howmayiannoyyou

Corporations are essentially considered individuals under the law in the United States for two good reasons:

1 - Companies employ taxpayers.

2 - Companies are taxpayers.

Remove companies' right to advocate for their interests gives disproportionate influence to employees and the unemployed, resulting in economic policy that discourages investment and hiring.

Transparency -> yes, emphatically, and that's good enough.

Flock has solved crimes in my state, including a few horrendous violent crimes.

We forget US society was configured (imperfectly) to allow families to raise their children in stability and safety, with guardrails around both sides of liberty. Surveillance has a legit role in protecting communities and their families - especially the most vulnerable.

Willing to be most of the Flock hate crowd doesn't have kids walking to school in areas where bad things happen - many probably don't have kids.

Why would you remove oil? And, Canada is emphatically NOT a internal economy. First, it imports most of its cars, industrial machinery and hardware. Second, its experiencing an FDI flood due to M&A activity that has key business being acquired and then relocated or repositioned to supply the US market.

Please have a look at the actual flow of trade between CAD and USA, and its components. The impact is nothing like what you suggest for the US. Canada can bend the knee to Trump, or it must gut its policies on natural resources and become an extractive economy similar to Russia pre-Ukraine war. There's no other option for Canadians and time is not on their side.

False. I'm in the trenches on the cross-border trade and issue in general every weekday. Investment, industrial production and migration of CAD businesses to the US is rapidly growing. Nothing Canada can do will reverse this, though several storms on the horizon unrelated to Canada could slow it.

Actually its the opposite. The pain of "giving in" is limited to specific Canadian industries and powerful stakeholders with a LOT of political influence. In the broadest terms, Canada's economy grows rapidly if they give in.

Latest concern amongst US attorneys using AI: Information shared with remote may may lose attorney-client privilege.

Yes, its exactly that. Its time HN - like X - posts the countries where its posts originate.

Simply false.

Surveillance networks are commonplace throughout history. Classic examples include Renaissance Italian networks in Europe, Egyptian networks operating in the Levant, Nazi networks in Europe and the UK, and so many more.

Did the US bring technology to the game? Yes. Were they the first global surveillance state, no. Are they the first to bifurcate by legal statute domestic and foreign intelligence? Yes, and with Congressional and Judicial oversight I might add.

Adding this comment:

1) We DO actually need to detect crime if we are going to fight it. Sticking our heads in the dirt and strapping a sign to our rear end saying "no surveillance" may feel good, but it does nothing for the victims of crime.

2) The anti-Palantir cries are funded in part by state actors whose operations are constrained by technology that detects and predicts their actions.

The quantity of anti-Palantir, anti-America and anti-American ally threads on HN has grown substantially. YCombinator and HN owe something to this country for setting conditions for their success. How about returning the favor though diligence in moderating HN?

I can't bring myself to use any model that trains or sends telemetry back to my country's primary competitor/adversary. I don't care how much money is saved.

The archeological and geological records strongly suggest we've been down this road before. There's as much arrogance in assuming we can prevent this, as there is in assuming we caused it (perhaps hastened it). Best use of national or global resources is preparing for the outcome, not trying to prevent it.

Mods... can we delete this unsourced propaganda?