• Palantir CEO Alex Karp claims AI companies are stealing customers’ data while charging them for unproductive tokens — says ’livid’ businesses ’are paying for tokens that create no value’
    https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/palantir-ceo-alex-karp-claims-ai-companies-are-stealing-customers-data

    #Alex_Karp, #CEO of well-known #AI #data_analytics company #Palantir, delivered quite the bombshell of an interview to CNBC’s Squawk Box. Although the interview’s topic was about the firm’s partnership with Nvidia, apropos the recently launched Sovereign AI OS Architecture, Karp bluntly claimed that frontier AI companies like #OpenAI and #Anthropic siphon customers’ valuable information while delivering questionable value.

    He continued by stating that #American enterprises are quietly “livid,” as “they are paying for tokens that create no value,” and that the AI players “are stealing [their customers’] weights and alpha.” The latter items refer to customers’ business processes and interconnections between their data, along with the data itself. Palantir’s shares jumped about 9% the day of the interview, while those of other AI companies experienced a dip.

    C’est ça les accélérationnistes ? Ils veulent accélérer le dégonflement de la bulle ?

  • Palantir posted a manifesto that reads like the ramblings of a comic book villain
    https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/palantir-posted-a-manifesto-that-reads-like-the-ramblings-of-a-comic-book-

    In case you haven’t gotten around to reading #Palantir CEO #Alex_Karp and Nicholas W. Zamiska’s 2025 book, The Technological Republic, (because why would you do that to yourself?), the company best known for supplying AI-driven defense and surveillance software to the likes of the #US_Army, #ICE and #NYPD shared a 1,000-word X post this weekend covering its main points. The entire thing is both bizarre and deeply concerning. "The ability of free and democratic societies to prevail requires something more than moral appeal,” one of the 22 points states. “It requires hard power, and hard power in this century will be built on software.”

    • Les 22 points résumés à partir de plusieurs sources (Merci Perplexity ; )
      1. L’Occident est en danger. Le monde entre dans une période de confrontation intense, et les démocraties occidentales risquent de perdre leur avance technologique et militaire si elles ne réagissent pas.
      2. L’ère de la bombe atomique touche à sa fin. La dissuasion par l’arme nucléaire ne suffit plus  : la puissance et l’équilibre militaire vont désormais reposer sur l’IA et les systèmes logiciels.
      3. La prochaine dissuasion sera logicielle. La capacité à développer des systèmes d’IA avancés déterminera quels États pourront empêcher la guerre ou au contraire la subir.
      4. Les ingénieurs ont une responsabilité politique. Les élites techniques de la Silicon Valley ne peuvent plus se contenter de faire des apps  : elles auraient le « devoir » de travailler à la défense de leur pays.
      5. La technologie civile ne suffit plus. Construire des réseaux sociaux, des services de livraison ou des jeux n’est plus à la hauteur des enjeux  ; il faut orienter les talents vers la défense, la sécurité et l’infrastructure critique.
      6. La paix relative depuis 1945 tient à la puissance américaine. Si le monde n’a pas replongé dans une guerre mondiale, c’est grâce à la suprématie militaire et technologique des États‑Unis, qu’il faudrait maintenir par une nouvelle vague technologique.
      7. Certaines cultures sont « vitales », d’autres « régressives »
      Les auteurs opposent des sociétés créatrices de « merveilles » technologiques et culturelles à d’autres présentées comme dysfonctionnelles, violentes ou hostiles à la modernité.
      8. Le relativisme culturel est dangereux. L’idée que « toutes les cultures se valent » serait naïve et nuisible, car elle empêcherait l’Occident d’affirmer ses valeurs et de se défendre.
      9. La démocratie a besoin de force pour survivre. Les institutions démocratiques ne tiendraient que si elles sont soutenues par une capacité de coercition technologique et militaire crédible.
      10. L’inclusivité peut affaiblir la culture organisationnelle. Les discours internes sur l’inclusion, la diversité ou la sécurité psychologique seraient accusés de détourner les entreprises de leur mission de performance et de défense.
      11. Les entreprises « vitales » doivent assumer des cultures exigeantes. Les organisations qui protègent l’Occident devraient privilégier excellence, loyauté et esprit de corps, même si cela heurte les normes RH dominantes.
      12. Les institutions publiques sont trop lentes. Les armées, les administrations et une partie de l’industrie de défense seraient engluées dans la bureaucratie et incapables d’innover à la vitesse requise.
      13. Le secteur privé technologique doit combler le vide. Des entreprises comme Palantir ou d’autres acteurs de la tech seraient appelées à prendre le relais de l’État pour construire les outils de défense essentiels.
      14. Les dirigeants qui « osent construire » doivent être soutenus. Les auteurs valorisent explicitement des figures entrepreneuriales qui se lancent dans les infrastructures lourdes, l’espace, l’IA de défense et acceptent le risque politique.
      15. La frontière entre civil et militaire s’estompe. Les mêmes outils de données et d’IA servent à la fois aux entreprises civiles et aux armées  ; il faut accepter cette porosité plutôt que la nier.
      16. Refuser les applications militaires de l’IA est irresponsable. Les ingénieurs qui boycottent l’armement ou la sécurité seraient accusés d’abandonner le terrain à des puissances adverses moins scrupuleuses.
      17. Les technologies de surveillance sont présentées comme protectrices. L’usage massif des données et des systèmes d’analyse pour surveiller, détecter et neutraliser les menaces est justifié au nom de la prévention des catastrophes.
      18. La neutralité politique des plateformes est jugée illusoire. Les grandes entreprises technologiques sont de facto des acteurs géopolitiques  ; elles devraient assumer ce rôle plutôt que prétendre à une neutralité bienveillante.
      19. L’Occident doit accepter une posture plus combative. Les démocraties sont invitées à renoncer à une vision irénique des relations internationales et à se préparer à des confrontations prolongées, y compris hybrides et numériques.
      20. L’IA de défense doit rester entre « bonnes mains ». Les auteurs affirment que les régimes autoritaires utiliseront l’IA pour opprimer  ; dès lors, il serait crucial de garantir que les outils les plus puissants restent contrôlés par des démocraties.
      21. Les compromis moraux se paient par la défaite. Renoncer à certaines capacités technologiques par scrupule éthique serait décrit comme un luxe que l’Occident ne peut plus se permettre s’il veut survivre.
      22. Le choix est entre déclin ou refondation technologique.
      Le texte se clôt sur l’idée que les sociétés occidentales doivent choisir  : soit se laisser aller au déclin, soit accepter un projet de refondation centré sur l’IA, la puissance logicielle et la militarisation de la technologie.

    • The Technological Republic, in brief.

      1. Silicon Valley owes a moral debt to the country that made its rise possible. The engineering elite of Silicon Valley has an affirmative obligation to participate in the defense of the nation.

      2. We must rebel against the tyranny of the apps. Is the iPhone our greatest creative if not crowning achievement as a civilization? The object has changed our lives, but it may also now be limiting and constraining our sense of the possible.

      3. Free email is not enough. The decadence of a culture or civilization, and indeed its ruling class, will be forgiven only if that culture is capable of delivering economic growth and security for the public.

      4. The limits of soft power, of soaring rhetoric alone, have been exposed. The ability of free and democratic societies to prevail requires something more than moral appeal. It requires hard power, and hard power in this century will be built on software.

      5. The question is not whether A.I. weapons will be built; it is who will build them and for what purpose. Our adversaries will not pause to indulge in theatrical debates about the merits of developing technologies with critical military and national security applications. They will proceed.

      6. National service should be a universal duty. We should, as a society, seriously consider moving away from an all-volunteer force and only fight the next war if everyone shares in the risk and the cost.

      7. If a U.S. Marine asks for a better rifle, we should build it; and the same goes for software. We should as a country be capable of continuing a debate about the appropriateness of military action abroad while remaining unflinching in our commitment to those we have asked to step into harm’s way.

      8. Public servants need not be our priests. Any business that compensated its employees in the way that the federal government compensates public servants would struggle to survive.

      9. We should show far more grace towards those who have subjected themselves to public life. The eradication of any space for forgiveness—a jettisoning of any tolerance for the complexities and contradictions of the human psyche—may leave us with a cast of characters at the helm we will grow to regret.

      10. The psychologization of modern politics is leading us astray. Those who look to the political arena to nourish their soul and sense of self, who rely too heavily on their internal life finding expression in people they may never meet, will be left disappointed.

      11. Our society has grown too eager to hasten, and is often gleeful at, the demise of its enemies. The vanquishing of an opponent is a moment to pause, not rejoice.

      12. The atomic age is ending. One age of deterrence, the atomic age, is ending, and a new era of deterrence built on A.I. is set to begin.

      13. No other country in the history of the world has advanced progressive values more than this one. The United States is far from perfect. But it is easy to forget how much more opportunity exists in this country for those who are not hereditary elites than in any other nation on the planet.

      14. American power has made possible an extraordinarily long peace. Too many have forgotten or perhaps take for granted that nearly a century of some version of peace has prevailed in the world without a great power military conflict. At least three generations — billions of people and their children and now grandchildren — have never known a world war.

      15. The postwar neutering of Germany and Japan must be undone. The defanging of Germany was an overcorrection for which Europe is now paying a heavy price. A similar and highly theatrical commitment to Japanese pacifism will, if maintained, also threaten to shift the balance of power in Asia.

      16. We should applaud those who attempt to build where the market has failed to act. The culture almost snickers at Musk’s interest in grand narrative, as if billionaires ought to simply stay in their lane of enriching themselves . . . . Any curiosity or genuine interest in the value of what he has created is essentially dismissed, or perhaps lurks from beneath a thinly veiled scorn.

      17. Silicon Valley must play a role in addressing violent crime. Many politicians across the United States have essentially shrugged when it comes to violent crime, abandoning any serious efforts to address the problem or take on any risk with their constituencies or donors in coming up with solutions and experiments in what should be a desperate bid to save lives.

      18. The ruthless exposure of the private lives of public figures drives far too much talent away from government service. The public arena—and the shallow and petty assaults against those who dare to do something other than enrich themselves—has become so unforgiving that the republic is left with a significant roster of ineffectual, empty vessels whose ambition one would forgive if there were any genuine belief structure lurking within.

      19. The caution in public life that we unwittingly encourage is corrosive. Those who say nothing wrong often say nothing much at all.

      20. The pervasive intolerance of religious belief in certain circles must be resisted. The elite’s intolerance of religious belief is perhaps one of the most telling signs that its political project constitutes a less open intellectual movement than many within it would claim.

      21. Some cultures have produced vital advances; others remain dysfunctional and regressive. All cultures are now equal. Criticism and value judgments are forbidden. Yet this new dogma glosses over the fact that certain cultures and indeed subcultures . . . have produced wonders. Others have proven middling, and worse, regressive and harmful.

      22. We must resist the shallow temptation of a vacant and hollow pluralism. We, in America and more broadly the West, have for the past half century resisted defining national cultures in the name of inclusivity. But inclusion into what?

      Excerpts from the New York Times Bestseller The Technological Republic: Hard Power, Soft Belief, and the Future of the West, by Alexander C. Karp & Nicholas W. Zamiska

      #Alex_Karp #Nicholas_Zamiska #Palentir #stratégie #silicon_valley #gouvernement #armée #défense #guerre #IA #big_data

    • https://mamot.fr/@Khrys/116448403637696044

      Capture d’un post LinkedIn de Diana Filippova où elle écrit :

      J’ai lu le manifeste de Palantir avec un vif intérêt.
      Ma première réaction : la stupéfaction. Après, j’ai ri. J’ai ri longtemps. Quand j’ai cessé de rire, j’ai décidé de réécrire cette subtile prose avec des mots simples.
      Je vous livre ma modeste tentative d’édition :

      « 1. Faisons la guerre.
      2. Faisons la guerre, pas des apps.
      3. Faisons la guerre, pas des mails.
      4. Ne soyons pas des fillettes, faisons la guerre.
      5. Pour faire la guerre, faisons des armes.
      6. On fait des armes, mais c’est vous qui ferez la guerre.
      7. On nous demande des armes, on fait des armes.
      8. Vive la corruption !
      9. Vive l’impunité !
      10. Vive les psychopathes !
      11. Vive Clausewitz (et vive la guerre) !
      12. Faisons des drones, pas des bombes.
      13. On est les meilleurs !
      14. On est les plus forts !
      15. L’Allemagne et le Japon étaient pas mal non plus !
      16. Vive Elon !
      17. Vive Minority Report !
      18. Vive les VSS en politique !
      19. Vive Grok !
      20. Vive les religions !
      21. Sauf l’Islam.
      22. À bas les wokes, vive les WASP ! »

      Avis aux auteurs débutants : écrire, c’est réécrire. Aussi, ce n’est pas parce vous employez des mots compliqués que le résultat vaut la peine d’être publié.

    • Le manifeste de Palantir pour une Silicon Valley en armes - France 24
      https://www.france24.com/fr/%C3%A9co-tech/20260424-le-manifeste-de-palantir-pour-une-silicon-valley-en-armes

      Le géant américain du traitement de données Palantir vient de publier un manifeste. Au menu : remise en cause du pluralisme, service militaire obligatoire, course aux armements dopés à l’intelligence artificielle. La marque de fabrique d’une entreprise qui s’est placée au cœur du complexe militaro-industriel américain et agit désormais sans garde-fous.

  • Palantir CEO Makes Shocking Confession on Disrupting Democratic Power
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/palantir-ceo-makes-shocking-confession-160030835.html

    Palantir CEO Alex Karp thinks his AI technology will lessen the power of “highly educated, often female voters, who vote mostly Democrat” while increasing the power of working-class men.

    “This technology disrupts humanities-trained—largely Democratic—voters, and makes their economic power less. And increases the economic power of vocationally trained, working-class, often male, working-class voters,” Karp said in a CNBC interview Thursday. “And so these disruptions are gonna disrupt every aspect of our society. And to make this work, we have to come to an agreement of what it is we’re going to do with the technology; how are we gonna explain to people who are likely gonna have less good, and less interesting jobs.”

  • Palantir CEO Makes Shocking Confession on Disrupting Democratic Power | The New Republic
    https://newrepublic.com/post/207693/palantir-ceo-karp-disrupting-democratic-power

    #Palantir CEO #Alex_Karp thinks his #AI technology will lessen the power of “highly educated, often #female #voters, who vote mostly #Democrat” while increasing the power of working-class #men.

    “This technology disrupts #humanities-trained—largely Democratic—voters, and makes their economic power less. And increases the economic power of vocationally trained, working-class, often male, working-class voters,” Karp said in a CNBC interview Thursday. “And so these disruptions are gonna disrupt every aspect of our society. And to make this work, we have to come to an agreement of what it is we’re going to do with the technology; how are we gonna explain to people who are likely gonna have less good, and less interesting #jobs.”

    Ça ne serait pas complètement crétin, on pourrait penser que ces gens sont authentiquement malveillants.

    (on me dit à l’oreillette qu’ils sont effectivement authentiquement malveillants et qu’il faudrait peut-être arrêter de les recevoir à l’Élysée et de leur faire des minutes de silence à l’Assemblée)

  • Un contrat à 10 millions d’euros avec la DGSI
    http://www.telerama.fr/medias/palantir-big-data-renseignement,153229.php

    En mars 2015, quelques semaines après l’attentat contre Charlie Hebdo et l’Hyper Cacher, Palantir a ouvert une filiale française, sur la très chic avenue Hoche, à quelques centaines de mètres de l’Arc de Triomphe. En toute discrétion, comme à son habitude. Après des mois de démarchages et de tractations, la firme américaine a trouvé un accord avec la Direction générale de la sécurité intérieure (DGSI). Selon nos informations, recueillies auprès de plusieurs sources au sein des services de renseignement, le contrat aurait été signé à l’été 2016. Montant estimé : 10 millions d’euros. 5% du budget de la DGSI. Auditionné par la commission défense de l’Assemblée nationale en mai dernier, Patrick Calvar, son patron, balisait le terrain en invoquant l’urgence : « Nous ne manquons pas de données ni de métadonnées, mais nous manquons de systèmes pour les analyser [...] Les entreprises françaises qui [les] développent ne sont pas encore capables de répondre à nos besoins, alors que nous devons acquérir ce big data immédiatement. Nos camarades européens sont dans la même situation. Le choix n’a pas encore été fait mais, en tout état de cause, la solution sera temporaire. »

    #palantir #dgsi #data #surveillance #silicon_army
    #Peter_Thiel #Alex_Karp #trump #NSA #RGPD

  • How A ’Deviant’ Philosopher Built #Palantir, A CIA-Funded #Data-Mining Juggernaut - Forbes
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/08/14/agent-of-intelligence-how-a-deviant-philosopher-built-palantir-a-cia-funded-

    The biggest problem for Palantir’s business may be just how well its software works: It helps its customers see too much. In the wake of NSA leaker Edward Snowden’s revelations of the agency’s mass surveillance, Palantir’s tools have come to represent privacy advocates’ greatest fears of data-mining technology — Google-level engineering applied directly to government spying. That combination of Big Brother and Big Data has come into focus just as Palantir is emerging as one of the fastest-growing startups in the Valley, threatening to contaminate its first public impressions and render the firm toxic in the eyes of customers and investors just when it needs them most.

    “They’re in a scary business,” says Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Lee Tien. ACLU analyst Jay Stanley has written that Palantir’s software could enable a “true totalitarian nightmare, monitoring the activities of innocent Americans on a mass scale.”

    Karp, a social theory Ph.D., doesn’t dodge those concerns. He sees Palantir as the company that can rewrite the rules of the zero-sum game of privacy and security. “I didn’t sign up for the government to know when I smoke a joint or have an affair,” he acknowledges. In a company address he stated, “We have to find places that we protect away from government so that we can all be the unique and interesting and, in my case, somewhat deviant people we’d like to be.”

    Palantir has explored work in Saudi Arabia despite the staff’s misgivings about human rights abuses in the kingdom. And for all Karp’s emphasis on values, his apology for the WikiLeaks affair also doesn’t seem to have left much of an impression in his memory. In his address to Palantir engineers in July he sounded defiant: “We’ve never had a scandal that was really our fault.”

    AT 4:07 P.M. ON NOV. 14, 2009 Michael Katz-Lacabe was parking his red Toyota Prius in the driveway of his home in the quiet Oakland suburb of San Leandro when a police car drove past. A license plate camera mounted on the squad car silently and routinely snapped a photo of the scene: his off-white, single-floor house, his wilted lawn and rosebushes, and his 5- and 8-year-old daughters jumping out of the car.

    Katz-Lacabe, a gray-bearded and shaggy-haired member of the local school board, community activist and blogger, saw the photo only a year later: In 2010 he learned about the San Leandro Police Department’s automatic license plate readers, designed to constantly photograph and track the movements of every car in the city. He filed a public records request for any images that included either of his two cars. The police sent back 112 photos. He found the one of his children most disturbing.

    “Who knows how many other people’s kids are captured in these images?” he asks. His concerns go beyond a mere sense of parental protection. “With this technology you can wind back the clock and see where everyone is, if they were parked at the house of someone other than their wife, a medical marijuana clinic, a Planned Parenthood center, a protest.”

    ... it’s clear that #Alex_Karp does indeed value privacy–his own.

    His office, decorated with cardboard effigies of himself built by Palantir staff and a Lego fortress on a coffee table, overlooks Palo Alto’s Alma Street through two-way mirrors. Each pane is fitted with a wired device resembling a white hockey puck. The gadgets, known as acoustic transducers, imperceptibly vibrate the glass with white noise to prevent eavesdropping techniques, such as bouncing lasers off windows to listen to conversations inside.

    He’s reminiscing about a more carefree time in his life–years before Palantir–and has put down his Rubik’s cube to better gesticulate. “I had $40,000 in the bank, and no one knew who I was. I loved it. I loved it. I just loved it. I just loved it!” he says, his voice rising and his hands waving above his head. “I would walk around, go into skanky places in Berlin all night. I’d talk to whoever would talk to me, occasionally go home with people, as often as I could. I went to places where people were doing things, smoking things. I just loved it.”

    “One of the things I find really hard and view as a massive drag … is that I’m losing my ability to be completely anonymous.”

    It’s not easy for a man in Karp’s position to be a deviant in the modern world. And with tools like Palantir in the hands of the government, deviance may not be easy for the rest of us, either. With or without safeguards, the “complete anonymity” Karp savors may be a 20th-century luxury.

    Karp lowers his arms, and the enthusiasm drains from his voice: “I have to get over this.”

    #surveillance, la préservation de la #vie_privée consideree comme un #luxe