39 ms·

This feels like pets.com made by Accenture consultants.

echelon 8mo ago
Palantir's secret weapon is the closeness and affinity to the DoD. The tech stack ontological model is flexible like Salesforce so that it can be jammed into any task or contract quicky. It isn't engineered, it's glued in. They're able to do this fast because they have a flexible model and because they have the friendly relationships. Their moat deepens every year with every new integration. It's smart as hell, actually. That's why they're swimming in money. And government contracts are about as lucrative as you can get. Engineers turn their nose at this, but look who has tapped into this wealthy revenue stream. While we preen about good architecture, they can retire for a thousand thousand lifetimes.
- bluegatty 8mo ago
  Palantir does not have infinity money, and 'ontology' is a buzzword. They're a gov. contracting agency, with some re-usable components, that's it. If they deliver stuff that works, good, if not, bad. There's nothing interesting about 'ontology'
  - echelon 8mo ago
    Ontology is not a buzzword. It's precision nomenclature. We've been using ontology well before RDF and the semantic web. It precisely describes their flexible engineering approach of using entities, definitions, and relationships.
- wbsun 8mo ago
  > Palantir's secret weapon is the closeness and affinity to the DoD. Is it a secret? I got an impression that it has been well known. How could you get any big number contracts without former secretaries or retired generals in your board or in your ‘consulting’ team?
  - echelon 8mo ago
    I'm quipping about the title, sorry.
- runarberg 8mo ago
  > Engineers turn their nose at this, but look who has tapped into this wealthy revenue stream. This may be one of the most tone deaf, american imperialist sentiment, I’ve heard on HN for a while. Engineers who have any sense of morality have a pretty good reason to turn their nose at this, and there is no but needed to follow that sentence.
  - zdragnar 8mo ago
    If you read the comment a little more closely, it is very obvious that the "this" engineers turn their noses up at is the flexible model full of glue code, ala Salesforce, as opposed to "good architecture". It's more or less in the same vein as pointing out that WordPress powered a massive chunk of the Internet despite violating almost every good coding practice you can name, and that getting things done is what makes money, not building ivory towers. The fact that you turned that argument into some sort of anti American screed says much more about you than the parent.
    - runarberg 8mo ago
      That is why I called it tone deaf, I admit the part about American Imperialism may have been unwarranted (may is in emphasis for a reason). This engineer turned their nose at the bad architecture and glue code, but neglected to mention the total lack of morality from Palantir. I would argue that abandoning morality and aiding the American imperalist machine in its war against human rights and dignity, has been a much bigger reason for Palantir’s success then their lack of good engineering practice. They are willing to get paid for something most people morally object to. Lots of engineers are willing to abandon their craftsmanship if it pays well enough, few their morals. Perhaps I read too much into this absence, in which case the post is only tone deaf, but I favor the read where this absence was intentional, in which case it is both tone deaf and American imperialist.
      - bluegatty 8mo ago
        I don't think it's at all fair to make this kinds of inference from what was written, you'd have to make huge assumptions, and also take an ideological perspective as well. It might be a perfectly valid critique ... but it can't be at all inferred from the comment.

Palantir's secret weapon is the closeness and affinity to the DoD. The tech stack ontological model is flexible like Salesforce so that it can be jammed into any task or contract quicky. It isn't engineered, it's glued in. They're able to do this fast because they have a flexible model and because they have the friendly relationships. Their moat deepens every year with every new integration. It's smart as hell, actually. That's why they're swimming in money. And government contracts are about as lucrative as you can get. Engineers turn their nose at this, but look who has tapped into this wealthy revenue stream. While we preen about good architecture, they can retire for a thousand thousand lifetimes.

bluegatty 8mo ago
Palantir does not have infinity money, and 'ontology' is a buzzword. They're a gov. contracting agency, with some re-usable components, that's it. If they deliver stuff that works, good, if not, bad. There's nothing interesting about 'ontology'
- echelon 8mo ago
  Ontology is not a buzzword. It's precision nomenclature. We've been using ontology well before RDF and the semantic web. It precisely describes their flexible engineering approach of using entities, definitions, and relationships.
wbsun 8mo ago
> Palantir's secret weapon is the closeness and affinity to the DoD. Is it a secret? I got an impression that it has been well known. How could you get any big number contracts without former secretaries or retired generals in your board or in your ‘consulting’ team?
- echelon 8mo ago
  I'm quipping about the title, sorry.
runarberg 8mo ago
> Engineers turn their nose at this, but look who has tapped into this wealthy revenue stream. This may be one of the most tone deaf, american imperialist sentiment, I’ve heard on HN for a while. Engineers who have any sense of morality have a pretty good reason to turn their nose at this, and there is no but needed to follow that sentence.
- zdragnar 8mo ago
  If you read the comment a little more closely, it is very obvious that the "this" engineers turn their noses up at is the flexible model full of glue code, ala Salesforce, as opposed to "good architecture". It's more or less in the same vein as pointing out that WordPress powered a massive chunk of the Internet despite violating almost every good coding practice you can name, and that getting things done is what makes money, not building ivory towers. The fact that you turned that argument into some sort of anti American screed says much more about you than the parent.
  - runarberg 8mo ago
    That is why I called it tone deaf, I admit the part about American Imperialism may have been unwarranted (may is in emphasis for a reason). This engineer turned their nose at the bad architecture and glue code, but neglected to mention the total lack of morality from Palantir. I would argue that abandoning morality and aiding the American imperalist machine in its war against human rights and dignity, has been a much bigger reason for Palantir’s success then their lack of good engineering practice. They are willing to get paid for something most people morally object to. Lots of engineers are willing to abandon their craftsmanship if it pays well enough, few their morals. Perhaps I read too much into this absence, in which case the post is only tone deaf, but I favor the read where this absence was intentional, in which case it is both tone deaf and American imperialist.
    - bluegatty 8mo ago
      I don't think it's at all fair to make this kinds of inference from what was written, you'd have to make huge assumptions, and also take an ideological perspective as well. It might be a perfectly valid critique ... but it can't be at all inferred from the comment.