What about selling geolocation data to ICE? Do you think it's part of the "core mission" of Coinbase, or a distraction? Don't you think that this, too, creates outrage and division? That it "stirs up shit" and poisons morale?
Some people may find it controversial to sell to ICE specifically. Anyone is free to believe that, but they are just optics. Any institute or company you dislike is going to use a wide array of COTS software, and you won't stop that. They'll probably also use electricity and order sandwiches. It's ridiculously ineffective to try and "cancel" any institute by means of suppliers.
If you have a problem with ICE tactics, engage in real politics rather than Twitter politics.
Further, I'd argue that before judging there has to be more clarity on what this tool is used for. Maybe it tracks down narcos, money laundrers, human traffickers, the like. Things that might align with your politics, instead of oppose them. Or perhaps they do use it in unfair and harmful ways. We simple don't know, at least I don't.
As for the geolocation part, Coinbase's claim is that they never sold customer private data, and that it's all on-chain. If that is true, then at best it's a lame action. Not to mention that your location data is shared all day every day.
> Coinbase’s mission is to create an open financial system for the world. This means we want to use cryptocurrency to bring economic freedom to people all over the world.
It’s not clear to me how selling geolocation data to ICE is within the scope of the mission. In fact, it seems to me that it actually hinders it.
And remember, it’s (allegedly) not just talk for Coinbase. They’re mission focused. They pushed out employees who didn’t agree with it.
The geolocation part is still not clear to me. They claim to not have sold customer data, so that means said data is on the blockchain itself, or can be derived from it. If that reading is correct, even the word "selling" is incorrect.
Further, an open financial system does not mean a total lack of regulation or tracking of bad actors. I would also assume that "economic freedom" is less applicable to criminals, assuming the tool is used for that.
ICE is a client that wants to utilize Coinbase services. Coinbase "core mission" is making money. As such, servicing ICE is completely within their "core mission".
You as a consumer may drive your car to the grocery store, fill up your cart, have lunch at some junkfood place and drive back home. You've now committed countless harmful acts if you were to trace back the supply chain of everything you consumed.
But now you don't care. It's all hypocritical virtue signalling.
Sure, nobody can make sure every single thing they touch, up and down the supply chain, is pure good. But don't act like you have no agency. If everyone makes small improvements when confronted with them, combined it adds up.
"Sure, nobody can make sure every single thing they touch, up and down the supply chain, is pure good."
The above is an agreeable statement, but in reality a cop-out. Doing better means putting in a lot of effort and giving up comforts, something I see extremely few people do at any serious level.
Another example: I saw some lady freak out on Twitter as she saw some ridiculously oversized pickup truck in her street. Filming it, harassing the driver, and loudly calling for such cars to be banned.
She has a point. The problem is though that there's very few such cars. If we're so serious about caring about climate change, it would be way more effective to ban the sale of TVs over 55".
And now...surprisingly few people are interested in the planet anymore. She doesn't want to give up even an inch of comfort, literally.
So that means you just don't care. You only care when it doesn't affect you.
Still you're right, any progress is good progress but at the same time I'm tired of this style of politics. Always claiming perfect morality whilst there's close to none.