Palantir CEO Alex Karp: AI Fears, Rise of the Far Right & Germany's Crisis

Well, first of all, that the Palantir thing is Palantir has a hundred more fans than people who describe me that way. In fact, my personal experience including in Germany, including and especially in Germany, is you the media version, and I'll get to that, is you something like, you know, bringing war to peace times or something. But the actual rational human being on the street is a Palantir fan. Part of our success. There's the product side which we could talk about. There's also like put this way every single person in Silicon Valley who finances things would cut off their right arm to have the fans we have and their and your left arm. So, but the many things in your question and I remember meeting you two and thinking, 'Oh, this is a really interesting person.' And you know well how does somebody who studies music end up running what I mean for those who are not in the German speaking world it's funny outside the German speaking world people do not understand the impact of Axel Springer and which Axel Springer which you it's you know it's easy to say you run but it's different you know in Germany there really aren't that many I can't think of any other entrepreneur or someone who owns a significant stake in the company that's also running it. So it's very very unusual setup. It's more similar to America but then we don't have essentially a second generation business run by an owner. So even in America that the whole setup is very very unusual. And then you know Yeah. I mean, what I think bound us together from the beginning is you're a it doesn't translate well into English, but a music scientist. So, we don't really have science and music and I guess in America, but it sounds kind of fake, even though I'm sure there is a faculty of that. But in any case, that's a very unusual setup on your end.

Well I get let me let me ask answer the question it's the exact right framing but I still want to push back on the it there's There's almost no one else in tech, maybe one or two that were who has anything like the fans I have. So it's there's this both the outside kind of I would say especially in Europe much less so here version of me Palantir Peter which is exactly what you described but I just want to also highlight the dynamic that these people also create fans like whenever I do something I'm basically only talk to Germany through you now and I get hate but I would say a hundred times more fans writing hey could you please thank you for helping Germany especially especially young people who are want to do things in Germany as an example. So any case, but let me get to let me answer your question directly without the caveat. But I do think there's a European and American difference here. But our products Palantir Gotham changed the course of history by reducing basically I mean there have been minor terror attacks and terror attacks can always happen but since we launched the product you have it has stopped hundreds and hundreds of terror attacks.

Well, again the but let me just answer the I'm trying to get to the question you're asking which is a really deep question. Why would people want to portray us so inaccurately is my version of the question and I think there's a functional reason for that and the function there really twofold and here I'm going to use Europe as an example. One the products worked too well so people can afford it. The terror attacks in Europe have basically been reduced to something that's not something people are afraid of even though there are way too many attacks on the streets especially of Germany and that but people view that as an immigration problem not as a terror problem right or wrong and two our products play a significant role in Ukraine so Russia and Russia doesn't appear to be winning so I think the setup to answer the Palantir attack thing especially in Europe you also have to say why can Europe why does Europe believe they can afford to hack Palantir and I'm telling you the primary reason is because and this is a Palantir problem. Our products were well were powerful enough that people believe they can afford it which is again okay so then what and so like so then you so that's I think the backdrop then why would you want to perceive us that way and I do think there's a Europe and an American difference and it basically comes down to America is hypercharging AI and tech and has these phenomenal and that's where I do think the reason why you're kind of a bridge between America and Europe There are lots of reasons but one of them is you look like more like an American business person like you own the company there's a big like that's a banality but it's also true and if you are saying like essentially just take a neutral example American businesses versus European businesses American businesses believe they're at war all the time so if you show up with a product that is demonstrably better on all scores in America and in Europe You're going to have a very different reception. In America, it's going to it's not going to be I like or do not like the person, although most Europe American businesses love Palantir, but it's going to be how does it work? Why does it work? Does it transform my business? Does the technology work? Is the technology stealing my IP? And in Europe, you can't really afford to ask these questions or they're not being asked correctly because the answer to the question would be some significant part of that infrastructure is going to have to be imported from America.

Um I just but nobody sees it that way outside of Europe. I mean we have Europe that's a widespread sentiment. The point the point I would say to especially Germany where I care is that really the widespread is that that is I think that's way downstream of very bad decision-making. So they perceive Palantir. By the way, again, I really, really deeply believe the they here are the professional media, left of center politicians, people who equate Peter and me with an old version of Germany, which they do not want. And that the vast majority of Germans, the vast majority of Germans would prefer a world where the decision-making was rational enough so you could evaluate Palantir in a rational way. That's what I believe.

But but let me just get to the technical point that I think is very important is the decision-making is objectively wrong from the perspective of how would you protect the data? You need an application layer. And so the crazy thing about what's happening in Europe is we have the only industrial user application layer in the world. That application layer protects your data from being essentially abused by large language model providers. So what you have in Europe are technically illiterate bureaucrats that in the name of protecting their people from a company they don't like because they don't like basically what Peter and I represent which in my view is actually old school European values. Old school European values mean the products are the best in the world and they actually are morally superior because of the competence involved and every single one of our products is like that. Those products cannot touch. So I so you're framing it as a moral thing. I'm saying the moral thing is way downstream of the competence problem. And if you were to solve the if you want to solve the competence problem in tech in Europe, which is the bigger problem like Europe is not a relevant market for Palantir except for that I care.

Well first of all the most interestingly fascinating thing if it wasn't sad and very very cowardly is the products we provide Palantir Gotham for which is what's used in the police forces and intel services in Europe, Foundry, Ontology which is used in the Ukraine and Ontology is essentially an application layer. These products are the products you will need and the only ones available at scale that I'm aware of to stop what people mean by surveillance. What do we mean by surveillance? What should Europe mean by surveillance? What it should mean is the IP the indigenous know-how that still powers Europe gets migrated to a different company in a company that's not European that has no interest in Europe that is not going to protect either the rights meaning your right to privacy your right to that data being purged also your right to have I mean in Europe one of the things I've always embraced is in America we have rights that are basically moral rights in Europe you have economic rights and they're intertwined which is always the vexing discussion. So the vexing discussion between America and Europe is from the American perspective, you don't protect rights enough vis-a-vis government. So Europe, no European country has anything like a first or second amendment. That's vexing. And the fourth amendment in Europe is probably the closest in America's closest to what you have, meaning the right to privacy. But even there, without going to technical details, we have widely divergent ideas of how to do that basic. And so then the vexing thing from a European perspective is Americans have all these rights vis-a-vis the government but you have no right of protection vis-a-vis companies and there are basically you have a right to succeed or fail here. You don't have a right to economic justice. I mean that's maybe something people want politically but in the constitution that is not enshrined. So you have a completely different idea of rights. I actually am a classic progressive. I'm still American in that I like my first, second, and fourth amendment, but I would like to see better treatment for poor. Okay. So,

Oh, I would describe myself as one of the few last standing actual progressives in that I believe well, first of all, I'm willing to defend the rights of someone I don't like. Okay, that somehow is gone. And again, it's particularly gone in Europe. Like, they frame this as I don't like you. How is that relevant? Why do we moralize everything? Also if it is about Germans who have been very successful in America in the Silicon Valley Peter Teal, Toby Litka, Shintla Phil Shintla, so there are a couple of Germans who made impressive careers in the Silicon Valley and we in Europe and in Germany do so far not really take advantage of it but first we moralize we say well there must be something.

Well, there's a difference in like I mean as a generalization, Germany is a very Lutheran culture and we're a Calvinist culture. So that like we equate success with being like the Swiss are Calvinist, the Dutch are Calvinist, but as a generalization, I would say Europe in general and Germany obviously in particular is a Lutheran culture where Lutheran culture tends to view massive success you've acquired during your lifetime with great skepticism. Calvinist, we're like peak Calvinism. Maybe we even take it too far where we ascribe financial success to moral success. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. The way I tend to want to frame the question is but the excess in Europe and moralizing is clearly in my view downstream from not wanting to solve the problems and so and then I think Palantir is the archetypical example you can say basically against all technical evidence that Palantir are technofascist what would that mean and that we're engaged in surveillance when our products are actually the ones that stop that. Or you can ask the more serious question, what has gone wrong in our culture that we have no other application layer that would allow us to do this?

No, I mean I so actually the way I would reframe the beginning of the question is I think my treatment in Germany is not what it should be but it's honestly given that how much money I've made fairer than you could think. I think the treatment of Peter is atrocious. Why? Well, first of all, again, it's one of the things I really you're you're I would start with again, and it's a very German concept. See, again, I think what is happening what scares me a lot in Germany is it's an importation of a version of America on top of German ideals that are have kind of are attenuated. And so the real question to ask is I think the question historically one would have asked in Germany is can we afford this? Can we afford not to learn from this person? And I think that's the right question Germans ask.

No no I'm going to first of all it is a misunderstanding. It's not true but I'm going to push back on that.

I read a book on Mao I'm reading books on Mao. I've read a lot of books on I learn I'm learning a lot from Mao and Deng. I don't agree with Mao on anything like so like I don't believe anyone can afford not to learn. And if you're in a very bad situation, let's just take an obvious example. The German tech scene. The German tech scene should be the number two in the world by any historical standard. Honestly, the German tech scene was the number one in the world. So number two is already like maybe shouldn't be the aspiration. It's on no one's list there. You're one of the more successful investors in Germany. You know, you probably know successful companies in Germany, but the most largest company in Germany by market cap I think is Siemens and Palantir is significantly larger even where we're obviously undervalued. So currently, so my first cut and you see this in this like where you know, you and I have been friends and we actually agree on the moral stuff pretty much one to one pro-democracy. What does democracy mean? Pro-data progression alignment with the west. We should have an alliance that is those of us who don't agree that alliance should be western Europe, America, the five eyes and Israel and Japan and Korea. So we agree on those things and many other things almost deontologically meaning with almost but where I think there is distance would be my approach which is I would the first question I would ask is can Germany afford not to learn from Peter even if all those things were true. Now you're right it has it should be clarified. I've known Peter since we were poor students at Stanford. We had conversations as like just poor students fighting about intellectual things. He was always heterodox right. I was always heterodox left. I don't think much has changed. He's still heterodox right. Meaning he's very frustrating to classic Republicans. He's never been a neocon. Like a lot of the thing he does he's never he actually does not really believe in classic Republican economic theory. He was the first person to flag and will always flag like in conversations you tend to have people on the right basically explaining all problems as the result of capitalism not being driven far enough. That's just not Peter's view. He's not a simplistic or caricature thinker on the right meaning and he's definitely not the caricature that the left wants to present. But what's fascinating to me is why is it so important to spend so much time blocking Peter from the German market? Forget Palantir. Like forget it's not like I want to help Germany because I care about Europe and because I have a I mean because of historical family and also I just felt at home in Germany for a long time. But for me that's because like let me just reframe the moral thing. It's so obviously thin what they're saying about him, what they say about Palantir. So obviously doesn't make sense on the merits. You only need 10 minutes, five minutes on Google to see this isn't true. Why do people want to and need to believe that truth was the question that I believe. And by the way, it's not that different. I mean, you're talking about Peter and me. I could ask you the same question. Like I've known you for not as long as I've known Peter, but you were very successful before I was. I mean I don't the German non-German audience may not realize how Axel Springer is discussed. Okay. So like there I think there are very important political figures in Germany without naming names that see no difference between you and the right side of the AfD. Okay. It's absurd. I believe most of my left-wing friends in Germany think Axel Springer wakes up in the morning and tries to make the world worse and goes to bed with a smile when the world is worse. This obviously not true.

I think the AfD is very complex and I'm not reading all the news all the time. I give you I think first of all the rise of the extreme parties was super predictable and I may have been talking shouting about this for the last 10 years. You can't if you're going to bring in doing wide square very deep and large migration into Germany without the buy-in of the German people and without an honest discussion of the consequences. Again, I understand why this is hard to do in Germany and it's completely about history which you know if my family hadn't left Germany I would be a lampshade. I mean they left before the Holocaust. I'm very everybody understands that and is sympathetic but we haven't you have in Europe but especially in Germany just an impossibly difficult painful inability to talk about obvious facts but the average person on the street is living with these facts. Okay.

I totally I'm going to get to the point where I agree with you. I just again we're like you're starting with the moral thing. I'm starting with the economic reason and cultural reason why this thing exists. See the question you asked is why have they why are they in ascendency? And they're much AfD is much stronger than they appear because I have friends who 5 years ago were telling me they would never vote for the AfD who are voting for the AfD. Like people who are social democrats and then when the AfD is polling at 40% there's another 10 points above that that would vote for them if they weren't the AfD.

No clarify. Well, this is again I basically agree with everything you said, but the point I would push back on I have a deep understanding for why they're succeeding. So it's like I would not vote for the AfD if I were able to vote and were voting in Germany. But that's different from I think part of the reason they're successful is the first of all no one actually believes like let's just say the parties the classic parties are actually going to take migration seriously but no one believes they're going to do it. So you get people voting for the AfD basically because you know it's a protest vote and you know you're Germans and people who care about Germany like me have been screaming and been right and no one listens and not only does no one listen and you are a great example of this you are honestly pretty left-wing on most issues as far as I can tell and I've known you for 20 years and you're kind of classically, if I were to describe you, classically left-leaning person who's a little bit more bought into the capitalist narrative than I am. That's how I would describe if I were describing. So, okay, you get pilloried and you tell everybody I'm against the AfD. God knows you have no sympathy for anyone who's pro-Russia. I mean, like you believe for that like we're on the front line for Putin. I should always clarify, we have nothing against the Russians. We have nothing against the Chinese, but we have a lot against I'm a Tai Chi. I'm an expert in one of the four great treasures in China. I'm reading all these things. I have a deep appreciation of Russian culture, Russian math. I have So, we agree on that. But shorthand, if I were to say what I think motivates you, after watching you for 20 years is you are deeply pro-democratic. You're kind of progressive on most issues except for you do not like you don't want anything that's stupid and won't work. And if I had to say where you're kind of a zealot, it's on the, you know, anti-Putin, anti-China stuff and actually on no tolerance for anti-semitism. So that's your those are your positions. Those positions are I mean they're solidly mainstream. And I can tell people who are listening and want to hear this like if like even in private discussions are like I'm much more on like yeah I want to understand why still of course I'm not going to I'm not interested in voting for them but I understand why and you're more on the they're wrong they're wrong they're wrong which is why our dialogues are fun. This is basically like it would be in private. Okay. So the Palantir we something I am actually frustrated with in Europe is again the anti-terror things would be very different and Ukraine would not have been able to succeed there. Okay, let me just finish this. But so obviously I'm not interested in supporting a party that is deeply sympathetic with Putin, is interested in like I think Europe made it like the CCP that is sympathetic with the CCP and quite frankly these parties are complex but they're you know the AfD does contain people that I kind of would suspect would not like me very much.

Yeah. But and here we are entering the era of AI and whether it's an opportunity or a threat. And I think we should also discuss the cultural differences between America and Europe and Germany in the context of these developments. I think we could turn it around and we could say this is now an opportunity because I see a lot of AI skepticism in America. I see in America almost more AI skepticism at this moment than in Europe among normal people. If we have an all hands in America, people are raising posters and saying AI is killing our jobs. If we do the same in Germany or in Europe, people are saying well we want to learn, we want to understand, we want to take advantage of it. Do you think that there could be?

It you can't it is nothing's going to work before the chancellor gets up and says we have an AI crisis because to fix the problem again you are going who's going to fix the problem? The problem is you are going to have to bring in a Tobias or a Schindler or a Teal in a very significant role you can't rebuild with people who've never done this before. And so and then who's going to build under what conditions? What are the working conditions? How do you bring the whole society along? How much can someone work per day? Tech works because people work are dedicated like doggedly dedicated around the clock for years. And by the way, if somebody doesn't belong on the team, you can move them out of the team or out of the company. By the way, the for tech people, again, I'm wildly I the people I got along with best when I was on boards in Germany were the union. So, I'm not saying but you don't need worker protection for someone who isn't a software engineer that could work at an LLM lab. So, but to get this to work, you have to have someone saying this is a crisis. I think you're also going to have to say this is an economic zone. We are going to create an economic zone in

Germany and in that economic zone competition is going to look exactly like it looks in America or does in China or does in Israel.

Well, first of all, yeah, I mean really honestly yes. And so like again I

Of course. It's a these are it's like you the simple metaphor that is simple but works is the the large language models are like uranium. Okay.

They no they have to be processed and in the processing they become first of all just touching them probably is not a good idea but so using them like again yeah but if you use the metaphor Iranian I think it's very appropriate because you can use it for bad or for good causes. And here again people start to have a moral discussion or whether it's good or bad instead of saying let's make sure that we use it for for good causes. I mean it's again there is this comparison to a knife. You can use a knife in order to prepare food and you can use a knife in order to kill people. So we should not basically forbid forbid but but it is both true and again this is why I think these things are actually economic and technical. First it is you have to understand what the technologies do. You have to have people who are working natively with these technologies and those people have to be involved. And again here it's like you basically have different parts of the stack. You have the GPU part of the stack. So that's chips. You have essentially you're in an enterprise you're going to have a data integration part of the stack. You can do that by hand. If you want civil liberties you're going to we do that. You have an application part of the stat. So, ontology, what does it mean? How does it mean? How's it deployed? How is it safely deployed? How do you process? How do you use? And you have the large language models, both closed and open models. And the closed and open models have different advantages to world here to have a tech scene in Europe. You need worldleading components in all those parts. That's not realistic. So you're going to have to figure out which components are actually the ones that could advance European industry, European sovereignty. The the sovereignty issue is a completely technical issue and in it it's not just Germany honestly the what's really happening in Europe is you have bureaucrats whose primary idea is how do I protect the market against American companies and everything else is downstream.

Let me again try to twist it towards an opportunity. If this kind of uh anti-I sentiment is ongoing in America and I fear that Americans could see an election campaign where the two parties are basically competing in order to explain that their party is protecting their people better against AI. I think that's a very dangerous case but that's what what's happening and has already started. So if that's ongoing and every kind of new data center is a big uh issue and raises a lot of protest and so on wouldn't that be an opportunity for Europe and say okay here welcome build the data centers here I I Matias I feel like I'm more German than you I'm just going to put that out there you're playing the American I'm playing like okay of course it's an opportunity but it's only an opportunity if it's technically credible so like if you ask me I'm in charge of Germany or in charge of France or some great nation. You have to say first we have a crisis. We we are going to get the best people in the world to come. We are going to call the best people in the world and say what would stop you from. By the way, I've told I haven't told this to this chancellor, but I've literally told directly or indirectly to every chancellor and every important politician that you can think of for the last 10-15 years. You got to do what Israel does, what China does, what America would do, what we did after World War II. Do do like we built our industry on German scientists. Like it's like and the people who built the bomb like when we built the bomb like Einstein writes the president the massive opportunity begins with I know we have a problem that is dangerous for the present and future of our society and has to be solved. There's only a political leader in Europe has to make that statement. It would be best if that was Germany for the leaving all of our um emotional attachments to Germany simply because Germany once had the best tech scene and still is the driving economic motor of Europe and there is no Europe without Germany. Okay. But then, sorry, let me just then the question is you're going to have to bring those people over and they are going to have to be the ones distributing the capital, hiring the people, saying how you do this. Of course, what happens is the local people, I mean, Germany has more talent and France is the same thing than any other country per per square. Okay? Those people learn how to do it and then build their things themselves. And that's and by the way another thing it's talent not money. It's like it it is part of the problem you let me give you a different version. Part of the reason it's hard to do the op optimistic thing is every day Europe makes another decision that makes it harder to fix the problem.

I mean again it's I'm just going to start on the battlefield is not where you want me to start maybe but without AI systems Russia would have won and by the way without preI but things that can almost do that you the parties that you know you're very focused on would be running Europe because you would have terror attacks that are rampant so Europe is already completely existing because of these technologies that Europe as we know it now with all its problems would not exist without these technologies being used actively. So that's like the baseline. Then you get to okay Germany has now has to compete with China. And to do that it's going to have to rebuild how it builds cars, how it processes chemicals, how it re changes its historically dominant industries into industries that can compete against America and China. uh and it has a limited workforce and immigration is failing. Okay, how would you get how would you raise GDP where you have very strict laws but some of which may have to change? You have energy things which probably will change but it's going to take a long time where where migration has not worked. There is only one technology that can do this and by the way I tend to think these things should be always asked and answered in the empirical. There are two and a half countries that are embracing these technologies. America which has GDP growth. In fact, part of the problem we have politically is it works almost too well. It's just not widely distributed. China seems to be working and Israel seems to be working. Where have people not embraced these technologies and so that it's like but again if you just start with the core problem Germany has it's an export culture. Its products have to be better than everyone else's or no one's going to buy them. And you okay you can basically ask Germans do you think your products are going to be responsible for your for your uh um economic health bullshand or is it going to be your diplomatic service that's going to deliver that? Are you going to you're going to rely on German popularity? And so the opportunity it's I I tend to think like the opportunity is that if you want to succeed and thrive there's only one set of technologies that can do this. How are you going to rebuild your car industry so it's as good as China's? Just start there. Like again that and people are doing that. We have partners. How are you going to rebuild these industries so you can compete and win there? There is no other way.

And by the way, that is not a European origin. No, Western problem. And is an arguably bigger problem here. This is where I do think America might have like I think okay, Europe has an obvious tech problem with political consequences that are really bad. America has a more of a political problem where left far left far right of just like they it's more hurt the people are successful than any solution and they're very serious about that and you know the idea they couldn't win is not true unfortunately um the the the the central framing I'm skeptical of here with people so people I agree with probably you and definitely people on tech world. Um, it's always like this is going to be a bastion of plethora of good things that everyone's going to profit from and there are no dangers. I'm not saying you say this, but but it is a commonly held view and that the tech people want everyone to like just stand up and say that and I think that is not credible. What but I what I think is actually just like the overselling of AI in this country is really really um really somewhat disconcerting but it's also depressing because you don't have to do it. This is a natural resource that is net net excruciatingly valuable for the betterment of humanity but it does have some negative externalities. First of all we don't know where it's going to go. It's these things are not deployable without processing engines, application layers, ontology etc. Um it and the biggest problem in this country is it does it while it will raise the standard of living of the average person the people involved are likely to get 10 100 times wealthier than they already are. That's a problem for society. You know the the way I try to explain to my Silicon Valley colleagues is

let me give you a different first let me give you a different the answer that I think sums up a lot of the problems in Europe and America this is a new playbook like there or there is no playbook like why am I doing so well because this is a neurodeivergent age and what the people had skills so so this is a different revolution and even if that is true and let's assume it is that everybody will do well I think that's not I think Most people will do better.

the mass that has nothing. No, no, no. I No, I'm not saying that. Again, I think that's like that's kind of the the that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying most people who are middle and middle class will do better. Everybody people who are willing to change their jobs are likely to do better, but not everyone. But that's not the real political problem. We have a political problem in this country, not a tech problem. In past revolutions, uh, the person at the bottom maybe their salary doubled and the person at the top became five times wealthier, but like it was very unusual to be a billionaire 40 years ago, right? You now have a revolution where, you know, I could become 20 times wealthier than I am now. And the person who is working out here could become you know they could have their salary could go over certainly could go up significantly by any normal standard over a period of 10 years go up 50% or double okay it when you have a complete decoupling of like unimaginable wealth and normal and that unimaginable wealth and then this is where we're not really allowed to say this but it's done by people that you don't really relate to like these These are like very oddly shaped IQ specimens that you know you probably wouldn't want to have over for dinner and if they were over for dinner you have nothing to talk to them about and by the way vice versa and you know and then our whole fabric is not like I got screamed at for like first of all it wasn't a draft I was like we should have some kind of service by the way by that I meant hospital taking care of old people our our fabric of our societyy's already strained wealthy people it's not like in the 50s and 60s where people actually knew each other, went to the same schools, were already totally separate societies, right? It basically is. I mean, it's inflammatory, but we already live in a separate but nonequal society. And then you hypercharge it with like extreme economic wealth like egregiously extreme while everybody else is kind of growing. And even if it's not true, people are afraid even if it is true that most people raise the actual fear people have is I'm going to lose my job. Now that fear even if it's not true, the people running the lab companies who are the leaders told you it's true. They're telling you your life is going to suck and they're also getting very wealthy and you don't find them very likable. And people who used to be on the winning side of history uh are now suddenly very much afraid that they would lose their job. I traveled to the Silicon Valley three times over the last uh uh few weeks and the the the level of nervousness uh is really surprising. A lot of people think we have only 6 months until our jobs are going to be gone and that is the tech community that is developers and they they work day and night in order to reinvent themselves because they are afraid that in a few months and again have no income