July 22, 2026 • 34 mins
What are we supposed to make of Palantir — a company whose software has helped organizations save lives, and end them? And what of CEO Alex Karp's warnings that AI could upend American democracy? Journalist Michael Steinberger spent six years reporting on Karp for his biography, The Philosopher in the Valley: Alex Karp, Palantir, and the Rise of the Surveillance State. He tells Oz that Alex Karp, the former progressive, is a provocateur who embraces the complexity of Palantir’s work and reputation.
Additional Reading:
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Welcome to tech stuff. I'm os Volosen. Today we're asking
the question what is going on with Palenteer, one of
America's most notorious and also profitable tech companies. Since the
beginning of the Trump administration, Palenteer has taken center stage
more and more, from their polarizing partnership with immigration and
customs enforcement to advocating for nationwide military service, to their
(00:40):
CEO stating that artificial intelligence will disrupt democracy as we
know it. Join Yesterday to unpack the story is journalist
and author Michael Steinberger, who has written a biography of
Palenteers polarizing CEO, Alex kap It's called The Philosopher in
the Valley Alex Carp Palenteer and the Rise of the
Surveyor and State. Michael, welcome, It's a pleasure to be
(01:02):
with you. Great to have you. I believe you first
wrote about Palteer in twenty twenty for the New York
Times magazine. Is that right?
Speaker 2 (01:09):
That is correct?
Speaker 1 (01:11):
What was it, you know, six years ago that sparked
your interest and why did it deepen over time?
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Well? What got my interest was two things. One, Pallenteer
was already then making a lot of news it was
involved to a certain degree with the first immigration crackdown
during Trump's first presidency. But there was also a personal
reason that Palenteer was on my radar. It's because Alex
Carpets CEO and I had gone to college together. We
both attended a small college outside of Philadelphia called Haverford College.
(01:41):
We were in the same graduating class. It's a quite
small school, fewer than fifteen hundred students. Yet amazingly, in
those four years on that tiny campus, we never once
exchanged a word, so there was no conflict of interest.
So they gave me the green light to do this story.
And so for those two reasons, because Pallenteers seemed even
then to be such an interesting and powerful company, and
(02:03):
because of this personal connection that carp and I shared,
I had this I was interested in writing about them.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
And he went on to spend six years interviewing for
the book.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
Effectively, I mean the story we first spoke in twenty nineteen.
Then the pandemic came along, and the pandemic made it
an even more interesting story because Pallenteer was very involved
in the pandemic response in the United States and the
UK and some other countries. The magazine story was published
in October twenty twenty, just after Pallenteer went public, and
(02:34):
it was a very comprehensive magazine piece. It was almost
nine thousand words. That's how the magazine story gave rise
to a book, and Carp and I kept in touch,
kept talking, and the book is the product of essentially
six years of ongoing conversation.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
Now, is this like that scene in Harry Potter where
he goes to the one shop for the first time
and his one kind of leaps off the shelf into
his hand. I mean, what is the what is the
relationship between a biographer and a subject? And how do
you how do you and come together? And are you
some kind of strange inin and yang? What is the
what is the what is there beyond the alumni connection.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Well, it's a great question, because you know, it's often
the case that biographers, by the time they reached the
end of their reporting and writing, have come to abstually
hate their subjects. I did not reach that point with Karp.
I enjoy his company, I enjoyed talking to him. We
disagree about a lot of stuff, but argument was, you know,
sort of the key to making the relationship work. At
(03:34):
one point during my reporting, just one day, I was
down in Washington with him and he was being driven
to a meeting and I just hopped along for the ride,
and we were just talking about the book, and he
said that people had asked him why he'd agreed to
cooperate with me, and he said one reason for that
was because he knew that I would never be jealous
or resentful of him. He was already very wealthy and
(03:56):
has become even more wealthy now. But it was true.
I was I was not going to be envious of
either his power or his wealth.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
How did he? How did he know that about you? Why?
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Why?
Speaker 1 (04:06):
Why is that the case?
Speaker 2 (04:07):
He's just he's got a very good sense of what
makes people tick. It's one of the it's one of
the things that I think has made him quite effective CEO.
He's he's very perceptive about you know, about people. He
can figure them out. He's not always right, He's been.
He was wrong about some things with me. He was
convinced that I was a trust fund kid and would
(04:29):
not believe me when I told him it's not true.
It's not true. So he was absolutely wrong about that.
But you couldn't I couldn't dissuade him otherwise.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Talk about Palenteer. I mean, it's sort of like a
sorry for another magic reference, but the word is almost
like a spell, and of course it comes from Tolkien.
But what what what are most people like behind the
kind of dark sorcery branding of Palenteer, or at least
perception of Paleteer in public, Like what do most people
miss about the story? And and what does your book reveal?
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Well, I think there's a fundamental misconception that colors a
lot of the debate about this company the work they do.
There's reason enough to be concerned, but a lot of
people labor under the misconception that this is a company
that collects data itself and uses the data itself, and
that's not true. It's technology that allows organizations to make
(05:21):
better use of their own data. They store it, they
use it, they oversee its use. So this is, as
I said, this has colored a lot of the discussion
about Palenteer. There are legitimate reasons to be concerned about
the service this company provides and some of the organizations
it works with, But a lot of people believe that
Palenteer is using the data itself. Is collecting and using it,
(05:44):
and that's just not the case.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
But the subtimes in your book is alex Cart Palenteer
and the rise of the surveillance state. So that's you
will be forgiven for the misunderstanding.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Well, yeah, no, that's that's you know, they work with
a lot of organizations and among the organizations they work
for are those who individuals and particular populations. And this
goes back to the very beginning. They were started in
part with funding from the CIA, and the first government
client was the CIA. But the software itself is not
surveillance technology. What it does is it enables those who
(06:15):
use surveillance technology and other things to make better use
of all the information that they're gathering. Palanteer is you
can think of it as like a wood shipper. It's,
you know, all this information is being fed into it
and it's it's in this case not spinning out what
it's spinning out, you know, patterns, connections, trends. It finds
these things in the data. But it's not surveillance technology
(06:37):
per se. But it enables those who, for instance, are
trying to track down terrorists or in the context of
the current moment, trying to find people who are in
the United States illegally. It makes it a lot easier
for them to use the data they're collecting. And it's
all sorts of data. It can be bank records, it
could be information gathered from automatical license plate readers. All
(07:00):
this is fed into Palenteer and the software merges it
and it finds, as I said, patterns, connections, trends that
would take human analysts days, hours, weeks, sometimes forever to find.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
And most people hear about Plenteer and read about it,
but they don't get to experience the product, in part
because it's very expensive, and also because most people don't
work for the CIA or for very deep corporations. But
I assume, and you're reporting you saw it working.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
Oh yeah, No, they have demos and they'll show them.
And then I would also say this, the company has
a reputation for being very secretive, and in some in
some ways that's true. There are relationships they have that
they can't really discuss publicly, and work that they help
with that they can't discuss publicly. But there is a
fair amount of transparency with this company. I mean you
(07:47):
just go to their website and just the amount of
detail the amount of information they're sharing there is quite extraordinary,
I think, and the idea that it is this opaque
black box is not really entirely case. That's a bit
of a misconception as well.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
How much fear is there within Paleteer about being a
victim of the saaspocalypse, in other words, of readily available
AI tools preventing them from charging this huge price to
deploy their software.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
Well, that's a great question, and there's obviously a lot
of debate about that now. And you know, Palenteer, the
argument there is that their product is sufficiently differentiated and
does things that other software doesn't do, and that therefore
they enjoy, as they say in the in the industry,
a mote. But you know, there are a number of people,
(08:39):
perhaps a growing number of people, who think that's not
the case, and that Pallenteer is under as much threat
as other companies. And obviously, you know, look at the
stock had a massive run up in the year after
Trump was like the second time, which mostly reflected investor
belief that the company was uniquely positioned to benefit from
a second Trump president. And see, and I think that's proven.
(09:01):
It hasn't.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Certainly, it certainly has in terms of its revenue. I
think government revenue, government contact revenues are up one hundred
and two percent this, you know, the last quarter. But
the stop market is not responding very positively.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
But it's also it's gotten you know. I mean, there's
been this pullback, but it also got pulled into this
selloff software starts because of exactly what you were talking about,
a belief that AI is coming for them too. So
you know, the party line, if you will, is that
Palenteer is different, It's product is sufficiently differentiated that they
should be Okay. I don't have a view on that,
because I have no idea. We're going to find out.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
So they say often that every every great book begins
with a great question. What was your question? What? What
didn't satisfy you in your reporting for the nine thousand
word magazine piece that made you want to spend five
years writing this book.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
I still was trying to figure out what karp is
all about. He's quite different than other CEOs, looks different,
and certainly talks differently. He is at very candid in
a way that is disarming and also quite refreshing for
someone in the business world. Were any any any public figure,
(10:09):
but he's also a very canny operator. And and you know,
trying to make sense of how much of this was
conviction and how much of this was expedients, and what
was good for the business and and and and what
was the exact balance That was very interesting to me.
And I'm still not sure I know the answer. People
(10:29):
who read the book will arrive at different conclusions, and
I know they have.
Speaker 1 (10:33):
You're talking specifically about the political shape shifting.
Speaker 2 (10:35):
With political shape shifting and and you know just how
you know, I mean, this is a guy who, you know,
during Trump's first presidency, made very clear that he was
not a fan of Donald Trump. Peter Tiel, his co
founder and very close friend and the chairman of Pallenteers board,
was Trump's biggest supporter in Silicon Valley and maybe the
biggest supporter in the business community. So you had this
(10:56):
this internal tension, though it was not an issue between
the two of them, but cart made very clear during
Trump's first presidency that he was not a fan and
a number of issues, including immigration. And then now here
we are Trump back in the White House, and carp
has I wouldn't say gone full maga, but he has
(11:16):
expressed a lot of support for Trump. Not everything, but
I mean he says that the issues that matter to him,
Trump is the guy. And so, you know, was what
he said during Trump's first presidency the real axe Carper?
Or are we seeing the real one now?
Speaker 1 (11:30):
But that's that's broadly true throughout the tech community, right
Like I think about Mark Pinkers, Mark Andreson, Like a
lot of these formerly you know, somewhat vocal opponents of
Trump are now like loud.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
Yeah, but they weren't as they weren't as specific in
their criticisms. They hadn't spent you know, the previous twenty
years shouting from every rooftop I'm a progressive the way carpad.
So you know, his about face has been quite a
bit more jarring. And even though many people in the
tech community have gotten on board with Trump this time around,
(12:05):
if you have been as outspoken about it or as
vituperative towards the other side as karp has been, so
you know, you've got this quite violent pivot with him.
And then he's just you know, he's pissing a lot
of people off with the stuff he's saying. And when
he goes out and says, you know, AI is is
coming from white collar jobs, and it's principally going to
affect women and they vote democratic. It's just, you know
(12:29):
a lot of people reacted, Okay, you're a misogynist too. Now,
whether that's true or not, I'm not going to say.
But he's really put himself out there in a way
that you know, maybe only Elon has other than in
that world.
Speaker 1 (12:42):
You have a quote from Copp on the back of
the book, which I actually never seen a quote from
the subject on the back of but Off tell us
the quote, well, I have in front of me saving
lives and on occasion taking lives is super interesting.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
Yeah, that's that's that's carp and he he is a provocateur.
He likes to cause a little shock. But he has
also been very clear that Palenteer has been used for
deadly purposes, For lethal purposes. Part of this is, you know,
has always he's always done this to kind of feed
the mystique. But I think it's also true because used
(13:28):
by intelligence services, used extensively by the US military. We
know it is being used now for lethal purposes because
Palenteer's software is the backbone for Maven smart system, which
is the Pentagon's AI targeting program. So yeah, its software
helps conduct lethal activities, and carp makes no bones about that.
(13:49):
It's an interesting thing. You know, if you saw him
around the office, he's kind of a he's a very
cheerful presence. He's funny, he's he's basically conducting a pep
rally for his people, and then of the Palenteer offices
is in on in a given day. And yet he's
got a very dark view of the world and always
has and this is the view that became Palenteer's worldview.
It's it's, you know, the world is inclined to violence, chaos,
(14:12):
that is humanity's natural condition. We have lots of people
who want to kill us, and I think his view
is we should do them harm before they do us harm.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
I want to come back to this kind of West
versus the rest. Well, before that, I want to I know,
I understand a little bit more about the origin story
of Palenteer you've written. Although Copp was Palenteer's CEO, the
press often referred to the company as Peter Teel's Palenteer
and that that part was why he wants to do
this book.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
Yeah. During the first Trump presidency, TiO, of course was
a lightning rod. He still is, but he was very
much so during the first Trump presidency because of the
support he had given Trump and the kind of center
stage role he had taken, at least during the transition.
When you saw him around Trump Tower, the famous meeting
with all the tech executives, that was Teal who had
(15:02):
organized that. And you know stories about Palenteer during the
first Trump presidency, I mean, the headlines invariably read Teal's
Pallenteer even though he was not running the company and.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
Never had larger shareholder or largest larger individual Shoholder.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Largest individual shareholder and chairman of the board, so very
involved with this, but his idea or so it was
his idea. It was his idea, you know this. The
origin story is that this grew out of PayPal. PayPal
had run into serious trouble with fraudsters and they designed
some anti fraud algorithms that ultimately saved the business. That again,
(15:38):
pattern recognition software, finding those needles in the haystack. They
were generating a massive amount of data. Human analysts at
PayPal couldn't figure out what's going on, so they developed
software that could do that. After nine to eleven. It
occurs to te at some point you know that same
idea could be applied to the war on terrorism, and
those anti fraud algorithms could perhaps be repurposed help intelligence
(16:01):
analysts find potential terrorists and prevent future attacks. And that
gave rise to Palenteer, so he was it was his idea.
He brought karp into Palenteer first to help raise money
for this startup company, and then in consultation with the
other co founders, brought him in a CEO. But it
was Karpoo from that point on ran it. So these
(16:24):
things can be put to all sorts of uses, and
that's why a lot of the discussion about Palenteer is tricky.
And part of what I've been trying to do and
talking about the book is to to get across the
point that this is a really complicated company, and because
they're doing good stuff in some areas. So for instance,
during the pandemic, they were being used by the World
(16:45):
Food Program to help manage logistics, and Palenters technology people
at the WFP will tell you helped save a lot
of lives during the pandemic, So that's good, But then
you look at the work they're doing with ice, and
I think a lot of people say, well that's not
that's so good. So it's a complicated picture, a complicated company.
Karp embraces those complications in their complexity. But what do
(17:07):
you think about Palenteer? It depends on what issues are
dominating the headlines. But I think there is ambiguity and
complexity of the story that maybe don't find with you
all that many companies.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Let's talk a bit more about him. I mean he
embodies certain contradictions, right, I mean, he's talked about how
his greatest fear is fascism, but he's often accused of
techno fascism. He has an unusual background for a Silicon
Valley mogul. He's biracial, black and Jewish, you know, went
his early part of his career was not working in tech,
(17:55):
but studying, you know, in the Frankfurt School and studying
you know, leftist politics essentially. I mean, who is he?
Speaker 2 (18:02):
Well, it's a great question. I mean, the unlikeliest tech
mogul I think you could find raised in an astaunchly
left wing household in Philadelphia. A father was a pediatrician,
mother and artist. I think they took a quite dim
view of the of the business world in general. It
was not their ambition for their son, and given that
(18:25):
much of his early childhood was spent going to anti
war protests, I don't think if you told him at
that time that your son would be running a major
defense contractor they would have been particularly happy. So he
came out of a very different background. He stayed this
was the world that he grew up in. He remained
in that world, having for college, which we both attended.
It was a traditional a Quaker school, so a tradition
(18:46):
of pacifism, and you know, very I would say, not
wildly left wing, but certainly left leaning, left of center.
Then he went to stand For law school, which he hated.
The only good thing he took away from that is
that that's where he and Teo met and became friends.
They were political opposites. Then Karp decided that he didn't
(19:08):
want to pursue a career in law and went off
to Germany to you a doctor at a got University
of Frankfurt, and you know, then decided he didn't want
to be a professor either. So he was in his
mid thirties kind of at loose ends, and again no
background in technology, no background really a business, had never
run an organization, and he ended up as the CEO
(19:30):
of this startup. But what tea recognized that Karp was
very good at working with people and was really good
at raising money. He got people to sign checks. But
the other co founders also saw that there was a
kind of charisma to Karp that that would be very
helpful to this company. And and and he is in
his very idiosyncratic way of very charismatic figures. So despite
(19:52):
this unlikely background, he ended up a CEO of this
tech startup.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Did he express any doubt to you about his political conversion?
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Well, I don't think he. I mean, he wouldn't say
that he's had a political conversion. He's one of those
who say I didn't leave the Democrats, they left me.
So that's kind of his view. He's never put it
quite so directly, but that is clearly what he's saying,
you know, in public, and kind of what he has
said in private, that he thinks that you know, he didn't.
It's not that he's portrayed his progressive values. He thinks
(20:23):
progressives have betrayed their own values. By I mean, he's
the critique has just kind of snowballed over the last
two years, but it was a lot of it was
about immigration, which you know, during the first Drump presidency
he said, look at you know, I'm totally fine with
the demographics of this country changing, but people do not
like an open border. They don't they do not like
scenes of chast at the border. And Democrats didn't take
(20:47):
these concerns seriously, and they got President Trump. And then
after Trump lost in twenty twenty, he said during the
Biden years, he said, if they don't take the border seriously,
you're going to have President Trump again. And he was
right about that. But I think one of many reasons
he grew frustrated with the Democrats and eventually split with
them is because they didn't listen to him. So there
(21:09):
is there is that they'd listened to.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
Hilan not being invited to the to the EV summing
at the White.
Speaker 2 (21:14):
House exactly exactly. I mean, you know, if Kamala had
brought him into runner campaign, maybe he'd feel different.
Speaker 1 (21:22):
But twits fascism word which he has, which he has
made a centerpiece of who he is, is wanting to,
you know, avoid fascism returning. And yet you know, if
you read nineteen eighty four, The kind of techno surveillance
and predictive algorithmic infrastructure that he is building for governments
(21:43):
can be certainly used and arguably is being used, depending
on perspective, for something approaching fascism.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Yes, well, he's got a multi part answer to this,
which is that oh, no, no, no. Our technology is
the stuff that prevent and prevents it in a couple
of ways. First of all, it's got these guardrails built
into it, these privacy controls, these robust audit logs, so
you can't be used for nefarious purposes, which isn't really
(22:12):
true because Palenteer doesn't monitor how its technology is being
used the clients use it. So if the people using it,
say at ICE or another government agency, actually don't give
a crap about legal niceties and don't fear any consequences,
you have a problem. So that's always been the kind
of fly in the ointment, if you will. But you know,
(22:33):
Karp's argument is like, no, no, no, our technology which
allows organizations to be much more targeted. They allow, for instance,
ICE to be much more targeted and going after people.
That's actually protecting cimiliberties in privacy and ultimately upholding democracy.
And then in the context of the current moment, he
just flat out denies that Trump is authoritarian. He dismisses
(22:54):
that argument out of hand. And so that's kind of
how he answers all these concerns, and that's Yes, fascism
is his fear, but no, this isn't fascism. So my
fear is not being realized.
Speaker 1 (23:06):
Did you find his own sepersuasive?
Speaker 2 (23:08):
No, No, we disagree about Trump and who he is
and what this is we're looking at. He has his
reasons there even if he even if he agreed with me,
he's running a company that's a major government contractor what's
he going to say? So, yeah, got to dance for
(23:29):
his dinner in a way that I don't. So I
cut him some slack in that regard. But I do
think that Palenter recently posted that twenty two point manifesto that.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
The British politician describe it as the ramblings of a supervillain.
Speaker 2 (23:41):
Exactly, and so you know, and and then this freaked
a lot of people out because you know, he has
express views. I mean, he published a he co authored
a book with a colleague from Pallenteer last year called
the Technological Republic that many people saw as a as
a thinly veiled manifesto for techno authoritarianism. That twenty two
point manifesto that they posted on x, which was kind
(24:03):
of a distillation of the main points of the book,
definitely came across too many people as an argument for
techno authoritarianism or techno fascism. So, you know, Karp again,
this is a way in which he's a complicated figure,
and some people would say, no, he's not complicated. It's
very clear what he is. But I've been following this
guy for a very long time. I've had pretty extensive conversations,
(24:25):
and I think it is a complicated picture.
Speaker 1 (24:27):
A few of the points Silicon from the twenty two
point manifesto. Silicon value owes a moral debt to the
country that made its rise possible. The engineeringly to Silicon
Valley has an affirmative obligation to participate in the defense
of the nation. The atomic age is ending, one age
of the terrants. The atomic age is ending in a
new era of the terrance built on AI is said
to begin. Silicon Valley must play a role in addressing
(24:50):
violent crime. How much do these personal beliefs or Palenteers
corporate strategy and how much has palentiers corporate strategy affect
the line of everyday Americans.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Well, this is integral to what Palenteer is. From the start,
its goal was to work with the government, and it
believes that if you choose to work with the government,
you have an obligation to fulfill your contractual commitments, regardless
of who's president or what policies they choose to implement
within a reason. I mean, that's the problem with that
argument is you can take it to extreme. Certainly there
(25:24):
are some policies that might be pursued where you, as
a corporation would say, well, we can't actually do that.
And that's kind of the big question right now with Palenteer,
and it's worked with this second Trump administration, is okay,
what are the red lines? So, for instance, with ICE,
how extensive do the reports need to be of what
our effectively human rights abuses before Palenteer might say, you
(25:45):
know what, we can't be part of this. If, as
people in the Tromp administration have suggested, ICE agents are
deployed at polling stations this November, is that going to
be okay? With Palenteer, is that work they're going to
want to help facilitate or just even working with that
agency in an effort to tamper with the election. You know,
(26:06):
they don't answer that question. It's not their interest to
answer it. But it is a very real question. What
are the red lines here?
Speaker 1 (26:12):
I mean the standard kind of cry as we build
the tools, not the rules. But they're also building the architecture, right,
an architect when you build something, the architecture has its
own set of rules baked into it, right, or like
using an architecture puts you in the rules of the
person who designs the architecture. And so I personally just
(26:32):
I don't understand what they're saying, but it rings a
little hollow.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
No, absolutely, I mean, you know, forget even ice. But
I mean, so for instance, you know they were they
tried for a number of years to break in with
police departments in the United States. I had some success.
Those relationships have all ended for various reasons now, but
they were being used in Los Angeles for predictive policing.
At the heart of the controversy is the idea that
(26:57):
the algorithms reflect human biases and that you're targeting minority
communities because that's the data. The technology is not neutral
because it's designed by human beings, and so you know this,
you know, we just build it, they use it. Explanation
is not very satisfying, not in that context certainly. And
(27:17):
I think this is where they're running into some real trouble.
It's not necessarily reflected in the share price that's come off,
but not because the political controversy. But yeah, it's not
reflected in the share price, not reflected in the in
the in the financials, it's not hitting the bottom line.
But they have become the bogeyman, and in ways that
were not true during the first Trump presidency. No company
(27:38):
I think has been more closely associated with Trump this
time around, and pollenteer and we'll see if it has
implications for them.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
I mean you mentioned possible implications. There was this kind
of reported internal mutiny last year by employees concerned about
normalizing authoritarianism. I mean you talked about Karp as someone
who's kind of like a cheerleader in chief levels around
the paleteer offices. Has he been able to cheer lead
his way out of this mutiny?
Speaker 2 (28:06):
Well, I would, I would, I would politely correct you
in that. I don't think it was a mutiny. You
had pretty robust internal descent during the first Trump presidency
over the work with ICE, which you know, that issue
was somewhat overblown because their contract at the time was
with a division of ICE that was not really involved
(28:27):
in the immigration crackdown. This is during the first Trump presidency. Now,
they of course are intimately involved in it. But back
you know, during the first Trump presidency you had several
hundred employees sign a letter asking, you know, Kark to
break the contract with ICE. I would say the difference
between now and then because the internal descent has been
quite a bit more muted this time. And I would
(28:48):
say the difference between now and then is that tech
jobs are a lot harder to come by right now,
So you know, it's it's yeah. In twenty eighteen, twenty nineteen,
you could protest Internallyalenteer, and if you end up pissing
off the up rachel On enough that they fired you,
you were pretty well assured that with your with your
background at Palenteer, you could get a job at another
(29:10):
major tech company. Now it's very hard, So I think
that has kind of kept a lid on the internal
dissent because there are not very many places you can
go to if you get shown in the door Palenteer.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
Well, so what are the potential consequence? Is it a
Democrat administration who come in basically saying, you know, our
first policy is to cancel our contracts with Palenteer. We're
seeing in the UK that the UK government is underpression
not to work with Palenteer with the NHS.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
Yeah, no, that's it. And they would never say this
publicly and they would probably deny it privately, but I
think I know that the view internally is that this
technology is mission critical for the US military. The number
of contracts they've received from US military, it's become Maven
has now become you know, the AI targeting program, of
which again Palneers software is the is the backbone. It's
(29:57):
just been made a program of record, which is a
very important day. So what Democrat coming in would say, Okay, yeah, Maven,
you know, is great and all, but you know what,
screw Pallenteer. So sorry you guys, you can't use this.
No one's going to do that. So so you know,
I think the calculus internally is like, Okay, we can
ride this out. And yeah, we're going to take some
(30:18):
stick from Democrats on Capitol Hill and we're not popular.
But are they going to really go through the trouble
of pulling us out of all the sockets, if you will?
And are they really going to sit here and say, oh,
this is the best product in the market, but because
we don't like Karp, we're not going to use it,
So you're going to have to use some a lesser product.
Is that how they Is that what they want to tell,
you know, voters, Is that what they want to tell
(30:39):
people on Capitol Hill? And so the answer is no.
And and look at I mean, there was concern after
the first Trump presidency that they would face blowback, that
the Biden administration would somehow punish them, and then that
really didn't happen. They have some reason to believe I
think that they can ride this out and that for
all the all the outcry, for all the approbrium heaped
(31:02):
at them, that it won't really materially impact their government
business in the long run.
Speaker 1 (31:09):
Because the product is the product is too good, or
because it's just baked in them. I guess my.
Speaker 2 (31:13):
Question is a combination. It's a combination of both and
I mean this, I mean what car clearly recognized and
then certainly one reason he became such a Trump enthusiast
this time around is he recognized that this was an
opportunity to even more deeply entrench the technology in government.
And that's what's happening. I mean, it's all across the
executive branch the federal landscape right now. So it was
(31:35):
already extensive use across many government agencies, across the military,
but now it's even more so. So, Yeah, they are
in a sense creating facts on the ground. And so
it's a combination of it is the incumbent and if
a normal bureaucratic inertia, who's going to replace it? And
then there's their view, which is that it can't be
replaced because it is materially better than other products available
(31:58):
to them.
Speaker 1 (31:59):
What's your view? Is it a digital crystal ball or
is it.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
The people who use it swear by it. They find
it much more effective, and it does have its issues.
There are things about it that they'll love, but you know,
they find that it is worth the premium that they're charged.
That's what you hear from people at Airbus. They say,
look at if we could find something better and something cheaper.
We would, but they have not been able to do
(32:26):
so in their view, so it does seem to be
very effective.
Speaker 1 (32:30):
Indeed, have you spoken to cops since publishing the book.
Speaker 2 (32:33):
Yeah, we spoke a couple times after. Haven't spoken in
a few months, but you know, we were in touch
after the book came out.
Speaker 1 (32:39):
And he was okay with with how it all came out.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
Oh yeah, yeah, No, I mean I think you know.
The position he took in public was that the book
was marred by my TDS, my Trump derangement syndrome, which
I would say was his Trump denial syndrome. Apart from that,
he thought it was I think he thought it was
very fair and I think he like being the subject
of a book, having his story told. And he said
(33:04):
that people who read it, people he knew who read it,
thought well of it.
Speaker 1 (33:08):
So final question for you, what do you hope readers
take away from this book.
Speaker 2 (33:14):
I think they need to understand where this technology is
taking us. They need to understand something about the people
who are taking us towards this new world. Karp is
someone who's at the forefront now of the AI revolution,
and I think you need to understand what makes these
people tick. You need to understand how they think, how
they see the world, and I think you understanding Karp,
(33:35):
understanding Palenteer is important if you want to understand the
moment we're living through.
Speaker 1 (33:40):
The book is The Philosopher in the Valley Alex Carp
Pallentier and the Rise of the Savannah State. Michael Steinberger,
thank you, thank you for tech stuff. I'mos Voloshin. This
(34:12):
episode was produced by Eliza Dennis. It was executive produced
by me and Julian Nutter for Kaleidoscope and Katrina norvelve
iHeart Podcasts. Jack Instantly mixed this episode and Kyle Murdoch
wrote alph theme song
Welcome to tech stuff. I'm os Volosen. Today we're asking
the question what is going on with Palenteer, one of
America's most notorious and also profitable tech companies. Since the
beginning of the Trump administration, Palenteer has taken center stage
more and more, from their polarizing partnership with immigration and
customs enforcement to advocating for nationwide military service, to their
(00:40):
CEO stating that artificial intelligence will disrupt democracy as we
know it. Join Yesterday to unpack the story is journalist
and author Michael Steinberger, who has written a biography of
Palenteers polarizing CEO, Alex kap It's called The Philosopher in
the Valley Alex Carp Palenteer and the Rise of the
Surveyor and State. Michael, welcome, It's a pleasure to be
(01:02):
with you. Great to have you. I believe you first
wrote about Palteer in twenty twenty for the New York
Times magazine. Is that right?
Speaker 2 (01:09):
That is correct?
Speaker 1 (01:11):
What was it, you know, six years ago that sparked
your interest and why did it deepen over time?
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Well? What got my interest was two things. One, Pallenteer
was already then making a lot of news it was
involved to a certain degree with the first immigration crackdown
during Trump's first presidency. But there was also a personal
reason that Palenteer was on my radar. It's because Alex
Carpets CEO and I had gone to college together. We
both attended a small college outside of Philadelphia called Haverford College.
(01:41):
We were in the same graduating class. It's a quite
small school, fewer than fifteen hundred students. Yet amazingly, in
those four years on that tiny campus, we never once
exchanged a word, so there was no conflict of interest.
So they gave me the green light to do this story.
And so for those two reasons, because Pallenteers seemed even
then to be such an interesting and powerful company, and
(02:03):
because of this personal connection that carp and I shared,
I had this I was interested in writing about them.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
And he went on to spend six years interviewing for
the book.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
Effectively, I mean the story we first spoke in twenty nineteen.
Then the pandemic came along, and the pandemic made it
an even more interesting story because Pallenteer was very involved
in the pandemic response in the United States and the
UK and some other countries. The magazine story was published
in October twenty twenty, just after Pallenteer went public, and
(02:34):
it was a very comprehensive magazine piece. It was almost
nine thousand words. That's how the magazine story gave rise
to a book, and Carp and I kept in touch,
kept talking, and the book is the product of essentially
six years of ongoing conversation.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
Now, is this like that scene in Harry Potter where
he goes to the one shop for the first time
and his one kind of leaps off the shelf into
his hand. I mean, what is the what is the
relationship between a biographer and a subject? And how do
you how do you and come together? And are you
some kind of strange inin and yang? What is the
what is the what is there beyond the alumni connection.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Well, it's a great question, because you know, it's often
the case that biographers, by the time they reached the
end of their reporting and writing, have come to abstually
hate their subjects. I did not reach that point with Karp.
I enjoy his company, I enjoyed talking to him. We
disagree about a lot of stuff, but argument was, you know,
sort of the key to making the relationship work. At
(03:34):
one point during my reporting, just one day, I was
down in Washington with him and he was being driven
to a meeting and I just hopped along for the ride,
and we were just talking about the book, and he
said that people had asked him why he'd agreed to
cooperate with me, and he said one reason for that
was because he knew that I would never be jealous
or resentful of him. He was already very wealthy and
(03:56):
has become even more wealthy now. But it was true.
I was I was not going to be envious of
either his power or his wealth.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
How did he? How did he know that about you? Why?
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Why?
Speaker 1 (04:06):
Why is that the case?
Speaker 2 (04:07):
He's just he's got a very good sense of what
makes people tick. It's one of the it's one of
the things that I think has made him quite effective CEO.
He's he's very perceptive about you know, about people. He
can figure them out. He's not always right, He's been.
He was wrong about some things with me. He was
convinced that I was a trust fund kid and would
(04:29):
not believe me when I told him it's not true.
It's not true. So he was absolutely wrong about that.
But you couldn't I couldn't dissuade him otherwise.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Talk about Palenteer. I mean, it's sort of like a
sorry for another magic reference, but the word is almost
like a spell, and of course it comes from Tolkien.
But what what what are most people like behind the
kind of dark sorcery branding of Palenteer, or at least
perception of Paleteer in public, Like what do most people
miss about the story? And and what does your book reveal?
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Well, I think there's a fundamental misconception that colors a
lot of the debate about this company the work they do.
There's reason enough to be concerned, but a lot of
people labor under the misconception that this is a company
that collects data itself and uses the data itself, and
that's not true. It's technology that allows organizations to make
(05:21):
better use of their own data. They store it, they
use it, they oversee its use. So this is, as
I said, this has colored a lot of the discussion
about Palenteer. There are legitimate reasons to be concerned about
the service this company provides and some of the organizations
it works with, But a lot of people believe that
Palenteer is using the data itself. Is collecting and using it,
(05:44):
and that's just not the case.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
But the subtimes in your book is alex Cart Palenteer
and the rise of the surveillance state. So that's you
will be forgiven for the misunderstanding.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Well, yeah, no, that's that's you know, they work with
a lot of organizations and among the organizations they work
for are those who individuals and particular populations. And this
goes back to the very beginning. They were started in
part with funding from the CIA, and the first government
client was the CIA. But the software itself is not
surveillance technology. What it does is it enables those who
(06:15):
use surveillance technology and other things to make better use
of all the information that they're gathering. Palanteer is you
can think of it as like a wood shipper. It's,
you know, all this information is being fed into it
and it's it's in this case not spinning out what
it's spinning out, you know, patterns, connections, trends. It finds
these things in the data. But it's not surveillance technology
(06:37):
per se. But it enables those who, for instance, are
trying to track down terrorists or in the context of
the current moment, trying to find people who are in
the United States illegally. It makes it a lot easier
for them to use the data they're collecting. And it's
all sorts of data. It can be bank records, it
could be information gathered from automatical license plate readers. All
(07:00):
this is fed into Palenteer and the software merges it
and it finds, as I said, patterns, connections, trends that
would take human analysts days, hours, weeks, sometimes forever to find.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
And most people hear about Plenteer and read about it,
but they don't get to experience the product, in part
because it's very expensive, and also because most people don't
work for the CIA or for very deep corporations. But
I assume, and you're reporting you saw it working.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
Oh yeah, No, they have demos and they'll show them.
And then I would also say this, the company has
a reputation for being very secretive, and in some in
some ways that's true. There are relationships they have that
they can't really discuss publicly, and work that they help
with that they can't discuss publicly. But there is a
fair amount of transparency with this company. I mean you
(07:47):
just go to their website and just the amount of
detail the amount of information they're sharing there is quite extraordinary,
I think, and the idea that it is this opaque
black box is not really entirely case. That's a bit
of a misconception as well.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
How much fear is there within Paleteer about being a
victim of the saaspocalypse, in other words, of readily available
AI tools preventing them from charging this huge price to
deploy their software.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
Well, that's a great question, and there's obviously a lot
of debate about that now. And you know, Palenteer, the
argument there is that their product is sufficiently differentiated and
does things that other software doesn't do, and that therefore
they enjoy, as they say in the in the industry,
a mote. But you know, there are a number of people,
(08:39):
perhaps a growing number of people, who think that's not
the case, and that Pallenteer is under as much threat
as other companies. And obviously, you know, look at the
stock had a massive run up in the year after
Trump was like the second time, which mostly reflected investor
belief that the company was uniquely positioned to benefit from
a second Trump president. And see, and I think that's proven.
(09:01):
It hasn't.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Certainly, it certainly has in terms of its revenue. I
think government revenue, government contact revenues are up one hundred
and two percent this, you know, the last quarter. But
the stop market is not responding very positively.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
But it's also it's gotten you know. I mean, there's
been this pullback, but it also got pulled into this
selloff software starts because of exactly what you were talking about,
a belief that AI is coming for them too. So
you know, the party line, if you will, is that
Palenteer is different, It's product is sufficiently differentiated that they
should be Okay. I don't have a view on that,
because I have no idea. We're going to find out.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
So they say often that every every great book begins
with a great question. What was your question? What? What
didn't satisfy you in your reporting for the nine thousand
word magazine piece that made you want to spend five
years writing this book.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
I still was trying to figure out what karp is
all about. He's quite different than other CEOs, looks different,
and certainly talks differently. He is at very candid in
a way that is disarming and also quite refreshing for
someone in the business world. Were any any any public figure,
(10:09):
but he's also a very canny operator. And and you know,
trying to make sense of how much of this was
conviction and how much of this was expedients, and what
was good for the business and and and and what
was the exact balance That was very interesting to me.
And I'm still not sure I know the answer. People
(10:29):
who read the book will arrive at different conclusions, and
I know they have.
Speaker 1 (10:33):
You're talking specifically about the political shape shifting.
Speaker 2 (10:35):
With political shape shifting and and you know just how
you know, I mean, this is a guy who, you know,
during Trump's first presidency, made very clear that he was
not a fan of Donald Trump. Peter Tiel, his co
founder and very close friend and the chairman of Pallenteers board,
was Trump's biggest supporter in Silicon Valley and maybe the
biggest supporter in the business community. So you had this
(10:56):
this internal tension, though it was not an issue between
the two of them, but cart made very clear during
Trump's first presidency that he was not a fan and
a number of issues, including immigration. And then now here
we are Trump back in the White House, and carp
has I wouldn't say gone full maga, but he has
(11:16):
expressed a lot of support for Trump. Not everything, but
I mean he says that the issues that matter to him,
Trump is the guy. And so, you know, was what
he said during Trump's first presidency the real axe Carper?
Or are we seeing the real one now?
Speaker 1 (11:30):
But that's that's broadly true throughout the tech community, right
Like I think about Mark Pinkers, Mark Andreson, Like a
lot of these formerly you know, somewhat vocal opponents of
Trump are now like loud.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
Yeah, but they weren't as they weren't as specific in
their criticisms. They hadn't spent you know, the previous twenty
years shouting from every rooftop I'm a progressive the way carpad.
So you know, his about face has been quite a
bit more jarring. And even though many people in the
tech community have gotten on board with Trump this time around,
(12:05):
if you have been as outspoken about it or as
vituperative towards the other side as karp has been, so
you know, you've got this quite violent pivot with him.
And then he's just you know, he's pissing a lot
of people off with the stuff he's saying. And when
he goes out and says, you know, AI is is
coming from white collar jobs, and it's principally going to
affect women and they vote democratic. It's just, you know
(12:29):
a lot of people reacted, Okay, you're a misogynist too. Now,
whether that's true or not, I'm not going to say.
But he's really put himself out there in a way
that you know, maybe only Elon has other than in
that world.
Speaker 1 (12:42):
You have a quote from Copp on the back of
the book, which I actually never seen a quote from
the subject on the back of but Off tell us
the quote, well, I have in front of me saving
lives and on occasion taking lives is super interesting.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
Yeah, that's that's that's carp and he he is a provocateur.
He likes to cause a little shock. But he has
also been very clear that Palenteer has been used for
deadly purposes, For lethal purposes. Part of this is, you know,
has always he's always done this to kind of feed
the mystique. But I think it's also true because used
(13:28):
by intelligence services, used extensively by the US military. We
know it is being used now for lethal purposes because
Palenteer's software is the backbone for Maven smart system, which
is the Pentagon's AI targeting program. So yeah, its software
helps conduct lethal activities, and carp makes no bones about that.
(13:49):
It's an interesting thing. You know, if you saw him
around the office, he's kind of a he's a very
cheerful presence. He's funny, he's he's basically conducting a pep
rally for his people, and then of the Palenteer offices
is in on in a given day. And yet he's
got a very dark view of the world and always
has and this is the view that became Palenteer's worldview.
It's it's, you know, the world is inclined to violence, chaos,
(14:12):
that is humanity's natural condition. We have lots of people
who want to kill us, and I think his view
is we should do them harm before they do us harm.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
I want to come back to this kind of West
versus the rest. Well, before that, I want to I know,
I understand a little bit more about the origin story
of Palenteer you've written. Although Copp was Palenteer's CEO, the
press often referred to the company as Peter Teel's Palenteer
and that that part was why he wants to do
this book.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
Yeah. During the first Trump presidency, TiO, of course was
a lightning rod. He still is, but he was very
much so during the first Trump presidency because of the
support he had given Trump and the kind of center
stage role he had taken, at least during the transition.
When you saw him around Trump Tower, the famous meeting
with all the tech executives, that was Teal who had
(15:02):
organized that. And you know stories about Palenteer during the
first Trump presidency, I mean, the headlines invariably read Teal's
Pallenteer even though he was not running the company and.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
Never had larger shareholder or largest larger individual Shoholder.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Largest individual shareholder and chairman of the board, so very
involved with this, but his idea or so it was
his idea. It was his idea, you know this. The
origin story is that this grew out of PayPal. PayPal
had run into serious trouble with fraudsters and they designed
some anti fraud algorithms that ultimately saved the business. That again,
(15:38):
pattern recognition software, finding those needles in the haystack. They
were generating a massive amount of data. Human analysts at
PayPal couldn't figure out what's going on, so they developed
software that could do that. After nine to eleven. It
occurs to te at some point you know that same
idea could be applied to the war on terrorism, and
those anti fraud algorithms could perhaps be repurposed help intelligence
(16:01):
analysts find potential terrorists and prevent future attacks. And that
gave rise to Palenteer, so he was it was his idea.
He brought karp into Palenteer first to help raise money
for this startup company, and then in consultation with the
other co founders, brought him in a CEO. But it
was Karpoo from that point on ran it. So these
(16:24):
things can be put to all sorts of uses, and
that's why a lot of the discussion about Palenteer is tricky.
And part of what I've been trying to do and
talking about the book is to to get across the
point that this is a really complicated company, and because
they're doing good stuff in some areas. So for instance,
during the pandemic, they were being used by the World
(16:45):
Food Program to help manage logistics, and Palenters technology people
at the WFP will tell you helped save a lot
of lives during the pandemic, So that's good, But then
you look at the work they're doing with ice, and
I think a lot of people say, well that's not
that's so good. So it's a complicated picture, a complicated company.
Karp embraces those complications in their complexity. But what do
(17:07):
you think about Palenteer? It depends on what issues are
dominating the headlines. But I think there is ambiguity and
complexity of the story that maybe don't find with you
all that many companies.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Let's talk a bit more about him. I mean he
embodies certain contradictions, right, I mean, he's talked about how
his greatest fear is fascism, but he's often accused of
techno fascism. He has an unusual background for a Silicon
Valley mogul. He's biracial, black and Jewish, you know, went
his early part of his career was not working in tech,
(17:55):
but studying, you know, in the Frankfurt School and studying
you know, leftist politics essentially. I mean, who is he?
Speaker 2 (18:02):
Well, it's a great question. I mean, the unlikeliest tech
mogul I think you could find raised in an astaunchly
left wing household in Philadelphia. A father was a pediatrician,
mother and artist. I think they took a quite dim
view of the of the business world in general. It
was not their ambition for their son, and given that
(18:25):
much of his early childhood was spent going to anti
war protests, I don't think if you told him at
that time that your son would be running a major
defense contractor they would have been particularly happy. So he
came out of a very different background. He stayed this
was the world that he grew up in. He remained
in that world, having for college, which we both attended.
It was a traditional a Quaker school, so a tradition
(18:46):
of pacifism, and you know, very I would say, not
wildly left wing, but certainly left leaning, left of center.
Then he went to stand For law school, which he hated.
The only good thing he took away from that is
that that's where he and Teo met and became friends.
They were political opposites. Then Karp decided that he didn't
(19:08):
want to pursue a career in law and went off
to Germany to you a doctor at a got University
of Frankfurt, and you know, then decided he didn't want
to be a professor either. So he was in his
mid thirties kind of at loose ends, and again no
background in technology, no background really a business, had never
run an organization, and he ended up as the CEO
(19:30):
of this startup. But what tea recognized that Karp was
very good at working with people and was really good
at raising money. He got people to sign checks. But
the other co founders also saw that there was a
kind of charisma to Karp that that would be very
helpful to this company. And and and he is in
his very idiosyncratic way of very charismatic figures. So despite
(19:52):
this unlikely background, he ended up a CEO of this
tech startup.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Did he express any doubt to you about his political conversion?
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Well, I don't think he. I mean, he wouldn't say
that he's had a political conversion. He's one of those
who say I didn't leave the Democrats, they left me.
So that's kind of his view. He's never put it
quite so directly, but that is clearly what he's saying,
you know, in public, and kind of what he has
said in private, that he thinks that you know, he didn't.
It's not that he's portrayed his progressive values. He thinks
(20:23):
progressives have betrayed their own values. By I mean, he's
the critique has just kind of snowballed over the last
two years, but it was a lot of it was
about immigration, which you know, during the first Drump presidency
he said, look at you know, I'm totally fine with
the demographics of this country changing, but people do not
like an open border. They don't they do not like
scenes of chast at the border. And Democrats didn't take
(20:47):
these concerns seriously, and they got President Trump. And then
after Trump lost in twenty twenty, he said during the
Biden years, he said, if they don't take the border seriously,
you're going to have President Trump again. And he was
right about that. But I think one of many reasons
he grew frustrated with the Democrats and eventually split with
them is because they didn't listen to him. So there
(21:09):
is there is that they'd listened to.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
Hilan not being invited to the to the EV summing
at the White.
Speaker 2 (21:14):
House exactly exactly. I mean, you know, if Kamala had
brought him into runner campaign, maybe he'd feel different.
Speaker 1 (21:22):
But twits fascism word which he has, which he has
made a centerpiece of who he is, is wanting to,
you know, avoid fascism returning. And yet you know, if
you read nineteen eighty four, The kind of techno surveillance
and predictive algorithmic infrastructure that he is building for governments
(21:43):
can be certainly used and arguably is being used, depending
on perspective, for something approaching fascism.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Yes, well, he's got a multi part answer to this,
which is that oh, no, no, no. Our technology is
the stuff that prevent and prevents it in a couple
of ways. First of all, it's got these guardrails built
into it, these privacy controls, these robust audit logs, so
you can't be used for nefarious purposes, which isn't really
(22:12):
true because Palenteer doesn't monitor how its technology is being
used the clients use it. So if the people using it,
say at ICE or another government agency, actually don't give
a crap about legal niceties and don't fear any consequences,
you have a problem. So that's always been the kind
of fly in the ointment, if you will. But you know,
(22:33):
Karp's argument is like, no, no, no, our technology which
allows organizations to be much more targeted. They allow, for instance,
ICE to be much more targeted and going after people.
That's actually protecting cimiliberties in privacy and ultimately upholding democracy.
And then in the context of the current moment, he
just flat out denies that Trump is authoritarian. He dismisses
(22:54):
that argument out of hand. And so that's kind of
how he answers all these concerns, and that's Yes, fascism
is his fear, but no, this isn't fascism. So my
fear is not being realized.
Speaker 1 (23:06):
Did you find his own sepersuasive?
Speaker 2 (23:08):
No, No, we disagree about Trump and who he is
and what this is we're looking at. He has his
reasons there even if he even if he agreed with me,
he's running a company that's a major government contractor what's
he going to say? So, yeah, got to dance for
(23:29):
his dinner in a way that I don't. So I
cut him some slack in that regard. But I do
think that Palenter recently posted that twenty two point manifesto that.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
The British politician describe it as the ramblings of a supervillain.
Speaker 2 (23:41):
Exactly, and so you know, and and then this freaked
a lot of people out because you know, he has
express views. I mean, he published a he co authored
a book with a colleague from Pallenteer last year called
the Technological Republic that many people saw as a as
a thinly veiled manifesto for techno authoritarianism. That twenty two
point manifesto that they posted on x, which was kind
(24:03):
of a distillation of the main points of the book,
definitely came across too many people as an argument for
techno authoritarianism or techno fascism. So, you know, Karp again,
this is a way in which he's a complicated figure,
and some people would say, no, he's not complicated. It's
very clear what he is. But I've been following this
guy for a very long time. I've had pretty extensive conversations,
(24:25):
and I think it is a complicated picture.
Speaker 1 (24:27):
A few of the points Silicon from the twenty two
point manifesto. Silicon value owes a moral debt to the
country that made its rise possible. The engineeringly to Silicon
Valley has an affirmative obligation to participate in the defense
of the nation. The atomic age is ending, one age
of the terrants. The atomic age is ending in a
new era of the terrance built on AI is said
to begin. Silicon Valley must play a role in addressing
(24:50):
violent crime. How much do these personal beliefs or Palenteers
corporate strategy and how much has palentiers corporate strategy affect
the line of everyday Americans.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Well, this is integral to what Palenteer is. From the start,
its goal was to work with the government, and it
believes that if you choose to work with the government,
you have an obligation to fulfill your contractual commitments, regardless
of who's president or what policies they choose to implement
within a reason. I mean, that's the problem with that
argument is you can take it to extreme. Certainly there
(25:24):
are some policies that might be pursued where you, as
a corporation would say, well, we can't actually do that.
And that's kind of the big question right now with Palenteer,
and it's worked with this second Trump administration, is okay,
what are the red lines? So, for instance, with ICE,
how extensive do the reports need to be of what
our effectively human rights abuses before Palenteer might say, you
(25:45):
know what, we can't be part of this. If, as
people in the Tromp administration have suggested, ICE agents are
deployed at polling stations this November, is that going to
be okay? With Palenteer, is that work they're going to
want to help facilitate or just even working with that
agency in an effort to tamper with the election. You know,
(26:06):
they don't answer that question. It's not their interest to
answer it. But it is a very real question. What
are the red lines here?
Speaker 1 (26:12):
I mean the standard kind of cry as we build
the tools, not the rules. But they're also building the architecture, right,
an architect when you build something, the architecture has its
own set of rules baked into it, right, or like
using an architecture puts you in the rules of the
person who designs the architecture. And so I personally just
(26:32):
I don't understand what they're saying, but it rings a
little hollow.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
No, absolutely, I mean, you know, forget even ice. But
I mean, so for instance, you know they were they
tried for a number of years to break in with
police departments in the United States. I had some success.
Those relationships have all ended for various reasons now, but
they were being used in Los Angeles for predictive policing.
At the heart of the controversy is the idea that
(26:57):
the algorithms reflect human biases and that you're targeting minority
communities because that's the data. The technology is not neutral
because it's designed by human beings, and so you know this,
you know, we just build it, they use it. Explanation
is not very satisfying, not in that context certainly. And
(27:17):
I think this is where they're running into some real trouble.
It's not necessarily reflected in the share price that's come off,
but not because the political controversy. But yeah, it's not
reflected in the share price, not reflected in the in
the in the financials, it's not hitting the bottom line.
But they have become the bogeyman, and in ways that
were not true during the first Trump presidency. No company
(27:38):
I think has been more closely associated with Trump this
time around, and pollenteer and we'll see if it has
implications for them.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
I mean you mentioned possible implications. There was this kind
of reported internal mutiny last year by employees concerned about
normalizing authoritarianism. I mean you talked about Karp as someone
who's kind of like a cheerleader in chief levels around
the paleteer offices. Has he been able to cheer lead
his way out of this mutiny?
Speaker 2 (28:06):
Well, I would, I would, I would politely correct you
in that. I don't think it was a mutiny. You
had pretty robust internal descent during the first Trump presidency
over the work with ICE, which you know, that issue
was somewhat overblown because their contract at the time was
with a division of ICE that was not really involved
(28:27):
in the immigration crackdown. This is during the first Trump presidency. Now,
they of course are intimately involved in it. But back
you know, during the first Trump presidency you had several
hundred employees sign a letter asking, you know, Kark to
break the contract with ICE. I would say the difference
between now and then because the internal descent has been
quite a bit more muted this time. And I would
(28:48):
say the difference between now and then is that tech
jobs are a lot harder to come by right now,
So you know, it's it's yeah. In twenty eighteen, twenty nineteen,
you could protest Internallyalenteer, and if you end up pissing
off the up rachel On enough that they fired you,
you were pretty well assured that with your with your
background at Palenteer, you could get a job at another
(29:10):
major tech company. Now it's very hard, So I think
that has kind of kept a lid on the internal
dissent because there are not very many places you can
go to if you get shown in the door Palenteer.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
Well, so what are the potential consequence? Is it a
Democrat administration who come in basically saying, you know, our
first policy is to cancel our contracts with Palenteer. We're
seeing in the UK that the UK government is underpression
not to work with Palenteer with the NHS.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
Yeah, no, that's it. And they would never say this
publicly and they would probably deny it privately, but I
think I know that the view internally is that this
technology is mission critical for the US military. The number
of contracts they've received from US military, it's become Maven
has now become you know, the AI targeting program, of
which again Palneers software is the is the backbone. It's
(29:57):
just been made a program of record, which is a
very important day. So what Democrat coming in would say, Okay, yeah, Maven,
you know, is great and all, but you know what,
screw Pallenteer. So sorry you guys, you can't use this.
No one's going to do that. So so you know,
I think the calculus internally is like, Okay, we can
ride this out. And yeah, we're going to take some
(30:18):
stick from Democrats on Capitol Hill and we're not popular.
But are they going to really go through the trouble
of pulling us out of all the sockets, if you will?
And are they really going to sit here and say, oh,
this is the best product in the market, but because
we don't like Karp, we're not going to use it,
So you're going to have to use some a lesser product.
Is that how they Is that what they want to tell,
you know, voters, Is that what they want to tell
(30:39):
people on Capitol Hill? And so the answer is no.
And and look at I mean, there was concern after
the first Trump presidency that they would face blowback, that
the Biden administration would somehow punish them, and then that
really didn't happen. They have some reason to believe I
think that they can ride this out and that for
all the all the outcry, for all the approbrium heaped
(31:02):
at them, that it won't really materially impact their government
business in the long run.
Speaker 1 (31:09):
Because the product is the product is too good, or
because it's just baked in them. I guess my.
Speaker 2 (31:13):
Question is a combination. It's a combination of both and
I mean this, I mean what car clearly recognized and
then certainly one reason he became such a Trump enthusiast
this time around is he recognized that this was an
opportunity to even more deeply entrench the technology in government.
And that's what's happening. I mean, it's all across the
executive branch the federal landscape right now. So it was
(31:35):
already extensive use across many government agencies, across the military,
but now it's even more so. So, Yeah, they are
in a sense creating facts on the ground. And so
it's a combination of it is the incumbent and if
a normal bureaucratic inertia, who's going to replace it? And
then there's their view, which is that it can't be
replaced because it is materially better than other products available
(31:58):
to them.
Speaker 1 (31:59):
What's your view? Is it a digital crystal ball or
is it.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
The people who use it swear by it. They find
it much more effective, and it does have its issues.
There are things about it that they'll love, but you know,
they find that it is worth the premium that they're charged.
That's what you hear from people at Airbus. They say,
look at if we could find something better and something cheaper.
We would, but they have not been able to do
(32:26):
so in their view, so it does seem to be
very effective.
Speaker 1 (32:30):
Indeed, have you spoken to cops since publishing the book.
Speaker 2 (32:33):
Yeah, we spoke a couple times after. Haven't spoken in
a few months, but you know, we were in touch
after the book came out.
Speaker 1 (32:39):
And he was okay with with how it all came out.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
Oh yeah, yeah, No, I mean I think you know.
The position he took in public was that the book
was marred by my TDS, my Trump derangement syndrome, which
I would say was his Trump denial syndrome. Apart from that,
he thought it was I think he thought it was
very fair and I think he like being the subject
of a book, having his story told. And he said
(33:04):
that people who read it, people he knew who read it,
thought well of it.
Speaker 1 (33:08):
So final question for you, what do you hope readers
take away from this book.
Speaker 2 (33:14):
I think they need to understand where this technology is
taking us. They need to understand something about the people
who are taking us towards this new world. Karp is
someone who's at the forefront now of the AI revolution,
and I think you need to understand what makes these
people tick. You need to understand how they think, how
they see the world, and I think you understanding Karp,
(33:35):
understanding Palenteer is important if you want to understand the
moment we're living through.
Speaker 1 (33:40):
The book is The Philosopher in the Valley Alex Carp
Pallentier and the Rise of the Savannah State. Michael Steinberger,
thank you, thank you for tech stuff. I'mos Voloshin. This
(34:12):
episode was produced by Eliza Dennis. It was executive produced
by me and Julian Nutter for Kaleidoscope and Katrina norvelve
iHeart Podcasts. Jack Instantly mixed this episode and Kyle Murdoch
wrote alph theme song
TechStuff News
Hosts And Creators
Oz Woloshyn
Karah Preiss
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.