Comment by Sauer_Kraut | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Sauer_Kraut | Hacker News Reader

As I referenced in another thread, Obama himself voted for the FISA amendment[1].

How clearer must it get that people working for companies like AT&T and Booz Allen are complicit in receiving monetary remuneration for collaborating with various arms of the government in circumventing/intel laundering/routing around the laws and regulations said arms of the government were to be checking each other against?

Must there need be more details of local law enforcement letting Steven Seagal maraud around in federally sourced tanks? Booz Allen assisting local law enforcement in copyright prosecutions? Drone managing SAIC running private monitoring centers with federal fusion center support?

AT&T workers NOT going along with what management puts forward, revealing secret closets instead. Or services shutting down to prevent such hardware from ever being installed?

The US government, all branches, are corrupt by being complicit in each others deeds. Together along with employees within corporations that collaborate with the US government, law is being undone or outright ignored.

Refuse, resist.

[1] H.R. 6304 (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ) Obama (D-IL), Yea: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_c...

I don't think the world is so black and white.

If you pay taxes to the federal government are you complicit with all of the government's actions? Well sure, but what other option do you have? You could not pay taxes and go to jail, or you could move somewhere else where there isn't an imperfect government--- say Antarctica.

Similarly, what are you going to do if you decide not to work for some "complicit" organization? Move to Silicon Valley and work at a startup? Is that any better? Is there any company that is morally and ethically perfect?

Governments, industries, populations, etc. are all part of an inter-related system called The World. If you think this system is imperfect and should be improved, then exiting the system won't solve anything. Rather, you can work within the system and do what you can to make it better.

I never said anything was black and white, just that a very large amount of people have become complicit in what they acknowledge as wrong-doings.

As to working within the system, attempting to halt or mitigate what you view as malfeasance is indeed not complying. Merely suggesting though, that people are working within doesn't do much in the face of the number of those working for without care or question.

Yes people have to make the choice of being complicit or face going to jail in some cases. Most just need to stop defending their profiting from the murder/kidnapping/torture/rendition/detention/prosecution of others. Providing infrastructural support like telecommunications is indeed an enabler for industries like drone warfare.

It's called "The World" as you put it.

I think you should eat brussel sprouts. My opinion entitles me to publicly deride you for failing to meet your moral imperatives. To do anything else makes you complicit in the great evil intrinsic to non-brussel sprout consumption.

I am a one dimensional human being who can easily assess the complexities in your life, so we're cool with this broad statement, right? There's clearly no other reasons you could be avoiding brussel sprout consumption.

What moral imperatives were implied?

I'm sorry- perhaps I misunderstood. I thought you were suggesting that anyone who works for these companies MUST somehow be complicit in these encroachments by the government.

If that's not the case, I think you're cool on not eating your brussel sprouts.

After being informed nearly daily of how one's work assists another in their deeds, then continuing to accept salary, it is compliance and complicity.

Others have shown they do not need to comply, to various ends. Snowden[1], Klein[2], Manning[3], Barrett[4], Levison[5]. This is a terribly narrow range of those who refused and resisted in recent history. From admin to technician to analyst to activist to owner, you can indeed not become complicit with the US government or others after learning knowledge of malfeasance.

Please leave the poor sprouts out of this.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Klein

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning

[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_Brown

[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavabit

When violent revolution is around the corner, I will buy this argument. The deficiency in your position is that it assumes change cannot happen from within.

Additionally there are great things that these companies do in spite of government intervention. If these services were abandoned, peoples lives can be put at risk.

Your arguments only make sense if the country is on the verge of revolution. Given the ratings on TV, and the velocity of posts on /r/advice animals, I don't think were there yet.

You assume that I made that assumption, that is wrong.

My position is those attempting to cause change from within have while at work helped give inertia and acceptance to what they think they want to fight against while at home watching the evening news.

Nothing stops them from finding other venues of employment, many excuses are made as to how they want to fight from within. We end up with users on forums attempting to defend their profiting from the entire ordeal. Complicit.

Essentially I am saying working from within is only a good choice for those who find themselves already in that position, like Snowden. Otherwise more harm is done.

Then we are in disagreement. People on the inside are the only ones who can make meaningful change.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com