One formal philosopher sees a bright future ahead:
First, from the point of view of the philosophy of science, data science arguably does offer a new mode of inquiry insofar as we are now routinely handling population datasets directly, or sample sizes so immense that they behave like population data. In this setting, inferential methods of statistical reasoning are used for an altogether different task, namely, as a form of quality control for the direct methods applied to these huge data sets. Second, there is now a realignment of interests that will make for new bed fellows. The fundamental needs of business and science resemble one another more closely on this score than they have on practically any other in the past, (with the exception of chemistry, perhaps) which means, among several things, that some scientific innovations will come from the business community. Third, one of the skills required by this emerging field, in addition to statistical and programming savvy, is an ability to synthesize results and, all at once, to convey the story and the limitations of the story. This is something that formal/scientific philosophers are particularly good at. Last, but not least, as we see in the news, the collection and storage of society’s “data exhaust” by governments and private companies is easily repurposed for countless tasks, some for the public good, others less so.--Gregory Wheeler.
Of course, down the road nobody should hold the technocratic philosophers accountable for their role(s) in serving the (commercial) surveillance state faithfully.
UPDATE: On Facebook I am being read as if I am accusing the personal integrity of all formal philosophers; that's unfortunate because (a) I am perfectly willing to believe that not all of formal philosophy is useful to the data-miners, and (b) I would prefer to generate a discussion about the potential abuses of philosophical technologies (rather than prompt 'not-me' reflexes).