Kindah like Palantir
And from my limited experience working with the government, they absolutely need / want / rely on having companies hold their hand as they insist on doing things the hard, slow, and very custom way.
Palantir isn't "disrupting" government contractors. It is a government contractor, țhe old-fashioned kind, at that, and nothing more.
And people aren't suspect of Palantir. People dislike Palantir because its government contracts are shady and boring (they're all about efficiently tracking people), but they pretend to be a "saving the world with tech" startup with such enthusiasm you'd think they put the Kool-Aid into the water coolers.
Unsurprisingly, XXI century Stasi trying to look hip to recruit the tech talent give off nothing but "how do you do, fellow kids" kind of vibes.
Disclaimer: interviewed for Palantir. They thought I could be a fit. Must have not been using their own software to vet candidates back then.
My personal experience is that large organisations and government are barely distinguishable. This is often excused in the name of "risk mitigation" - but in my experience it's really just that there are more snouts in the money trough, and that politics is more important than success. The close ties between government and the largest organisations also invite a similar culture.
The end result for both government and large enterprise is "hard, slow and very custom". (Of course, there are exceptions in both government and enterprise).
[0] http://www.johnralstonsaul.com/non-fiction-books/the-unconsc...
In the UK, I note that politicians extolling the efficiency of the private sector rarely have any substantial experience in big companies.
>He has said that technology companies like Palantir have an obligation to support the U.S. military. He has defended Palantir's contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement during the controversy over family separations, saying that while separations are "a really tough, complex, jarring moral issue," he favors "a fair but rigorous immigration policy". He has said the U.S. government should have a strong hand in tech regulation and that western countries should dominate AI research.
>Karp founded the London-based money management firm Caedmon Group.
>In 2004, along with Peter Thiel (who had been a classmate at Stanford) and others, he co-founded Palantir as CEO.
>He is described as a wellness fanatic who swims, skis cross country, practices Qigong meditation and martial arts, and keeps Tai Chi swords in his offices.
He'd make for a good Silicon Valley or Black Mirror character.
Palantir is a consultancy body shop with a dashboard product and a probably good pipeline for merging data. ( Reference - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11646587 )
Pure consultancy is rated much lower ( eg. Thoughtworks if you want a reference)
Especially when the majority of your tech headcount bills by the hour and gets paid to tell the customer "Yes."
In the context of pltr, I'm saying it's not similar as Oracle/ibm and comparison is futile.
While they are just using tensorflow and other things like anyone else.
Additionally, large tech can't apply for defense contracts because of internal ethical concerns of employees. So the naritive remains.
Not me, but i see some guys trying to spread that naritive.
But having 'cracked AI' means you are the innovator. Not just using the tools ( eg. Compare that with Google & AlphaGo ).
We're not talking about the same things.