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

GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 708 posts

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#351

Post by kevingadd »

nostrademons wrote: post #270
commandlinefan wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also have to wonder what percentage of GitHub’s employees _are_ non-US citizens. Every programming job I’ve ever had in the U.S. was for a company that was staffed by at least 90% foreigners; if they see U.S. immigration as an adversary, they may be opposing any contract on personal grounds.

Every non-citizen I know keeps their head down and doesn't express their personal opinions on political matters ( particularly relating to ICE) because they don't want to jeopardize their visa. It would be strange and kinda stupid for a foreign programmer on an H1B to oppose a contract with ICE because they do eventually want to get that Green Card and eventually citizenship, and they know who holds the power in that…

This will be less likely to shift in the coming years, since the US government is openly investigating the ability to revoke citizenship. It's depressing to see, but I guess it shouldn't be surprising because the US approach to citizenship - birthright and/or naturalization - is not universally the case in other countries.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#352

Post by ken »

andyroid wrote: post #286
ken wrote: post #235

> The results of GitHub’s quarterly anonymous employee survey — which showed a decline in trust of leadership ... In 100% of cases where I've known a small company that got bought by a much bigger company, this has occurred. It's amazing anyone still believes that their small company can get bought and somehow they'll be able to preserve (what they think is) their "company culture".

Huh? GitHub’s company culture has been described as toxic way before they were acquired - not at least here. The problem seems to be exactly that they’ve managed to preserve that. Kudos to the employees speaking up though!

I’m simply going off what the article says.

If it was “toxic” before and still managed to decline, that sounds even worse!

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#353

Post by kevingadd »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #154
commandlinefan wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also have to wonder what percentage of GitHub’s employees _are_ non-US citizens. Every programming job I’ve ever had in the U.S. was for a company that was staffed by at least 90% foreigners; if they see U.S. immigration as an adversary, they may be opposing any contract on personal grounds.

> Every programming job I’ve ever had in the U.S. was for a company that was staffed by at least 90% foreigners. Where the hell are you working? I'm going to call bullshit, because it's really not that easy to get a work visa in the US. You're saying 90% of your colleagues weren't US citizens?

One of my first SW jobs (mid-scale startup in Palo Alto) I had multiple canadians on my team and we had some chinese and indian immigrants on other teams. I wouldn't say 90%, but a sizable percentage.

At other companies like Google and Microsoft I've had plenty of immigrant colleagues along with colleagues at offices overseas. Some eventually choose to return to their home country, some migrate here after starting at the employer.

The main game studio I worked for also had lots of chinese and korean immigrants on staff, but I suspect that was influenced by the parent company being korean.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#354

Post by azirbel »

The comments here seem very negative compared to e.g. the Google employee protests over Project Dragonfly. [1]

There are two questions here: whether GitHub should allow ICE to buy its software, and whether employees should influence the direction of their company via protests, petitions, and threats to quit.

GitHub specifics aside, I think employees absolutely should organize and quit over issues they feel strongly about (at least when they have the flexibility to find other jobs). Company policy should be guided by the people who work there, and the a company's leadership structure is set up well to resolve the conflict.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18542830

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#355

Post by tomschlick »

supernova87a wrote: post #348

I question how much an employee should concern him/herself with how a product is used once it's created. You have to let certain control go after a point. Or if your product is open to everyone, you'll have to live with the fact that people may use it in ways you disagree with. Xerox or Canon (or whoever) probably makes copiers that ICE uses to make copies. Lenovo or Apple probably makes hardware that they use also t…

> Why don't the employees at all these other companies object like Github employees? Why do Github employees get a special right to withhold consent for their product to be used in a setting they might object to? Why is ICE the only company that they object to? Why do some causes get their favor and not others?

Wokeness and the recent trend of trying to cancel anything that doesn't align within a narrow spectrum of progressive viewpoints is a big reason here.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#356

Post by SquishyPanda23 »

mfer wrote: post #20

Topics like this, I think, give us an opportunity to go deeper on the issues and concepts surrounding what's going on. I realize that the common quick answer these days is to harshly reject people and organizations we deeply disagree with. But, there may be some things worth pondering, like... Is there a way technology companies can influence these organizations and the situations of the people they touch for the bet…

Has this ever worked?

People will come up with all sorts of reasons to convince themselves to take blood money, but surely they're self delusions at best.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#357

Post by malvosenior »

shadowgovt wrote: post #322
baggy_trough wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the immigrant detention centers measure up to the definition at, for example, the Encylopedia Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/topic/concentration-camp

I remember in 2016 when people were predicting people would be debating the definition of concentration camp during this administration. Here we are.

That makes sense since those same people are now labeling detention centers "concentration camps". It's tautological.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#358

Post by matt4077 »

andyroid wrote: post #286
ken wrote: post #235

> The results of GitHub’s quarterly anonymous employee survey — which showed a decline in trust of leadership ... In 100% of cases where I've known a small company that got bought by a much bigger company, this has occurred. It's amazing anyone still believes that their small company can get bought and somehow they'll be able to preserve (what they think is) their "company culture".

Huh? GitHub’s company culture has been described as toxic way before they were acquired - not at least here. The problem seems to be exactly that they’ve managed to preserve that. Kudos to the employees speaking up though!

I'm not sure if I would characterise it as toxic? There is obviously disagreement. But my impression has always been "this is a company where people have values other than technology & money, and are empowered to speak up". The alternative isn't really never having disagreements, but rather being secretive and vindictive to the point where employees fear to speak up, or consider it useless in the face of corporate bureaucracy and unaccountability.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#360

Post by enraged_camel »

ryanbrunner wrote: post #251
ratsmack wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never heard of that organization. Do they have a web site?

What point are you trying to get at? There are plenty of ideologies and political ideas that aren't represented by a singular organization advocating for them.

There isn't a point he is trying to get at, because he isn't arguing in good faith.
Post reply on HN