3 ms·

it's amusing to me that projects related to national defense are considered evil to these people but google's core business of mining and selling user data for

it's amusing to me that projects related to national defense are considered evil to these people but google's core business of mining and selling user data for advertisements isn't.

teachrdan 8y ago
This seems like a false equivalence to me. While ad tech may be morally bad, by many people's standards (including mine) helping the US government kill people by remote control is far worse. According to US military doctrine adopted under GW Bush and continued under Obama and Trump, the entire world--including allied countries with extradition treates!--is a battlefield[0]. The US has literally given itself license to attack and kill anyone we consider a threat anywhere on planet Earth without due process. That is reason enough to not contribute to a project making drone killing easier. 0. https://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Wars-Battlefield-Jeremy-Scahill/dp/156858671X https://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Wars-Battlefield-Jeremy-Scahill...
- grillvogel 8y ago
  what if your contributions to the project reduced collateral damage and increased the odds of hitting the right target? or are you making the argument that all military action is wrong?
prepend 8y ago
This is interesting to me as well. I’m not sure where these people draw their ideological lines. Letting sugar sell to kids and overweight people is ok, when sugar kills people.[0] Or that google sells data to the NSA and other governments. [1] It’s usually possible to dislike multiple things and support or protest multiple causes. But if you are quitting or trying to change corporate governance, those are exclusive decisions. So it’s hard to tell the reasoning behind these people’s morals. [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24493081/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24493081/ [1] https://gizmodo.com/confirmed-nsa-paid-google-microsoft-others-millions-1188615332 https://gizmodo.com/confirmed-nsa-paid-google-microsoft-othe...
- lern_too_spel 8y ago
  > Or that google sells data to the NSA and other governments. [1] That's a strange way of putting it. If the government compels you to comply with a non-trivial request, you are entitled to compensation to cover your costs.
  - prepend 8y ago
    Or you can refuse compensation out of principle. This is kind of my point though, Google is entitled to compete for and win defense contracts. I’m not arguing that and I agree that Google is entitled to payment for their costs. But is that more important than end-state diversity? To these protesters, yes. But I don’t understand their priorities or at least the rationale behind them. This is a very important issue to them, and it seems odd.
- pteredactyl 8y ago
  Most draw their lines based on what the media/state tells them.
skj 8y ago
Without necessarily agreeing, the line between designing machines that kill people and designing ad placement algorithms is pretty bright.

it's amusing to me that projects related to national defense are considered evil to these people but google's core business of mining and selling user data for advertisements isn't.

teachrdan 8y ago

This seems like a false equivalence to me. While ad tech may be morally bad, by many people's standards (including mine) helping the US government kill people by remote control is far worse. According to US military doctrine adopted under GW Bush and continued under Obama and Trump, the entire world--including allied countries with extradition treates!--is a battlefield[0]. The US has literally given itself license to attack and kill anyone we consider a threat anywhere on planet Earth without due process. That is reason enough to not contribute to a project making drone killing easier. 0. https://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Wars-Battlefield-Jeremy-Scahill/dp/156858671X https://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Wars-Battlefield-Jeremy-Scahill...

grillvogel 8y ago
what if your contributions to the project reduced collateral damage and increased the odds of hitting the right target? or are you making the argument that all military action is wrong?

prepend 8y ago

This is interesting to me as well. I’m not sure where these people draw their ideological lines. Letting sugar sell to kids and overweight people is ok, when sugar kills people.[0] Or that google sells data to the NSA and other governments. [1] It’s usually possible to dislike multiple things and support or protest multiple causes. But if you are quitting or trying to change corporate governance, those are exclusive decisions. So it’s hard to tell the reasoning behind these people’s morals. [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24493081/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24493081/ [1] https://gizmodo.com/confirmed-nsa-paid-google-microsoft-others-millions-1188615332 https://gizmodo.com/confirmed-nsa-paid-google-microsoft-othe...

lern_too_spel 8y ago
> Or that google sells data to the NSA and other governments. [1] That's a strange way of putting it. If the government compels you to comply with a non-trivial request, you are entitled to compensation to cover your costs.
- prepend 8y ago
  Or you can refuse compensation out of principle. This is kind of my point though, Google is entitled to compete for and win defense contracts. I’m not arguing that and I agree that Google is entitled to payment for their costs. But is that more important than end-state diversity? To these protesters, yes. But I don’t understand their priorities or at least the rationale behind them. This is a very important issue to them, and it seems odd.
pteredactyl 8y ago
Most draw their lines based on what the media/state tells them.

skj 8y ago

Without necessarily agreeing, the line between designing machines that kill people and designing ad placement algorithms is pretty bright.