Or those execs are ignorant about their staff's concerns.
reply> completely ignorant about what palantir is and who it's owned by
replyPerhaps you could give your take? When I look at the facts, I see a fairly humdrum data integration company that was a slightly early adopter of applied machine learning.
down voted by all the tech bro billionaire wannabes on hackernews
replyno british person would down vote this - at least not one with any integrity
Or, the non politicized take is that they think the software could improve the data landscape of the NHS, which, if we are bring honest, has a lot of room for improvement.
replyI am an American so the plight of the NHS has no direct impact on me, but I'd argue that Palantir is a fundamentally political company and thus there is no room for non-politicized takes.
replyHave you used Palantir or know the infra on how it provides services? Or just giving sound bites you’ve read on media?
replyYou can mandate an installation on self managed infra. We install / use it on a completely self managed cloud install with pretty solid exfiltration protections. It’s a data platform, provides interesting connections in the data. But that’s where its utility ends.
Do they work with US defense and govt? Sure they do. But you don’t have to share your data outside of your cloud infra.
An almost literal "No True Scotsman" fallacy, IRL.
replyBoring comment. Let’s say things that add value to the conversation please.
replyReductive take
replyThere have been recent articles in the FT about a man (who surname, funnily enough, sounds like swindle) who was an advisor to Palantir while also being chair of 4 NHS Trusts and pushing the trusts to put more of their data into Palantir.
replyDefinitely not a conflict of interest...