| 11 Mar 2024 |
 joepie91 🏳️🌈 | that seems like a good starting point, to collect such resources in the pad | 22:09:49 |
 Shalok Shalom | Ideally, we would focus on that, and not just them being a company that sells weapons.
But that they had concretely caused certain damage, that we could showcase. | 22:09:57 |
| Shalok Shalom | Eventually graphically. | 22:10:06 |
| Shalok Shalom | Including the background of the people involved in, and their actions. Particulary the founder. (Without letting it look, as if we are running a smear campaign) | 22:11:15 |
| Shalok Shalom | Do they limit themselves to whom they deliver? Maybe we can get a list of clients. | 22:12:16 |
 @phileas:asra.gr | https://www.wired.com/story/palmer-luckey-anduril-border-wall/ | 22:13:57 |
| @phileas:asra.gr | NixOS tries to be inclusive, I suppose people from Mexico included, perhaps having a sponsor who exists simply because there is technology needed for segregating Mexico from the US is perhaps not the most inclusive thing you can do. | 22:15:21 |
| @phileas:asra.gr | I find it quite upsetting that apparently Anduril employees are proactively defending Anduril, whilst not making it obvious they're working for them. | 22:16:26 |
| Shalok Shalom | The image of NixOS and the Internet being limitless and without borders, seems to serve a nice visual image, I suppose. | 22:16:26 |
|  Pyrox [Fox/It/She/They] joined the room. | 22:16:36 |
 @arianvp:matrix.org | I'm pretty sure Anduril's only planned customer is the US government by the way. I think it's somewhere in their mission statement | 22:18:21 |
| Shalok Shalom | I think one can argue, this makes it a political party, that takes influence on the NixOS development. | 22:19:01 |
| Shalok Shalom | * I think one can argue, this makes it a political party/player, that takes influence on the NixOS development. | 22:19:14 |
 @patka_123:matrix.org | (I find it pretty frustrating that @jonringer is sharing his opinion, while his employer is Anduril. He doesn't disclose this and people don't know that they are entering a discussion with an employee) | 22:19:18 |
| @arianvp:matrix.org | Also I don't actually think they have developed any offensive weapons? The closest thing seems to be that Roadrunner M but that's an aerial defense system. | 22:19:22 |
| Shalok Shalom | In reply to @arianvp:matrix.org
Also I don't actually think they have developed any offensive weapons? The closest thing seems to be that Roadrunner M but that's an aerial defense system. The first thing I heard today about them, is that they are selling rockets. | 22:20:04 |
| Shalok Shalom | But that is just an anecdote, so idk. | 22:20:17 |
| @arianvp:matrix.org | Roadrunner M is a missile yes. But it's built to take down drones and cruise missiles | 22:20:31 |
| @arianvp:matrix.org | Agree that'd be nice if people disclose their background in these kind of discussions :/ | 22:21:19 |
| Shalok Shalom | https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/7/23392441/palmer-luckey-anduril-military-first-weapons-loitering-munitions-drones | 22:21:46 |
| Pyrox [Fox/It/She/They] | In reply to@arianvp:matrix.org
Also I don't actually think they have developed any offensive weapons? The closest thing seems to be that Roadrunner M but that's an aerial defense system. they sell:
an anti-drone drone with weapons onboard missiles command gear for these missiles that "accelerates complex kill chains"(from their website) autonomous submarines autonomous planes??(that's what it looks like to me)
and more, this is just from a brief look at their website. | 22:23:55 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | In reply to @arianvp:matrix.org
Also I don't actually think they have developed any offensive weapons? The closest thing seems to be that Roadrunner M but that's an aerial defense system. note that "defensive weaponry" means a very specific thing, does not match what people would understand as "self-defense", and includes things which most people would consider offensive | 22:24:16 |
| @phileas:asra.gr | In reply to @patka_123:matrix.org
(I find it pretty frustrating that @jonringer is sharing his opinion, while his employer is Anduril. He doesn't disclose this and people don't know that they are entering a discussion with an employee) Note a mod complains that this is doxing, though this is just on LinkedIn/Google so not sure if that would be considered doxing. (Though not disclosing as other Anduril employees on their GitHub/Discourse profile certainly shows a preference of secrecy). | 22:24:38 |
| Shalok Shalom | "I kill you, before you kill me" kind of defense | 22:24:54 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | crucially, for instance, weaponry that is used to maintain an occupation is often classified as 'defensive' because it is used to 'defend' the occupation | 22:25:10 |
| @phileas:asra.gr | I think it's unfair having Anduril stuff collaborating in that discussion, how do we know they are not doing this during their working hours? Sounds unfair to have people getting payed for defending their employers industry on an Ethical discussion. | 22:25:42 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | (and makes design tradeoffs accordingly, it tends to be much more about whether you are fighting on controlled vs. uncontrolled territory) | 22:25:54 |
| Shalok Shalom | People not disclosing their conflict of interest, could be considered infiltrators, if you like to give it a dramatic name. | 22:27:27 |
| @arianvp:matrix.org | Yeh but categorizing an aerial defense drone as a murdering machine is just not factually correct and not helpful to make a point in my opinion. They take down other semi- autonomous machines | 22:27:42 |
| Shalok Shalom | Are they currently used in any conflicts? | 22:28:33 |
