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

How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 114 posts

Re: How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

#41

Post by nitrogen »

manigandham wrote: post #14
somenomadicguy wrote: post #5

Thus the reason I hang up on startup recruiters the moment they say "A peter thiel funded start-up". I'm not sure what is a sadder waste of this amazing braintrust we have in the United States today, all of the advertising start-ups, or sociopathic dreck like Palantir.

This is the wrong attitude - there is no "waste" of braintrust. Innovation doesnt work like that, it comes from all over by people working on what they want to work on. What's wrong with advertising startups? Some of the most valuable companies on this planet are advertising companies because it's an essential part of success for any business.

You are kind of begging the question with your second paragraph. You argue that advertising is valuable because it's essential, but advertising is only essential because of its own existence. That doesn't make it valuable to society's broader goals.

Re: How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

#43

Post by Spooky23 »

nitrogen wrote: post #41
manigandham wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the wrong attitude - there is no "waste" of braintrust. Innovation doesnt work like that, it comes from all over by people working on what they want to work on. What's wrong with advertising startups? Some of the most valuable companies on this planet are advertising companies because it's an essential part of success for any business.

You are kind of begging the question with your second paragraph. You argue that advertising is valuable because it's essential, but advertising is only essential because of its own existence. That doesn't make it valuable to society's broader goals.

Advertising is a zero-sum game. Advancements only improve the product, there is little/no change in spending from the point of view of society.

Re: How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

#44

Post by Spooky23 »

ejcx wrote: post #20
jdavis703 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having worked in DC and SV I'm not sure DC engineers are cheap, especially the ones who can clear.

I have too. The ceiling for an engineers salary is much lower in DC. Also young people have a much lower salary as well. Some managers might be pretty close in compensation though. We are talking about DMV. Working in the city is very uncommon for big primes. All their HQs are in Tysons It's more than DC though. Big primes have satellite offices everywhere.

It creates culture and political problems.

When I worked for a .gov, the amount of political blowback from a consultant billing $600/hr and workforce resentment at a consultant making $500k made the untenable.

Re: How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

#45

Post by jomamaxx »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #26
manigandham wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the wrong attitude - there is no "waste" of braintrust. Innovation doesnt work like that, it comes from all over by people working on what they want to work on. What's wrong with advertising startups? Some of the most valuable companies on this planet are advertising companies because it's an essential part of success for any business.

Most people in most startups are not "working on what they want to work on" they are working on what their boss wants them to work on. Heck, I would wager that >50% of startup employees are not even doing the work they think is most important for the success of the startup . They are doing the work their boss (who by definition is further removed from the facts) thinks is most important. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised…

"their boss (who by definition is further removed from the facts)"

While I agree that poor leadership is common, I strongly beg to differ with the reasoning that leadership is removed from the facts.

Friend - 'Engineering' is not 'the facts', or not usually.

Customers, business opportunities, markets, investors - these are usually the 'facts' in a business, and sometimes it means doing things that don't seem obvious to a coder.

I've never seen something great come to fruition that involved a linear progress from 'need' to 'product'. It's usually messy, and involves all sorts of actors.

For example, hacking together a 'throw away' something to impress a customer or to ensure they believe in the capacity of the company would likely been seen as a 'waste' from an ops perspective, but it's certainly not if the business situation calls for it.

Sometimes the facts are in the code, but this is much less often than one would realize.

That said, Palantir is a little scammy. They're just CGI or Accenture by another name.

Re: How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

#46

Post by gaur »

DominikPeters wrote: post #35
asdfologist wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does "p.a." mean?

per annum = per year

Why do people replace transparent English phrases with opaque foreign abbreviations? We're not writing with quills on vellum anymore.

Even "$500k/yr" is an improvement on "$500k p.a.".

Re: How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

#47

Post by seizethecheese »

somenomadicguy wrote: post #5

Thus the reason I hang up on startup recruiters the moment they say "A peter thiel funded start-up". I'm not sure what is a sadder waste of this amazing braintrust we have in the United States today, all of the advertising start-ups, or sociopathic dreck like Palantir.

Ad Hominem attacks like this add very little value to the discussion.

Re: How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

#48

Post by adenadel »

gaur wrote: post #46
DominikPeters wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

per annum = per year

Why do people replace transparent English phrases with opaque foreign abbreviations? We're not writing with quills on vellum anymore. Even "$500k/yr" is an improvement on "$500k p.a.".

As far as I know, per annum is actually a part of the English language. I typically have seen it used in the context of pricing or finance which seems to be verified. [1] I don't disagree with you about p.a. less clear than /yr though.

1. http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/3933/what-is-the-...

Re: How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

#49

Post by tptacek »

gaur wrote: post #46
DominikPeters wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

per annum = per year

Why do people replace transparent English phrases with opaque foreign abbreviations? We're not writing with quills on vellum anymore. Even "$500k/yr" is an improvement on "$500k p.a.".

Complaining about p.a. in a finance context makes about as much sense as complaining about "etc".

Re: How Silicon Valley's Palantir Wired Washington

#50

Post by nitrogen »

Spooky23 wrote: post #43
nitrogen wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are kind of begging the question with your second paragraph. You argue that advertising is valuable because it's essential, but advertising is only essential because of its own existence. That doesn't make it valuable to society's broader goals.

Advertising is a zero-sum game. Advancements only improve the product, there is little/no change in spending from the point of view of society.

I might venture to say it's negative sum, because the need to advertise in order to compete diverts resources away from positive sum activities (R&D).
Post reply on HN