"You know, what ICE is doing was voted on at the ballot box. So So Palantir again, not that you speak for everyone at Palantir but Palantir is more comfortable with mass deportations in the context of a world where Donald Trump campaigned on mass deportations and won than it might be in a world where he had not mentioned deportations at all, and then asked Palantir to design a mass deportation abetting software."
"What I'm saying is the people voted on this. That seems like a functioning democracy there. And of course, there's going to continue to be discursive interaction and disagreement. That's the beauty of our political process. But that's an important distinction. Disagreement over how the Trump administration has approached deportations is the beauty of the political process, Palantir's C.T.O., Shyam Sankar, argues on Interesting Times."
Mass deportation policies were presented in campaigns and were chosen by voters at the ballot box. A major technology firm expressed greater willingness to design systems supporting deportation when those policies were publicly campaigned and enacted, rather than being asked after the fact. Election results provide political legitimacy for enforcement decisions and influence how technology companies approach requests to build enabling tools. Ongoing discursive interaction and disagreement about enforcement approaches remain central to the functioning of the democratic process.
Read at www.nytimes.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]