Some? It's about as subtle as a Bond villain.

Perhaps it was intentional. In that case, it might just be-- fitting.

No one who was involved in naming the company has ever asked themselves that question, but it might be a good thing to consider for the devs wearing "Defend the Shire" shirts around.

Pippin, you weren’t supposed to actually LOOK into the Palintir! Fool of a Took.

The whole story is such a direct fable of the danger of powerful tools being used perhaps initially with neutral or good intent but ultimately serving the interest and aims of powerful evil people, how the very power itself will inevitably corrupt the bearer and how some tools are perhaps just better off never ever being used. With a company actually called Palantir, is this just lack of awareness or is it nihilism?

With someone like Peter Thiel I find it very easy to believe that all he got out of the Palantir subplot of LotR was "wow, it would be great if something like that really existed!" and all the cautionary elements of the tale just went in one ear and out the other. Or, he just doesn't mind becoming an actual Sauron figure.

Based on interviews I’ve heard with him it seems like he would have a sophisticated argument about why Tolkien was somewhat insightful about technology’s transformative power, but ultimately naive and that reading LOTR through a Girardian lens allows for a synthesis that overcomes its childish Manichean framing.

Or: if you are like Saruman, using the Palantir will corrupt you. You have to be like Sauron, who is in no danger of being further corrupted by the Palantir...

You're good at wording.

And just like Tolkien's Palantíri, said information can drive others mad and although it may be truthful, it can still be manipulated to create a false impression.

Far too fitting indeed.

Ironic, or just taking the crystal ball concept literal?

Nominative determinism is such a funny thing... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_determinism

This is not nominative determinism. Per your link, nominative determinism is the theory that influence occurs after the name is coined. Palantir was very intentional in picking the name before they even started, because it aligned with what they were trying to produce. Additionally, nominative determinism is typically reserved for human names, not business entities.

I'd argue this is more a case of an aptronym, mentioned in the second paragraph of the wiki entry you referenced. "Nominative determinism differs from the related concept aptronym, and its synonyms aptonym, namephreak, and Perfect Fit Last Name (captured by the Latin phrase nomen est omen 'the name is a sign'), in that it focuses on causality. Aptronym merely means the name is fitting, without saying anything about why it has come to fit."

You’re right. Aptronym.

I swear they developed a sophisticated bot to trigger this discussion in every comment section. The most powerful nerd distraction since Natalie Portman. Pure evil indeed.

Don't need a bot, it's called marketing! (They chose the name.)

Yup, the argument that they must be evil because they're named after a crystal ball from Lord of the Rings is one of the least convincing things I've ever heard. I have no idea why this is so consistently parroted on this forum.

I dunno, if elon musk's next spacex project was called "death star", I might be a little concerned.

on a more serious note, people do choose the names for their companies/products. they could be totally meaningless, merely sound good, or convey something about the brand. it's not a rigorous argument, but nor is it ridiculous to wonder what they were going for here.

That's not the argument. The argument is they're evil because they're doing pretty questionable things that have massive possibility of abuse. And that they intentionally used a name that seems to describe the exact kind of moral problem with their technology is just, like, lazy writing.