[dark_mode]

> The decision has not affected Microsoft’s wider commercial relationship with the IDF, which is a longstanding client and will retain access to other services. The termination will raise questions within Israel about the policy of holding sensitive military data in a third-party cloud hosted overseas.

It's worth noting that even after finding out the "most moral" army is conducting mass surveillance, they're still happy to provide them services.

[tick_tock_tick]

Doesn't every army conduct "mass surveillance"? What do you think all those satellites with cameras are doing orbiting the planet?

Wouldn't the opposite be incredibly immoral? Attacking/bombing/etc without large scale surveillance would largely mean increased collateral damage.

[lordofgibbons]

Are you seriously equating observing an area using satellites with indiscriminately monitoring everyone's calls, messages, and possibly hacking their devices?

[kennywinker]

Perhaps the actual moral choice isn’t attacking blindly or mass surveillance of an occupied nation - it’s peace?

Regardless, the death toll in gaza (somewhere between 45,000 and 600,000) suggests that this mass surveillance isn’t being used effectively to reduce the death toll. It also doesn’t take mass surveillance to know that bombing hospitals and schools is going to kill innocent people.

[dark_mode]

> Wouldn't the opposite be incredibly immoral? Attacking/bombing/etc without large scale surveillance would largely mean increased collateral damage.

The concern is who gets to decide what is or isn't a legitimate target? Today's heroes might be tomorrow's victims. I'd rather no one have that much power over others.

[Sporktacular]

Arguing that mass surveillance is not unethical but actually a way to save lives is pretty disingenuous, absurdly so considering how little the country wielding it cares about collateral damage.

[ycombigators]

It would be pretty difficult for the IDF to increase their level of collateral damage.

[samirillian]

Holy crap you’re totally right

[nashadelic]

Two things: 1. The death toll has shown that this is the most indiscriminate bombings (Biden's own words) and deaths of civilians in recent memory. So, you could argue the tech is aiding in killing key civil infra staff

2. Sure, they can surveil, let them do it on their own data centers. It's actually strange that they would put such data/tech on a 3rd party data center to begin with.

[StanislavPetrov]

>Attacking/bombing/etc without large scale surveillance would largely mean increased collateral damage.

That would only be true if your goal was not to completely obliterate the population you are attacking and bombing, as Israel has demonstrated.

[Capricorn2481]

> It's worth noting that even after finding out the "most moral" army is conducting mass surveillance, they're still happy to provide them services.

Well, why wouldn't they? It's Microsoft, they're not exactly stewards of privacy.

[AzzyHN]

Where does "most moral" come from?

[reverius42]

Per Wikipedia, the idea that the IDF is the "most moral army in the world" comes from Colonel Richard Kemp, a retired British army officer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity_of_arms

[thrance]

It's a throwaway line Israeli officials have been using for a long time. I heard Netanyahou himself use it to describe the IDF and explain it can't possibly do wrong.

https://x.com/IsraeliPM/status/1745501858611786029?lang=en

[xg15]

"Finding out" in the "shocked! shocked!" Casablanca sense.

The IDF's "Wolf" system have been well known for years.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/apr/19/idf-facia...

[wolvesechoes]

I mean, there are other reasons to not provide them services. Really, mass surveillance is quite low on the list.

[andrepd]

How so? The Patriot Act was arguably the kick-off of the state of constant mass surveillance that is ubiquitous today.