[toomuchtodo]

In engaging with enterprise and government stakeholders, I have found that if the technology foundation does not exist, it will be used as an excuse to not execute or improve. So, when an issue is raised, if you have come prepared to show that you can solve the problem with existing primitives or systems in a straightforward manner, it becomes much more challenging to assert the problem cannot be solved.

"We can solve this today; if you're asserting we can't, be prepared to prove it before the audience expands to encourage accountability." Whether that audience is higher up the leadership ladder, adversarial peer stakeholders more motivated to succeed, the general public, regulators/legislators, or journalists is situation specific.

[bradjohnson]

The politics of the situation might make a perceived lack of technological solution a convenient scapegoat, that is true. However, from the HN comments section, suggesting a technological solution to a human rights abuse problem doesn't move the needle, because it is not a lack of technology that has caused the human rights abuse. You are responding to a non-issue that hasn't been presented to you and that you have no authority to solve.

[moralestapia]

Wrong. It's the opposite.

When there's a will, there's a way.

Unfortunately, in this situation, there's no will.