4 ms·
> Palantir’s clients also include the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a federal agency who rely on Palantir’s products for their ethnic cleansing..." And
by okasaki 2y ago
> Palantir’s clients also include the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a federal agency who rely on Palantir’s products for their ethnic cleansing..."
And don't forget the UK National Health Service
- reshlo 2y agoThat’s the main subject of the linked post by Doctorow.
- Aeolun 2y agoAre you trying to say that working for the NHS is bad? I’d choose the NHS over a great many other things if given the option.
- scott_w 2y agoThe discussion of Palantir in the NHS is not a question of whether "Palantir are good/bad for taking NHS work," it's actually "should the NHS contract out to (and share sensitive patient data with) a company with a reputation like Palantir?" The first question makes no sense at all. The latter question, however, is an important one for democratic governments to tackle.
- crimsoneer 2y agoI think the challenging question here is that while palantir obviously have a reputation, they're practically not that different to any of the big consultancies.
- hobs 2y agoThat is an important part that a lot of people miss, if you are working with McKinsey you've basically hired some of the worst scum on the earth. Their history on human right's abuses and opioids alone is enough to send them to the shadow realm.
- scott_w 2y agoSpecific to the NHS, Palantir not being a UK company was a big talking point, so yes, that's a tangible difference between Palantir and, say, Capita. Your (and the sibling) responses also beg the question: must governments contract to big foreign consultancies? It's not illegal to do things in-house if they so choose, you know.
- crimsoneer 2y agoGod, if we're only now going to accept "Built British" IT, we're not going to be going very far.
- scott_w 2y agoTake the effort you’re putting into trying to look edgy on the internet and instead channel it into reading and understanding what I actually wrote.
- llamaimperative 2y agoWhat you actually said is ridiculous: "Your (and the sibling) responses also beg the question: must governments contract to big foreign consultancies? It's not illegal to do things in-house if they so choose, you know." No, they don't must do this. No, it's obviously not illegal to do things in-house. They choose not to because it's obscenely hard to build what Palantir has already built and to battle test its security anything close to what Palantir has done. (Disclaimer: I used to work there, so you can go ahead and dismiss my opinion outright, but I am responding directly to what you're saying)
- scott_w 2y ago> They choose not to because it's obscenely hard to build what Palantir has already built and to battle test its security anything close to what Palantir has done. While true, it also doesn’t answer legitimate concerns that the British public had that their medical data was being shared with a foreign entity that had actively participated in foreign government programmes of questionable morality. The response to that was “all fundamental contractors have done dodgy things.” To which you have my quoted reply. Which I’m not sure you understood at all, judging by your response.
- orochimaaru 2y agoI think palantir sets up their software on your infra and allows you the controls. So I don’t think it’s sharing - as in meta or instagram.