Live data from Hacker News

How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

theintercept.com

71–80 of 207 posts

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#71
post #2

So, why does anyone pay attention to the truly awful human being known as Peter Thiel? Between his plots to destroy the infrastructure that allowed PayPal and Y Combinator to be built, and his active attempts to rip away rights from other LGBT people, of which he is one, it seems like a poor idea to pay this person any mind.

In my view, rich people have the prerogative to adopt political views which appear contrary to their own interests; but in fact, they can easily achieve those interests elsewhere regardless of political environment. You can adopt any view on abortion you want if you and the people you know can easily fly to another country to get excellent medical service. What do you care if gun laws are loosened or tightened? You h…

Because all rich people are completely selfish, and care nothing for others. /s

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#72
post #42
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sad that people generalize about people that vote Republican. Most republicans (or people that vote republican) I have met, including myself, have been supportive of the LGBT community. Not ALL Republicans are against LGBT, just like not all liberals want free government handouts. These generalizations about the "other side" are counter-productive. Also, I'm not saying you came across as generalizing, I know you…

All of the Republican nominees this time around were opposed to gay marriage. So it doesn't seem to be that unfair to generalize to the conclusion that Republicans aren't very concerned about LGBT rights. They're certainly willing to vote for candidates who don't support LGBT rights.

It always seem odd to me that on a site where people are expert at algorithms and problem solving, lots of people here cannot deduce this very simple "therefore" scenario.

Or maybe people just really hate duck typing :)

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#73
post #70
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has nothing to do with libertarianism nor serves as a coherent critique of it. In fact, some of your points are things that we see readily in governments today. As an example, many corrupt police officers exist in many government systems, including western countries. A critique of libertarianism based on such things is not well thought out.

we live in a democracy. In Ferguson, police were abusive and corrupt. Mass protests followed, media attention was gathered, changes were made. In libertarian land, mass protests against police corruption and abuse occur, the media is not allowed to enter, the protestors are all shot on sight. The end. The burden is on libertarians to explain exactly why this would not happen in the absense of any democratically elect…

Or maybe it doesn't happen. In hypothetical land anything goes!

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#74
post #53
post #2

So, why does anyone pay attention to the truly awful human being known as Peter Thiel? Between his plots to destroy the infrastructure that allowed PayPal and Y Combinator to be built, and his active attempts to rip away rights from other LGBT people, of which he is one, it seems like a poor idea to pay this person any mind.

Trump is a lot of things, but he isn't really anti-LGBT.

Honestly he was the most progressive candidate in the Republican field.

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#75
post #15

As far as I can tell, there's no new "technology" in whatever product Palantir offers (I have briefly used it before?). It seems to me that it's just a program for data visualization, which given that the government is one of their customers, is quite the grifting of the public.

I interviewed for them a few months back and they have some things surrounding data tagging and linking that fall under "dynamic ontology" they'd probably consider unique. And they have some access control stuff that seems neat. I don't understand either concept fully - only got 3 rounds in.

Didn't know about this, thanks for the info!

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#76

As far as I can tell, there's no new "technology" in whatever product Palantir offers (I have briefly used it before?). It seems to me that it's just a program for data visualization, which given that the government is one of their customers, is quite the grifting of the public.

I imagine it's less the tech and more that it's likely to be used for extreme political aims. People feel other CEOs would have held back from using data collection for such drastic political means. Thiel wouldn't, and may have created the business to accomplish his political dreams. We all try to influence society through government by voting with our feet, voice, and wallet. Thiel just happens to have a much bigger…

I do not disagree!

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#77
post #60
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a little bit of an oversimplification. Thiel thinks that globalization of development without massive technological advancement will lead to a kind of slow Malthusian catastrophe since current technology (fossil fuel energy systems, slow transit, inefficient power grids, etc.) cannot possibly support the entire human race at a modern developed world standard of living. I don't agree with everything Peter think…

What's your opinion about the causes of this "mini Dark Age"? Do you still feel that we're in it?

Around the early 1970s, the great watch-word of the culture became "back."

This came primarily in two forms: back to nature (left), and back to the Bible (right). Under the hood both embrace the naturalistic fallacy (natural equals good) and the idea that there is a proper order from which we have deviated (sin, redemption, reconciliation). This manifested as the Religious Right, the anti-development wing of the Green movement, dogmatic Skepticism (a.k.a. scholasticism), and finally the alt-right.

The alt-right is the ultimate Hegelian synthesis. I'll get to more on what I think is happening today later.

IMHO this was driven by a number of things. These are some that jump out at me:

"Duck and cover"-- this was the generation that grew up with the looming terror of instant thermonuclear annihilation. A bit of ludditeism and retro fantasy is understandable.

Social and urban decay-- by the 1970s pollution was very bad in the West and cities were becoming vast ugly slums. Families were falling apart. Crime rates were rising. Reality did not look so good. See also: duck and cover.

Disillusionment with the collapse of the optimistic and futurist 1960s psychedelic counterculture. By the 1970s the Human Be-In type stuff had given way to Altamont and Manson and "acid casualties."

This was the generation that grew up on television. Broadcast TV is the most passive form of media in history and encourages escape into fictional idealized worlds.

Finally I think we got overwhelmed on an emotional level by rapid change and rapid discovery. Years ago I was thinking about this topic and came across a photo of the Earth from the Moon. I saw it through different eyes, saw it not as an amazing picture of accomplishment but as a terrifying image of our "frightful place in the universe" as H.P. Lovecraft so eloquently put it. Look at that picture. Do you see a God who cares about us? Do you see anything that will save us? I just see a speck of dust covered with a thin film of air floating in infinite black mystery. If an asteroid came along and whacked that speck of dust, nothing would care.

There were many other things too, like the de-funding of basic research in favor of "practical" research, but I see those as secondary effects rather than primary drivers. The primary drivers are deep philosophical and emotional currents.

Capitalism kept driving innovation, but not invention. We kept taking the stuff we'd invented in the first 2/3 of the 20th century and refining it. We took microprocessors from toys to today's behemoths and we took feature sizes down to But we stopped inventing. I think invention requires a fundamentally progressive worldview. To invent is to posit that there is a better way that has never existed, which negates the possibility that there is or was a better way today or in the past. Invention is fundamentally anti-tradition, anti-nature, anti-status-quo, and imaginative.

It goes without saying that if you accept the naturalistic fallacy (or the theistic version) or a dogmatic and scholastic approach to knowledge there is no point in inventing. Invention is either a sin, foolish, or futile.

Fast-forward to today:

I think it's ending. If I had to put a date on it, I'd say the day SpaceX landed its first rocket. Seems a good enough piece of symbolism to me.

One of the symptoms of its end is a final blow-out phase. The alt-right, as I said above, represents a total synthesis of the retro-left and the retro-right. It combines concrete manifestations of the luddite left (anti-tech, anti-GMO, anti-health-care, anti-vax, etc.) with concrete manifestations of both the religious and secular reactionary right. As such it has swept up both 70s-liberals and 70s-conseratives. Under the hood it is driven by explicitly reactionary traditionalist thought, including but not limited to the likes of Julius Evola.

The alt-right's embrace of racism and sexism also represents a final total embrace of the naturalistic fallacy. The idea of global human equality is profoundly unnatural. Racism is natural. Gender inequality is natural.

It's true that the alt-right is partly a millennial thing, but it's being driven by boomers and late-boomers.

My prediction is that the alt-right will flame out spectacularly and then the 70s will finally be over.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNMhl7YuKEY

Edit: Thiel's backing of Trump and the alt-right is why I doubt I agree with him about the causes here. Either that or he's playing insanely "meta" 5D-chess and is actually trying to accelerate the demise of the zeitgeist by driving it to its final culmination. That would be true high magic, but I doubt it.

Edit #2: our frightful place in the universe: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/moon_and_earth_lroe...

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#78
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a little bit of an oversimplification. Thiel thinks that globalization of development without massive technological advancement will lead to a kind of slow Malthusian catastrophe since current technology (fossil fuel energy systems, slow transit, inefficient power grids, etc.) cannot possibly support the entire human race at a modern developed world standard of living. I don't agree with everything Peter think…

That theory has a major blind spot: the increase in demand for a Western standard of living at an unprecedented global scale enables innovation to bring down costs. Example: Africa has dealt with underinvestment for a long time in many areas, like telecommunications infrastructure. But because of that, many African nations have leapfrogged hardline telecommunications in favor of mobile, resulting in less spending bef…

All of that is incremental and evolutionary. Here's a good example of what I mean.

Fundamental invention: radio. Before radio communication via invisible waves over long distances was impossible. After radio it wasn't. This is a fundamental qualitative change in capability.

Innovation and evolution: morse code keys to 4G/LTE and WiFi. This represents a quantitative change in capability (faster/better/cheaper), but qualitatively WiFi is the same class of capability as morse code key radio.

If the EmDrive actually worked, that would represent a new fundamental invention happening today. At this point I doubt it does, but it's an example of what such a thing would look like. In the pre-EmDrive world you couldn't propel something without reaction mass. In a post-EmDrive world you could. Qualitative step change in capability.

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#79
post #24

What about ex president Obama who actually used the tech? So much outrage for Thiel, but where were the protests when Obama wiretapped the world? Ps. I think Thiel is a hypocrite if he really thinks himself as libertarian. Also, despite having money and power I think he has big balls to go against SV where he made himself. I also don't understand how did he became so powerful, every time he talks.. He has charisma of…

> but where were the protests when Obama wiretapped the world? right here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/26/nsa-rally-stop... now stop derailing. Thiel is the one in power right now.

The guy also chairs the steering committee of Bildeberg.

Re: How Peter Thiel’s Palantir helped expand the NSA’s global spy network

#80
post #60
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a little bit of an oversimplification. Thiel thinks that globalization of development without massive technological advancement will lead to a kind of slow Malthusian catastrophe since current technology (fossil fuel energy systems, slow transit, inefficient power grids, etc.) cannot possibly support the entire human race at a modern developed world standard of living. I don't agree with everything Peter think…

What's your opinion about the causes of this "mini Dark Age"? Do you still feel that we're in it?

I'd say all our innovative energy is going into social experimentation. Maybe that's the trade-off you'd choose, but if you look at what the government spends its various forms of capital on, it's mostly ways to make up for changing social structures: no more hometowns, no more social pride, no more multi-generation homes, no more homemakers, fewer multi-parent homes.

To get in front of a probable counterargument, the government also spends a lot (not as much as people think, but a lot) on military ventures, but not more than it did in the early 20th century.

Post reply on HN