Rules:
  1. Rule 1.
  2. Please use a "*" or "nm" in the subject line to denote topic only posts.
  3. Any post or attempt to take things "off the board" will result in a ban. Do not use other poster's real names or personal info.
  4. Don't be a Tom Izzo.

Admins - Rich, BBA, Nikos
Ceremonial Moderator - the wino
Moderator Emeritus - Beave
Honorary Moderators - BigLake, Blue Man

POTY - Craig

📌 🏈 Michigan at Minnesota*
📌 To register, email victardgoblue@gmail *

The Victors

Post a New Message

I think a big part of the problem is there is no constituency within the government advocating for reducing costs, red tape, and administrative bloat

Posted on August 28, 2026 at 11:53:13 AM by Alpo

Efficiency, simpler, etc. all sort of implicitly means fewer people, the elimination of positions, a more streamlined bureaucracy and so on. Anyone within that bureacuracy doing reviews and approvals and acting as cogs in the machine that takes in an application for something and spits out an approval some months later see themselves as an essential and necessary part of the process -- immunity from this need to be simpler and faster.

I have zero doubt that widespread government application of AI could substantially reduce costs and speed things up. But nobody within government is super keen on implementing that because it would make a lot of workers superfluous so it is probably the last place it will really show up.

Back to the board

Thread:

Log in to reply.

Probation ends …