Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 164 posts

Re: Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

#81

Post by avmich »

strooper wrote: post #22

> "Palantir software is instrumental to the operations of ICE, which is planning one of the largest-ever targeted immigration enforcement raids this weekend on thousands of undocumented families. Activists argue raids of this scale would be impossible without software like Palantir." Once and for all, it is the policy makers, not the tech industry, who are responsible for these operations. Tech enables people doing t…

Remember that in Nuremberg trials a prevailing opinion was that merely obeying illegal orders can be criminal.

Similarly if the technology being built can be reasonably used for great harms - and one building it is supposed to differentiate between 'knife' and 'Death Star'-level of potential threat - building the technology by itself may become the responsibility.

Re: Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

#82

Post by hnaccy »

rjurney wrote: post #60
_iyig wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an American citizen who is happy to see the law enforced. I don't live in Atherton or Palo Alto. There were two Central American gang-related shootings near my family's home last week; there were two MS-13 murders in the broader area earlier this year. I grew up here, and it didn't used to be like this. I want to see those who come here illegally, or who have been denied refugee status as the result of due proces…

The problem is most people that want undocumented immigrants deported don't actually want them deported. They just want them to be an underclass available for cheap labor and keep their mouths shut. Undocumented workers are essential to the economy and the same people that hate them hire them. If you want rule of law, provide work permits and a path to citizenship. Immigrants of all variety aren't going away. We need…

>The problem is most people that want undocumented immigrants deported don't actually want them deported. They just want them to be an underclass available for cheap labor

Do you have source backing this up?

Re: Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

#83

Post by deogeo »

rsweeney21 wrote: post #59

I'm mixed on this. I hired a former CIA analyst a few years ago. Part of his job at the CIA was to contribute to the daily briefings provided to president Obama. I asked him how he felt about the ethics of spying on American citizens. He said I wouldn't believe the number of threats that were prevented on a daily basis because of the tools and data they have access to. He said they don't share the information about w…

Think how many more attacks could be prevented if everyone had to wear an ankle monitor at all times.

Re: Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

#84

Post by mindcrime »

zarathustraa wrote: post #8
chance_state wrote: post #2

What motivates extremely talented tech workers to devote their limited working years to making the world a worse place to live in?

It's making it worse until something bad happens to someone you value. If Obama's daughters (or Trump's if you are on the other side) were killed in some horrific racist incident, wouldn't you approve the usage of such software if it was the only hope of getting the perpetrator? Or would you say "as much as I am saddened, I cannot approve such massive invasion of privacy".

Or would you say "as much as I am saddened, I cannot approve such massive invasion of privacy".

Yes, I would take that stance every time, and twice on Sunday.

Re: Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

#85

Post by bsamuels »

count wrote: post #72
rsweeney21 wrote: post #59

I'm mixed on this. I hired a former CIA analyst a few years ago. Part of his job at the CIA was to contribute to the daily briefings provided to president Obama. I asked him how he felt about the ethics of spying on American citizens. He said I wouldn't believe the number of threats that were prevented on a daily basis because of the tools and data they have access to. He said they don't share the information about w…

Keep in mind that internally lots of stats/etc are posted around things like cyber attacks, where a 'port scan' is counted as 65k different attacks (all of the tcp ports getting a 'malicious' SYN == an attack). It's the functional equivalent of calling satellite overflights attacks, every time they fly by. 'We are under constant attack!' also helps the internal justification of working for/with agencies like that.

I don't think that we can compare cybersecurity to government intelligence agencies. Cybersecurity is a field that can only grow by making people fear for their computer security, which is why you often hear such exaggerated numbers for "attacks".

You could argue the same thing about the CIA, but there's no direct financial incentive like there is for growing your cybersecurity business.

I believe the real crux of the problem is intellectuals won't trust intel agencies because there's no evidence that they're being used exclusively for good, and the intel agencies can't provide that evidence without burning their methodology.

There's absolutely no way for us as outsiders to evaluate whether mass intelligence collection tools like PRISM are being used for good or bad, or whether they're even necessary. So instead we have to judge them based on what we know

Re: Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

#87

Post by homonculus1 »

count wrote: post #72
rsweeney21 wrote: post #59

I'm mixed on this. I hired a former CIA analyst a few years ago. Part of his job at the CIA was to contribute to the daily briefings provided to president Obama. I asked him how he felt about the ethics of spying on American citizens. He said I wouldn't believe the number of threats that were prevented on a daily basis because of the tools and data they have access to. He said they don't share the information about w…

Keep in mind that internally lots of stats/etc are posted around things like cyber attacks, where a 'port scan' is counted as 65k different attacks (all of the tcp ports getting a 'malicious' SYN == an attack). It's the functional equivalent of calling satellite overflights attacks, every time they fly by. 'We are under constant attack!' also helps the internal justification of working for/with agencies like that.

It doesn't seem to pass the smell test, does it? Presumably these attacks would be thwarted by raiding and arresting the conspirators... the feds might be able to snuff out a story that so-and-so was plotting to assassinate the president, but I don't think they'd be able to hide it if they were kicking in that many doors on a daily basis. That would get out eventually if only through rumor and word of mouth. Maybe they plant bags of coke and call it a drug bust?

Re: Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

#88

Post by [deleted] »

_iyig wrote: post #7
chance_state wrote: post #2

What motivates extremely talented tech workers to devote their limited working years to making the world a worse place to live in?

What leads well-off Americans, whose safety and comfort is guaranteed by the constant efforts of law enforcement, to conclude that legal efforts to make law enforcement more efficient would make the world a worse place?

[deleted]

Re: Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

#89

Post by 4ntonius8lock »

TrueDuality wrote: post #30
chance_state wrote: post #2

What motivates extremely talented tech workers to devote their limited working years to making the world a worse place to live in?

I almost guarantee that these engineers have a very different value set than you. They could possibly see this as granting law enforcement legitimate and authorized access to collect evidence needed to prosecute real criminals. In their minds abuses of the technology they make is likely the illegal part not the existence of their tool itself. Most of the responses I'm seeing here are about money and while that is pro…

I will add to this.

If you look at us biologically speaking, we are herding creatures.

That means the majority will go along with what the leaders want.

While the Milgram experiment was skewed, the reality is most people will shock you to death just because an authority told them so. And if you ask them at the end if what they did was right, they will say yes, or they wouldn't have done it.

Being a decent of German Jews, I normally think: "Who of the people that I know wouldn't turn me in."

The sad reality: very few. It's by design. Herds don't work when everyone is trying to go their own way. There will always be individuals who eschew herd. Biologically, they generally die, but a few find new environments or start their own new herds. Of course the herd problem then starts over.

Re: Palantir’s User Manual for Cops

#90

Post by count »

bsamuels wrote: post #85
count wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep in mind that internally lots of stats/etc are posted around things like cyber attacks, where a 'port scan' is counted as 65k different attacks (all of the tcp ports getting a 'malicious' SYN == an attack). It's the functional equivalent of calling satellite overflights attacks, every time they fly by. 'We are under constant attack!' also helps the internal justification of working for/with agencies like that.

I don't think that we can compare cybersecurity to government intelligence agencies. Cybersecurity is a field that can only grow by making people fear for their computer security, which is why you often hear such exaggerated numbers for "attacks". You could argue the same thing about the CIA, but there's no direct financial incentive like there is for growing your cybersecurity business. I believe the real crux of th…

I was using that as an illustration, not a direct comparison. Govt employees are graded and promoted based on two primary things: # of subordinates and $ managed. There is a tremendous incentive to grow your career through a mindset that you're always under attack. And, depending on your personal point of view YOU MIGHT NOT BE WRONG.

I didn't say they weren't doing that, I was just suggesting that that frame of mind is fostered for a variety of reasons inside those agencies.

And 'intellectuals' can look at history and see that, categorically, the intel agencies have not used their powers exclusively for good at any point in history under any government. That doesn't mean they're not necessary, worthwhile, or even honorable in intention. But the facts are the facts.

Post reply on HN