"The law" is the contract. The Pentagon agreed to terms of service. The law is not on the Pentagon's side. The contract did not change; what changed is the Pentagon breaking the contract.

Perhaps you think the law shouldn't allow such a contract; that's a valid position. But that's not what the law currently says.

> if its within the law.

The current administration has been caught flouting court orders in dozens of cases, to the point that courts are no longer even granting them the assumption that they’re operating in good faith.

I can think of a million good reasons not to give these people the tools to implement automated totalitarianism. Your proposal that they simply refuse service to the government entirely would be ideal.

The government works for the people, not the other way around. For the people, by the people and of the people.

If you don't question people in positions of power they will just do whatever they want. Democracy is sustained by action, not by acquiescence.

And with the lawlessness of this administration, I would make it a point to hold them accountable. I'm not going to let them do mass surveillance when they decide to change the law.

Are you native, or just ignoring what is going on?

It’s a service. Democracy doesn’t give the government the right to force you to perform a service.

The technology isn’t suitable for the purposes the regime wants.

That is crazy. You are suggesting that corporations should have no power over their own IP.

Are you really saying that if Anthropic sells a limited version of their product to Palantir at a certain price, the government should be able to demand access to an unlimited version of Anthropic's product for free because they are a customer of Palantir?

That would effectively mean the government gets an unlimited license to all IP of companies that do business with government suppliers... that would be terrible.