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

331–340 of 841 posts

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

#331

Post by tsimionescu »

ancorevard wrote: post #136
drunkpotato wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Demonstrably and rather obviously untrue. They're violating the law in many instances, including but not limited to the cases of asylum seekers and current green card holders; it's just they're following the evil, xenophobic whims of the current political leadership, who are failing to hold themselves or ICE accountable to the rule of law, so they are, for the moment, getting away with their lawlessness. I hope we ca…

ICE arrests are significantly down under the current administration compared to the previous administration.

And why is that relevant? Age you assuming that most people in this thread liked Obama's immigration policies?

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

#332

Post by gerbal »

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #203
Drakim wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is using the correct definition of concentration camp, you are the one in error. Concentration camps have existed outside Nazi Germany. Just because that was the most horrible instance doesn't mean that other instances stopped being "concentration camps" just like how a particularly horrible murder doesn't make a less violent murder into a non-murder. https://www.britannica.com/topic/concentration-camp

The colloquial definition of the term is different from the technical definition, but they don't even meet the technical definition. According to your definition, a concentration camp is an "internment centre for political prisoners and members of national or minority groups who are confined for reasons of state security, exploitation, or punishment.." People of certain minority groups aren't being rounded up. Illega…

So you don't like the questions the term "concentration camp" makes you ask about the indefinite detention of foreign nationals for misdemeanor offenses?

Maybe the term isn't the problem and the policy you are trying to defend is

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

#333

Post by simplify »

lurknn wrote: post #99

If working with ICE is so reprehensible, why are none of these employees taking advantage of their in-demand skillset and moving on to companies that better respect their values? I'm sympathetic with those who point out that corporations typically have more leverage than individual employees, and that changing jobs is not so easy for those who are less privileged. That category, though, of "less privileged" with rega…

Because leaving is the best way to remove all pressure from leadership to change their ways.

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

#334

Post by fiestaman »

d33lio wrote: post #156

I fully support steps being taken to reign in police and ICE, however it's still painfully ironic that CHAZ currently has been prioritizing enforcing borders, has roaming groups (peaceful and otherwise) ousting dissidents or those deemed as dissidents and verifying "citizenship". This kind of behavior in any form is troubling.

I just walked through the CHAZ yesterday and there was no-one guarding any borders or anyone verifying “citizenship”.

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

#335

Post by tsimionescu »

NE2z2T9qi wrote: post #199
couchand wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you aren't thinking about the implications of your decisions doesn't make the consequences any less real.

I guess when they start administering ideological purity tests at the bagel shop, I'll know who to thank. After all, providing any type of sustenance or service to a person with the wrong political beliefs helps enable their wrong-ness, doesn't it?

Equating government contracts to service at a bagel shop is naive at best.

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

#336

Post by joosters »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #239
tsimionescu wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've got this backwards. What is happening here is the real political process - people congregating and trying to achieve their political goals through organizations they can actually influence. Organizing to convince your employer, or your local government, or your school board or whatever organization you can to push things in some direction is the political process. Sure, voting is one aspect of it, but it is by…

I don’t believe I’ve got it backwards. If Github/Microsoft won’t serve ICE, someone else will. If you want to fix ICE, the political process is what fixes that, not feel good efforts on a single business. As someone with entities that are registered to do business with the federal government, I’d provide services to ICE, because ICE isn’t the problem: how they’re regulated is the problem. Not providing services to IC…

"If I don't mug this person wandering lost & alone at night, someone else will." - 'someone else will' is not a very good argument or justification for your actions.

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

#337

Post by dnautics »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #257
jobeirne wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope - in free societies you should be able to refuse service on any grounds, including those things. Otherwise you're permitting the government to forcibly compel you to allocate your time and resources to ends they define. In free societies, governments should only be able to forcibly compel people not to do things (murder, threaten, steal, etc.) - see the concept of "negative rights."

I mean this in the nicest possible way; have you ever faced discrimination based on the colour of your skin, gender, sexual orientation, disabilities or anything else which is protected by law in most civilised countries? If, like a significant portion of the HN audience, you are straight, white, middle class and male it's probably easier for you to dismiss the right to fair treatment than it might be for individuals…

I have. And you know what, civil rights laws did jack all to protect me. I'm much happier knowing that the people that operate that business were racist jerks (instead of, say, them being forced to serve me and spit in my food, which would be a health concern), and I have dissuaded probably on the order of a hundred people from going to that place, and that was in the era before social media.

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

#338

Post by goatinaboat »

marpstar wrote: post #71
jobeirne wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a private entity, especially for essentially political reasons, is lunacy. Um, think you've got this backwards. Private entities shouldn't have to take on anyone they don't want as customers (for whatever reason - do you have to justify who you do or don't want in your livingroom?), but publicly-funded institutions shouldn't be able to deny service o…

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.

Source code is a company’s Crown Jewels. Who can take the risk that their business will be shut down because an employee tweeted something 8 years ago that is now out of favour? At least Git by it’s very nature protects you but you would still have your issue tracker and CICD pipeline held to ransom.

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

#339

Post by herbstein »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #195
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…

So not to go all Godwin, but take an extreme example... Do you think a company in 1930s Germany should have ethically refused to provide software that was used in concentration camps? [In fact, there was a bit of "IT" then, used for such, but it was provided by IBM. But to make the analogy closer, let's imagine a hypothetically Germany company]. ("Companies" don't do anything by themselves, so I guess the question is…

I definitely think this line of reasoning pays off well, and is isn't really an "extreme example". The point is to establish the "sometimes it's the right thing to do", to unequivocally prove that the discussion should be re-framed.

I've posited the same argument around violence. Most people, in my experience, wouldn't fault a Jew for violently resisting the Nazis. In fact, many resistance groups are held in very high regard. So immediately the questions necessarily moves from "is violence sometimes allowed?" to "when is violence allowed?". Which, if nothing else, is very much a more interesting discussion to have.

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

#340

Post by mc32 »

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…

To me one of the issues is if companies have to toe political lines, then every new change of administration potentially means disruption. The alternative is the government doing more things in-house which pushes up costs.

So in the end this is posturing (aka signaling).

Can Boeing see a conflict of interest via a vis a military conflict and say, no to the DoD because they like some baddie the USG might tangle with? Now in reality this wouldn’t happen because of USG buying power... but put that aside.

Post reply on HN