Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts • Hacker News Board

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

#381

Post by joyeuse6701 » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:19 PM UTC

woodruffw wrote: post #290

rayiner wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ironic on so many levels. The first level is, of course, the irony of refusing to do military work at a company that only exists because of defense contractors working on a military project (ARPANET). More generally, the irony is that the U.S. military has made a far greater positive contribution to the world than Google. Under the Pax Americana , we have seen the greatest number of people rise out of abject pov…

This country only exists because of Puritan persecution in England, but you don't see me thanking the Anglican church for America. Bad means result in good ends all the time; that doesn't mean we should celebrate bad means. I agree that the US military has made positive contributions to the world, but I don't think it's the main source of the Pax Americana -- strong international bodies (NATO, UN, &c), the tendency f…

At the end of it all, the threat of violence moves humans. We don't need to qualify it with good or bad. It is in our nature.

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

#382

Post by 394549 » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:20 PM UTC

sdenton4 wrote: post #360

lazysheepherd wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This _is_ a very valuable action logically let alone morally. In the next decades either we resolve to mitigate this "us or them" mentality on this earth, or pure physics and math will resolve to see the end of the civilization as we know it. Google is a US company yes, but with so many engineers from all over the world and customers from every corner of the world, who is "them" for a Google employee really? And befo…

Lemme just underline this. Google engineers come from all over the world, and Google products are built to serve people all over the world. The Googlers opposed to Maven believe that building software that enables one government to enact (more) drone strikes against civilians in other countries is contrary to the mission of making people's lives better. Preemptive lazy answers for lazy replies: Companies only exist t…

> Maven believe that building software that enables one government to enact (more) drone strikes against civilians in other countries is contrary to the mission of making people's lives better.

I think that's a mischaracterization that's important to correct in the name of accuracy:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/30/technology/google-project...:

> The polarized debate about Google and the military may leave out some nuances. Better analysis of drone imagery could reduce civilian casualties by improving operators’ ability to find and recognize terrorists.

Also, a lack of "AI"-based image analysis hasn't stopped the US military from carrying out airstrikes with drones, and denying them better analysis tools is unlikely to cause them to reduce their frequency. The US military tries to avoid civilian casualties while still performing its mission, so giving it the tools to do so could arguably prevent civilian noncombatant deaths.

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

#383

Post by pofilat » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:21 PM UTC

gok wrote: post #327

cbg0 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, Googl…

FDA didn't claim the advertised medicine was counterfeit, only that some companies in the industry ship counterfeits.

Anyway, yeah, I'd assume that the individuals who don't want to build for the military don't want to build for counterfeit pharmacies. Other individuals would do both. Google has many employees.

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

#384

Post by pofilat » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:21 PM UTC

sheepmullet wrote: post #234

cbg0 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How is that any different than our military mostly being used to keep us safe but occasionally being used to harm others?

How is drone warfare keeping us safe?

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

#385

Post by jimbofisher1 » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

gcb0 wrote: post #342

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…

lol. right now the HN front page item right under this one has everyone celebrating a spacex military contract.

Elon Musk is some kind of enlightened prophet to most techies despite mountains of evidence that he is a shitty person running shitty companies.

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

#386

Post by Bhilai » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

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…

To each his own.

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

#387

Post by pofilat » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

allegedganon wrote: post #79

The many stories that have been appearing recently on Google's deep cultural changes point to a very basic fact of life: organizations, and even more so, their culture, aren't forever. As a matter of fact, organization cultural changes can happen very quickly, at the whim of leadership changes. The trust their users/customers extend these organizations ( way too much in the cast of Google) rarely takes this basic fac…

Green joined Google a few years ago. michaelochurch will explain how the foxes had long since taken over.

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

#388

Post by buddhistan » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:23 PM UTC

stonogo wrote: post #338

briankirby wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused. You seem to think everyone on HN agrees with each other.

Are you really confused, or did you just phrase your comment that way to mock the parent comment?

Are you really wondering their intent, or did you just phrase your question to point out the implication of their comment?

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

#389

Post by hungerstrike » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:24 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #349

Bartweiss wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but there's at least something to which comments end up at the top. My sense has been that "programmers need better ethics" almost always tops out the "programmers worked with the government" stories, and outside of this chain "programmers are being self-righteous and unpatriotic" has had basically all the top slots in this thread. I suppose the easy guess is just that people who disagree with a story are more…

When it comes to voting, strong opinions (one way or the other) will always end up on top.

I have pretty strong opinions that never get to the top, such as "Apple tech is mostly gimmicky, trendy garbage whereas Microsoft tech is mostly the best mix of freedom, flexibility and quality". Probably even just using that as my example here will harm me!

There are definite, identifiable leanings from the denizens here on HN.

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

#390

Post by jimbofisher1 » Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 4:24 PM UTC

woodruffw wrote: post #290

rayiner wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ironic on so many levels. The first level is, of course, the irony of refusing to do military work at a company that only exists because of defense contractors working on a military project (ARPANET). More generally, the irony is that the U.S. military has made a far greater positive contribution to the world than Google. Under the Pax Americana , we have seen the greatest number of people rise out of abject pov…

This country only exists because of Puritan persecution in England, but you don't see me thanking the Anglican church for America. Bad means result in good ends all the time; that doesn't mean we should celebrate bad means. I agree that the US military has made positive contributions to the world, but I don't think it's the main source of the Pax Americana -- strong international bodies (NATO, UN, &c), the tendency f…

Name 1 Major thing NATO or the UN has done without US support. The idea that they have any power outside what the US sanctions is to be pretty ignorant of the reality of power in world affairs.