There hasn't been a piece published about Palantir that offers a decent explanation of what their software does, instead relying on sensationalism. The most recent example only a couple of weeks ago in The Guardian (ofc). It's using human intelligence, just an analysis tool. 1,000,000 times better than twine and tacks, but still essentially the same concept. Only as good as the data it's manually fed and the people who manually assemble said data. Most people don't understand how rudimentary a lot of investigative work is in the digital space. This is a great example in LE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJ-u7yDwC6g. They're just referencing information in a way that common sense would dictate. This kind of stuff is only coming to reality now, despite what tentacles you may speculate exist. It's basic. These are not evil geniuses and they don't have any access to govt. records. At best they have access to test databases or sandboxes.
Case in point re. evil genius: Look at the URLs their website is fucking wordpress and hasn't even been whiteboxed. I don't even start work on WP without clearing up those kinds of security flaws. The crafty bastards have changed the site and removed their educational / research affiliations which were key to proving my point. Looks like i'm not the only one who saw the connections stacking up. I don't even like discussing it because I'd hate to blow their cover, but the mass ignorance surrounding them is astonishing.
From the moment I heard Thiel was working with Trump I was on the Trump train. The media are constantly out to get the him - just look at Nobody Speak. My pet theory from the beginning of the Wikileaks last year is that Palantir have already uncovered PG, and if anyone is leaving crumbs it's them. Why else would they offer to make exceptions for the Clinton campaign when a key founder is trying to get the opposition in?
Side note: Checked out for a bit and came back just as George was making an ass of himself (Seth Rich USB key anybody?!), and i've become extremely skeptical since. His poorly assembled research says something: he's hopeless at assembling his case and needs Palantir's software, or he's talking through his ass. Streams have generally been a joke, too.
I was saying i'm expecting to get mass downvoated for going against the popular narrative! Bad Georgie Good Palantir isn't going to work at all for some people.
I'm no fan of Webb. And most tech articles, especially on AI, are sensationalised imo. As far as Palantir is concerned, it would be nice if your optimism is borne out, but for the moment I'm highly suspicious.
And you'd be right to be suspicious. Like I said, pet theory. More important is dealing with folks perceptions of Palantir - it's a bit of a dud to cite them as directly involved with anything imo. If I forcibly insert an iPad into someone's ass it's not Apple's fault. Bad analogy but you get the picture. I can't stand the alarmism about all-seeing AI and such, which isn't limited to Palantir. The recent Facebook AI story was painted with the same liberties in some corners. We don't have to worry about what could really be considered as AI in this century (my 2c of futurism; futurists are generally always wrong).
view the rest of the comments →
LeHappyMerchant ago
There hasn't been a piece published about Palantir that offers a decent explanation of what their software does, instead relying on sensationalism. The most recent example only a couple of weeks ago in The Guardian (ofc). It's using human intelligence, just an analysis tool. 1,000,000 times better than twine and tacks, but still essentially the same concept. Only as good as the data it's manually fed and the people who manually assemble said data. Most people don't understand how rudimentary a lot of investigative work is in the digital space. This is a great example in LE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJ-u7yDwC6g. They're just referencing information in a way that common sense would dictate. This kind of stuff is only coming to reality now, despite what tentacles you may speculate exist. It's basic. These are not evil geniuses and they don't have any access to govt. records. At best they have access to test databases or sandboxes.
Moar:
http://www.palantir.com/wp-assets/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Impact_Study_Fighting_Child_Pornography.pdf http://www.palantir.com/wp-assets/wp-content/pdf/impact-study-ncmec.pdf
http://www.palantir.com/wp-assets/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Impact-Study-Combating-the-Cholera-Outbreak-in-Haiti.pdf
Case in point re. evil genius: Look at the URLs their website is fucking wordpress and hasn't even been whiteboxed. I don't even start work on WP without clearing up those kinds of security flaws. The crafty bastards have changed the site and removed their educational / research affiliations which were key to proving my point. Looks like i'm not the only one who saw the connections stacking up. I don't even like discussing it because I'd hate to blow their cover, but the mass ignorance surrounding them is astonishing.
From the moment I heard Thiel was working with Trump I was on the Trump train. The media are constantly out to get the him - just look at Nobody Speak. My pet theory from the beginning of the Wikileaks last year is that Palantir have already uncovered PG, and if anyone is leaving crumbs it's them. Why else would they offer to make exceptions for the Clinton campaign when a key founder is trying to get the opposition in?
Side note: Checked out for a bit and came back just as George was making an ass of himself (Seth Rich USB key anybody?!), and i've become extremely skeptical since. His poorly assembled research says something: he's hopeless at assembling his case and needs Palantir's software, or he's talking through his ass. Streams have generally been a joke, too.
Downvoat away, just telling ye...
cantsleepawink ago
It's not often that someone says why they downvoat. Appreciated.
LeHappyMerchant ago
I was saying i'm expecting to get mass downvoated for going against the popular narrative! Bad Georgie Good Palantir isn't going to work at all for some people.
I abstained.
cantsleepawink ago
I'm no fan of Webb. And most tech articles, especially on AI, are sensationalised imo. As far as Palantir is concerned, it would be nice if your optimism is borne out, but for the moment I'm highly suspicious.
LeHappyMerchant ago
And you'd be right to be suspicious. Like I said, pet theory. More important is dealing with folks perceptions of Palantir - it's a bit of a dud to cite them as directly involved with anything imo. If I forcibly insert an iPad into someone's ass it's not Apple's fault. Bad analogy but you get the picture. I can't stand the alarmism about all-seeing AI and such, which isn't limited to Palantir. The recent Facebook AI story was painted with the same liberties in some corners. We don't have to worry about what could really be considered as AI in this century (my 2c of futurism; futurists are generally always wrong).
cantsleepawink ago
I agree with your thoughts on AI (I have a little background in that department).