Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 516 posts

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#11

Post by dev_dull »

iainmerrick wrote: post #10

One thing I find strange about this is why Google is so keen to get this government business in the first place. They’re amazingly profitable already, one of the most successful companies of all time; is defense work really something that could become another major revenue stream? Given the obvious conflicts with their company culture (obvious to rank and file employees, anyway) it doesn’t seem like a very appealing…

I want them to have these contracts because I want the smartest people on the planet working to defend our country. This is such a weird and controversial concept to so many people here.

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#12

Post by dev_dull »

robin_reala wrote: post #5

Every company I apply to is told during the interview process that I will not work on military projects, and that I would probably leave the company if they chose to take on a military contract. If you have personal moral limits and you’re upfront about them then no-one is the worse off; I’ve yet to be turned down for a job over it and, somewhat the opposite, companies seem to appreciate frankness.

If you contribute to open source software then you’re contributing to military projects.

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#13

Post by mark_edward »

dev_dull wrote: post #11
iainmerrick wrote: post #10

One thing I find strange about this is why Google is so keen to get this government business in the first place. They’re amazingly profitable already, one of the most successful companies of all time; is defense work really something that could become another major revenue stream? Given the obvious conflicts with their company culture (obvious to rank and file employees, anyway) it doesn’t seem like a very appealing…

I want them to have these contracts because I want the smartest people on the planet working to defend our country. This is such a weird and controversial concept to so many people here.

Maybe "many people here" feel that what our military does has little to nothing to do with defending our country, and often puts us at more risk and/or makes the world a worse place.

This is such a weird and controversial concept to so many people here.

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#14

Post by pmontra »

iainmerrick wrote: post #10

One thing I find strange about this is why Google is so keen to get this government business in the first place. They’re amazingly profitable already, one of the most successful companies of all time; is defense work really something that could become another major revenue stream? Given the obvious conflicts with their company culture (obvious to rank and file employees, anyway) it doesn’t seem like a very appealing…

It can be not to leave all of that cake to its main competitors: if Google takes a slice from Amazon and Microsoft, they will grow a little less faster. This applies to every sector, not only government and military.

If you ever played boardgames (especially German style) maybe you'll remember some games when only one player developed some resource unchecked by the other ones. This usually leads to an easy win for that player. Not easy to notice it in the earlier turns but then the differential in income (whatever it is in that game) is so obvious that everybody understands the game is over well before the end.

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#15

Post by kelukelugames »

ta1234567890 wrote: post #8

Great for the people that protested and stood their ground, hopefully that kind of behavior and mentality towards war becomes more wide-spread. Although it's hard not to be skeptical given... > It's unclear if Google has abandoned air gap technology or is still planning to build it over employees’ objections. The feature is not technically very difficult, so Google could easily find other engineers to do the work. An…

Microsoft had a blog post bragging about their work with ICE. But only 300 employees have signed a petition to denounce it.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/21/17488328/microsoft-ice-em...

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#16

Post by throwaway2048 »

pmontra wrote: post #14
iainmerrick wrote: post #10

One thing I find strange about this is why Google is so keen to get this government business in the first place. They’re amazingly profitable already, one of the most successful companies of all time; is defense work really something that could become another major revenue stream? Given the obvious conflicts with their company culture (obvious to rank and file employees, anyway) it doesn’t seem like a very appealing…

It can be not to leave all of that cake to its main competitors: if Google takes a slice from Amazon and Microsoft, they will grow a little less faster. This applies to every sector, not only government and military. If you ever played boardgames (especially German style) maybe you'll remember some games when only one player developed some resource unchecked by the other ones. This usually leads to an easy win for th…

We Must Not Allow a Tunnel Gap!

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#17

Post by berti »

dev_dull wrote: post #11
iainmerrick wrote: post #10

One thing I find strange about this is why Google is so keen to get this government business in the first place. They’re amazingly profitable already, one of the most successful companies of all time; is defense work really something that could become another major revenue stream? Given the obvious conflicts with their company culture (obvious to rank and file employees, anyway) it doesn’t seem like a very appealing…

I want them to have these contracts because I want the smartest people on the planet working to defend our country. This is such a weird and controversial concept to so many people here.

It's a little sad when you have to divert your best and brightest away from advancing the state of civilization, to merely defending what you already have.

Obviously that will still advance the state of the art in some areas.

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#18

Post by adrianN »

dev_dull wrote: post #11
iainmerrick wrote: post #10

One thing I find strange about this is why Google is so keen to get this government business in the first place. They’re amazingly profitable already, one of the most successful companies of all time; is defense work really something that could become another major revenue stream? Given the obvious conflicts with their company culture (obvious to rank and file employees, anyway) it doesn’t seem like a very appealing…

I want them to have these contracts because I want the smartest people on the planet working to defend our country. This is such a weird and controversial concept to so many people here.

If the "smartest people on the planet" decide they'd rather not work for the military, maybe there's a good reason.

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#19

Post by jath »

My personal hunch is Google will still work on ‘air-gapped’ technology as this is critical for many non military applications as well. Google is eyeing to catch up with AWS in its cloud business and will take a leaf out of AWS’s GovCloud service and the money spinner it is for Amazon.

Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

#20

Post by robin_reala »

dev_dull wrote: post #12
robin_reala wrote: post #5

Every company I apply to is told during the interview process that I will not work on military projects, and that I would probably leave the company if they chose to take on a military contract. If you have personal moral limits and you’re upfront about them then no-one is the worse off; I’ve yet to be turned down for a job over it and, somewhat the opposite, companies seem to appreciate frankness.

If you contribute to open source software then you’re contributing to military projects.

That’s the standard argument, and yes, it’s true. There’s a difference between actively working on a defined project and putting some stuff out into the open though, and that at least for me is a reasonable border.
Post reply on HN