6 ms·

These open source projects certainly love the very high quality, free services Github offers them, until they start learning how the sausage is made. ICE has d

by 013a 7y ago

These open source projects certainly love the very high quality, free services Github offers them, until they start learning how the sausage is made. ICE has done, and continues to do some terrible things. Horrible, horrible things; all legal things, but nonetheless horrible. But, frankly, if its legal, I am much less comfortable with Github's users subverting the US legal system by backdooring their moral code into products these legal entities rely on. Go to your senators. Go out and vote. Go protest. It's not that hard, but it is much harder than signing your name on a petition.

tom_ 7y ago
Signing a petition is legal too?
firethief 7y ago
Surely you can't be equating boycotting a company with "subverting the US legal system". What am I missing here?
watwut 7y ago
> Go to your senators. Go out and vote. Go protest. This is the protest. This is one form of how protest looks like.
staticassertion 7y ago
No one is subverting the legal system lol what the fuck "go protest" what do you think you're reading?
switzer 7y ago
Increasingly people (esp. Millennials) consider ethics and values toward the top when deciding whether to purchase or use a product. Why wouldn't they get together and shame a company when that company acts against their own moral values? Is the best possible solution to wait until the first Tuesday in November and hope for the best? I am sure many will also vote, call their elected officials, go to a protest. They'll also sign online petitions.
- ianai 7y ago
  How about funding GitHub so it has the ability to be picky and choosey about its contracts? It’s really easy to voice concern. But github can’t fund itself on concern.
  - Eldt 7y ago
    Considering its size and popularity, why exactly can GitHub not be picky and choosey?
    - switzer 7y ago
      Your assumption is that they are accepting the ICE contract despite their moral values. Maybe they do not see a conflict.
    - ng7j5d9 7y ago
      How would that even work? I imagine GitHub has a pretty typical sales department right now, with salesfolks who try to make deals selling licenses to anyone willing to buy (with perhaps a handful of well-understood exceptions, like no sales to Iran or North Korea). If they add an ethical vetting layer in there, ok, sure this one is an easy call. But people will continue to complain about other government agencies, foreign and domestic. People will complain about corporations who violate privacy or violate open source licenses or violate web standards. People will complain about non-profits who align with religious or political interests. People will complain about polluters and arms manufacturers or companies with ties to polluters or arms manufacturers. Next thing you know, GitHub can't sell to the State Department or DOJ or Ford or GM or Maersk or Boeing or Shell or Aramco or Google or Facebook or McKinsey or so many others. And, I dunno, cutting those organizations out might be a great ethical move, but I'm not sure spending significant amounts of time investigating organizations and adjudicating the results and deciding NOT to make sales and dealing with the inevitable lawsuits is going to help GitHub make money.
      - NullPrefix 7y ago
        >but I'm not sure spending significant amounts of time investigating organizations and adjudicating the results and deciding You don't need to do any of that, just wait and let the angry mob tell you who to not do business with.
philipodonnell 7y ago
> Horrible, horrible things; all legal things, but nonetheless horrible. But, frankly, if its legal... Not sure where the conditional is coming from, its right in the second paragraph with sources: > This government agency is actively committing numerous crimes and human rights violations, in contravention of both US and international law.
burkaman 7y ago
As you know, people are capable of voting and protesting in addition to signing a petition. Also, the stance of "you shouldn't tell an organization you don't like what they're doing unless it's literally illegal" is pretty wild. Nevertheless, since it seems to matter to you, ICE constantly breaks the law: https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=15649 https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=15649 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/02/how-badly-did-cbp-treat-visa-holders-read-these-horror-stories.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/02/how-badly-did-cb... https://www.opb.org/news/article/ice-courthouse-arrest-ban-oregon/ https://www.opb.org/news/article/ice-courthouse-arrest-ban-o... https://www.aclu.org/cases/escobar-v-gaines https://www.aclu.org/cases/escobar-v-gaines https://www.aclu.org/cases/colotl-v-kelly https://www.aclu.org/cases/colotl-v-kelly https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/ice-agents-illegally-detained-colorado-us-citizen-for-days-because-he-was-hispanic-lawsuit-claims https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/ice-agents-... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/us/ice-detains-woman-california.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/us/ice-detains-woman-cali... https://www.aclumich.org/en/press-releases/aclu-sues-ice-us-marine-corps-veteran-jilmar-ramos-gomezs-case https://www.aclumich.org/en/press-releases/aclu-sues-ice-us-... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/francisco-galicia-ice-releases-us-citizen-18-held-near-texas-border-more-than-3-weeks/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/francisco-galicia-ice-releases-... https://www.aclu.org/cases/immigrants-rights/morales-v-chadbourne https://www.aclu.org/cases/immigrants-rights/morales-v-chadb... https://www.propublica.org/article/pennsylvania-ice-who-polices-the-immigration-police https://www.propublica.org/article/pennsylvania-ice-who-poli... etc. etc. etc.
- ratsmack 7y ago
  Most of your links are cases of "alleged" wrongdoing by immigration officials. Stating that ICE "constantly breaks the law" is hyperbole at best.
  - burkaman 7y ago
    I found many decided cases, but you're right, it takes an incredibly long time for these cases to be resolved, so many of them are still technically in question. Note that many of my examples, which I found in about 10 minutes of searching, are single cases of violations that happen constantly. For example, I listed a couple US citizens that were wrongfully arrested by ICE, which happened thousands of times: https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-citizens-ice-20180427-htmlstory.html https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-citizens-ice-20180...
ergothus 7y ago
> But, frankly, if its legal, I am much less comfortable with Github's users subverting the US legal system by backdooring their moral code into products these legal entities rely on I don't follow this logic. If it's legal, we should not take moral stances in our actions outside of political actions? Doesn't the concept of "voting with your wallet" expressly involve taking moral stances in ALL actions? Sure, the open source projects may not be paying Github directly, but I'm VERY uncomfortable with saying that money is the only way to take a moral stance. The idea that there's some set of actions that should be categorically immune to moral reactions is...weird at best and feels pretty darn dangerous. Almost no one wants to make every decision an intense moral debate, but the OPTION should exist. Otherwise you just create places to foster corruption. > It's not that hard, but it is much harder than signing your name on a petition. This feels like a false choice. Doing one doesn't mean the other is unavailable, and doing one doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T do the other. Indeed, if you think the stakes are high, doing both seems to be the best option.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- 013a 7y ago
  They're threatening a boycott. They're not actually boycotting. I'll start paying attention when they actually start deleting repositories. That's also when Github will start paying attention; they've gotten enough warning. But no one will actually do that, because everyone who signed this but still has a community and a repository on Github is a coward. They love all the free stuff, and they'd love for Github to just do whatever they tell them to do, but without any of that icky hard work like migrating a community to someone with more aligned morals. Prove me wrong. Delete your account, NOW. Please. Prove me wrong. No one will. Because all anyone ever does is whine; no one acts. Its so easy to sign your name and complain; its hard to actually Act.
throwthisaway2 7y ago
Im ok with it, just like im okbwith github serving ice. The fact is these guys dont pay and ice does. If github turns down this contract it will make other vendors scared. Whose next? Not good business. Get woke go broke.
vangelis 7y ago
It's possible to do both. How exactly is asking a private entity to change their behavior "subverting the US legal system?"
bachmeier 7y ago
> These open source projects certainly love the very high quality, free services Github offers them Hopefully this argument will die soon. You don't hear anyone talking about how Google should be treated as a charity because the price of their search engine and YouTube is $0. Nor do you hear it about Facebook. Nor do you hear it about any other marketing campaigns by anyone else. That's their business model. What really bugs me when someone says this about Github is that Github added closed infrastructure on top of an open source project. Without open source projects giving them the product and then the free marketing, they sure as hell wouldn't have sold for $7.5 billion. Open source projects don't also have to be forever in the debt of Github as well, do they? I'm not going to comment on the rest of your argument, but your opening sentence is really weak.

by 013a 7y ago

tom_ 7y ago

Signing a petition is legal too?

firethief 7y ago

Surely you can't be equating boycotting a company with "subverting the US legal system". What am I missing here?

watwut 7y ago

> Go to your senators. Go out and vote. Go protest. This is the protest. This is one form of how protest looks like.

staticassertion 7y ago

No one is subverting the legal system lol what the fuck "go protest" what do you think you're reading?

switzer 7y ago

Increasingly people (esp. Millennials) consider ethics and values toward the top when deciding whether to purchase or use a product. Why wouldn't they get together and shame a company when that company acts against their own moral values? Is the best possible solution to wait until the first Tuesday in November and hope for the best? I am sure many will also vote, call their elected officials, go to a protest. They'll also sign online petitions.

ianai 7y ago
How about funding GitHub so it has the ability to be picky and choosey about its contracts? It’s really easy to voice concern. But github can’t fund itself on concern.
- Eldt 7y ago
  Considering its size and popularity, why exactly can GitHub not be picky and choosey?
  - switzer 7y ago
    Your assumption is that they are accepting the ICE contract despite their moral values. Maybe they do not see a conflict.
  - ng7j5d9 7y ago
    How would that even work? I imagine GitHub has a pretty typical sales department right now, with salesfolks who try to make deals selling licenses to anyone willing to buy (with perhaps a handful of well-understood exceptions, like no sales to Iran or North Korea). If they add an ethical vetting layer in there, ok, sure this one is an easy call. But people will continue to complain about other government agencies, foreign and domestic. People will complain about corporations who violate privacy or violate open source licenses or violate web standards. People will complain about non-profits who align with religious or political interests. People will complain about polluters and arms manufacturers or companies with ties to polluters or arms manufacturers. Next thing you know, GitHub can't sell to the State Department or DOJ or Ford or GM or Maersk or Boeing or Shell or Aramco or Google or Facebook or McKinsey or so many others. And, I dunno, cutting those organizations out might be a great ethical move, but I'm not sure spending significant amounts of time investigating organizations and adjudicating the results and deciding NOT to make sales and dealing with the inevitable lawsuits is going to help GitHub make money.
    - NullPrefix 7y ago
      >but I'm not sure spending significant amounts of time investigating organizations and adjudicating the results and deciding You don't need to do any of that, just wait and let the angry mob tell you who to not do business with.

philipodonnell 7y ago

> Horrible, horrible things; all legal things, but nonetheless horrible. But, frankly, if its legal... Not sure where the conditional is coming from, its right in the second paragraph with sources: > This government agency is actively committing numerous crimes and human rights violations, in contravention of both US and international law.

burkaman 7y ago

As you know, people are capable of voting and protesting in addition to signing a petition. Also, the stance of "you shouldn't tell an organization you don't like what they're doing unless it's literally illegal" is pretty wild. Nevertheless, since it seems to matter to you, ICE constantly breaks the law: https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=15649 https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=15649 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/02/how-badly-did-cbp-treat-visa-holders-read-these-horror-stories.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/02/how-badly-did-cb... https://www.opb.org/news/article/ice-courthouse-arrest-ban-oregon/ https://www.opb.org/news/article/ice-courthouse-arrest-ban-o... https://www.aclu.org/cases/escobar-v-gaines https://www.aclu.org/cases/escobar-v-gaines https://www.aclu.org/cases/colotl-v-kelly https://www.aclu.org/cases/colotl-v-kelly https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/ice-agents-illegally-detained-colorado-us-citizen-for-days-because-he-was-hispanic-lawsuit-claims https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/ice-agents-... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/us/ice-detains-woman-california.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/us/ice-detains-woman-cali... https://www.aclumich.org/en/press-releases/aclu-sues-ice-us-marine-corps-veteran-jilmar-ramos-gomezs-case https://www.aclumich.org/en/press-releases/aclu-sues-ice-us-... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/francisco-galicia-ice-releases-us-citizen-18-held-near-texas-border-more-than-3-weeks/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/francisco-galicia-ice-releases-... https://www.aclu.org/cases/immigrants-rights/morales-v-chadbourne https://www.aclu.org/cases/immigrants-rights/morales-v-chadb... https://www.propublica.org/article/pennsylvania-ice-who-polices-the-immigration-police https://www.propublica.org/article/pennsylvania-ice-who-poli... etc. etc. etc.

ratsmack 7y ago
Most of your links are cases of "alleged" wrongdoing by immigration officials. Stating that ICE "constantly breaks the law" is hyperbole at best.
- burkaman 7y ago
  I found many decided cases, but you're right, it takes an incredibly long time for these cases to be resolved, so many of them are still technically in question. Note that many of my examples, which I found in about 10 minutes of searching, are single cases of violations that happen constantly. For example, I listed a couple US citizens that were wrongfully arrested by ICE, which happened thousands of times: https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-citizens-ice-20180427-htmlstory.html https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-citizens-ice-20180...

ergothus 7y ago

> But, frankly, if its legal, I am much less comfortable with Github's users subverting the US legal system by backdooring their moral code into products these legal entities rely on I don't follow this logic. If it's legal, we should not take moral stances in our actions outside of political actions? Doesn't the concept of "voting with your wallet" expressly involve taking moral stances in ALL actions? Sure, the open source projects may not be paying Github directly, but I'm VERY uncomfortable with saying that money is the only way to take a moral stance. The idea that there's some set of actions that should be categorically immune to moral reactions is...weird at best and feels pretty darn dangerous. Almost no one wants to make every decision an intense moral debate, but the OPTION should exist. Otherwise you just create places to foster corruption. > It's not that hard, but it is much harder than signing your name on a petition. This feels like a false choice. Doing one doesn't mean the other is unavailable, and doing one doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T do the other. Indeed, if you think the stakes are high, doing both seems to be the best option.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
013a 7y ago
They're threatening a boycott. They're not actually boycotting. I'll start paying attention when they actually start deleting repositories. That's also when Github will start paying attention; they've gotten enough warning. But no one will actually do that, because everyone who signed this but still has a community and a repository on Github is a coward. They love all the free stuff, and they'd love for Github to just do whatever they tell them to do, but without any of that icky hard work like migrating a community to someone with more aligned morals. Prove me wrong. Delete your account, NOW. Please. Prove me wrong. No one will. Because all anyone ever does is whine; no one acts. Its so easy to sign your name and complain; its hard to actually Act.

throwthisaway2 7y ago

Im ok with it, just like im okbwith github serving ice. The fact is these guys dont pay and ice does. If github turns down this contract it will make other vendors scared. Whose next? Not good business. Get woke go broke.

vangelis 7y ago

It's possible to do both. How exactly is asking a private entity to change their behavior "subverting the US legal system?"

bachmeier 7y ago

> These open source projects certainly love the very high quality, free services Github offers them Hopefully this argument will die soon. You don't hear anyone talking about how Google should be treated as a charity because the price of their search engine and YouTube is $0. Nor do you hear it about Facebook. Nor do you hear it about any other marketing campaigns by anyone else. That's their business model. What really bugs me when someone says this about Github is that Github added closed infrastructure on top of an open source project. Without open source projects giving them the product and then the free marketing, they sure as hell wouldn't have sold for $7.5 billion. Open source projects don't also have to be forever in the debt of Github as well, do they? I'm not going to comment on the rest of your argument, but your opening sentence is really weak.