[basket_horse]

I don’t think it’s really this simple. Palantir is a major government contractor that enables it to be more tech savvy. It’s embedded through hundreds of teams / agencies. You can’t remain a credible partner if you play morality police on every workflow. Palantir has worked through multiple administrations of both parties and have to support whoever is in power to have a seat at the table.

Ultimately the question is just: would you prefer to have a competent or incompetent government?

Otherwise you can agree or disagree with government policies, but that shouldn’t be directed at tech vendors, it should be directed at politicians and people in government / at the voting booth.

[standardly]

Here's a better question, in line with your positioning... Is Palantir necessary to a "competent government"

I think you know the answer to that.

[basket_horse]

The government is notoriously terrible at tech. Are you debating that? Out of the top tech talent over the last 20 years, how many of them do you suppose work in FAANG vs the US government?

I'm not saying Palantir specifically is necessary, but I do think finding avenues for Silicon valley to help the US government is necessary for them to be tech competent.

[3form]

> You can’t remain a credible partner if you play morality police on every workflow

Sure. That's the price to pay for not setting morality aside. One that they're not willing to pay.

[basket_horse]

Palantir's ICE contract itself is 30 million over 2 years. Thats 15 mil a year, where this past year's total revenue was ~4B. Thats about .00375 of their revenue. I hardly think it's the literal contract money they care so deeply about.

[chinathrow]

> Ultimately the question is just: would you prefer to have a competent or incompetent government?

Is this a joke? Have you looked at the current administration?

[basket_horse]

Haha, true, although I meant competent from a tech perspective. The reason Palantir is even in the building is because the government is notoriously bad at technology.

You need to separate government institutions ability to use tech from Trumps obvious buffoonery.