Sourcehut blog condeming Trump and supporters | Hacker News Reader

Sourcehut blog condeming Trump and supporters

lists.sr.ht

28 pointslumpa26 comments

I think I'm getting fatigue for all the $CompanyX condemns the Capitol riots stuff I'm seeing. It's actually outpaced the generic emails I get about how Marriott/Lyft/Uber/Delta/McDonald's/Wells Fargo/public transportation/Pornhub are committed to supporting me during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Every time I log a bike ride in Strava, 15% of the screen is a message from the founders of Strava a out their feelings re: the Capitol rioting.

Is this the new normal? Does every company feel obligated to let its customers know that they condemn terrorism? I don't want corporations to constantly remind me about all the fucked up stuff in the world. I already know that things are fucked up. Just let me have a few minutes of escapism while I ride my bike/buy groceries/check out source code.

Imagine you’re not in a position to enjoy that escapism, and you’re trying to evaluate whether riding/ordering from/sharing data with a company is going to put you in danger because they’re openly or carelessly collaborating with this hateful mob. Some assurance that your existence is valued is probably better than knowing nothing because the company values your comfort more.

What's the most biggest corporation that's collaborated with them? I REALLY doubt that there's any collaborators that I (or most people) have a relationship with.

Microsoft. And they're big enough that who knows which of their customers are too, unwittingly or not.

Yes I really appreciate it. Helps me with my socially conscious investing so I don’t have to go look them up individually.

> Helps me with my socially conscious investing so I don’t have to go look them up individually.

Why? Do you otherwise have time for that?

Yes, it’s a well established practice. There’s even funds for that.

I doubt they want to. Its likely just either trying to get ahead of the PR or in response to complaints on social media.

> 15% of the screen is a message from the founders of Strava a out their feelings re: the Capitol rioting.

Isn't it what's called influencers, these days everyone tries to be one especially people at the top of the companies both small and large.

Author here. I would not have written this if it weren't for GitHub's actions. Because we're in the same space, I felt it was necessary to speak up.

I would prefer that the original article, not a follow-up discussion on the mailing list, be the subject of this HN discussion:

https://sourcehut.org/blog/2021-01-13-regarding-ethics/

> I would prefer that the original article, not a follow-up discussion on the mailing list, be the subject of this HN discussion

Your original post omitted details that this mailing list post attempted to clarify, although I'm still left uncertain what the answer is. Specifically, is this policy for things done on sourcehut, or for anything a person does, include outside of your service?

Centralized platforms are always going to be like this, easier to start on a decentralized platform than it is to migrate to one

https://git.scuttlebot.io/%25n92DiQh7ietE%2BR%2BX%2FI403LQoy...

https://github.com/cjb/GitTorrent

et al

Engineering and politics should not mix. I try to pick providers which are neutral and focus their energy on building good products, not activism.

I'm curious if your opinion on this extends to, say, IG Farben providing Zyklon B to the Nazis (or IBM providing information services to same). At some point 'politics' just becomes 'ethics'. Participation in an activity is not "neutral", it is endorsement.

"Just following orders" isn't even a valid defense for soldiers - why should it apply to corporations who are free to refuse business?

> I'm curious if your opinion on this extends to, say, IG Farben providing Zyklon B to the Nazis

Wasn't IG Farben already taking in political money to find such chemicals?

> Research by Fritz Haber of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physical Chemistry and Electrochemistry led to the founding in 1919 of Deutsche Gesellschaft für Schädlingsbekämpfung mbH (Degesch), a state-controlled consortium formed to investigate military use of the chemical.

of which IG Farben was a part. So it seems like this would suggest to not add politics (la military weapons research) to engineering

What's "political money"? Does it come in different denominations to regular money? Should IG Farben have refused to do business with the Nazi regime on ethical grounds?

I'm confused - should companies pick and choose who they do business with, or shouldn't they?

Well it'd be a company explicitly avoiding getting into politics wouldn't it?

I don't think anyone has spoken against companies getting to pick and choose in this chain, just on what merits they should pick and choose on

Reply on news.ycombinator.com