782K views · Aug 29, 2009 · 3:23 · 0 HN recommenders · 8 mentions · discussed 2013–2025
A short scene from the film Clerks in which two characters debate whether the independent contractors killed on the second Death Star were innocent victims. It is a comedic discussion of moral responsibility.
Why Hacker News points people here: Invoked as a joke or analogy whenever contractors or employees work for a morally dubious or doomed organization.
“it's a reference to a debate in Clerks about independent contractors working on the Death Star II”
Clerks scene about independent contractors on the Death Star II
Because there's a part of HN too young to appreciate your comment, it's a reference to a debate in Clerks about independent contractors working on the Death Star II: this video
“this is barely humorous, and actually has a point”
I know humorous links are discouraged on Hacker News, but this is barely humorous, and actually has a point: this video As an independent contractor he owed it to himself to think through his choices and protect himself more carefully than he did. That said, he did get hosed by a completely crazy and corrupt system. It's just that I think he should have known better.
“I'll refer to the discussion of Death Star politics and the impact on contractors”
I hate to invoke Godwin's Law because it never helps any discussion, so instead I'll refer to the discussion of Death Star politics and the impact on contractors: this video
“Would you be a contractor building the Death Star?”
>The people doing the work for GCHQ and the NSA are just like us. That's the scariest part: it's the banality of evil, updated for the XXI century. Would you turn down a safe and well-paid government job? Would you be a contractor building the Death Star? (for the record, this is not a new question: this video )
“I'm reminded of the scene from 'Clerks' discussing Contractors[0]”
Both driver and passenger think they know the full truth of the matter for the financial transaction they're agreeing to, but they don't. There's implicit dishonesty in that, and when you combine dishonesty with money we call it 'fraud' usually. But let's set aside the question of whether it was legal. Was it moral? Software like this doesn't fall from the sky- management approved it, software teams wrote it, maintain it and system tests probably exist to validate it works... how do those developers feel okay about this? How do they not feel like they're cheating people out of money? When your Mom hears about it, and asks if you were part of it will you spend 20 minutes giving a long-winded answer about how it was actually not a bad thing? That's a bad sign, man. I'm reminded of the scene from 'Clerks' discussing Contractors[0] [0] this video
“Reminds me of Clerks and the Death Star contractors”
Reminds me of Clerks and the Death Star contractors, though this line of thinking has scary implications for working in the World Trade Center, any federal building, or Youtube. this video
“This is like the contractors working on the Death Star when it was blown up.[1]”
This is like the contractors working on the Death Star when it was blown up.[1] They knew what they were working on. They knew the dangers. Can't cry for them when they're blown to smithereens. I've been asked on two separate occasions to work on some crypto startup idea. Aside from my skepticism that they were even worthwhile projects, I declined because hell no I'm not writing code that touches other people's money . [1] this video
“any of the other derivatives of the infamous Clerks dialogue”
This is the sort of reference I winked at - or any of the other derivatives of the infamous Clerks dialogue: this video
