4 ms·

Palantir is not going anywhere anytime soon. They are about to sleaze their way into the british healthcare system. Uber is likely to go under, sold for their r

Palantir is not going anywhere anytime soon. They are about to sleaze their way into the british healthcare system. Uber is likely to go under, sold for their rider and driver base at a discount value. Airbnb’s bubble has burst. Door dash? Why is even door dash such a popular thing. And why do these companies need so many people to maintain their apps? Should be max 100 devs and everyone else in sales and support.

kman82 4y ago
Sleaze?
- yrgulation 4y ago
  In British English this means immorality, corruption. I am referring to this: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/13/controversial-360m-nhs-england-data-platform-lined-up-for-trump-backers-firm https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/13/controversia... Please ignore the trump bit. It’s about what they will do to our data and how the corrupt tory government is turning a blind eye to it.
  - worik 4y ago
    That is terrifying. I am in a different country. I argued with my doctor that I would not tell them confidential health related information that could have consequences for me, or held against me. They said "do not worry, it is entirely confidential". I did not share the information, told my doctor lies (as I said I would if they were putting their notes in a database). I feared hackers (happened recently to a neighbouring health group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waikato_District_Health_Board_ransomware_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waikato_District_Health_Board_...) but the NHS actually selling the data? They are completely mad, bad, unbelievably irresponsible.
kornhole 4y ago
Yes and Palantir is deeply embedded into many US government agencies. They are somewhat protected by this, but they may need to slim down to justify the bailouts they might receive.
zh3 4y ago
Palantir and Peter Thiel remind me of Edward Heath's choice phrase "...the unpleasant and unacceptable face of capitalism".
adventured 4y ago
Uber isn't likely going under; they're going to squeeze and squeeze and squeeze their way to getting by. Lyft is quasi going away (they'll be acquired), which will further benefit Uber's survival chances. Uber's sales hit $29b with a $2.2b operating loss, over the past four quarters. It won't take much to keep squeezing that loss further downward to the point where they can trivially float it indefinitely. They continue to become more dominant in their space, not less. If the US economy crashes hard (and nobody can predict that accurately at this point), that would be the only serious risk to change that.
azylman 4y ago
> Should be max 100 devs and everyone else in sales and support. People with no experience running systems at scale often underestimate the amount of effort required.
- malfist 4y ago
  Everything is simple if you ignore complexities.
- fock 4y ago
  and then there is basecamp and you wonder whether maybe there's "experience" and ... experience. (though I agree that regulations and fitting to markets just requires people)
  - moralestapia 4y ago
    Also WhatsApp was like 15 guys? I know Palantir is much more complex, but still.
- ok_dad 4y ago
  You can definitely run Uber-scale systems with <100 engineers. Whatsapp was famously run by like 30 people or something. The problem is when you expand your business at the rate Uber has, or any VC-funded startup, in which case you gain massive (absolutely massive) amounts of tech debt in the form of bandaging new features onto old code without proper refactoring. Then you start doing "microservices" and you hire 10k engineers and now you have even more problems, and your infrastructure and codebase expand exponentially. I think for a good scaled architecture, the keys are: having at most ~30-50 developers, good planning by a few key architects, controlling what's in your database with an iron fist, knowing exactly which bits of data are where and what they are used for, and having strict codebase standards. However, to really be successful in the goals above, the business needs to support a rigorous software process. Normally, this is where things fall apart, since business people and sales people (who are otherwise great people) will push you to work faster and cut corners to get things done. In the end, they also pay the bills, so if the business isn't run by people who understand why software development has to be strict, then you get sloppy software processes.
_ea1k 4y ago
I'm pretty sure Uber is now cash flow positive. I doubt they are doing to fail either.

kman82 4y ago

Sleaze?

yrgulation 4y ago
In British English this means immorality, corruption. I am referring to this: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/13/controversial-360m-nhs-england-data-platform-lined-up-for-trump-backers-firm https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/13/controversia... Please ignore the trump bit. It’s about what they will do to our data and how the corrupt tory government is turning a blind eye to it.
- worik 4y ago
  That is terrifying. I am in a different country. I argued with my doctor that I would not tell them confidential health related information that could have consequences for me, or held against me. They said "do not worry, it is entirely confidential". I did not share the information, told my doctor lies (as I said I would if they were putting their notes in a database). I feared hackers (happened recently to a neighbouring health group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waikato_District_Health_Board_ransomware_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waikato_District_Health_Board_...) but the NHS actually selling the data? They are completely mad, bad, unbelievably irresponsible.

kornhole 4y ago

Yes and Palantir is deeply embedded into many US government agencies. They are somewhat protected by this, but they may need to slim down to justify the bailouts they might receive.

zh3 4y ago

Palantir and Peter Thiel remind me of Edward Heath's choice phrase "...the unpleasant and unacceptable face of capitalism".

adventured 4y ago

Uber isn't likely going under; they're going to squeeze and squeeze and squeeze their way to getting by. Lyft is quasi going away (they'll be acquired), which will further benefit Uber's survival chances. Uber's sales hit $29b with a $2.2b operating loss, over the past four quarters. It won't take much to keep squeezing that loss further downward to the point where they can trivially float it indefinitely. They continue to become more dominant in their space, not less. If the US economy crashes hard (and nobody can predict that accurately at this point), that would be the only serious risk to change that.

azylman 4y ago

> Should be max 100 devs and everyone else in sales and support. People with no experience running systems at scale often underestimate the amount of effort required.

malfist 4y ago
Everything is simple if you ignore complexities.
fock 4y ago
and then there is basecamp and you wonder whether maybe there's "experience" and ... experience. (though I agree that regulations and fitting to markets just requires people)
- moralestapia 4y ago
  Also WhatsApp was like 15 guys? I know Palantir is much more complex, but still.
ok_dad 4y ago
You can definitely run Uber-scale systems with <100 engineers. Whatsapp was famously run by like 30 people or something. The problem is when you expand your business at the rate Uber has, or any VC-funded startup, in which case you gain massive (absolutely massive) amounts of tech debt in the form of bandaging new features onto old code without proper refactoring. Then you start doing "microservices" and you hire 10k engineers and now you have even more problems, and your infrastructure and codebase expand exponentially. I think for a good scaled architecture, the keys are: having at most ~30-50 developers, good planning by a few key architects, controlling what's in your database with an iron fist, knowing exactly which bits of data are where and what they are used for, and having strict codebase standards. However, to really be successful in the goals above, the business needs to support a rigorous software process. Normally, this is where things fall apart, since business people and sales people (who are otherwise great people) will push you to work faster and cut corners to get things done. In the end, they also pay the bills, so if the business isn't run by people who understand why software development has to be strict, then you get sloppy software processes.

_ea1k 4y ago

I'm pretty sure Uber is now cash flow positive. I doubt they are doing to fail either.