Reply to post: Re: "This is a very confused post"

Blood money is fine with us, says GitLab: Vetting non-evil customers is 'time consuming, potentially distracting'

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: "This is a very confused post"

"Because the issue is far more complex than many people think, and the solution far more complex than they like to think."

Agreed - how do we want our corporates to behave in a democracy?

Should they leave the task of protesting government policies to their employees as individuals and accept that some employees will leave because of those policies as sufficient action directly against the government and work to support those that are affected by injustice/social issues in more politically neutral ways?

Or should corporates actively take part in political issues to try and drive political change? In my view this already happens via lobbying and I'm not sure it is a desirable outcome for a political system as corporates tend to shift the balance of power away from individuals/the electorate due to having access to more resources..

There is a lot of grey between those two differing views - my question for the GitLab v ICE issue is whether GitLab's action will result in ICE's human rights abuses stopping or have only a token effect as the policies originate outside of ICE and GitLab's tools are not being used directly against those being abused while access to the tools may have other negative impacts to immigration/customs in the US that cause harm to others. That is meant as speculation to demonstrate the areas of grey rather than judgement against GitLab..

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019