Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. The Swiss government has ended its contract with American analytics company Palantir, after federal agencies in the country rejected Palantir at least nine times over seven years.

The Swiss government has ended its contract with American analytics company Palantir, after federal agencies in the country rejected Palantir at least nine times over seven years.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
21 Indlæg 20 Posters 55 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • gcluley@mastodon.greenG gcluley@mastodon.green

    Meanwhile, the UK has signed contracts worth over £800 million with Palantir for NHS and Ministry of Defence systems. British MPs are now asking awkward questions about why their due diligence has reached such a different conclusion.

    Switzerland chose sovereignty over convenience. They chose not to risk using Palantir.

    Other countries should be asking themselves: if Switzerland deemed these risks unacceptable, what are we missing?

    What do you think?

    2/2

    geoffairey@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
    geoffairey@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
    geoffairey@mastodon.social
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #12

    @gcluley While you should never rely on another entity's decision, if other companies/countries are publicly rejecting vendors then it should raise red flags

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • gcluley@mastodon.greenG gcluley@mastodon.green

      Meanwhile, the UK has signed contracts worth over £800 million with Palantir for NHS and Ministry of Defence systems. British MPs are now asking awkward questions about why their due diligence has reached such a different conclusion.

      Switzerland chose sovereignty over convenience. They chose not to risk using Palantir.

      Other countries should be asking themselves: if Switzerland deemed these risks unacceptable, what are we missing?

      What do you think?

      2/2

      lexinova@cyberplace.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
      lexinova@cyberplace.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
      lexinova@cyberplace.social
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #13

      @gcluley UK was always an US slave that obey it's master.

      And now they don't have EU tie, they return to their Full slave yes yes decision.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • gcluley@mastodon.greenG gcluley@mastodon.green

        The Swiss government has ended its contract with American analytics company Palantir, after federal agencies in the country rejected Palantir at least nine times over seven years. The reason? Security concerns that should make other countries think carefully:

        - Risk of US intelligence gaining access to sensitive data
        - Potential loss of national sovereignty
        - Dependence upon foreign specialists in crisis situations

        Swiss authorities won't touch their software with a bargepole.

        1/2

        beldarak@mastodon.gamedev.placeB This user is from outside of this forum
        beldarak@mastodon.gamedev.placeB This user is from outside of this forum
        beldarak@mastodon.gamedev.place
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #14

        @gcluley

        Not wanting to associate with literal nazis should be in the list of reasons

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • paradegrotesque@mastodon.sdf.orgP paradegrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org

          @gcluley

          Switzerland is showing the way, while making some very reasonable points.

          I suspect the rest of Europe will follow. The UK, I am not so sure.

          npars01@mstdn.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
          npars01@mstdn.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
          npars01@mstdn.social
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #15

          @ParadeGrotesque @gcluley

          Like the USA, politics in the UK are overly entwined with The Moneyed, white supremacy, and fossil fuel funded fascists.

          The wealthy are determined to fry both democracy itself, along with the planet.

          https://www.desmog.com/2025/01/21/mapped-donald-trump-transatlantic-anti-green-network/

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • gcluley@mastodon.greenG gcluley@mastodon.green

            Meanwhile, the UK has signed contracts worth over £800 million with Palantir for NHS and Ministry of Defence systems. British MPs are now asking awkward questions about why their due diligence has reached such a different conclusion.

            Switzerland chose sovereignty over convenience. They chose not to risk using Palantir.

            Other countries should be asking themselves: if Switzerland deemed these risks unacceptable, what are we missing?

            What do you think?

            2/2

            railmeat@fosstodon.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
            railmeat@fosstodon.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
            railmeat@fosstodon.org
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #16

            @gcluley

            The NHS using Palantir is scary. At least it would scare me if I lived in the UK.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • gcluley@mastodon.greenG gcluley@mastodon.green

              Meanwhile, the UK has signed contracts worth over £800 million with Palantir for NHS and Ministry of Defence systems. British MPs are now asking awkward questions about why their due diligence has reached such a different conclusion.

              Switzerland chose sovereignty over convenience. They chose not to risk using Palantir.

              Other countries should be asking themselves: if Switzerland deemed these risks unacceptable, what are we missing?

              What do you think?

              2/2

              gypsyvegan@sfba.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
              gypsyvegan@sfba.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
              gypsyvegan@sfba.social
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #17

              @gcluley Carole Cadwalladr has been ringing this alarm for years, hopefully more will take up the task

              https://substack.com/@carolecadwalla/p-183932001

              ooze@wirejunkie.netO 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • gypsyvegan@sfba.socialG gypsyvegan@sfba.social

                @gcluley Carole Cadwalladr has been ringing this alarm for years, hopefully more will take up the task

                https://substack.com/@carolecadwalla/p-183932001

                ooze@wirejunkie.netO This user is from outside of this forum
                ooze@wirejunkie.netO This user is from outside of this forum
                ooze@wirejunkie.net
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #18

                @gypsyvegan @gcluley "If our national security rests on US technology, we have no national security." This applies just as much for us here in Australia.

                jbiserkov@mas.toJ 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • ooze@wirejunkie.netO ooze@wirejunkie.net

                  @gypsyvegan @gcluley "If our national security rests on US technology, we have no national security." This applies just as much for us here in Australia.

                  jbiserkov@mas.toJ This user is from outside of this forum
                  jbiserkov@mas.toJ This user is from outside of this forum
                  jbiserkov@mas.to
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #19

                  @Ooze @gypsyvegan @gcluley
                  Greetings stranger.
                  Did you know Australia has been a US vassal for the past half century?
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • gcluley@mastodon.greenG gcluley@mastodon.green

                    The Swiss government has ended its contract with American analytics company Palantir, after federal agencies in the country rejected Palantir at least nine times over seven years. The reason? Security concerns that should make other countries think carefully:

                    - Risk of US intelligence gaining access to sensitive data
                    - Potential loss of national sovereignty
                    - Dependence upon foreign specialists in crisis situations

                    Swiss authorities won't touch their software with a bargepole.

                    1/2

                    extraflauschig@chaos.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
                    extraflauschig@chaos.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
                    extraflauschig@chaos.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #20

                    @gcluley there never was a contract. They never signed a contract with Palantir, so there’s nothing to end.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • gcluley@mastodon.greenG gcluley@mastodon.green

                      Meanwhile, the UK has signed contracts worth over £800 million with Palantir for NHS and Ministry of Defence systems. British MPs are now asking awkward questions about why their due diligence has reached such a different conclusion.

                      Switzerland chose sovereignty over convenience. They chose not to risk using Palantir.

                      Other countries should be asking themselves: if Switzerland deemed these risks unacceptable, what are we missing?

                      What do you think?

                      2/2

                      bernab@sueden.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                      bernab@sueden.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                      bernab@sueden.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #21

                      @gcluley I think, you’re right.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • tanyakaroli@expressional.socialT tanyakaroli@expressional.social shared this topic
                      Svar
                      • Svar som emne
                      Login for at svare
                      • Ældste til nyeste
                      • Nyeste til ældste
                      • Most Votes


                      • Log ind

                      • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                      • Login or register to search.
                      Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                      Graciously hosted by data.coop
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Hjem
                      • Seneste
                      • Etiketter
                      • Populære
                      • Verden
                      • Bruger
                      • Grupper