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

361–370 of 516 posts

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

#361

Post by pofilat »

walshemj wrote: post #181
bad_user wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Sorry to rain on your parade Google is a "US" company - just because its sets up in Europe to get access to cheap labour and as a lobbying tool "look we employ x people in your country" - doesn't make any difference. Eu companies do the same German pro union at home hire dodgy American union busters in the UK for example

How many thousands of employees, including executive roles, does a company need before it is an international company?

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

#362

Post by sremani »

pofilat wrote: post #356
sremani wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who ensures a Ship with South Korean flag which does not a solid Navy reaches its destination ? I understand the analogy of Container being an innovative idea. With out calm seas under-written by US Navy, its not so great. Without US Navy and its 10 carriers, we will be back to 19th century mercantilism and how much fun colonialism which is its off-shoot has been.

How can you say that the "military" get credit for preventing conflicts while at the same time not get blame for being the muscle of colonial oppression.

Which Colonial Oppression you are talking vis-a-vis Post World War II US Navy ?

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

#363

Post by pofilat »

Nimitz14 wrote: post #224
Atlantium wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"who have chosen to mostly rely on the US military for their own national security" I often wonder if statements like this are disingenuous. The US military "polices" parts of the world where American interests lie; ie Natural resources, supply chains, potential markets for American companies to exploit. When you say countries "choose" American military protection you are not considering the considerable economic pre…

Just because some people who don't know any better say the US invaded Iraq for oil does not make it true. And ignoring Iraq, did the US intervene in the Balkans because of natural resources or potential markets? Or in Somalia? Please try and put in a little more effort into your thought process.

The US occupied Iraq for over a decade, and installed a new government. The US spent a little time in the Balkans and Somalia and then gave up. There's a difference.

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

#364

Post by pofilat »

white-flame wrote: post #331
_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…

> There's certainly a case to be made that a strong US military is in the world's best interest. The USA was formed on a basic distrust of the government, including checks & balances, and non-federal armament in the 2nd amendment. It is not allowed to be a single, trusted federal power, but rather one whose powers are defined by limited and explicit allowance, with default powers resting on the distributed states and…

Foreign affairs is one of the few enumerated central/Federal powers, so I don't understand your point.

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

#365

Post by pofilat »

ekianjo wrote: post #218
tonfa wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 world) hold the belief expressed in the previous statement. That's probably true for US citizens, but I highly doubt non-US folks share that view (at least from a western European perspective I'd say definite…

Did you kind of forget that Russia pretty much controlled half of Europe not too long ago, and sent tanks to fight citizens when it was needed to maintain "order". Countries under US rule never faced such severe repression.

That's because the US already took over and genocided the interesting parts of its continent (+ Hawaii), and used covert operations to install friendly dictators across the hemisphere when it needed to maintain "democracy".

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

#366

Post by pofilat »

blueatlas wrote: post #273
tonfa wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 world) hold the belief expressed in the previous statement. That's probably true for US citizens, but I highly doubt non-US folks share that view (at least from a western European perspective I'd say definite…

I'm genuinely curious - what do you think the world would look like if the US decreased their military capabilities and stopped involvement in any world conflicts or terrorism? I'm a US citizen and I would like to see the US stop being the worlds police for 5 to 10 years, just to see what the world looks like at the end of that.

Point to ponder: A (small, but potent) bunch of Middle Easterners got very interested in blowing up the USA.

Why did they not blow up Canada, or Mexico, or China? Do you think the US military actions might be a reason?

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

#367

Post by spoiledtechie »

emaginniss wrote: post #323
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

Agreed! Glad we don't always come to a consensus. Discourse is allowed.

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

#368

Post by sp332 »

hutzlibu wrote: post #231
sp332 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a moral point. Maybe I'd rather be dead than kill someone.

Doubt that to be honest. In theory maybe, but in a real life scenario I don't think there are many people who let themself (and their loved ones) to be killed than to kill. Even though I have a lot of respect for Ghandi, I am not sure if I could respect someone who would let his family murdered, out of a moral point.

Here's how I see it: I'm not going to be held accountable for someone else's actions. I'm going to be held accountable for my actions. I'm not going to plan ahead to make it easier to kill someone in some as-yet hypothetical self-defense scenario.

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

#369

Post by killjoywashere »

pofilat wrote: post #357
rayiner wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China's recent economic development is the result of unprecedented levels of trade in an unprecedentedly peaceful world. That peace, in turn, is the direct result of U.S. efforts to maintain international stability, through the use or threat of military force.

China is far more stable than the US.

You mean the country that just appointed a dictator for life and has a debt:GDP of 260% in 2017?

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

#370

Post by pofilat »

Bartweiss wrote: post #355
JackCh wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a guess, but perhaps being extremely rich and extremely powerful gives you a relatively small social circle, considering the grand scheme of humanity at almost 7.5 billion people. Consider also the allegations of Google being a de facto branch of the state department in When Google Met Wikileaks (2011). It may be the case these people are all friends or acquaintances and enjoy the opportunity to work with each o…

I still get a bit tense when I remember reading The New Digital Age . (Written, not coincidentally, by Schmidt and Jared Cohen - ex State Department staffer, current Google visionary.) It is, to an impressive degree, a love letter to the US government. It shows absolute faith in the ability of technology experts to help remake the world, spreading information worldwide for the benefit of all - but only the right info…

Jared Cohen is the driver behind YouTube censorship and making Google/Internet an arm of the US government's propaganda effort. Schmidt has been trying to push his way into world politics as an unelected guru for about a decade.

https://www.wired.com/2016/09/inside-googles-internet-justic...

Post reply on HN