| ▲ | estearum 4 hours ago |
| Is allowing random malicious actors to buy health data worse than allowing NHS's own employees to interact with that data productively? yes |
|
| ▲ | chromehearts 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Palantir may not be random but it's certainly a malicious actor |
| |
| ▲ | jdross 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | "certainly" is doing a lot of work here. I'm not "certain". In fact the people I have spoken to who have worked on Palantir platform were deeply suspicious of their users treating data with respect, and so built security and immutable auditability as foundational tech. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | philipallstar 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| The NHS does it so badly that they brought in Palantir. |
| |
| ▲ | estearum 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | ... which provides software to help NHS personnel utilize their own data... | | |
| ▲ | DrewADesign 40 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Yeah. The data vacuum whose CEO loves to talk about how effectively their software helps the US government kill people is exactly who should have unfettered access to extremely intimate details of many people’s existence, without their permission. | | |
| ▲ | estearum 6 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Good data infrastructure can be used for all sorts of things If anything, the fact the US IC, DOD, NIH, and NHS trust the software with such sensitive and operationally critical data is positive signal Do you believe these customers don't audit systems/processes that they put their data into? |
|
|
|
