| 8 Sep 2023 |
 ttamttam | * Well that's my particular misunderstanding. That doesn't really change the fact that it's a controversial company that can certainly strike up some negative emotions in people.
That's actually one reason I prefer to speak generally, so as to avoid "gotchas" that don't change the core of my argument, and if I address them we suddenly end up three pages down in the forum thread debating what is and isn't acceptable practice for border security when the point I was trying to make was about a pattern of rhetoric that I believe is unhealthy for the community. | 20:57:37 |
 vcunat | OK, I think I understand what you meant with "marginalized" and the context around. I thought it was about the discussion happening and not one use case for those weapons. | 20:59:49 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | In reply to @artturin:matrix.org
It appears that the company makes sentry(surveillance) towers for the US border which reduce the manpower needed to monitor the border (from their website), not automatic turrets for the border. this is correct, but also a distinction without a difference; because that monitoring information is then used to harass and, frequently, kill migrants | 21:11:03 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | (one such case that is relatively well-documented is CBP destroying hydration points) | 21:12:43 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | (also note that Anduril does in fact also make autonomous weapons; just none of them have been deployed at the border... yet, anyway.) | 21:14:40 |
