
Microsoft Employees Pressure Leadership to Cancel ICE Contract - rumcajz
https://gizmodo.com/microsoft-employees-pressure-leadership-to-cancel-ice-c-1826965297
======
jgaa
Governments will always do evil. Not to everyone, all of the time - but they
are by nature evil.

When I wrote the War FTP Daemon in 1996, as freeware, this became a problem to
me. I did want to give away my work for free, but I did _not_ want any
government agency to abuse it. So I came up with a solution - a GPL license
with an additional clause - that the government - _any_ government - could not
use it for any purpose.

Someone actually complained to the Free Software Foundation about this clause,
and they concluded, at that time, that it was permissible.

In years to follow I received many emails from universities, schools,
hospitals, research facilities - with requests to use the software. In most
cases I granted them permission. But by doing it this way, I could sleep well
at night - knowing that my software could not - legally - be used to separate
children from parents, or for any other evil purpose by any governments around
the globe.

\----

War Software series Copyright (C) 1996 - 2018 by Jarle (jgaa) Aase
(www.jgaa.com) This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation version 2 of the License - WITH THE FOLLOWING
RESTRICTIONS:

    
    
      * GOVERNMENTS, GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES OR COMMERCIAL
        COMPANIES OWNED 50% OR MORE BY THE GOVERNMENT ARE
        NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE SOFTWARE OR SORCE CODE FOR
        ANY PURPOSE. THIS RESTRICTION ALSO APPLIES FOR
        PROGRAMS DERIVED FROM THE SOURCE CODE, OR PROGRAMS/
        SOURCE CODE THAT USE SPECIAL TECHNICS/ALOGRITHMS
        INVENTED IN THIS SOFTWARE.
    
      * THE FULL SOURCE CODE IS WITHELD FROM A PUBLIC RELEASE
        UNTIL THE LINUX VERSION IS RELEASED.
    

This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT
ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Corporations are no less evil than governments. If anything, they may be more
evil, as they are motivated solely by profit and have no particular reason to
care about the population at large.

Why single out governments?

~~~
jgaa
> Corporations are no less evil than governments. If anything, they may be
> more evil, as they are motivated solely by profit and have no particular
> reason to care about the population at large.

Corporations are accountable. They are accountable as entities, and as
individuals (owners, managers, employees). If they do fatal decisions, the
corporation may go bankrupt. If people act immoral, they may get fired. If
they cheat, they may be caught and go to jail.

Corporations can also choose to act ethically - and, according to a recent
Freakonomics podcast, actually benefit from that by attracting better
employees :)

~~~
blindwatchmaker
Meanwhile in the real world, many corporations get away with doing all these
things, abusing labour, regulatory capture and the people running them get
rich as Croesus doing it.

~~~
jgaa
Yes. And often with support from the Government.

In USA, corruption is regulated by law... Politics is all about getting
financial support and basically selling laws and policies to the highest
bidder.

------
deegles
> “Our current engagement with ICE is focused on moving legacy infrastructure
> such as mail, calendar, messaging and document management to the cloud using
> Azure.”

I don’t understand why this makes it any better. I’m sure there’s a lot of
“messaging and document management” needed to run those detainment centers.
And besides, what’s going to happen in the future when they do ask to use
Cognitive Services in their mission? “Sorry, you only get O365?”

~~~
jadedhacker
Child concentration camps run a lot smoother on Office 365, now on Azure!

EDIT: Anyone that collaborates with ICE from this point forward is complicit.
In a just world, collaborators, ICE officers, and high officials would be
tried in the International Criminal Court. Following orders or making money
was not an acceptable defensible at Nuremberg, nor will it be in the coming
future when the US loses enough international standing.

~~~
Ntrails
Why on earth would you want to prosecute the supermarket where ICE buys loo
roll? The builders merchant who sold them fence posts?

I mean, the hyperbole is real here - because there's zero chance the
international courts prosecute any US citizen - but if they did it's not going
to be the people who sold them spreadsheet software.

~~~
eesmith
Perhaps for the same reason the US extended its trade embargo with Cuba to
include foreign companies trading with Cuba -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms%E2%80%93Burton_Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms%E2%80%93Burton_Act)

Or for the reasons that people have divested from companies doing business
with South Africa under apartheid, or the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions
Movement regarding Israel, or any of a number of other examples.

See also
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_action](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_action)
.

------
everdev
As I get older, it's becoming clear how intertwined our morality is with our
politics. And how that bleeds into business, sports, religion, etc.

It's nice to think of aspects of life that should be free from politics, but
in reality that seems hard to achieve.

~~~
danjayh
This situation in particular is more complicated than the media portrays.
Separating children from parents is obviously bad, and needs to stop. Zero
tolerance for illegal crossings, on the other hand, is probably actually good.
The prior policy of letting anyone with children go & handing them a court
date heavily incentivized human trafficking of children, because a child was a
golden ticket into the USA (and indeed, many children were trafficked as a
result). To eliminate that incentive, deportation after an illegal crossing
needs to be enforced, even when a child is in tow. I think that the best
answer is detention as a family during the process of prosecution and
deportation, but I understand that there are some legal hurdles to that. They
need to work them out, and fast.

~~~
int_19h
From my experience talking to different people in US, most of them on both
sides of the immigration debate have zero clue what their immigration laws are
even like. One theme that's particularly common is hearing "they should just
get into the line and wait for their turn". They genuinely don't understand
that there is no line for the majority of those people - they don't have any
legal avenues for immigration at all, except for winning the diversity visa
lottery (the chances for which for any individual person are so slim, no-one
in a sane mind would plan around that as a strategy).

~~~
briandear
But that isn’t true. Asylum applications can be submitted to a US consulate.
There is a process. Syrian refugees didn’t just show up in Laredo. Asylum can
also be requested at a legal port of entry. These unlawful entry arrests are
from aliens entering the country while avoiding ports of entry.

~~~
dagw
Quoiting from the first sentence on the main page about asylum on
usembassy.gov, which is the first hit I got on Google:

"The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad.
Under U.S. law, the United States considers asylum only for aliens who are
physically present in the United States."

So I guess it's understandable that some people might believe they have to be
physically present in the United States to be apply for asylum

------
jhanschoo
It would be nice if the recent instances of employee pressure in Google and
Microsoft are early signs of software workers organizing.

~~~
oh_sigh
How would employees at Google or Microsoft benefit from unionizing?

~~~
blind_boy_grunt
The same way any other unionized employees do: higher wages, better benefits,
collective bargaining, serious representation in the corporate hierarchy,
better job security.

~~~
briandear
And Google employees don’t already that? What better benefits could a Google
possibly want? How much higher could their salaries go?

~~~
dagw
_What better benefits could a Google possibly want?_

More vacation time, more reasonable working hours, a more transparent process
for promotions and raises, better paternity/maternity polices, a seat on the
board and more say into how the company is run.

There is a lot more to collective bargaining than salaries.

------
newscracker
I for one am glad that at least some employees of companies like Google and
Microsoft are taking ethical stances for the greater good. A job cannot be
seen as just something that provides some personal satisfaction and puts food
on the table. There are lines that, when crossed, have larger implications for
a large population and how we as humankind want the world to be. Where there's
more clarity on certain topics, taking a strong stance is the right thing to
do!

------
rumcajz
Statement from Satya Nadella: [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/my-views-us-
immigration-polic...](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/my-views-us-immigration-
policy-satya-nadella/?published=t)

------
macspoofing
>part of a backlash against the agency’s policy of separating children from
their families at the U.S. border.

Is that a policy that ICE can simply drop?

~~~
gameswithgo
trump/sessions specifically mandated this policy.

------
RickJWagner
Yet another reason to choose Open Source.

There will be other political skirmishes. How to decide what to take a stand
on? What if time reveals you made a mistake (i.e. NOW supporting Bill
Clinton)? People are too easily manipulated.

~~~
jobigoud
> Yet another reason to choose Open Source.

I'm an open source fan but I fail to see your point.

Open source software can be used by anyone, including people you don't agree
with. You can suddenly find yourself helping bad people just by maintaining or
developing your open source software.

I have had it happen with one of my project, where people used it (and are
probably still using it) for activities I disagree with. The only thing you
can do is not interact with them, but they are still benefiting from the work.

------
huffmsa
They do know that if M$FT cancels, the contract will just go to someone with
zero scruples about this, right?

It's better to keep things you dislike close so you can keep an eye on them
than to pretend like they don't exist.

~~~
SlowRobotAhead
Haven’t seen anyone non-ironically use M$FT in like 20 years. It on the same
fringe scale as wiring “First!” on a comment section.

~~~
joeframbach
By all means they should keep typing the "$" so I can more quickly skip over
their post as someone who hasn't changed their worldview since the 90s, and
someone who is susceptible to memetic bandwagonning.

~~~
mindslight
Yeah after two decades and the adoption of Unicode, everyone knows the
contemporary problem is Fac€book.

------
noobermin
dupe:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17351353](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17351353)

------
techterrier
Don't panic, I'm sure Peter Theil can pick up the slack if Microsoft cancel.

------
ggg9990
I just don't think we're tracking towards a healthy world where your email
vendor pulls the plug on your contract because of your activities. I don't
think any business should be allowed to deny their offering to any paying
customer.

Edit: Does that mean I have to sell lumber to the KKK even though they will
likely burn a cross with it? Yes, unless they explicitly say they're going to.
Leave those policing problems to the police, don't ask everyone to become a
member of the police.

~~~
allenz
When ICE violates human rights, it's no longer a free speech issue. Microsoft
shouldn't work with ICE in the same way that banks shouldn't work with
sanctioned oligarchs.

~~~
weiming
ELI5 what human rights is ICE violating in this case? Is due process not being
followed?

~~~
deegles
Separating children from parents causes permanent changes to a developing
brain due to toxic amounts of stress. It’s torture.

~~~
weiming
It seems like we are treating these children well (and I'm glad): "he seemed
cheerful, “He shared how he was learning English, playing games and being well
treated,” Ms. Ortiz said." [1]

However, I was appalled by the horrible "children in cages" photo taken during
the Obama era. How was this allowed to happen? Wish I/we all had known about
this, back then.

[1] [https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/17/us/immigration-
deported-p...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/17/us/immigration-deported-
parents.html)

~~~
deegles
> Under federal law, which adopts the United Nations definition, torture is:
> “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is
> intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as … punishing him or
> her for an act he or she or a third person … has committed or is suspected
> of having committed.” And though in theory any action inflicting such
> suffering is banned, that is what is inflicted by separating parents and
> children in border detention.

[0]
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/0...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/05/15/separating-
children-from-parents-at-the-border-isnt-just-cruel-its-torture/)

~~~
true_religion
If being separated from your parents is torture, then what about the prison
system?

~~~
deegles
The U.S. prison system is widely condemned as inhumane, overcrowded, and
violent. So yeah, I would say that's torture, too.

------
cm2187
The problem is that "doing evil" is in the eyes of the beholder. To some it is
performing a gay wedding. Are we supporting a world where it is ok to refuse
to sell a cake because it would be used in a gay wedding? Is it a good thing
that the major cloud providers and OS makers enforce a democrat agenda on
their clients? I think this is undesirable and dangerous. Already there are
many calls for social medias to step in to police the political debate and
suppress comments that are deemed to carry fake news. It is only too obvious
how such a responsability can be abused (and if human nature and history
teaches us anything, _will_ be abused).

~~~
pluma
I don't know. "Does it violate the UN Convention on Human Rights?" is a good
start. Also "Does it violate the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?".
Or, y'know, the Kantian Imperative.

~~~
prepend
I think that’s actually a good standard. How are determinations made for what
violates the UN Convention on Human Rights?

------
briandear
Weird, employees had nothing to say in 2014 when these images were published:

[http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/06/18/photos-
ob...](http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/06/18/photos-obama-used-
same-so-called-cages-to-detain-child-border-crossers/)

Kids were being separated then and being housed in the exact same facilities
being used now.

Interestingly, this story “breaks” the exact same week the FBI inspector
general’s report was released.

I am not judging the wrongness or rightness of what is and has happened in
terms of illegal immigrants, however, a thinking person ought to be very
skeptical about how this story catches fire at exactly the same time a
significant piece of news happens: the inspector general’s damning report of
the FBI. Were Microsoft employees sleeping when reports of these sorts of
situations where being reported in 2014? Or was it more acceptable then
because it was a different president?

~~~
cr1895
>Kids were being separated then

Incorrect; the story you linked describes unaccompanied minors. Separating
families is solely the doing of the Trump Administration.

"Detaining child border crossers was a policy during the Obama administration,
where Breitbart Texas exclusively reported on the conditions in which
unaccompanied minors were being packed into crowded cells and holding
facilities."

[https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/us/politics/new-us-
effort...](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/us/politics/new-us-effort-to-
aid-unaccompanied-child-migrants.html)

[https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/17/us/us-sets-up-crisis-
shel...](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/17/us/us-sets-up-crisis-shelter-as-
children-flow-across-border-alone.html)

>Were Microsoft employees sleeping when reports of these sorts of situations
where being reported in 2014? Or was it more acceptable then because it was a
different president?

The key issue here which is different from what you suggest is the same in
2014 is that the Trump administration separates children from their parents.
The Obama administration, rightly or wrongly, detained unaccompanied minors.
The Trump administration is detaining children who had their parents with
them, and in cases deporting parents without their children. Surely you see
this as a different situation??

~~~
dawnerd
I think the part people like OP are missing is if it was happening as they say
then, it doesn't make it right now. They're just shifting blame for something
they can be a part of stopping.

~~~
SlowRobotAhead
Sort of. More like if you are outraged now but not then, if it is only covered
now and not then, if “reasonable” people only care now that it can be
attributed to BadManTheyDontLike... that’s dishonest.

------
factsaresacred
> I think that what we’re seeing right now with ICE is deeply immoral. It’s a
> violation of human rights on all kinds of levels.

Treating criminals as criminals happens every day in every country and comes
with the same consequences - children are separated from their parents.

Right now there are tens of thousands of broken black homes as one or two
parents are in prison - where's the outrage for them and what about their
human rights and their families?

This moral panic, fanned by the media, truly reflects an inability for
critical thought. Illegal aliens ignore US law, knowing full well that their
acts are illegal and have consequences. Go to a port of entry or embassy like
all other immigrants. It's that simple.

~~~
zasz
These people are asylum seekers. What they are doing is literally not illegal.
According to USCIS, asylum seekers must be physically present in the US to
apply: To obtain asylum through the affirmative asylum process you must be
physically present in the United States. You may apply for asylum status
regardless of how you arrived in the United States or your current immigration
status.

[https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-
asylum/asylum/ob...](https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-
asylum/asylum/obtaining-asylum-united-states)

These people are being punished for following the law.

Additionally, there is no need to detain parents separately from children, and
prior to the Trump administration, while deportations of asylum seekers did
happen, families were not split up.

> Right now there are tens of thousands of broken black homes as one or two
> parents are in prison - where's the outrage for them and what about their
> human rights and their families?

Nice of you to pretend to care. Can I refer you to your closest Black Lives
Matter chapter?

~~~
macspoofing
The legal way to claim asylum is to do so from official points of entry.

~~~
woodruffw
No. The legal way to claim asylum is to do so within a year of entering the
country, regardless of whether your entry was official[1].

The US is currently breaking its commitment to the 1951 UN convention on the
rights of refugees by _not_ ignoring "irregular entry."

[1]:
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158)

~~~
firic
Sure, they may apply for asylum. However, if they entered illegally, then they
should be detained so that if they are not accepted for asylum then they can
get deported.

~~~
woodruffw
First: They are _not_ entering illegally if they _intend_ to report within a
year. Entering illegally is something that non-refugees do. This is why
Nielsen's claims about "criminal refugees" are misleading at best -- she's
talking about the "crime" of entering the country in the way we explicitly
allow.

Second: Consider what an actual refugee crisis looks like. You _can 't_ detain
hundreds of thousands of people crossing over a massive border, both for
logistical and humanitarian reasons. That's why we're a signatory to the 1951
agreement.

This is probably what 45 is referring to when he talks about a "loophole" in
immigration law, and why he feels politically safe asking for a legislative
rather than executive solution. But to be absolutely clear: _nothing_ about
our current _laws_ requires that we separate children from their parents, _or_
detain refugee applicants indefinitely. Those are both cruel options, chosen
to terrorize an already vulnerable population.

~~~
macspoofing
>First: They are not entering illegally if they intend to report within a
year.

Illegal entry is illegal entry. I don't know what you're talking about. There
is no exemption for asylum seekers.

>This is probably what 45 is referring to when he talks about a "loophole" in
immigration law

The loophole is that the Trump administration is enforcing an existing law
that was not enforced by previous administrations. You're advocating for
following the precedent set by previous administrations and simply ignore the
law again.

>and why he feels politically safe asking for a legislative rather than
executive solution.

But it should be a legislative solution. It is a bad law that was made worse
by the ninth circuit interpretation. If 1/10th of the pressure that is levied
on Trump was put on Congress, this law would be changed already.

The fact that Democrats in Congress are now using this for political gains is
incredibly distasteful. [1]

[1][http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/393069-schumer-rejects-
go...](http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/393069-schumer-rejects-gop-proposal-
to-address-border-crisis)

