<story><title>Palantir worked with Cambridge Analytica on the Facebook data it acquired</title><url>https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/27/palantir-worked-with-cambridge-analytica-on-the-facebook-data-whistleblower.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>vowelless</author><text>I wonder how confident Thiel was of a Trump presidency back in May 2016, when he started being open about his support for Trump. Perhaps he was operating with more knowledge than available to the general public and national pollsters? I wonder how involved he was with CA for the purpose of the election. His $1.25 million donation in October 2016 seems even more interesting in light of all this.&lt;p&gt;I took out a bet on Trump when Thiel became open with his support. It was driven by my belief that he was  operating with deeper knowledge about the state of the nation precisely due to his association  with Palantir (mostly) and Facebook. I feel dirty about winning that one.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>gdubs</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve always thought of it in terms of asymmetric risk – something Thiel seems to have a preternatural intuition for. In other words, what he stood to gain with a Trump win far outweighed what he stood to lose with a Trump loss. Most business leaders were throwing in with Clinton. If Thiel had done the same, and Clinton won, he&amp;#x27;d be one voice in a crowded field. By being one of the few to publicly back Trump, he all but guaranteed a prime seat at the table. This is exactly what played out post-election, with Thiel ushering in tech leaders in the lobby of Trump Tower.&lt;p&gt;Had Trump lost, Thiel would have probably diminished his standing with the Clinton administration significantly. But, due to the crowded field, it would have been a small standing to begin with.&lt;p&gt;And here&amp;#x27;s the crux: Thiel has held controversial opinions for a while. He probably figured his association with Trump wouldn&amp;#x27;t really move the dial on his likability much, and he seems to enjoy being contrarian anyway.&lt;p&gt;So, anyway, there&amp;#x27;s my theory. Risk asymmetry. A lot to gain in the event of a Trump win, little to lose in the event of a Trump loss.</text></comment>
<story><title>Palantir worked with Cambridge Analytica on the Facebook data it acquired</title><url>https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/27/palantir-worked-with-cambridge-analytica-on-the-facebook-data-whistleblower.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>vowelless</author><text>I wonder how confident Thiel was of a Trump presidency back in May 2016, when he started being open about his support for Trump. Perhaps he was operating with more knowledge than available to the general public and national pollsters? I wonder how involved he was with CA for the purpose of the election. His $1.25 million donation in October 2016 seems even more interesting in light of all this.&lt;p&gt;I took out a bet on Trump when Thiel became open with his support. It was driven by my belief that he was  operating with deeper knowledge about the state of the nation precisely due to his association  with Palantir (mostly) and Facebook. I feel dirty about winning that one.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dmode</author><text>Given the margin of Trump&amp;#x27;s victory was so small, and he lost the overall popular vote, I would be surprised that anyone can be confident of a victory looking at any data set.</text></comment>