4 ms·

> How is including Huawei as a founding member of the Rust Foundation in any way justifiable from a moral perspective? Probably in the same way that it is just

> How is including Huawei as a founding member of the Rust Foundation in any way justifiable from a moral perspective? Probably in the same way that it is justifiable to support the DoD of the USA to use Rust on their drones that kill civilians all over the world. (the micro-controller of one of the turbines used in these drones runs 100% Rust). US military technology that uses Rust is also deployed in Israel to genocide palestinians, and at this point Rust is involved somewhere in every civilian life the US directly or indirectly contributes to taking away. So if this is where you want to put the bar, then none of the tech companies that are now major Rust foundation members would pass it. I mean, Microsoft hosts the NSA cloud that's used to spy on citizens all around the world, and rattle them out to get them killed when it suits the CIA. Facebook was used by Cambridge Analytica to rig Brexit in the UK, and the list goes on and on and on.

rl3 6y ago
It seems the point of my [now censored] comment was misunderstood. It's not about the fact that the Rust language itself is used to do bad things. It's about what the organizations that comprise the Rust foundation represent. Yeah, I'll grant you the others are indeed guilty of terrible things. Personally I abhore parts of virtually every company there in some way or another. Here's the thing: not every member company is completely beholden to an authoritarian government. Only one is.
- volta83 6y ago
  > Here's the thing: not every member company is completely beholden to an authoritarian government. Only one is. If you think this is an objectively a bad thing, you should probably compare the per capita excess mortality of China vs the US for 2020... --- The Rust community is very diverse and include people from all around the world, including a huge number of Chinese developers. Not giving China a voice means that "negotiation" is not an option that China can choose when there is a dispute, forcing them to pick some other option instead. If you really believe that China is super dangerous, forcing them out of the negotiation table is probably the single worst decision you can actually make. I really hope you are not in favor of expelling China and all other countries you disagree with from the United Nations and similar policies, because that's how World War 3 starts...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - rl3 6y ago
    >If you think this is an objectively a bad thing, you should probably compare the per capita excess mortality of China vs the US for 2020... Authoritarian regimes are much better equipped than free societies to handle pandemics. That doesn't somehow excuse nor justify crimes against humanity at terrifying scale. >The Rust community is very diverse and include people from all around the world, including a huge number of Chinese developers. Including Chinese developers is great. Including a large tech company that has no choice but to act as an arm of its authoritarian government isn't. These are two very different things. >Not giving China a voice means that "negotiation" is not an option that China can choose when there is a dispute, forcing them to pick some other option instead. Generally speaking when large-scale atrocities occur, the concern isn't with giving the entity committing said atrocities a voice so much as it is things like international condemnation and exclusion until the abhorrent behavior ceases. Negotiating with and giving voice to authoritarian regimes simply enables them to act in bad faith. History is littered with examples of this. Atrocities become bargaining chips, and that is grotesque.

rl3 6y ago

It seems the point of my [now censored] comment was misunderstood. It's not about the fact that the Rust language itself is used to do bad things. It's about what the organizations that comprise the Rust foundation represent. Yeah, I'll grant you the others are indeed guilty of terrible things. Personally I abhore parts of virtually every company there in some way or another. Here's the thing: not every member company is completely beholden to an authoritarian government. Only one is.

volta83 6y ago
> Here's the thing: not every member company is completely beholden to an authoritarian government. Only one is. If you think this is an objectively a bad thing, you should probably compare the per capita excess mortality of China vs the US for 2020... --- The Rust community is very diverse and include people from all around the world, including a huge number of Chinese developers. Not giving China a voice means that "negotiation" is not an option that China can choose when there is a dispute, forcing them to pick some other option instead. If you really believe that China is super dangerous, forcing them out of the negotiation table is probably the single worst decision you can actually make. I really hope you are not in favor of expelling China and all other countries you disagree with from the United Nations and similar policies, because that's how World War 3 starts...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- rl3 6y ago
  >If you think this is an objectively a bad thing, you should probably compare the per capita excess mortality of China vs the US for 2020... Authoritarian regimes are much better equipped than free societies to handle pandemics. That doesn't somehow excuse nor justify crimes against humanity at terrifying scale. >The Rust community is very diverse and include people from all around the world, including a huge number of Chinese developers. Including Chinese developers is great. Including a large tech company that has no choice but to act as an arm of its authoritarian government isn't. These are two very different things. >Not giving China a voice means that "negotiation" is not an option that China can choose when there is a dispute, forcing them to pick some other option instead. Generally speaking when large-scale atrocities occur, the concern isn't with giving the entity committing said atrocities a voice so much as it is things like international condemnation and exclusion until the abhorrent behavior ceases. Negotiating with and giving voice to authoritarian regimes simply enables them to act in bad faith. History is littered with examples of this. Atrocities become bargaining chips, and that is grotesque.