zlacker

>>fajmcc+(OP)
If you work for Palantir and if you work on these systems: You have blood on your hands. You know that it's not right what is happening on the ground right now. Do something.

>>chinat+Ma
The particular problem here is the vast majority of people that are writing this software

1. Don't care, blood is great.

2. Think they are the good guys.

3. Are more worried about their next paycheck and having bad things happen to them related to not paying rent.

>>pixl97+Hd
I don’t think it’s really this simple. Palantir is a major government contractor that enables it to be more tech savvy. It’s embedded through hundreds of teams / agencies. You can’t remain a credible partner if you play morality police on every workflow. Palantir has worked through multiple administrations of both parties and have to support whoever is in power to have a seat at the table.

Ultimately the question is just: would you prefer to have a competent or incompetent government?

Otherwise you can agree or disagree with government policies, but that shouldn’t be directed at tech vendors, it should be directed at politicians and people in government / at the voting booth.

>>basket+MB
> Ultimately the question is just: would you prefer to have a competent or incompetent government?

Is this a joke? Have you looked at the current administration?

>>chinat+HG
Haha, true, although I meant competent from a tech perspective. The reason Palantir is even in the building is because the government is notoriously bad at technology.

You need to separate government institutions ability to use tech from Trumps obvious buffoonery.

>>basket+SH
I am thinking that whether I want a technically competent federal government depends entirely on who I think will be running it in the future. Right now the technical incompetence, such that it exists, works to our advantage.