61–70 of 94 posts
In fairness, is this any worse than what Palantir will do with the whole countries NHS records? And they're being paid by the government to do it!
…says a happy frog who will be as cooked as everyone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In fairness, is this any worse than what Palantir will do with the whole countries NHS records? I don’t get this trend of seeing bad thing happen and then commenting that other bad thing exists and therefore “in fairness” we should downplay it. Bad things are bad. Comparing them to other things we don’t like doesn’t make them less bad. I don’t like Palantir either but they’re not intentionally leaking health detail…
> they’re not intentionally leaking health details To many, they are. They're leaking information that has been trusted to the NHS to their own databases. The fact that it's being done under government contract and (arguably) within the law shouldn't immediately make it any less bad.
Of course it should, to say otherwise is absurd
what, the NHS shouldn't have _any_ subcontracting? All data must only be held by sacred NHS monks in a vault somewhere?
As long as palentir are holding the data on UK servers, to modern data security standards, and they have a contract to do so, they should be able to
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I paid for TheGuardian because if we don't support truly independent, objective, investigative journalism, who will? Certainly not Billionaires buying newspapers (e.g. Washington Post/Bezos, ...).
Like Eric Schmidt, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, George Soros and countless other billionaires through their "charities"? https://theguardian.org/
Just because they are liberal and non-profit doesn't mean they are independent, that only appears this way if you only think in the narrow confines of the Overton Window between "conservative" and "liberal" of mainstream discourse.
There isn't much difference between giving this data to 20,000 researchers all over the world and simply publishing the data on the web. I personally would like data like this to simply be published, together with a law that says using the data to make personalized decisions affecting those individuals is punishable with life in prison. Basically, this data is 'opensource', but not for use to decide insurance premium…
That kind of data should be public anyways.
Should or shouldn't in general, but THIS one database shouldn't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is allowing random malicious actors to buy health data worse than allowing NHS's own employees to interact with that data productively? yes
Palantir may not be random but it's certainly a malicious actor
In fact the people I have spoken to who have worked on Palantir platform were deeply suspicious of their users treating data with respect, and so built security and immutable auditability as foundational tech.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that’s a bunch of bluster about database software.
No, Palantir is not a "database vendor", it's an intelligence company closely working with IOF in their ongoing genocidal efforts and with DHS with mass deportations. I'd rather see Oracle than a ghoul openly supporting targeting civilians.
In fairness, is this any worse than what Palantir will do with the whole countries NHS records? And they're being paid by the government to do it!