4 ms·
i'm sorry, but i think this is mistaken. it's both mis-applying the term and misunderstanding why this list could be useful. guilt by association is when, say
by andrewcooke 13y ago
i'm sorry, but i think this is mistaken. it's both mis-applying the term and misunderstanding why this list could be useful.
guilt by association is when, say, two companies happen to share the same building. if one is known to work for the intelligence community then guilt by association blackens both. but this isn't (accidental) association. this is a direct, paid relationship.
and association isn't useful anyway. what's interesting is understanding why.
you don't give money for nothing. you use it to buy (or invest in) something. maybe it's a useful service. palantir's products seem like exactly the kind of thing you'd buy if you were an intelligence agency. or hardware and software for processing a large volume of data.
but what about other companies here? can they all be explained that simply?
if not, what else could the money be buying? access? information?
that seems like a smart question to ask. particular when you no longer trust the person paying.
i don't think this is being paranoid, but i am curious. i'm not painting everyone black through simple "association", but i am asking myself what is being sold.
and that seems like a reasonable question.
[indeed, given how reasonable that seems, your knee-jerk dismissal is odd. do you really not see the questions raised?]
- martinlandau 13y agoYah I agree, this list doesn't build all the bridges that are really there, like Joe Lonsdale (of Palantir) now funding OculusVR. We need a list that connects all the relevant people and boards with everyone else, then we will have a more accurate picture. Can anyone provide it?
- nemothekid 13y agoIf you look at their portfolio you would see most of these investments are centered around products, namely those that processes or make sense of either large amounts or complex data, nothing that includes covert surveillance a la facebook. NSA bad actors withheld, I have a tough time seeing why anyone would consider In-Q-Tel a bad thing. A lot of our current technology (lets not forget the Internet) were born out of government funded projects.
- fixxer 13y ago> I have a tough time seeing why anyone would consider In-Q-Tel a bad thing. Wholeheartedly agree. I take their investment as a stronger sign of success because they are closer to the customer (rather than just being one of those firms that bets on the greater fool theory). Case in point, consider their 10gen play. CIA has been a major player in database design since the beginning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation#Overall_timeline http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation#Overall_time...