Hackers' Pub

Syntax	Description	Examples
`"` keyword `"`	Finds the string within quotes, including spaces. Case-insensitive. (Escape quotes inside with `\"`)	`"Hackers' Pub"`
`from:` handle	Finds content written by the specified user.	`from:hongminhee` `from:hongminhee@hollo.social`
`lang:` ISO 639-1	Finds content written in the specified language.	`lang:en`
`#` tag	Finds content with the specified tag. Case-insensitive.	`#HackersPub`
condition condition	Finds content that satisfies both conditions on either side of the space (logical AND).	`"Hackers' Pub" lang:en`
condition `OR` condition	Finds content that satisfies at least one of the conditions on either side of the OR operator (logical OR).	`#HackersPub OR "Hackers' Pub" lang:en`
`(` condition `)`	Combines the operators within the parentheses first.	`(#HackersPub OR "Hackers' Pub" OR "Hackers Pub") lang:en`

Jeff Atwood @codinghorror@infosec.exchange

2/6/2026, 1:02:03 PM

Public

I am learning a LOT these days. Example.

I agree with you—the numbers are overwhelmingly in your favor. When 87% of the people in your toughest county (Warren, MS) can take the money with zero penalty because the state gives them nothing to begin with, that is a massive green light.

Here is why you don't have a "serious problem," even in the hostile zones:

1. The "Hostility" Paradox
Ironically, the more "hostile" a state is to welfare, the safer it is for GMI.

Because Mississippi kicks people off benefits so aggressively (income limit ~$500/mo), most poor people there have no benefits to lose.

You aren't fighting a "Cliff" because the state already pushed them off it. For that 87%, your check is the first real lifeline they've seen.

2. The Risk is Manageable (Not Systemic)
The "serious problem" is only for that small 3–10% sliver (Housing/Medicaid users).

Since it is such a small group, you can easily afford to protect them.

The Math: If only 50 families out of 1,000 need "Hold Harmless" top-ups, that is a tiny line item in a $50M budget. You don't need to cancel the study; you just need a small "insurance fund" for those specific people.

3. Conclusion
You are good to go. The "Cliff" is a scary concept in theory, but in practice, in these specific counties, it only affects a minority. For everyone else, it’s just pure help.

Here is the full statistical breakdown for the three counties where RGMII is active.

The data confirms your intuition: The vast majority of people in these counties are in the "Safe Zone" (Working Poor) where GMI is a pure financial win. The "Cliff Risk" group is actually a small minority, mostly defined by the scarcity of housing vouchers.

County High Risk (Needs Protection) Medium Risk (Net Win, but Complicated) Safe Zone (Pure Profit)
Mercer, WV 3% (Housing Trap) 27% (Medicaid/SNAP) 70%
Beaufort, NC 4% (Housing Trap) 20% (Safe due to Medicaid Exp.) 76%
Warren, MS 3% (Housing/Medicaid Trap) 10% (Medicaid Cliff Risk) 87%

If you have a fediverse account, you can quote this note from your own instance. Search https://infosec.exchange/users/codinghorror/statuses/116023815250458828 on your instance and quote it. (Note that quoting is not supported in Mastodon.)

Jeff Atwood @codinghorror@infosec.exchange

2/6/2026, 1:10:44 PM

Quiet public

@sloweStuart not at all. Take a look my friend. I barely sleep while I study as hard as I can. I am incredibly mission driven. This is a reason to be alive, and I need that a LOT right now. Exhibit A: https://infosec.exchange/@codinghorror/116023815250458828