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.
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.
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.