3 ms·
All the providers you mention here work with the US government in situations where their platforms are being used by terrorist organizations. It sounds like the
by ktm5j 1mo ago
All the providers you mention here work with the US government in situations where their platforms are being used by terrorist organizations. It sounds like the a/i folks are specifically offering free services to a militant group, so that's why they're being sanctioned. I don't think your argument flies.
- john_strinlai 1mo agoif the argument is harm reduction and reducing the overall incidence of terrorism, my argument flies.
- ktm5j 1mo agoRemoving all the oxygen from our atmosphere would kill 100% of terrorists, that's a good strategy too right?
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- john_strinlai 1mo agoindeed, that would be a very effective way to reduce terrorism to 0.
- ktm5j 1mo agoMy point is, most people are looking for strategies that actually make sense. Shutting down Google to stop terrorism, even when Google is already cooperating with the US government, makes no sense.
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- cholantesh 1mo agoAnd if the terrorist group that provides the impetus for the sanction is practically nonexistent, it's entirely sensical?
- ktm5j 1mo agoThey aren't specifically supporting terrorism, and in fact are cooperating with the US to stop terrorist groups. This isn't an ends justifies the means situation, as I was trying to illustrate with the oxygen/atmosphere metaphor.
- moron129 1mo ago[flagged]