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

321–330 of 516 posts

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

#321

Post by ggambetta »

I'm confused.

When engineers from a company who deals with the military (or some other ethically objectionably client) don't refuse to work on these projects, HN questions their values and urges them to make a stand, refuse, find another job if necessary, etc.

When the engineers do refuse, HN criticises them for beign self-righteous, virtue-signalling, and unpatriotic because countries with a lower ethical bar (Russia and China are the usual ones) are going to surpass the US in cyberwar.

So... which is it?

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

#322

Post by pixl97 »

wolfgke wrote: post #294
pixl97 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, HackerNews' other greatest sin "If someone's freethinking, they'll think exactly like me"

> "If someone's freethinking, they'll think exactly like me" I claim that my point nevertheless stands. I was explicitly talking about "hacker spirit". If you read up on the hacker ethics > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hacker_ethic&oldi... you will find many points that will make such a person a really unsuitable soldier, for example "Mistrust authority — promote decentralization", which is at least in…

>If the teacher really had the "hacker spirit" in teaching, the pupils will be too freethinking

This is the comment I was shooting at. I don't believe this. Instead I believe something far more terrifying.

"Society manages complexity by the occasional cull of the free thinker"

Lots of smart people can bring a lot of good change to a society and culture, but one needs to be very careful to think the majority of the population in that society will accept those changes, and the faster they occur, the more resentment builds. Suddenly you have politicians and activists pining for the 'good old days'. Suddenly a nice authoritarian figure pops up and tells the masses that he can fix all their problems. There are ample examples in history to see where this leads.

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

#323

Post by emaginniss »

ggambetta wrote: post #321

I'm confused. When engineers from a company who deals with the military (or some other ethically objectionably client) don't refuse to work on these projects, HN questions their values and urges them to make a stand, refuse, find another job if necessary, etc. When the engineers do refuse, HN criticises them for beign self-righteous, virtue-signalling, and unpatriotic because countries with a lower ethical bar (Russi…

There's probably more than one person on HN

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

#324

Post by megous »

v_lisivka wrote: post #319
megous wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Most of ISIS didn't deserve drone attacks. It was a state-like big organization comprised of many diffrent kinds of people who opportunistically, or out of ideology, or by being misled, or under a threat of force, or taken young and brainwashed, joined and helped said organization, which seemed or was in some important cases objectively better than the possible alternatives. Being highly sectarian it was also ve…

You should go to ISIS and change their ideology, arrest their leaders, protect them from threats, stop brainwashing, lead them to proper direction, and stop any help to ISIS. If it looks easy for you, maybe it really easy. Just do it.

You should go and murder 70 000 people (google Raymond Thomas ISIS) by yourself. It's pretty obvious they all deserved to die, from your armchair.

I can play stupid word games too, see.

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

#325

Post by briankirby »

ggambetta wrote: post #321

I'm confused. When engineers from a company who deals with the military (or some other ethically objectionably client) don't refuse to work on these projects, HN questions their values and urges them to make a stand, refuse, find another job if necessary, etc. When the engineers do refuse, HN criticises them for beign self-righteous, virtue-signalling, and unpatriotic because countries with a lower ethical bar (Russi…

I'm confused.

You seem to think everyone on HN agrees with each other.

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

#326

Post by Kurtz79 »

ggambetta wrote: post #321

I'm confused. When engineers from a company who deals with the military (or some other ethically objectionably client) don't refuse to work on these projects, HN questions their values and urges them to make a stand, refuse, find another job if necessary, etc. When the engineers do refuse, HN criticises them for beign self-righteous, virtue-signalling, and unpatriotic because countries with a lower ethical bar (Russi…

"HN" is not a single entity and it is made up of los of people with different opinions and values.

If everybody had the same point of view, there would be no ground for a discussion...

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

#327

Post by gok »

cbg0 wrote: post #69
gok wrote: post #33

I wonder how many engineers refused to build tools to sell ads for counterfeit medicine.

I don't know if you're trying to imply that they're being hypocritical or not, but those engineers built tools to sell ads in general, not to sell specific ads, so there's probably a lot of reprehensible stuff being advertised for with these tools, things which those engineers might not agree with. You wouldn't blame a knife maker for people stabbing each other.

Well it never went to court, so we may never know the details, but the FDA claims it went way beyond that.

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/google-settles-over-on...

> An undercover investigator informed Google employees creating the advertising for the products that they were manufactured overseas and did not require customers have a valid prescription, she said. “In each instance, despite this knowledge, Google employees created a full advertising campaign for each of the undercover websites,” Martin-Weis said.

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

#328

Post by philip1209 »

Another angle: Having to get security clearance affects your personal life and opens you to criminal problems you wouldn't otherwise have. I would think people could opt out for this reason if it wasn't a upfront requirement of the job.

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

#329

Post by pixl97 »

ionised wrote: post #155
carlosrg wrote: post #117

Meanwhile, regimes like China, North Korea or even Russia won’t have this kind of issues.

I feel like you think this somehow proves a point.

I'm guessing his point is

"Taking a stand against war is great, right up till the enemy jackboots are stepping on your face"

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

#330

Post by aplummer »

ggambetta wrote: post #321

I'm confused. When engineers from a company who deals with the military (or some other ethically objectionably client) don't refuse to work on these projects, HN questions their values and urges them to make a stand, refuse, find another job if necessary, etc. When the engineers do refuse, HN criticises them for beign self-righteous, virtue-signalling, and unpatriotic because countries with a lower ethical bar (Russi…

The problem with discourse in 2018 is outrage motivates people to comment more than anything. “What gets rewarded gets done” so the place becomes an outrage factory, then online discourse self selects for outrage, then cycle.
Post reply on HN