7 ms·

I used to work for Blizzard. The Chinese government requested that we modify the WoW client so that they could intercept all chat. As far as I know, no-one said

I used to work for Blizzard. The Chinese government requested that we modify the WoW client so that they could intercept all chat. As far as I know, no-one said anything, including me - and Blizzard, of course, was more than happy to comply, given the size of the market and the risk of being forbidden to do business there. There were plenty of other MMOGs happy to play ball and eat that cake. I didn't say anything. It was happening to "them", Chinese nationals. Not only that, but "they" should know better than to say sensitive things online, because even if we didn't install the back door, I reasoned, it wouldn't be too hard to get that data through various other means. I really regret not only my participation, but not making a big stink about it. No-one did. I strongly suspect that that same system is being being used domestically, now. Clearly it was the wrong thing to do. I've regretted my role in that implementation for several years. I shouldn't have participated, and I should have protested. Even if it didn't stop it, at least the company leadership might have felt the heat. But I was a coward and I didn't want to lose my job, didn't want to fight a legal battle, and, like I said, it was just China spying on it's people, which everyone knew they do anyway. And who knows? The news probably would have been ignored, or, if it wasn't, I might have been branded as a coward and a disloyal employee, betraying the people who put food on my table. And I being under 30, overpaid, over-priviledged, etc. I can hear the Fox News commentators even now. That, to me, has been the most difficult thing about Snowden, is that here's someone who did the right thing, who revealed wrong-doing on the part of our government, and there are a lot of people who say he's the wrongdoer, who attack him as disloyal and worse. A back door in a game used by China? Who would even care about that? And if they did, I'd just be torn to shreds, unemployable and with heaven-knows-what kind of future. The reaction to Manning and Snowden, particularly the lack of strong public support, sends a strong signal that people don't want to know. They don't want to upset the apple cart. They don't want to challenge the government, they don't want to question it, not even when it's clearly violating it's own most important rules - the rules that, presumably, we've been fighting to promote these last 200 years. It seems hopeless.

ihsw 13y ago
That's what it means to be an ideologue - willingness to die for your values. Don't be ashamed about your decisions, a strong sense of self-preservation is perfectly natural.
- kalkin 13y ago
  What s/he did can be perfectly natural and not imply that s/he's a worse-than-average person, but still be worthy of shame. I don't mean to be an asshole here, but it's important for all of us to recognize that normal humans (ie. we) have a capacity to do awful things if circumstances encourage it - the Stanford Prison Experiment would be a famous illustration. That's why these slides are helpful.
  - dylangs1030 13y ago
    I agree, and I'd also like to mention the other usually cited experiment along those lines - the Milgram obedience experiment. http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_Experiment http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_Experiment
    - kalkin 13y ago
      Thanks for the reminder. If you are ever placed into a situation psychologically and ethically analogous to these experiments--a possibility that in a militarized and capitalist world it seems wise not to dismiss--and you want to acquit yourself better, what can you do? One option is to just have faith that you'll turn out to be an exceptionally good person. But that doesn't seem to me to be much wiser than assuming that no one with authority will ever encourage you to do something wrong. I think a better option, per the OP, is to think seriously in advance about what kind of situations might arise in your actual life and how you would like yourself to respond.
      - dylangs1030 13y ago
        Classically, I respond to this line of thinking - the doubt of being an exceptionally "good" person - with the following self-assessed metric: "If you were raised in the deep South during the 18th and 19th centuries, would you be aggressively racist, ambivalent or abolitionist in your views towards Black enslavement?" The immediate gut feeling that people feel is important, because it doesn't end there. You then ask if that gut feeling can be reasoned to be consistent with their behavior, or if it's just a feel-good response. If someone really feels they'd be abolitionist, this should be at least somewhat reflected in small examples of day to day behavior. People don't reserve "goodness" for large deeds, they are usually the kind of people who help out in small, less noticeable/outspoken ways as well. NB: This is not a test designed to prove how good someone is to another person, it's a self-assessment. It's asked to help the person learn more about themselves.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
marquis 13y ago
>I might have been branded as a coward If you have an ethical choice to make, consider the reaction of your esteemed colleagues (get counsel if you feel you can), not that of the mainstream news. The general support for those such as Snowden and Manning among my peers would prove that indeed they are held in high regard among those to whom it matters. The decision you made was your decision and you should not curse yourself for it but learn from it and support those who did make decisions to release materials and information.
- javajosh 13y ago
  I think it would be great if someone with money in Silicon Valley were to make public statements along the lines of, "If you blow the whistle, and it's legit, you won't have to worry about your career. We want people who are driven to do the right thing. We want to hire heroes." If Google really wants to make a statement about being not-evil, make Snowden a generous offer for employment while he's in Russia.
  - dylangs1030 13y ago
    Eh...well intentioned, but no. There would be severe consequences for just offering employment to such sensitive individuals. People like Snowden are not branded untouchable because people are ideologically opposed to his actions - that's a misrepresentation of what's actually going on. Whistleblowers become shunned because whoever they come into contact with will be elevated to accomplice status. Google doesn't want that kind of fire under their ass. Altruism is all well and good, but there's a reason wh you're instructed to put your own oxygen mask on in a airplane emergency. If a company like Google did that, they would immediately: 1. Place Snowden in United States lawful jurisdiction, 2. Endanger their own fiscal well-being, 3. Draw political attention and divisive sentiments to themselves. I believe tech companies have a responsibility to take a stand, but being the hero and standing up to the man like that is essentially taking out Snowden and your company in a massive kamekaze attack that benefits only his detractors.
    - javajosh 13y ago
mr_spothawk 13y ago
Fuck it, I'll go ahead and say it: First, thanks for coming clean. You're a human being who's made a really bad decision. You should feel terrible for this. "They" are not merely your possible friends, or your relative's relatives, or your neighbors' cousins... "They" are other human beings who might someday decide to stand up for their human rights. "They" are millions of people you sold out for easy "dinner" & "rent". And now the tool you helped build to invade their privacy is likely being turned on all your real friends, and your real relatives, and your real neighbors. And you're not even getting paid anymore. You should feel terrible for selling out for so little. You weren't as afraid of being unemployed as you were of having to do something. You were mentally lazy and your moral compass was clearly defunct. Too bad your behavior is not undoable and you'll have to live with it for the rest of your life. Maybe you can do something to recover for it in the future. Hopefully your ethical failure can serve as an example of what not to do.
- icebraining 13y ago
  What did you hope to accomplish with this post? "Here's someone who did something bad, who can't undo it, and who feels bad enough to come clean - let's rub it in so as to discourage others from doing so"?
  - Skalman 13y ago
    I'd say that a clear goal of that post is to emphasize that it was a choice. To me Spothawk is rubbing in the fact that it was a decision.
    - amirmc 13y ago
      And it's a lot of people's 'decision' to bury their heads in the sand about the implications of Snowden's leaks. In that light, why isn't it also directed at everyone who doesn't care, rather than one guy who does? Edit: What about the employer's choices to go ahead with it? No anger directed that way? This guy should have fallen on his sword but his company gets a pass?
ian00 13y ago
How about a program that would encrypt/decrypt game chat for users, since the wow interface has programmability. The act of commenting here and anonymously disclosing this, is a good thing.
lawnchair_larry 13y ago
But much like with the US government spying, China's laws permit them to spy. It was all legal. So what's the big deal? ;)
- tluyben2 13y ago
  I know/hope you are kidding, but I still feel the need to respond. That whatever is legal or not can still go against your own feel of right or wrong. Who cares if something is legal somewhere and you don't agree with it. There are probably many examples of things legal in countries you visit which your moral compass would prevent you from taking part in. My personal annoyance being bullfighting in Spain (where I live 4 months of the year).
  - lawnchair_larry 13y ago
    I was going to add the </sarcasm> tag, but settled on the wink emoticon. I did think it might be too subtle. Sadly, it's only subtle because there are crazies around here and in the government who actually use that as an argument.
    - tluyben2 13y ago
      Yeah, I know people who use that as argument; that's why I responded.
- alan_cx 13y ago
  "Legal" does not equal "ethical" or "moral", in any country.
wslh 13y ago
I was asked by government agency to protect (even from other government agencies) specific individuals information that were probable involved in corruption cases. I was vocal and fought against it and was ready to publicize it once finished. At the end the project was cancelled. So... I don't believe in neutral ethical engineering decisions when the outcomes are crystal clear. I am not talking about ethical decisions on working at Zynga, at the end people can decide if they play their stupid games or not.
peterkelly 13y ago
Just wanted to say I really admire you for having the courage to come out and say this publicly (even though it was anonymously). The world needs more people like you. We all do things we regret later in life. I have great respect for the fact that you've reflected on your involvement in this, come to regret it, and have now chosen to speak out about it. I think this particular case actually deserves a HN story in itself.
cheapsteak 13y ago
If it makes you feel any better, you would not have made a difference. Having lived there for nearly a decade, including middle and high school, I can tell you that people here just don't care anymore, and news papers and websites would know better than to publish a story like that anyway; you would have self-immolated for nothing.
- anonymous 13y ago
  If it were me, I'd have looked for a way to sneak it into a popup that shows the first time you run the updated client. Something like In the interest of your safety and the prosperity of the Chinese, all your chat messages are henceforth constantly monitored by government officials. Have a nice day. [OK] It may ultimately turn out to be impossible to do, but I would like to at least try.
freewizard 13y ago
Don't feel too bad about what you did to Chinese people. At least game chat is far less a privacy concern for me, compared to forum, email or instant message which have been fully censored in China already. But you might want to feel sorry about your government who clearly "improved" a lot in the last few years after it learned Yahoo's leak person email to Chinese government.
monotrophic 13y ago
This just in: People Viewing Post On Internet Believe Everything They Read. Common Sense Responds, "I Give Up!"... HINT: People who work for Blizzard don't work for every Blizzard office, as Blizzard operates offices in multiple countries... In other news: Apple Inc. Still Operates Sweatshop-Like Conditions As Internet Cares About WoW Instead.

ihsw 13y ago

That's what it means to be an ideologue - willingness to die for your values. Don't be ashamed about your decisions, a strong sense of self-preservation is perfectly natural.

kalkin 13y ago
What s/he did can be perfectly natural and not imply that s/he's a worse-than-average person, but still be worthy of shame. I don't mean to be an asshole here, but it's important for all of us to recognize that normal humans (ie. we) have a capacity to do awful things if circumstances encourage it - the Stanford Prison Experiment would be a famous illustration. That's why these slides are helpful.
- dylangs1030 13y ago
  I agree, and I'd also like to mention the other usually cited experiment along those lines - the Milgram obedience experiment. http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_Experiment http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_Experiment
  - kalkin 13y ago
    Thanks for the reminder. If you are ever placed into a situation psychologically and ethically analogous to these experiments--a possibility that in a militarized and capitalist world it seems wise not to dismiss--and you want to acquit yourself better, what can you do? One option is to just have faith that you'll turn out to be an exceptionally good person. But that doesn't seem to me to be much wiser than assuming that no one with authority will ever encourage you to do something wrong. I think a better option, per the OP, is to think seriously in advance about what kind of situations might arise in your actual life and how you would like yourself to respond.
    - dylangs1030 13y ago
      Classically, I respond to this line of thinking - the doubt of being an exceptionally "good" person - with the following self-assessed metric: "If you were raised in the deep South during the 18th and 19th centuries, would you be aggressively racist, ambivalent or abolitionist in your views towards Black enslavement?" The immediate gut feeling that people feel is important, because it doesn't end there. You then ask if that gut feeling can be reasoned to be consistent with their behavior, or if it's just a feel-good response. If someone really feels they'd be abolitionist, this should be at least somewhat reflected in small examples of day to day behavior. People don't reserve "goodness" for large deeds, they are usually the kind of people who help out in small, less noticeable/outspoken ways as well. NB: This is not a test designed to prove how good someone is to another person, it's a self-assessment. It's asked to help the person learn more about themselves.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

marquis 13y ago

>I might have been branded as a coward If you have an ethical choice to make, consider the reaction of your esteemed colleagues (get counsel if you feel you can), not that of the mainstream news. The general support for those such as Snowden and Manning among my peers would prove that indeed they are held in high regard among those to whom it matters. The decision you made was your decision and you should not curse yourself for it but learn from it and support those who did make decisions to release materials and information.

javajosh 13y ago
I think it would be great if someone with money in Silicon Valley were to make public statements along the lines of, "If you blow the whistle, and it's legit, you won't have to worry about your career. We want people who are driven to do the right thing. We want to hire heroes." If Google really wants to make a statement about being not-evil, make Snowden a generous offer for employment while he's in Russia.
- dylangs1030 13y ago
  Eh...well intentioned, but no. There would be severe consequences for just offering employment to such sensitive individuals. People like Snowden are not branded untouchable because people are ideologically opposed to his actions - that's a misrepresentation of what's actually going on. Whistleblowers become shunned because whoever they come into contact with will be elevated to accomplice status. Google doesn't want that kind of fire under their ass. Altruism is all well and good, but there's a reason wh you're instructed to put your own oxygen mask on in a airplane emergency. If a company like Google did that, they would immediately: 1. Place Snowden in United States lawful jurisdiction, 2. Endanger their own fiscal well-being, 3. Draw political attention and divisive sentiments to themselves. I believe tech companies have a responsibility to take a stand, but being the hero and standing up to the man like that is essentially taking out Snowden and your company in a massive kamekaze attack that benefits only his detractors.
  - javajosh 13y ago

mr_spothawk 13y ago

Fuck it, I'll go ahead and say it: First, thanks for coming clean. You're a human being who's made a really bad decision. You should feel terrible for this. "They" are not merely your possible friends, or your relative's relatives, or your neighbors' cousins... "They" are other human beings who might someday decide to stand up for their human rights. "They" are millions of people you sold out for easy "dinner" & "rent". And now the tool you helped build to invade their privacy is likely being turned on all your real friends, and your real relatives, and your real neighbors. And you're not even getting paid anymore. You should feel terrible for selling out for so little. You weren't as afraid of being unemployed as you were of having to do something. You were mentally lazy and your moral compass was clearly defunct. Too bad your behavior is not undoable and you'll have to live with it for the rest of your life. Maybe you can do something to recover for it in the future. Hopefully your ethical failure can serve as an example of what not to do.

icebraining 13y ago
What did you hope to accomplish with this post? "Here's someone who did something bad, who can't undo it, and who feels bad enough to come clean - let's rub it in so as to discourage others from doing so"?
- Skalman 13y ago
  I'd say that a clear goal of that post is to emphasize that it was a choice. To me Spothawk is rubbing in the fact that it was a decision.
  - amirmc 13y ago
    And it's a lot of people's 'decision' to bury their heads in the sand about the implications of Snowden's leaks. In that light, why isn't it also directed at everyone who doesn't care, rather than one guy who does? Edit: What about the employer's choices to go ahead with it? No anger directed that way? This guy should have fallen on his sword but his company gets a pass?

ian00 13y ago

How about a program that would encrypt/decrypt game chat for users, since the wow interface has programmability. The act of commenting here and anonymously disclosing this, is a good thing.

lawnchair_larry 13y ago

But much like with the US government spying, China's laws permit them to spy. It was all legal. So what's the big deal? ;)

tluyben2 13y ago
I know/hope you are kidding, but I still feel the need to respond. That whatever is legal or not can still go against your own feel of right or wrong. Who cares if something is legal somewhere and you don't agree with it. There are probably many examples of things legal in countries you visit which your moral compass would prevent you from taking part in. My personal annoyance being bullfighting in Spain (where I live 4 months of the year).
- lawnchair_larry 13y ago
  I was going to add the </sarcasm> tag, but settled on the wink emoticon. I did think it might be too subtle. Sadly, it's only subtle because there are crazies around here and in the government who actually use that as an argument.
  - tluyben2 13y ago
    Yeah, I know people who use that as argument; that's why I responded.
alan_cx 13y ago
"Legal" does not equal "ethical" or "moral", in any country.

wslh 13y ago

I was asked by government agency to protect (even from other government agencies) specific individuals information that were probable involved in corruption cases. I was vocal and fought against it and was ready to publicize it once finished. At the end the project was cancelled. So... I don't believe in neutral ethical engineering decisions when the outcomes are crystal clear. I am not talking about ethical decisions on working at Zynga, at the end people can decide if they play their stupid games or not.

peterkelly 13y ago

Just wanted to say I really admire you for having the courage to come out and say this publicly (even though it was anonymously). The world needs more people like you. We all do things we regret later in life. I have great respect for the fact that you've reflected on your involvement in this, come to regret it, and have now chosen to speak out about it. I think this particular case actually deserves a HN story in itself.

cheapsteak 13y ago

If it makes you feel any better, you would not have made a difference. Having lived there for nearly a decade, including middle and high school, I can tell you that people here just don't care anymore, and news papers and websites would know better than to publish a story like that anyway; you would have self-immolated for nothing.

anonymous 13y ago
If it were me, I'd have looked for a way to sneak it into a popup that shows the first time you run the updated client. Something like In the interest of your safety and the prosperity of the Chinese, all your chat messages are henceforth constantly monitored by government officials. Have a nice day. [OK] It may ultimately turn out to be impossible to do, but I would like to at least try.

freewizard 13y ago

Don't feel too bad about what you did to Chinese people. At least game chat is far less a privacy concern for me, compared to forum, email or instant message which have been fully censored in China already. But you might want to feel sorry about your government who clearly "improved" a lot in the last few years after it learned Yahoo's leak person email to Chinese government.

monotrophic 13y ago

This just in: People Viewing Post On Internet Believe Everything They Read. Common Sense Responds, "I Give Up!"... HINT: People who work for Blizzard don't work for every Blizzard office, as Blizzard operates offices in multiple countries... In other news: Apple Inc. Still Operates Sweatshop-Like Conditions As Internet Cares About WoW Instead.