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

Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 894 posts

Re: Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

#311

Post by skinkestek »

2THFairy wrote: post #234
skinkestek wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Gazans obviously. Who else?

Who else? The people actually holding the hostages, perhaps. Because you surely mistakenly implied here that All Gazans categorically are responsible for the hostage-taking and "deserve" to be killed as a consequence of that. Your use of language betrays your feelings. You are disgusting.

Even in nazi Germany a number of people tried to help the Jews.

On Gaza: not a single that I am aware of have tried to help the hostages, not even the toddlers, despite promised financial rewards.

Re: Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

#312

Post by snickerdoodle14 »

duxup wrote: post #269
nashashmi wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One protestor was fired after interrupting a CEO's speech.

I feel like interrupting a CEO's speech at a big conference is pretty well understood to be a social indicator of a high level of insubordination. I suspect the protestor knew that too. The consequences were appropriate, even if I might share some of the protestor's concerns.

> insubordination

Are we talking about the military or some company?

Re: Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

#313

Post by catigula »

Joeboy wrote: post #309
catigula wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to imagine that this argument exists, the real victims of mass murder aren't the actual victims of mass murder.

If a country was killing thousands of people and saying it was to make people like you safer, might you not be inclined to point out it's having the opposite effect?

No, that isn't my general reaction to Hitler saying he killed Jews to make Europeans safer.

My reaction is "what are you talking about, psycho murderer?"

That's a good look, try that.

Re: Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

#314

Post by dotancohen »

basilgohar wrote: post #182
dotancohen wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Their own land, of course, where they've lived for thousands of years.

Serious question, what do you think is their own land? And what exactly makes you think it is their land?

Are you aware that most of the Arabs of the Holy Land came around the same time period as the Jews? There were Arabs living here previously, of course, as were there living here Jews. Half a century before the British mandate, Jerusalem was already Jewish majority.

  > where they've lived for thousands of years.
The only reason that Jews in the West Bank are called settlers is because the Jews were ethnically cleansed from the West Bank in 1948, and that territory was free of Jews for 19 years. Other than those 19 years, the Jews had been here far longer than the Arab colonizers had been.

Re: Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

#317

Post by dmix »

thewebguyd wrote: post #263
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people seem to think rioting and vandalism are acceptable behaviors. It's important that people engaging in such activity are dealt with swiftly and justly. Such behavior further encourages violence and destruction as acceptable behaviors in society, which they are not.

Rioting and vandalism are unacceptable...until they aren't and are instead necessary. Is everyone so quick to forget that the rights we have today in the US were won through violence after all other methods failed? The 40 hour work week we enjoy today was also won through blood. Now, in this case between employees and Microsoft I'd agree, no, vandalism wasn't necessary at all. But when it comes to defending our right…

There’s been a couple studies showing that disruptive protests (blocking roads, yelling at people entering buildings, etc) cause public support for their cause to decrease or even increase opposition.

If the ideas are good then support will build through effectively communicating those ideas. Being noisy is fine but there’s an obvious line that selfish activists cross. The sort of people who want their toys now and don’t want to patiently do the hard work of organically building up a critical mass. So they immediately start getting aggressive and violent in small groups. Which is counter productive.

Re: Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

#318

Post by grumple »

groos wrote: post #296
grumple wrote: post #232

[flagged]

Have you not seen any news coming out of Gaza for the past two years? It's a desolate flattened lunarscape. Israel never had any intent of avoiding civilian deaths. Quite the contrary in fact and they still have their eyes on the West Bank.

> It's a desolate flattened lunarscape. Israel never had any intent of avoiding civilian deaths.

So you think they managed to destroy so many buildings and only killed ~65k people (about half militants) out of 2 million by not avoiding civilian deaths? If half the buildings are destroyed, we would expect a million dead if there were no efforts to avoid civilian deaths.

Do you think Israel makes no efforts to avoid civilian deaths? If you were presented with easily verifiable proof that they do avoid it (via both their own reporting, international reporting, and Palestinians themselves), would you retract your statement? Are there any facts which would change your mind? I ask because these facts are easily accessible, and I'm happy to provide them with many sources, but only if providing them isn't a total waste of time because it's become a pseudo-religious belief.

Re: Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

#319

Post by snickerdoodle14 »

cm2187 wrote: post #302
kayodelycaon wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half the jobs I’ve worked, I’d be immediately fired if I interrupted a CEO’s speech. The other half, I’d be in serious trouble and I’d be first on any layoff.

I know a story of a guy who got fired for just talking to the CEO of his large company!

america sounds like such a hell-hole

that would be a nice compensation package in any first world country

Post reply on HN