5 ms·

It's not an everyday platform. It was created to compete with/replace the terrible systems FBI and others have spent billions on without results. It's used by l

It's not an everyday platform. It was created to compete with/replace the terrible systems FBI and others have spent billions on without results. It's used by large corporations, nonprofits and domestic and foreign governments to make sense of intelligence. It's like Google for intelligence... can be used to find human traffickers, LAPD infiltrating political groups or other govts assassinating journalists. https://www.buzzfeed.com/nitashatiku/protest-palantir-muslim-registry https://www.buzzfeed.com/nitashatiku/protest-palantir-muslim... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-11-22/palantir-the-war-on-terrors-secret-weapon https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-11-22/palantir-...

riffraff 10y ago
palantir might be "Google for Intelligence", but judging by previous discussions on HN it looks like it's actually "Accenture for Intelligence". I.e. they don't seem to have scary innovative technology as much as a horde of people doing integration work (and some good reusable tools) See discussions from 1 year ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11646587 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11646587 And 2 years ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8872054 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8872054 Google for Intelligence is what they have been selling, but it's unclear they have actually delivered.
- demonshalo 10y ago
  Google's bet is that technology will replace humans. Palantir's bet is that technology works best when combined with human intuition. So yes, they do horde a lot of people but the idea is to bet on the intersection between man and machine rather than trying to replace one with the other!
- praneshp 10y ago
  Palantir might not be "Google for Intelligence", but there is some unfavorable bias on HN against them, so the "Accenture for Intelligence" nickname might stem from wanting to be condescending.
  - user5994461 10y ago
    Accenture is much more accurate than Google. Palantir and Accenture are consulting company. They make money by reselling meat by the hours, as we say in business. They don't profit from what is created at the client. They profit more by buying cheaper meat (graduates) and reselling with higher margin to clients. Google is a software company. It makes money on the software service they provide. They get the returns for everything you do. They get more money by you making "better" software infrastructure and services.
    - Anderkent 10y ago
      > They don't profit from what is created at the client Palantir does indirectly profit from what's created at the client, by reselling the code created at one client to other clients later.
      - user5994461 10y ago
        Software companies benefit from code re-use and quality by reselling the same software to every client, then getting all the returns. Consulting companies don't. The reason they are called in the first place is to make highly customized software. Most consulting companies will pretend to re-use things across clients. In practise however, it cannot be achieved because it's going against their business model (yet they'll still pretend they do).
        Anderkent 10y ago
        Consulting companies very often do not own the software they build at a clients, and so can't really reuse it. That's not what Palantir does. I'm not sure what you think the business model is that would go against code reuse across sites. If you can afford to negotiate for ownership of what you build at a client site, why wouldn't you reuse things that are common? Like, the reuse thing isn't binary. There's a whole spectrum between 'give everyone exactly the same thing', and 'give ever y single client something built for them from scratch'. And if you can build something from scratch at one client site, take half of that to another client, take 3/4 of that to yet another, and eventually end up only having to build 2-3% of the thing at every place, that's building a product while already getting paid for it.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

riffraff 10y ago

palantir might be "Google for Intelligence", but judging by previous discussions on HN it looks like it's actually "Accenture for Intelligence". I.e. they don't seem to have scary innovative technology as much as a horde of people doing integration work (and some good reusable tools) See discussions from 1 year ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11646587 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11646587 And 2 years ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8872054 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8872054 Google for Intelligence is what they have been selling, but it's unclear they have actually delivered.

demonshalo 10y ago
Google's bet is that technology will replace humans. Palantir's bet is that technology works best when combined with human intuition. So yes, they do horde a lot of people but the idea is to bet on the intersection between man and machine rather than trying to replace one with the other!
praneshp 10y ago
Palantir might not be "Google for Intelligence", but there is some unfavorable bias on HN against them, so the "Accenture for Intelligence" nickname might stem from wanting to be condescending.
- user5994461 10y ago
  Accenture is much more accurate than Google. Palantir and Accenture are consulting company. They make money by reselling meat by the hours, as we say in business. They don't profit from what is created at the client. They profit more by buying cheaper meat (graduates) and reselling with higher margin to clients. Google is a software company. It makes money on the software service they provide. They get the returns for everything you do. They get more money by you making "better" software infrastructure and services.
  - Anderkent 10y ago
    > They don't profit from what is created at the client Palantir does indirectly profit from what's created at the client, by reselling the code created at one client to other clients later.
    - user5994461 10y ago
      Software companies benefit from code re-use and quality by reselling the same software to every client, then getting all the returns. Consulting companies don't. The reason they are called in the first place is to make highly customized software. Most consulting companies will pretend to re-use things across clients. In practise however, it cannot be achieved because it's going against their business model (yet they'll still pretend they do).
      - Anderkent 10y ago
        Consulting companies very often do not own the software they build at a clients, and so can't really reuse it. That's not what Palantir does. I'm not sure what you think the business model is that would go against code reuse across sites. If you can afford to negotiate for ownership of what you build at a client site, why wouldn't you reuse things that are common? Like, the reuse thing isn't binary. There's a whole spectrum between 'give everyone exactly the same thing', and 'give ever y single client something built for them from scratch'. And if you can build something from scratch at one client site, take half of that to another client, take 3/4 of that to yet another, and eventually end up only having to build 2-3% of the thing at every place, that's building a product while already getting paid for it.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]