Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 240 posts

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#151

Post by andreilys »

enraged_camel wrote: post #138
tluyben2 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not very realistic for people who need to put food on the table and where the evil vs non evil is not that clear. Especially if you work on a very small cog in the machine, which most engineers do ofcourse. Where do you draw the line? Maybe your company makes software that is nice but it is sold to companies using it for evil? I think this is too vague and not solvable by engineers unless in clear cut cases like you…

>>Not very realistic for people who need to put food on the table and where the evil vs non evil is not that clear. Evil vs. non-evil being not that clear is not a problem. That's why we have the court system: to sort those types of things out. As for "needing to put food on the table", how far are you willing to take that logic? It seems you could use it to justify virtually any behavior, as long as you get paid doi…

I don’t think the court system is a panacea for solving moral dilemmas. Especially in tech where things move much quicker than our laws can keep up with.

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#152

Post by avianlyric »

jhall1468 wrote: post #83
skrebbel wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop pushing the blame upstairs. If you knowingly build software that hurts people, you share the blame. The job market for programmers has never been better. "My boss told me to do it" is not an excuse. I, for one, hope more engineers involved in fraud (eg VW), privacy breaches (eg Facebook) etc get tried and punished. It might help make programmers realize that yes, your work actually affects real humans and yes, y…

The moment you open that door you have created the ultimate scapegoat in every corporate decision. Now every engineer is personally responsible for corporate decisions. It's easy when you look at VW and Facebook, but the more nuanced these things get, the more that what your advocating for is that programmers have to be lawyers as well. This horrible precedent and pushes the blame for everything downstairs. Meanwhile…

> This horrible precedent and pushes the blame for everything downstairs.

It’s already been set in other industries, the financial industry springs to mind.

Everybody in a bank is responsible for detecting and preventing money laundering. Failure to report money laundering if you suspect it is a criminal offence (this is true in the UK, I assume similar laws exist in the US). If your boss refuses to acknowledge your report, then you’re obligated to whistle blow.

There is no reason why a similar framework can’t exist elsewhere. A requirement that engineers report abuses of data, or corrupt behaviour, and an obligation to whistle blow of management refuse to acknowledge the issue.

These laws of-course place a heavy burden on C-suite execs, making it clear they can be held criminally liable for the misbehaviour of their organisation, even if they weren’t aware of. The simple act of not being aware of criminal behaviour is criminal.

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#153

Post by warbird »

dmix wrote: post #142
warbird wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article itself barely touches upon the titular "stake." NPR inserts "election interference" and Smith is quoted in reference to personal data acquisition as a potentially dangerous wealth transfer/concentration. Since election interference is widely reported and understood to have been an intel operation aimed at polarizing U.S. public opinion with legitimate and illegitimate information, I dont see how treebeard…

Even beyond how effective the election manipulation was or wasn't, no one is asking whether the vague 'regulations' (by the US gov?) will do anything useful at all. I suspect not but this all sounds reactionary "something must be done" where the utility of the something is always downplayed.

Agreed, of course. And, thanks for bringing my sidenote back onto topic (:

The subject of the article is not too well-defined, which reflects our inability to come to terms with the associated Big Issues. So, yeah, it's difficult for me to imagine forward thinking regulation coming out of the current conversation--such as it is, in main editorial media and government.

In my personal life, having a productive conversation about the current and future impacts of data (non)privacy is next to impossible due to the inherent complexity of integrating the subject with pre-existing ideological frameworks. I do not think I'm brighter than them, just happen to have a long-standing interest. Based on observation, politicians seem no better equipped.

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#154

Post by timwaagh »

skrebbel wrote: post #70
GreaterFool wrote: post #52

> that governments need to put some "guardrails" around engineers and the tech titans they serve The evil engineers! Not the managers, CEOs and so on, but engineers. The true root of evil. Finally someone recognizes who's really at fault

Stop pushing the blame upstairs. If you knowingly build software that hurts people, you share the blame. The job market for programmers has never been better. "My boss told me to do it" is not an excuse. I, for one, hope more engineers involved in fraud (eg VW), privacy breaches (eg Facebook) etc get tried and punished. It might help make programmers realize that yes, your work actually affects real humans and yes, y…

Actually 'my boss told me to build it' is an excuse. if you dont build it, you breach contract. you get fired or possibly sued for damages or breach of contract (as a contractor or external consultant).

The job market isn't exactly great for recently fired engineers either. Nobody is above the law, and it is more than likely that some unlucky 'git-blamed' junior is going to face such a case some day instead of the boss who ordered it. But i hope in that case a judge will take the migitating circumstances into account.

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#155

Post by tryptophan »

pytester wrote: post #45
Barrin92 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument is always repeated within the first ten minutes of these discussions, but I don't really understand why anyone assumes that competition is somehow the panacea to every problem on the planet. I don't want ten unregulated facebooks who all leak my data, I want one facebook that plays by reasonable rules. The dynamics of social networks which don't deliver value if they're fragmented has made the competiti…

This oversimplified "regulation is bad" idea is pushed by a lot of think tanks (e.g. CATO, americans for prosperity, freedomworks, heritage foundation) set up by the Koch brothers. They have close links with the media, which is why these weirdly specific views get parroted a lot. If you've ever read a story about the evils of hairdresser licensing (for instance), it's from them. They have been on a crusade against re…

This oversimplified "regulation is good" idea is pushed by a lot of think tanks (e.g. Brookings, center for american progress, The Commonwealth Institute) set up by the Soros and Clintons. They have close links with the media, which is why these weirdly specific views get parroted a lot.

If you've ever read a story about the evils of low taxes (for instance), it's from them. They have been on a crusade for regulation since a lot of their fights with the environmental protection agency.

| Great comments. Lets keep this up!

(This comment is intended to show that simply pointing out that a group advocates for something doesn't make it wrong and dismissable because of that.)

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#156

Post by blackflame7000 »

pilsetnieks wrote: post #148
blackflame7000 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The halting problem shows that it is impossible to verify a program is bug free. Therefore anyone could say that some feature X that harms the user is actually just a bug and you would be hard pressed to beat reasonable doubt Edit: I love downvotes without rebuttal.

> anyone could say that some feature X that harms the user is actually just a bug and you would be hard pressed to beat reasonable doubt That would fall under criminal negligence then.

Ahh, so you see, additional regulation is not required.

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#157

Post by coding123 »

skrebbel wrote: post #87
jhall1468 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The moment you open that door you have created the ultimate scapegoat in every corporate decision. Now every engineer is personally responsible for corporate decisions. It's easy when you look at VW and Facebook, but the more nuanced these things get, the more that what your advocating for is that programmers have to be lawyers as well. This horrible precedent and pushes the blame for everything downstairs. Meanwhile…

I don't advocate that corporate execs have shielding and the engineers don't. Where did you read that? It sounds to me that you're misreading my comment on purpose, to make an us-vs-them argument that I fundamentally disagree with. This isn't about engineers vs bosses, it's about doing the right thing no matter what's on your business card. The argument "if we can't shift the blame up, it'll automatically go down" si…

It's kinda like asking all the ICE (internal combustion engine) engineers at ford, toyota, nissan, dodge, etc... to stop working on ICE right now because of climate change. Now they can do that, and ask to be re-assigned to EVs, but you can bet they can't replace all those jobs with EV jobs. (at least immediately, maybe in 10 to 20 years)

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#158

Post by HillaryBriss »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #13

Once upon a time public opinion was manipulated by TV and the big newspapers; now it is manipulated by new media companies. My stupid question is: where is the big difference?

TV was/is heavily regulated. And starting a newspaper was much easier than starting a Google or FB competitor is today. IOW, big tech dominates in a way that is more complete, closer to total, than TV and newspapers did.

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#159

Post by tejtm »

skrebbel wrote: post #70
GreaterFool wrote: post #52

> that governments need to put some "guardrails" around engineers and the tech titans they serve The evil engineers! Not the managers, CEOs and so on, but engineers. The true root of evil. Finally someone recognizes who's really at fault

Stop pushing the blame upstairs. If you knowingly build software that hurts people, you share the blame. The job market for programmers has never been better. "My boss told me to do it" is not an excuse. I, for one, hope more engineers involved in fraud (eg VW), privacy breaches (eg Facebook) etc get tried and punished. It might help make programmers realize that yes, your work actually affects real humans and yes, y…

> Stop pushing the blame upstairs

Why? "follow the money" is a time tested and highly reliable heuristic.

I am with you on an individuals responsibility despite embedding within systems designed to provide legal shielding for amoral choices.

Re: Microsoft President: Democracy Is At Stake. Regulate Big Tech

#160

Post by strken »

goatherders wrote: post #114
jhall1468 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that by the fact that you only talked about punishing engineers. And I'm not misreading your comment on purpose, trust me I had to read it 4 times just to make sure I wasn't crazy and I was actually reading what I thought I was: someone advocating that bottom of the food chain employees be criminally liable for code they write. You are making an us-vs-them argument, to be sure. Your "us" is consumers and your…

Disagree. The idea that whatever you are asked to do has been vetted by others is an abdication of ethical responsibility. At present, a lot of what tech companies do is still legal, but that doesnt make it right. It's still legal because the maps of cyber law are largely still uncharted. An engineer working on a project that tracks user behavior without consent (for example) shouldn't be absolved or responsibility b…

I'm not sure that moral responsibility for investigating the legality of instructions should rest with the employee, in cases where the instructions aren't clearly repugnant.

Consider the example of engineers getting the details of tax compliance in a payroll system wrong because their boss provided the wrong instructions. To my mind, they should not be at fault for this unless they demonstrably knew what they had been asked to do was illegal.

Post reply on HN