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

451–460 of 894 posts

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

#451

Post by meowface »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #399
meowface wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Israel has a legitimate reason to want to try to intercept and detect terrorist activity, but given what they've been doing in Gaza for the past year and a half, they simply can't be trusted. They've lost all credibility and benefit of the doubt. So they can't expect other entities to help them do something they say is legitimate, because no one can trust them to do something in a legitimate and ethical way.

I think OP’s point is Israel’s legitimate surveillance needs have risen alongside their credibility crashing. This isn’t a simply reduced problem unless one has a horse in the race.

I understand that, and I am sympathetic to those needs to some degree. They do have increased legitimate surveillance needs. But they've lost all of their good will. Partnering with them is too morally and PR-ily hazardous.

I am not saying Israel is nearly as bad as Nazi Germany, but I think this argument is overall kind of pointless because one could easily have said that Nazi Germany had greatly increased legitimate surveillance needs after they invaded Poland.

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

#453

Post by selimthegrim »

righthand wrote: post #184
politelemon wrote: post #93

I am seeing several kneejerk "Microsoft bad" reactions here, which HNers don't do for many other companies. I encourage many of you to read what is written. They listened to their internal staff and stakeholders and public pressure, and did terminated the contract instead of ignoring it or doubling down. That is a good thing.

> did terminated the contract instead of ignoring it or doubling down This was after they ignored it and doubled down for almost 3 years*. What was the total gain in profits and how many Palestinians died during that time? You’re going to ignore the full cost because they did the least they could do almost 3 years later? * if the starting line is set to October 2022 attacks, if not how long were they making money off…

October 2023

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

#454

Post by jameshilliard »

basilgohar wrote: post #407
dotancohen wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It is not a lie. It is so extreme that it has merited its own Wikipedia page [0], but don't trust that, read the citations. Leaders[1] statements[2] have been chronicled calling for genocide. It is happening in both word and action. Resisting an occupying force is not genocide. [1] https://amnesty.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Amnesty-Intern... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20250916081026/https://www.ohchr... [0] h…

It's quite clear which group has genocidal intent, there's a Wikipedia page [0] for that as well. Groups like Hamas are quite open about their genocidal intentions, they even detail those desires in their charter [1].

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

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Hamas_charter

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

#456

Post by lostlogin »

thisislife2 wrote: post #354
colpabar wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wonder if a company like microsoft has any real concern over people tweeting negative things about it. It seems like companies are finally realizing a lot of it can just be ignored, but with microsoft specifically, what’s the risk? Who in a position to deny ms enough money that they’d care or even notice is going to decide to do it based on people protesting?

You are right that with the Trump administration (well, bipartisan support), US companies don't have to worry about any adverse political action by cooperating with Israel. Negative publicity from the common people also won't adversely affect their bottom line. But they do have to worry about the legal aspects - the US is one of the few countries actually having laws against genocide / war crimes. Trump may be ready…

> the US is one of the few countries actually having laws against genocide / war crimes.

Yet the US does not allow prosecutions in the international criminal court.

How do you explain Mai Lai what went on more recently in Afghanistan and Iraq.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_Intern...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes

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

#457

Post by js212 »

basilgohar wrote: post #395
skinkestek wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Palestine" have declared themselves to be at war with Israel. Syria is at war with Israel since decades. Lebanon has been shooting rockets at Israel and preparing ground attacks. Yemen (or rather the Houtis) keep firing at Israel. Are these the examples you want to show about Israel being bad? Edit: Tunisia hasn't been attacked. The influencer convoy was attacked by their own flare and media claimed ot was a drone u…

Palestine has been illegally occupied by Israel since its inception. It is not AT WAR. It is resisting occupation. Israel has been the single most belligerent nation in the middle east, attacking and antagonizing their own so-called allies for its entire existence. Israel is responsible for attacking the British (King David Hotel), the US (USS Liberty), all of its neighbors, and even others more distant (Tunisia). It…

Great. So if you support Hamas you support everything that comes after. Actions have consequences.

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

#458

Post by moogly »

underdeserver wrote: post #376
moogly wrote: post #45

No one left to surveil, I guess.

Estimates of deaths are around 60,000, of a 2 million strong population.

I could write things here about those officially reported deaths (not estimates, which are much higher, but no one really knows and very likely never will), or the internal diaplacement, but since there might be at least 1 Palestinian still alive digging in the rubble somewhere, literalists like you would still feel the need to overcorrect.

I thought the defeated tone of my post made it clear that it was not meant to be taken that literally. I guess not.

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

#459

Post by coredog64 »

rolph wrote: post #383
pmontra wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess that one needs some help to transfer "swiftly" 8000 Terabytes of data. At 1 Terabit per second it would take about 18 hours. 8000*8 Tb / 60s / 60 / 24 = .740740... 24 h *.740 = 17.76 h But is 1 Tb/s a thing? I think this has been another case of "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway" (Andrew Tanenbaum, 1981). Maybe rack units of disks? For very important…

that would be an interesting service contract. the rack and infra are yours; the storage media and all contents are mine.

AWS Snowball can be used to get data out of S3. They copy it onto portable devices, ship them to you, and you can copy the data off without saturating your DirectConnect bandwidth.

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

#460

Post by Forgeties79 »

sugarpimpdorsey wrote: post #403
Forgeties79 wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a pretty low bar for “beyond the pale.” Company PR isn’t some sacred thing and these people paid a hefty price for their protest. They should be praised for their bravery even if you disagree with their message.

I make no comment on their message but you cannot use company resources to do it and not expect consequences. Sorry if that is unclear. This is a fireable offense in nearly every company handbook in existence.

When did I say they shouldn’t expect consequences or that it wasn’t a fireable offense? The whole point of this discussion is that cries for people to “protest properly” are ridiculous and designed to make protests ineffective.

Clearly I get that their jobs and more were at risk, hence why I said they were brave. The only thing unclear is where you got the impression I thought otherwise.

Post reply on HN