8 ms·
Palantir CEO Alex Karp gives $180k to ousted hermit River Dave
- rdxm 5y agowho gives a f*** edit to add: how does this make it onto the HN feed???? seriously....a narcissist ass makes a token gesture and it lands here?..lame....
- aresant 5y agoTwitter and HN have amplified and normalized technology founders and CEOs as celebrities to the rest of us in this orbit. Who cares? (yes Dang I know it's upvoted so it's relevant haha). With Karp @ $2.1b net worth, this is akin to somebody worth $10m giving away $715.00. Or somebody worth $100,000 giving away $7.15. There is nothing notable about this story, other than Carp was probably browsing the internet, saw this "Local News Cares" tragic story and the subsequent GoFundMe and made a donation to a story that pulled on his heart strings just like the rest of us.
- paulpauper 5y agoMuch more effective pr for palintir than any ad agency
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- tclancy 5y agoIt’s the same green washing as a football club for Qatar or UAE but they can cover it by pointing to this guy as a proper libertarian. As a NH resident, I feel for the guy, but try squatting on Karps land or Theil’s if you can get to NZ and see how close to home their charity continues.
- derefr 5y agoI think many HN readers don't gloss "Palantir CEO" as "tech celebrity" but rather as "Spymaster of Evil Mercenary Spy Agency". To these people, news where the Evil Spymaster does something humanist and caring, would be surprising news, simply by being completely at odds with their biases.
- OrvalWintermute 5y agoWhat is so different between Evil Spymaster for the US Govt [1], and Evil Spymaster for every advertiser [2], and potentially other govts, and the Evil Spymaster that sells your data [3]? Perhaps the exception is that one doesn't mine on their own and merely integrates data, whereas the other 2 are actively weaponizing data against their own users? [1] https://www.palantir.com/ https://www.palantir.com/ [2] http://www.google.com/ http://www.google.com/ [3] https://www.facebook.com/ https://www.facebook.com/
- derefr 5y agoI believe the sense anti-Palantir people have is that queries against Palantir's database directly result in people being put under criminal/terrorist suspicion; and that that's kinda the whole point of their business model. Advertisers generally aren't out to kill you.
- bpodgursky 5y agoThere are a lot of other people out there with a lot of money, and Karp was the only one who did it. That's a mildly interesting fact. Now I'll slightly adjust a couple priors. Good enough for me.
- OrvalWintermute 5y agoI am happy he actually did something about it, and didn't just wear a virtue signalling shirt "Support the Homeless", or, go on bloviating about Global Warming while taking a private Jet to Davos Switzerland.
- jdavis703 5y agoYou minimize this as a $7.15 donation, but as someone with a net worth approximately in this range I don’t see the problem? If someone unsheltered asks for a fast food meal I’ll buy it. If I see a sad story from a stranger with a GoFundMe link I might donate $5 or $10. I don’t expect a news story or anything out of it. But I do like to think my small action has in some tiny way made the world a better place.
- javajosh 5y agoBut you don't get a news article about you. I think the implicit injustice here is that the public perception and appreciation of selfless giving is firmly stuck in absolute rather than relative terms. The problem of course is if people started thinking in relative terms then there would be little or no incentive for the wealthy to give anything at all. In this version of a just world, this $180k gift would be just as ignored as the $7.50 gift. The fact that this person gave non-anonymously tells me that it was about PR as much as anything else. BTW, truly blessed are the ones who give anonymously. That, to me, is the ultimate in giving, because you receive nothing, not even notoriety, in return.
- jhanschoo 5y agoFrom the news article, it seems to me there was no push for publicity on the side of Palantir or Karp. And ironically, for someone like Karp, giving anonymously might engender worse speculation if found out.
- actually_a_dog 5y agoOne difference here is that in one case, we're talking about someone who's financially independent hundreds of thousands of times over, and has enough financial resources to do real good on a fairly large scale, versus @jdavis703, who still needs to work to provide for himself. One can argue (and this is becoming a stronger argument day by day as the whole "tax the rich" sentiment grows stronger and stronger) that the CEO has a responsibility to give back to the society that allows him to exist [0]. This isn't minimizing your personal act of charity. You don't have the power to, say, make sure that every unhoused person in your city has access to shelter, or that every American has access to an affordable source of potable water, or any of the other shameful situations that exist in the richest country in the world by total GDP[1]. This is bringing the scale of the CEO's act down to something the 99.999% of us who aren't billionaires can comprehend. --- [0]: Of course, I don't mean in the literal sense of "society allows this guy to live," but more that his billionaire status owes in large part to the fact that American society is set up to allow people to become billionaires. [1]: This is to say nothing of fighting climate change, or any other, important, global issue.
- devin 5y agoWow, the ultrarich are donating their table scraps. I guess we shouldn't worry about taxing them after all. Edit to add: @rdxm -- my first thought was what you originally posted. If I could give you an upvote I would, rules or not.
- function_seven 5y agoOkay, what’s the story behind this story? How did Karp know of River Dave? What was the property dispute that resulted in the fire? Why does Lidstone have his own Facebook group of supporters? Can’t put my finger on it, this story just seems strange.
- elzbardico 5y agoyou were probably busier than the usual a few weeks ago when the story of river dave got mildly viral.
- Fezzik 5y agoThis. It was (near the) front page news of most local newspapers that all get their news from the same Reuters-like sources/each other - stories like this are always popular water-cooler topics and spread rapidly as easy smalltalk.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- claviska 5y agoHe’s resided on the river for decades, living off the land and doing his thing. He’s a local legend just a few towns away from my own. Recently, he was forced to leave and then his cabin mysteriously burned down. https://www.concordmonitor.com/After-decades-in-woods-New-Hampshire-man-forced-from-cabin-41803479 https://www.concordmonitor.com/After-decades-in-woods-New-Ha...
- ilamont 5y agoBig news in New England. Local character resembling Santa Claus squatting on some rural land in New Hampshire for close to two decades. Out-of-state owner who inherited the land in the 1960s wasn't even was aware Dave was there. Estranged from family but friendly to local paddlers on the river, some who became his champions in the dispute. Town officials said the structure he built was illegal, and told the landowner it had to be removed. River Dave said it was a hunting cabin and not subject to the same rules. Authorities cited him and he was summoned to court. He cursed all of the authorities who he said were persecuting him including the judge IIRC. He was unable or unwilling to move elsewhere. The day the story broke in the Boston Globe (and from there to national media), the place burnt down.
- DoreenMichele 5y agoI actually read about River Dave recently. I don't think I posted the story. I don't recall why. I did think about posting it. Anyway, if you don't care about the CEO angle, River Dave's story is interesting. Or was to me, fwiw.
- yellow_lead 5y agoGot a link?
- DoreenMichele 5y agoIt's not hard to google, but I probably read something relatively local with an ugly interface (which might be the reason I didn't post) and a quick scan makes me think it was roughly a story like this one: https://sentinelcolorado.com/uncategorized/river-dave-doesnt-think-he-can-go-back-to-being-a-hermit/ https://sentinelcolorado.com/uncategorized/river-dave-doesnt...
- thrower123 5y agoIf the town tax assessor hadn't caused a stink over a few hundred dollars in taxes for this shack, all of this fuss could have been avoided. The landowner wouldn't have even realized this geezer was squatting, and he would have continued in peace and tranquility for the few years he has remaining. Instead it's been a whole hoohah that's wasted a lot of time and money and energy.
- EvRev 5y agoThank you for providing the reasoning behind all this!
- make3 5y agoI don't like stories like this, that are supposed to make us feel good towards the ultra rich. This is a raindrop in an ocean of people in need. Tax the rich and it wouldn't be necessary.
- chrisseaton 5y ago> that are supposed to make us feel good Is a new story 'supposed' to make you feel anything? It's just giving you the facts.
- actually_a_dog 5y agoStories are chosen for a reason. I don't know what that reason was, in this case, but you can be certain that it benefits those in control of the printing press. It is in this sense that all journalism is propaganda of one sort or another. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
- chrisseaton 5y ago> I don't know what that reason was Right.
- actually_a_dog 5y agoSo, you get it now? This story is most certainly made to influence you in some way (i.e. make you feel something). That's the literal definition of propaganda, after all.
- chrisseaton 5y ago> So, you get it now? You said you thought it was supposed to make us feel good, then you said you don't know what it was supposed to do. Both things cannot be true at the same time, can they?
- devin 5y agoI'm excited for the Paul Graham post about "roses growing from concrete" or some equally ridiculous and juvenile claim that uses billionaires who make money off of creating dubious technology BUT WHO ALSO buy more girl scout cookies than their neighbors as some kind of proof of the value of their continued existence and deserved exaltation.
- pstuart 5y agohttp://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
- justinator 5y agoThe best satire is hard to distinguish from reality, isn't it?
- dang 5y agoPlease don't fulminate like this on HN, regardless of how you feel about "Paul Graham" or "billionaires". It degrades discussion, and we're trying for something different here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- devin 5y agoI disagree with this assessment I think, and am rather disappointed that this post was flagged. In the future (for me) it would be useful to understand exactly what is meant by "fulmination" in the site guidelines. The definition is broad and ranges from "vehement protest" to "exploding violently". I'm not trying to split hairs, but "vehement protest" is also quite vague. I think what I wrote is a pretty concise critique of the public writings of one of the site's founders and it's relevant to the way the HN set interprets articles like this (billionaire donates to soup kitchen). If you could provide some feedback on what specifically led to you flagging the post, I'd appreciate it. Thanks dang!
- dang 5y agoI didn't see a "concise critique", just internet snark and name-calling. Those things are tedious and degrade discussion, which is why the site guidelines ask commenters here to avoid them. You even used quotes to make it look like you were quoting someone when you weren't, which is a trope of degraded discussion in its own right. Thoughtful critique is welcome on HN. That requires substantive engagement with something somebody actually said. It also requires some meaningful relationship to the topic. I didn't see that here, nor any actual information. By 'fulminating' I suppose I mean the high-indignation-low-information style of internet commenting (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22high%20indignation%22%20%22low%20information%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). One thing you might find helpful for understanding what's good vs. bad to post to HN—at least I have found it helpful—is the distinction between reflexive and reflective posts: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=reflective%20reflex%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor.... Your GP comment struck me as reflexive. It basically seems to hop along a chain of reflexes like this: rich person -> rage -> other rich person -> rage. Another point I orient by is that HN threads get less interesting and valuable as they get more generic (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=generic%20discussion%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...), and especially as they get more generic+indignant. To me your GP comment seemed like a sharp move in those directions, which is always a move towards threads getting worse and more predictable. Keep in mind that the issue is not just the value of a comment individually but the expected value of the subthread it is likely to lead to: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22expected%20value%22%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor.... I hope that helps explain things a bit and isn't too much of a downer. I appreciate the question and your intention to understand. I also agree that there are reasonable critiques to be made about "billionaire donates to soup kitchen" stories (if that's what this was). But not by fulminating, and especially not on classic flamewar topics.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- pelorat 5y agoGood for River Dale but Alex Karp should be in prison and Palantir should be shut down. An enemy of the free world. Hopefully we'll see Palantir employees face prosecution if they ever dare to leave the USA.
- abrokenpipe 5y agoWhat did he do?
- voz_ 5y agoHey! I do not think this comment contributes valuably to the conversation at all. Please refrain.
- dumbfoundded 5y agoIf anything, I'm interested in learning about why they should be in jail. I'm pretty uninformed on the subject.
- okareaman 5y agoCurious, I did a search sorted by popularity on HN. Palantir appears to be an impressively evil company: Palantir worked with Cambridge Analytica on the Facebook data it acquired Palantir is using War on Terror tools to track American citizens NYPD is canceling its Palantir contract Leaked Palantir Doc Reveals Uses, Specific Functions and Key Clients U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network Britain gave Palantir access to sensitive COVID-19 patient records in £1 deal
- Barrin92 5y agoI mean everything Peter Thiel funds is basically a technology out of Minority Report combined with a name from Lord of the Rings on it At this point you can probably reverse engineer that process. Invent something that persecutes minorities in some form, go to the lotr wiki, hit the random button and apply for a loan
- 5y ago
- bifrost 5y agoHere's an unpaywalled article about what happened: https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/river-dave-grateful-fire-ravaged-home-79359990 https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/river-dave-grateful-fire... Still unclear to me why Karp gave him the money but seems like its helpful to "River Dave".
- slater 5y agoFive imaginary bucks say Karp lists that as charitable giving on his tax returns
- longerthoughts 5y agowhat else would you call it?
- slater 5y agonot sure if you're spectacularly missing the point, but if not: the point i'm making is, he wouldn't have to mention it, period. but will do so to reap the tax benefits.
- longerthoughts 5y agoyeah, i got it. and the point i’m making is i’m not getting outraged over it because it is a charitable contribution and he has an incentive to report it. does it feel a little gross and is this whole thing probably a PR stunt? sure. but i’ll settle for letting billionaires be charitable for the wrong reasons if it means they’re being charitable. i trust people to see this for what it is. i’m not sure why anybody feels obligated to leap into threads like this and strain to reframe neutral-to-positive events as profoundly negative. you don’t need to save us from possibly thinking a brief positive thought about a thing a billionaire did. we’re fine.
- slater 5y ago> i’m not sure why anybody feels obligated to leap into threads like this and strain to reframe neutral-to-positive events as profoundly negative. Have you seen the insane money-making by the rich over the last, I dunno, 30-40 years? The kind of money-making that thoroughly fucks/fucked the rest of us?
- longerthoughts 5y agoit’s possible to think extreme wealth disparity is a bad thing without needing every single action taken by its beneficiaries to be a bad thing.
- voz_ 5y agoI'd really rather he pay another 180k in tax, and then we apply it better as a society.
- Nasrudith 5y agoI'm afraid the apply it better part needs to come either at the same time or first. The spending will reflect the priorities. You almost certainly will hate them.
- seattle_spring 5y agoHopefully you realize that donating x doesn't mean that the donor pays x less in taxes. Doesn't really matter in this case anyway: gifting money to an individual definitely does not count as a charitable contribution.
- joelbondurant 5y agoCommunist thugs will take their majority cut.