3 ms·
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 org
by 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 agoMost 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 agoThat'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..