Palantir CEO Warns Silicon Valley Face Nationalization Over AI Job Cuts

Palantir首席执行官警告：硅谷或因AI裁员面临国有化风险 科技精英除非与国防利益保持一致，并向工薪阶层军人家庭证明其巨额财富的合理性，否则将面临国家控制与民粹主义反弹的风险。 Palantir首席执行官Alex Karp对全球地缘政治给出了直率的评估，坚称在软件、硬件和AI领域的技术主导地位是美国维持全球威慑的唯一途径。他向硅谷精英发出严厉警告，认为一方面使白领岗位自动化，另一方面却未能支持美军，将引发政治反弹以及科技行业被国有化的潜在风险。Karp强调了美国民主的脆弱性，并呼吁创始人建立对工薪阶层军人家庭及国防建制派的同理心。最终，他将Palantir的成功和美国的战略优势归功于有意培养能够解决复杂国家安全问题、极具个性的神经多样性人才。 Palantir的核心长期使命始终是通过实现技术驱动的军事优势，确保美国作战人员安全归国。 (0:00) 美国通过第一、第二和第四修正案等宪法基本权利，保护意识形态、宗教和神经认知层面的多样性。 (0:00) 美以近期在伊朗的联合军事行动（如Operation Epic Fury）成功重建了此前遭到严重削弱的强力地缘政治威慑。 (0:00) 现代战争和地缘政治主导权完全由技术实力决定，而非完全平等、基于国际法的框架。 (0:00) 提供表面化服务的纯软件公司时代已经终结，取而代之的是需要将软件、硬件与AI紧密融合的混合国防动态格局。 (8:13)

Speaking at the a16z American Dynamism Summit, Palantir CEO Alex Karp argued that American global standing relies on decisive military and technological deterrence powered by an integration of software, hardware, and AI. He warned that Silicon Valley risks severe political retaliation and nationalization if it automates domestic livelihoods while refusing to back national defense. Technological Dominance and Reestablishing Deterrence (0:00) Karp asserted that modern geopolitics leaves no room for theoretical, perfectly equal global orders, framing the real-world contest as a choice between leadership by the United States, China, or Russia. Pointing to historical conflicts like World War II alongside operations such as Operation Midnight Hammer and the US-Israeli strikes in Operation Epic Fury, Karp maintained that military deterrence had previously eroded but is now being reestablished through advanced technology. The AI Triad and Nationalization Risks (8:13) According to Karp, the era of pure, superficial software providers is ending, with survivability depending on a hybrid triad integrating software, hardware, and artificial intelligence. He highlighted Palantir's defense initiatives, such as the once-controversial Project Maven, as pivotal to modern military readiness while praising the US armed forces as a meritocratic institution that pioneered racial integration as early as the Korean War. Karp cautioned tech executives that their industry faces immense political danger. He argued that if Silicon Valley displaces white-collar jobs across the workforce while concurrently refusing to assist the US military, public backlash will trigger government intervention. He warned that high intelligence will not shield tech leaders from populist measures, including wealth taxes or outright nationalization, if the broader public perceives technology as an economic threat that delivers no collective national benefit. Cultural Divides and Founder Missteps (12:58) Reflecting on post-war European history, Karp noted that democratic systems endure only when they reliably function, warning that extreme wealth disparities could fracture America's social contract. He urged tech executives to engage directly with working-class military families in places like Iowa to understand defense needs and justify their wealth, rather than assuming expertise across all domains. For startup founders engaging with the Department of Defense, Karp advised humility and relationship-building before attempting to pitch military leadership. He cautioned that a frequent failure mode among tech founders is assuming high domain intelligence translates into negotiating acumen or military insight, counseling them to recognize their limitations when navigating complex defense contracts. Constitutional Privacy and Neurodivergent Talent Karp noted that Fourth Amendment protections represent an area of cross-partisan concern as advanced technology begins to deduce private domestic activities and health records. He urged Silicon Valley to proactively address ethical implications and self-regulate, comparing the moment to Hollywood adopting its own rating system to prevent poorly conceived federal intervention. To outpace global rivals such as the People's Republic of China, Karp concluded that the United States must actively support and augment neurodivergent talent, including individuals with outlier IQs and alternative problem-solving styles. He argued that safeguarding constitutional freedoms—specifically citing First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment protections—provides the essential foundation for these non-traditional thinkers to develop critical national defense capabilities. While Karp maintains that American technological superiority and deterrence have strengthened, he leaves unresolved how the tech industry will settle the tension between aggressive white-collar automation and the preservation of domestic social stability.

Palantir首席执行官Alex Karp主张，现代地缘政治竞争的实质是技术主导权的争夺，美国必须依靠软硬件与人工智能的深度融合来重建军事威慑；同时他警示，硅谷若在借由AI淘汰白领就业的同时拒绝对接国家防务与主流社会，将诱发剧烈的民粹反弹乃至行业被强制国有化的严重危机。 军事技术威慑与大国零和博弈现实 (0:00) Alex Karp指出，现代战争已经彻底演变为由先进技术主导的对抗。他列举了美以针对伊朗发起的“史诗之怒行动”（Operation Epic Fury，致哈梅内伊身亡）以及委内瑞拉的“午夜之锤行动”（Operation Midnight Hammer）等军事范例，认为这些行动证明了美国技术优势对重建此前受创的威慑力具有决定性作用。Karp驳斥了有关建立完全平等、以规则为基础的国际秩序的理论设想，断言在现实世界中，全球领导权本质上面临的是在美国、中国（PRC）或俄罗斯之间的零和抉择。 他强调，军事优势是确保美国在全球事务中保持终极裁决权的唯一基石。即便外界对美国的力量投射存在争议，战场实效也无法被忽视。在Karp看来，通过技术手段让美军前线作战人员安全返乡是根本使命，放弃技术威慑将使整个国家体系暴露在外部威胁之下。 纯软件模式衰落与防务软硬件AI一体化 (8:13) Karp分析了防务技术格局的深刻演变，直言提供表面化服务的纯软件公司时代已经终结，这类商业模式正面临被市场清洗的命运。现代国家安全与技术对抗要求构建涵盖软件、硬件与人工智能深度结合的混合三位一体架构。他声称Palantir正是由于长期聚焦于业务专用性、安全保障以及数据编排能力，才得以在行业洗牌中维持立足之地，甚至成为抵抗通用大语言模型同质化冲击的少数堡垒。 在此背景下，Karp将美国军方评价为全美最具任人唯贤（Meritocracy）特质且最受尊重的国家机构。他特别强调，美军早在朝战时期就已在种族融合方面走在全美社会前沿，为各类人口群体提供了公正的晋升路径。因此，高科技行业理应抛弃优越感，积极服务于这一具有深厚制度信誉的防御体系。 白领失业危机与科技行业被国有化风险 (12:58) 针对硅谷当前的傲慢态度，Karp发出了尖锐的政治风险警告。他认为，科技精英若试图依靠人工智能全面颠覆白领就业（受冲击者多为高学历名校毕业生及特定选民群体），同时又高调拒绝对接国防军工，无异于在政治上自掘坟墓。Karp告诫称，即使创始人智商高达160，一旦公众认定高科技只在剥夺普通人饭碗且拒绝捍卫国家利益，科技资产将直接面临被政客顺应民意实施国有化的严重后果。 结合早年在德国攻读博士时对极权历史与民主脆弱性的调查体验，Karp指出当巨额财富高度集中在少数不受欢迎的人手中时，社会契约极易崩塌。他以财富税为例，指出该政策的核心吸引力并不在于能否扶贫，而在于迎合公众惩罚富豪的民粹冲动。他援引好莱坞早期建立分级制度避免华盛顿粗暴干预的先例，督促硅谷在监管者“尝到血腥味”之前主动建立自律框架与爱国共识。 弥合军民文化隔阂与宪法隐私权平衡 (20:30) 针对试图打入五角大楼采购体系的初创团队，Karp直言科技界最典型的认知误区是误以为“在单一技术领域聪明，就等同于在所有领域无所不知”。他建议缺乏军队背景的创始人不要盲目谈判复杂军事合同，而应先前往爱荷华州或军事基地，与军人家庭展开实质沟通以建立同理心。他强调，技术界与国防部门的裂痕根源于彼此隔绝的文化壁垒，行业必须确立一项“可反驳的推定”：即竭尽一切技术可能确保前线官兵生存。 同时，Karp指出美国社会的核心利益在于“安全与繁荣”，技术发展必须审慎处理与宪法第四修正案隐私保护的边界冲突。在现代算法已经能够推断居民室内私密行为与健康数据的背景下，科技界不能将自身的经济权益与研发自由当成不可触碰的绝对特权，而必须在合宪框架下回应公众对民权侵蚀的合理忧虑。 神经多样性人才与宪法基石的核心优势 (25:47) 作为“美国活力”（American Dynamism）运动的标杆人物，Karp将自身管理理念概括为尊重独特个体的“艺术性”，并严词批评压制个性的虚饰合规文化（Woke Culture）。他提出，极高智商本质上是一种类似于自闭症的神经多样性（Neurodivergence），这类人才具备常人无法企及的离群问题解构能力。Palantir通过包容并赋能这些非典型思维，才得以打造出如Project Maven这样曾饱受争议却对扭转战局至关重要的防务产品。 Karp总结道，美国相较于中国等竞争对手的最根本护城河，恰恰在于其能够为思想、宗教和神经认知存在差异的人群提供制度避难所。只要国家能切实捍卫由第一、第二、第四和第五修正案所构筑的个体天赋权利，并持续将特立独行的尖端头脑与国家安全机制相绑定，美国就能在未来的AI与常规地缘博弈中保持长久的主导权。 Karp在发言中将国防科技的深度绑定置于美国国运与文明存续的关键地位，论证了军事硬实力与技术威慑不可替代的现实主义逻辑；然而，对于AI普及引发的白领大规模失业补偿、数据推断对第四修正案隐私边界的技术性侵蚀，以及如何建立透明防务监管机制等深层矛盾，讨论主要停留在宏观政治警示与文化批评层面，未能给出具体可操作的制度解决方案。

[22:46] Alex Karp: The single biggest mistake people make in this area is because they're intelligent in one area, they assume they're intelligent in all areas.

[0:00] We were the freak show. [0:02] And we spent 20 years for [music] this [0:04] moment. [0:06] We're doing it. [0:08] We're doing it. And I'm sure you're [0:10] enjoying this as much as I am. [0:13] I just got three things to say. [0:16] God bless our troops. [0:18] God bless America. [0:26] We are the power that actually has the [0:30] decisive vote. And that is with military [0:33] superiority. If Silicon Valley believes [0:36] we are going to take away everyone's [0:40] white-collar job, you're [0:42] The most important [music] thing [0:43] Palantir is doing is to make sure that [0:47] American warfighters are much more [0:49] likely to come home. If we are going to [0:52] outperform the rest of the world, our [0:54] single advantage is [1:05] >> Dr. Karp, it is a pleasure to finally [1:06] have the OG American Dynamism founder on [1:09] stage with us at the fourth annual [1:11] summit. [1:12] Um, I think gosh, if we had had this [1:15] >> Like that. [laughter] [1:16] >> Yes. Um, I think if we had had [1:18] >> I shouldn't get that there's a gang [1:20] sign. [1:21] >> [laughter] [1:21] >> No, I I I think we all got the the [1:23] reference. [1:24] >> Mati is in the audience. He [1:26] >> [laughter] [1:26] >> He doesn't get out much. He's like, [1:27] "Huh? What is that?" [1:29] >> Uh, this is a great great conversation. [1:30] So I think uh [1:31] if we had had this conversation 72 hours [1:33] ago, it would have been very different. [1:35] Um, but of course there's been a lot of [1:37] news and so I want to get straight to to [1:39] the news and what's happening [snorts] [1:40] in the world um because Palantir is [1:42] certainly um part of that story. So over [1:44] the weekend uh the US and Israel bombed [1:47] Iran in Operation Epic Fury. Ayatollah [1:50] Khamenei is dead. The Middle East is now [1:52] at war. [1:53] What do you think the situation means [1:54] for the future of the West, something [1:55] you talk a lot about, and the future of [1:57] America. [1:58] >> Well, first of all, I'm delighted to be [1:59] on stage with you, and um [2:02] you know, for many of you in this [2:03] audience, by the way, I'm I've been [2:05] talking so much, I'm kind of losing my [2:06] voice, but I didn't I I would have [2:08] probably canceled on anyone but you, but [2:10] >> Well, well, that that means a lot. We're [2:11] glad you're here. [2:12] >> [laughter] [2:12] >> Yeah, I love to cancel, by the way, for [2:14] those of you, cuz I guess it's my [2:15] favorite thing, cuz I I actually am an [2:17] introvert. Any excuse to cancel, as as [2:19] libertarians know, it's uh [2:21] yeah. Um but yeah, you've been such a [2:24] force um [2:25] in public and behind the scenes for, [2:28] you know, I think helping people in the [2:31] broadly speaking defense tech, or let [2:34] America wins, or things that are good, [2:37] uh broadly defined, [2:39] um and then we also align on something [2:41] we could talk about later on, like the [2:43] importance of not putting our youth in [2:46] straightjackets because they're [2:47] divergent neurologically, which is a [2:50] passion of of mine, and should be a [2:52] passion of everyone's, since you could [2:55] define our wonderful and great country [2:57] uh as a country where everyone who was [2:59] divergent in ideology, thought, [3:01] religion, or quite frankly, like uh [3:05] uh neurologically, came to this country [3:07] to have a better place where they could [3:09] express their freedom, and had the right [3:11] to A, express what they thought, which [3:14] and there's a deep link between [3:16] expressing what you think [3:18] publicly and privately, first and fourth [3:20] amendment, and being able to think it, [3:22] and if that doesn't work, being able to [3:24] defend it with the second amendment. Uh [3:27] and uh the and last not least, our our [3:30] founders founders [3:33] uh uh did not structure these rights the [3:35] way they are in, say, where I lived for [3:37] a lot of my life in Germany, as rights [3:39] granted to us by other bureaucrats. [3:42] We they're given to us, they're [3:44] inalienable from a higher being. [3:46] Uh and uh I would just say, before I get [3:48] into uh how the world's changed, [3:51] we have American war fighters on the [3:54] battlefield uh [3:56] willing to sacrifice their lives [3:59] uh some of whom have sacrificed their [4:01] lives. They have families and kids. So, [4:03] the kids and families don't know if [4:05] their loved ones are coming home and uh [4:07] you know, we uh I know in this room, but [4:10] we should publicly, privately support [4:13] them and people who are not aware or [4:16] somehow so effing spoiled that they [4:19] don't realize what these people do for [4:20] us, we should publicly humiliate them. [4:24] Uh [4:25] and everyone has a role in that. Uh [4:28] um [4:28] and especially those of us who are [4:31] riding a crest [4:33] of of of intergenerational, cultural, [4:38] intellectual courage advantage, which it [4:41] which it is to be an American nowadays, [4:43] uh should not obviously should not [4:45] forget uh the war fighter, who are [4:47] disproportionately [4:49] uh [4:50] from uh the middle of our our country [4:54] and disproportionately have gotten [4:55] screwed [4:57] uh [4:57] and uh you know, I'm proud uh [5:00] very proud that at Palantir [5:03] uh you know, we we get arrows and people [5:06] I mean, half the people attacking us, [5:08] it'd be good if they spent 2 minutes on [5:09] Wikipedia at least learning the talking [5:12] points they're regurgitating. But [5:15] but um you know, there's some legitimate [5:17] criticisms [5:19] uh of any company and but [5:22] at the end of the day, the fact is the [5:25] most important thing Palantir is doing [5:27] and that I other people in this room are [5:29] doing and people like you and other [5:31] people [5:32] adjacent or ancillary to building uh uh [5:36] more lethal and deadly weapons [5:39] is to make sure that American war [5:43] fighters [5:44] uh are much more likely to come home. [5:46] And quite frankly, the people who are [5:48] trying to harm them [5:50] uh know that they won't be coming home. [5:52] And that's the way you stop people from [5:54] attacking us, in my opinion. And then, [5:57] on the [clears throat] the kind of um [6:00] the leading up to what's going on, but I [6:03] think that there are probably people in [6:05] this room who are wildly supportive, [6:08] uh and there are people who aren't. [6:11] It is hard to deny [6:14] that America is exerting a deterrent [6:16] capability that was eviscerated. [6:20] You you can like or not like. That's [6:23] different than ignoring we now have a [6:26] deterrent capability that no other [6:28] country appears to have. And that is for [6:31] all for lots of reasons, and obviously [6:34] uh the warfighter, people organize the [6:37] warfighter, the generals, the [6:38] leadership, the president. [6:41] But one advantage that often gets [6:44] overlooked in it for reasons that make [6:47] no sense is warfighting is technology. [6:50] You know, I I spent half my life in in [6:52] Germany [6:54] for familiar reasons, and then I wrote [6:56] my PhD there. [6:58] It it the and then the rise of America [7:00] after World War II, the reason America [7:02] was able to win World War II were [7:05] technological advantages. [7:07] And if you look what happened in, you [7:09] know, Operation Midnight Hammer, what [7:11] happened in Venezuela, what's so far [7:13] happening uh uh in in in in Iran, [7:17] you see one society just totally [7:21] dominating. That's our society. Now, you [7:24] could get into I I would ex- I I I'm in [7:27] always in fights with my intellectual [7:28] friends about They're They're like, "But [7:30] wouldn't it be better to have a rule a a [7:33] a law-based system where everyone is [7:35] equal?" Yeah, sure, in theory. But in [7:38] this world, it's us or China or Russia. [7:42] >> Yeah. [7:42] >> And I don't know how you guys feel about [7:44] those decisions, but I think we're doing [7:47] I literally believe we're doing the work [7:50] of higher a higher purpose by making [7:51] sure and not just for America, but for [7:53] the whole world that we [7:56] are the power that actually has the [7:59] decisive vote. And there is only one way [8:02] to do that, and that is with military [8:05] superiority. And when I say military [8:07] superiority, I don't mean that we're [8:09] arguing on a PowerPoint. It means [8:11] But America so now you get to what is [8:14] technology done. Now again, I think [8:15] whenever people like me are talking [8:17] about this it you can't say enough that [8:19] it's the warfighter and their courage [8:21] and I'm not doing that. I'm sitting [8:23] here. [8:24] Um [8:25] And you know, and I'm not and we have [8:27] Palantirians all over on like I'm [8:29] talking to them constantly. So they're [8:32] doing they're putting themselves in [8:33] harm's way and you know, [8:35] um [8:36] uh [8:37] I'm [8:38] I am kind of but not directly. It's [8:40] mostly all the people who yell at me and [8:42] I guess maybe there are some people want [8:43] to shoot at me, but um it [8:47] the the [8:48] if you look at the rise of like [8:51] in the in lifetime of Palantir, there's [8:54] been the rise of software which [8:56] essentially meant meant your you know, [8:59] software company that is supplying a [9:01] steak dinner is obviously parasitic is [9:03] not cutting it. That kind of those those [9:06] companies are being eviscerated. [9:08] You the rise of defense tech and now you [9:10] have a hybrid software hardware AI [9:14] where you really need all three. Um uh [9:17] interestingly from an investment [9:18] perspective, um [9:20] you know, I would say the last company [9:23] standing before we all have to salute [9:25] the overlord of the LM will be Palantir, [9:27] but it's mainly [laughter] [9:29] >> We're going to get into that. I promise. [9:31] >> mainly because [9:33] um [9:34] you you the the it's it's the [9:35] specificity of and the security and the [9:38] orchestration. [9:40] But, none of that has to make any sense [9:42] to anyone in this room. I'll tell you [9:44] what, it makes a lot of sense to our [9:45] adversaries right now. [9:47] How is America doing this? Now, again, [9:50] it's specialized ways, it's 25, 30 years [9:53] of experience in fighting, it's [9:55] meritocracy, the Department of War is [9:57] the most meritocratic environment. It [9:59] integrated in Korea before our society [10:01] did. Uh it's it it is the most popular [10:04] institution [10:06] and most revered institution, and [10:08] probably the only institution in America [10:10] that is actually revered by the American [10:13] people across every demographic. And [10:16] it's revered by the American people [10:17] across every demographic precisely [10:19] because it's been meritocratic. It If [10:22] you were a black American, uh you got [10:25] your break in America by going to the [10:27] military. If you wanted to be treated [10:29] fairly, uh and you were from a group [10:31] that you felt that every demographic has [10:34] somebody [10:35] who is in the military, whose life was [10:38] changed, and it did something noble and [10:40] wonderful for America. They also have [10:42] the experience of coming home in America [10:43] not sticking up for them. [10:45] We should change that. Now, you get to [10:47] Silicon Valley. [10:48] Uh my one message for And again, I I [10:51] don't I'm without getting in specific [10:53] people or cuz I'm like [10:56] if Silicon Valley believes we are going [10:59] to take away everyone's white-collar [11:02] job, [11:04] meaning primarily democratic [11:07] shaped [11:08] uh people that whom I grew up with, [11:11] highly educated people who went to elite [11:13] schools or went to schools that are [11:14] almost elite, who vote for one party. [11:17] And you're going to screw the military. [11:19] If you don't think that's going to lead [11:21] to nationalization of our technology, [11:23] you're [ __ ] [11:24] And you might be particularly [ __ ] [11:27] cuz you have a 160 IQ. But, it's you [11:30] This is where that path is going. Like [11:33] >> you cannot have technologies that [11:36] simultaneously take away everyone's job [11:38] and then be perceived Again, there's a [11:41] lot of subtlety here behind behind the [11:43] curtain. I've been heavily involved in [11:45] that subtlety. What can be where it can [11:47] be deployed, what can be deployed. [11:50] There's a difference between US military [11:52] and surveillance and despite what [11:55] everyone thinks Palantir is the [11:57] anti-surveillance company. I know your [11:59] personal online things that's not true [12:00] but every technical expert does so I end [12:02] up in every conversation that I don't [12:04] want to be in but [12:06] the the danger for our industry is that [12:11] America you get a you get a famous [12:13] horseshoe effect where there's only one [12:16] thing people agree on and that's that [12:18] this is not paying the bills and people [12:20] and our industry should be nationalized. [12:22] And And so the the the societal benefit [12:26] that is going on in Iran besides the [12:28] fact that I think I suspect the Iranian [12:30] people feel like finally someone's on my [12:33] side and it wasn't the Berkeley faculty [12:35] that was supposed to like me. [12:37] Uh [laughter] it it's uh um [12:40] a big lesson for you. Yeah, it's so um [12:44] and but then as America we and the [12:47] people who are prominent in the tech [12:49] industry, you know, we have to find a [12:51] way to make sure that we're not just [12:55] popular in Palo Alto. [12:57] >> Yeah. I I want to get back to something [12:59] you just said which is that you know, [13:01] that [13:02] it's it's either us winning or China [13:04] winning or Russia winning or another [13:05] country that it's a zero-sum game and it [13:07] feels like the people in this room in [13:09] Washington really understand that AI is [13:10] zero-sum but that Silicon Valley [13:12] doesn't. Silicon Valley doesn't like to [13:14] think in terms of zero-sum. They like to [13:16] think that everything is a positive-sum [13:17] game. So how would you explain to the [13:19] people in Silicon Valley who are again [13:21] building the LLMs, you know, building um [13:23] what what they would say is a brand new [13:25] net new technology that hasn't existed [13:26] before and therefore it needs to be [13:27] treated differently. What would you say [13:29] to them about this new [13:30] >> Well, I mean there's so first of all [13:31] it's it's By the way, I just want to [13:33] push back slightly. They do think it's [13:35] zero-sum and they think it's zero-sum [13:36] versus each other. [13:37] So like they absolutely are fighting. [13:39] There will be like it you know, it's my [13:42] own rhetoric but I happen to think it's [13:43] true. It's going to be chips, ontology [13:45] and I suspect in the end one one and a [13:47] half provider. So they pretend they [13:49] don't think it's zero-sum but then ask [13:50] them how they feel about their [13:51] competitor. [13:52] >> Yeah, that's true. [13:53] >> very very I mean these people are [13:54] fighting very very hard for the dominant [13:56] position. So like what they don't [13:58] understand is in the world it's [14:00] zero-sum. But I I actually think the [14:03] primary issue in the valley is it's [14:06] going to be zero-sum vis-a-vis you when [14:09] America decides that look okay, I have a [14:12] I I interact with a lot of political [14:14] figures. I have a lot of respect. I [14:15] think and some are [14:18] When politicians figure out this is the [14:19] one winning issue, it is going to be [14:21] zero-sum. It's going to be your money [14:24] and your company being zero-sum [14:26] nationalized. So that's the part they [14:28] don't understand. [14:30] Helping people understand that you know, [14:32] either we set the rules or de facto like [14:35] I'm I'm much more [14:37] I'm much more on America should be [14:39] strong [14:40] so that we don't have to worry about the [14:42] enemies than our enemies are evil kind [14:44] of thing. So I'm not super neocon. It [14:46] seems to be very hard in this culture as [14:49] someone who's lived abroad a lot of my [14:52] life. It's very hard in this culture to [14:53] explain to people that we're in a [14:55] competitive environment because things [14:58] here are so good they don't understand [15:01] how different it will be and how much we [15:04] will change and how much the pressure [15:06] will be on America not just legally but [15:08] militarily and culturally if we fall [15:10] behind. And I [15:12] one of the things that again, it's So I [15:15] I personally think the better way to get [15:18] people to change is to [15:20] Okay, [15:22] go bring people like that to Iowa. Bring [15:25] them to DC [15:27] and explain to our American political [15:29] leadership why you make a hundred [15:31] million dollars and why a soldier from [15:34] Iowa can't explain to his wife he has [15:36] the best technology. And then go across [15:38] the hall, so let's classically [15:40] Republican shape, then go across the [15:42] hall and talk to progressive Democrats [15:44] about how every one of their [15:46] constituencies not going to have a job. [15:49] And then leave and imagine what's going [15:51] to happen to you. You know, the funny [15:52] thing about those of us who spent most [15:54] of our life abroad, like in Germany, [15:56] which is a phenomenal culture, [15:59] we have a much better sense of how [16:00] fragile this experiment is, America. It [16:04] could go wrong. And it will go wrong if [16:07] if all wealth is going to a small number [16:09] of people and those people do not appear [16:11] to be on side. Now, that perception [16:14] might is obviously a caricature. It is a [16:16] caricature in the sense this is new [16:18] technology and you're not going to be [16:19] able to use the same kind of [16:22] framework and you're going to need [16:23] people who appreciate how it's [16:25] different. And there are real questions [16:27] about Fourth Amendment protections, like [16:29] our right to privacy. What is privacy in [16:31] a world where you can impute what [16:33] someone's doing at home through [16:35] technology? How how do you protect our [16:37] right to have our own thoughts, our own [16:39] ideas, our own practices at home, our [16:41] own health records? [16:43] That those are real issues when the [16:46] technology can also help you to be [16:48] healthier, live longer, [16:50] uh have a higher economic status, [16:52] potentially, certainly if you're a [16:53] vocational worker. But so those issues [16:55] have to be unpacked and where Silicon [16:57] Valley is right is you you're going to [17:00] need a forum to talk about that that [17:03] doesn't pretend, [17:05] you know, a large language model is the [17:07] same thing as [17:08] machine learning is the same thing as [17:10] software is the same thing as a bullet. [17:11] They're they're not. [17:13] Um uh but um but but but but de facto I [17:18] I very much believe uh [17:21] as a critique of the uh like uh economic [17:26] elite especially in in the technical [17:28] area, there's there's like uh to use an [17:30] economic a a kind of [17:32] uh overly economic uh a philosophical [17:34] term, they reify, meaning they turn it [17:36] into a thing. [17:38] Our rights, but those rights, you know, [17:41] when I was in Germany, I I was there and [17:43] there were I spent a lot of time [17:45] I did a PhD. [17:47] Uh but I you know, there were a lot of [17:49] older Germans and I I would spend time [17:51] with them uh in the countryside. In the [17:53] city, of course, they they didn't know [17:54] anybody who was a Nazi. In the [17:55] countryside, they're like, "We're all [17:57] Nazis." So, I would ask them. But the [17:59] one of the more fascinating [18:00] conversations is why they became [18:02] Democrats or not like left-right, but [18:04] capital D. And it was always because it [18:07] worked. And then the unwinding of it [18:10] that we don't ask if it unwinds, [18:12] you know, our it will not we will not be [18:15] protected. [18:16] And it it's just the dialogue we have [18:19] currently is not acknowledging what's [18:22] going to happen politically, what is [18:23] happening politically. You know, the [18:25] wealth tax is a derivative of this [18:27] because everyone knows the wealth tax [18:29] isn't going to help the poor, it's just [18:30] going to [ __ ] the rich. And that's [18:32] enough to get it done. [18:34] And if if that's happening, just imagine [18:37] what's going to happen when it's like [18:38] there's going to be 50 unlikable people [18:40] with all the money. [18:42] >> [laughter] [18:43] >> Anybody here like that? And you guys are [18:44] doing well. [18:46] >> Yep. No, I I I I want to get back to to [18:48] kind of the conversation about how [18:51] um [18:51] how we ensure that the Department of War [18:53] continues to lead on AI because I think [18:55] this has been top of mind for everyone [18:56] in the room for the last 48 hours. [18:59] Um our adversaries are looking at, you [19:01] know, contracting wars um that are [19:02] playing out in press releases. You know, [19:04] what is your view on how we can ensure [19:06] that we win this AI race against the [19:07] PRC? If you if you're giving advice to [19:10] all the founders and CEOs of of you know [19:13] the the the all our companies. [19:14] >> part of what I'm doing and part what [19:16] part of the reason I'm here besides your [19:17] charm and importance what part of the [19:19] reason I'm here is [19:20] uh [19:21] I want [19:22] My reputation in the valley every you [19:25] always have reputations. My reputation [19:27] which I'm not even saying the reputation [19:28] is true. But in my case like I'm viewed [19:32] as the batshit crazy guy who is often [19:35] telling you something you don't want to [19:36] hear and you may not like but is [19:39] probably right. [19:41] And [19:41] >> That's true. [19:42] >> So [19:43] Yeah. [19:44] >> [laughter] [19:44] >> And that's why I want you to send this [19:47] first step we have to they're not [19:49] understanding mistakes. And what I [19:52] nothing's going to happen till people [19:53] understand mistakes. This will affect [19:55] you. [19:56] Now then the question is like what [19:58] Hollywood did is Hollywood got together. [20:01] The whole rating system was Hollywood [20:03] realized if we don't do rating ratings [20:06] Washington's going to. [20:08] And Washington is going to butcher it. [20:11] And it let's even say Washington doesn't [20:13] want to butcher it. But like it it [20:15] doesn't understand the métier. So the [20:18] first step is everybody and I'm already [20:21] on the phone with people saying okay [20:22] great I understand your issue. [20:24] But you realize the wolves are at the [20:26] gate and they already have tasted blood. [20:30] >> Yeah. [20:30] >> Uh [20:31] second step is we have to find ways [20:33] where we [20:35] get together and say okay like if you [20:38] just want to go through the issues. Yes [20:40] there are you know using technologies in [20:42] the context of eviscerating [20:45] uh fourth amendment rights in America is [20:48] a is something left and right in this [20:50] country actually don't want. It's a [20:51] caricature to believe that either side [20:53] wants it. There are people on the [20:55] honestly I'm in private rooms. There are [20:57] people on the left who don't care about [20:58] these issues who pretend to do it in [21:00] public do in public. But there are [21:02] people and there people on the right who [21:04] pretend not to care who do care. Both [21:06] parties have significant coalitions and [21:09] the American people cares care and it's [21:11] in our constitution, but then you have [21:13] to get be very granular about what's [21:15] going to happen on the battlefield [21:17] because there the the two issues [21:20] Americans care about are their [21:22] prosperity and their safety. [21:24] So, if the if if [21:26] the two things that Silicon Valley has [21:29] to figure out is is [21:31] what are we going to how are we going to [21:32] ethically talk about what's going to [21:35] happen to our economy. [21:37] I in my view, you have you could create [21:40] a lot of prosperity with trade shaped [21:43] people. [21:44] Uh okay, but what is going to happen to [21:46] the white-collar workers and what are we [21:49] going to do? That That's one issue and [21:51] then we we're not going to agree, but we [21:53] have to have something like a we're [21:55] going to do these initiatives just like [21:57] Hollywood did and then you're going to [21:59] have to have a discussion on the [22:01] battlefield where you know, the [22:04] rebuttable presumption, meaning it [22:06] doesn't happen is that the we are going [22:09] to do the maximal amount to make sure [22:11] our war fighters come home safely. And [22:13] if you are sitting in Silicon Valley [22:16] making an argument that somehow would [22:18] eviscerate that or conversely, you're [22:21] not able to understand what Silicon [22:23] Valley saying, meaning there's going to [22:24] have to be a medium. Without going into [22:26] details on all these breakdowns cuz [22:29] I was in the middle of it and I want to [22:30] stay in the middle of it. There there [22:32] are substantive issues and there are [22:33] cultural issues. [22:35] If we could get rid of the cultural [22:37] misunderstanding, we could get pretty [22:38] close to agreements here, but you you're [22:41] dealing with worlds that never ever ever [22:43] talk and don't have an ability to talk [22:46] to each other. [22:46] >> Yeah. Well, and you've been building a [22:48] bridge between these cultures for 20 [22:50] years. I mean, that's what's so [22:51] interesting. I mean, that's in some ways [22:52] why we have this conference is to bring [22:53] together people who speak two different [22:55] languages, very different value sets and [22:57] try to get them aligned. I I'd love your [22:59] advice for these founders who maybe are [23:01] new. You know, it's sort of like that [23:02] meme, the first time meme with the Coen [23:04] brothers film, you know, where it's like [23:05] a lot of these people are having their [23:06] first conversations with the Department [23:08] of War. Or they don't or they maybe they [23:10] don't have any family in the military, [23:11] maybe they've never never met a [23:12] warfighter. What is your advice to some [23:14] of these CEOs who are maybe new to these [23:15] conversations that you've been having [23:17] for for 20 years now? [23:19] >> Well, the best thing you could do is go [23:21] to Iowa or go to a base and have a like [23:24] I don't think look this way. [23:27] Um [23:27] maybe the first time [23:31] it's probably not PG, but you know, I'm [23:34] happily not married, not divorced, so [23:36] don't follow how I live, but you don't [23:38] have to maybe if you're going to meet [23:41] somebody you really want to impress it [23:42] maybe not maybe you have an advantage if [23:44] it's your third girlfriend or boyfriend, [23:46] not your first. [23:47] Like go have a conversation with [23:49] somebody like if you're going to meet a [23:51] general or somebody like that and you've [23:54] never talked to somebody who's actually [23:56] done something on the battlefield or [23:59] someone who has family who's done [24:01] something on the battlefield and you [24:03] don't have any because of that you don't [24:05] have an ability to emphasize with their [24:07] perspective, [24:09] that's probably a huge mistake. [24:12] >> Yeah. [24:12] >> And I that's probably going to backfire. [24:14] Last Secondly though, you have to be [24:17] honest aware about where your aptitude [24:19] is. Like, you know, [24:21] um [24:22] Silicon Valley tech builders broadly [24:24] defined hardware, software, AI, [24:27] I would say we build in the military [24:29] context [24:31] essentially [24:32] software scaffolding much more like in a [24:35] weird way more more like hardware [24:37] software, but it's in software [24:39] managing LLMs. [24:41] Um [24:42] uh [24:43] it is [24:44] the single biggest mistake people make [24:47] in this area is because they're [24:49] intelligent in one area, [24:51] they assume they're intelligent in all [24:53] areas. And a big failure mechanism in [24:55] the valley is every valley person is [24:58] forced to present as if they're the [25:00] smartest in all areas at all time. [25:03] And that's like if you don't know who [25:04] the mark is, you're the mark. [25:06] >> Yeah. [25:06] >> Like if you think you're the smartest [25:07] person So I I'm dyslexic and I think one [25:09] of the reasons I've done so well is [25:11] I do think I'm one of the better people [25:14] at certain things least I believe it and [25:16] I know I'm not at everything. It's a [25:18] very small It's like but a failure mode [25:22] for the valley is I'm the smartest on [25:24] every issue. I For example, I need to be [25:26] the person negotiating this contract. [25:28] >> Yeah. [25:29] >> What if you have no aptitude for that? [25:31] Just cuz you can do X does not mean [25:34] you've imputed high aptitude at Y. In [25:36] fact, it's very unlikely it's true. [25:38] >> Yeah. [25:38] >> It's It's almost certain that you're [25:40] just not smart enough to realize how bad [25:42] you are. [25:43] >> That's probably one of the most [25:44] important lessons for for company [25:45] builders in the room. I actually I I [25:47] want to [25:48] um end the conversation on Palantir is [25:50] the OG American Dynamism company. Um I [25:53] think a lot of our founders in this room [25:54] are indebted. They've worked for you. [25:56] They've um you know, built their [25:57] playbooks inside of Palantir or they've [25:59] built new companies that, you know, are [26:01] are epic in their own right, but they [26:02] started at Palantir in many cases. And [26:04] so I want to dive into you you brought [26:06] up the neurodivergent fellowship. It's [26:08] one of my favorite things you've ever [26:09] done. You've done a lot of great things, [26:10] but I think it's it's one of the most [26:11] extraordinary um stands that you've [26:14] taken in the company. But you've always [26:16] looked for people who are different and [26:18] somehow cultivated them and brought [26:19] together people who are Democrats, [26:22] Republicans, on the right, on the left, [26:23] people who are of all walks of life. [26:26] How do you lead such a diverse group of [26:28] people especially at scale like at the [26:29] scale you are? [26:32] >> Well, I mean [26:34] it's always hard to know when you're [26:37] re- Like I I I view myself as an artist. [26:40] So you really it's like well, how do you [26:41] create the art? And it's funny because I [26:43] I mean I Look, I [26:45] I like the freedom money gives me and I [26:47] I certainly don't want to like do some [26:50] [ __ ] philanthropy to prove that I'm [26:51] good [26:52] when because I did something bad cuz I [26:54] think what we do is [26:56] uh very important. Um but it's like at [26:59] the end of the day, it's like an [27:01] artistic thing, but you know, I had It's [27:04] always helpful. I had [27:06] My parents are among the most talented [27:08] people I've ever met and [27:11] I feel they don't agree with me that, [27:13] you know, [27:14] like they should have They could like [27:16] It's kind of weird I'm so famous. [27:18] Put it that way from my And [27:20] um [27:22] I [27:23] uh [27:24] um [27:25] uh [27:27] I [27:28] I And I then there's the American thing [27:30] where we are I really believe in the [27:34] magical liberating inalienable right for [27:37] all of us to be individuals and that's [27:40] what I see as [27:41] particularly moral and special in the [27:43] world. I don't like these things that [27:46] like I I've been famously anti-woke, but [27:49] in The thing I find offensive about it [27:51] is actually that it's people pretending [27:54] to be different while all being the [27:55] same. [27:56] And so I don't like uh so I tend to [27:59] gravitate towards [28:01] people who are unique and yeah, I don't [28:03] really care their politics. I care about [28:05] like their ability to think and do. Um [28:09] there is an aptitude thing where can you [28:12] recognize [28:13] somebody who is truly unique in [28:16] something you've not done yourself is [28:19] a just something you're born with. [28:21] Um [28:22] I [28:24] I do think it's a form of [28:25] neurodivergence like outlier IQ is a It [28:28] is certain way it's not that different [28:30] than being autistic. Like you just can't [28:33] You're not going to You're not going to [28:34] decomp a problem the way somebody who is [28:37] all just normal smart will. Um and I [28:39] find that very, very charismatic. The [28:42] trick to doing it is you have to [28:46] It's It's very hard thing where somebody [28:49] who is the best I I believe the [28:51] Palantirians [28:53] will manage a Palantir and sometimes in [28:55] many and most cases presumably after a [28:58] Palantir I am helping them to express [29:01] something that only they can do [29:03] at that moment and if you look at our [29:05] products and what we've done it is [29:06] actually true even what we're doing in [29:08] in like right now it all across the [29:10] Middle East and obviously in America [29:13] each single product at each single part [29:15] was built by the one person in the world [29:17] that could have done it [29:18] but that and then I have to somehow get [29:21] them to do things that they don't [29:23] actually think are valuable but on their [29:25] terms and that's basically my job [29:27] because at that level of aptitude you [29:30] can't just say do this idiot cuz they're [29:32] like why would I do that you're the [29:33] idiot [29:35] and so [29:36] and and then what I think is very [29:38] special about the Palantirians [29:41] ex-Palantirians and current Palantirians [29:43] is [29:44] when you're at Palantir you're not [29:46] learning to to actually follow my [29:49] playbook you're learning to follow your [29:51] playbook where I'm inserting some things [29:54] that may not have occurred to you maybe [29:56] you don't know I'm doing that [29:58] to make sure that your playbook gets rid [30:00] of your dyslexia basically I'm [30:01] anti-dyslexifying [30:03] your playbook it but around you and if [30:06] you take like the I don't know there's [30:08] so many really important ex-Palantirians [30:11] what you'll see is [30:13] they're a kind of plastic people and [30:16] they're not going to build the same [30:17] company Palantir was they're also not [30:19] going to build the same company of the [30:20] ex-personal as Palantir and that's why [30:23] they play such a disproportionate role [30:25] and at the end of the day that's why [30:26] Palantir is like [30:28] playing such a big role because like [30:30] Foundry PG Apollo ontology [30:34] the management of ontology [30:36] Maven which is like you know we've just [30:39] like been able to target in a way no [30:41] other country can. It's like the other [30:43] countries are like, what the happened [30:44] here? Like we were thinking Afghanistan. [30:47] Like, what is this? Meaning our retreat. [30:50] Like [30:51] meaning and like like America has [30:54] reestablished deterrence. [30:56] That actually just happened. It's [30:58] happened in the last year. Like that [31:01] right left center [31:02] I don't care what party you're in in [31:05] private. Obviously you can't say this in [31:06] public. [31:08] In private that is a phenomenal asset [31:11] that America now has that it did not [31:13] have. And there are lots of reasons for [31:15] it, but a one maybe not the most [31:17] important is a concatenation of the most [31:19] unusual [31:21] in some cases otherwise maybe not fully [31:23] functional talent [31:25] built around building something that was [31:27] an absolutely scandalous unpopular dream [31:30] rejected by many people called Maven. [31:33] And that's how this country By the way, [31:37] if we are going to outperform the rest [31:39] of the world, [31:40] uh our single advantage is to augment [31:45] neurodivergent [31:47] highly individual people to be their [31:51] absolutely unique best and protect their [31:53] first, second, fourth, and fifth [31:55] amendment rights so that they don't get [31:56] screwed. [31:58] >> Absolutely. Well, again, the OG American [32:01] Dynamism founder, thank you so much for [32:03] all you've done for the country. [32:04] >> Thank you. [32:15] >> [music]