4 ms·
It is really too bad people are criticizing Lessig, or he thinks he is being critisized, because "Palantir is a bad company, or that it has done bad things, or
by mlinksva 13y ago
It is really too bad people are criticizing Lessig, or he thinks he is being critisized, because "Palantir is a bad company, or that it has done bad things, or that it has been funded by bad people".
That's not the first thing that comes to mind when I read "technologies that could give us, and more importantly, reviewing courts, a very high level of confidence that data collected or surveilled was not collected or used in an improper way."
That's incredible!
- jaekwon 13y agoMore people need to know about this. I think people get lost in his prose and lose the gist of what he's really trying to do.
- mlinksva 13y agoWhat do you mean by "what he's really trying to do"? Anyway, I'm pointing out that he's making/repeating a technically incredible claim. I'm ever so slightly surprised and saddened that scrutiny of that claim isn't the focus here.
- jaekwon 13y agoHe's using the issue of copyright to condone the current direction of the surveillance state, and he is offering red herrings as "balancing" compromises. Yes, I agree with you. I think it is because we are among the first to find it, sparked by that blog post. This seems to be the technical crux of the debate.
- mlinksva 13y agoI doubt his aim is to condone the current direction of the surveillance state, but perhaps pursuit of "balance" plus technical credulity helps achieve the same.