About a month before he became president, Donald Trump met with the leaders of the country’s top technology companies at Trump Tower in Manhattan.
The meeting included the chief executives of Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft and other household names like Tesla and Oracle. And then there was Alex Karp, chief executive of a company, called Palantir Technologies, that few outside Silicon Valley and government circles had heard of.
Palantir, the only privately held company represented in the room, had become a major player among government contractors. And, indicative of its growing prominence, one of its founders, venture capitalist Peter Thiel, had supported Trump during the 2016 election and had helped set up the meeting.
Now, as Palantir prepares to go public in what could be the largest stock market listing of a tech startup since Uber last year, many are wondering: What exactly does this influential but little-known company do?
Offering software — and, crucially, teams of engineers that customize the software — Palantir helps organizations make sense of vast amounts of data. It helps gather information from various sources like internet traffic and cellphone records and analyzes that information. It puts those disparate pieces together into something that makes sense to its users, like a visual display.
But it can take plenty of engineers and plenty of time to make Palantir’s technology work the way customers need it to. And that mix of technology and human muscle may lead to some confusion on Wall Street about how to value the company. Is Palantir a software company, which is traditionally a very profitable business, or is it a less-profitable consulting firm? Or is it both?
“For investors, it is a bit of a Rubik’s Cube,” said Daniel Ives, managing director of equity research at Wedbush Securities.
Palantir, which was founded in 2003, has long described its technology as ideal for tracking terrorists, often embracing an unconfirmed rumor that it helped locate Osama bin Laden. The name Palantir is a nod to spherical objects used in the “Lord of the Rings” books to see other parts of fictional Middle-earth.
Funded in part by In-Q-Tel, the investment arm of the Central Intelligence Agency, the company built its flagship software technology, Gotham, with an eye toward use inside the CIA.
Palantir’s technologies can also help track the spread of the coronavirus, as it is now doing for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And they can help find immigrants living in the country without legal permission, which is how Immigration and Customs Enforcement, under orders from the White House, is using these technologies, according to recently released federal documents.
The company is deeply wedded to its work inside the government. Although some Palantir employees have protested its work with ICE and other parts of the government, it has not backed off.
In a letter to potential investors, included in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission Tuesday, Karp pointedly jabbed at fellow Silicon Valley companies and said he was proud of Palantir’s work with federal agencies.
“Our company was founded in Silicon Valley. But we seem to share fewer and fewer of the technology sector’s values and commitments,” he wrote. He added that “software projects with our nation’s defense and intelligence agencies, whose missions are to keep us safe, have become controversial, while companies built on advertising dollars are commonplace.”
The New York Times
U.S. President Donald Trump stepped up attacks on big tech firms Tuesday, warning Facebook, Google and Twitter to be "careful," hours after slamming what he called "rigged" internet search results.
Trump offered no details on what if any actions he might take, but a top White House aide suggested the administration may look at some type of regulation in response to the president's complaints.
After a pair of early-morning tweets assailing Google, Trump expanded his warnings to other big internet firms in comments to reporters at the White House.
"I think Google is really taking advantage of a lot of people and I think that is a very serious thing and it is a very serious charge," Trump said.
He went on to cite Facebook and Twitter, in an apparent reference to his claims last week of social media suppressing conservative voices.
"You can't do that to people," he said. "We have literally thousands and thousands of complaints coming in."
Trump added: "Google and Twitter and Facebook -- they are really treading on very, very troubled territory and they have to be careful."
In his Twitter comments, the U.S. president complained that Google searches for "Trump news" brought up mostly negative stories about him.
"They have it RIGGED, for me & others, so that almost all stories & news is BAD. Fake CNN is prominent. Republican/Conservative & Fair Media is shut out. Illegal?" he wrote.
According to Trump, "96% of results on 'Trump News' are from National Left-Wing Media."
Google strongly rejected any bias claims.
"Search is not used to set a political agenda and we don't bias our results toward any political ideology," it said.
"We continually work to improve Google search and we never rank search results to manipulate political sentiment."
It was not immediately clear what, if any, measures Trump envisioned, but his top economic adviser Larry Kudlow told reporters at the White House that "we're looking into it" when asked about the claims on Google.
Last week, Trump tweeted that "Social Media is totally discriminating against Republican/Conservative voices" and added "we won't let that happen."
Free speech guarantees
The president's claims on Google appeared to be based on a report from the Trump-friendly news site PJ Media which relied on an analysis chart by conservative news host Sharyl Attkisson that categorized major news outlets such as the New York Times, CBS and CNN as "left wing."
"Google & others are suppressing voices of Conservatives and hiding information and news that is good," Trump said.
Google and other internet firms have long faced complaints about search results, which are based on algorithms that can take into account user browsing history, location and other factors.
But technology and media analysts say there is little evidence to suggest Google skews results for political reasons. And if they did, the president would have little recourse under the constitution's free speech protections.
"Accusations of search engine 'bias' have existed as long as there have been search engines. Indeed, search engines are 'biased' in the sense that they privilege some information over others," said Eric Goldman, who heads Santa Clara University's High Tech Law Institute.
Goldman said that any government attempts to force search engines to display only good news would be a flagrant violation of the Constitution's First Amendment speech guarantees.
"Any effort by Trump to 'fix' search engine results will violate the First Amendment. It's not even a close question," Goldman said.
Democratic Representative Ted Lieu of California maintained that Trump's comments merely show he refuses to tolerate negative news coverage.
"Instead of yet another @realDonaldTrump conspiracy theory, the simpler explanation is that when @POTUS behaves badly, such as by ripping kids from parents or disrespecting an American hero, most of the free press reports it," Lieu tweeted.
Pressure is 'worrisome'
Nuala O'Connor, president of the Washington-based Center for Democracy & Technology, said that while "algorithmic bias" is a legitimate question, there is no evidence of bias and that it would be worrisome if the government tried to step in with regulations.
"It's deeply concerning that any government official would try to bring public pressure on a platform over news and information that is important to our democracy," O'Connor said.
While there is little to suggest that internet firms actively suppress content for political reasons and many conservatives have large online followings, public perception is another matter.
A Pew Research Center survey released in June found 43 percent of Americans say major technology firms support the views of liberals over conservatives, and 72 percent say social media platforms actively censor opposing political views.
Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, 85 percent said social media sites intentionally censor political viewpoints, according to Pew.
source: news.abs-cbn.com
WASHINGTON - The lobby group for some of the most powerful US tech firms said Friday it would join the legal challenge to the planned rollback of "net neutrality" rules requiring internet service providers to treat all online traffic equally.
The Internet Association -- a group which includes Google, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft, among others -- announced it would support legal efforts to block the rollback voted last month by the Federal Communications Commission.
The association gave no specifics but suggested it would seek to intervene in lawsuits expected by several attorneys general, including from Washington and New York states.
Internet Association president Michael Beckerman said the FCC action voted December 14 "defies the will of a bipartisan majority of Americans and fails to preserve a free and open internet."
He said the association "intends to act as an intervenor in judicial action against this order and, along with our member companies, will continue our push to restore strong, enforceable net neutrality protections through a legislative solution."
Last month's vote capped a heated partisan debate and is just the latest twist in a battle over more than a decade on rules governing internet service providers.
FCC chairman Ajit Pai, who pushed the latest effort, has argued that the neutrality rule enacted in 2015 served to stifle investment and innovation in a fast-evolving sector.
But net neutrality backers have argued that clear rules are needed to prevent internet service providers from blocking or throttling services or websites for competitive reasons, and that the rollback would increase the power of a few dominant providers to control what users see online.
Lawsuits could not be filed until the FCC's order was published, which occurred this week. Some lawmakers have also begun efforts to invalidate the FCC's action.
The battle over net neutrality has raged for over a decade in the FCC and the courts, with both sides contending they represent "internet freedom."
The 2015 net neutrality rules were backed by then-president Barack Obama and endorsed by a 3-2 Democratic majority at the time. But the election of President Donald Trump reversed the FCC party majority and it quickly reversed course.
source: news.abs-cbn.com
