3 ms·
>> more good that can be achieved by opening up the code to the software so that anyone can use it to tackle local and global problems around the planet >This
by jsprogrammer 12y ago
>> more good that can be achieved by opening up the code to the software so that anyone can use it to tackle local and global problems around the planet
>This attitude bothers me. Palantir is not a charity. Why are you holding them to these standards?
I fail to see how that statement is an 'attitude'. I'm also not holding them to any standard in that statement. As far as I can tell, it's only a statement of fact. Or at least, perceived fact.
Do you think the statement is not accurate?
- zo1 12y agoYou're implying that they should give up their competitive edge over the market so that they can help the world "tackle local and global problems around the planet". That sounds like you're saying they should give to charity and/or forfeit profit for some noble good. And yes, it's an attitude/opinion though it sounds like you're just nitpicking words. I'm not the OP you responded to, but it's clear your attitude/opinion towards this topic is that this software should be given away for free, with the sole reason for that being that it would "[do] more good". They invented it, they didn't steal it (presumably), and they're choosing to use that product of their intellect in a way that makes them profit. Heck, you could argue that they're already doing good by making it available to law-enforcers while still profiting. In which case your entire point is that they're not doing enough good according to your opinion.
- totalrobe 12y agoIt's extremely naive to think that governments and coroprations worldwide would intrinsically "do good" if this type of product was open source.
- jpttsn 12y agoYou're correct that my gripe is with the subtext. The statement itself is too vague to be accurate or inaccurate.