Palantir does a ton of customization and consulting for specific use cases. This isn't like Microsoft Excel being used to track uranium enrichment in Iran, it is a direct, explicit part of their business.
Even if you do nothing else of impact in your life, you can stop defending the bad guys.
I’m not defending the “bad guys”. The original argument was about moral culpability based on distance from the bad deed. Microsoft could have just as easily refused Azure for the ICE contract, but they didn’t, yet somehow they are just far enough away to not be culpable.
Due to background, I know a lot of people who work at google, and while many of them will give lipservice to ethical concerns, none of them have made any changes at all because, and this is an exact quote, "the money is too good."
This take is so wrong it qualifies as delusional. The valley was all about money and nothing but money by any means by no later 1996 when the dotcom got under way. In 2001 I was at a company actively engaging in meetings with a certain three letter agency wanted us to build a secret project to tap oc192 cables at various service providers while talking about how the internet was bringing freedom and openness to society.
Same. I would never allow anyone who has Palantir on their resume to be hired in any company I have influence over. They are the brownshirts of the tech industry, worse even than the people poisoning children's minds at Meta.
The NTP server thing was especially egregious given that the transition to everything being under TLS was underway and clocks matter in that situation.
"What happens when multiple devices in your /8 want to listen on port 80 and 443 on the public address?"
This is a feature not a flaw. The average person doesn't have anything acting as a server, and that's a good thing, because the only servers they'd have would be embedded garbage in poorly maintained or completely abandoned IOT devices with incompetent code that should not be publicly exposed, ever, in anything but a call out model.
Firewall is a feature. Forced NAT that noone in the above described situation wants is just a flaw. And the other solution where you're forced to buy a fucking "public" number out of a grossly insufficient pool of those for $5/month for each of the NATted machines and your router, is a crime against humanity.
I'm naive with network security, so this is a honest question looking for a practical honest answer: Would my grandma's computer, with its old version of windows, be more or less safe with a NAT without DMZ configured?
Using a normal ISP issued router, wouldn’t make a lick of difference if it was IPv4 with a NAT or IPv6 without a NAT. They’re all configured out-of-the-box with a default deny firewall. I’m not actually aware of any residential grade router that doesn’t come configured like this.
Of course if the router is misconfigured, then all bets are off. But that’s true regardless of IPv4 vs IPv6, because people will just compromise your router first and use that as a launch pad for the rest of your network. Just like to do today with plenty of old residential routers.
> would never be able to perform well on novel coding or mathematics tasks. We were wrong
I'm not clear at all we were wrong. A lot of the mathematics announcements have been rolled back and "novel coding" is exactly where the LLMs seem to fail on a daily basis - things that are genuinely not represented in the training set.
I am sorry that has been your experience. I have worked in a lot of "rough/gruff/hardcore" environments, almost all of my career, at companies that are widely recognized to be fairly political and antagonistic, and none of them have ever, ever been even remotely like this.
This is a "the horse might sing" situation for the whole market that focused on breakthrough-level results (AGI, ASI, or even just "not going off the rails after the third response").
Even if you do nothing else of impact in your life, you can stop defending the bad guys.
reply