4 ms·
So? I honestly don't know what your point is here. This isn't some sort of "'free market' vs 'government', and who gets credit for various achievements" discu
by jlgreco 13y ago
So?
I honestly don't know what your point is here. This isn't some sort of "'free market' vs 'government', and who gets credit for various achievements" discussion.
- pmorici 13y agoThe point is that the valley isn't an innocent victim here they have in the past and still do facilitate the surveillance state. To act as if refusing to deal with anyone involved would only mean uninviting some government employees from a few conferences and black balling a collection of beltway bandits is naive. The uncomfortable truth is that you would probably have to stop dealing with a lot more people and companies than you would be comfortable with.
- jlgreco 13y agoConsider the possibility of blackballing anybody who continues to be involved. Would that mean blackballing people who continue to work for government contractors as well? Possibly. I'd say that is left up to the individual implementor. We don't need to all literally agree on a list of individuals to blackball. A general trend across some subset of the community would do just fine. Some people may take it to the extreme, some may only dissociate from a narrowly defined group of people. This sort of social tension, or pressure, doesn't need to be engineered with exacting precision. A respected professor here, an influential ex-boss there, one of your college buddies that you might consider asking for a recommendation one day... all can contribute to this ostracism in their own way.