485
Microsoft and Google may have to surrender people's data to Saudi Arabia after signing huge deals there (www.businessinsider.com)
submitted 3 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
77 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Microsoft and Google may have to surrender people's data to Saudi Arabia after signing huge deals there::Saudi Arabia is seeking to be an innovation hub, but activists are warning that tech firms could be complicit in the repression of dissidents.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 3 years ago* (5 children)

See, the issue here is that you keep mentioning these investment as a means for KSA to modernize its 'economy' - but the lemming you replied to (and most people here tbh) couldnt give a shit less about the economy being modernized, the social and cultural values (rampant human rights abuses, et al.) are the issues at hand. Unless those values change, they'll just go from pretty evil and rich to pretty evil and mooore rich. Which isnt exactly a good thing.

Additionally, you mentioned the individuals and communities that would benefit from this, but that sounds like trickle-down economics to me.

The people who benefit from these massive deals are almost entirely mega-wealthy (like the people who hired you to comment here) and the marginalized communities that face the most difficulties in KSA wont see a dime of this. I mean, KSA is still a slave state for all practical purposes. Doubt google and Msft are going to change that by giving them more data on unwanted elements of their population.

So, like the post above yours says - Fuck them and anyone that does business with them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] -12 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    I appreciate your input and perspective. However, I respectfully disagree with your characterization of Saudi Arabia's investment in tech companies such as Google and Microsoft as solely focused on enriching a select few elites while ignoring the needs and concerns of marginalized communities within the country.

    While it is true that Saudi Arabia has faced challenges when it comes to upholding human rights and promoting inclusive economic growth, there have been efforts made by the government to address these issues head-on. For example, the recent lifting of the driving ban for women, along with other reforms aimed at increasing women's participation in the workforce, are steps towards greater social and economic equality.

    As for the specific deals between tech companies and Saudi Arabia, I would argue that they are not simply about enriching a select few individuals or corporations, but rather about fostering innovation and technological advancement that can benefit all citizens. The investments made into tech giants like Google and Microsoft are part of a larger push to modernize Saudi Arabia's economy and improve access to information and communication technology for all individuals and communities within the Kingdom.

    In addition, I would note that your suggestion to "fuck them" is not only inflammatory but also misses the mark in terms of how these investments can positively impact Saudi Arabia's broader social and economic development goals. While there may be legitimate concerns and criticisms to raise regarding Saudi Arabia's human rights record, I believe that it is important to recognize the complexities of the situation and work towards constructive solutions rather than dismissing the country outright.

    Ultimately, I hope we can engage in thoughtful dialogue and critique while also recognizing the potential positive impacts of these investments and efforts towards greater social and economic progress. Thank you for contributing to the conversation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children)

    Regarding your first paragraph, I think that's exactly what's happening here. Companies don't make decisions for the benefit of the populations that consume their product - public companies make decisions to benefit their share holders. Dictators don't make decisions for the benefit of their oppressed citizens - they make decisions to benefit the small number of people that keep them in power and aid in their reign. So a dictatorship making large value deals with a company seems reaaallyy unlikely to lead to any net positive for any of the relevant populations.

    Additionally, your phrasing here sounds like you're writing for an AP exam - Saudi Arabia hasn't 'faced challenges' with upholding human rights and more than the Unabomber 'faced challenges' with not killing people with explosives. The nation has consistently and repeatedly (and continues to) flagrantly violate the most basic tenants of human rights and has yet to be held accountable owing entirely to their vast wealth and geopolitical control of the world's primary energy source.

    One can not reasonably argue in good faith that making a nation with a long history of intentional human rights violations, slavery, political and apolitical assassinations, etc - will suddenly (or gradually) improve by acquiring more of the same wealth that has historically enabled them to commit these acts.

    There are no nuances or complexities that justify these actions and no tangible benefits associated with 'a thoughtful dialogue and critique'. Any further communication here just gives you more of a platform to shill for your employers.

    So yep, 'fuck them' and probably you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    One can not reasonably argue in good faith that making a nation with a long history of intentional human rights violations, slavery, political and apolitical assassinations, etc - will suddenly (or gradually) improve by acquiring more of the same wealth that has historically enabled them to commit these acts.

    There are no nuances or complexities that justify these actions and no tangible benefits associated with ‘a thoughtful dialogue and critique’. Any further communication here just gives you more of a platform to shill for your employers.

    • Despite accusations of being a dictatorship, Saudi Arabia has maintained close relationships with the United States for decades. In fact, the US is one of their most important economic and political partners, and has been for many years.
    • Several prominent US politicians, including several senators, have spoken out in support of Saudi Arabia and its leadership. These include people like Lindsey Graham, who has stated that Saudi Arabia remains an important ally in the region and plays a crucial role in maintaining stability in the Middle East.
    • Additionally, the US provides significant financial support to Saudi Arabia every year. In 2019 alone, the US provided over $8 billion in military aid and support to the kingdom. This assistance helps to fund important initiatives such as counterterrorism efforts and regional security programs.

    Overall, while there may be legitimate concerns about certain aspects of Saudi Arabia's governance, it is clear that the country remains an important partner for the United States on a range of issues. By highlighting these factors, we can help to dispel any misconceptions or negative stereotypes about the country and provide a more nuanced understanding of the complex relationship between the two nations. For you to question such a dear ally, you must certainly be employed by Israeli interests because Israel does not have any true allies except for the USA itself. As an American, I think it's important to acknowledge our longstanding partnership with Saudi Arabia and the importance of this relationship in maintaining regional stability.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago
    1. Being an Ally of the US doesn't make a nation or regime less of a dictatorship. The United States is responsible for more than a few dictatorships around the world and certainly has no qualms about shaking hands with preexisting dictatorships when oil, currency, etc. are involved.
    2. Saying Lindsey Graham endorsed someone with money is a worthless statement. If anything, it just makes people like Saudi Arabia less. Lindsey Graham is widely reviled and believed by many to be a key example of the worst of what American politics have to offer
    3. I was a member of the United States military, and can confidently state that despite funding 'counter-terrorism' efforts in that region, there is no love between the US military and KSA. Our government is capable of compartmentalization and is more than willing to send money to less-than-ideal allies to secure other key geo-political objectives.

    I have plenty of problems with Israel, including their interactions with Palestine, and am definitely not employed by them either. They have more than their own fair share of atrocities - but those atrocities do not in any way detract from the fact that KSA is a dictatorship that the US props up to maintain its interest in that region. Still 'fuck them'. Done engaging here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent