8 comments

  • hannesfur 31 minutes ago
    With that going on, it's hard to imagine there once was a time where the news paper publishers hat little to no signal on what actually sold news papers. Given that papers were only sold as a bundle of articles and most sold through subscribers, they pretty much had to guess. So they had a rough direction they knew their readers expected and they had some sparse feedback from the "letters to the editor" but you had to be really angry to follow through on writing a physical letter, getting a stamp and walk to the post box just to complain.

    I would argue, that helped journalism because journalists probably assumed that their readers would hold them to the same standards they hold the writes of the other papers to.

  • mint5 14 minutes ago
    Even with moral issues aside, Palantir is absurdly expensive and seems to be focused on selling buzzwords over actual value and tech. It’s like crack for non-technical big wigs.
  • waltbosz 16 minutes ago
    I dislike USA Today. It feels like lowest common denominator fluffy news.

    Also, I remember staying at a hotel once where they delivered one to every guest room.

  • BitWiseVibe 4 minutes ago
    Imagine paying a billion dollars for some contract software devs to add tracking cookies to your websites.
  • seydor 28 minutes ago
    That's like eating dinner with a chainsaw
  • eth0up 24 minutes ago
    Let's also remember: https://techcrunch.com/2026/04/15/can-ai-judge-journalism-a-...

    Objection (objection.ai), which proposes to apply AI to “adjudicate the truth of journalism.” Pay $2,000 to contest allegations in a published story or various social media sources.

  • kittikitti 21 minutes ago
    Personally, I ditched almost all western media outlets altogether because of their zionist and fascist tendencies. The propaganda was much too obvious. I don't think a Palantir partnership is going to change my mind.

    Hacker News occasionally indexed Palestinian voices but this was a breath of fresh air compared to outlets like USA Today. I'm actually constantly conflicted about the sources I consume and still seek alternatives. If they want me to view more of their content, including more authoritarian surveillance technology is not the right move.

  • bpodgursky 36 minutes ago
    > “It’s important to note all of our data remains our data,”

    Despite all the negative attention about "palantir taking your data", this kind of data privacy is actually why so many organizations choose Palantir over the large AI providers. Palantir uses OSS AI models which don't feed back into the large lab training data and sets up firewalled instances per customer to give them total data sovereignty.

    (and no, I have no financial stake in Palantir)

    • threecheese 19 minutes ago
      You’ve enquoted “Palantir taking your data” as if it’s not factual, but the only one with data privacy guarantees here is USA Today.

      You can’t “convert the sheer scale of our audience into known, orchestrated first-party relationships” without compromising your privacy.

    • kevin_thibedeau 28 minutes ago
      If the storage is on US soil their contractual privacy declaration is meaningless. They can either be forced to hand over data or they can be backdoored to take it without their knowledge. They are becoming the Cloudflare of digital life patterns and that is a tempting target for the powers who want that data.
    • thinkindie 34 minutes ago
      they were the one coming up with forward deployed engineers, weren't they? The least I would expect from this model is that I own the whole infra.
      • glaslong 30 minutes ago
        I've still never quite understood the difference between an FDE and a contractor SWE the client hires through their parent consultancy, other than that with the contractor it would be clearer the hiring company owns all the work, data and infra produced.
        • glaslong 23 minutes ago
          Pessimistically I might think that the client demands data privacy and ownership on paper, but also doesn't want the liability of actually owning and maintaining or even touching their own vast stores directly. While the firm would love to learn from the data to better their systems... and more. So there's just a nice wink and a nod about what's not happening. But that is an uncharitable conspiratorial lens. I'm sure it's fine.