3 ms·

TBF - NHS barely has access to NHS data, so good luck with that.

lmeyerov 6y ago
Yeah the bigger issue is similar to US Health and Human Services, where the basic consulting model was to take ownership of the core data pipelines & tools and ultimately own the org's data future. We basically don't engage with any org where palantir bought out the decision making. IMO most CIO/CTOs are losing the long-term relevance of their parents org if they give away their data future. Not just a problem with Palantir; the biggest consulting orgs all lobby hard to displace internal ownership with themselves. Nowadays often a revolving door. Where NHS is on that journey, no idea.
- nojito 6y ago
  US health data is very transparent and has been publicly available for years.
  - lmeyerov 6y ago
    Some of it is, but unfortunately, not what I'm talking about. I'm less worried about spying (funny enough, I bet Palantir has better data privacy than most orgs) and FOIAs and more about IT collapse based on the digital transformation strategy lobbying. US gov data pipelines are often managed by big private contractors, and in cases like Palantir, build them as well. The result is lock-in that's way worse than say Oracle DB's: both the DB + SW + projects end up owned by the contractor. Ex: a gov team once had to sue Palantir for the ability to get interop across some data/projects. Having been involved in seeing how sw gets selected, once a big consulting firm (and worse, one with custom sw) gets in, they grow and its hard to do anything that's not them. They bring in quick digital transform, but with the side-effect of slowly suffocating the org.
    - nojito 6y ago
      Most if not all of the useful data is publicly available. It’s just painful to collect, organize, and make use out of. Which is why there are always startups and companies like palantir that come along once in a while before the us realizes they are a waste and moves on.
      - lmeyerov 6y ago
        That's not true at all: - data: most data for anything at the level for fraud investigations isn't open, open is very coarse. Operational is generally closed. - tools: these orgs then own the tools ecosystems, which further completes practical low-level layers of the lockin I'm not sure why the effort to misrepresent, or maybe you come from a special use case..

Yeah the bigger issue is similar to US Health and Human Services, where the basic consulting model was to take ownership of the core data pipelines & tools and ultimately own the org's data future. We basically don't engage with any org where palantir bought out the decision making. IMO most CIO/CTOs are losing the long-term relevance of their parents org if they give away their data future. Not just a problem with Palantir; the biggest consulting orgs all lobby hard to displace internal ownership with themselves. Nowadays often a revolving door. Where NHS is on that journey, no idea.

nojito 6y ago
US health data is very transparent and has been publicly available for years.
- lmeyerov 6y ago
  Some of it is, but unfortunately, not what I'm talking about. I'm less worried about spying (funny enough, I bet Palantir has better data privacy than most orgs) and FOIAs and more about IT collapse based on the digital transformation strategy lobbying. US gov data pipelines are often managed by big private contractors, and in cases like Palantir, build them as well. The result is lock-in that's way worse than say Oracle DB's: both the DB + SW + projects end up owned by the contractor. Ex: a gov team once had to sue Palantir for the ability to get interop across some data/projects. Having been involved in seeing how sw gets selected, once a big consulting firm (and worse, one with custom sw) gets in, they grow and its hard to do anything that's not them. They bring in quick digital transform, but with the side-effect of slowly suffocating the org.
  - nojito 6y ago
    Most if not all of the useful data is publicly available. It’s just painful to collect, organize, and make use out of. Which is why there are always startups and companies like palantir that come along once in a while before the us realizes they are a waste and moves on.
    - lmeyerov 6y ago
      That's not true at all: - data: most data for anything at the level for fraud investigations isn't open, open is very coarse. Operational is generally closed. - tools: these orgs then own the tools ecosystems, which further completes practical low-level layers of the lockin I'm not sure why the effort to misrepresent, or maybe you come from a special use case..