I have no strong opinion of Tan, but calling a person who happily worked for (and profited from) Palantir a 'moral canary in a coal mine' seems a bit of a stretch.
By the time of the LoTR timeframe, when have the palantiri ever been used for good? Seems like malevolently misleading things happen even to the evil characters after they use it.
Based only on your comment, I'm guessing you're unaware of Palantir's work with intelligence agencies even when Tan was there. Also, Thiel's mission from the start was this kind of work.
I served in the Marine Corps. I've had some exposure to Palantir's 'offerings'. It's a fucking nightmare of a company, morally and ethically, and it always has been.
Not to defend Thiel, but don’t you think that his exist from Facebook (after 17 years) because of the stance they took at the beginning of the pandemic is worthy of some attention?
Specially, that Facebook suffocated voices of Trump’s advisors who opposed the lockdown.
“Social media, particularly Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook, was actively suffocating voices, including mine, that dissented from the accepted COVID narrative. By August, Facebook told the Washington Post they had taken down seven million posts “for spreading coronavirus misinformation.” Meanwhile, Wikipedia crafted smears and distortions of my background and then locked it to edits”.
—Dr. Scott Atlas, A Plague Upon Our House: My Fight at the Trump White House to Stop COVID from Destroying America
I tried to watch that interview. It's just dry, boring, slow and abstract (to me) but I'll grant you it wasn't what I was expecting.
My issue with Thiel is his hypocrisy: he warns about surveillance AI and how it's evil, which is just rich, since he founded Palantir and holds shares of Clearview.
Someone asked him directly this question and he addressed it in quite a lot of detail, something along the lines of two morally good ideas of extreme transparency and extreme privacy. I don't agree with him though, I personally stand strictly on the conservative/classical-liberal side that there is no compromise that's acceptable with regards to 4th amendment.
Not "mainstream left"? I guess the right, what was once the far right but today is just the right is indeed not "mainstream left". Make no mistake where he stands: he was one of the largest donors of Trump, served on his transitional team and has once written "I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible".
There were hundreds of doners to Donald Trump's 2020 campaign, let alone 2016 campaign. If not directly, then through other superPACS including FAANG companies [1].
If your viewpoint is so myopically constrained by a single data point, I don't know what to say.
I find intellectuals from all corners of political spectrum to be interesting. Usually, when people dismiss intellectuals not for their arguments, but by some ostensible thinly veiled morality or the media zeitgeist; it is already an indicator that something interesting is out there. Anyways, all I am saying is that Peter is not evil in any stretch of the definition as the media portrays him. He is just not your typical conformist thinker.
you talk about donating to "both sides" however dems are also a conservative party and hardly a "leftist" organization, your point is not as strong as you make it seem
I am addressing "mainstream left" and honestly, the main point of contention is that we should debate about Peter Thiel, but calling him evil is wrong and extremely misinformed.
Do you remember why Thiel invested in Confinity which became PayPal? Because he thought a digital wallet could lead to “the erosion of the nation-state”. If it's not self evident to you why that's a bad thing perhaps read https://eand.co/how-america-collapsed-and-became-a-fourth-wo...
Max Chafkin argues that Thiel “has been responsible for creating the ideology that has come to define Silicon Valley: that technological progress should be pursued relentlessly—with little, if any, regard for potential costs or dangers to society.” continued with “Palantir, his second company, popularized the concept of data mining after 9/11 and paved the way for what critics of the technology call surveillance capitalism”.
And of course there was gawker. No, what gawker did was not right but Thiel's reaction was not right either. That's some straight up vigilante BS.
I disagree with Max Chafkin, I've watched probably every single Thiel interview (there is a Spotify podcast of collection of his interviews) and I do not share whoever this Max Chafkin guy is.
> As far back as 2004, Thiel lamented that “America’s constitutional machinery” prevents “any single ambitious person from reconstructing the old Republic.”
As far as I know the 'monarchy' dude is Yarvin. I'd be surprised if Thiel had publicly committed himself to anything so sophomoric, and it would be interesting to see an actual example.
