← Back to context

Comment by holistio

2 days ago

Anyone who has read The Lord of The Rings has exactly zero reasons to trust Palantir.

Indeed. The corporation name is literally (in literature!) an example of all-seeing surveillance tools causing harm when (not if) they fall into evil hands.

  • If my understanding is correct, the use of palantir by creatures leads to their own downfall, both for evil and good characters. So following through, it's very useful for it to be in evil hands

Crazy that there's a weapons company called Anduril as well

  • Creative people seem to be rather pacifistic. Warmongers seem less so, they have to "borrow" from the creative ones.

  • Why? Naming a weapons company after Aragorn's sword makes sense. "The Daily Beast" on the other hand is a rather cynical name...

    • Anduril as a 'tech' weapons company is ironic. In the books, it is Saruman, with his "mind of metal and gears" who is the scientist and engineer. The sword Anduril powerful not because of technology but because of the craftsmanship of its make and the valor of its wielder.

      1 reply →

  • I'd call my company Sauron's Eye (we'll figure out what the company does later), but sadly that's trademarked to the LOTR franchise.

  • Anduril is quite a positive name, it is a broken sword reforged later to save humankind. Quite a metaphor about western reindustrialization.

    • except of course that Tolkien, as a Catholic was quite adamant that he didn't write a story of Western chauvinism. The sword is not a metaphor for industrialization, which is quite literally the villain of the story, it's a symbol for restored kingship and hope.

      5 replies →

Well it’s kind of the same with Rand. That’s their thing, they read these books as preteens and the nuance is lost on them

  • > Well it’s kind of the same with Rand. That’s their thing, they read these books as preteens and the nuance is lost on them

    In the case of Ayn Rand, it is questionable whether there's nuance to be found.