After GitHub CEO backs Black Lives Matter, workers demand an end to ICE contract • Hacker News Board

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

#561

Post by frewsxcv » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

no-s wrote: post #548

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…

Well, I don't know. Freedom of speech is also a principle. Public accommodation and non-discrimination are also principled. We don't need laws to see these as a public good. We shouldn't parse these ideas into orthogonal pretzels just because wokeness.

> We don't need laws to see these as a public good.

Yes, actually you do.

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

#562

Post by tsimionescu » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 8:56 PM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #494

tsimionescu wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Personally, I don't think open borders are unthinkable, but I am not necessarily for them either.

However, the deportation process must be humane. You can detain people who are to be deported in conditions that respect their human rights. You can allow parents of small children with US citizenship to take their children with them (assuming both parents are deported), or to make other arrangements.

The two alternatives are not (1) open borders or (2) concentration camps for illegal immigrants.

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

#563

Post by kennywinker » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 8:58 PM UTC

nodesocket wrote: post #532

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…

I don't see the connection between supporting black lives matter and enforcing our immigration laws. If they want completely open borders, then they need to come out and say that, but demanding ICE lose contracts and technical software access is absurd.

As we are about to see in minneapolis, just like defund the police doesn’t mean no law enforcement, abolish ice doesn’t mean an open border. It means ICE is a structure that is harming american values (liberty, justice, due process).

And the idea here is to apply pressure any way possible. Maybe losing github doesn’t practically change much, but if I was working somewhere and companies started cancelling contracts due to the unethical actions of my workplace... i would start looking for another job.

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

#564

Post by afiori » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 8:58 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #372

brabel wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am strongly against a private business being able to refuse service to a person/organization on political grounds, even when the "victim" may seem to be performing evil actions, as long as it is not breaking any laws. One should not discriminate on the basis of race, political orientation, gender, origin or religion. Refusing service is clearly a form of discrimination. When you aim that towards your own Government…

>One should not discriminate on the basis of race, political orientation, gender, origin or religion. Refusing service is clearly a form of discrimination It looks like you're trying to imply that discriminating based on political orientation is as bad as as discriminating based on race, gender, origin or religion, but that's wrong. At least when it comes to the law, political orientation isn't a protected class. Rac…

I think that there is a good midway solution to this.

For example in many countries you need to "register" political advertising[1]. One could say that it is perfectly reasonable not to help political opponents, but then it would be reasonable to declare your business as politically oriented.

Similarly to how even private universities in the US must uphold free-speech rights is they declare free-speech friendly.

This is not a complete solution, but it does not need to be all or nothing.

[1] in the Uk there was some conversation about Ryanair's showing pro-stay slogan on a plane behind a press conference during the Brexit campaing

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

#565

Post by afiori » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 8:59 PM UTC

jlokier wrote: post #556

adwn wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] but it's crazy to not let discrimination happen on things that are a choice. Religion is a choice. Does that mean that you're fine with discrimination based on one's religion?

Is religion a choice? I'm sure many people who believe in $DEITY, and the duties which follow from this, do not see "belief" as a choice they are making.

I'm sure many people who believe in $IDEOLOGY, and the duties which follow from this, do not see "belief" as a choice they are making.

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

#566

Post by joshuamorton » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

Fellshard wrote: post #496

joshuamorton wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

FWIW, in my work I've seen both. But I'm sort of asking things at a higher level. If a client is asking you to prioritize a generic enhancement over others, they are presumably doing so because they believe that generic enhancement will have the greatest value to their work.

So if ICE asks github to prioritize better native CI support for Windows, or something, they're doing it because it is of maximum benefit to ICE.

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

#567

Post by tsimionescu » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 9:03 PM UTC

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 Github/Microsoft publicly refuse to serve ICE, they will directly make it harder for other companies to serve ICE, through bad PR and through inspiring workers in other corporations to pressure their own companies to do so.

It is to some extent a symbolic gesture, but symbolic gestures have power in our world, especially when they are done by the powerful.

And of course ICE is part of the problem. Sure, the way they are regulated is also part of the problem, and that also needs to be changed, but the boots on the ground and their direct managers are not blameless. And they are likely to hold full responsibility for some of the horrendous acts being committed, not everything is commanded from on high. Not to mention the criminal negligence displayed in cases like losing track of people's children - that was not an order from somewhere, that is some bureaucrat who should be held personally accountable for failing to do their job right with catastrophic consequences.

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

#568

Post by toasterlovin » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 9:06 PM UTC

jakelazaroff wrote: post #146

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

In the U.S. context, concentration camp is used almost exclusively to refer to the extermination camps run by Nazis in World War II. I know not everyone on here is American, but that bit of information is useful for understanding why so many people make the association between concentration camps and the extermination of Jews in WWII. And it also explains why it is disingenuous of Americans to state that the US government is running concentration camps; it is technically correct according to the dictionary definition, but it is not correct according to lay usage in the United States.

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

#569

Post by chipotle_coyote » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 9:07 PM UTC

rattray wrote: post #513

takeda wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm happy that people are allowed to protest, but I don't think they should protest for causes that I don't agree with" "I think ICE needs reforms, but I don't believe a pressure should be put on them to impose changes" Makes me wonder if you truly support people protesting or even agree that ICE is doing anything wrong.

This just seems like a weird, ineffective way to put pressure on ICE to stop detaining people excessively, inhumanely, or lethally. Anger and outrage are valuable, and it's important that we channel them in the right directions.

This just seems like a weird, ineffective way to put pressure on ICE to stop detaining people excessively, inhumanely, or lethally.

It might very well be, and it's worth debating how much giving business support to an organization whose policies you (possibly vehemently) disagree with is a kind of implicit support of those policies. But, it's also worth asking: if protest by workers to put pressure on their employees to stop giving business support to organizations whose policies they vehemently disagree with is "disappointing," what kind of protest isn't?

It seems to me that when we're talking about corporations, who you do and don't sign contracts with -- who you buy from, who you sell to, and what charities you support -- is far and away the strongest signal you can send. If you're sending a signal of support to Black Lives Matter protests, it's nice if you send out a few tweets and update your home page, but it's better if you donate money, services, and/or employee time. And the group you donate those things to is going to send a signal: donating to Colin Kaepernick's "Know Your Rights Camp" is in some sense a more specific, stronger message than donating to the ACLU.

So it certainly seems reasonable that asking the corporations you work for (and perhaps work with) to put their money where their PR is in terms of who they do business with also sends a message. No, it's probably not in and of itself going to put much pressure on ICE, but it is a statement of values.

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

#570

Post by afiori » Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 9:08 PM UTC

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.

Property is private, but the market is public.

I am not sure how much legal barter is, but in many sense the currency is intrinsically linked to the public space of the state.