I had high expectations, there’s a lot of interesting content in this topic, but this is 22 points of low-substance buzzwording.

There’s no common theme, very little justification of any of the claims, and frankly very little to do with palantir

> 19. America created the first global surveillance state, but it will not be the last. Too many have forgotten, or perhaps taken for granted, the revelations of Wikileaks and Snowden. States across the world from China to Russia are creating even more powerful global surveillance systems and propaganda machines. Leveraging private defense contracts in countries across the world, Palantir seeks to make itself the operating system of a cross-border global secret state while it pushes its own farcical version of ethno-nationalism.

If you're honestly thinking the US surveillance state is used to the same extent that those in China and Russia are to act upon enemies of the state at home and abroad, it makes me take you less seriously.

Could it be? Absolutely. Would Alex Karp gladly direct his company to program it even if it imprisoned/killed his own family for the benefit of shareholders? Probably. But when SCOTUS just told the government this week that they need warrants for geofenced surveillance operations, this doesn't point to the existence of a surveillance state like that in those nations. At least, not yet.

> These are my personal beliefs, not those of Nym.

Why are you posting this on your company's site, littered with ads for the company's product?

Post it on a personal blog, or just say that these indeed are the company's beliefs.

Europe and Asia have it much much worse than we do on the surveillance state.

Ask anyone in jail for social media posts in the UK.

Ask any Chinese citizen about their social score and how it's adjusted.

So this sounds like an Anti-American and Anti-Palantir rant.

I wonder what is the contextualization of the OP's preference of the "Palantir as a data/power broker" narrative to that of "Palantir as a highly profitable staffing agency".

My strong feeling while reading this “philosopher CEO”’s manifesto: you run a consumer VPN company. Your work primarily helps customers fight for their right to stream Netflix. It might be good to touch some grass.

> 5. Surveillance can only be defeated by building software and hardware to defend ourselves.

Here's where it went off the rails. Once you've abandoned the idea of democracy and peaceful self-governance, you're just another technofascist. You are Palantir, just in an earlier stage.

The fear of an imminent surveillance state just rings so hollow to me. It used to appeal to me as an existential threat, but then real world experience made me realize how implausible this is, not due to technological limitations but political will.

We already have surveillance states. Walk into any chain drug store in the country and you'll be met with cameras tracking your every movement, deodorant under lock and key and a security guard at the door. You walk in and the overseers know who you are and track your every move.

However, people walk in to drug stores every day and walk out with stuff. They're often unmasked and repeat offenders. The drug store chain gladly hands over all identifying information to police as well as their patterns. Yet nothing happens.

People comment on forums exactly how and where scams take place. YouTubers bait car and package thieves within hours. Whenever a horrific crime occurs, 9 times out of 10 the perpetrator has had dozens of arrests.

> The “enemy within” continually expands until it encompasses the entire population of a nation regardless of their status and beliefs, justifying evermore paranoid and totalizing surveillance.

So the police doesn't go after known criminals who have been arrested for the umpteenth time, but I'm made to believe they're about to come after me any day now for my innocuous offense, they just need one more Palantir camera.

Be real, there's just no political will to enable a police state.

So now on to technology. Technology should make our lives better. Police should use it to capture and stop the 1% of the population that's making life much more difficult for the rest of us. And they should lock them up for a considerable amount of time, not as rehabilitation or punishment, just to make the lives of ~99% of us better off. Maybe not 3 strikes, but can we settle on 10? 20? Anything would help.

So these theoretical arguments about a surveillance state where some hypothetical political dissident is getting doxed and raided just strikes me as fantasy.

> "most of our current rulers are degenerate pedophiles"

This guy is not a serious person.

>> Unlike the generations that fought in the world wars, most of our current rulers are degenerate pedophiles who would sacrifice the well-being of the youth and the entire planet due to their infantile desire for wealth and power. Technologies of surveillance and automated warfare reflect their increasingly desperate attempts to maintain archaic forms of domination.

Tell us what you think, Harry, please don’t hold back

Blogger has thoughts. World continues to spin.