7 ms·

What motivates extremely talented tech workers to devote their limited working years to making the world a worse place to live in?

meesles 7y ago
$
- confounded 7y ago
  Surprisingly, at least for the Bay Area, the money doesn’t even seem to be that good: https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Palantir,Google,Facebook&track=Software%20Engineer https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Palantir,Google,Facebook&tra...
baobrain 7y ago
$, like someone else has said, but I also would guess that many of the engineers do not have a clear idea of the overarching functionality of the application. I'm sure internal communication about the product is extremely positive, with phrases like "improved law enforcement accuracy by XX%, decreased customer costs and time by YY," so some may truly believe they are doing something that everyone would agree is good.
- afutd 7y ago
  Somehow I have a feeling that nearly all the engineers working on it have a clearer idea of the overarching function of the application than you do.
zeropnc 7y ago
Believe it or not, contrary to judeo-christian Western ideals, not everything is morally black and white.
sansnomme 7y ago
Is the work-life balance at Palantir better? Read on HN that defence companies have much better pacing.
- pm90 7y ago
  In general, yes, defense contractors are better. But they also have a old school thinking about compensation and equity, so it’s a trade off. Not sure about Palantir specifically though.
- nosequel 7y ago
  Most defense contracts require 40-hour work weeks. A company can't ask you to work more than 40 hours typically or be in breach of contract (being unfair to the competition who bid on the contract). So yes, when I worked on DoD contracts I was in at 7am, out at 3:45pm.
_iyig 7y ago
What leads well-off Americans, whose safety and comfort is guaranteed by the constant efforts of law enforcement, to conclude that legal efforts to make law enforcement more efficient would make the world a worse place?
- fromthestart 7y ago
  An understanding of the inevitability of abuse of unchecked power.
- imglorp 7y ago
  Paying attention to world history, for one. For another, I've personally seen my work get turned from a human safety product in one market into a direct instrument of human oppression in another market. Lots of tech is just a tool, which can be used for good or evil. The thing is, once good people see what is possible, it provides them an easy route to doing evil which they might not have had before.
  - _iyig 7y ago
    I'm sorry to hear about your personal experience; I've been in a similar situation myself, related to voice assistant technology. However, I don't think either of our experiences necessarily imply that Palantir is evil. For example: Typewriters can be turned to evil. IBM showed this to the world with their WWII-era Nazi collaboration. That doesn't mean the world should abandon typewriters, or that no self-respecting engineer should work on typewriters, or that they would be necessarily used for evil by the law-enforcement arm of a democratic society. Should police agencies collect and store real-time location data for every private car? Probably not. I'd support legislation to restrict such practices. Should Palantir help police officers sort and present the data they collect, in general including not only LPR data but also criminal records, known associates, and vehicle information? I'd say yes.
    - anigbrowl 7y ago
      Typewriters can be turned to evil. IBM showed this to the world with their WWII-era Nazi collaboration. That doesn't mean the world should abandon typewriters, or that no self-respecting engineer should work on typewriters, or that they would be necessarily used for evil by the law-enforcement arm of a democratic society. IBM's relationship with the Third Reich was not based on the mere supply of typewriters; such a suggestion reduces your credibility on this topic to zero. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust
zarathustraa 7y ago
It's making it worse until something bad happens to someone you value. If Obama's daughters (or Trump's if you are on the other side) were killed in some horrific racist incident, wouldn't you approve the usage of such software if it was the only hope of getting the perpetrator? Or would you say "as much as I am saddened, I cannot approve such massive invasion of privacy".
- _iyig 7y ago
  Are you alleging that Palantir enables or encourages "horrific racist incidents"? Could you be more specific? EDIT: I see what you mean. I had mistaken the meaning of OP. Please ignore this comment.
  - pm90 7y ago
    I think the reference here is to the problem of fatal shooting of minorities by police in the US. The OP is attempting to draw attention to the problem by an exaggerated situation in which the former first daughters are involved in such an incodent.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - daveFNbuck 7y ago
    They're saying the opposite. They're saying that Palantir is helping catch violent racists after they commit crimes.
- chance_state 7y ago
  >If Obama's daughters (or Trump's if you are on the other side) were killed in some horrific racist incident, wouldn't you approve the usage of such software if it was the only hope of getting the perpetrator? Or would you say "as much as I am saddened, I cannot approve such massive invasion of privacy". The latter, every time. The nature of principles is that they do not change with changing circumstances. I find your example extremely unpersuasive.
dbuder 7y ago
They think they are on the good guys' side.
atemerev 7y ago
Why a worse place? In this particular example, Palantir is used by the cops to run investigations; it is just a more convenient user interface and analytical engine to already existing data sources. I don’t see anything particularly unethical here.
- avmich 7y ago
  > just a more convenient user interface This. A difference between a rock in a sling and a nuclear bomb can, hyperbolically, viewed as a better UI for rather similar goal. Does it explain the things? Do you see how quantitative differences become qualitative?
leesec 7y ago
Would you rather tech companies not be trying to help law enforcement or our military, and just leave them to their own devices? I have my answer, but I don't think it's nearly this black and white. Palantir probably does a lot of good, just like all the big tech companies, even though it's the bad stuff that mostly makes the news.
- chance_state 7y ago
  > Would you rather tech companies not be trying to help law enforcement or our military, and just leave them to their own devices? Yes, I'd rather not aid law enforcement in spreading disinformation and targeting journalists, for example [1]. Though I do agree that it's not as cut and dry as "Palantir is evil". [1] https://www.thetechherald.com/articles/Data-intelligence-firms-proposed-a-systematic-attack-against-WikiLeaks/12751/ https://www.thetechherald.com/articles/Data-intelligence-fir...
TrueDuality 7y ago
I almost guarantee that these engineers have a very different value set than you. They could possibly see this as granting law enforcement legitimate and authorized access to collect evidence needed to prosecute real criminals. In their minds abuses of the technology they make is likely the illegal part not the existence of their tool itself. Most of the responses I'm seeing here are about money and while that is probably a factor at some level, I like to believe that people need to have a lot of pressure put on them by society for other reasons to give up their personal morals in exchange for money. "No one is the villain in their own story".
- chance_state 7y ago
  I asked the question in earnest, so I appreciate your reply. I think you're probably right.
- 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
  I will add to this. If you look at us biologically speaking, we are herding creatures. That means the majority will go along with what the leaders want. While the Milgram experiment was skewed, the reality is most people will shock you to death just because an authority told them so. And if you ask them at the end if what they did was right, they will say yes, or they wouldn't have done it. Being a decent of German Jews, I normally think: "Who of the people that I know wouldn't turn me in." The sad reality: very few. It's by design. Herds don't work when everyone is trying to go their own way. There will always be individuals who eschew herd. Biologically, they generally die, but a few find new environments or start their own new herds. Of course the herd problem then starts over.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- singron 7y ago
  So far every job orientation I've done has been 10% information useful for doing the job and 90% making me feel good about the job. You probably didn't take the job if you didn't feel at least a little good about it. If you don't feel good about the job anymore, then you probably quit. This pattern makes sure that the organization is mostly full of people that support it. Most of your feelings aren't rational conclusions based on sound analytical reasoning, and if your day-to-day is just making widgets for other widgets, you probably aren't often forced to update them.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
49531 7y ago
I mean, how many of us work at Microsoft or Amazon? Companies currently in a bidding war to build the "War Cloud".
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ataturk 7y ago
Statism, the replacement of religion by the state. Also, some people have a character flaw in that they want to control other people and they genuinely believe they know what is in everyone else's best interest. Armed with that mindset, any number of atrocious acts are possible.
subjectsigma 7y ago
I'm sure if you had a shred of empathy in your whole body, you could think for about five seconds and realize that maybe not everyone else had the same system of values as you.

meesles 7y ago

confounded 7y ago
Surprisingly, at least for the Bay Area, the money doesn’t even seem to be that good: https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Palantir,Google,Facebook&track=Software%20Engineer https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Palantir,Google,Facebook&tra...

baobrain 7y ago

$, like someone else has said, but I also would guess that many of the engineers do not have a clear idea of the overarching functionality of the application. I'm sure internal communication about the product is extremely positive, with phrases like "improved law enforcement accuracy by XX%, decreased customer costs and time by YY," so some may truly believe they are doing something that everyone would agree is good.

afutd 7y ago
Somehow I have a feeling that nearly all the engineers working on it have a clearer idea of the overarching function of the application than you do.

zeropnc 7y ago

Believe it or not, contrary to judeo-christian Western ideals, not everything is morally black and white.

sansnomme 7y ago

Is the work-life balance at Palantir better? Read on HN that defence companies have much better pacing.

pm90 7y ago
In general, yes, defense contractors are better. But they also have a old school thinking about compensation and equity, so it’s a trade off. Not sure about Palantir specifically though.
nosequel 7y ago
Most defense contracts require 40-hour work weeks. A company can't ask you to work more than 40 hours typically or be in breach of contract (being unfair to the competition who bid on the contract). So yes, when I worked on DoD contracts I was in at 7am, out at 3:45pm.

_iyig 7y ago

What leads well-off Americans, whose safety and comfort is guaranteed by the constant efforts of law enforcement, to conclude that legal efforts to make law enforcement more efficient would make the world a worse place?

fromthestart 7y ago
An understanding of the inevitability of abuse of unchecked power.
imglorp 7y ago
Paying attention to world history, for one. For another, I've personally seen my work get turned from a human safety product in one market into a direct instrument of human oppression in another market. Lots of tech is just a tool, which can be used for good or evil. The thing is, once good people see what is possible, it provides them an easy route to doing evil which they might not have had before.
- _iyig 7y ago
  I'm sorry to hear about your personal experience; I've been in a similar situation myself, related to voice assistant technology. However, I don't think either of our experiences necessarily imply that Palantir is evil. For example: Typewriters can be turned to evil. IBM showed this to the world with their WWII-era Nazi collaboration. That doesn't mean the world should abandon typewriters, or that no self-respecting engineer should work on typewriters, or that they would be necessarily used for evil by the law-enforcement arm of a democratic society. Should police agencies collect and store real-time location data for every private car? Probably not. I'd support legislation to restrict such practices. Should Palantir help police officers sort and present the data they collect, in general including not only LPR data but also criminal records, known associates, and vehicle information? I'd say yes.
  - anigbrowl 7y ago
    Typewriters can be turned to evil. IBM showed this to the world with their WWII-era Nazi collaboration. That doesn't mean the world should abandon typewriters, or that no self-respecting engineer should work on typewriters, or that they would be necessarily used for evil by the law-enforcement arm of a democratic society. IBM's relationship with the Third Reich was not based on the mere supply of typewriters; such a suggestion reduces your credibility on this topic to zero. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

zarathustraa 7y ago

It's making it worse until something bad happens to someone you value. If Obama's daughters (or Trump's if you are on the other side) were killed in some horrific racist incident, wouldn't you approve the usage of such software if it was the only hope of getting the perpetrator? Or would you say "as much as I am saddened, I cannot approve such massive invasion of privacy".

_iyig 7y ago
Are you alleging that Palantir enables or encourages "horrific racist incidents"? Could you be more specific? EDIT: I see what you mean. I had mistaken the meaning of OP. Please ignore this comment.
- pm90 7y ago
  I think the reference here is to the problem of fatal shooting of minorities by police in the US. The OP is attempting to draw attention to the problem by an exaggerated situation in which the former first daughters are involved in such an incodent.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- daveFNbuck 7y ago
  They're saying the opposite. They're saying that Palantir is helping catch violent racists after they commit crimes.
chance_state 7y ago
>If Obama's daughters (or Trump's if you are on the other side) were killed in some horrific racist incident, wouldn't you approve the usage of such software if it was the only hope of getting the perpetrator? Or would you say "as much as I am saddened, I cannot approve such massive invasion of privacy". The latter, every time. The nature of principles is that they do not change with changing circumstances. I find your example extremely unpersuasive.

dbuder 7y ago

They think they are on the good guys' side.

atemerev 7y ago

Why a worse place? In this particular example, Palantir is used by the cops to run investigations; it is just a more convenient user interface and analytical engine to already existing data sources. I don’t see anything particularly unethical here.

avmich 7y ago
> just a more convenient user interface This. A difference between a rock in a sling and a nuclear bomb can, hyperbolically, viewed as a better UI for rather similar goal. Does it explain the things? Do you see how quantitative differences become qualitative?

leesec 7y ago

Would you rather tech companies not be trying to help law enforcement or our military, and just leave them to their own devices? I have my answer, but I don't think it's nearly this black and white. Palantir probably does a lot of good, just like all the big tech companies, even though it's the bad stuff that mostly makes the news.

chance_state 7y ago
> Would you rather tech companies not be trying to help law enforcement or our military, and just leave them to their own devices? Yes, I'd rather not aid law enforcement in spreading disinformation and targeting journalists, for example [1]. Though I do agree that it's not as cut and dry as "Palantir is evil". [1] https://www.thetechherald.com/articles/Data-intelligence-firms-proposed-a-systematic-attack-against-WikiLeaks/12751/ https://www.thetechherald.com/articles/Data-intelligence-fir...

TrueDuality 7y ago

I almost guarantee that these engineers have a very different value set than you. They could possibly see this as granting law enforcement legitimate and authorized access to collect evidence needed to prosecute real criminals. In their minds abuses of the technology they make is likely the illegal part not the existence of their tool itself. Most of the responses I'm seeing here are about money and while that is probably a factor at some level, I like to believe that people need to have a lot of pressure put on them by society for other reasons to give up their personal morals in exchange for money. "No one is the villain in their own story".

chance_state 7y ago
I asked the question in earnest, so I appreciate your reply. I think you're probably right.
4ntonius8lock 7y ago
I will add to this. If you look at us biologically speaking, we are herding creatures. That means the majority will go along with what the leaders want. While the Milgram experiment was skewed, the reality is most people will shock you to death just because an authority told them so. And if you ask them at the end if what they did was right, they will say yes, or they wouldn't have done it. Being a decent of German Jews, I normally think: "Who of the people that I know wouldn't turn me in." The sad reality: very few. It's by design. Herds don't work when everyone is trying to go their own way. There will always be individuals who eschew herd. Biologically, they generally die, but a few find new environments or start their own new herds. Of course the herd problem then starts over.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
singron 7y ago
So far every job orientation I've done has been 10% information useful for doing the job and 90% making me feel good about the job. You probably didn't take the job if you didn't feel at least a little good about it. If you don't feel good about the job anymore, then you probably quit. This pattern makes sure that the organization is mostly full of people that support it. Most of your feelings aren't rational conclusions based on sound analytical reasoning, and if your day-to-day is just making widgets for other widgets, you probably aren't often forced to update them.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

49531 7y ago

I mean, how many of us work at Microsoft or Amazon? Companies currently in a bidding war to build the "War Cloud".

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

ataturk 7y ago

Statism, the replacement of religion by the state. Also, some people have a character flaw in that they want to control other people and they genuinely believe they know what is in everyone else's best interest. Armed with that mindset, any number of atrocious acts are possible.

subjectsigma 7y ago

I'm sure if you had a shred of empathy in your whole body, you could think for about five seconds and realize that maybe not everyone else had the same system of values as you.