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

Palantir employees are starting to wonder if they're the bad guys

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 756 posts

Re: Palantir employees are starting to wonder if they're the bad guys

#541

Post by antiframe »

UltraSane wrote: post #514
carlosjobim wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WWII was won by terror bombings of German cities, and terror nuclear bombing of Japanese cities. That's common knowledge. Not mentioning the Soviet terror in Germany during and after the war, since the topic is the US.

It isn't really accurate to describe those bombings as terrorism when they happened during the largest war in human history.

While I agree there's not a universally agreed upon definition of terrorism, I want to hear more about why you think bombing with novel munitions expressly delivered to dense urban areas which killed 250k people 90% of whom were civilian, in an attempt to scare them into surrender, is not "terrorism".

Re: Palantir employees are starting to wonder if they're the bad guys

#542

Post by augstein »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #511
bastawhiz wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are U.S. defense contractors at an U.S. defense company. We should stop using the word "defense". They're war contractors at a war company. The Department of Defense is the Department of War. They changed the name and then immediately started taking military action against other countries. We're in a war in Iran for reasons that nobody can quite articulate, but it certainly has nothing to do with "defending" t…

> nobody can quite articulate, but it certainly has nothing to do with "defending" the country. It's not hard: * They're trying to build nuclear weapons, and they're one of the worlds leading sponsor of terrorism (if not the sole leader). * The country ran out of water, people started to protest their government, and were killed by the thousands (some say tens of thousands potentially more). Water is one of the most…

* Their nuclear program was obliterated in June 2026, says even the White house (1)

* The worlds leading sponsor of and spender on terrorism (including financial aid to Hamas) is Israel, by a wide margin (2)

* Claims that “thousands” or “tens of thousands” were killed specifically over water protests are not supported by widely accepted evidence

Now I'm wondering which country is a bigger threat to us and peace in general.

A country on the brink of financial collapse, with a severe drought and one of the last remaining opponents of our greatest ally?

Or a country that "provides funding to both Democratic and Republican leadership teams, often supporting over 90% of targeted caucus members" (3) and constantly wants us to fight their wars?

1) https://www.whitehouse.gov/releases/2025/06/irans-nuclear-fa...

2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_state-sponsored_ter...

3) https://www.trackaipac.com/congress

Re: Palantir employees are starting to wonder if they're the bad guys

#544

Post by sneak »

arthurjj wrote: post #504
theturret wrote: post #283

As I said in another comment, I think it’s important to debate what these companies are doing, how they’re doing it, and whether the United States’ actions are morally and legally justified. But I also think we need to get more smart people interested and working in national security. That’s the way you get the best balance between effective security and the minimum negative side effects to civil liberties or collate…

> As I said in another comment, I think it’s important to debate what these companies are doing, how they’re doing it, and whether the United States’ actions are morally and legally justified. I think it's sometimes hard to debate these issues in tech circles. In my experience something like 5-10% of techies are vocally critical of these companies or anything National Security related. This article headline is a grea…

Not wanting to work with people who are ok with the MIC is not a sign of immaturity.

Re: Palantir employees are starting to wonder if they're the bad guys

#545

Post by SmirkingRevenge »

palmotea wrote: post #24

> ...about working for a company named after J. R. R. Tolkien’s corrupting all-seeing orb. Wasn't the the problem that Sauron had one so he could corrupt the other users through the orb, but the orb itself was not corrupting?

The Elephant Graveyard video that went viral a while back, that was a comedic troll of Rogan, Musk, Theil, etc (also a half-serious commentary) - had an entertaining sequence at the end about Palantiri/LOTR

https://youtu.be/ewvRS3NwIlQ?t=4629

Re: Palantir employees are starting to wonder if they're the bad guys

#546

Post by judge2020 »

hn_user82179 wrote: post #133

> “I’m curious why this had to be posted. Especially on the company account. On the practical level every time stuff like that gets posted it gets harder for us to sell the software outside of the US (for sure in the current political climate), and I doubt we need this in the US?” wrote one frustrated employee. The message received more than 50 “+1” emojis. > “Wether [sic] we acknowledge it or not, this impacts us al…

[dead]

Re: Palantir employees are starting to wonder if they're the bad guys

#547

Post by davidw »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #221
_factor wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being at a corporation normalizes sociopathy to some extent. The phrase: “It’s business, not personal”, outlines it well. It is ok to harm another group of people financially and even personally because that’s what “business does”. Degradation being a ratchet that calcifies unethical behavior doesn’t help. Companies tend to get less ethical the older and larger they become.

> Being at a corporation normalizes sociopathy to some extent. The phrase: “It’s business, not personal”, outlines it well The phrase essentially describes subsuming individuality in favour of group interests. You see similar refrains in militaries, monarchies, non-profits and HOAs.

Especially HOAs.

Re: Palantir employees are starting to wonder if they're the bad guys

#548

Post by TeMPOraL »

nickburns wrote: post #212
alterom wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Obviously there's the cognitive dissonance aspect to point out, but we are all doing that to some extent. Not necessarily. I mean, the people who give out an uncomfortable laugh do exhibit signs of cognitive dissonance. I don't have an issue with accepting both statements: factory farming is awful, and I still eat meat. There is no cognitive dissonance. The logic is straightforward: I do not believe that me, an indi…

Equating eating meat with martyrdom in the year 2026 is, in fact, the same cognitive dissonance you personally deny. I eat meat. And I'm highly, highly morally conflicted. I'll leave it at that to avoid sounding hypothetical—except to mention that the only logical reason I don't go vegetarian/vegan is the work and personal development that'd be required of me. (I'll take being called lazy over disingenuous any day, i…

> I eat meat. And I'm highly, highly morally conflicted. I'll leave it at that to avoid sounding hypothetical—except to mention that the only logical reason I don't go vegetarian/vegan is the work and personal development that'd be required of me. (I'll take being called lazy over disingenuous any day, if we're ostensibly virtue signaling here.)

But that is precisely acting as a martyr.

You're "highly morally conflicted", which means you suffer inside. You could stop that suffering by either 1) going vegan, so you don't have to worry about it, or 2) deciding to continue eating meat and no longer worry about it. Right now, you're picking the strictly worse combination of continuing to eat meat and remaining conflicted indefinitely.

I'm starting to realize that internal moral conflicts are a lot like physical pain - it's an important signal from the body, and you should pay attention to it, but in the end, if you know you're not going to do anything about the underlying cause, then there's no point in continuing to suffer - you just make it go away with painkillers, and carry on living. This does not mean denying the problem - quite the opposite. Constant pain makes it hard to think rationally, and suppressing it puts you in a much better position to address its underlying cause.

Re: Palantir employees are starting to wonder if they're the bad guys

#549

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

ericmay wrote: post #367
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nothing has meaningfully changed here Legally? No. That's what OP said: > The only thing stopping US presidents from acting like kings is precedent. Now if we're talking reality, the realty is that new precedents were set (president acting like a king) which revealed that there are not effective legal checks on US presidents acting like kings (or else we would not have a president acting like a king).

Sorry, I just don't agree with your assessment. Anyone can just say "well so and so is acting like a king or queen". Trump, as despicable and annoying as he is certainly says a lot, but he's not doing anything from what I can tell that isn't at least poorly argued that he has a right or legal justification for doing. A king or queen needs no such justification, and if one is going through the motions and being forced…

Sorry, but I just can't agree with your assessment:

> Anyone can just say "well so and so is acting like a king or queen".

This does not mean that anytime someone says it, it is false. If many folks are saying a thing, there is more evidence of it being true than if "anyone" says it. The consensus here seems to be that the current USA president is acting like a king. To alter the consensus, make a successful argument to that effect.

To wit:

- "He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good."

- "He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance."

- "He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures."

- "He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power."

- "For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us"

- "For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States"

- "For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world"

- "For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent"

- "For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury"

- "For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences"

For someone in the USA, some of this might ring a historical bell.

Post reply on HN