• Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    There is nothing evil about palantir as a company or business model. They are a highly skilled big data analytics firm and just ingest clients data and output useful metrics.

    The evil is the client(governments) intention to collect and use this kind of data. Which has nothing to do with capitalism and is only happening due to liberalism being on the way out.

    • Prox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Nah fuck them. They black box said analytics, making any kind of audit of the decisions impossible. This is HORRIBLE, especially in the contract of government and health care.

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Not true. They absolutely let auditors go through the work especially for big clients like government. There is a ton of 3rd party audits that asses if palantir actually provided value and improvement in their contract.

        Nothing is “black box” if you have the money.

    • kalkulat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I guess there was nothing evil about GM and Ford supplying Nazis with vehicle parts (Henry Ford got a ‘golden eagle’ award from Adolf!) before WW2. Just good business, right?

      Nothing evil about IBM supplying them with punch cards to keep track of the Jewish either, right?

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The evil there is the Nazi’s so Im not going to talk about “most evil” and point to Ford when the Nazi’s are standing right next to them.

        We can easily chain together support to call anyone evil but thats stupid and unproductive. I’ll draw the line at the person committing the evil act being evil. Are people who hold raytheon stock evil? Are people who work for the government under Trump evil? Are the people who made food for Nazi’s evil? Where do you draw your line?

        • zqps@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Amazing. If you build and sell tools to commit horrible crimes against humanity, that’s all cool, it’s just good business actually as long as someone else is pushing the button.

          Kindergarteners have more robust ethics than this.

          • Fizz@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            What are the horrible crimes against humanity that make Palantir the most evil company in the world and be specific.

            • zqps@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Sure, here is a specific response to your question: This isn’t ChatGPT you fuck. And since you proudly do not care, why would I spend any more time on you than to write this comment.

            • Dirac@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Instead of answering this question, I’ll direct you to some tangential research that may help you answer this question yourself. I’d like you to read a bit on different ethical frameworks (you can just wiki that one), then I’d like you to apply that to some of the openly available policies, contracts and practices of the company. At that point you should have your answer. Thank you in advance for doing your own research 😉

              • Fizz@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Thanks for letting me know you can’t answer the question at the start

                • Dirac@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Well let me just ask you a question: how much say should an AI have in the decision to kill a human being? What percentage do you think is appropriate?

                  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    What makes you think you can measure the % say an AI has in the decision to kill a human? Even if we pretend “it had 100% say” was true it wouldnt matter, it would still be a human that ordered the deployment and be responsible for the decision.