| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 28 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 43:07:44 |
| Calls: | 422 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,024 |
| Messages: | 90,180 |
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion
about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
<div><br></div><div>regards</div><div><br></div><div>Andrew</div></div></div>
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our >Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place >where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuseI have not been abused by Google and it generally does not appear to be nazi-adjacent like Twitter, so I am good with our relationship with them.
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion
about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
Yet, Google has for a long time closely collaborated with the UnitedIf you are concerned about this then I recommend that you also reflect
States Government, specifically with the Defense and Intellence arms.
Guys come on what the hell. Since past few days all I have been hearing on this mailing list is endless arguments sparked by debian team pulling out
of X.Since past few days you had been also bringing geo politics into open source space. We all know when microsoft decided to pull plug on windows , for our older systems and one who cannot afford buying new ones just yet cause it hadn't been that long when they first bought their system we have
to end up relying on Linux that is our only hope when windows start slowing down approaching end of life period.Debian is literally open source so we
can see what code is being put into it so it's no issues.
(...)
Don't bring geopolitics here yo'all forget why we joined this mailing at first place. iT was to know internal updates about debian and to see if we can contribute something to it. If debian team pulled off X , it's their choice. It was undoubtedly that x sometimes interfered with other country's politics and sometimes allowed hate speech but hey which platform didn't ? Even reddit was no less. When debian joined x they joined it to keep users informed about updates to Debian who are not in mailing list. We all hail from different parts of world and literally every country's dev contributes to open source. That's what open source is all about ,so how about we
accept what happened and move on.
roberto@debian.org wrote:
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our >Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place >where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuseI have not been abused by Google and it generally does not appear to be nazi-adjacent like Twitter, so I am good with our relationship with them.
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion >about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
Yet, Google has for a long time closely collaborated with the UnitedIf you are concerned about this then I recommend that you also reflect
States Government, specifically with the Defense and Intellence arms.
on Debian preparing to cheerfully welcome a LoongArch port, which is obviously a tool of Chinese soft power.
My advice--not that I expect anyone to take it--is that if you work for Google, don't talk about it _and_ don't participate in any community
decision making process involving the company in any way. These are the ethical things to do if you're involved with Debian. If the thought of
this frustrates you, try to salve your feelings by reviewing your latest
pay stub. And if even that doesn't work, maybe you're not working at
the right place.
Hi Soren,
Thank you for the serious follow-up.
At 2025-02-06T17:57:39-0700, Soren Stoutner wrote:
On Thursday, February 6, 2025 4:50:50 PM MST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
My advice--not that I expect anyone to take it--is that if you work for Google, don't talk about it _and_ don't participate in any community decision making process involving the company in any way. These are the ethical things to do if you're involved with Debian. If the thought of this frustrates you, try to salve your feelings by reviewing your latest pay stub. And if even that doesn't work, maybe you're not working at
the right place.
I respectfully disagree with the above statement.
1. It is contrary to the principles for with Debian stands to exclude someone from participating in Debian solely because of who employs
them.
I agree. To be clear, I neither said or implied otherwise.
This includes participating in discussions about Debian policies that involve their employer.
Here I must disagree. I think your statement is equivalent to claiming
that "there is no such thing as a conflict of interest", an ethical
stance with a poor track record of producing socially desirable
outcomes.[1]
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 13:08, Roberto C. Sßnchez <roberto@debian.org> wrote:
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
Full disclosure: I am currently employed by Google, and do not speak for
the company.
DFSG #6 discusses not discriminating against fields of endeavour.
I can see the project wishing to cut ties with a social media platform that is unable to ensure a minimum level of civil discourse. I'm not seeing how this is even remotely equivalent to disengaging from a corporate sponsor because of their commercial practices?
To do this, Debian would need to run its own cloud platform as a
replacement. I've been advocating for it, and volunteered to
maintain an OpenStack cloud deployment for Debian own use.
If you wish that Debian gets out of using Google, engage in this
effort, and find somewhere we can host such a deployment (then
Debian can spend the money for buying the hardware). At this time,
I have no clue where we should go, and I have no time to research
it, plus I do not wish to get my employer involved to avoid any
type of conflict of interest.
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 13:08, Roberto C. Sßnchez <[1]roberto@debian.org>
wrote:
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our
Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place
where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion
about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
Full disclosure: I am currently employed by Google, and do not speak for
the company.
DFSG #6 discusses not discriminating against fields of endeavour.
I can see the project wishingáto cut ties with a social media platform
that is unable to ensure a minimum level of civil discourse. I'm not
seeing how this is even remotely equivalent to disengaging from a
corporate sponsor because of their commercial practices?
regards
Andrew
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 02:25:19PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 13:08, Roberto C. Sánchez <[1]roberto@debian.org>
wrote:
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our
Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place
where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion
about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
Full disclosure: I am currently employed by Google, and do not speak for
the company.
DFSG #6 discusses not discriminating against fields of endeavour.
I can see the project wishing to cut ties with a social media platform
that is unable to ensure a minimum level of civil discourse. I'm not
seeing how this is even remotely equivalent to disengaging from a
corporate sponsor because of their commercial practices?
regards
Andrew
The formula I am applying here is directly:
"We do not want to be present in a place where we cannot ensure that
users will be respected and where abuse happens without consequences."
"We [Debian] do not want to be present in a place [on Twitter/X] where
we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse happens [causing certain people to feel unsafe] without consequences [moderation/banning]."
It seems quite natural, then, that this follows:
"We [Debian] do not want to be present in a place [Google Cloud Platform
and other Google services] where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse happens [directly assisting the US government
to prepare and execute missions that result in unconscionable civilian casualties] without consequences [legal reprecussions]."
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 02:25:19PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 13:08, Roberto C. Sánchez <[1]roberto@debian.org>
wrote:
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our
Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place
where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion
about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
Full disclosure: I am currently employed by Google, and do not speak for
the company.
DFSG #6 discusses not discriminating against fields of endeavour.
I can see the project wishing to cut ties with a social media platform
that is unable to ensure a minimum level of civil discourse. I'm not
seeing how this is even remotely equivalent to disengaging from a
corporate sponsor because of their commercial practices?
regards
Andrew
The formula I am applying here is directly:
"We do not want to be present in a place where we cannot ensure that
users will be respected and where abuse happens without consequences."
"We [Debian] do not want to be present in a place [on Twitter/X] where
we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse happens [causing certain people to feel unsafe] without consequences [moderation/banning]."
It seems quite natural, then, that this follows:
"We [Debian] do not want to be present in a place [Google Cloud Platform
and other Google services] where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse happens [directly assisting the US government
to prepare and execute missions that result in unconscionable civilian casualties] without consequences [legal reprecussions]."
If the former results in leaving a social media platform, then the
latter should result in at least the same (leaving the platform and
services) and, I would argue, also calls for terminating the sponsor relationship. To do otherwise would be to tacitly endorse things that
are objectively far worse than things we have *already* publicly stated
as a project we find reprehensible.
"Roberto" == Roberto C Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> writes:
On 1/31/25 03:59, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our
Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place
where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion
about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
Currently, the Debian project has a much closer relationship with
than we have ever had with Twitter/X. Google is listed on the Debian
Partners Program page [2], which states:
"Google sponsors parts of Salsa's continuous integration
infrastructure
within Google Cloud Platform."
"Google is one of the largest technology companies in the world,
providing a wide range of Internet-related services and products as
online advertising technologies, search, cloud computing, software, and
hardware."
Additionally, Google is a DebConf25 sponsor [3].
Yet, Google has for a long time closely collaborated with the United
States Government, specifically with the Defense and Intellence arms.
This collaboration is no longer something that our project can continue
to turn a blind toward. Just within the last year Google has increased
this collaboration to the point of becoming a full-fledged and
enthusiastic participant in the US defense industrial complex.
2024-04-09: "Google is now authorized to host classified data in the
cloud" [4]
"We're thrilled to announce another significant milestone for Google
Public Sector: the authorization of Google Distributed Cloud Hosted to
host Top Secret and Secret missions for the U.S. Intelligence Community,
and Top Secret missions for the Department of Defense," Leigh Palmer,
the company’s vice president of delivery and operations said at Google
Cloud Next conference in Las Vegas. "This authorization underscores
Google Public Sector's commitment to empowering government agencies with
secure, cutting-edge technology."
2024-04-17: "Google Public Sector ‘hitting our stride’ in government
market, CEO says" [5]
"Being authorized on secret and top secret for the most stringent
government requirements more than anything demonstrates Google's
commitment to this market. I’m so proud of that. You know, I'm a mission >> junkie, former Navy officer, this is what I came to Google for: to be
able to deliver on the promise of Google technology and those missions."
This goes far beyond the US Defense and Intellence agencies
purchasing
the same mass market products which are available to everyone, far
beyond benign public sector services for education and healthcare.
Google is specifically tailoring products and services, in close
collaboration with the US Defense and Intellence agencies, to
specifically increase the capabilities of those agencies.
Since there are people within the project who will not even travel
to
the US because of problematic policies and overreach by the government,
especially by intelligence agencies, it seems highly problematic for us
to continue accepting Google as a sponsor. Especially given the fact
that Google has become a de facto part of the US government, and
especially of its intellegence arm. I feel far more threatened by a
continuing relationship between Debian and Google--knowing that Debian
shares a computing platform and resources with the monsters responsible
for thousands of drone strikes across the world, being responsible for
countless civilian deaths, as well as who knows what other atrocities
both inside the US and across the world--than by our former use of
Twitter/X as a platform for publishing bits of news about the project.
And a continuing relationship between Debian and Google objectively
poses a far greater threat of far greater harm to far more people than
did our former use of Twitter/X.
I am calling for those responsible for the Debian Partners Program
to
immediately discontinue the partner relationship with Google and then
for those responsible for managing the various Google-integrated and
Google-hosted Debian services to being the process of divestiture.
Regards,
-Roberto
Hi Roberto,
I largely agree that we should reduce our use of sponsored hosting
space in general, and Google (non-free) cloud platform specifically.
To do this, Debian would need to run its own cloud platform as a
replacement. I've been advocating for it, and volunteered to maintain
an OpenStack cloud deployment for Debian own use.
If you wish that Debian gets out of using Google, engage in this
effort, and find somewhere we can host such a deployment (then Debian
can spend the money for buying the hardware). At this time, I have no
clue where we should go, and I have no time to research it, plus I do
not wish to get my employer involved to avoid any type of conflict of interest.
I think the further away from free software something is, the higher the
bar we should apply for getting involved in the politics.
I think both in the X and Google cases, Debian should not get involved
in the politics.
Secondly, I think we should allow people in Debian doing the work to
have significant flexibility in how (and whether) that work gets done.
If what the publicity team and those maintaining Debian's X presence
were saying was that *they* felt uncomfortable being in a place where
they were not respected, then I fully support them. Similarly, if they
were saying that they did not want to do work in a place where users
were not respected, then as the people previously doing that work, I
support them in withdrawing.
How do I feel about the statement we made?
honestly, I am not thrilled.
If it really was a political decision (our people felt comfortable in
the X environment, but wanted to make a statement by leaving), I really
wish we had done something different.
If it was a non-political decision (our people felt uncomfortable
continuing the work), and we made a political statement anyway … well, there are many worse things in the world.
So how would I apply this reasoning to Google?
If the DebConf team is uncomfortable in their interactions with
google---say because they are not treated respectfully, I absolutely
support them in withdrawing from the relationship. (I believe that to
be counter-factual; as far as I know Google has always treated us with respect.)
If the Salsa team and CI team want to work on more free cloud options, I absolutely support that, even if that involves spending some Debian
money.
If we developed a free option for our CI infrastructure and wanted to
make a press release about it, I'd feel a lot more comfortable if we
focused on free software issues than broader issues with Google's
decisions.
I think the interesting question comes up if say Debconf wanted to put together a policy for what sort of sponsors were acceptable.
Non-profits sometimes have to do that. My university, MIT, was in the
news for some of their infamous donors in ways they really did not
enjoy, and as a result, they have chosen to be much more clear about who
they take money from.
In my mind I'd rather the Debconf group put that together rather than
the project as a whole.
If they wanted to start including issues like environmental impact and
issues like you bring up, I guess I would hold my nose and support the
people doing the work making the decisions.
I wouldn't have a lot of sympathy if there were a budget shortfall if
the policy was too strict.
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion
about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
Currently, the Debian project has a much closer relationship with Google
than we have ever had with Twitter/X. Google is listed on the Debian
Partners Program page [2], which states:
"Google sponsors parts of Salsa's continuous integration infrastructure within Google Cloud Platform."
"Google is one of the largest technology companies in the world,
providing a wide range of Internet-related services and products as
online advertising technologies, search, cloud computing, software, and hardware."
Additionally, Google is a DebConf25 sponsor [3].
Yet, Google has for a long time closely collaborated with the United
States Government, specifically with the Defense and Intellence arms.
This collaboration is no longer something that our project can continue
to turn a blind toward. Just within the last year Google has increased
this collaboration to the point of becoming a full-fledged and
enthusiastic participant in the US defense industrial complex.
2024-04-09: "Google is now authorized to host classified data in the
cloud" [4]
"We're thrilled to announce another significant milestone for Google
Public Sector: the authorization of Google Distributed Cloud Hosted to
host Top Secret and Secret missions for the U.S. Intelligence Community,
and Top Secret missions for the Department of Defense," Leigh Palmer,
the company’s vice president of delivery and operations said at Google Cloud Next conference in Las Vegas. "This authorization underscores
Google Public Sector's commitment to empowering government agencies with secure, cutting-edge technology."
2024-04-17: "Google Public Sector ‘hitting our stride’ in government market, CEO says" [5]
"Being authorized on secret and top secret for the most stringent
government requirements more than anything demonstrates Google's
commitment to this market. I’m so proud of that. You know, I'm a mission junkie, former Navy officer, this is what I came to Google for: to be
able to deliver on the promise of Google technology and those missions."
This goes far beyond the US Defense and Intellence agencies purchasing
the same mass market products which are available to everyone, far
beyond benign public sector services for education and healthcare.
Google is specifically tailoring products and services, in close collaboration with the US Defense and Intellence agencies, to
specifically increase the capabilities of those agencies.
Since there are people within the project who will not even travel to
the US because of problematic policies and overreach by the government, especially by intelligence agencies, it seems highly problematic for us
to continue accepting Google as a sponsor. Especially given the fact
that Google has become a de facto part of the US government, and
especially of its intellegence arm. I feel far more threatened by a continuing relationship between Debian and Google--knowing that Debian
shares a computing platform and resources with the monsters responsible
for thousands of drone strikes across the world, being responsible for countless civilian deaths, as well as who knows what other atrocities
both inside the US and across the world--than by our former use of
Twitter/X as a platform for publishing bits of news about the project.
And a continuing relationship between Debian and Google objectively
poses a far greater threat of far greater harm to far more people than
did our former use of Twitter/X.
I am calling for those responsible for the Debian Partners Program to immediately discontinue the partner relationship with Google and then
for those responsible for managing the various Google-integrated and Google-hosted Debian services to being the process of divestiture.
The decision about how we inform our users about our work isdonations
fundamentally different from the decision about who we accept
from to support that work—as long as the donations do not influenceour
free work.
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 02:25:19PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 13:08, Roberto C. Sánchez <[1]roberto@debian.org>
wrote:
Since we as a project have left Twitter/X (as recently announced by our
Publicity Team) on the basis of "We do not want to be present in a place
where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse
happens without consequences" [0] [1], I would like start a discussion
about how we as a project can promptly sever ties with Google.
Full disclosure: I am currently employed by Google, and do not speak for
the company.
DFSG #6 discusses not discriminating against fields of endeavour.
I can see the project wishing to cut ties with a social media platform
that is unable to ensure a minimum level of civil discourse. I'm not
seeing how this is even remotely equivalent to disengaging from a
corporate sponsor because of their commercial practices?
regards
Andrew
The formula I am applying here is directly:
"We do not want to be present in a place where we cannot ensure that
users will be respected and where abuse happens without consequences."
"We [Debian] do not want to be present in a place [on Twitter/X] where
we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse happens [causing certain people to feel unsafe] without consequences [moderation/banning]."
It seems quite natural, then, that this follows:
"We [Debian] do not want to be present in a place [Google Cloud Platform
and other Google services] where we cannot ensure that users will be respected and where abuse happens [directly assisting the US government
to prepare and execute missions that result in unconscionable civilian casualties] without consequences [legal reprecussions]."
If the former results in leaving a social media platform, then the
latter should result in at least the same (leaving the platform and
services) and, I would argue, also calls for terminating the sponsor relationship. To do otherwise would be to tacitly endorse things that
are objectively far worse than things we have *already* publicly stated
as a project we find reprehensible.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
On 1/31/25 03:59, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
Yet, Google has for a long time closely collaborated with the United
States Government, specifically with the Defense and Intellence arms.
I am calling for those responsible for the Debian Partners Program to immediately discontinue the partner relationship with Google and then
for those responsible for managing the various Google-integrated and Google-hosted Debian services to being the process of divestiture.
I largely agree that we should reduce our use of sponsored hosting space in general, and Google (non-free) cloud platform specifically.
To do this, Debian would need to run its own cloud platform as a
replacement. I've been advocating for it, and volunteered to maintain an OpenStack cloud deployment for Debian own use.