[mattnewton]

How hot does the water need to be before you raise the alarm?

I think there is value in pointing out trend lines and voicing opposition even if there are other countries that have more authoritarian views on speech. This is not a competition, what matters is the experience of the people in the country today not the fact that if they moved to Russia it would be worse. What is important is that the US state has both gained capabilities to act that way, and has shown predilections for it.

Texas just gave a man 30 years for transporting zines because of the politics of those zines. The trend lines are potentially very bad. And it only gets harder to reverse if the concerned people are right; would you just say “I don’t think it can happen here” and have people wait until it does and delay talking about it until we are not allowed?

[lenerdenator]

The alarm's been raised for a while now.

You have to hold elected and appointed leaders to account.

That means going to a voting site on each and every election day (I don't care if it's for dog catcher and only dog catcher) and voting even if candidates aren't perfect. It means making it clear that the three boxes of liberty will be used by the people to make sure that their rights are protected.

In the US, we still have some ability to do what I mentioned. There just doesn't seem to be any will to do it.

[gowld]

Your comment is not responsive to the comment you replied to, which was a critique of point 19.

[mattnewton]

I read point 19 as Palantir’s goal being to import Chinese and Russian style surveillance, and the comment saying effectively “it can’t happen here” and “taking them less seriously” because they are raising alarm. After rereading my comment, I still think it clearly responds to that.