←back to thread

Reflections on Palantir

(nabeelqu.substack.com)
479 points freditup | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
wg0 ◴[] No.41863679[source]
TLDR - Basically deployed developers in the field who scoured various archaic data sources into mostly read only dashboards in a hacky way and the other half kept generalizing it into a product.

Now they have a platform that's hard to replace because the businesses that rely on them are extremely slow to adapt themselves that's the very reason Plantir was able to get into the space.

replies(3): >>41863758 #>>41865544 #>>41866273 #
1. maeil ◴[] No.41865544[source]
It's funny to read this. The reality is the opposite - Palantir pushes the custoner all day to go with actual operational usecases (i.e. CRUD, not R) and oftentimes some highlevel exec says no, I just want my reports.

Most companies like the mentioned Airbus though do nowadays get convinced to do more impactful things, and they do reap the rewards.

It doesn't help that the product has evolved ridiculously over the years. Just in these comments there's people who e.g. worked there in 2016. Productwise they might have well have been at an entirely different company, unless they were on the gov side of things.

replies(1): >>41870455 #
2. mind-blight ◴[] No.41870455[source]
Yeah, I was there from 2013-2016. I got to use a few of the products that would eventually turn into Foundary. I've actually hung out with the author a couple of times (I was on the AirBus deployment as well as in the building right next to the healthcare team for a while, though we didn't actually interact on any deployments).

Going for operation use cases was a huge win. Once novel data existed in the system (rather than just transforms of existing data), it became a lot harder to rip out. That could be as simple as having someone merge records so you know that two companies are actually the same.

Foundry was a really interesting case because it was basically an enterprise ETL platform before those became very popular + a team of people who helped you get data into it. One of the genius things about the business model was that it operated like a consultancy, but built contracts like a product company. That allowed them to charge based on the value provided rather than hours worked, then pull the best lessons from the deployment back into the main product.