Hacker News Reader

Comment by Alex3917 | Hacker News Reader

Since my understanding is that covering up a war crime is itself a war crime under Complicity doctrine, could Google executives get charged for this in The Hague?

View on HN

I urge you to report this inhumane case and follow-up with a "show HN" (I filed an ICC case, then THIS happened).

   otp.informationdesk@icc-cpi.int

I am not an expert in international law, but you would still have to prove intent, I believe. It's hard to prove intent on an algorithm that very simply is incapable of understanding the significance of its actions.

Deferring decisions to an algorithm doesn't absolve the owner from responsibility for its actions. If the consequences are unknown, why should it be allowed to use it?

Couldn't that also imply that someone else would need to view the algorithm to verify it's intent?

For things that are crimes only if the intent is there, it certainly does absolve the owner from responsibility. There's no duty to preserve everything that might be evidence in some manner (because, really, everything might be) - if evidence gets destroyed as a byproduct of normal operations, that's not prohibited.

Because if the consequences are unknown, there is no intent, and intent is necessary for complicity.

If Google/people at Google made an algorithm to intentionally delete criminal evidence, that would qualify. Having an algorithm that deletes lots of things, and happens to delete evidence does not.

The parent post mentions they've been reviewed by a human (appeals process) and been rejected anyway.

That should get past any "it woz the algorithm that did it!" arguments about intent.

If I'd write an algorithm for a self-driving car that just drives it in a straight line with high speed.. I'd be still responsible if the car kills somebody and couldn't just say that "whoops it was just the silly algorithm" even though I didn't specifically intend to kill somebody.

Unlikely, but an interesting argument.

Google executives are overwhelmingly US citizens. The ICC has no jurisdiction over them.

Do some of them have dual citizenship?

a lot of the h1bs will have

I'm willing to bet that in their hundreds and hundreds of pages of terms and conditions there is a paragraph saying that by using their services you give up your right to sue Google for war crimes.

Even if there were, such contracts have been tried before and the courts simply ignore them.

A contract can't override criminal law.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com