Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

medium.com

191–200 of 289 posts

Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

#191
Don't focus on profit, say the employee who focus on his pay.

The real reason why people work at Amazon is because the pay is better, or the perks are better than the other jobs they applied to. If they go see their boss in order to negotiate a rise, they don't want to hear "sorry, no rise for you, but you should be happy, we didn't sell our product to the police".

The vast majority of employees are motivated by their pay. And in order for them to get paid, their company has to make money. They want their boss to make them rich, and this is what their boss is doing by putting profits over people, and that's why they are still there.

There are a few people who care more about the cause their work serve than money, they are often found in nonprofits, much less so in tech giants.

Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

#192
It's a little backwards. You're not actually making the military more lethal by selling them facial recognition tech. You are making them more accurate. Right now, an 18-25 year old looks at a (often) blurry video and tries to say if something is a weapon. With visual recognition technology, you actually decrease the false positives. Same with police. You're reducing the false positives inherent with human intervention in an already established system.

Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

#194

> Amazon, where I work, is currently allowing police departments around the country to purchase its facial recognition product, Rekognition, and I and other employees demand that we stop immediately. Ok, nod, nod... > The letter also contained demands to kick Palantir, the software firm that powers much of ICE's deportation and tracking program, off Amazon Web Services and to institute employee oversight for ethical…

>Second, you risk AWS being seen as non-neutral based on the whims of employees' feelings about a company

God forbid workers have say in how their work is used, instead of just being robots. Smart enough to build the technology, but apparently not qualified enough to have input on limiting its nefarious and anti-social uses at the hand of an executive branch the employees probably don't favor.

Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

#195

> Amazon, where I work, is currently allowing police departments around the country to purchase its facial recognition product, Rekognition, and I and other employees demand that we stop immediately. Ok, nod, nod... > The letter also contained demands to kick Palantir, the software firm that powers much of ICE's deportation and tracking program, off Amazon Web Services and to institute employee oversight for ethical…

The real issue is that the leader of ICE / Military / etc. etc. change power roughly... every 4 years. Police is a local issue, and may change closer to every 2 years (although local municipalities may have a Sheriff, or a Commission, or may rely upon a Mayor to make those decisions). We already have a mechanism for choosing the leader of these various institutions. And whatever powers we give to these institutions,…

So people have been separated from their children should just wait for the American people to maaaaaaybe kick out the jackboots in two to four years?

Naw, dawg, when things get ugly, you have to resist where you can. I'm guessing you can't agree, but there's a fair number of people who think we're in a Germany 1937 situation. We have a president who in all likelihood enlisted Russian interference in the election, who shares plenty of rhetorical similarity to actual fascists. We have a Congress that is moving as fast as it can to stack the judiciary, which in turn will hear future election cases. Things are getting grim. I've lived and worked in places where these processes have played out - like Hungary - and anyone who says it can't happen here is kidding themselves.

Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

#196
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you do not believe that people should profit from increasing the lethality of the military, then you do not believe in the utility of having a military. That doesn't follow. One can believe in the utility of the military while at the same time holding that it must operate purely as a public service, so that no incentives are created for a state of permanent war. Famously, an American president expressed this ver…

Unless the staff operating the public service receive no compensation at all, then there is profit involved.

You may be confusing the legal terms "nonprofit" and "not-for-profit".

In a "nonprofit", the paid staff cannot be paid contingent on the fundraising efforts of the organization. The nonprofit organization has a separate legal existence from the totality of its membership. A "not-for-profit" is identical to the totality of its membership, and may pay its staff or members out of general funds. Nonprofits are 501(c)(3) tax-exempted, not-for-profits are probably 501(c)(7) tax-exempted.

For example, a religious organization might be organized as nonprofit. It has a high priest, several underpriests, and some knights on its payroll. These are all paid predefined salaries and wages. They get paid the same regardless of whether the temple collects a lot of tithes, or none at all. If a nonprofit could not hire paid staff, it would likely have insufficient volunteers to accomplish its stated purposes.

A performing marching band might be organized as a not-for-profit. They go out and sell candy bars stamped with bars of musical notation to raise funds. They can spend the proceeds of the fundraising on themselves, or their staff, but it has to be in furtherance of the organization's stated purpose. They can hire a band director, arranger, and transportation coordinator, and book hotel rooms for themselves. If they raise more funds, they can spend it on themselves, and also give their staff bonuses. But they can't just distribute excess cash; that would be profit. They could buy touring buses and instruments and uniforms that are more expensive and worth more at resale, which would be suspiciously similar to profit, but the rules for "not-for-profit" are more lax than for "nonprofit".

Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

#197
post #151

> Amazon, where I work, is currently allowing police departments around the country to purchase its facial recognition product, Rekognition, and I and other employees demand that we stop immediately. Ok, nod, nod... > The letter also contained demands to kick Palantir, the software firm that powers much of ICE's deportation and tracking program, off Amazon Web Services and to institute employee oversight for ethical…

It baffles me that some people seemingly want their country to fill with illegal immigrants and they also don't want to give the police/ICE/whatever the necessary tools to be able to dispatch them. Fantasy world indeed. I guess it's the result of being a wealthy programmer in the upper part of San Francisco: they won't affect your job security and you won't have to deal with or even see them

Well some countries also don't want legal immigrants.

https://fuckoffgoogle.de/

Pretty good if you want some perspective.

Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

#198
post #72

> Regardless of our views on the military, no one should be profiting from “increasing the lethality” of the military. It makes no sense for these two clauses to exist together. If you do not believe that people should profit from increasing the lethality of the military, then you do not believe in the utility of having a military. Especially when the author follows up with this sentence: > We will not silently build…

So because we have a military we should maximize everything:

1. When going to work we should be strip searched - that's definitely maximizing the military power.

2. We should all be required to fight in military campaigns at the age of 18 and stop when we are 65, that is definitely maximizing the military.

3. We should bomb all other countries on this planet until there is no one left, because that is maximizing the deadly force of the military.

Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

#199
post #72

> Regardless of our views on the military, no one should be profiting from “increasing the lethality” of the military. It makes no sense for these two clauses to exist together. If you do not believe that people should profit from increasing the lethality of the military, then you do not believe in the utility of having a military. Especially when the author follows up with this sentence: > We will not silently build…

That is the whole point of having armed forces! Armed forces exist to provide achieve foreign policy goals (deterrence, coercion) through the credible threat of its lethality. WTF? No, just no. The only foreign policy goal the armed forces exist to serve is defense of the homeland. Everything else is a misuses of the military. Just because it's commonplace in this day and age doesn't mean it's OK or that anyone shoul…

That's a seriously naive take.

Militaries exist to project power onto foreign entities. Defense of national territory is but one use for that projected power.

Keeping trade lanes open--such as those through the Straits of Hormuz or the South China Sea--is another use. Enforcing a trade blockade or embargo is another. The size and lethality of your military is measurable proof of your commitment to a particular political issue.

Re: Amazon Employee: We Shouldn’t Sell Facial Recognition Tech to Police

#200
post #191

Don't focus on profit, say the employee who focus on his pay. The real reason why people work at Amazon is because the pay is better, or the perks are better than the other jobs they applied to. If they go see their boss in order to negotiate a rise, they don't want to hear "sorry, no rise for you, but you should be happy, we didn't sell our product to the police". The vast majority of employees are motivated by thei…

And that is why we need to abandon the notion of company's as moral entitys. That's what the state and law is for to be moral and humane.
Post reply on HN