37 ms·

Dropping Mozilla because Eich is anti-gay-marriage made sense to me because Mozilla is the beacon of open source. Mozilla belongs to us in a very personal way,

Dropping Mozilla because Eich is anti-gay-marriage made sense to me because Mozilla is the beacon of open source. Mozilla belongs to us in a very personal way, many of us have contributed code to Firefox personally. But Condi Rice joining a completely private Dropbox as a board member - this is a non-issue. I'm as strongly anti-Bush administration and anti-war in general (especially the Iraq War - good grief) as anyone you could hope to meet, but this is ridiculously naive and short sighted to think that Condi being involved with Dropbox is something to get excited about. There are SO many people involved with private companies that are so much more partisan and support with no hesitation so many terrible things that if you want to go down this rabbit hole, you're going to be down there for a while my friends. Edit: that Condi Rice is a "privacy" concern - ok. Fine. I think that's ridiculous but you know what - nothing is particularly ridiculous when it comes to privacy anymore. So I will accept that argument.

geekam 13y ago
>>There are SO many people involved with private companies that are so much more partisan and support with no hesitation so many terrible things that if you want to go down this rabbit hole, you're going to be down there for a while my friends. What do think we do then if we find that a decision-maker in a company is highly partisan and maybe bad for privacy?
mcv 13y ago
It's not about partisanship, it's about whether your data is safe. Of course maybe data can never be safe in the hands of a US company, but I put significantly less trust in a company that hires someone who supported all the violations by various secret services, than in one that fights those violations.
- EdiX 13y ago
  Before this I could at least pretend they didn't play ball with the NSA, I knew it was self deception but I'm also very lazy. Now they might as well hang a "Friend of NSA" sign in front of their building. I downgraded my Pro account.
sdegutis 13y ago
Can't we just keep software and politics separate? Do we really need to divide ourselves in yet another area because of differences of opinion?
- humancontact 13y ago
  Unfortunately there's no division as to where politics is allowed to interfere. From Wikipedia[1]: Politics is the process observed in all human (and many non-human) group interactions by which groups make decisions, including activism on behalf of specific issues or causes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_%28disambiguation%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_%28disambiguation%29
- icebraining 13y ago
  You can shut your eyes and pretend that they're separate, but that doesn't make it true. One's political and ethical views deeply influence how they act, particular towards others. EDIT: This is a general point, not an opinion on the current issue.
- sdegutis 13y ago
  Disclaimer: I'm pretty orthodox Catholic and thus firmly disagree with most software programmers on topics that are often discussed here. But I don't boycott emacs just because the authors are atheists (I actually use emacs full time for work now). And I don't boycott software whose maintainers are pro-choice or whatever else. Boycotting software because of political or religious differences isn't going to help software, it's only going to further unnecessary dissension instead of fostering understanding and personal change.
  - vdaniuk 13y ago
    No, you should not help software per se. You should help software to change the world for the better, that's what matters.
- wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
  The personal attachment that comes with using a good brand in this field isn't trivial, and it should be expected that users project their sensibilities on the brand. Being politically neutral in the view of its users should have been a priority for DP, regardless of which powerful gatekeepers to world markets are on Rice's speed dial.
frabcus 13y ago
This sounds like holding non-profits to higher standards than corporates. That seems a strange and grossly unfair thing to do, ultimately counterproductive to the very purpose of non-profits. Of course, when it comes to their core values you have to hold non-profits to high standards - e.g. Mozilla on the open web. But when it comes to things unrelated to their mission... Why should they be any more perfect than a for-profit corporation! I like people holding organizations to high standards, its fantastic. But please, hold all of them to high standards - both for-profits and non-profits.
- TylerE 13y ago
  This is rapidly turning very ugly, and I can't stand it. Is being "anti-gay" or "pro-war" or even just "republican" the new Communism? The new witchcraft?
  - EC1 13y ago
    I hope so. We're moving into a phase where there you can grab information about anything, from nearly anywhere, at almost any time. There is little advantage to decision making based on cemented ideals anymore. This new era has exposed the good and bad in all facets of life. It's no longer about republicans, or communists, or this, or that, it's just about life. I prefer to remain non-partisan and instead look at things as a complete outsider, just as a regular human being without any rooted loyalty in any one system or another. If a company hires a shitty person, and people start dropping their service like flies, and that company reconsiders, then we're moving in a good direction, and I view my "vote" of not sticking with Dropbox more as a single ballot to living in a more informed and refined society. I really hope somebody replies and lets me know why I'm wrong rather than just sitting here at -2. Please don't turn HN into Reddit :(
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
      - icebraining 13y ago
equalarrow 13y ago
There's a big level of difference (in my mind) of being partisan and being in the crew that set the wheels in motion.
Dolimiter 13y ago
This is the logical conclusion after the Mozilla farce. Every new hire will be vetted for correct political affiliates, or the ISJP (Internet Social Justice Police) will do their McCarthyism thing. We live in interesting times!
k-mcgrady 13y ago
>> "Dropping Mozilla because Eich is anti-gay-marriage made sense to me because Mozilla is the beacon of open source. Mozilla belongs to us in a very personal way, many of us have contributed code to Firefox personally." I feel the opposite. Eich's opinion (which I don't agree with) was unlikely to impact his work. Rice was part of the administration that created PRISM. I don't want her anywhere near a company I'm supposed to trust with all my files.
- unreal37 13y ago
  You have a point. One can say that Condi Rice's lies as the National Security Advisor led to 100,000+ civilian deaths in Iraq. Yet some people see it worse that Eich, the inventor of Javascript which arguably powers the modern web, was the CEO of Mozilla. It's an interesting rationalization process.
- guptaneil 13y ago
  You might have the opinion that universal health care is bad for this country. I would disagree with you, but that would be your personal opinion and I couldn't fault you for it, whatever I may think of you privately. But if you believe all colored people should be enslaved and donate money towards making it happen, then we all should fault you because that's not an acceptable opinion, it's bigotry. Similarly, stripping gay men and women of their civil liberties is bigotry that should not be tolerated. Rice's actions have also resulted in harming our civil liberties and I don't support her, but I can't fault Drew Houston for wanting her on their Board. Anybody who has the chance to add somebody as powerful and well-connected as Rice to their Board would be stupid not to. She is there to advise, not lead. I don't believe her presence on the Board will make Dropbox any more or less trustworthy with our data than before. If Dropbox is going to leak our private data now, then that's a company that would've done so without Rice as well.
wreegab 13y ago
That people will leverage this to at least bring some sort of accountability, I completely applaud.
ewoodrich 13y ago
I'm not very passionate about either the Eich situation or this new Dropbox issue, but I have to say that this feels much more "political" and relevant than with Mozilla. Eich privately opposed gay marriage, but the public disclosure threatened to hurt the foundation's image and his effectiveness. Rice was a unabashed supporter and post 2006, an architect of the Iraq War. It would be closer to Mozilla hiring Mike Huckabee or similar as CEO.
subdane 13y ago
I had precisely the opposite view. I felt that Eich's politics weren't aligned with my beliefs but were personal and legal. Condi is in a whole other league - having to help prosecute an illegal war and intentionally mislead our citizenry.
spindritf 13y ago
Dropping Mozilla because Eich is anti-gay-marriage made sense to me because Mozilla is the beacon of open source. The leap from open source to pro-gay sounds like a complete non sequitur to me. What is the reasoning there? I like the way Torvalds put it. For example, the GPLv2 in no way limits your use of the software. If you're a mad scientist, you can use GPLv2'd software for your evil plans to take over the world ("Sharks with lasers on their heads!!"), and the GPLv2 just says that you have to give source code back. And that's OK by me. I like sharks with lasers. I just want the mad scientists of the world to pay me back in kind. I made source code available to them, they have to make their changes to it available to me. After that, they can fry me with their shark-mounted lasers all they want. Open source means just that.
- midnitewarrior 13y ago
  > The leap from open source to pro-gay sounds like a complete non sequitur to me. What is the reasoning there? Your characterization of it being a "leap to pro-gay" is a bit much. Supporters of Prop 8 are actively trying to deny other Americans rights, many people find this offensive, regardless of the grounds for denial. It echoes racial, gender and age discrimination of the past -- things that many find to be un-American. The fact that the people affected happen to be gay is secondary for many who opposed Prop 8. No American should be legislated as a second class citizen. Open Source is about open access, both to contribute and use. Prop 8 was trying to deny people access to government, rights and benefits. These attitudes are in direct opposition. Beyond the ideological friction, you are dividing the community of users and contributors -- people who support gay rights and marriage equality somehow feel like they are supporting somebody who is trying to change society by denying people rights. Mozilla isn't driven by profit, it's driven by the goodwill of its users and contributors. Mr. Eich was well aware of the sensitive nature of people's attitudes towards his contribution -- he's tried for years to make it a non-issue, but it has kept following him. It's not that Open Source is "pro-gay rights", it's that it is pro-open access and equality. Mr. Eich's contribution shows contempt for this ideal at some level. It appears that many had issue with this. Additionally, Google, Mozilla's largest financial contributor, is a company that has actively taken a strongly anti-Prop 8 stance. Having the leader of the Mozilla Foundation be openly in opposition to Google's stance brings questions about if this will ultimately affect Mozilla's funding. Mr. Eich's technical leadership and history with Mozilla probably qualifies him as a very competent leader for the organization, however the political realities of Mozilla's relationship with Google and the open source community's ideals creates doubt about the realities of his ability to manage these important relationships between Google, users and contributors.
BaronVonAwesome 13y ago
"Dropping" Eich or getting rid of Mozilla because you disagree with someone's point of view on a single issue is pretty extreme. You may find that literally hundreds of good and/or services you currently use are the brainchild of someone or is being headed by someone who has many ideals you also disagree with. You might be left with nothing.
mikeash 13y ago
It strikes me as the opposite. Eich's politics weren't all that important. There was a minor issue of whether it would cause trouble for Mozilla's gay employees (or employees who just felt strongly about it) and a big public relations problem, but the technical functioning of the company wouldn't be affected. With Dropbox and Rice, I think there's a decent chance (not huge, but decent) that she's sitting down and giving everybody pointers for how they can most efficiently and effectively cooperate with the NSA. She's out of the administration but people like this never truly leave.
chr1 13y ago
From the side it looks like Dropping Mozilla because Eich, made sense to you because it was issue you cared about, and dead people in Iraq? well they are far away and probably didn't think like you anyway. Same with contributing code to Firefox: of course my small patch for the bug affecting me personally looks like a big deal, but if i look at a big picture, my contribution isn't even comparable to what Brendan Eich did. I don't say that dropping dropbox is a good thing, but i don't see how one can think logically that harassment of Eich was something for greater good, and this is a non-issue. Unfortunately emotion is a strong thing, much stronger than logic.
Spooky23 13y ago
I think the Rice as a board member issue is a totally different concern, directly related to the delivery of the service. Rice is a former National Security Advisor, and is looped into the political structure. So now, when the three letter agency of your choosing needs to have a frank conversation with someone at Dropbox, Condi will be a trusted conduit.
mjolk 13y ago
Eich also created JavaScript and I don't see a massive push to drop it everywhere. I think these sort of things are an outrage-economy with no serious or lasting effect.
- jff 13y ago
  I wish there was a massive push to drop it, though...
- quaunaut 13y ago
  Because that's just unfeasible. Removing him as CEO is one thing, we can't even get another language on the web anymore as it is.
pbreit 13y ago
Agreed. I think the Mozilla case was different due to the nature of the role, the nature of the company and how the person involved handled the whole situation.
ryguytilidie 13y ago
Why do you think that it is "ridiculous" for people to be upset that a strong supporter of warrant-less wiretapping and PRISM is now a board member at the place they store their data?

geekam 13y ago

>>There are SO many people involved with private companies that are so much more partisan and support with no hesitation so many terrible things that if you want to go down this rabbit hole, you're going to be down there for a while my friends. What do think we do then if we find that a decision-maker in a company is highly partisan and maybe bad for privacy?

mcv 13y ago

It's not about partisanship, it's about whether your data is safe. Of course maybe data can never be safe in the hands of a US company, but I put significantly less trust in a company that hires someone who supported all the violations by various secret services, than in one that fights those violations.

EdiX 13y ago
Before this I could at least pretend they didn't play ball with the NSA, I knew it was self deception but I'm also very lazy. Now they might as well hang a "Friend of NSA" sign in front of their building. I downgraded my Pro account.

sdegutis 13y ago

Can't we just keep software and politics separate? Do we really need to divide ourselves in yet another area because of differences of opinion?

humancontact 13y ago
Unfortunately there's no division as to where politics is allowed to interfere. From Wikipedia[1]: Politics is the process observed in all human (and many non-human) group interactions by which groups make decisions, including activism on behalf of specific issues or causes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_%28disambiguation%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_%28disambiguation%29
icebraining 13y ago
You can shut your eyes and pretend that they're separate, but that doesn't make it true. One's political and ethical views deeply influence how they act, particular towards others. EDIT: This is a general point, not an opinion on the current issue.
sdegutis 13y ago
Disclaimer: I'm pretty orthodox Catholic and thus firmly disagree with most software programmers on topics that are often discussed here. But I don't boycott emacs just because the authors are atheists (I actually use emacs full time for work now). And I don't boycott software whose maintainers are pro-choice or whatever else. Boycotting software because of political or religious differences isn't going to help software, it's only going to further unnecessary dissension instead of fostering understanding and personal change.
- vdaniuk 13y ago
  No, you should not help software per se. You should help software to change the world for the better, that's what matters.
wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
The personal attachment that comes with using a good brand in this field isn't trivial, and it should be expected that users project their sensibilities on the brand. Being politically neutral in the view of its users should have been a priority for DP, regardless of which powerful gatekeepers to world markets are on Rice's speed dial.

frabcus 13y ago

This sounds like holding non-profits to higher standards than corporates. That seems a strange and grossly unfair thing to do, ultimately counterproductive to the very purpose of non-profits. Of course, when it comes to their core values you have to hold non-profits to high standards - e.g. Mozilla on the open web. But when it comes to things unrelated to their mission... Why should they be any more perfect than a for-profit corporation! I like people holding organizations to high standards, its fantastic. But please, hold all of them to high standards - both for-profits and non-profits.

TylerE 13y ago
This is rapidly turning very ugly, and I can't stand it. Is being "anti-gay" or "pro-war" or even just "republican" the new Communism? The new witchcraft?
- EC1 13y ago
  I hope so. We're moving into a phase where there you can grab information about anything, from nearly anywhere, at almost any time. There is little advantage to decision making based on cemented ideals anymore. This new era has exposed the good and bad in all facets of life. It's no longer about republicans, or communists, or this, or that, it's just about life. I prefer to remain non-partisan and instead look at things as a complete outsider, just as a regular human being without any rooted loyalty in any one system or another. If a company hires a shitty person, and people start dropping their service like flies, and that company reconsiders, then we're moving in a good direction, and I view my "vote" of not sticking with Dropbox more as a single ballot to living in a more informed and refined society. I really hope somebody replies and lets me know why I'm wrong rather than just sitting here at -2. Please don't turn HN into Reddit :(
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
    - icebraining 13y ago

equalarrow 13y ago

There's a big level of difference (in my mind) of being partisan and being in the crew that set the wheels in motion.

Dolimiter 13y ago

This is the logical conclusion after the Mozilla farce. Every new hire will be vetted for correct political affiliates, or the ISJP (Internet Social Justice Police) will do their McCarthyism thing. We live in interesting times!

k-mcgrady 13y ago

>> "Dropping Mozilla because Eich is anti-gay-marriage made sense to me because Mozilla is the beacon of open source. Mozilla belongs to us in a very personal way, many of us have contributed code to Firefox personally." I feel the opposite. Eich's opinion (which I don't agree with) was unlikely to impact his work. Rice was part of the administration that created PRISM. I don't want her anywhere near a company I'm supposed to trust with all my files.

unreal37 13y ago
You have a point. One can say that Condi Rice's lies as the National Security Advisor led to 100,000+ civilian deaths in Iraq. Yet some people see it worse that Eich, the inventor of Javascript which arguably powers the modern web, was the CEO of Mozilla. It's an interesting rationalization process.
guptaneil 13y ago
You might have the opinion that universal health care is bad for this country. I would disagree with you, but that would be your personal opinion and I couldn't fault you for it, whatever I may think of you privately. But if you believe all colored people should be enslaved and donate money towards making it happen, then we all should fault you because that's not an acceptable opinion, it's bigotry. Similarly, stripping gay men and women of their civil liberties is bigotry that should not be tolerated. Rice's actions have also resulted in harming our civil liberties and I don't support her, but I can't fault Drew Houston for wanting her on their Board. Anybody who has the chance to add somebody as powerful and well-connected as Rice to their Board would be stupid not to. She is there to advise, not lead. I don't believe her presence on the Board will make Dropbox any more or less trustworthy with our data than before. If Dropbox is going to leak our private data now, then that's a company that would've done so without Rice as well.

wreegab 13y ago

That people will leverage this to at least bring some sort of accountability, I completely applaud.

ewoodrich 13y ago

I'm not very passionate about either the Eich situation or this new Dropbox issue, but I have to say that this feels much more "political" and relevant than with Mozilla. Eich privately opposed gay marriage, but the public disclosure threatened to hurt the foundation's image and his effectiveness. Rice was a unabashed supporter and post 2006, an architect of the Iraq War. It would be closer to Mozilla hiring Mike Huckabee or similar as CEO.

subdane 13y ago

I had precisely the opposite view. I felt that Eich's politics weren't aligned with my beliefs but were personal and legal. Condi is in a whole other league - having to help prosecute an illegal war and intentionally mislead our citizenry.

spindritf 13y ago

Dropping Mozilla because Eich is anti-gay-marriage made sense to me because Mozilla is the beacon of open source. The leap from open source to pro-gay sounds like a complete non sequitur to me. What is the reasoning there? I like the way Torvalds put it. For example, the GPLv2 in no way limits your use of the software. If you're a mad scientist, you can use GPLv2'd software for your evil plans to take over the world ("Sharks with lasers on their heads!!"), and the GPLv2 just says that you have to give source code back. And that's OK by me. I like sharks with lasers. I just want the mad scientists of the world to pay me back in kind. I made source code available to them, they have to make their changes to it available to me. After that, they can fry me with their shark-mounted lasers all they want. Open source means just that.

midnitewarrior 13y ago
> The leap from open source to pro-gay sounds like a complete non sequitur to me. What is the reasoning there? Your characterization of it being a "leap to pro-gay" is a bit much. Supporters of Prop 8 are actively trying to deny other Americans rights, many people find this offensive, regardless of the grounds for denial. It echoes racial, gender and age discrimination of the past -- things that many find to be un-American. The fact that the people affected happen to be gay is secondary for many who opposed Prop 8. No American should be legislated as a second class citizen. Open Source is about open access, both to contribute and use. Prop 8 was trying to deny people access to government, rights and benefits. These attitudes are in direct opposition. Beyond the ideological friction, you are dividing the community of users and contributors -- people who support gay rights and marriage equality somehow feel like they are supporting somebody who is trying to change society by denying people rights. Mozilla isn't driven by profit, it's driven by the goodwill of its users and contributors. Mr. Eich was well aware of the sensitive nature of people's attitudes towards his contribution -- he's tried for years to make it a non-issue, but it has kept following him. It's not that Open Source is "pro-gay rights", it's that it is pro-open access and equality. Mr. Eich's contribution shows contempt for this ideal at some level. It appears that many had issue with this. Additionally, Google, Mozilla's largest financial contributor, is a company that has actively taken a strongly anti-Prop 8 stance. Having the leader of the Mozilla Foundation be openly in opposition to Google's stance brings questions about if this will ultimately affect Mozilla's funding. Mr. Eich's technical leadership and history with Mozilla probably qualifies him as a very competent leader for the organization, however the political realities of Mozilla's relationship with Google and the open source community's ideals creates doubt about the realities of his ability to manage these important relationships between Google, users and contributors.

BaronVonAwesome 13y ago

"Dropping" Eich or getting rid of Mozilla because you disagree with someone's point of view on a single issue is pretty extreme. You may find that literally hundreds of good and/or services you currently use are the brainchild of someone or is being headed by someone who has many ideals you also disagree with. You might be left with nothing.

mikeash 13y ago

It strikes me as the opposite. Eich's politics weren't all that important. There was a minor issue of whether it would cause trouble for Mozilla's gay employees (or employees who just felt strongly about it) and a big public relations problem, but the technical functioning of the company wouldn't be affected. With Dropbox and Rice, I think there's a decent chance (not huge, but decent) that she's sitting down and giving everybody pointers for how they can most efficiently and effectively cooperate with the NSA. She's out of the administration but people like this never truly leave.

chr1 13y ago

From the side it looks like Dropping Mozilla because Eich, made sense to you because it was issue you cared about, and dead people in Iraq? well they are far away and probably didn't think like you anyway. Same with contributing code to Firefox: of course my small patch for the bug affecting me personally looks like a big deal, but if i look at a big picture, my contribution isn't even comparable to what Brendan Eich did. I don't say that dropping dropbox is a good thing, but i don't see how one can think logically that harassment of Eich was something for greater good, and this is a non-issue. Unfortunately emotion is a strong thing, much stronger than logic.

Spooky23 13y ago

I think the Rice as a board member issue is a totally different concern, directly related to the delivery of the service. Rice is a former National Security Advisor, and is looped into the political structure. So now, when the three letter agency of your choosing needs to have a frank conversation with someone at Dropbox, Condi will be a trusted conduit.

mjolk 13y ago

Eich also created JavaScript and I don't see a massive push to drop it everywhere. I think these sort of things are an outrage-economy with no serious or lasting effect.

jff 13y ago
I wish there was a massive push to drop it, though...
quaunaut 13y ago
Because that's just unfeasible. Removing him as CEO is one thing, we can't even get another language on the web anymore as it is.

pbreit 13y ago

Agreed. I think the Mozilla case was different due to the nature of the role, the nature of the company and how the person involved handled the whole situation.

ryguytilidie 13y ago

Why do you think that it is "ridiculous" for people to be upset that a strong supporter of warrant-less wiretapping and PRISM is now a board member at the place they store their data?