[eduction]

This will likely be deeply unpopular but: Good!

The place to set policies on the use of hammers and police enforcement is not at the counter of the hardware store. “You want a hammer but don’t have a contractors license? Are you in a training program? Oh you just want to hang framed art - can I see your lease, does it allow hammering metal into the walls?”

We govern these things through laws and a democratic process. Police enforce the laws.

I don’t want some overconfident Silicon Valley engineering firm telling me how to use my digital tools, and you shouldn’t either.

Whatever you think of this administration, our military should not have to ask contractors permission for their operations.

To stop mass surveillance and autonomous lethality, pass laws. Asking unelected tech executives to do this is asking for trouble. They have no business doing it.

[ben_w]

> I don’t want some overconfident Silicon Valley engineering firm telling me how to use my digital tools, and you shouldn’t either.

Last I heard, a US firm can refuse to do business with the US military as a customer in general commercial contexts, there is no blanket legal duty for private companies to sell goods or services to the US military, government agencies do not have a constitutional right to (nor are they a protected category for) the purchase of goods and services from private businesses, and private contracts are voluntary so if either party doesn't like the terms they can decline.

There's the somewhat conscription-y Defense Production Act, but the US goverment making use of that in this case is fundamentally incompatible with them simultaneously declaring the exact same organisation a "supply chain risk". Even without the near simultaneous references to both in this case, it seems to me like the US admin has said:

  WE DEMAND YOU SELL US YOUR STUFF OR WE'LL SHOW YOU BY BANNING OURSELVES FROM BUYING YOUR STUFF!!!!!111

Modulo Trump being more shouty and less coherent, and Hegseth being less shouty.

> To stop mass surveillance and autonomous lethality, pass laws. Asking unelected tech executives to do this is asking for trouble. They have no business doing it.

The US executive appears to consider the US constitution to not bind on them, only on their enemies.

What laws do you think you can pass, when even the constitution is seen that way?