GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract • Hacker News Board

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

#531

Post by throw_m239339 » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 2:53 AM UTC

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…

> 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.

Well if a business fostered a culture where it's deemed acceptable to question who the business should or shouldn't be working with, nobody can blame the employees for doing exactly what they were incentivized to do.

Plenty of businesses would fired a rebellious employee on the spot without a second thought, or at the very least ask him to resign if he dares question managements on a matter that is neither legally questionable or related to the employee's work conditions, for instance, a group of employees that would be asking management to boycott a certain country.

Seems it is a different culture at GitHub,Google or Facebook where apparently questioning management is a virtue.

I see nothing wrong with that. It's their own doing.

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

#532

Post by sjy » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 2:53 AM UTC

zer00eyz wrote: post #427

opnitro wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to think labor should have more power over what it creates. I'm not sure how an example of being required to work on something they objected to due to economic factors outside of their control is an example that helps your case.

> I'm not sure how an example of being required to work on something they objected to due to economic factors outside of their control is an example that helps your case. Quitting on moral grounds is a luxury in the scope of human history, and is a luxury for MOST Americans today. Im not sure it is a realistic stance for most people (but probably for most of HN). I don't think GitHub is going to (or should) change it…

> Indemnity is a wonderful thing. Indemnity is why we have open source.

What do you mean by this? I don't see any necessary connection between open source and indemnities. Professional developers might want to release free software but accept payment to guarantee its fitness for purpose. Conversely, malware authors shouldn't be able to disclaim responsibility for their actions simply by publishing source code.

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

#533

Post by pm90 » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 2:54 AM UTC

MattP86 wrote: post #88

pm90 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ICE is not a partisan organization, Only if you have your head deliberately under the sand in the face of all the reporting that has been done so far about wanton cruelty inflicted on human beings by this agency, including but not limited to: * separation of toddlers from their parents * horrific conditions in detention facilities * detaining immigrants for as long as they possibly can * arresting and trying to dep…

* also separation of children from smugglers. Stoping human trafficking is primary role of ICE.

Important to note that there are different divisions of ICE. The division that tackles International crime (HSI) is different from the one that subjects immigrants to cruelty (ERO).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/seeki...

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

#534

Post by Legogris » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 2:54 AM UTC

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…

GitHub doesn’t sell product in the same way as your examples. They are a service provider. I’d say different dynamics come in with services (hosting content, providing and managing infrastructure, providing support and maybe even consulting) vs products.

Also for people who draw comparison with discrimination against individuals: Companies, agencies and organizations aren’t “discriminated” against in the same sense as individuals. I am not aware of any legislation where it’s considered wrongly discriminatory to decline B2B contracts.

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

#535

Post by travisgriggs » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 2:55 AM UTC

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…

There is a difference between a) offering something (for free or gain) ubiquitously to the world at large regardless of any of the myriad ways we choose to distinguish one from another and b) have an arrangement with a specific entity to further their specific cause.

I'm not under the impression that gitlab employees are complaining about the first (surely ICE employees and contractors can make use of the myriads of repositories gitlab makes available to the world at large). They are reacting negatively to specific contracts gitlab has with ICE.

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

#536

Post by Thorentis » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 2:56 AM UTC

rtpg wrote: post #487

slykat wrote: post #381

I find it ironic that the same people protesting the contract would also protest a bakery that refuses to sell a product for say a same sex couple (or if you were in the 60s, restaurants that refused to serve blacks). You either have a viewpoint that: 1) a business shouldn't make a moral judgement on its customers and be accessible to all 2) A business can make moral judgements on its customers and choose not to do b…

This is a false dicothomy The actual (IMO correct) position most of these people share is the following two points at once: - businesses should have a moral position, since businesses are just a set of people - that moral position should be right! This isn’t rocket science! Stuff like “don’t support a business doing bad stuff” and “support businesses doing good stuff” is just really basic consumer activism. There’s n…

This is not a false dichotomy at all.

Businesses should have a moral position, sure.

That moral position should be right? According to who? The business itself? Then that second point is redundant. Everybody thinks their moral position is right, that's what morals are. It's a tautology otherwise.

GitHub employees think their moral position on ICE is right. Many disagree. But according to them that's fine, because they think they're right so should be able to boycott who they like.

Replace Github with bakery refusing to serve same-sex couples. Bakery thinks they're right. Many disagree. But according to them that's fine, because they think they're right so should be able to boycott who they like.

You only think it's a false dichotomy because you personally disagree with the bakery and (presumably?) agree with Github. By saying "the moral position should be right", is you simply saying "and they should agree with me otherwise they are wrong".

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

#537

Post by pm90 » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 2:57 AM UTC

CorruptedArc wrote: post #341

pm90 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ICE is not a partisan organization, Only if you have your head deliberately under the sand in the face of all the reporting that has been done so far about wanton cruelty inflicted on human beings by this agency, including but not limited to: * separation of toddlers from their parents * horrific conditions in detention facilities * detaining immigrants for as long as they possibly can * arresting and trying to dep…

It truly isn't a partisan organization. The Dems buried their heads when this happened under President "Deporter & Chief" Obama. People are pretending this issue is new because they didn't take the time to learn about it years ago. Some media reported on it under Obama, but few took the time until they were looking for ammunition against Trump.

No, don't do this both sidesim over here.

Obama prioritized deportation of those with criminal backgrounds. He created the DREAM program to help the millions of immigrants who spent most of their life in the US.

Its not the same.

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

#538

Post by CapricornNoble » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 2:58 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #499

shaftoe wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These aren't people fleeing genocide. These are people leaving Mexico. And they're being put in hotels and buses. It's easy to pretend you're fellow Americans are monsters, but they're not.

> These aren't people fleeing genocide. These are people leaving Mexico. No, they are people fleeing violence in Central America through Mexico, in large part. That violence, incidentally, is in substantial part resulting from the US training nonviolent drug war criminals into extremely violent criminals in its original and then deporting then to Central America what they have no substantial roots.

>>>No, they are people fleeing violence in Central America through Mexico, in large part.

If you are passing through one country because you desire to get to a specific destination, you are basically asylum shopping.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_shopping

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

#539

Post by throw_m239339 » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 2:59 AM UTC

istjohn wrote: post #514

manigandham wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of morality is that it is subjective. You can not determine what is right as a rule.

That's nonsense. Philosophers will debate subtleties around morality until the end of time, but that shouldn't prevent us from taking a stand against evil when we see it.

> That's nonsense. Philosophers will debate subtleties around morality until the end of time, but that shouldn't prevent us from taking a stand against evil when we see it.

"evil" is exactly what religious people called homosexuality for centuries, which is ironic considering your statement. Morality is purely an opinion, just like religion.

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

#540

Post by p1necone » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 3:00 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #528

verall wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current administration has been crystal-clear that it intends to reduce legal and illegal immigration through all means available. One of these means is lengthening the asylum-seeking process and requirements. Another is reducing the allowed number of successful asylum seekers through informal quotas. The current administration has done both. They are intentionally gumming up the asylum system in order to make go…

What you see as “lengthening the process”, others see as actually aligning the process with the laws. HN loves to rail against the corrupt H1-B system, but apparently actually getting asylum seekers is amoral. What would be more honest is to say “I don’t like cheap tech labor, so therefore clamping down on H1-Bs is good.” And “I don’t like the Trump administration and I want an open immigration system, so what Trump…

H1-B visas and asylum seekers are two entirely different things, I'm not sure why you're trying to conflate them.

Edit: arguing about the legality of the asylum seekers is also missing the point.