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

GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 708 posts

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

#681

Post by malvosenior »

shadowgovt wrote: post #679
malvosenior wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our infrastructure is already in bad shape, a bunch of shanty towns is not going to help. The same people that want open immigration also want free healthcare for all and student loan forgiveness. Who pays for all of this? Millions of American's are struggling, it's totally logical that people would look at this situation and say "why not help people who already live here before letting millions of more people pour i…

It's logical that people react that way, but it's a fear-based reaction that fails to acknowledge possible solutions. For example, people who are working on the fringes of society as undocumented immigrants aren't paying as many taxes into the system because they legally can't, not necessarily because they don't want to. How much tax money is bad immigration policy leaving on the table? If you don't want your taxes t…

I actually think it should be easier to become a legal immigrant. Not "walk across the border and you're a citizen" easy but easier than it is. The fact is illegal immigration helps no one though and until there's legal means to come to the country, coming illegally is not a good idea and I don't see those tasked with stopping that as amoral.

Remember this discussion isn't about if immigration policy should change. It's if Github is "evil" for working with ICE, an agency currently tasked with enforcing existing laws and policy.

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

#682

Post by shadowgovt »

malvosenior wrote: post #681
shadowgovt wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's logical that people react that way, but it's a fear-based reaction that fails to acknowledge possible solutions. For example, people who are working on the fringes of society as undocumented immigrants aren't paying as many taxes into the system because they legally can't, not necessarily because they don't want to. How much tax money is bad immigration policy leaving on the table? If you don't want your taxes t…

I actually think it should be easier to become a legal immigrant. Not "walk across the border and you're a citizen" easy but easier than it is. The fact is illegal immigration helps no one though and until there's legal means to come to the country, coming illegally is not a good idea and I don't see those tasked with stopping that as amoral. Remember this discussion isn't about if immigration policy should change. I…

We're in agreement on the need to change immigration policy.

On the topic of the morality of working with the current system: evil is something people decide by their conscience. But if a person feels the actions of ICE are evil (and those photos generate a real visceral reaction that is hard to ignore, at least in my conscience), refusing to perpetrate that implementation, facilitate its perpetration, and walk away if one's company does so and one lacks the power to change their policy is the moral option. We know the opinion history has of people who choose complicitness or complacency in the face of evil.

We appear to be in agreement that the cruelty is the point---it's intentionally harsh and dangerous to the immigrants as a deterrant. When the system actively engages in cruelty, refusing to aid that system diminishes its ability to inflict cruelty. While I don't think it's true that evil would not exist if people did no actions, I do believe that a system architected to perpetrate evil (which I believe "cruelty as the goal" qualifies as) starts to break down if people don't support it.

Those people wouldn't be in cages if nobody showed up to put them in the cages. No reason Github staff should feel compelled to help that process go easier for the people perpetrating it.

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

#683

Post by malvosenior »

shadowgovt wrote: post #682
malvosenior wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think it should be easier to become a legal immigrant. Not "walk across the border and you're a citizen" easy but easier than it is. The fact is illegal immigration helps no one though and until there's legal means to come to the country, coming illegally is not a good idea and I don't see those tasked with stopping that as amoral. Remember this discussion isn't about if immigration policy should change. I…

We're in agreement on the need to change immigration policy. On the topic of the morality of working with the current system: evil is something people decide by their conscience. But if a person feels the actions of ICE are evil (and those photos generate a real visceral reaction that is hard to ignore, at least in my conscience), refusing to perpetrate that implementation, facilitate its perpetration, and walk away…

We are in agreement that we should change immigration policy.

We are not in agreement that "cruelty is the point". When I look at those pictures it doesn't cause a visceral reaction. It looks pretty much exactly how I imagine it would look. They're dealing with hundreds of thousands of people flooding across the border illegally. That seems like a reasonable way to house them until they can be sent back or processed.

We're also not in agreement on who's fault it is that those people ended up like that. To me and many others, it is 100% their own fault. They took the risk and now they have to pay the price for getting caught. That's not cruel, it's just sensible. Advocate for legal change, don't break the law if you can't handle the consequences.

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

#684

Post by shadowgovt »

malvosenior wrote: post #683
shadowgovt wrote: post #682

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're in agreement on the need to change immigration policy. On the topic of the morality of working with the current system: evil is something people decide by their conscience. But if a person feels the actions of ICE are evil (and those photos generate a real visceral reaction that is hard to ignore, at least in my conscience), refusing to perpetrate that implementation, facilitate its perpetration, and walk away…

We are in agreement that we should change immigration policy. We are not in agreement that "cruelty is the point". When I look at those pictures it doesn't cause a visceral reaction. It looks pretty much exactly how I imagine it would look. They're dealing with hundreds of thousands of people flooding across the border illegally. That seems like a reasonable way to house them until they can be sent back or processed.…

I don't really care about fault regarding the immigration waves any more than I care about fault for a natural disaster. On the one hand, we have people arriving with the clothes on their back. On the other, we have a country with a federal tax revenue of $3.6 trillion gross. It's obvious where the power balance lies in that relationship. To be blunt, "they took the risk and now they have to pay the price" sounds a lot like justice without mercy, and most schools of faith and philosophy I'm familiar with would call that "cruelty." It doesn't breed positive outcomes; it breeds resentment. Nobody knows all the rules of the games they're playing by; we only get by globally as a species by being merciful when we can afford it.

And we can afford it, collectively, if we get creative. Three point six trillion dollars. This Congress and administration passed a big tax cut package.

I believe you did agree the cruelty was the point; that it was intentionally a harsh process to deter further attempts at illegal immigration. Apologies if I misunderstood you and am putting words in your mouth.

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

#685

Post by wvenable »

fiter wrote: post #670
wvenable wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if your work is to construct the machines sent to the Nazi's to help perpetrate the Holocaust, you should probably not compartmentalize. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust The clear answer is that one should never just be following orders and if your company is doing something that you personally feel uncomfortable with, you should try to stop it. And failing that, quit.

I completely agree that if you do not feel comfortable with the work you are doing, then you should stop. If you feel comfortable with it because you've compartmentalized, then I imagine you would not stop. And, unfortunately, there's often some reason to compartmentalize some situations: because your competitor will just as soon take the business. It certainly would have been better if we could have gotten US policy…

> because your competitor will just as soon take the business.

So what? You might as well be a hitman because, if you're not, somebody else will. You're just leaving money on the table by not being a killer for hire.

Your own principles don't depend on what your competitors will do.

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

#686

Post by madhadron »

zozbot234 wrote: post #644
School-Cotton wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hong Kong has never had democratic elections. It has elections but they are non-democratic, as the “functional consistencies” system rigs them in one side’s favor. “One country, two systems” refers to Hong Kong’s separate economic and legal system, not to democracy.

"Rigs" is quite overstated. The system is quite transparent, and other countries have similar systems and yet we do not call them undemocratic. Such as the U.S., with the electoral college for presidential elections.

The imbalances induced by the electoral college are orders of magnitude smaller than those of the functional constituency system.

Thank being said, I think the electoral college should go, too.

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

#687

Post by dang »

sascha_sl wrote: post #652
dang wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't take HN threads further into ideological flamewar. Such discussions are repetitive and predictable and deteriorate as they go along. That makes them off topic here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

dang, this is clearly on-topic. ICE is in the title of the post. Not every response to a political post that is apathy incarnate is an "ideological flamewar". Some things have to be named as what they are, this is not hyperbole. This is happening right now. And I'm sorry anything but your typical "but what about refusing services to the gays" makes you uncomfortable.

What makes political flamewars off topic on HN is that they are repetitive and therefore predictable. There's no curiosity in that, and HN is a site for curiosity. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

Substantive conversation about the specifics of the OP is different; that's possible, and if people can do it, it's on topic here. But it takes discipline not to devolve into flame-throwing.

When a thread gets to the level of name-calling about concentration camps, there's no substantive discussion left to be had. Internet forums as a medium are quick to become vessels for venting rather than information sharing. That's what we want to avoid here. If your wish is to fight battles and smite enemies, please do so elsewhere. I'm sure there are many good reasons to smite them; we are certainly not saying that these issues are unimportant.

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

#688

Post by iron0013 »

dang wrote: post #687
sascha_sl wrote: post #652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dang, this is clearly on-topic. ICE is in the title of the post. Not every response to a political post that is apathy incarnate is an "ideological flamewar". Some things have to be named as what they are, this is not hyperbole. This is happening right now. And I'm sorry anything but your typical "but what about refusing services to the gays" makes you uncomfortable.

What makes political flamewars off topic on HN is that they are repetitive and therefore predictable. There's no curiosity in that, and HN is a site for curiosity. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . Substantive conversation about the specifics of the OP is different; that's possible, and if people can do it, it's on topic here. But it takes discipline not to devolve into flame-throwing. Whe…

dang, it's not name-calling to call concentration camps what they are. ICE literally runs concentration camps. There's no exaggeration, trolling, or flame-warring involved in saying so.

It's simply the same way that it's not libelous to call someone who committed murder a "murderer"--because they earned the title when they committed the murder.

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

#689

Post by dang »

iron0013 wrote: post #688
dang wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes political flamewars off topic on HN is that they are repetitive and therefore predictable. There's no curiosity in that, and HN is a site for curiosity. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . Substantive conversation about the specifics of the OP is different; that's possible, and if people can do it, it's on topic here. But it takes discipline not to devolve into flame-throwing. Whe…

dang, it's not name-calling to call concentration camps what they are. ICE literally runs concentration camps. There's no exaggeration, trolling, or flame-warring involved in saying so. It's simply the same way that it's not libelous to call someone who committed murder a "murderer"--because they earned the title when they committed the murder.

When I said name-calling I was referring to words like vile and cynic.

Words like concentration camp seem to me in a different category. They aren't necessarily name-calling, but they do have dual semantics: a factual aspect and a pejorative one. If all a comment does is repeat those words and add additional pejoratives, that's not a substantive comment by HN standards.

Repeating pejoratives very much feels like "saying what something is" or "naming things as they are". But it feels like exactly the opposite of that to others, who then feel justified in escalating. That is the dynamic of flamewar, not conversation. We can't have both, and HN threads are supposed to be conversations.

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

#690

Post by manigandham »

drjesusphd wrote: post #649
manigandham wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalism is nothing but an economic system where you own the means to production. There is no inherent morality. Nobody has an issue with you making choices and voting with your dollars. The issue is forcing those choices on everyone else (as in a business, especially as a non-owner) through your own interpretation of morality.

> There is no inherent morality. Not inherent; we have to make it so. Capitalism dominates, what, 80% of our waking lives? The idea that morality should only be relegated to the other 20% is madness.

Dominates? I don’t even know what means. It’s an economic system. What is the other 20% exactly?
Post reply on HN