5 ms·

> My friend Chris Rohlf has a snarky dismissal of a lot of "hardware hacking" and "IOT" security conference talks: "look at this debugger debugging! > Stories

> My friend Chris Rohlf has a snarky dismissal of a lot of "hardware hacking" and "IOT" security conference talks: "look at this debugger debugging! > Stories like this call that snark to mind. "Look at this database databasing!" This isn't a technical story, it's a social and governmental one. > if you're angry at Palantir for assisting mass deportation, you should be equally angry at Oracle and Cisco. I am --- in fact, a little more so. Isn't Palantir's assistance clearer and more direct? Aren't they building applications with a lot of knowledge of what they'll be used to do? As far as I know, Cisco doesn't sell products like "gigabit mass-deporation cloud router 2239." Any assistance they give is much more indirect.

JoshTriplett 10y ago
> As far as I know, Cisco doesn't sell products like "gigabit mass-deporation cloud router 2239." https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/ciscos-latest-attempt-dodge-responsibility-facilitating-human-rights-abuses-export https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/ciscos-latest-attempt-...
ng12 10y ago
Assuming ICE is operating legally, what's the difference? Cisco assumes ICE is using their routers for legal purposes. Same with Oracle or SAP or IBM. At the point at which we're witch-hunting tech companies for their involvement it's already way too late.
- tptacek 10y ago
  The first part of this comment is in fact what I'm saying. The second part, where you call this "witch hunting", I don't agree with. I think our profession is way, way too detached from the consequences of the applications of our work. Nobody bats an eyelash when doctors refuse to help with executions or torture, or pharma companies resist selling execution drug cocktails. But for some reason technologists are just fine selling the technical building blocks of a surveillance and mass deportation system. That's not right; it's a sign of the diminished professionalism of our field versus other professions, and it does need to change.
  - ng12 10y ago
    It sounds great in theory but it's so divorced from reality I can't help but feeling anger at Palantir is misdirected. If Palantir refused the contract ICE would walk down the street and offer it to IBM/SAP/Northrop/Raytheon etc. If by some miracle they all refused it remember most three letter agencies have very skilled in-house teams. All of this is just distracting from the real issues at hand.
    - et-al 10y ago
      > If Palantir refused the contract ICE would walk down the street and offer it to IBM/SAP/Northrop/Raytheon etc. What what we debating here? ICE's conduct or Palantir being an enabler? Because if we're talking about Palantir, "someone else would have done it" is not a good excuse.
      - ng12 10y ago
        I'm saying worry about ICE's conduct, worrying about Palantir is unproductive. ICE's ability to build a database is not the limiting factor.
        nobodyorother 10y ago
        Worrying about both is appropriate: in both cases, folks are acting like amoral jerks, mentally divorcing their actions from the amount of suffering they directly or indirectly cause. I think the long term question is: how can we make these choices less okay and less profitable?
        et-al 10y ago
        Though it's easier to attract bright and hopefuls to work for Palantir than ICE, right? And it's easier for these employees to excuse their actions with an "I didn't know my efforts would end up being used for that purpose", or "I just wanted to work on interesting problems".
        sedachv 10y ago
        > I'm saying worry about ICE's conduct, worrying about Palantir is unproductive. How so? Exposing and holding people and companies accountable for wrong behavior does not stop anyone from trying to change the government policies that encourage the wrong behavior. The added media exposure probably helps, especially with people that are interested in the person/company but are not aware of the government policies and their impact.
gumby 10y ago
>> if you're angry at Palantir for assisting mass deportation, you should be equally angry at Oracle > Isn't Palantir's assistance clearer and more direct? Are you aware that the name "Oracle" comes from the original CIA contract? (crappy reference I found via wikipedia in case you didn't realise this, but it's not a secret part of company history: https://www.theguardian.com/g2/story/0,3604,215072,00.html https://www.theguardian.com/g2/story/0,3604,215072,00.html )
- hkmurakami 10y ago
  fascinating article: "Ellison was wrong about the success of massively parallel processing computers (though he invested his own money in the idea), wrong about the success of so-called video-on-demand (as Oracle found when it ran a pilot with British Telecom), wrong about network computers replacing PCs (or at least, there's no evidence yet), and wrong about several other things - though we might have to revise that view in 10 years and say he was right but too early." looks like history has proven that he was right about all of these things!
- Chaebixi 10y ago
  > Are you aware that the name "Oracle" comes from the original CIA contract? I'm not saying that companies should shun the CIA, so that's irrelevant. The distinction I was making was between providing generic products which can be used to implement a policy and products specifically designed to that policy's business requirements. My understanding is Palantir produces the later, and if the policy in question is problematic then they are more culpable than if they developed something generic. Also, your link doesn't really support your characterization that Oracle Database was developed for the CIA: > Ampex was developing a giant database for the CIA, and Ellison was assigned to the project, along with Bob Miner and Ed Oates. The CIA's codename for the project was Oracle. The project was something of a disaster, but it led eventually to the formation of Oracle Corporation and its current hugely successful range of databases. If you pay attention, it says Ampex was the company with the CIA contract, and that project inspired Ellison to found Oracle.

JoshTriplett 10y ago

> As far as I know, Cisco doesn't sell products like "gigabit mass-deporation cloud router 2239." https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/ciscos-latest-attempt-dodge-responsibility-facilitating-human-rights-abuses-export https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/ciscos-latest-attempt-...

ng12 10y ago

Assuming ICE is operating legally, what's the difference? Cisco assumes ICE is using their routers for legal purposes. Same with Oracle or SAP or IBM. At the point at which we're witch-hunting tech companies for their involvement it's already way too late.

tptacek 10y ago
The first part of this comment is in fact what I'm saying. The second part, where you call this "witch hunting", I don't agree with. I think our profession is way, way too detached from the consequences of the applications of our work. Nobody bats an eyelash when doctors refuse to help with executions or torture, or pharma companies resist selling execution drug cocktails. But for some reason technologists are just fine selling the technical building blocks of a surveillance and mass deportation system. That's not right; it's a sign of the diminished professionalism of our field versus other professions, and it does need to change.
- ng12 10y ago
  It sounds great in theory but it's so divorced from reality I can't help but feeling anger at Palantir is misdirected. If Palantir refused the contract ICE would walk down the street and offer it to IBM/SAP/Northrop/Raytheon etc. If by some miracle they all refused it remember most three letter agencies have very skilled in-house teams. All of this is just distracting from the real issues at hand.
  - et-al 10y ago
    > If Palantir refused the contract ICE would walk down the street and offer it to IBM/SAP/Northrop/Raytheon etc. What what we debating here? ICE's conduct or Palantir being an enabler? Because if we're talking about Palantir, "someone else would have done it" is not a good excuse.
    - ng12 10y ago
      I'm saying worry about ICE's conduct, worrying about Palantir is unproductive. ICE's ability to build a database is not the limiting factor.
      - nobodyorother 10y ago
        Worrying about both is appropriate: in both cases, folks are acting like amoral jerks, mentally divorcing their actions from the amount of suffering they directly or indirectly cause. I think the long term question is: how can we make these choices less okay and less profitable?
      - et-al 10y ago
        Though it's easier to attract bright and hopefuls to work for Palantir than ICE, right? And it's easier for these employees to excuse their actions with an "I didn't know my efforts would end up being used for that purpose", or "I just wanted to work on interesting problems".
      - sedachv 10y ago
        > I'm saying worry about ICE's conduct, worrying about Palantir is unproductive. How so? Exposing and holding people and companies accountable for wrong behavior does not stop anyone from trying to change the government policies that encourage the wrong behavior. The added media exposure probably helps, especially with people that are interested in the person/company but are not aware of the government policies and their impact.

gumby 10y ago

>> if you're angry at Palantir for assisting mass deportation, you should be equally angry at Oracle > Isn't Palantir's assistance clearer and more direct? Are you aware that the name "Oracle" comes from the original CIA contract? (crappy reference I found via wikipedia in case you didn't realise this, but it's not a secret part of company history: https://www.theguardian.com/g2/story/0,3604,215072,00.html https://www.theguardian.com/g2/story/0,3604,215072,00.html )

hkmurakami 10y ago
fascinating article: "Ellison was wrong about the success of massively parallel processing computers (though he invested his own money in the idea), wrong about the success of so-called video-on-demand (as Oracle found when it ran a pilot with British Telecom), wrong about network computers replacing PCs (or at least, there's no evidence yet), and wrong about several other things - though we might have to revise that view in 10 years and say he was right but too early." looks like history has proven that he was right about all of these things!
Chaebixi 10y ago
> Are you aware that the name "Oracle" comes from the original CIA contract? I'm not saying that companies should shun the CIA, so that's irrelevant. The distinction I was making was between providing generic products which can be used to implement a policy and products specifically designed to that policy's business requirements. My understanding is Palantir produces the later, and if the policy in question is problematic then they are more culpable than if they developed something generic. Also, your link doesn't really support your characterization that Oracle Database was developed for the CIA: > Ampex was developing a giant database for the CIA, and Ellison was assigned to the project, along with Bob Miner and Ed Oates. The CIA's codename for the project was Oracle. The project was something of a disaster, but it led eventually to the formation of Oracle Corporation and its current hugely successful range of databases. If you pay attention, it says Ampex was the company with the CIA contract, and that project inspired Ellison to found Oracle.