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

After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 841 posts

Re: After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

#141

Post by ChristianBundy »

rattray wrote: post #14

What a bummer that workers are publicly demanding this, and (presumably) seeking press attention on it. I'm no fan of ICE – a very large percentage of my friends in the US are immigrants, and I generally want my country to be a welcoming one. ICE has certainly committed unethical and probably illegal acts (probably true of most federal agencies). But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a pri…

> But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a private entity, especially for essentially political reasons, is lunacy.

It really isn't. Private institutions are under no obligation to collaborate with public agencies unless explicitly required by the Defense Production Act[0]. Please remember that the government is meant to serve us, not the other way around.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950

Re: After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

#142

Post by the-dude »

jobeirne wrote: post #97
nahtnam wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about anti-discrimnation laws? Where do you stand on the issue with the baker refusing to bake a cake for the gay couple?

In societies that have full respect for private property, I should be able to refuse to do business with you for any reason, including the color of your shoes, the kind of music you listen to, or your marital preferences. Whether it is wise or rationally self-interested to do so is a different question.

You are carefully tiptoeing around race & gender here.

Re: After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

#144

Post by poxrud »

staticassertion wrote: post #117
rattray wrote: post #14

What a bummer that workers are publicly demanding this, and (presumably) seeking press attention on it. I'm no fan of ICE – a very large percentage of my friends in the US are immigrants, and I generally want my country to be a welcoming one. ICE has certainly committed unethical and probably illegal acts (probably true of most federal agencies). But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a pri…

Microsoft already banned the police from using Rekognition. I think if the bar is "don't kill minorities" people are mostly going to be OK with you cutting the contract.

Rekognition is Amazon, not Microsoft.

Re: After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

#145

Post by sergiotapia »

Is the US the only country on _earth_ where the media is so hellbent on propaganda for opening the borders?

I can't think of another nation that does this. Not brazil, not bolivia, certainly not argentina, not spain, hell no japan lol, russia of course not.

What makes the US so special in this unique problem with the media?

Re: After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

#146

Post by jakelazaroff »

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #104
dsr_ wrote: post #66

Corporations are people. If they don't act ethically, we can't expect people to act ethically. Ending a contract with an agency that runs concentration camps is good. Better, though, is to not accept any contracts with any government that runs concentration camps. Small steps are good. Big steps are better. PS: great fear from all paying customers that run concentration camps that an internet mob could separate them…

Your choice of language by saying "concentration camps" is unproductively hyperbolic and reminiscent of Nazis killing Jews in WW2. People found to have been here illegally are being kept in detention centers until deportation or trial. Nobody is getting gassed or burned in ovens.

Note that there is a distinction — albeit a blurry one — between concentration camps [0] and extermination camps [1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_camp

Re: After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

#147

Post by acbart »

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #104
dsr_ wrote: post #66

Corporations are people. If they don't act ethically, we can't expect people to act ethically. Ending a contract with an agency that runs concentration camps is good. Better, though, is to not accept any contracts with any government that runs concentration camps. Small steps are good. Big steps are better. PS: great fear from all paying customers that run concentration camps that an internet mob could separate them…

Your choice of language by saying "concentration camps" is unproductively hyperbolic and reminiscent of Nazis killing Jews in WW2. People found to have been here illegally are being kept in detention centers until deportation or trial. Nobody is getting gassed or burned in ovens.

Which part of the definition do you take issue with in this context?

> Concentration Camps: A place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard —used especially in reference to camps created by the Nazis in World War II for the internment and persecution of Jews and other prisoners

Re: After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

#148

Post by cmdshiftf4 »

whydoyoucare wrote: post #135

Never virtue signal if you are a CEO, unless all consequences are thought through. ;-)

Friedman made his bed years ago in this regard. I don't blame him though because the same people causing shit for him now will also pull the "silence is violence" or "remaining silent is being complicit" angle should he now tow the line.

And if he disagrees with them, well, look how quickly they ran to the LA Times with their private internal comms slack screenshots.

Re: After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

#149

Post by krrrh »

Fellshard wrote: post #11
duxup wrote: post #6

Is GitHub a hug part of what ICE ... does? Personally I wouldn't want to work for a company actually detaining people, but call me terrible but I'm not sure I'd feel the same about letting them pay to host some code...

There's a big strain of consequentialism running through the modern left - no neutral service is held as neutral if it permits the 'wrong' customers.

There is also a huge generational split between those on the left holding liberal values, and the new progressive left, which has been demonstrated by the recent crackups at media organs like the New York Times (who saw it in their mandate to publish an op-Ed by Hitler in 1941, but the publishing of a sitting senator (Tom Cotton) resulted in a staff revolt and cost the opinion editor his job).[1]

Anyone who was around when the OSI set out a basic definition of minimal requirements for open source licenses will remember that there were some arguments about whether a license could restrict use based on fields of endeavour. The idea that it couldn’t is aligned with universalist civil libertarian principles, and epistemological humility.

> 6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor > The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.[2]

The principles of open source are still very strong, and somehow more obvious than free speech or due process. The network effects could make it impossible for any significant change, but I expect we’ll soon see attempts at licenses that are otherwise free, but attempt to restrict use by certain domestic enemies of the maintainers. [1] Matt Taibbi - https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-news-media-is-destroying-i... [2] OSI - https://opensource.org/osd-annotated

Re: After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract

#150

Post by alonmower »

elicash wrote: post #111
marpstar wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP didn't say they should be required to work with certain entities, only that it could jeopardize their stance with other, less controversial, entities.

> could jeopardize their stance with other, less controversial, entities That would, of course, be a terrible and illegal abuse of power and essentially be the government policing political speech by private individuals. What an indictment of our government (and I don't mean a single person, but of the system itself) that this seems to be an uncontroversial statement. Because I agree, it's true, and it's the mark of…

I’m not sure it needs to even be as nefarious as that. If I’m in charge of deciding what technology to use for another, less controversial, arm of the government and I see that one of the companies I’m considering has decided to stop doing business with another I might feel less confident in deciding whether or not to use them. What if they decide they don’t want to do business with me at some point in the future?

That might be overly naive and I agree that there’s great potential for corruption here as well.

Post reply on HN