Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts

Post by walshemj » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 11:04 AM UTC

bad_user wrote: post #60

_ptgt wrote: post #30

These employees are free to exercise their right to (not) work for whomever they want, but the certainty they express (as well as most commenters here) in their own self-righteousness seems misplaced to me. There's certainly a case to be made that a strong US military is in the world's best interest. In fact, I would wager that a majority of Americans (and a majority of citizens of democratic countries across the wor…

Google is at this point not just some US company, but a multi-national one. I'm not a US citizen, so for me the US having a strong military isn't necessarily in my best interests, depending on circumstance. So what stops me, as a Google customer (which I am), to stop doing business with them, given that I see proof after proof that they are working against my interests? This is the same problem as with the Snowden le…

Post by omnimus » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 11:06 AM UTC

derping_hacker wrote: post #170

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.

The current era of peace between world powers is unprecedented in human history and is only possible because the power of the US military makes it pointless for anyone to start a war. The US military also makes your welfare state in Sweden possible, we've spent 10s of trillions over the last 70 years protecting Europe for free, the least you could do is show some appreciation. I look forward to the day America Shrugs…

Post by jopsen » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 11:06 AM UTC

derping_hacker wrote: post #170

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.

The current era of peace between world powers is unprecedented in human history and is only possible because the power of the US military makes it pointless for anyone to start a war. The US military also makes your welfare state in Sweden possible, we've spent 10s of trillions over the last 70 years protecting Europe for free, the least you could do is show some appreciation. I look forward to the day America Shrugs…

Post by oldcynic » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 11:09 AM UTC

slavik81 wrote: post #144

greyman wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not a US citizen, so for me the US having a strong military isn't necessarily in my best interests, depending on circumstance. Yes, that's exactly the problem. What if in the future, my country and USA will be enemies? It is not very probable, but so wasn't a prospect of war in Ukraine, for example. You just don't know how things will develop, and if a company want's to be global, it shouldn't directly support…

That's not how things are done today. Military technology is shared widely among allies. If we cannot trust our friends, we are doomed. There might be national secret-sauce here or there, but the major military contractors are all international. Lots of projects involve R&D spread across multiple nations. Things mostly get dicey when looking at nations that are too unstable to trust (Egypt, Pakistan, etc.), or those…

Post by gambiting » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 11:10 AM UTC

tomohawk wrote: post #177

gambiting wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]