[fluoridation]

>'Palantir "remains open to the critique of potentially being an accessory to acts of deportation, imprisonment, and racism through its contracts".' Open to critiques of potentially being an accessory to "racism?" What is this, the Future Crimes unit from Minority Report?

No. What that means is, "there's nothing here that prevents these tools from being used in this manner". It's not about what may happen in the future, it's about the current situation, which is that the tools are already produced with the objectionable capacity. It's the same reason speeding is punished, even when no harm follows as a consequence; the act is inherently reckless, regardless of the actual consequences.

[dwd]

Someone in ICE uses Microsoft Excel to maintain a list of people who they believe should be send to an internment camp. Therefore Microsoft is an accessory to that?

Where do you draw the line? Are we arguing there is a level of software capability that is simply too dangerous?

Maybe everyone should just stick to "I have my own biases, and I don't like Alex Karp's politics because they don't match my own. I'd rather this software was developed by someone from my side of politics - but still have the same capabilities".

[fluoridation]

>Someone in ICE uses Microsoft Excel to maintain a list of people who they believe should be send to an internment camp. Therefore Microsoft is an accessory to that?

Utterly disingenuous. Surveillance software is primarily sold to governments to spy on individuals. It doesn't exist for any reason except for the powerful to oppress the weak.

>Where do you draw the line?

"I just kept turning the heat up and the frog seemed perfectly fine. The fact that it's cooked now can't have anything to do with my actions." I don't have to propose a generalized demarcation criterion to say whether a particular example is on either side of the line.

[dwd]

Since when has Palantir sold surveillance software? They sell data integration software and they don't store, transfer or share customer's data.

If surveillance software is your issue, then companies like Cisco or Huawei are provide the hardware and software. But like most technology, there is always potential to use it for things we disagree with politically or personally.

[fluoridation]

>They sell data integration software

Uh-huh? Which is used for what?

>they don't store, transfer or share customer's data.

LOL. Yeah, that's the issue, here.

>If surveillance software is your issue, then companies like Cisco or Huawei are provide the hardware and software.

Whataboutism? Sure, I have no problem lobbing the same criticism at them.

[pebble]

If Microsoft sells ICE a subscription to Office then yes.

[dzhiurgis]

How about selling cakes to gay couples?

[pebble]

Only a bigot would see a problem with that.