What interest would they have in you and if they can use it on us we can use it on them. Anyway of theybspying on is its been happening for a long time already. Espescially if you are in here.
You’re arguing two opposite things at once. First it’s “why would they care about you,” which assumes surveillance only happens if you’re personally important. Then it’s “they already spy on everyone,” which admits it’s mass, automated, and impersonal. Those can’t both be true. Modern surveillance doesn’t need interest, it runs on bulk data, pattern matching, and future reuse.
And “we can use it on them” is just pure fantasy. Regular citizens don’t control the databases, the models, the warrants, or enforcement. The state does. That imbalance is the whole point.
Once this infrastructure exists, it doesn’t belong to whoever you politically agree with today, it belongs to whoever holds power tomorrow.
That’s why cheering it on because it’s aimed at someone else right now is how you end up on the wrong side of it later.
This is the same mistake people make when they cheer the obliteration of states’ rights because federal power helps us this one time, or when they celebrate nuking the filibuster because it produces one short-term win, even though filibusters have historically protected conservatives more often than liberals.
You’re not changing who holds power, you’re changing how much power exists for the ones that hold it.
And once that power exists, it doesn’t belong to “our side.” It belongs to whoever controls the system next. That’s how people end up absolutely shocked and outraged when the tools they applauded get turned back on them.
Very well put. I've never liked the argument of "Ive got nothing to hide" as a counter to mass government surveillance, and its tricky to articulate why so concisely
Whoa the dv Karen's are out in force. Sogwap is right. Wake up, ai is here and the real solution is for it (and the coupled surveillance) to be used on everyone instead of just us peons. David Brin saw this decades ago in 'transparent society '. And if you think it's not feasible, why are you here? Or on the Internet at all?
All it takes with this kind of ai dragnet, is one bad actor, or the left stealing powe back. And everything boards like this ever fought for will be destroyed.
Just because it's being used for something we like doesn't mean it's in the hands of the good guys. Even if that was true, why do you think it would stay that way?
Good to hear. Sometimes I feel like I've been dropped into Bizarro World when I see people here do things like cheer for Big Brother surveillance-state shit, or obliterating states' rights in favor of federal might or other such Orwellian scenarios. Nice to see that people haven't all gone fucking nuts. ✌️
Could something like this lead to something like China's social scoring system? How will we ensure this technology isn't used against the public? It seems like we're cheering for the technology that will be used to control us.
I guarantee you it is being used on EVERYBODY, right now in this moment.
How would it work at all if it wasnt? The AI isnt determining who is who before building out a profile... it determines who is who by building out a profile
Your argument is akin to cutting off your own dick to fight against rape. I'll also refer you to the second amendment, and the tens of thousands of arguments over it since inception.
Saying “don’t build mass surveillance systems” isn’t self-harm, it’s saying you don’t fix one problem by creating a much bigger one. History is very clear on this. Tools built to go after “bad people” never stay limited to "bad people".
AI tracking, databases, bounties, and private contractors don’t stop where you hope they will. They expand, they get misused, and eventually innocent people get caught in it. That’s not hypothetical, that’s how every surveillance state works.
You can want immigration enforcement without cheering for a police-state surveillance machine. If you’re fine with the machine, just be honest about that tradeoff. 🤷♀️
I honestly don’t know what point you’re trying to make with the Second Amendment here.
Arguing against surveillance isn’t like arguing against the Second Amendment, and arguing against surveillance isn’t like disarming yourself.
If your point is just “people argue about everything,” then sure, but that doesn’t actually defend mass surveillance. It just dodges the issue.
If your point is that both the 2nd Amendment and mass surveillance are tools to be used against those you oppose or those that oppose you, then they're opposite goals. The 2nd Amendment is about limiting state power over citizens and mass surveillance is about expanding state power over citizens. Those are actually opposite goals, see?
If there’s a clearer argument you’re making, please spell it out, because right now the comparison doesn’t make sense. 🤷♀️
The 2a is about citizens having the same weapons as the government. Surveillance and ai are weapons and there's no sticking them back in the bottle no matter how you may wish for it. There's no point in forgoing their use in a legitimate pursuit as purging our country of illegals and keeping it that way. You're fighting the last war, of us vs government. It's rapidly being cleaned and rehabilitated before our eyes. Not too long from now we're going to truly take the reins of government while devolving much of it's power back to local government or citizen control. Maintaining control at all levels will not be any easier in a vain attempt to simultaneously neuter it.
The 2a is about citizens having the same weapons as the government.
😂😂😂😂😂
Are you serious? No, really. Are you really serious here?
The 2nd Amendment has never meant citizens have the same weapons as the government.
Civilians can’t own weaponized tanks, weaponized drones, missiles, weaponized submarines, nuclear arms, satellites, etc...and even at the small arms level the government has explosives, air support, armored vehicles, and electronic warfare while citizens have ...personal firearms.
Surveillance is even worse. Citizens have phones that track them. NOT tracking government entities no subpoena power, no warrants, no classified datasets, and no enforcement arm, while the state has mass biometric databases, real time geolocation, financial and travel records, AI trained on proprietary and classified data, legal compulsion, and armed agents (much better armed than citizens) to act on the output. Pretending “we can use it on them” is pure fantasy.
Saying “you’re fighting the last war” doesn’t fix that; it just hand-waves away the fact that every time people cheer federal overreach, mass surveillance, or constitutional shortcuts because it helps this one cause, they’re doing the exact thing they swear they oppose — betting that power will stay benevolent after the precedent is set, which is how power has NEVER WORKED. Not once, in any system, ever.
But let's test how much you actually believe what you're trying to sell here.
Let's pretend that everything in the video above was exactly the same....except ....substitute "Illegals" for "Christians" and "FBI" for "ICE", and set it a year ago, when Biden was in the White House.
Would you have so readily been all for it? Defended it so thoroughly?
Be honest. Actually answer this one question, if you do ANYTHING.
Yes or No? Would you still have the same opinion of it as you've detailed above?
I'm very serious. Are you thinking you score debate points by behaving like a child?
“A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”
Just because we don't have parity and haven't for a long time doesn't mean we should abandon the true 2a goal, any more than we should in the technology realm either. Cowering and scolding isn't an effective strategy. Are you sure you really belong here? We're here to fight and win against our oppressors.
Quoting the Founders doesn’t erase reality. Citizens with rifles are not “independent” from a government that has satellites, mass surveillance, AI targeting, financial tracking, warrants-on-demand, and legal force behind it. That gap isn’t philosophical, it’s absolute. The gap isn’t “less parity than we’d like,” it’s orders of magnitude difference.
What you’re defending isn’t citizen power, it’s state power you happen to like right now. Saying “we’ll take control later” is wishful thinking. Once these tools exist and are normalized, they don’t get handed back.
The 2A was about preventing runaway power, not cheering it on and hoping it behaves this time.
Also, why have you ignored this?:
But let's test how much you actually believe what you're trying to sell here.
Let's pretend that everything in the video above was exactly the same....except ....substitute "Illegals" for "Christians" and "FBI" for "ICE", and set it a year ago, when Biden was in the White House. Would you have so readily been all for it? Defended it so thoroughly? Be honest. Actually answer this one question, if you do ANYTHING.
Yes or No? Would you still have the same opinion of it as you've detailed above?
Oh no! AI is takin’ our jeeeeerbs! ( South Park. It's sarcasm, for those that don't know South Park references.....)
I get the “any means necessary” mindset when it comes to deportations, but this is where the logic falls apart. We don’t get to spend years warning about Big Tech, Big Brother, facial recognition, mass surveillance, and the police state… and then cheer when the same exact tools are pointed at someone we don’t like.
These systems don’t stay narrow. They never have. Once you normalize AI tracking people, cross-referencing databases, paying bounties, and letting contractors run the machinery, it doesn’t magically stop at “illegals.” It expands. New admins take over, definitions change, databases screw up, innocent people get flagged.
“If you’re legal you have nothing to worry about” is the line every authoritarian system uses right before it decides you’re the next problem.
So either mass surveillance is bad on principle...or it’s fine as long as you trust the people holding the switch today. 🤷♀️
Alright, if you're serious about your position then chuck your phone, your computer, your car if it's been made recently.. then be sure to not go near any metropolitan area.. you see what I'm getting at.
Pointing out structural power imbalance isn’t the same as pretending you can opt out of modern life .
"You use technology so you must accept unlimited surveillance” is just resignation dressed up as realism. People criticize pollution while breathing air, criticize monopolies while buying groceries, and criticize surveillance while owning a phone because participation ≠ consent.
The question was never “can you escape it,” it’s who controls it, who sets the rules, and who it’s aimed at. And right now that’s the state, not citizens, not local communities, not some future hypothetical where power is magically devolved after being centralized and weaponized first.
Telling people to throw away their phones is just a way to avoid answering the actual point. Once you normalize tools of total surveillance because you like today’s target, you’ve already surrendered the argument for liberty tomorrow.
Cell phones are the most important component in the surveillance state. I advocate for co-opting the entirety of it from top to bottom. It's not just the most logical but really the only solution.
That’s not a solution, it’s a slogan. You can’t “co-opt” a system you don’t own, don’t control, and can’t audit. You don’t run the cell towers, the OS, the app stores, the baseband firmware, the cloud infrastructure, the data brokers, the subpoenas, or the enforcement arm. The state and corporations do.
Saying “we’ll take it over later” is the same fantasy as “we’ll use it on them”. Power doesn’t reverse just because people want it to. Once surveillance is normalized, it only ever flows one way.
That’s the whole point people keep missing. Tools built for control don’t magically become tools of liberty because the intentions feel righteous in the moment.
Also, why have you ignored this?: (TWICE NOW)
But let's test how much you actually believe what you're trying to sell here. Let's pretend that everything in the video above was exactly the same....except ....substitute "Illegals" for "Christians" and "FBI" for "ICE", and set it a year ago, when Biden was in the White House. Would you have so readily been all for it? Defended it so thoroughly? Be honest. Actually answer this one question, if you do ANYTHING. Yes or No? Would you still have the same opinion of it as you've detailed above?
I will answer this question just as soon as you answer this one, that you've dodged FOUR TIMES now.
But let's test how much you actually believe what you're trying to sell here. Let's pretend that everything in the video above was exactly the same....except ....substitute "Illegals" for "Christians" and "FBI" for "ICE", and set it a year ago, when Biden was in the White House. Would you have so readily been all for it? Defended it so thoroughly? Be honest. Actually answer this one question, if you do ANYTHING. Yes or No? Would you still have the same opinion of it as you've detailed above?
This is great and all until it gets weaponized against the American people, just like the Patriot Act. If the government does it to enemies of the country, they'll declare you an enemy next.
I look forward to seeing the creative solutions Palantir will move on to after the illegals are captured. They'll look for new revenue streams once that dries up. The possibilities for total control are endless.
You know, sometimes I feel like some of the posts here are part of some horrible social experiment to see how far a person can be lured from their core beliefs, and how easily.
To see what it would take for someone to do a complete 180 on long held, deeply held beliefs... like government surveillance of private citizens or states rights' being trampled by federal overreach or the sanctity of the US Constitution when it doesn't produce the results they want.
And from what it looks like by what I'm seeing here, all it takes is some random person making some random post on X, full of misinterpretation of laws and sometimes just flat out lies.
Not sure I like this.
Anyone else thinking this tech isn't being used to spy on people like us is deluding themselves.
Yeah, it's pretty darn creepy.
100% agree.
What interest would they have in you and if they can use it on us we can use it on them. Anyway of theybspying on is its been happening for a long time already. Espescially if you are in here.
You’re arguing two opposite things at once. First it’s “why would they care about you,” which assumes surveillance only happens if you’re personally important. Then it’s “they already spy on everyone,” which admits it’s mass, automated, and impersonal. Those can’t both be true. Modern surveillance doesn’t need interest, it runs on bulk data, pattern matching, and future reuse.
And “we can use it on them” is just pure fantasy. Regular citizens don’t control the databases, the models, the warrants, or enforcement. The state does. That imbalance is the whole point.
Once this infrastructure exists, it doesn’t belong to whoever you politically agree with today, it belongs to whoever holds power tomorrow.
That’s why cheering it on because it’s aimed at someone else right now is how you end up on the wrong side of it later.
This is the same mistake people make when they cheer the obliteration of states’ rights because federal power helps us this one time, or when they celebrate nuking the filibuster because it produces one short-term win, even though filibusters have historically protected conservatives more often than liberals.
You’re not changing who holds power, you’re changing how much power exists for the ones that hold it.
And once that power exists, it doesn’t belong to “our side.” It belongs to whoever controls the system next. That’s how people end up absolutely shocked and outraged when the tools they applauded get turned back on them.
Very well put. I've never liked the argument of "Ive got nothing to hide" as a counter to mass government surveillance, and its tricky to articulate why so concisely
Watch this u/SOGWAP
Then tell me you'd be completely OK with this happening to you and ruining your career, launching you into years of litigation and financial ruin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9M4F_U1eEw
Whoa the dv Karen's are out in force. Sogwap is right. Wake up, ai is here and the real solution is for it (and the coupled surveillance) to be used on everyone instead of just us peons. David Brin saw this decades ago in 'transparent society '. And if you think it's not feasible, why are you here? Or on the Internet at all?
All it takes with this kind of ai dragnet, is one bad actor, or the left stealing powe back. And everything boards like this ever fought for will be destroyed.
I am sure it will come.
Palantir should be made Public. The Board of Directors should ALL be America First.
I'd honestly prefer it destroyed. Its far too dangerous
It needs to be Tamed. Not in any hands who are responsible for enabling GAZA Genocide.
Amen
Making the CCP look like the power rangers is my favorite comment.
It is a useful tool but let's hope it will not be used on citizens later.
Why in the world would you think it wouldn't be? Other than wishful thinking?
It could be used for good or evil. Let's hope and pray that this technology stays in the hands of good people.
Just because it's being used for something we like doesn't mean it's in the hands of the good guys. Even if that was true, why do you think it would stay that way?
I never said it would stay that way. I'm terrified that it is not in good hands and that it will not be used for good intentions.
Good to hear. Sometimes I feel like I've been dropped into Bizarro World when I see people here do things like cheer for Big Brother surveillance-state shit, or obliterating states' rights in favor of federal might or other such Orwellian scenarios. Nice to see that people haven't all gone fucking nuts. ✌️
I'm not willing to trade my liberty for a little bit of temporary safety.
It will be used for evil later but I hope much later.
It will
Beast system.
Could something like this lead to something like China's social scoring system? How will we ensure this technology isn't used against the public? It seems like we're cheering for the technology that will be used to control us.
I guarantee you it is being used on EVERYBODY, right now in this moment.
How would it work at all if it wasnt? The AI isnt determining who is who before building out a profile... it determines who is who by building out a profile
Of course.
Ask and you shall receive.
Yes. Was it you who asked to be Bounty Hunter?
I suggested it. But I would have to hire younger folks. I am not as fast as I used to be. 😎
Oh howls. I knew there were some of you frogs wanting to go get them. I just wanted to toss them to gators. LOL
Gators got to eat too! 🐊🐊🐊
Exactly.
Homan needs to deputize every police officer in the USA and pay them a bounty for every illegal they hold for ICE.
Excellent idea.Half year from now, you might see this.
Better party like it's 1983, 1984 is upon us.
2020 was 1984.
Yeah and we found out who didn't read the warning.
True. I did.
I was thinking this would be a huge problem for me. I don't think I could choose between bounty hunter and privateer. But I can probably do both.
That's what would be the "huge problem" you have with this?
Really?
Your argument is akin to cutting off your own dick to fight against rape. I'll also refer you to the second amendment, and the tens of thousands of arguments over it since inception.
That analogy is nonsense.
Saying “don’t build mass surveillance systems” isn’t self-harm, it’s saying you don’t fix one problem by creating a much bigger one. History is very clear on this. Tools built to go after “bad people” never stay limited to "bad people".
AI tracking, databases, bounties, and private contractors don’t stop where you hope they will. They expand, they get misused, and eventually innocent people get caught in it. That’s not hypothetical, that’s how every surveillance state works.
You can want immigration enforcement without cheering for a police-state surveillance machine. If you’re fine with the machine, just be honest about that tradeoff. 🤷♀️
I honestly don’t know what point you’re trying to make with the Second Amendment here.
Arguing against surveillance isn’t like arguing against the Second Amendment, and arguing against surveillance isn’t like disarming yourself.
If your point is just “people argue about everything,” then sure, but that doesn’t actually defend mass surveillance. It just dodges the issue.
If your point is that both the 2nd Amendment and mass surveillance are tools to be used against those you oppose or those that oppose you, then they're opposite goals. The 2nd Amendment is about limiting state power over citizens and mass surveillance is about expanding state power over citizens. Those are actually opposite goals, see?
If there’s a clearer argument you’re making, please spell it out, because right now the comparison doesn’t make sense. 🤷♀️
The 2a is about citizens having the same weapons as the government. Surveillance and ai are weapons and there's no sticking them back in the bottle no matter how you may wish for it. There's no point in forgoing their use in a legitimate pursuit as purging our country of illegals and keeping it that way. You're fighting the last war, of us vs government. It's rapidly being cleaned and rehabilitated before our eyes. Not too long from now we're going to truly take the reins of government while devolving much of it's power back to local government or citizen control. Maintaining control at all levels will not be any easier in a vain attempt to simultaneously neuter it.
😂😂😂😂😂
Are you serious? No, really. Are you really serious here?
The 2nd Amendment has never meant citizens have the same weapons as the government.
Civilians can’t own weaponized tanks, weaponized drones, missiles, weaponized submarines, nuclear arms, satellites, etc...and even at the small arms level the government has explosives, air support, armored vehicles, and electronic warfare while citizens have ...personal firearms.
Surveillance is even worse. Citizens have phones that track them. NOT tracking government entities no subpoena power, no warrants, no classified datasets, and no enforcement arm, while the state has mass biometric databases, real time geolocation, financial and travel records, AI trained on proprietary and classified data, legal compulsion, and armed agents (much better armed than citizens) to act on the output. Pretending “we can use it on them” is pure fantasy.
Saying “you’re fighting the last war” doesn’t fix that; it just hand-waves away the fact that every time people cheer federal overreach, mass surveillance, or constitutional shortcuts because it helps this one cause, they’re doing the exact thing they swear they oppose — betting that power will stay benevolent after the precedent is set, which is how power has NEVER WORKED. Not once, in any system, ever.
But let's test how much you actually believe what you're trying to sell here.
Let's pretend that everything in the video above was exactly the same....except ....substitute "Illegals" for "Christians" and "FBI" for "ICE", and set it a year ago, when Biden was in the White House.
Would you have so readily been all for it? Defended it so thoroughly?
Be honest. Actually answer this one question, if you do ANYTHING.
Yes or No? Would you still have the same opinion of it as you've detailed above?
I'm very serious. Are you thinking you score debate points by behaving like a child?
“A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”
Just because we don't have parity and haven't for a long time doesn't mean we should abandon the true 2a goal, any more than we should in the technology realm either. Cowering and scolding isn't an effective strategy. Are you sure you really belong here? We're here to fight and win against our oppressors.
Quoting the Founders doesn’t erase reality. Citizens with rifles are not “independent” from a government that has satellites, mass surveillance, AI targeting, financial tracking, warrants-on-demand, and legal force behind it. That gap isn’t philosophical, it’s absolute. The gap isn’t “less parity than we’d like,” it’s orders of magnitude difference.
What you’re defending isn’t citizen power, it’s state power you happen to like right now. Saying “we’ll take control later” is wishful thinking. Once these tools exist and are normalized, they don’t get handed back.
The 2A was about preventing runaway power, not cheering it on and hoping it behaves this time.
Also, why have you ignored this?:
Sign up.
That would up my total to 4 jobs, all of them really cool. I've probably been out of IT too long to be qualified as an AI Pokemon trainer however.
Seriously though, why would anyone think that this hasn't been getting used already? This article is just disclosure.
It has been used I am sure. Anything else would be stupid. You wouldn't use a tech without lots of testing, right?
I know better than that.
You are good. Do you find time to sleep?
Thanks, I do. I hope you do too.
Yes. Most days 6 hours if I can grab it. LOL
Hah ya gotta master the power nap too.
Yes. That's right.
Anyone who is chill with this, watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9M4F_U1eEw
Dude STILL HAS A CRIMINAL RECORD for trespassing, despite being 100% innocent and wrongly identified by an A.I. system.
Currently suing the officer, the city, and the casino, and will take years before hes no longer a convicted criminal with a record.
Wow. Not good.
Oh no! AI is takin’ our jeeeeerbs! ( South Park. It's sarcasm, for those that don't know South Park references.....)
I get the “any means necessary” mindset when it comes to deportations, but this is where the logic falls apart. We don’t get to spend years warning about Big Tech, Big Brother, facial recognition, mass surveillance, and the police state… and then cheer when the same exact tools are pointed at someone we don’t like.
These systems don’t stay narrow. They never have. Once you normalize AI tracking people, cross-referencing databases, paying bounties, and letting contractors run the machinery, it doesn’t magically stop at “illegals.” It expands. New admins take over, definitions change, databases screw up, innocent people get flagged.
“If you’re legal you have nothing to worry about” is the line every authoritarian system uses right before it decides you’re the next problem.
So either mass surveillance is bad on principle...or it’s fine as long as you trust the people holding the switch today. 🤷♀️
You can’t have it both ways.
Alright, if you're serious about your position then chuck your phone, your computer, your car if it's been made recently.. then be sure to not go near any metropolitan area.. you see what I'm getting at.
That’s not an argument, it’s a false dilemma.
Pointing out structural power imbalance isn’t the same as pretending you can opt out of modern life .
"You use technology so you must accept unlimited surveillance” is just resignation dressed up as realism. People criticize pollution while breathing air, criticize monopolies while buying groceries, and criticize surveillance while owning a phone because participation ≠ consent.
The question was never “can you escape it,” it’s who controls it, who sets the rules, and who it’s aimed at. And right now that’s the state, not citizens, not local communities, not some future hypothetical where power is magically devolved after being centralized and weaponized first.
Telling people to throw away their phones is just a way to avoid answering the actual point. Once you normalize tools of total surveillance because you like today’s target, you’ve already surrendered the argument for liberty tomorrow.
Cell phones are the most important component in the surveillance state. I advocate for co-opting the entirety of it from top to bottom. It's not just the most logical but really the only solution.
That’s not a solution, it’s a slogan. You can’t “co-opt” a system you don’t own, don’t control, and can’t audit. You don’t run the cell towers, the OS, the app stores, the baseband firmware, the cloud infrastructure, the data brokers, the subpoenas, or the enforcement arm. The state and corporations do.
Saying “we’ll take it over later” is the same fantasy as “we’ll use it on them”. Power doesn’t reverse just because people want it to. Once surveillance is normalized, it only ever flows one way.
That’s the whole point people keep missing. Tools built for control don’t magically become tools of liberty because the intentions feel righteous in the moment.
Also, why have you ignored this?: (TWICE NOW)
Seriously, why are you here if you just assume the endless pendulum will keep swinging back and forth and down on us?
I will answer this question just as soon as you answer this one, that you've dodged FOUR TIMES now.
I doubt you'll admit to being yet another nuthin ever happens type, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
This is great and all until it gets weaponized against the American people, just like the Patriot Act. If the government does it to enemies of the country, they'll declare you an enemy next.
Just don't trust the Demonrats.
Anyone have a link to the stalking job? I love doing surveillance.
I will go see.
Ty
Don't thank me yet. Once I find it....
The effort is worth thanks regardless
Try this.
https://ice.usajobs.gov/job/848932900
Thank you!
You are welcome. Best of luck. I don't want to meet you when you get the job. LOL
I look forward to seeing the creative solutions Palantir will move on to after the illegals are captured. They'll look for new revenue streams once that dries up. The possibilities for total control are endless.
It's the beast system.
You know, sometimes I feel like some of the posts here are part of some horrible social experiment to see how far a person can be lured from their core beliefs, and how easily.
To see what it would take for someone to do a complete 180 on long held, deeply held beliefs... like government surveillance of private citizens or states rights' being trampled by federal overreach or the sanctity of the US Constitution when it doesn't produce the results they want.
And from what it looks like by what I'm seeing here, all it takes is some random person making some random post on X, full of misinterpretation of laws and sometimes just flat out lies.
😒