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

491–500 of 841 posts

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

#491

Post by tick_tock_tick »

dsr_ wrote: post #393
oh_sigh wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Criminals are also a minority group that are concentrated into prisons. Is that wrong too?

Criminals are not a "minority group". Due process is the method that a society uses to determine whether people should be punished. The concentration camps under discussion do not hold people who have been adjudicated and condemned; they hold people who have been accused.

He's using the exact same word play. Criminals are most certainly a "minority group" as in they make a minority of the population it's just the colloquial definition of "minority group" means race.

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

#493

Post by [deleted] »

mchanson wrote: post #31
johncena33 wrote: post #2

I guess this is the reason lot of corporates try to stay out of politics. Because once you set a precedence then people will use that as to push their own political agendas. I personally don't like the slippery slope argument since it's very lazy and justifies inaction in many cases. But at the same time when I see news like this, I just wonder how long it will take two different subgroups trying push their own confl…

We are going through a very strange and extreme period in US History. Corporations are a huge part of the political landscape. Of course workers who are powerful will demand things of their workplaces. All corporations are political. By accepting the ICE contract previously it was political. Now by reversing they would be changing sides. They were already in the political fray.

[deleted]

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

#494

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

tsimionescu wrote: post #263
syshum wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I can't see how this helps improve immigration, In many ways it does the opposite, for reforms to work you need to build coalitions from all political segments of society, vilifying political opponents (the ones that believe in some kind of immigration control and do not support fully open borders) does not build that coalition that is need to fight the unethical and illegal acts. Instead it puts people on the def…

If you are in favor (or in the process) of putting large groups of people who have not directly harmed anyone in concentration camps, separating them from their families, keeping children in cages etc, THEN you are considered a racist authoritarian almost akin to mid 1940's Germany.

What alternative proposals do you have for dealing with people who've unlawfully crossed the border? If your answer is "let them live freely in the US", I think it's fair to characterize that as a a call for open borders.

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

#495

Post by sergiotapia »

umvi wrote: post #243
sergiotapia wrote: post #145

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?

Good question, tons of other countries are extremely racist towards immigrants (Japan, Italy, etc) yet only the USA gets lambasted. I think a lot of people just focus on the USA because it's an easy target.

>USA because it's an easy target.

What makes the US especially an easy target?

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

#496

Post by Fellshard »

joshuamorton wrote: post #477
Fellshard wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Features, yes. Are those features directly connected to those clients' work, or is it a more general feature that has to do with the execution of the service? I will agree that it's dubious that that nuance is reflected in the rulings on the Masterpiece case. I'm trying to follow the same lines set there, though, in my argumentation.

> Are those features directly connected to those clients' work How can they not be?

Let me rephrase to see if it answers your question:

Would the added features be useful in another context? Would they be useful regardless of the type of work being done? Are they merely enhancements of the platform, or are they specifically tailored to the client's domain?

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

#497

Post by cannedslime »

phoe-krk wrote: post #12

Doing cheap PR moves like blacking out logos or posting Twitter "support" posts from CEO accounts or announcing the end of default branches named "master" is, as I said, cheap. The real issue is dealing with the elephants in the room, such as the aforementioned ICE contract of GitHub. It is about time that corporations, with GitHub here as an example, noticed that backing this or that or another minority or "trying"…

To be honest the whole master / slave discussion is laughable because:

1. Most humans have ancestral past as slaves, be it serfdom or thraldom.

2. Etmologically the master branch is associated with the concept of a master copy, not a whip lashing plantation owner.

3. Slavery is pretty much a thing of the past, accept from certain parts of the middle east and africa. And let us not forget, the producers of our consumer goods in asia...

Sold by the same companies that foregive to care jackshit about anything. LOL!

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

#498

Post by lukevdp »

munk-a wrote: post #213
malandrew wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would that be an abuse of power? The company has demonstrated that they are an unreliable government partner. It's wholly different to not accept a contract in the first place, but to unilaterally end it for any reason, political or otherwise, is grounds to consider that service provider unreliable.

The contract was brought to an end - but did the company prove they were an unreliable partner or did the government? These calls to end government association aren't coming from no where - these government acts don't have majority support and it's gotten to the point where individuals are feeling the need to take on personal risk to ensure that the government is actually aligned with the citizenry.

> but did the company prove they were an unreliable partner or did the government?

The company.

You can support the employees without needing to twist reality. There is no question that ending service on non service related grounds makes a company unpredictability unreliable.

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

#499

Post by seph-reed »

NE2z2T9qi wrote: post #264
seph-reed wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but with power comes responsibility. The poor little CEOs are going to have to recognize that their decisions have consequences, and those consequences must be thought through. They don't just get to play Capitalist without any repercussions because they call themselves non-political. If you have power, you are responsible for what happens with it. It's not just free money.

And if you don't get your way, what's next? Shutting off ICE employee's water, electricity, and telephone service? And why not kick them out of their apartments too since sheltering an ICE officer helps enable them.

This isn't about me getting my way. I'm just very, very opposed to the idea of someone wielding massive amounts of power without it being a burden. Power is burdensome because it means responsibility. If you just want just the power but not the responsibility, you're being a parasite. It's not okay.

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

#500

Post by codezero »

tsimionescu wrote: post #238
codezero wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's great that employees can direct this kind of business decision. It's also unfortunate (I am assuming) that the employees have much less of a stake collectively than other shareholders. There's a good chance they would make more informed decisions if they were to fail or be successful based on those decisions. For what it's worth, I think the employees would still make these demands, it would just be nice…

Why does it matter if it's the right business decision? Don't moral considerations have precedence over business considerations? It should be expected of a company to take a profit hit if it is the only way to uphold a moral standard. Regular people do it all the time, why should corporations be held to lower standards?

That's a fair point, but it's often hard to find a single agreed upon moral compass at an entire company.

Also, I would bet that a review of this from a business point of view might make a moral stance moot. If that's the case, it seems like an easier way to avoid a minefield.

Post reply on HN