7 ms·

Palantir CEO rips Silicon Valley, accuses it of selling out America

50 points by bane 8y ago

writepub 8y ago
Google's initial investors included the CIA (InQTel). The internet itself was a defense (DARPA) project. The Bell Labs work on the transistor emerged from war-time efforts to produce extremely pure germanium "crystal" mixer diodes, used in radar units. I can go on and on about the inventions spawned by defense funding. Silicon valley itself owes its existence to Northrop Grumman and their ilk, who were early tech employers seeding Intel, Xerox, HP, Apple, with crucial tech talent. Today's tech aversion to defense agencies is one of the most paradoxical philosophies to ever exist. Instead of demanding more accountability from defense agencies, they outright refuse to sell/engage with the very people providing national security, and hence allowing a civilized society with a stable government to exist.
- skybrian 8y ago
  There are certainly many people who work for defense contractors and they are necessary. But, other people don't want to do that. If they join a company that's not a defense contractor, and it becomes a defense contractor, it feels like a bait-and-switch. That's not what they signed up for. And it does seem like, in a large industry with many different kinds of jobs that need to be done, it's clearly not necessary for everyone to work in defense. On the other hand, the funny thing about large companies is that they do many things, but by reputation they're treated as a single entity. So you get into a somewhat weird situation where people care what some distant part of the company does that has almost nothing to do with their work day-to-day. I'm reminded of Paul Graham's classic essay, "Keep Your Identity Small" [1]. If you join a large company and identify with it, this is making your identity larger than it probably should be. For better or worse, many employees of these companies feel responsible for things they have little control over. They feel good when the company does something good and bad when the company does something they don't like. So they decide the problem is that they need to have more control and this results in a rather problematic kind of company politics. [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - writepub 8y ago
    There's no bait and switch anywhere. Employment is primarily at-will, and anyone can walk out anytime. Also, companies have certain identities in certain time-windows. Apple was a computer company in the late 90s, by late 2000s it had already gone through 2 identities: a music player company, to primarily a phone company. Employers cannot guarantee what work and markets they will and won't chase. Being a cloud infrastructure and AI company, it's predictable for Google to decide to go after one of the largest spenders in the space, defense.
    - xiphias2 8y ago
      If you listened to the TGIFs made by Eric Schmidt 12 years ago, it was totally different. It looked like there's enough opportunities to make a lot of money without going to the war industry (I can't call defence what the U.S. is doing). What do you think ,,Don't be evil'' means? We (non-Americans) were all writing code and staying at Google in the late evenings, sometimes working on weekends because we really though that Google is different. Of course when 2008 happened, a lot of things changed, the optimism changed to being cautious and more frugal, which everybody understood. Since then Google changed it's motto, but the code and the network effect stayed with it.
      - writepub 8y ago
        > We (non-Americans) were all writing code and staying at Google in the late evenings You weren't really doing Google a favor, they were paying you well above market for your work. The fact that your nationality is a point for you to highlight is indicative of your warped expectations. You chose to move to America, no one forced it on you. And you chose to work for Google. If America welcomed you, allowed you to freely express yourself and thrive professionally, WHY is liking America, or supporting the defense establishment that protects your civil liberties and safety, and creates a stable socio-political environment for YOU and million others who immigrate and live here, such a toxic thing? America is the world's most sought after immigration destination for a reason, it's OK to acknowledge the positives, and like it for the same
adamnemecek 8y ago
He of all people has very little moral high ground for statements like this.
- taneq 8y ago
  Or his yardstick just points in a drastically different direction than yours or mine.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Aeolun 8y ago
Pot, meet kettle.
paxys 8y ago
> Karp, whose Palo Alto, California-based company provides services to the Defense Department, CIA and FBI, blasted tech companies that refuse work with the federal government to keep the country safe. This guy has a very different definition of "selling out America"
RockIslandLine 8y ago
Demonstrate how those programs do keep the country safe. Just because someone wants to do it doesn't mean that it's actually valuable work. ------ "Karp, whose Palo Alto, California-based company provides services to the Defense Department, CIA and FBI, blasted tech companies that refuse work with the federal government to keep the country safe."
- zdragnar 8y ago
  It's not so much the programs as the analysts who use them (and confirm the outputs) I think. I once had the pleasure of watching one use nothing but twitter posts to map out all the gang territories of Chicago. While he was at it, he found evidence in a murder case and found a picture someone posted of themselves holding an RPG in the city. If I remember correctly, he'd put all of this together in 3 days. Of course, he was independent and so had to rely on the publicly available twitter searches, where the expectation is that tweets are public. The good - and terrible - things that could be done with access to what people expect to be private is a far more challenging prospect to justify. And, I think that is a debate worth having. However, it is certainly a forgone conclusion that the programs can and do contribute to stopping bad actors.
  - toufiqbarhamov 8y ago
    And, I think that is a debate worth having. However, it is certainly a forgone conclusion that the programs can and do contribute to stopping bad actors. No... it’s not a forgone conclusion, that’s the very point up for debate. That’s a massive claim made without commensurate evidence, and you’re responding to someone specifically making that point!
    - zdragnar 8y ago
      Why believe any evidence I present to you? I'm just a screen name on the internet. I've given one example of how quickly data can be synthesized to new intel. These tools do nothing human analysts haven't already been doing for years- aside from shortening the process from weeks down to a day or three. Frankly, the effectiveness of the tools is the least interesting aspect of the debate. The far more interesting and valuable debate to my mind is the extent to which we, the civilian government, should enable the policing and military powers to use the tools, and at what cost to ourselves.
pvarangot 8y ago
He's basically gatekeeping being "weird"? I can't believe a guy that had a LOTR themed office going now says one needs an excuse to do it, I'm not going to ask society permission to be myself if just want to be goofy and nerdy.
scrame 8y ago
irony.
KaiserPro 8y ago
what did the moral vacuum say to arses at silicon valley? "you're a sellout"
pgodzin 8y ago
> "The reason why people put up with crazy looking people that are doing their thing in a different way is because we have historically delivered either jobs or national security," Karp told CNBC on Wednesday. "People understood the value of what we're doing." Has Silicon Valley ever had a particular history of delivering "national security". I would say more than jobs or national security SV has delivered free or cheaper consumer-facing products, which is the real value the entire country has seen.
- et-al 8y ago
  SV has always worked with the DoD, and the internet was a DARPA project. More tangibly, Lockheed Martin was founded in Palo Alto, and Raytheon is still in the area. But I'm guessing your question is asking whether or not these products have resulted in "national security". Does having more fighter jets or satellites make us safer? Traditionally, yes. However in the 21st century, I think we need to focus more on robust systems of communication while building bridges with the rest of the world.
  - pgodzin 8y ago
    Certainly he isn't referring to government contractors like Lockheed when referring to the tech companies of SV who have sold out America.
  - dkersten 8y ago
    I remember reading a rather interesting "history of SV as a tech hub" type documentary series of articles that went all the way back to the 40's war effort.
mmanfrin 8y ago
As opposed to Palantir, which sells out the American people.
d--b 8y ago
Theses guys have no shame. Thiel is notoriously libertarian. He’s advocating for smaller and smaller government. Yet, the company he founded makes money by selling surveillance software to the government. Surveillance software that has some good use cases - in the fight against terrorism - but that inevitably empowers the government against its citizen. Palantir can be used to track terrorist, but it can be used to find anything. Political agitators, for instance. In the wrong hands, it’s a tool that is damaging to the American “social contract” these guys are so vehemently defending. If anyone at Palantir reads this: get your story straight. Be libertarians or pro government. If your pro government, stop financing political parties that cut massive tax breaks.
- xiphias2 8y ago
  Thiel doesn't have a moral high ground. Just look at how much he talks about the importance of making a monopoly for creating money. I respect him for not saying that he's making the world (or especially U.S.) a better place by going for government contracts.
- cannabis_sam 8y ago
  The profit motive does not give a single fuck about logical consistency. Quite the opposite, if everyone else is constrained by trying to be consistent, it means there a market opportunity available by breaking free of the constraints. Hence you get libertarians who build the surveillance state. It’s the inevitable consequence of right libertarianism (they disregard economic power); left libertarianism avoids this by consistently refusing to get any real power.
- mips_avatar 8y ago
  Libertarians believe in defense and national security spending, if not social programs. I think most people believe that our government should be competent, if the FBI can identify a terrorist/school shooter before they murder people that saves lives. Will these tools be used tyrannically? That’s up to our government, but luckily we get to elect them. If you want government agencies to change their mission or be reformed then get legislators elected who believe in this, don’t try to sabotage our government’s ability to do what it needs to do.
nodesocket 8y ago
While it's not going to a be a popular oppinion, I do have first hand knowledge and experience and agree. As somebody who lived in SF for over five years, the last couple of years especially there is a palatable distain for Americanism and patriotism at bay area companies. I'd even go as far as some people are flat out anti-American. There is an anti-authority ideology that permeates everything and a persistent skepticism.
- techsin101 8y ago
  Do you not think if an intelligent person looked at things objectively they would come to hate our frogein policy, 1% controlled government, and wealth inequality which is result of capitalism that has gone haywire? Budget of NASA is Tiny percentage of what we spend on WAR every year. Destroy elected governments, setup puppets, veto UN's majority decisions... Use automonus drones, use vaccination camps to recruit spies, kill doctors in war zone... It keeps going. List of atrocities grow every year sadly. How do you feel when you learn there is a billionaire who has not paid any tax in years or corporations owe billions in taxes. What about Verizon hijacking fcc?
- marssaxman 8y ago
  Yep. That's how it's been as long as I've been involved in the industry, and it's a good thing.
- dmode 8y ago
  I feel nationalism and patriotism are dangerous concepts that need to be challenged. We should be looking to form an inclusive global community that can progress together instead of boxing ourselves into arbitrarily drawn man made lines which we are thrown into by luck of birth. Not that I don't believe in nation status. But I never understood why should I like a person who falls on one side of that line more than a person on another side of that arbitrary line. As for being anti-American, I guess it depends on which America. Is it the one that professes the values of democracy and progress, leads in sciences and exploration, welcomes everyone with open arms ? I love that America. Or is it the America of wealth inequality, foreign wars, and global geopolitics. Not a fan of that America.
gammateam 8y ago
ITT: he’s not wrong just the wrong person to say it
- ionised 8y ago
  No, he's definitely wrong.
dmode 8y ago
This reads like an Onion headline
PalantirSlayer 8y ago
If you have sold your soul to uncouth government agents violating law and then lying about it, you pretty much will end up being very unhappy about the rest of the world. Now, the central idea of united states was to have small micro communities that will mind their own business, will chose their own values and give zero fks about "greater society". "Greater Society" is the euphemism for handful few who pretend to be the representatives of the "greater society" or "greater good". In fact when a person talks about "greater good" always be aware he is trying to sell you something that is clearly not good for you. Google or any other company should not be compelled to work on anything that it is not willing to work. That is an important value USA has learned the hard way and we better keep it. After all Karp and his company are there to help DoD or Pentagon or FBI.
ionised 8y ago
It's an important distinction that he makes when he says Silicon Valley is selling out America™, as opposed to the American people, which Palantir has sold out.
leroy_masochist 8y ago
Biggest takeaway I got from the video was how hard Karp was trying to push the concept that Palantir is a product, rather than a service business.

50 points by bane 8y ago

Google's initial investors included the CIA (InQTel). The internet itself was a defense (DARPA) project. The Bell Labs work on the transistor emerged from war-time efforts to produce extremely pure germanium "crystal" mixer diodes, used in radar units. I can go on and on about the inventions spawned by defense funding. Silicon valley itself owes its existence to Northrop Grumman and their ilk, who were early tech employers seeding Intel, Xerox, HP, Apple, with crucial tech talent. Today's tech aversion to defense agencies is one of the most paradoxical philosophies to ever exist. Instead of demanding more accountability from defense agencies, they outright refuse to sell/engage with the very people providing national security, and hence allowing a civilized society with a stable government to exist.

skybrian 8y ago
There are certainly many people who work for defense contractors and they are necessary. But, other people don't want to do that. If they join a company that's not a defense contractor, and it becomes a defense contractor, it feels like a bait-and-switch. That's not what they signed up for. And it does seem like, in a large industry with many different kinds of jobs that need to be done, it's clearly not necessary for everyone to work in defense. On the other hand, the funny thing about large companies is that they do many things, but by reputation they're treated as a single entity. So you get into a somewhat weird situation where people care what some distant part of the company does that has almost nothing to do with their work day-to-day. I'm reminded of Paul Graham's classic essay, "Keep Your Identity Small" [1]. If you join a large company and identify with it, this is making your identity larger than it probably should be. For better or worse, many employees of these companies feel responsible for things they have little control over. They feel good when the company does something good and bad when the company does something they don't like. So they decide the problem is that they need to have more control and this results in a rather problematic kind of company politics. [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- writepub 8y ago
  There's no bait and switch anywhere. Employment is primarily at-will, and anyone can walk out anytime. Also, companies have certain identities in certain time-windows. Apple was a computer company in the late 90s, by late 2000s it had already gone through 2 identities: a music player company, to primarily a phone company. Employers cannot guarantee what work and markets they will and won't chase. Being a cloud infrastructure and AI company, it's predictable for Google to decide to go after one of the largest spenders in the space, defense.
  - xiphias2 8y ago
    If you listened to the TGIFs made by Eric Schmidt 12 years ago, it was totally different. It looked like there's enough opportunities to make a lot of money without going to the war industry (I can't call defence what the U.S. is doing). What do you think ,,Don't be evil'' means? We (non-Americans) were all writing code and staying at Google in the late evenings, sometimes working on weekends because we really though that Google is different. Of course when 2008 happened, a lot of things changed, the optimism changed to being cautious and more frugal, which everybody understood. Since then Google changed it's motto, but the code and the network effect stayed with it.
    - writepub 8y ago
      > We (non-Americans) were all writing code and staying at Google in the late evenings You weren't really doing Google a favor, they were paying you well above market for your work. The fact that your nationality is a point for you to highlight is indicative of your warped expectations. You chose to move to America, no one forced it on you. And you chose to work for Google. If America welcomed you, allowed you to freely express yourself and thrive professionally, WHY is liking America, or supporting the defense establishment that protects your civil liberties and safety, and creates a stable socio-political environment for YOU and million others who immigrate and live here, such a toxic thing? America is the world's most sought after immigration destination for a reason, it's OK to acknowledge the positives, and like it for the same

adamnemecek 8y ago

He of all people has very little moral high ground for statements like this.

taneq 8y ago
Or his yardstick just points in a drastically different direction than yours or mine.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

Aeolun 8y ago

Pot, meet kettle.

paxys 8y ago

> Karp, whose Palo Alto, California-based company provides services to the Defense Department, CIA and FBI, blasted tech companies that refuse work with the federal government to keep the country safe. This guy has a very different definition of "selling out America"

RockIslandLine 8y ago

Demonstrate how those programs do keep the country safe. Just because someone wants to do it doesn't mean that it's actually valuable work. ------ "Karp, whose Palo Alto, California-based company provides services to the Defense Department, CIA and FBI, blasted tech companies that refuse work with the federal government to keep the country safe."

zdragnar 8y ago
It's not so much the programs as the analysts who use them (and confirm the outputs) I think. I once had the pleasure of watching one use nothing but twitter posts to map out all the gang territories of Chicago. While he was at it, he found evidence in a murder case and found a picture someone posted of themselves holding an RPG in the city. If I remember correctly, he'd put all of this together in 3 days. Of course, he was independent and so had to rely on the publicly available twitter searches, where the expectation is that tweets are public. The good - and terrible - things that could be done with access to what people expect to be private is a far more challenging prospect to justify. And, I think that is a debate worth having. However, it is certainly a forgone conclusion that the programs can and do contribute to stopping bad actors.
- toufiqbarhamov 8y ago
  And, I think that is a debate worth having. However, it is certainly a forgone conclusion that the programs can and do contribute to stopping bad actors. No... it’s not a forgone conclusion, that’s the very point up for debate. That’s a massive claim made without commensurate evidence, and you’re responding to someone specifically making that point!
  - zdragnar 8y ago
    Why believe any evidence I present to you? I'm just a screen name on the internet. I've given one example of how quickly data can be synthesized to new intel. These tools do nothing human analysts haven't already been doing for years- aside from shortening the process from weeks down to a day or three. Frankly, the effectiveness of the tools is the least interesting aspect of the debate. The far more interesting and valuable debate to my mind is the extent to which we, the civilian government, should enable the policing and military powers to use the tools, and at what cost to ourselves.

pvarangot 8y ago

He's basically gatekeeping being "weird"? I can't believe a guy that had a LOTR themed office going now says one needs an excuse to do it, I'm not going to ask society permission to be myself if just want to be goofy and nerdy.

scrame 8y ago

irony.

KaiserPro 8y ago

what did the moral vacuum say to arses at silicon valley? "you're a sellout"

pgodzin 8y ago

> "The reason why people put up with crazy looking people that are doing their thing in a different way is because we have historically delivered either jobs or national security," Karp told CNBC on Wednesday. "People understood the value of what we're doing." Has Silicon Valley ever had a particular history of delivering "national security". I would say more than jobs or national security SV has delivered free or cheaper consumer-facing products, which is the real value the entire country has seen.

et-al 8y ago
SV has always worked with the DoD, and the internet was a DARPA project. More tangibly, Lockheed Martin was founded in Palo Alto, and Raytheon is still in the area. But I'm guessing your question is asking whether or not these products have resulted in "national security". Does having more fighter jets or satellites make us safer? Traditionally, yes. However in the 21st century, I think we need to focus more on robust systems of communication while building bridges with the rest of the world.
- pgodzin 8y ago
  Certainly he isn't referring to government contractors like Lockheed when referring to the tech companies of SV who have sold out America.
- dkersten 8y ago
  I remember reading a rather interesting "history of SV as a tech hub" type documentary series of articles that went all the way back to the 40's war effort.

mmanfrin 8y ago

As opposed to Palantir, which sells out the American people.

d--b 8y ago

Theses guys have no shame. Thiel is notoriously libertarian. He’s advocating for smaller and smaller government. Yet, the company he founded makes money by selling surveillance software to the government. Surveillance software that has some good use cases - in the fight against terrorism - but that inevitably empowers the government against its citizen. Palantir can be used to track terrorist, but it can be used to find anything. Political agitators, for instance. In the wrong hands, it’s a tool that is damaging to the American “social contract” these guys are so vehemently defending. If anyone at Palantir reads this: get your story straight. Be libertarians or pro government. If your pro government, stop financing political parties that cut massive tax breaks.

xiphias2 8y ago
Thiel doesn't have a moral high ground. Just look at how much he talks about the importance of making a monopoly for creating money. I respect him for not saying that he's making the world (or especially U.S.) a better place by going for government contracts.
cannabis_sam 8y ago
The profit motive does not give a single fuck about logical consistency. Quite the opposite, if everyone else is constrained by trying to be consistent, it means there a market opportunity available by breaking free of the constraints. Hence you get libertarians who build the surveillance state. It’s the inevitable consequence of right libertarianism (they disregard economic power); left libertarianism avoids this by consistently refusing to get any real power.
mips_avatar 8y ago
Libertarians believe in defense and national security spending, if not social programs. I think most people believe that our government should be competent, if the FBI can identify a terrorist/school shooter before they murder people that saves lives. Will these tools be used tyrannically? That’s up to our government, but luckily we get to elect them. If you want government agencies to change their mission or be reformed then get legislators elected who believe in this, don’t try to sabotage our government’s ability to do what it needs to do.

nodesocket 8y ago

While it's not going to a be a popular oppinion, I do have first hand knowledge and experience and agree. As somebody who lived in SF for over five years, the last couple of years especially there is a palatable distain for Americanism and patriotism at bay area companies. I'd even go as far as some people are flat out anti-American. There is an anti-authority ideology that permeates everything and a persistent skepticism.

techsin101 8y ago
Do you not think if an intelligent person looked at things objectively they would come to hate our frogein policy, 1% controlled government, and wealth inequality which is result of capitalism that has gone haywire? Budget of NASA is Tiny percentage of what we spend on WAR every year. Destroy elected governments, setup puppets, veto UN's majority decisions... Use automonus drones, use vaccination camps to recruit spies, kill doctors in war zone... It keeps going. List of atrocities grow every year sadly. How do you feel when you learn there is a billionaire who has not paid any tax in years or corporations owe billions in taxes. What about Verizon hijacking fcc?
marssaxman 8y ago
Yep. That's how it's been as long as I've been involved in the industry, and it's a good thing.
dmode 8y ago
I feel nationalism and patriotism are dangerous concepts that need to be challenged. We should be looking to form an inclusive global community that can progress together instead of boxing ourselves into arbitrarily drawn man made lines which we are thrown into by luck of birth. Not that I don't believe in nation status. But I never understood why should I like a person who falls on one side of that line more than a person on another side of that arbitrary line. As for being anti-American, I guess it depends on which America. Is it the one that professes the values of democracy and progress, leads in sciences and exploration, welcomes everyone with open arms ? I love that America. Or is it the America of wealth inequality, foreign wars, and global geopolitics. Not a fan of that America.

gammateam 8y ago

ITT: he’s not wrong just the wrong person to say it

ionised 8y ago
No, he's definitely wrong.

dmode 8y ago

This reads like an Onion headline

PalantirSlayer 8y ago

If you have sold your soul to uncouth government agents violating law and then lying about it, you pretty much will end up being very unhappy about the rest of the world. Now, the central idea of united states was to have small micro communities that will mind their own business, will chose their own values and give zero fks about "greater society". "Greater Society" is the euphemism for handful few who pretend to be the representatives of the "greater society" or "greater good". In fact when a person talks about "greater good" always be aware he is trying to sell you something that is clearly not good for you. Google or any other company should not be compelled to work on anything that it is not willing to work. That is an important value USA has learned the hard way and we better keep it. After all Karp and his company are there to help DoD or Pentagon or FBI.

ionised 8y ago

It's an important distinction that he makes when he says Silicon Valley is selling out America™, as opposed to the American people, which Palantir has sold out.

leroy_masochist 8y ago

Biggest takeaway I got from the video was how hard Karp was trying to push the concept that Palantir is a product, rather than a service business.