Live data from Hacker News

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

theguardian.com

511–520 of 894 posts

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

#511

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…

[flagged]

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

#512
post #97

The issue that people have with Israel's actions is the death of civilians, not the death of Hamas, the widely recognised terrorist. I believe it also to be true that the IDF do not want to kill civilians, and that their target is only Hamas. In which case, is it prudent to remove the IDF's ability to successfully target the correct people? Precise military intelligence is absolutely necessary for minimising civilian…

You can easily find telegram channels that show what regular Israeli soldiers are up to, they post it themselves like they're proud of it. Take a look at it and see what you think then.

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

#513
post #497

> The decision has not affected Microsoft’s wider commercial relationship with the IDF, which is a longstanding client and will retain access to other services. The termination will raise questions within Israel about the policy of holding sensitive military data in a third-party cloud hosted overseas. It's worth noting that even after finding out the "most moral" army is conducting mass surveillance, they're still h…

[flagged]

How so? The Patriot Act was arguably the kick-off of the state of constant mass surveillance that is ubiquitous today.

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

#514
post #473

I think Cloud providers should be common carriers. I don’t think that it is a good thing when a company can make an arbitrary decision and disable functionality that you have put millions of dollars and thousands or tens of thousands of person hours into. I think that the only reasons that a cloud provider should be permitted to use to justify termination of service, are illegal activity (in the country of service),…

So you think making a genocide is not illegal ?

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

#515
post #78

All: Please actually read the article before posting conclusions based on the headline or a quick skim. Most of this thread is confused.

This is off-topic, but I'd like to hijack your comment to remind everyone that your comment is _technically_ against the rules. I hope this particular example reveals that the rule against "RTFA" is misguided and should be changed or removed because it creates a culture where people are deliberately misinformed seeking only a summary in the comment section (if that) and some kind of hot take to fume about.

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

#516
post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that’s my point - who will do that? Who is going to go to their company’s CEO and convince them to put in the massive amount of effort to switch cloud providers? Who is going to say “I don’t think we should use Teams anymore” and actually be able to switch to something else? I have no idea if microsoft even cares about retail customers anymore, but are there really enough people who are going to boycott microsoft…

> are there really enough people who are going to boycott microsoft products Maybe not, but some is better than none, and I'll continue to push more people to do it, rather than tell them nothing they do matters. > over this? Maybe it's not just this. Maybe this is the straw that breaks the user's back. Or maybe the next thing is. My point was to address your belief that they're too big for anyone to make any differe…

That's fair. For the record, I recently dumped windows for linux and won't ever buy/use a microsoft product again if I can help it, and I will encourage others to do the same, but that decision had nothing to do with politics.

I don't think I actually disagree with anything you've said. I am just very cynical, and while I want to believe like you do, I find it very difficult.

edit: "Can they not make principled moves either?" - Yeah, they _could_, but does that _ever_ happen at companies as big as microsoft?

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

#517
post #497

> The decision has not affected Microsoft’s wider commercial relationship with the IDF, which is a longstanding client and will retain access to other services. The termination will raise questions within Israel about the policy of holding sensitive military data in a third-party cloud hosted overseas. It's worth noting that even after finding out the "most moral" army is conducting mass surveillance, they're still h…

[flagged]

[deleted]

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

#519

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.

M$ is bad, just not cause of this

[flagged]

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

#520
>Unit 8200, the military’s elite spy agency, had violated the company’s terms of service by storing the vast trove of surveillance data in its Azure cloud platform

reliance of everything/everybody on cloud platforms already mind-boggling.

One can extrapolate it further - in a near future conflicts both sides may have their data, weapons control systems, etc. running inside the same Big Cloud Provider ... in this case would they need actual physical weapons systems? or may be it would be easier to just let those weapons control systems duke each other out in the virtual battle space provided as a service by the same Big Cloud Provider.

Post reply on HN