GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract • Hacker News Board

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#371

Post by KyeRussell » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:33 AM UTC

supernova87a wrote: post #348

I question how much an employee should concern him/herself with how a product is used once it's created. You have to let certain control go after a point. Or if your product is open to everyone, you'll have to live with the fact that people may use it in ways you disagree with. Xerox or Canon (or whoever) probably makes copiers that ICE uses to make copies. Lenovo or Apple probably makes hardware that they use also t…

All these people are saying is "I don't want people using things I make for (what I perceive to be) evil".

Aside from the compensation, anything you have implied beyond this is just augmentation derived from capitalism and acceptance of the status quo. Saying "I don't like what you are doing with the thing I am producing for you, so I may stop offering you services" is just...basic human communication. I really can't see how there is any more to this?

You speak with such absolute authority ("You have to let certain control go after a point."). However, this story (and others like it) are proof that this is untrue. Your assertion is false.

Just because somebody is an employee, it does not mean they lose all bargaining power / agency. If you are exchanging goods or services with someone else in a scenario where the power dynamic is not entirely one-sided, there is always room for negotiation. This is all that's happening.

Just because you don't care about how your stuff is used, doesn't mean that it applies to everyone.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#372

Post by shadowgovt » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:33 AM UTC

thereare5lights wrote: post #332

shadowgovt wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no strong evidence other than "It's actually happening right now and the companies have only made minor deviations from their courses." That second half is purely subjective, and we won't really have a good idea on how much of a difference it made until historians can look back on this era with a quarter-century of hindsight.

> I have no strong evidence other than "It's actually happening right now and the companies have only made minor deviations from their courses." I've yet to see anything actually happen in terms of exerting pressure aside from internal grumbling.

Several employees have left and made public they left over Dragonfly and Maven projects at Google.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#373

Post by si1entstill » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:34 AM UTC

supernova87a wrote: post #348

I question how much an employee should concern him/herself with how a product is used once it's created. You have to let certain control go after a point. Or if your product is open to everyone, you'll have to live with the fact that people may use it in ways you disagree with. Xerox or Canon (or whoever) probably makes copiers that ICE uses to make copies. Lenovo or Apple probably makes hardware that they use also t…

I would think that employees at those companies would probably prefer if they weren't doing business with some of those people, but I think it is much more difficult in cases where there is just a good being purchased through retailers (there are intermediary steps).

With these kinds of contracts it feels much more akin to a partnership, so I think the feedback makes more sense. Its odd to me that we question why employees would want to have a say in how their company conducts business. Sure, its a choice for the company to make, but saying it is entitled for the employees to speak out just seems insane to me.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#374

Post by KyeRussell » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:34 AM UTC

tomschlick wrote: post #355

supernova87a wrote: post #348

I question how much an employee should concern him/herself with how a product is used once it's created. You have to let certain control go after a point. Or if your product is open to everyone, you'll have to live with the fact that people may use it in ways you disagree with. Xerox or Canon (or whoever) probably makes copiers that ICE uses to make copies. Lenovo or Apple probably makes hardware that they use also t…

> Why don't the employees at all these other companies object like Github employees? Why do Github employees get a special right to withhold consent for their product to be used in a setting they might object to? Why is ICE the only company that they object to? Why do some causes get their favor and not others? Wokeness and the recent trend of trying to cancel anything that doesn't align within a narrow spectrum of p…

"ICE is currently doing some bad things" is a viewpoint shared by a pretty large group of people. Honestly it just sounds like you're projecting.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#375

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:35 AM UTC

tomschlick wrote: post #355

supernova87a wrote: post #348

I question how much an employee should concern him/herself with how a product is used once it's created. You have to let certain control go after a point. Or if your product is open to everyone, you'll have to live with the fact that people may use it in ways you disagree with. Xerox or Canon (or whoever) probably makes copiers that ICE uses to make copies. Lenovo or Apple probably makes hardware that they use also t…

> Why don't the employees at all these other companies object like Github employees? Why do Github employees get a special right to withhold consent for their product to be used in a setting they might object to? Why is ICE the only company that they object to? Why do some causes get their favor and not others? Wokeness and the recent trend of trying to cancel anything that doesn't align within a narrow spectrum of p…

The specific concerns may be new, but the general tactics are neither new, nor specific to progressives; in fact, while the labor movement has had some notable successes with it, the general approach has been most extensively deployed in this country by, and still is extensively used by, conservatives, particularly Christian conservatives, against policies, institutions, art, personages, etc., they disapprove of.

They call it “cancel culture” when it is their ox getting gored, but it is not as if no one told them what the harvest is like when you sow the wind...

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#376

Post by opnitro » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:36 AM UTC

zer00eyz wrote: post #369

opnitro wrote: post #361

God forbid I have some sort of say in how my labor is used.

I'm baffled by this statement. Sure you have a say, you also (likely) have the luxury of having a skill set that makes you able to make these choices. A while back there was an ask HN post about surviving through the first bubble (2001). If you find a group of engineers of that vintage it is likely that you can quickly find someone who worked putting up adult content. (Note I don't have an objection to the topic but…

I tend to think labor should have more power over what it creates. I'm not sure how an example of being required to work on something they objected to due to economic factors outside of their control is an example that helps your case.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#377

Post by p1necone » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:36 AM UTC

tomschlick wrote: post #355

supernova87a wrote: post #348

I question how much an employee should concern him/herself with how a product is used once it's created. You have to let certain control go after a point. Or if your product is open to everyone, you'll have to live with the fact that people may use it in ways you disagree with. Xerox or Canon (or whoever) probably makes copiers that ICE uses to make copies. Lenovo or Apple probably makes hardware that they use also t…

> Why don't the employees at all these other companies object like Github employees? Why do Github employees get a special right to withhold consent for their product to be used in a setting they might object to? Why is ICE the only company that they object to? Why do some causes get their favor and not others? Wokeness and the recent trend of trying to cancel anything that doesn't align within a narrow spectrum of p…

> "narrow spectrum of progressive viewpoints"

Oh fuck off, the way the US government is currently treating asylum seekers and immigrants is horrifying. Only within the bubble of American politics could someone brush complaining about it off like that.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#378

Post by lacampbell » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:36 AM UTC

I don't understand wealthy Americans at all. It seems like they want to abolish the concepts of borders and immigration control entirely. I assume it's so they can more readily access cheaper labour, which would explain why poorer americans generally take the opposite stance.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#379

Post by KyeRussell » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:36 AM UTC

zer00eyz wrote: post #369

opnitro wrote: post #361

God forbid I have some sort of say in how my labor is used.

I'm baffled by this statement. Sure you have a say, you also (likely) have the luxury of having a skill set that makes you able to make these choices. A while back there was an ask HN post about surviving through the first bubble (2001). If you find a group of engineers of that vintage it is likely that you can quickly find someone who worked putting up adult content. (Note I don't have an objection to the topic but…

So why are you baffled by that statement?

The rest of your comment seems irrelevant.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#380

Post by jcims » Fri, Nov 01, 2019, 12:38 AM UTC

mercutio2 wrote: post #325

jcims wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is 'criminals' better? Also technically true.

Working without documentation, or overstaying a visa, or entering a country without a visa, have historically been misdemeanors in the USA. The current administration has decided to treat them somewhat differently, but that's quite new. Americans don't, typically, describe people who received a parking ticket, or a speeding ticket, as criminals. In the same way, most people have not, historically, referred to people…

They are sort of misdemeanor plus because in addition to legal inconveniences in the US they also lead to deportation. This is something that has been vilified in the case of folks coming up from Mexico of course, but nobody gives a shit if a person that followed all the rules gets deported because of some bad luck with the lottery or their sponsor ditches them or their time is just up.

Case in point, I have a young lady on my team at work that came to the US to receive her masters in computer science, and is presently employed on a STEM OPT extension to her F1 visa. We have tried twice to get her H1-B and she hasn't been picked up. Next year will be the last try, and we're unsuccessful she will be kicked out of the US to no press or protest. She's a wonderful person and has been a true asset to my team and the company, she did everything 'right' and yet may have to leave. However if we do the exact same thing to someone that skipped all of those formalities and broke the rules, it's somehow racist and nationalist and practically a human rights violation?

I get it, calling these folks 'illegals' is a bit crass. But it's more precise than calling them 'immigrants' because it's a special case of immigrant that we're talking about, one is distinct not because of race or color or country of origin, but because of legal status.