33 ms·

I would have thought that the workers at GitHub would know as much as anyone that restricting access to one Git service would have a negligible impact on ICE. T

I would have thought that the workers at GitHub would know as much as anyone that restricting access to one Git service would have a negligible impact on ICE. The real impact would be on GitHub themselves, as they would lose any opportunity to help guide policy or technology at ICE or any other government agency. It may feel better to watch and yell from the outside, and you may have the moral high ground in doing so. But change happens from the inside. We need more companies like GitHub working with agencies to reform their policies. Also, change is slow. Protests are step one, but there are probably 235 more steps until change is realized. Slow and steady, my friends. EDIT: To answer the questions about how a company influences policy. Companies influence policy all. the. time. Look at ALEC[1] look at PACs. Look at the fact that Microsoft is not going to be offering facial recognition tech until privacy protections are passed. Not saying ALEC is good, but it exists. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legislative_Exchange_Council https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legislative_Exchange_...

zachrip 6y ago
I'm pretty sure github has zero impact on the tech choices made by ICE or any other government agency.
- salmon30salmon 6y ago
  GitHub perhaps, but we are talking Microsoft, and we are talking other corporate powers. One of the things I hear all the time is that corporations influence public policy _too much_. Look at ALEC, look at PACs etc. Companies _can_ influence policy. Look at Microsoft saying they won't offer facial recognition until laws are passed.
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    Right, Microsoft is influencing policy at ICE by refusing to provide them facial recognition software, which prevents them from having facial recognition software. In general, if the idea is that a tool makes you more efficient/effective, denying that tool does the opposite. Making ICE less effective seems laudable, so why not throw roadblocks, even small ones, in the way?
    - salmon30salmon 6y ago
      Because ICE as an organization isn't purely bad, nor is it purely good. As it is made up of people, there are good and bad. ICE also fights sex trafficking, which to me is akin to modern day slavery. I want ICE to have every tool at their disposal to fight sex trafficking. If we stop ICE from using these tools, are you saying that sex trafficking victims are less worthy of help than detained immigrants? How do you draw that line?
      - cmdshiftf4 6y ago
        >which to me is akin to modern day slavery There's 3 times more slaves today than during the period of the transatlantic slave trade. Estimated to be 40m people, 10m of which are children, mainly in Africa and Asia.[0] [0] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/feb/25/modern-slavery-trafficking-persons-one-in-200 https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/feb/25/modern-slavery-...
      - joshuamorton 6y ago
        No, but there are other organizations that I can donate time, money, and resources to to combat human trafficking. So any negative impact by defunding ICE's human trafficking response can be offset. > I want ICE to have every tool at their disposal to fight sex trafficking. I want a different organization to fight sex trafficking. If it's an important enough issue, it can be split from the organization that imprisons children, which is....not too far from what you're lauding ICE from preventing.
Miner49er 6y ago
How exactly would Github cause change within ICE? I don't see what power they have to do that.
couchand 6y ago
It think it's pretty naive to expect that GitHub's contract with ICE gives them some kind of inside opportunity to help guide policy within the agency. On the other hand, employees of ICE, who are actually inside do probably have some (admittedly limited) amount of leverage. It might by that if they are frustrated at losing access to tools that they previously thought worth paying for, they would attempt to exert that leverage for change.
DudeInBasement 6y ago
The taxpayer/citizens should influence ICE/government. Not GitHub. Government should serve/fear the people, not corps. And people wonder why there is a military industrial complex.
- coolreader18 6y ago
  I don't think encouraging a security department to keep working with a corporation would necessarily help stop the military/industrial complex.
- Klinky 6y ago
  Corps don't just get to magically do whatever they want without repercussion. The purpose of corps is to better humanity, and they should certainly fear "the people" if they are are doing the opposite.
ivanbakel 6y ago
If Github has a negligible technical impact on ICE, in what way are they meant to have any significant influence on ICE's policy?
dx87 6y ago
> The real impact would be on GitHub themselves, as they would lose any opportunity to help guide policy or technology at ICE or any other government agency. There's about a 0% chance that a government agency would change anything about their policies based on what GitHub employees say. Companies that work on government contracts get "report cards" detailing the agency's satisfaction with their performance, and any other government agency can view the reports for that company, so it's in their best interest to try and get favorable reviews by doing what the agency wants.
julianeon 6y ago
How is GitHub supposed to change ICE's policies by working with ICE? "Hey, you see this part of the code where you sort through the parents, to separate them from their children? Maybe don't do that?" ICE is going to ignore any unprofessional suggestions, that's not what they hired GitHub to do. In fact the usual argument employers give when you don't do exactly they hired you to do - "that's not what we hired you for" - is pretty strong. And unless GitHub sabotages their own work (which they won't), then their work will simply be in service to ICE's goals. There's no room left over for contributing non-work opinions.

zachrip 6y ago

I'm pretty sure github has zero impact on the tech choices made by ICE or any other government agency.

salmon30salmon 6y ago
GitHub perhaps, but we are talking Microsoft, and we are talking other corporate powers. One of the things I hear all the time is that corporations influence public policy _too much_. Look at ALEC, look at PACs etc. Companies _can_ influence policy. Look at Microsoft saying they won't offer facial recognition until laws are passed.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Right, Microsoft is influencing policy at ICE by refusing to provide them facial recognition software, which prevents them from having facial recognition software. In general, if the idea is that a tool makes you more efficient/effective, denying that tool does the opposite. Making ICE less effective seems laudable, so why not throw roadblocks, even small ones, in the way?
  - salmon30salmon 6y ago
    Because ICE as an organization isn't purely bad, nor is it purely good. As it is made up of people, there are good and bad. ICE also fights sex trafficking, which to me is akin to modern day slavery. I want ICE to have every tool at their disposal to fight sex trafficking. If we stop ICE from using these tools, are you saying that sex trafficking victims are less worthy of help than detained immigrants? How do you draw that line?
    - cmdshiftf4 6y ago
      >which to me is akin to modern day slavery There's 3 times more slaves today than during the period of the transatlantic slave trade. Estimated to be 40m people, 10m of which are children, mainly in Africa and Asia.[0] [0] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/feb/25/modern-slavery-trafficking-persons-one-in-200 https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/feb/25/modern-slavery-...
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      No, but there are other organizations that I can donate time, money, and resources to to combat human trafficking. So any negative impact by defunding ICE's human trafficking response can be offset. > I want ICE to have every tool at their disposal to fight sex trafficking. I want a different organization to fight sex trafficking. If it's an important enough issue, it can be split from the organization that imprisons children, which is....not too far from what you're lauding ICE from preventing.

Miner49er 6y ago

How exactly would Github cause change within ICE? I don't see what power they have to do that.

couchand 6y ago

It think it's pretty naive to expect that GitHub's contract with ICE gives them some kind of inside opportunity to help guide policy within the agency. On the other hand, employees of ICE, who are actually inside do probably have some (admittedly limited) amount of leverage. It might by that if they are frustrated at losing access to tools that they previously thought worth paying for, they would attempt to exert that leverage for change.

DudeInBasement 6y ago

The taxpayer/citizens should influence ICE/government. Not GitHub. Government should serve/fear the people, not corps. And people wonder why there is a military industrial complex.

coolreader18 6y ago
I don't think encouraging a security department to keep working with a corporation would necessarily help stop the military/industrial complex.
Klinky 6y ago
Corps don't just get to magically do whatever they want without repercussion. The purpose of corps is to better humanity, and they should certainly fear "the people" if they are are doing the opposite.

ivanbakel 6y ago

If Github has a negligible technical impact on ICE, in what way are they meant to have any significant influence on ICE's policy?

dx87 6y ago

> The real impact would be on GitHub themselves, as they would lose any opportunity to help guide policy or technology at ICE or any other government agency. There's about a 0% chance that a government agency would change anything about their policies based on what GitHub employees say. Companies that work on government contracts get "report cards" detailing the agency's satisfaction with their performance, and any other government agency can view the reports for that company, so it's in their best interest to try and get favorable reviews by doing what the agency wants.

julianeon 6y ago

How is GitHub supposed to change ICE's policies by working with ICE? "Hey, you see this part of the code where you sort through the parents, to separate them from their children? Maybe don't do that?" ICE is going to ignore any unprofessional suggestions, that's not what they hired GitHub to do. In fact the usual argument employers give when you don't do exactly they hired you to do - "that's not what we hired you for" - is pretty strong. And unless GitHub sabotages their own work (which they won't), then their work will simply be in service to ICE's goals. There's no room left over for contributing non-work opinions.