Mitchell Kapor Leaves Groove Over TIA

Deao writes "Mitchell Kapor, one of the founders of the EFF, has quit Groove. Supposedly he has left to pursue open source software interests, but insiders say he is unhappy with Groove's products forming a crucial part of the Total Information Awareness project. Read all about it at the NYTimes (Free Registration required)."

Comments

Can you blame him for having a conscience?

[hafree]

"Mitch cares very much about the social impact of technology" - I think that really says it all here. How would you feel knowing that you are the reason certain civil liberties and rights to privacy no longer exist?

Re:Ethics

[banzai51]

Whatever you feel is right, of course. However, don't be shocked if your decision has consequences, i.e. loss of job.

The world needs more good examples

[SolemnDragon]

1. He left his job because he was uncomfortable with what was happening with what they'd built.
Anybody remember the line that was used on production lines/ development for the atom bomb? "Our job is to build them, not to decide where they fall."

Take heart, folks. Add this one to the tiny corner of the bulletin board labelled "The world is not all bad." People really do sometimes help total strangers, people really do sometimes care about what their work is being used for, and frankly, i'm ALL IN FAVOUR of a guy who can turn around and quit based on what he thinks is an appropriate use of his work. (of course, i might not feel that way if he felt that what he was building SHOULD be spyware and they hadn't been headed there)I'm more willing to respect a belief the less it looks like it's going to mess with other people's- relatively innocent people's- lives. Granted, we can't all pay the rent if we walk off the job for moral reasons, so choose your battles carefully, and we don't all have a widespread fanbase to keep the world aware of what we've just done. (So when you choose them, do it as publicly as possible.) But sometimes, it's worth it, and i'll lead the cheer. Thanks!!!! Good example of what's not all wrong with the world.

Re:The world needs more good examples

[xyzzy]

This whole thing is rather silly. Are people here equating building a P2P collaboration app with shared whiteboads and calendaring with building the atom bomb? I'm sorry, but the two things aren't even CLOSE to morally equivalent.

If they are, all you hackers out there better put down your keyboards, because this is a wakeup call. Practically everything written out there in software-land could be used for nefarious purposes -- whether open source, closed source, or you name it. Remember the Marine training program using Doom?

Re:Ethics

[$$$$$exyGal]

The physicists in the Hiroshima era didn't seem to have any choice but to make the bomb, because it was a race. If they didn't make the bomb, first, then a nation hostile to the United States might get it done first. That put a lot of pressure on the physicists.

In this case, though, there doesn't seem to be any race, so there shouldn't be as much pressure to just walk away.

Mod parent up!

[TopShelf]

All too often our first reaction to something that we don't approve of is to distance ourselves from it, and by doing so we relinquish any opportunity to effect change. In international affairs, consider the differences over the last 10-20 years between the US relationships with Russia and China, and our relationships with Cuba and North Korea. In the former, we've taken steps to open up the lines of commerce and seen those countries change dramatically. In the latter, we've taken a hard-line embargo position, and haven't seen an iota of positive result.

While I respect Kapor's stand, I'd encourage him to stay engaged and voice his opinions.

Re:Ethics

[PhxBlue]

If in the future I find myself coding something dubious for a government or corporation, what is the correct ethical choice?

If you're relying on someone else to answer that for you, then you've made the wrong choice already. Just follow whatever course of action is most ethical for you; because, at the end of the day, it's not your naysayers you'll see when you look in the mirror.

Re:Ethics

[gpinzone]

It's always a race. For example, if we don't come up with a method to crack 2,048 public key encryption, someone else will. You can't assume it could only happen by perfecting a quantum computer; someone could find a way to calculate products of primes quicker. The point is, it's not a matter of if, it's when.

If it is dubious, the choice is obvious

[MyNameIsFred]

I've always been a firm believer in listening to your instincts. If the voices in your head are raising doubts, there's probably a problem. In those situations, I would argue that the choice is obvious -- quit.

The more damning problem is situations where the feature creep slowly brings on new capabilities. Until one day you look at the big picture and wonder what you had done.

"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for me -- and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."

-Martin Niemöller

Re:Ethics

[Soko]

You must have very strong ethics my friend. Perhaps too strong?

Like it or not, you will at some time or another support Microsoft in this industry. They're just too big and too pervasive to ignore and still put food on the table. (By your logic, SAMBA and WINE should not exist for Linux, since they support products from an un-ethical company, but I digress.)

Realistically, Microsoft isn't going away any time soon - if ever. It takes quite a while to fritter away $40 Billion, and that's just the war chest. IMHO, we can either continue to tilt at windmills or we can be more constructive and try to modify the beasts behaviour. If Microsoft were to stop being so arrogant and paranoid at the same time, they would likely be a pretty cool company (Aside: Look at what's happened to the stuffiest corp of all time - Big Blue). Then, these moral dillemas won't de-rail us from getting our jobs done.

BTW, I'm not saying you should tone down or compromise your ethics in any way - I'm saying that you should try to find more constructive ways to uphold them than possibly hanging your future out dry. We need advocates, not martyrs.

God bless, and best of luck to you - I hope you make a wise decision.

Soko

Our peers work for TIA

[hey]

Think about it ... some computer science types answered a want ad for the TIA. Did a few interviews and security checks then accepted a job there. What is wrong with these people?

Groove backdoor will FEED the TIA?

[Bigger R]

Maybe he's unhappy about certain "modifications" to his core technology?

Just like Zimmerman hinting that newer versions of NAI PGP (post 6.58?) might have issues.

And why he refers to it as a delicate situation.

Just a thought.

Maybe he's leaving after seeing the new MS Office?

[LibertineR]

The new Office suggests that Microsoft finally has their Groupware act together, and from what I understand, the beta is selling like wildfire on the web site. At $20 shipping, half a million copies might sellout before the week is over.

Office + Sharepoint, will kill the market for Groove before they can get one.

This is NOT a troll either, if you dont agree, do a little research. This Office version might actually be worth upgrading to.

Conscientious Brain Drain

[lucasw]

In Howard Rheingold's Tools For Thought it is mentioned that three decades ago many top scientists working on the government funded computer and communications projects left their posts out of dissatisfaction with government policy:

In 1970, a combination of growing opposition to the Vietnam war, and the militarization of all ARPA research, meant that an extraordinary collection of talent in the new fields of computer networks and interactive computing were looking for greener pastures...

Luckily, XEROX and other private companies were around to snatch them up and not let their talents go to waste.

This kind of phenomenon can't be do much good: It doesn't help legitimate national security interests, and scientists and engineers without the means to innovate don't benefit the economy. If young persons decide to avoid engineering or science completely when a perceived immoral government taints those fields, there's even more fallout...

Re:Reg Free Link

[jd142]

Better yet, why do so many people bitch about getting access to free information? Come on people, just sit down and generate a random id, sign up for it on hotmail and use that for everything. Why do you think I have such an odd id? Check the hotmail account once a month, delete everything there. Is that so hard to do to get free access to something?

groove not central to TIA...

[bigpat]

why would it be a big deal if they are using the software for collaboration. I'm sure they are using email, telephones and pencils too... If Groove is actually acting as a subcontractor and doing TIA research then I could understand being upset, since TIA is very very very unamerican.

What's next... people boycotting boxcutters?

Well, no. specifically...

[SolemnDragon]

I'm paralleling the moral dilemma of 'leaving one's job because one's otherwise harmless and useful shared whiteboards and calendars have been snapped up by the government as a handy tool for a goal which one doesn't agree with' ...to ... well, 'the moral dilemma of having one's hardware technologies and one's physics work appropriated as part of a government project with goals that one doesn't agree with.'

The point here is not the measure of the potential threat, it's the matter of taking action as a matter of principle. It's a valid statement that the two are not morally 'equivalent'- but it IS true (at least in my view) that the two actions are morally parallel in that they do both make a public statement against an actively directed specific use by the government of a specific technology.

When the TIA creeps are sharing your desktop, then you at least have one person who will have said, hey, i worked on this, and this was NOT what we had in mind.

You're right. Practically anything written out there in softwareland could be used to erode rights, could be used to persecute individuals- the question isn't can a hammer be used to break heads? but more importantly, When the company you design hammers for starts selling them to the guys using them to break heads, are you still going to be there designing hammers for them?

Remember, folks, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.