4 ms·

The most ironic part is that employees are convinced — totally convinced — that they aren’t building that infrastructure. It would be different if people had t

• maxxxxx 8y ago
  A few weeks ago at work we looked at the categories Facebook puts each of us into for advertisers. The Nazis or the east German Stasi would have been super happy with that level of data. It would have made their lives much easier. You probably can always buy the data you need for a surveillance state if you can afford it.
• deegles 8y ago
  I struggle with the idea that for every programmer that finds it unethical to build weapons or surveillance software, there are others that believe it is their patriotic duty to do so (or at least enough to get those projects done).
  • glenneroo 8y ago
    I've been involved in projects which were teetering on the edge of my ethical boundaries, knowing full-well they would/could easily be abused... but I knew if I didn't do it, I would lose/quit my job and then somebody else would just do the project. Even if say, 90% of programmers turned the job down, there are enough hungry people in the world who would gladly do the job in order to feed their family/buy a lambo/etc., regardless of ethical implications.
  • TeMPOraL 8y ago
    Patriots at least care. They may realize that the tools they're building aren't serving the best interest of their country. The worst are pure mercenaries, who care only about the paycheck. (But that's still simplifying the problem. Taking a moral stand is also a function of your life circumstances. It's easy to complain about ethical problems when you aren't the sole provider for two households and also facing a huge medical bill. Also, evil people don't write job advertisements for complete turn-key doomsday products. There's a spectrum there - isolated parts may not seem that evil.)
  • shawn 8y ago
    Eh. It would be better not to make people feel afraid for expressing those views. I held them once, before NSA’s bad behavior came to light. In many ways I still do. The argument goes like this: any student of war will tell you that the most important factor in warfare is intelligence. Strength is of course a requirement, but it’s secondary. It was why Japan was defeated at Midway, for example — that situation arose only because we knew for a fact what their plans were, thanks to breaking their comms. In that light, since humans seem no different from a hundred years ago till now, it seems rather better to be top dog than to be someone else’s dog. And that makes it my duty to keep my country firmly in that place. ... at least, that’s how I felt growing up. Those feelings have translated more into “we have to be in this for each other, not for governments.” It feels like the Internet is one of the last bastions of true freedom — free from employers, free from identity. You can even make a fortune if you’re sufficiently lucky and talented. It feels hollow, though. Part of the reason for the feelings I expressed above was that it fulfills a deep primal desire to be a part of something greater than yourself, to be aligned to a common goal, something more than just chasing a paycheck. I wrote this mainly to give some context about how someone might be ok with the idea of building surveillance software, but feelings are always a complex and multifaceted thing. And we’re all still learning what it means to be human and to contextualize our place in the world. Is this really the best way to spend our time? And yet we’re forced to, if someone else has a club they want to club you with. One closing point: the best way to change an organization is from the inside. If someone was truly worried about the NSA, joining them seems like one of the most effective things you could do. Because you truly believe it could be a tool of good, rather than a dystopaian weapon. There’s a reason idealists like Snowden were attracted to the job. I hope this wasn’t too philosophical. Mostly it’s just hard to determine what you should even do with your life. It feels like no matter what you do, there will be people who hate it. So why bother defending your own point of view? Yet that feels like a cheap way out.
  • thedragonline 8y ago
    Don’t discount desperation. I can very easily imagine a struggling programmer who has the choice of putting food on the table or going without. The felon programmer who posted to HN several months ago falls into this category.
• dec0dedab0de 8y ago
  Reminded me of this quote from the movie Cube: It's all the same machine, right? The Pentagon, multinational corporations, the police. If you do one little job, you build a widget in Saskatoon, and the next thing you know, it's two miles under the desert, the essential component of a death machine.
• iforgotpassword 8y ago
  Eroding and not being applied properly. What was that stuff snowden revealed about the NSA and their capabilities again? Now consider how much time has passed since then and how much they could have refined their tools and methods over time. And remember how nobody gave a fuck who wasn't exactly involved with tech or human rights. Sure, it's "just" the secret service(s) able to access that data, but is our solution really always just pointing at some other country and saying "well look this is even worse so I guess we're doing fine". Also, every time some shit the govt or some agency was pulling gets uncovered, large scale end-of-history syndrome sets in and people assume that now that this has been revealed, everything is fine for good. I'd like to argue that this even leads to us caring less about it than we should. In the west we are so convinced that our political systems are far superior, so that our governments can't do any evil, and if theyd try, someone would take care of stopping them. Only that I have my doubts about that really happening. The favorite way Americans like to do this is playing the "freedom of speech" card, but I guess other countries have equivalents.
• acct1771 8y ago
  Strong weaponry, and strong encryption.