6 ms·

I cannot believe we are doing this again. Just because Palantir was asked by Aaron Barr to use their technology against Greenwald does not mean that they did. P

by Permit 13y ago

I cannot believe we are doing this again. Just because Palantir was asked by Aaron Barr to use their technology against Greenwald does not mean that they did. Palantir later confirmed that their technology didn't even have the ability to do what Aaron Barr was asking. This is the second smear against Palantir in three days that cites an email without even showing the email to give you some context. They also don't link to Palantirs response to these claims. Please approach this with some level of skepticism.

glesica 13y ago
Just as we should approach Palantir itself with a great deal of skepticism... A company that profits from violence and war really can't be expected to be terribly trustworthy. I realize this community loves the idea of Palantir and many people probably know people who are involved. But why should Palantir get a free pass to go about their business with excessive secrecy in an area that features massive abuse without the additional scrutiny that must accompany such behavior?
- Permit 13y ago
  A company that profits from violence and war really can't be expected to be terribly trustworthy. Their business does not center around tracking down terrorists. They do all things "Big Data". That includes finance and tracking the source of E-Coli outbreaks. The problem is that people like yourself know nothing about the company, yet still feel qualified to condemn them.
  - wavefunction 13y ago
    >>Their business does not center around tracking down terrorists. You're right, just tracking the rest of us.
  - nazka 13y ago
    Well just to cut the apple in two pieces. Maybe for this point it's the fault of Palantir. Their business is in the finance, government with secret projects, and others B2B areas that are far away of any american's ear. For this reason they didn't manage their public image, and now you have this exploding in their hands... So at the end, they deserve what they get.
    - Permit 13y ago
      Because they don't want to share their business specifics they deserve what they get? That sounds an awful lot like "If you've got nothing to hide, you should tell us what you're doing". I'm all for transparent governments, but I don't think transparency should be a requirement of a private company.
      - sophacles 13y ago
        Speaking of false dichotomies... So a transparent government is well and good for those who need utmost secrecy. They just contract out to the non-transparent companies!
      - rhizome 13y ago
        Then they put their business reputation into the hands of strangers.
      - nazka 13y ago
        Yes they deserve it especially as you said because they made the choice to ignore everyman. And now you have all this story with their name on it, and all the war, government and secrecy effects around that. How people can't be at least frustrated or even more feeling themselves fooled with a total absence of marketing by Palantir? I am not saying it's like "If you've got nothing to hide, you should tell us what you're doing". I am saying that you have to be able to manage the public image of your company even if it is a private company. Or things like that will happen and it will be hard to restore your reputation over people you ignored. It's all about the communication, public image, reputation... There are even companies dedicated to do that for you. I don't know for instance they should use the same idea behind their website: a company of high quality dedicated to BigData, and advertise that in every public media with nothing related to war, secrecy or others things... Just a company providing high value products to who you want.
      - glesica 13y ago
        As far as the company's contracts with the government are concerned, yes, those should be totally transparent. Otherwise it is stupidly easy for the government to do an end-run around transparency: just pay a private company to do your dirty tricks for you. You can't have it both ways. If private companies are going to provide important government services, then those companies must accept a certain measure of public scrutiny and transparency, a much greater measure than an ordinary private company would need to accept. If the companies don't like it, then they shouldn't bid on government contracts. No one is forcing them to do so. And if you don't think the government should occupy such a large segment of the economy, AWESOME! I'm all for that! I say dismantle the whole military-security-industrial complex!
  - pqqqqq 13y ago
    > Their business does not center around tracking down terrorists. They do all things "Big Data". The company is a defense contractor. Yes, they've successfully commercialized their technology for law enforcement, bank fraud detection, disaster recovery, and whatnot, but you'd be silly to think that intelligence (and "tracking down terrorists") is not central to their business. They were funded by the CIA's VC firm.
  - freyr 13y ago
    > ... tracking the source of E-Coli outbreaks That's great, but it's more likely a publicity play than a notable source of revenue. "Early investments came in the form of $2 million from the CIA's venture arm In-Q-Tel." They've been catering to the defense industry from the beginning. That's not inherently bad, and there's no reason to skirt around the issue. One of Palantir's cofounders was recently interviewed (http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=3052 http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=3052). He reminisced about pitching the product to two defense industry suits who actually high-fived each other at the end of his presentation. That was when he knew he had made it. If you want to find examples about how the military uses Palantir's software, you don't have to look far. For instance, http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/no-spy-software-scandal-here-army-claims/ http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/no-spy-software-scan...
  - bane 13y ago
    "Our products are built for real analysis with a focus on security, scalability, ease of use and collaboration. They are broadly deployed in the intelligence, defense, law enforcement and financial communities, and are spreading rapidly by word of mouth into applications in other industries and realms of impact." 2 of the 4 named industries sound like "terrorist hunters" and 3 of the 4 are not generic big data. None of them are e-coli outbreaks. Palantir is easy to condemn because from their own messaging to third party analysis, every angle you look at them they look like a boilerplate "evil company" on par with Blackwater/XE/whatever they're called now. Glassbox reviews and interview reviews are absurd and eye opening, tangles with RICO law and unethical business partners seem the norm, and on and on and on. Other than some nice looking tech, they're public image is one of "mercenary nerds for hire".
- JPKab 13y ago
  Palantir, like all too many firms creating innovative software, went to where the demand for innovative software was: preventing terrorist attacks. New, large scale software never gets adopted in the private sector, because the suits that run them are too myopic to think technology can solve core issues that have never been solved with technology before. They only invest in improving the technology they already have in the segments of the business which are already automated. Oracle sold its first relational database to the United States Air Force. Nobody else thought they needed it at the time. Palantir actually offers a very general purpose toolset, but it is the intelligence agencies which were the first to have a giant pile of money and a problem that never goes away.
  - glesica 13y ago
    That's fine, I'm not saying Palantir is poorly run, just that we should be suspicious of their actions. Money is a powerful motivator, especially big money. Even the strongest principles can collapse under the weight of enough zeroes. My point is that Palantir deserves scrutiny, just like everyone else who profits from bad things happening or threatening to happen, and just like everyone else who is entrusted with great power.
  - aclevernickname 13y ago
    That's slightly disingenuous, though I don't think you did it intentionally. Oracle was the name of the software database Larry Ellison, Bob Miner and Ed Oats created, named after the CIA project they all worked on together [1]. Imagine a world where Edward Snowden got excited about the NSA surveillance, and dorked out on it. That's these guys. Products of the government, who found a way to sell products to the government. Palantir smells a lot like the same sort of beast, I think. Just my opinion, though. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation#Overall_timeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation#Overall_tim...
- lostlogin 13y ago
  I agree with you, but am mildly surprised you haven't been slammed with down votes. Obviously I have pre-judged the audience incorrectly. Violence and war ---> profit. And this is a system used by a fair few companies. Just looking round the room here and I see a few. GE, Siemens and Philips all stoop to this from memory, and I haven't even got off my chair.

by Permit 13y ago

glesica 13y ago

Just as we should approach Palantir itself with a great deal of skepticism... A company that profits from violence and war really can't be expected to be terribly trustworthy. I realize this community loves the idea of Palantir and many people probably know people who are involved. But why should Palantir get a free pass to go about their business with excessive secrecy in an area that features massive abuse without the additional scrutiny that must accompany such behavior?

Permit 13y ago
A company that profits from violence and war really can't be expected to be terribly trustworthy. Their business does not center around tracking down terrorists. They do all things "Big Data". That includes finance and tracking the source of E-Coli outbreaks. The problem is that people like yourself know nothing about the company, yet still feel qualified to condemn them.
- wavefunction 13y ago
  >>Their business does not center around tracking down terrorists. You're right, just tracking the rest of us.
- nazka 13y ago
  Well just to cut the apple in two pieces. Maybe for this point it's the fault of Palantir. Their business is in the finance, government with secret projects, and others B2B areas that are far away of any american's ear. For this reason they didn't manage their public image, and now you have this exploding in their hands... So at the end, they deserve what they get.
  - Permit 13y ago
    Because they don't want to share their business specifics they deserve what they get? That sounds an awful lot like "If you've got nothing to hide, you should tell us what you're doing". I'm all for transparent governments, but I don't think transparency should be a requirement of a private company.
    - sophacles 13y ago
      Speaking of false dichotomies... So a transparent government is well and good for those who need utmost secrecy. They just contract out to the non-transparent companies!
    - rhizome 13y ago
      Then they put their business reputation into the hands of strangers.
    - nazka 13y ago
      Yes they deserve it especially as you said because they made the choice to ignore everyman. And now you have all this story with their name on it, and all the war, government and secrecy effects around that. How people can't be at least frustrated or even more feeling themselves fooled with a total absence of marketing by Palantir? I am not saying it's like "If you've got nothing to hide, you should tell us what you're doing". I am saying that you have to be able to manage the public image of your company even if it is a private company. Or things like that will happen and it will be hard to restore your reputation over people you ignored. It's all about the communication, public image, reputation... There are even companies dedicated to do that for you. I don't know for instance they should use the same idea behind their website: a company of high quality dedicated to BigData, and advertise that in every public media with nothing related to war, secrecy or others things... Just a company providing high value products to who you want.
    - glesica 13y ago
      As far as the company's contracts with the government are concerned, yes, those should be totally transparent. Otherwise it is stupidly easy for the government to do an end-run around transparency: just pay a private company to do your dirty tricks for you. You can't have it both ways. If private companies are going to provide important government services, then those companies must accept a certain measure of public scrutiny and transparency, a much greater measure than an ordinary private company would need to accept. If the companies don't like it, then they shouldn't bid on government contracts. No one is forcing them to do so. And if you don't think the government should occupy such a large segment of the economy, AWESOME! I'm all for that! I say dismantle the whole military-security-industrial complex!
- pqqqqq 13y ago
  > Their business does not center around tracking down terrorists. They do all things "Big Data". The company is a defense contractor. Yes, they've successfully commercialized their technology for law enforcement, bank fraud detection, disaster recovery, and whatnot, but you'd be silly to think that intelligence (and "tracking down terrorists") is not central to their business. They were funded by the CIA's VC firm.
- freyr 13y ago
  > ... tracking the source of E-Coli outbreaks That's great, but it's more likely a publicity play than a notable source of revenue. "Early investments came in the form of $2 million from the CIA's venture arm In-Q-Tel." They've been catering to the defense industry from the beginning. That's not inherently bad, and there's no reason to skirt around the issue. One of Palantir's cofounders was recently interviewed (http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=3052 http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=3052). He reminisced about pitching the product to two defense industry suits who actually high-fived each other at the end of his presentation. That was when he knew he had made it. If you want to find examples about how the military uses Palantir's software, you don't have to look far. For instance, http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/no-spy-software-scandal-here-army-claims/ http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/no-spy-software-scan...
- bane 13y ago
  "Our products are built for real analysis with a focus on security, scalability, ease of use and collaboration. They are broadly deployed in the intelligence, defense, law enforcement and financial communities, and are spreading rapidly by word of mouth into applications in other industries and realms of impact." 2 of the 4 named industries sound like "terrorist hunters" and 3 of the 4 are not generic big data. None of them are e-coli outbreaks. Palantir is easy to condemn because from their own messaging to third party analysis, every angle you look at them they look like a boilerplate "evil company" on par with Blackwater/XE/whatever they're called now. Glassbox reviews and interview reviews are absurd and eye opening, tangles with RICO law and unethical business partners seem the norm, and on and on and on. Other than some nice looking tech, they're public image is one of "mercenary nerds for hire".
JPKab 13y ago
Palantir, like all too many firms creating innovative software, went to where the demand for innovative software was: preventing terrorist attacks. New, large scale software never gets adopted in the private sector, because the suits that run them are too myopic to think technology can solve core issues that have never been solved with technology before. They only invest in improving the technology they already have in the segments of the business which are already automated. Oracle sold its first relational database to the United States Air Force. Nobody else thought they needed it at the time. Palantir actually offers a very general purpose toolset, but it is the intelligence agencies which were the first to have a giant pile of money and a problem that never goes away.
- glesica 13y ago
  That's fine, I'm not saying Palantir is poorly run, just that we should be suspicious of their actions. Money is a powerful motivator, especially big money. Even the strongest principles can collapse under the weight of enough zeroes. My point is that Palantir deserves scrutiny, just like everyone else who profits from bad things happening or threatening to happen, and just like everyone else who is entrusted with great power.
- aclevernickname 13y ago
  That's slightly disingenuous, though I don't think you did it intentionally. Oracle was the name of the software database Larry Ellison, Bob Miner and Ed Oats created, named after the CIA project they all worked on together [1]. Imagine a world where Edward Snowden got excited about the NSA surveillance, and dorked out on it. That's these guys. Products of the government, who found a way to sell products to the government. Palantir smells a lot like the same sort of beast, I think. Just my opinion, though. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation#Overall_timeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation#Overall_tim...
lostlogin 13y ago
I agree with you, but am mildly surprised you haven't been slammed with down votes. Obviously I have pre-judged the audience incorrectly. Violence and war ---> profit. And this is a system used by a fair few companies. Just looking round the room here and I see a few. GE, Siemens and Philips all stoop to this from memory, and I haven't even got off my chair.