This was really interesting! I'm not a game dev, but I am a game player. FPS counter are just kind of part of the scenery so I never considered what is actually involved in the calculation. This was like a mini episode of 99% invisible.
Man, this is the sort of stuff that makes me glad for Hacker News. Someone doing a hyper niche, high effort artistic project for no reward other than it's something they want to do. In a time where I have to second guess absolutely everything in case it's just AI slop there's something so wonderfully human about this sort of endeavour.
I would never have known it existed and, in some tiny way, my life is better now that I do.
There are a few outdoor ranges around Edinburgh but they focus on clay shooting and shotguns. I think there are one or two rifle ranges in town but they only accept students.
The one I went to is indoors, although not a tunnel but a Nissen hut [1].
> In fairness, is this any worse than what Palantir will do with the whole countries NHS records?
I don’t get this trend of seeing bad thing happen and then commenting that other bad thing exists and therefore “in fairness” we should downplay it.
Bad things are bad. Comparing them to other things we don’t like doesn’t make them less bad. I don’t like Palantir either but they’re not intentionally leaking health details so this comparison doesn’t even make any sense.
no, they should not, since we already know that the contract won't stop them from using that data for other purposes and other governments. A government should act in the interest of its own citizens, first and foremost, and not pretending to believe a pinky swear by a notoriously bad actor.
That's a catch 22, I mean they literally are using the contractor... So yeah, they're effectively doing it.
The point was that they shouldn't use contractors and keep their citizens data private. Whenever they don't do that... that's an issue. Hence the critique.
That was the norm for some time, it's just being eroded over the years and is basically entirely gone at this point
"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.
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.
Do you believe the organization that whoops-leaked 500k people’s intimate health data is capable of auditing any complex technical system? Are you asserting that Palantir is no different than any other infrastructure company? Do you think that my criticism would ever apply to the US IC or the DoD? Do you think there’s any way I would approve of the NHS or NIH using Palantir based on my earlier statements? Is there a reason you’re peppering me with tangential rhetorical questions sort of poking around the premise of what I said like a lawyer from palantir talking a deposition while glibly dismissing what I actually said? Dispensing with the rhetorical questions, let’s get concrete: do you have a Palantir logo Coffee Mug? Pajamas? … briefs?
> Do you believe the organization that whoops-leaked 500k people’s intimate health data is capable of auditing any complex technical system?
Yes I believe that it's possible that an organization capable of effective auditing could also leak data
> Are you asserting that Palantir is no different than any other infrastructure company?
For the most part, yes. Palantir is more effective and more "ideological" than most, but in the direction away from your implication that they're vacuuming up data and mixing it across customers
> Do you think there’s any way I would approve of the NHS or NIH using Palantir based on my earlier statements?
No, but the question was whether facts or data adjust your opinion or not, and in which direction if so. Duping one mostly-competent organization on security/privacy posture is much, much harder than duping dozens or hundreds of organizations, including the most security-competent on the planet.
> Is there a reason you’re peppering me with tangential rhetorical questions sort of poking around the premise of what I said
Because the premise of what you said is wrong. The phrase "data vacuum" is clearly meant to imply a fact pattern that just isn't true. The term "unfettered access" is not true either, as data infrastructure companies (Palantir more than most) have significant controls on their exposure to customer data.
The overall implication that people's UK health data would be somehow mixed into a US government effort to kill people is laughably wrong when you actually have to write it out explicitly instead of relying on nudge nudge wink wink.
And yes I do have a Palantir mug actually! Good guess.
Let's get concrete: have you ever actually used Palantir? Ever engaged in contract negotiations with them or set up their access controls on your own data to understand what is or is not allowed, and to what degree you have visibility and control into it?
Sorry buddy but it's you who's speaking in baseless rhetoric here.
“In fairness, this pot of water was already uncomfortably hot before [latest development] raised the temperature another few degrees closer to boiling.”
…says a happy frog who will be as cooked as everyone else.
… As part of an explicit, openly stated mission to reshape the global political order.
Palantir is indeed in many ways just a software vendor but we shouldn’t downplay that they have a much more explicit agenda than most other companies do in seeking government contracts.
Eh. I mean, the government will do what the government will do with the software it buys. We've just seen that with Anthropic. The US government wouldn't give contracts to Palantir if it seemed like its ideology didn't line up with US aims, and they wouldn't give contracts to other vendors if it seemed like their less ideological marketing meant they weren't aligned with US aims.
1) we’re talking about a UK government contract with Palantir
2) actually historically, and aspirationally, the US government isn’t supposed to be focused on ideological alignment of its vendors - the current government is anomalous and we shouldn’t normalize this.
“Palantir is here to disrupt and make the institutions we partner with the very best in the world and, when it’s necessary, to scare enemies and on occasion kill them,” Karp said, with a smile on his face. The CEO added that he was very proud of the work his firm is doing and that he felt it was good for America. “I’m very happy to have you along for the journey,” he said. “We are crushing it. We are dedicating our company to the service of the West, and the United States of America, and we’re super-proud of the role we play, especially in places we can’t talk about.” [1]
No, Palantir is not a "database vendor", it's an intelligence company closely working with IOF in their ongoing genocidal efforts and with DHS with mass deportations.
I'd rather see Oracle than a ghoul openly supporting targeting civilians.
Meta will go down in history as the quintessential case study of late stage capitalism. A company that has provided a consistently worse product over time and produced consistently less value over time to the detriment of both their users and employees, yet somehow gets consistently more profitable.
The tutorial is like: Step 1. Drag asteroids away from planet. Step 2. Do all the other mechanics.
Everything was smooth and looked good, but we need some sort of hint about what we're supposed to be doing.
reply