Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The NSO contributed to the murder of a journalist, has repeatedly aided in attacks on human rights activists, and according to the complaint, actively assisted or even ran these "operations".

Any of those would have been sufficient to ensure I wouldn't work for them for any amount of money, and I'd quit if I found out about them after I was employed.

Honestly, that's blood money.



Your "morals" precludes anyone from working at any major company. Let alone companies like WashingtonPost who helped start many illegal wars and led to the death of millions of innocent people with their lies.

Using your logic, the murdered journalist took blood money.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2003/02/06/i...

If you work for pretty much any major company in the world, you are receiving "blood money". If you are working for the US government or any major government, you are receiving "blood money".

Can you point me to a company that is "without sin"?


1. I think everyone would agree there is an obvious moral difference between working for your neighbourhood builder who occasionally overcharges and maintaining the fences on a concentration camp. IE there are degrees of harm, we don't deal in black and whites. Working as a kindergarten teacher for a government does not imply you are any more or less responsible for that government going to war than say a local independent farmer.

2. Not many people would conflate working for washington post and helping to kill civilians in the middle east. But perhaps if shown enough evidence they would maybe do so and act accordingly. So knowledge, like the knowledge in this article, enabled the OP to make an ethical decision.

3. Your comment doesn't help anyone. Because you have discounted degrees of harm ("any major company in the world", "any government") and this then undermined the small bit of knowledge imparted (the WP link). The nett effect is a call to inaction.



Would you work for Lockheed or Boeing?


I wouldn't, but this is besides the point.

Is it ethically acceptable to join a weapon manufacturer? A drug cartel? The SS?

You always have to draw a line somewhere.


My assertion is that there is no distinction between Lockheed and NSO. Both are military systems manufacturers with a similar list of clientele, and their products are deployed for better or for worse.


no.

Lockheed because it is primarily a military contractor.

Boeing because one half is military contractor and the other half is cost cutting at the cost of lives.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: