6 ms·

Palantir doesn't collect any data. Palantir builds software tools to browse and analyze data. The government already has that data, and that data stays with the

Palantir doesn't collect any data. Palantir builds software tools to browse and analyze data. The government already has that data, and that data stays with the government not Palantir.

uniqueid 6y ago
Close enough. I have ample pique to spread among multiple parties who have a hand in this.
- chrstphrknwtn 6y ago
  Exactly. Microsoft have a lot to answer for with their ‘tools’ for data analysis. Every single hedge fund was using Excel leading up to the 2008 financial crisis. It’s sickening. /s
  - uniqueid 6y ago
    Has MS worked with government to make it easier to call up records of my hemorrhoids or eczema? If so, I'll reserve some hate for MS, too. With billions of people on this planet, some terrorist kingpin and I might have the same birthmark on our ankle. Thanks to the work Palantir does, that could result in law enforcement swatting me, or worse. That is sickening.
- michannne 6y ago
  Huh? They build a tool. If it's not Palantir then it'll be someone else, likely the NSA. I'd be surprised if they aren't already investigating ways to analyze without Palantir's help. Your scorn is misguided
  - uniqueid 6y ago
    Not misguided. It's not like Palantir is selling hamburgers to millions of faceless individuals. They themselves want to take the responsibility for their consulting for government agencies. I assign responsibility to them, too. Can you think of examples of amoral company decisions from history? I can... "Our bank just facilitated the deposit of enormous quantities of paper money. We didn't do the drug-smuggling." "Our company simply supplied The Republic of ___ with ammunition. That was our only involvement." "The government needed to sort incoming prisoners by religion. We merely won the bid to do the data-processing." Palantir's arguments are more annoying, though, since the company management is not just amoral, but proud of itself.
    - michannne 6y ago
      I don't see the point of any of those examples. You don't blame the bank when fraud happens through it's accounts unless the bank knowingly let it happen, your second example is a false equivalence as selling ammo to another country is definitely grounds for treason if we are at war with that country, not to mention the regulation surrounding the sale, and the third example is silly - if the government needed to discriminate against you, they don't need Palantir to do that, so why would you blame Palantir if they choose to get paid for something that will inevitably get done? My point is you should be directing your criticism to government data collection practices that enable them to have data to process, once that 1st step is achieved, it doesn't matter who achieves step 2, 3, 4 or beyond, so your focus on Palantir is fleeting at best.
      - uniqueid 6y ago
        > My point is you should be directing your criticism to government data collection practices I agree. It's not a binary choice, though: if I rob a bank, and you drive the getaway car, I'm clearly guilty, but you share some responsibility. The point is that there is enough culpability to go around. Re: my examples (in the same order)... HSBC https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hsbc-usa-idUSKBN1E50YA https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hsbc-usa-idUSKBN1E50YA EDO MBM Technology ltd https://www.undocs.org/en/S/2018/594 https://www.undocs.org/en/S/2018/594 IBM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust It's a reasonable position to complain about a company who knowingly enables bad behaviour of a third party, even if they don't directly carry it out.
        michannne 6y ago
        It still doesn't make any sense. Tell me: is the bus driver culpable if the murderer took the bus to get away from the scene of the crime?
        uniqueid 6y ago
        In many cases: yes. It depends on whether the driver aids the criminal knowingly (eg: overheard "To my ex-husband's, driver! Can't wait to shoot him in the face"), and of the driver's own free will (eg: did not overhear "if you don't take me, I'll shoot you, too!")
bsder 6y ago
> Palantir builds software tools to browse and analyze data. Collecting is bad and should be outlawed, but analyzing is the bigger threat. Vast amounts of data in aggregate are useless. It's like a school of fish, the probability of any single one being targeted is difficult. When you start applying tools that can identify the fish, now its a problem.
- manfredo 6y ago
  What exactly do you mean data collecting is bad and should be outlawed? Should banks no longer report financial transactions over $3,000? Should purchases of schedule II drugs no longer be recorded? Again, I'm not sure if you understand what it is Palantir does. The fish is already identified: the government knows your name, your address, etc. The challenge lies not in identifying the fish, but identifying which fish are doing bad things. To take a concrete example: Palantir was used to identify fraudulent pharmacies (aka "Pill Mills") and drug dealers using said pharmacies. Previously, analysts would sort purchases of certain classes of drugs by amount, and investigate from there. Drug dealers adapted by making multiple, smaller purchases none of which were large enough to attract the attention from analysts. Using Palantir, analysts were able to identify people purchasing the same drugs on the same day at different pharmacies. That is suspicious. In addition to that, Palantir let them plot these purchases on a map, and link to a street view of the address. Clear patterns emerged, where dealers would purchase moderate quantities of drugs along a stretch of highway, often from pharmacies that did not have any external signage indicated that the building was a pharmacy. The government's ability to enforce laws is enhanced, but the data collected remains unchanged.

Palantir doesn't collect any data. Palantir builds software tools to browse and analyze data. The government already has that data, and that data stays with the government not Palantir.

uniqueid 6y ago

Close enough. I have ample pique to spread among multiple parties who have a hand in this.

chrstphrknwtn 6y ago
Exactly. Microsoft have a lot to answer for with their ‘tools’ for data analysis. Every single hedge fund was using Excel leading up to the 2008 financial crisis. It’s sickening. /s
- uniqueid 6y ago
  Has MS worked with government to make it easier to call up records of my hemorrhoids or eczema? If so, I'll reserve some hate for MS, too. With billions of people on this planet, some terrorist kingpin and I might have the same birthmark on our ankle. Thanks to the work Palantir does, that could result in law enforcement swatting me, or worse. That is sickening.
michannne 6y ago
Huh? They build a tool. If it's not Palantir then it'll be someone else, likely the NSA. I'd be surprised if they aren't already investigating ways to analyze without Palantir's help. Your scorn is misguided
- uniqueid 6y ago
  Not misguided. It's not like Palantir is selling hamburgers to millions of faceless individuals. They themselves want to take the responsibility for their consulting for government agencies. I assign responsibility to them, too. Can you think of examples of amoral company decisions from history? I can... "Our bank just facilitated the deposit of enormous quantities of paper money. We didn't do the drug-smuggling." "Our company simply supplied The Republic of ___ with ammunition. That was our only involvement." "The government needed to sort incoming prisoners by religion. We merely won the bid to do the data-processing." Palantir's arguments are more annoying, though, since the company management is not just amoral, but proud of itself.
  - michannne 6y ago
    I don't see the point of any of those examples. You don't blame the bank when fraud happens through it's accounts unless the bank knowingly let it happen, your second example is a false equivalence as selling ammo to another country is definitely grounds for treason if we are at war with that country, not to mention the regulation surrounding the sale, and the third example is silly - if the government needed to discriminate against you, they don't need Palantir to do that, so why would you blame Palantir if they choose to get paid for something that will inevitably get done? My point is you should be directing your criticism to government data collection practices that enable them to have data to process, once that 1st step is achieved, it doesn't matter who achieves step 2, 3, 4 or beyond, so your focus on Palantir is fleeting at best.
    - uniqueid 6y ago
      > My point is you should be directing your criticism to government data collection practices I agree. It's not a binary choice, though: if I rob a bank, and you drive the getaway car, I'm clearly guilty, but you share some responsibility. The point is that there is enough culpability to go around. Re: my examples (in the same order)... HSBC https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hsbc-usa-idUSKBN1E50YA https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hsbc-usa-idUSKBN1E50YA EDO MBM Technology ltd https://www.undocs.org/en/S/2018/594 https://www.undocs.org/en/S/2018/594 IBM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust It's a reasonable position to complain about a company who knowingly enables bad behaviour of a third party, even if they don't directly carry it out.
      - michannne 6y ago
        It still doesn't make any sense. Tell me: is the bus driver culpable if the murderer took the bus to get away from the scene of the crime?
        uniqueid 6y ago
        In many cases: yes. It depends on whether the driver aids the criminal knowingly (eg: overheard "To my ex-husband's, driver! Can't wait to shoot him in the face"), and of the driver's own free will (eg: did not overhear "if you don't take me, I'll shoot you, too!")

bsder 6y ago

> Palantir builds software tools to browse and analyze data. Collecting is bad and should be outlawed, but analyzing is the bigger threat. Vast amounts of data in aggregate are useless. It's like a school of fish, the probability of any single one being targeted is difficult. When you start applying tools that can identify the fish, now its a problem.

manfredo 6y ago
What exactly do you mean data collecting is bad and should be outlawed? Should banks no longer report financial transactions over $3,000? Should purchases of schedule II drugs no longer be recorded? Again, I'm not sure if you understand what it is Palantir does. The fish is already identified: the government knows your name, your address, etc. The challenge lies not in identifying the fish, but identifying which fish are doing bad things. To take a concrete example: Palantir was used to identify fraudulent pharmacies (aka "Pill Mills") and drug dealers using said pharmacies. Previously, analysts would sort purchases of certain classes of drugs by amount, and investigate from there. Drug dealers adapted by making multiple, smaller purchases none of which were large enough to attract the attention from analysts. Using Palantir, analysts were able to identify people purchasing the same drugs on the same day at different pharmacies. That is suspicious. In addition to that, Palantir let them plot these purchases on a map, and link to a street view of the address. Clear patterns emerged, where dealers would purchase moderate quantities of drugs along a stretch of highway, often from pharmacies that did not have any external signage indicated that the building was a pharmacy. The government's ability to enforce laws is enhanced, but the data collected remains unchanged.