Palantir CEO Alex Karp: AI Panic, Rise of Germany's AfD & Saving Europe

[music] [music] [music] Good morning, Alex. We are sitting here in the mid of the mountains of Idaho

near Selli in your beautiful house.

I remember very well when we met for the first time. It was in 2003. It was at a

first time. It was in 2003. It was at a party in southern France and somebody introduced you to me preparing me by

saying Alex Karp is a super interesting guy. He studied at a good university in

guy. He studied at a good university in Frankfurt. Jorgen Haram was his

Frankfurt. Jorgen Haram was his professor. He's an intellectual.

professor. He's an intellectual.

Unfortunately, he has no job. Uh

penniless, but an interesting guy. We

met, we got along very well. And I have the feeling this is a guy who is rather on the left side of the political spectrum, very intellectual personality, cares a lot about the state of

democracy, about individual rights.

And [clears throat] today this guy has launched one of the most successful companies of recent business in history, Palanteer.

Market cap currently north of 300 billion.

And certainly people are describing you like a kind of Darth Bader uh a sinister figure of

far right-wing ideologies and almost like a war bunker. Please tell me what happened. Did you change?

what happened. Did you change?

Well, first of all that the the the Paler thing is Palanteer has a hundred more exfans than than than people who describe me. that way. In fact, my

describe me. that way. In fact, my personal experience including in Germany, including and especially in Germany, is you you the media version,

and I'll get to that, is you something like, you know, bringing war to peace times or something. [laughter]

Um, but the actual rational human being on the street is a Palanteer fan. part of our success.

Palanteer fan. part of our success.

There's the product side um which we could talk about. There's

also like put this way every single person in Silicon Valley who finances things would cut off their right arm to have the fans we have and their and your

left arm. So, but the the the the many

left arm. So, but the the the the many things in your question and I remember meeting you two and thinking, "Oh, this is a really interesting person." Um and

you know well how does somebody who studies music end up running what I mean for those who are not in the German speaking world it's funny outside

the German speaking world people do not understand the impact of Axel Springer um and which Axel Springer which you it's you know it's easy to say you run

but it's it's different you know in Germany there really aren't that many I can't think of any other ien tumor or someone who owns a significant stake in

the company that's also running it. So

it's very very unusual setup. It's more

similar to America but then we don't have essentially a second generation business run by uh an owner. So even in America that the whole setup is very

very unusual. Uh and then you know Yeah.

very unusual. Uh and then you know Yeah.

I mean, what I think uh bound us together from the beginning is you're um you're a it it doesn't translate well into English, but a music scientist. So,

we don't really have science and music and I guess in America, but it sounds kind of fake, even though I'm sure there is a faculty of that. But in any case, um uh that's a very unusual setup on your end.

Yeah, we are both outsiders. That's

absolutely true. And uh we both um are polarizing. That's also fair to say. I

polarizing. That's also fair to say. I

just tried to get it why a person that I met almost a quarter century ago and whom I've met during that time very

regularly and I did not observe any change in your world view or in your personality now the description of you the outside picture of you is in sharp contrast well I get

let me let me ask answer the question it's the exact right framing but I still want to push back on the it there's There's almost no one else in tech, maybe one or two that were who has

anything like the fans I have. So it's

there's this both the outside kind of I would say especially in Europe much less so here version of me paler Peter which is exactly what you described but I I just

want to also highlight the dynamic that these people also create fans like whenever I do something I'm basically only talk to Germany through you now and

I get hate but I would say a hundred times more fans writing hey could you please thank you for helping Germany especially especially young people who are want to do things in Germany as an

example. So any case, but let me get to

example. So any case, but let me get to let me answer your question directly uh uh without the caveat. Um but I do think there's a European and American

difference here. But our products PG

difference here. But our products PG um changed the course of history by reducing basically I mean there have been minor terror attacks and terror

attacks can always happen but since we launched the product you have it has stopped hundreds and hundreds of terror attacks but Alexio then simply describe

the mission of Palunteer what you think Palanteer is doing to society what is the mission in in order to help people to decide whether they should feifers.

Well, again the but let me just answer the I'm trying to get to the question you're asking which is a really deep question. Why would people want to

question. Why would people want to portray us so inaccurately is my version of the question and I think there's a functional reason for that and the function there really twofold and here

I'm going to use Europe as an example.

One the products worked too well so people can afford it. The terror attacks in Europe have basically been reduced to something that's not something people are afraid of even though there are way too many attacks on the streets especially of Germany and that but

people view that as an immigration problem not as a terror problem right or wrong and two our products play a significant role in Ukraine so Russia and Russia doesn't appear to be winning

so I I think the setup to to answer the pounder attack thing especially in Europe you also have to say why can Europe why does Europe believe they can afford to hacked Pounder and I'm telling

you the primary reason is cuz and this is a pounder problem. our products were well were powerful enough that people believe they can afford it which is

again okay so um then what what and so like so then you so that's I think the backdrop then why would you want to perceive us that way and I do think there's a Europe and an American

difference and it basically comes down to America is hypercharging AI and tech and has these phenomenal and that that's where I do think the reason why you're kind of a bridge between America and

Europe There are lots of reasons but one of them is you look like more like an American business person like you own the company there's a big like that's a benality but it's also true and if you

are saying like essentially just take a neutral example American businesses versus European businesses American businesses believe they're at war all the time so if you show up with a

product that is demonstrabably better on all scores in America and in Europe You're going to have a very different reception. In

America, it's going to it's not going to be I like or do not like the person, although most Europe American businesses love Palunteer, but it's going to be how

does it work? Why does it work? Does it

transform my business? Does the

technology work? Is the technology stealing my IP? And in Europe, you can't really afford to ask these questions or or they're not being asked correctly

because the answer to the question would be some significant part of that infrastructure is going to have to be imported from America.

I mean, you you have described me many times that your main goal, your mission is to protect democracy, and that's your what you're doing, I think, quite efficiently. Nevertheless, the debate in

efficiently. Nevertheless, the debate in Europe is mainly these guys are collaborating with the American Secret

Service. That's bad. That's dangerous.

Service. That's bad. That's dangerous.

What do we get wrong? I mean, to work with the Secret Service of democracy in order to protect democracy, I think is a good thing. But why why is that

good thing. But why why is that perceived problematic? Why are German

perceived problematic? Why are German states boycotting Palanteer and portray you as a force of evil although you are obviously just

on the side of democracies.

Um I just but nobody sees it that way outside of Europe. I mean we have Europe that's a widespread sentiment.

The point the point I would say to especially Germany where I care is is that really the wides is that that is I

think that's way downstream of very bad decision-m. So they perceive Palunteer.

decision-m. So they perceive Palunteer.

By the way, again, I really, really, deeply believe the they here are the professional media, left of center politicians, people who equate Peter and me with an an old version of Germany,

which they do not want. And that the vast majority of Germans, the vast majority of Germans would prefer a world where the decision-m was rational enough so you could evaluate Palanteer in a

rational way. That that's what I

rational way. That that's what I believe. Are you brother?

believe. Are you brother?

But but let me let me just get to the but but the the um the the technical point that I think is very important is

the decision-m is objectively wrong from the perspective of how would you protect the data?

You need an application layer. And so

the crazy thing about what's happening in Europe is we have the only industrial industrially user application layer in the world. That application layer

the world. That application layer protects your data from being essentially abused by law large language model providers. So what you have in

model providers. So what you have in Europe are technically illiterate bureaucrats that in the name of protecting their people from a company they don't like because they don't like

basically what Peter and I represent which in my view is actually old school European values. Old school European

European values. Old school European values mean the products are the best in the world and they actually are morally superior because of the competence involved and every single one of our

products is like that. Those products

cannot touch. So I so you're framing it as a moral thing. I'm saying the moral thing is way downstream of the competence problem. And if you were to

competence problem. And if you were to solve the if you want to solve the competence problem in tech in Europe, which is the bigger problem like Europe is not a relevant market for Palunteer except for that I care.

The main accusation is data surveillance. Palanteer is uh

surveillance. Palanteer is uh a form of espionage and the most aggressive term was you are technofascists.

you are rather on the side of data surveillance or are you rather on the side of uh well first of all the the the um the

most interestingly fascinating thing if it wasn't sad and and very very cowish

is the products we provide PG for which is what's used in the police forces uh and intel services in Europe

uh foundry uh ontology which is used in the Ukraine and ontology is essentially a application layer. These products are the products you will need and the only

ones available at scale that I'm aware of to stop what people mean by surveillance. What do we mean by sur

surveillance. What do we mean by sur what what what what should Europe mean by surveillance? What what it what it

by surveillance? What what it what it should mean is the IP the indigenous know-how that still powers Europe gets migrated to a different company in a company that's not European that has no

interest in Europe that is not going to protect either the rights meaning your right to privacy your right to that data being purged also your right to have I mean in Europe one of the things I've

always embraced is in America we have rights that are basically moral rights in Europe you have economic rights and they're intertwined which is always the vexing discussion. So the vexing

vexing discussion. So the vexing discussion between America and Europe is from the American perspective, you don't protect rights enough visav government.

So Europe, no European country has anything like a first or second amendment. That's vexing. And the fourth

amendment. That's vexing. And the fourth amendment in Europe is probably the closest in America's closest to what you have, meaning the right to privacy. But

even there, without going to technical details, we have widely divergent ideas of how to do that basic. And so and then the the vexing thing from a European perspective is Americans have all these

rights visa v the government but you have no right of protection visa v companies and there are basically you have a right to succeed or fail here.

You don't have a right to economic justice. I mean that's maybe something

justice. I mean that's maybe something people want politically but in the constitution that is not enshrined. So

you have a completely different idea of rights. I actually am a classic

rights. I actually am a classic progressive. I'm more I'm I'm still

progressive. I'm more I'm I'm still American in that I I like my first, second, and fourth amendment, but I would like to see better treatment for poor. Okay. So,

poor. Okay. So,

you would still describe yourself as a progressive correct?

Oh, I I would describe myself as one of the few last standing actual progressives in that I believe well, first of all, I'm willing to defend the rights of someone I don't like. Okay,

that somehow is gone. And again, it's particularly gone in Europe. Like, they

frame this as I don't like you. that how

is that relevant like why do we moralize everything also if it is about Germans who have been very successful in America in the Silicon Valley Peter Teal

uh Toby Litka Shintla Phil Shintla so there are a couple of Germans who made impressive careers in the Silicon Valley and we in Europe and in Germany do so far not

really take advantage of it but first we moralize we say well there must be something.

Well, there's there's there's there's a difference in like I mean as a generalization, Germany is a very Lutheran culture and we're a Calvinist culture. So that like we equate success

culture. So that like we equate success with being like the Swiss are Calvinist, the Dutch are Calvinist, but as a generalization, I would say Europe in

general and Germany obviously in particular is a Lutheran culture where Lutheran culture tends to view massive success. you've you've acquired during

success. you've you've acquired during your lifetime with great skepticism.

Calvinist, we're like peak Calvinism.

Maybe we even take it too far where we ascribe financial success to moral success.

Both have their strengths and weaknesses. the the the the the way I

weaknesses. the the the the the way I tend to want to frame the question is but the e excess in Europe and moral

ising moralizing is clearly in my view downstream from not wanting to solve the problems and so and and then and I think Palanteer is the archetypical example

you can say basically against all technical evidence that Palunteer are technofascist what would that mean and that we're engaged in surveillance when our products are actually the ones that

stop that. Or you can ask the more

stop that. Or you can ask the more serious question, what has gone wrong in our culture that we have no other application layer that would allow us to do this?

Probably the most impactful and successful German of recent decades is Peter Teal. You know him well. Uh he was

Peter Teal. You know him well. Uh he was the co-founder of Palunteer.

Is he an anti-democrat? Is he a religious fanatic? Could you

religious fanatic? Could you No, I mean I so actually the way I would reframe the beginning of the question is I think my treatment in Germany is

it's not what it should be but it's honestly given that I how much money I've made fairer than you could think. I

think the treatment of Peter is atrocious. Um

atrocious. Um why? Well, first of all, again, it's one

why? Well, first of all, again, it's one of the things I really you're you're I would start with again, and it's a very German concept. See, again, I I think

German concept. See, again, I I think what is happening what what scares me a lot in Germany is it's an importation of a version of America on top of German

ideals that are have kind of are are attenuated. Um and uh and so the real

attenuated. Um and uh and so the real question to ask is I think the question historically one would have asked in Germany is can we afford this? Can we

afford not to learn from this person?

And I think that's the right question Germanies ask.

Well, you make a point and could say well it depends on where the person stands with regard to values. So if

somebody is intrinsically anti-democratic or has a leaning towards of regime That's a different thing than this person I think should not be used should not be a role model. The question

is here is it a misunderstanding or is there a point?

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

misunderstanding. It's not true but I'm I'm going to push back on that.

I don't I you can I'm reading books on Deng Shoping. I read a book on Ma I'm

Deng Shoping. I read a book on Ma I'm reading books on Mao. I I've read a lot of books on I learn I've I'm learning a lot from Mao and D. I don't agree with

Mao on anything like so like I don't believe anyone can afford not to learn.

And I and if you're in a very bad situation, let's just take an obvious example. The German tax scene. The

example. The German tax scene. The

German taxine should be the number two in the world by any historical standard.

Honestly, the German tech scene was the number one in the world. So number two is already like maybe shouldn't be the aspiration. It's on no one's list there.

aspiration. It's on no one's list there.

You You're one of the more successful investors in Germany. You know, you probably know successful companies in Germany, but the the most largest company in Germany by market cap I think is Seammens and Palunteer is

significantly larger even where we're obviously undervalued. So currently, so

obviously undervalued. So currently, so my first cut and and you see this in this like where you you know, you and I have been friends and we we actually agree on the moral stuff pretty much one

to one pro-democracy. What does

democracy mean? Prodatative progression

alignment with the west. We should have an alliance that is those of us who don't agree that alliance should be western Europe, America, the five eyes

and Israel and Japan and Korea. So we we agree on those things and many other things almost deongish meaning with almost but where I think there is

distance would be my approach which is I would the first question I would ask is can can Germany afford not to learn from Peter even if all those things were

true. Now you're right it has it should

true. Now you're right it has it should be clarified. I I've known Peter

be clarified. I I've known Peter since we were poor students at Stanford.

Um, we had conversations as like just poor students fighting about intellectual things. He was always

intellectual things. He was always heterodox right. I was always heterodox

heterodox right. I was always heterodox left. I don't think much has changed.

left. I don't think much has changed.

He's still heterodox right. Meaning he's

very frustrating to classic Republicans.

He I he's never been a neocon. Like a

lot of the thing he he he does he's um never he actually does not really believe in classic uh Republican

economic theory. uh he was the first

economic theory. uh he was the first person to flag and will always flag like in conversations you tend to have people on the right basically explaining all

problems as the result of capitalism not being driven far enough. That's just not Peter's view. Uh he he's not he's not a

Peter's view. Uh he he's not he's not a simplistic or caricature thinker on the right meaning and he's definitely not the caricature that the left wants to

present. But what's fascinating to me is

present. But what's fascinating to me is why is it so important to spend so much time uh blocking Peter from the German market? Forget Palinger. Like forget

market? Forget Palinger. Like forget

it's not like I want to help Germany because I care about Europe and because I have a I mean because of historical family and also I just felt at home in

Germany for a long time. Uh but but for me that's because like let me just reframe the moral thing. It's so

obviously thin what they're saying about him, what they say about Palanteer. So

obviously doesn't make sense on the merits. You only need 10 minutes, five

merits. You only need 10 minutes, five minutes on Google to see this isn't true. Why do people want to and need to

true. Why do people want to and need to believe that truth was the question that I believe. And by the way, it's not that

I believe. And by the way, it's not that different. I mean, you're talking about

different. I mean, you're talking about Peter and me. I could ask you the same question. Like I've known you for not as

question. Like I've known you for not as long as I've known Peter, but and you were very successful before I was. Um I

I mean I don't the German non-German audience may not realize how Axel Springer is discussed. Okay. So like

there I think there are very important political figures in Germany without naming names that see no difference between you and the right side of the

offday. Okay. It's absurd. I I I believe

offday. Okay. It's absurd. I I I believe mo most of my left-wing friends in Germany think Axel Springer wakes up in the morning and tries to make the world worse and goes to bed with a smile when

the world is worse. This obviously not true.

What is your take actually on the rise of the IFD in Germany as somebody who has studied in Germany, speaks German, uh cares very much about the well-being of the country. We see now this kind of polarization of society. The very left

and the far right are on the rise and the FDA, what is it for you? Is it a normal party or is it uh I I think the off day is very complex

and I'm not reading all the news all the time. I I I give you um I I think first

time. I I I give you um I I think first of all the rise of the of extreme parties was super predictable and I may have been talk shouting about this for

the last 10 years. You can't if you're going to bring in uh doing wide square very deep and large migration into

Germany without the buyin of the German people and without an honest discussion of the consequences. Again, I understand why this is hard to do in Germany and

it's completely about history which you know if my family hadn't left Germany I would be a lampshade. I mean they left before the Holocaust. I'm very everybody understands that and is sympathetic but

we haven't you have in Europe but especially in Germany just an impossibly difficult uh painful inability to talk

about obvious facts but the average person on the street is living with these facts. Okay.

these facts. Okay.

You know avoiding my question what do you think about the IFD Palanteer is defending Ukraine against Russia. The FDA is asking uh Ukraine and

Russia. The FDA is asking uh Ukraine and just recently one of the leaders said we have to force Ukraine at the table to negotiate with Russia. That is turning

history and perpetrator and I totally I'm going to get to the point where I agree with you. I just I I I again we're like you're starting with the moral thing. I'm starting with the

economic reason and cultural reason why this thing exists. See the question you asked is why have they why are they in ascendency? And they're much off day is

ascendency? And they're much off day is much stronger than they appear because I have friends who 5 years ago were telling me they would never vote for the off day who are voting for the off day.

Like people who are social democrats and and then when the off day is polling at 40% there's another 10 points above that that would vote for them if they weren't the off day.

But honestly I think the day is just the consequence of weak leadership in the center of political spectrum. uh but

that does not necessarily mean that that disruption is done by a force by a political force that has a concept that will be good for Germany. I personally

think that the IFD is just not an alternative because it is intrinsically in large parts of the party, pro-Russia, pro-China, even with a certain tolerance

uh to uh well, I mean forces in the Middle East, it is in large parts intrinsically anti- capitalist. It is in large parts anti-American. Just recently

we heard that Germany is divided in two parts. We have East Germany, where are

parts. We have East Germany, where are the German Germans and then we have West Germany, where are the American Germans.

Okay.

So this is just not a alternative.

Uh and I just would like from you because some people are accusing Peter or you that you have a certain leaning or understanding for that.

No clarify.

Well, this is again I basically agree with everything you said, but the point I would push back on I have a deep understanding for why they're succeeding. So it's like I would not

succeeding. So it's like I would not vote for the off day if I were able to vote and were voting in Germany. And um

but that's different from I think part of the reason they're successful is the first of all no one actually believes like let's just say the parties the

classic parties are actually going to take migration seriously but no one believes they're going to do it. So you

get people voting for the off day basically because you know it's a protest vote and you know you know you're Germans and people who care about

Germany like me have been screaming and been right and no one listens and not only does no one listen and you are a great example of this you are honestly

pretty left-wing on most issues as far as I can tell and I've known you for 20 years and and and and you're kind of classically, if I were to describe you,

classically leftleaning person who's a little bit more bought into the capitalist narrative than I am. That

that's how I would describe if I were describing. So, okay, you get pillaried

describing. So, okay, you get pillaried and and you tell everybody I'm against the off day. God knows you have no sympathy for anyone who's pro-Russia. I

mean, like you believe for that like we're on the front line. for Putin. I

should always clarify, we have nothing against the Russians. We have nothing against the Chinese, but we have a lot against I I I'm a Tai Chi. I'm an expert in one

of the four great treasures in China.

I'm reading all these things. I I I have a deep appreciation of Russian culture, Russian math. I have So, we agree on

Russian math. I have So, we agree on that. But shorthand, if I were to say

that. But shorthand, if I were to say what I think motivates you, uh, after watching you for 20 years is you are deeply pro-democratic.

You're kind of progressive on most issues except for you do not like you don't want anything that's stupid and won't work. And if I had to say where

won't work. And if I had to say where you're kind of a zealot, it's on the, you know, anti-Putin, anti-China stuff and actually on uh no

tolerance for anti-semitism. So that's

your those those are your positions.

Those positions are I mean they're solidly mainstream. And I

can tell people who are listening and want to hear this like if like even in private discussions are like I'm much more on like yeah I want to understand why still of course I'm not going to I'm not interested in voting for them but I

understand why and you're more on the they're wrong they're wrong they're wrong which is why our dialogues are fun. This is basically like it would be

fun. This is basically like it would be in private. Okay. So the I pounder we

in private. Okay. So the I pounder we something I am actually frustrated with in Europe is again the anti-terror things would be very different and

Ukraine would not have been able to succeed there. Okay, let me just finish

succeed there. Okay, let me just finish this. But so obviously I'm not

this. But so obviously I'm not interested in supporting a party that is deeply sympathetic with Putin, is interested in like I think I think Europe made it like the C that is

sympathetic with the CCP and and quite frankly these parties are complex but they're you know the day does contain people that I kind of would suspect

would not like me very much. Um okay,

Alex, I think the frustration uh of people is very much driven by a failed migration policy, a failed energy policy and that Germany and Europe is

completely and the GDP not delivering exactly is not delivering on economic growth. That has to do with a lack of uh

growth. That has to do with a lack of uh startup culture of risk culture in America. people deploy millions to a new

America. people deploy millions to a new idea and just believe that the impossible is possible. Whereas in

Europe and in Germany we have to a large degree a very risk focused culture.

Yeah. But and here we are entering the era of AI and whether it's an opportunity or a threat. And I think we should also discuss the cultural

differences between America and Europe and Germany in the context of these developments. I I think we could turn it

developments. I I think we could turn it around and we could say this is now an opportunity because I see a lot of AI skepticism in America. I see in America

almost more AI skepticism at this moment than in Europe among normal people. If

uh we have an all hands in America, people are raising posters and saying AI is killing our jobs. If we do the same in Germany or in Europe, people are saying well we want to learn, we want to understand, we want to take advantage of

it. Do you think that there could be?

it. Do you think that there could be?

Well, yeah, but not without acknowledging that there's a crisis for the very simple reason. First of all, the the debate is different. Europe is

partly not skeptical of AI because you are not like for example, take the Palunteer example. We are the only

Palunteer example. We are the only product available that makes AI useful on the battlefield and safe and useful and safe and commercial. I it's very

hard to discuss AI when what they mean are largely companies being slightly unfair that would not be able to compete in America. So they

you're talking about AI light but the thing is but let's talk also about the opportunity. I mean I get it and we

opportunity. I mean I get it and we agree that Germany has not delivered, Europe has not delivered. What can we do? Let me just finish this.

do? Let me just finish this.

It you can't it is nothing's going to work before the chancellor gets up and says we have an a crisis because to fix

the problem again you are going who's going to fix the problem? The problem is you are going to have to bring in a Tobiius or a Schindler or a Teal as in a

very significant role you can't rebuild with people who've never done this before. And so and then who's going to

before. And so and then who's going to build under what conditions? What are

the working conditions? How do you bring the whole society along? How how how much can someone work per day? Tech

works because people work are dedicated like doggedly dedicated around the clock for years. And by the way, if somebody

for years. And by the way, if somebody doesn't belong on the team, you can move them out of the team or out of the company. By the way, the the for tech

company. By the way, the the for tech people, again, I'm wildly I the people I got along with best when I was on boards in Germany were the union. So, I'm not saying but you don't need worker

protection for someone who isn't a software engineer that could work at an LLM lab. So, but to get this to work,

LLM lab. So, but to get this to work, you have to have someone saying this is a crisis. I think you're also going to

a crisis. I think you're also going to have to say this is an economic zone. We

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

Why are people in America more afraid of than in Europe at the moment? Do they

know more? Uh is it what is Well, first of all, yeah, I mean really honestly yes. And so like again I

honestly yes. And so like again I So do you think the fear is appropriate?

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

You can use it for a good cause or for a bad cause.

They no they have to be processed and in the processing they become first of all just touching them probably is not a good idea but so using them like again yeah but if you use the metaphor Iranian

I think it's very appropriate because you can use it for bad or for good causes. And here again people start to

causes. And here again people start to have a moral discussion or whether it's good or bad instead of saying let's make sure that we use it for for good causes.

I mean it's again there is this comparison to a knife. You can use a knife in order to prepare food and you can use a knife in order to kill people.

So we should not basically forbid forbid but but it is both true and again this is why I think these things are actually economic and technical. First it is you

have to understand what the technologies do. You have to have people who are

do. You have to have people who are working natively with these technologies and those people have to be involved.

And again here it's like you basically have different parts of the stack. You

have the GPU part of the stack. So

that's chips. You have essentially you're in an enterprise you're going to have a data integration part of the stack. You can do that by hand. If you

stack. You can do that by hand. If you

want civil liberties you're going to we do that. You have an application part of

do that. You have an application part of the stat. So, ontology, what does it

the stat. So, ontology, what does it mean? How does it mean? How's it

mean? How does it mean? How's it

deployed? How is it safely deployed? How

do you process? How do you use? And you

have the large language models, both closed and open models. And the closed and open models have different advantages to world here to have a tech scene in Europe. You need

worldleading components in all those parts. That's not realistic. So you're

parts. That's not realistic. So you're

going to have to figure out which components are actually the ones that could advance European industry, European sovereignty. The the

European sovereignty. The the sovereignty issue is a completely technical issue and in it it's not just Germany honestly the

what's really happening in Europe is you have bureaucrats whose primary idea is how do I protect the market against American companies and everything else is downstream. Let me again try to twist

is downstream. Let me again try to twist it towards an opportunity. If this kind of uh anti-I sentiment is ongoing in America and I fear that Americans could

see an election campaign where the two parties are basically competing in order to explain that their party is protecting their people better against AI. I think that's a very dangerous case

AI. I think that's a very dangerous case but that's what what's happening and has already started. So if that's ongoing

already started. So if that's ongoing and every kind of new data center is a big uh issue and raises a lot of protest and so on wouldn't that be an

opportunity for Europe and say okay here welcome build the data centers here I I Matias I feel like I'm more German than you I'm just going to put that out there you're playing the American I'm playing like okay

of course it's an opportunity but it's only an opportunity if it's technically credible so like if you ask me I'm in charge of Germany or in charge of France

or some great nation. You have to say first we have a crisis. We we are going to get the best people in the world to come.

We are going to call the best people in the world and say what would stop you from. By the way, I've told I haven't

from. By the way, I've told I haven't told this to this chancellor, but I've literally told directly or indirectly to every chancellor and every important politician that you can think of for the

last 10-15 years. You got to do what Israel does, what China does, what America would do, what we did after World War II. Do do like we built our

industry on German scientists. Like it's

like and the people who built the bomb like when we built the bomb like Einstein writes the president the

massive opportunity begins with I know we have a problem that is dangerous for the present and future of our society and has to be solved. There's only a

political leader in Europe has to make that statement.

It would be best if that was Germany for the leaving all of our um emotional attachments to Germany simply because Germany once had the best tech scene and

still is the driving economic motor of Europe and there is no Europe without Germany. Okay. But then, sorry, let me

Germany. Okay. But then, sorry, let me just then the question is you're going to have to bring those people over and they are going to have to be the ones

distributing the capital, hiring the people, saying how you do this. Of

course, what happens is the local people, I mean, Germany has more talent and France is the same thing than any other country per per square. Okay?

Those people learn how to do it and then build their things themselves. And

that's and by the way another thing it's talent not money. It's like it it is part of the problem you let me give you a different version. Part of the reason

it's hard to do the op optimistic thing is every day Europe makes another decision that makes it harder to fix the problem. Okay, Alex, I we agree

problem. Okay, Alex, I we agree absolutely on the opportunity and on the necessity to bring back to Germany the best talent. Unfortunately, we have a

best talent. Unfortunately, we have a lot of people who made their careers, who know how things are working and who still feel a certain degree of patriotism or in any case want that Europe and that Germany succeed. So,

let's bring them back. Let's take

advantage of them or let's use them where they are. We agree on that. But a

fundament for that would be that people believe in the opportunity and believe in the necessity to embrace AI to be at the forefront of these developments.

Could you briefly explain why AI is more of an opportunity than a threat if you think if you think I mean again it's I I'm just going to start on the battlefield is not where

you want me to start maybe but without AI systems Russia would have won and by the way without preI but things that can almost do that you the parties

that you know you're very focused on would be running Europe because you would have terror attacks that are rampant so Europe is already completely existing because of these technologies that Europe as we know it now with all

its problems would not exist without these technologies being used actively.

So that's like the baseline. Then you

get to okay Germany has now has to compete with China. And to do that it's going to have to rebuild how it builds cars, how it processes chemicals, how it

re changes its historically dominant industries into industries that can compete against America and China. uh

and it has a limited workforce and immigration is failing. Okay, how would you get how would you raise GDP where you have very strict laws but some of

which may have to change? You have

energy things which probably will change but it's going to take a long time where where migration has not worked. There is

only one technology that can do this and by the way I tend to think these things should be always asked and answered in the empirical. There are two and a half

the empirical. There are two and a half countries that are embracing these technologies. America which has GDP

technologies. America which has GDP growth. In fact, part of the problem we

growth. In fact, part of the problem we have politically is it works almost too well. It's just not widely distributed.

well. It's just not widely distributed.

China seems to be working and Israel seems to be working. Where have people not embraced these technologies and so that it's like but again if you just

start with the core problem Germany has it's an export culture. Its products

have to be better than everyone else's or no one's going to buy them. And you

okay you can basically ask Germans do you think your products are going to be responsible for your for your uh um economic health bullshand or is it going to be your diplomatic service that's

going to deliver that? Are you going to you're going to rely on German popularity? And so the opportunity it's

popularity? And so the opportunity it's I I tend to think like the opportunity is that if you want to succeed and thrive there's only one set of technologies that can do this. How are

you going to rebuild your car industry so it's as good as China's? Just start

there. Like again that and people are doing that. We have partners. How are

doing that. We have partners. How are

you going to rebuild these industries so you can compete and win there? There is

no other way.

Alex, I think we are living in one of the most exciting times of civilization. There is so much change.

civilization. There is so much change.

There is so much progress. There is

progress on so many levels in highest and accelerated speed. It is the case for space. It is the case for health. It

for space. It is the case for health. It

is the case for computing and robotics.

It is uh the case also for defense.

Unfortunately, we need that. So my

question is although we are at the eve of an incredible accelerated

productivity gain and uh potentially a better form of living in civilization.

I really see that opportunity.

Nevertheless, it is one of the most skeptical times. There is a lot of fear.

skeptical times. There is a lot of fear.

There is a lot of anger.

How do you explain that? Is it simply the speed of change? Well, it's too much. Now, let me just focus on America,

much. Now, let me just focus on America, I think.

And by the way, that is not a European origin. No, Western problem. And is an

origin. No, Western problem. And is an arguably bigger problem here. This is

where I do think America might have like I think okay, Europe has an obvious tech problem with political consequences that are really bad. America has a more of a

really bad. America has a more of a political problem where left far left far right of just like

they it's more hurt the people are successful than any solution and they're very serious about that and you know the idea they couldn't win is not true

unfortunately um the the the the central framing I'm skeptical of here with people so people I agree with probably you and definitely people on tech world.

Um, it's always like this is going to be a bastion of plethora of good things that everyone's going to profit from and there are no dangers. I'm not saying you

say this, but but it is a commonly held view and that the tech people want everyone to like just stand up and say that and I think that is not credible.

What but I what I think is actually just like the overselling of AI in this country is really really um really somewhat disconcerting but it's also

depressing because you don't have to do it. This is a natural resource that is

it. This is a natural resource that is net net excruciatingly valuable for the betterment of humanity but it does have some negative externalities. First of

all we don't know where it's going to go. It's these things are not deployable

go. It's these things are not deployable without processing engines, application layers, ontology etc. Um it and the

biggest problem in this country is it does it while it will raise the standard of living of the average person the people involved are likely to get 10 100

times wealthier than they already are.

That's a problem for society. You know

the the way I try to explain to my Silicon Valley colleagues is do you think that the wealth I mean if we go back to history then innovation uh

and new technologies have always led to uh growth to prosperity and to an improvement of the standard of living of all people particularly of the lower

income income classes that has started uh centuries ago. It was true when the wheel was invented. It was true when the steam engine was invented. It was true

when uh computers were invented. It has

in the end, if we draw a line, contributed to the well-being of people and it has improved the shape of society. Nevertheless, at the beginning

society. Nevertheless, at the beginning there's always the concern the steam engine is going to destroy.

But let me just sorry jobs and we are always afraid. So my my point is do you think that is now different that let me give you a different first let me give you a different the answer that I

think sums up a lot of the problems in Europe and America this is a new playbook like there or there is no playbook like why am I doing so well

because this is a neurodeivergent age and what the people had skills so so this is a different revolution and even if that is true and let's assume it is

that everybody will do well I think that's not I think Most people will do better.

You you think the society is going to divide into a very few with incredible wealth. I mean

wealth. I mean the mass that has nothing.

No, no, no. I No, I'm not saying that.

Again, I think that's like that's kind of the the that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying most people who are middle and middle class will do better.

Everybody people who are willing to change their jobs are likely to do better, but not everyone. But that's not the real political problem. We have a political problem in this country, not a

tech problem. In past revolutions,

tech problem. In past revolutions, uh, the person at the bottom maybe their salary doubled and the person at the top

became five times wealthier, but like it was very unusual to be a billionaire 40 years ago, right? You now have a revolution where, you know, I could

become 20 times wealthier than I am now.

And the person who is working out here could become you know they could have their salary could go over certainly could go up significantly by any normal

standard over a period of 10 years go up 50% or double okay it when you have a complete decoupling of like unimaginable wealth

and normal and that unimaginable wealth and then this is where we're not really allowed to say this but it's done by people that you don't really relate to like these These are like very oddly

shaped IQ specimens that you know you probably wouldn't want to have over for dinner and if they were over for dinner you have nothing to talk to them about and by the way vice versa and you know

and then our whole fabric is not like I got screamed at for like first of all it wasn't a draft I was like we should have some kind of service by the way by that I meant hospital taking care of old

people our our fabric of our societyy's already strained wealthy people it's not like in the 50s and 60s where people actually knew each other, went to the same schools, were already totally

separate societies, right? It basically

is. I mean, it's inflammatory, but we already live in a separate but nonequal society. And then you hypercharge it

society. And then you hypercharge it with like extreme economic wealth like like egregiously extreme while everybody

else is kind of growing. And even if it's not true, people are afraid even if it is true that most people raise the actual fear people have is I'm going to

lose my job. Now that fear even if it's not true, the people running the lab companies who are the leaders told you it's true. They're telling you your life

it's true. They're telling you your life is going to suck and they're also getting very wealthy and you don't find them very likable. And people who used

to be on the winning side of history uh are now suddenly very much afraid that they would lose their job. I traveled to the Silicon Valley three times over the

last uh uh few weeks and the the the level of nervousness uh is really surprising. A lot of people think we

surprising. A lot of people think we have only 6 months until our jobs are going to be gone and that is the tech community that is developers and they they work day and night in order to

reinvent themselves because they are afraid that in a few months and again [clears throat] have no income and then and then that the political version that scares me a lot and I do think so and I'm yelling at everyone in

Silicon Valley in private and on public.

I've been a Democrat despite what you may be reading about me most of my life.

I'm still a 70s progressive, which is actually a real progressive, meaning I want to help the poor. I just don't want to burn the rich. The the Silicon Valley

line basically is don't believe your lying eyes. Okay, this doesn't work

lying eyes. Okay, this doesn't work politically. And by the way, it's the

politically. And by the way, it's the same problem Germany and Europe have about all these issues. And if you if you tell people don't believe your lying eyes, you know what they do? They

protest vote.

That's what happens. and they protest vote because what they're really saying is you are telling me not to believe everything I know to by the way also just overarching in Europe and in

America the political class is low legitimacy so what you know what your version of reality is they're always lying to me I don't know why they're lying that's hard to figure out but you

people believe they're always lying to me and again to just overly tie this in to annoyingly why I'll give you a different version why is Palenteer the most popular brand in the world. People

always frame as the mo unpopular. We

have for every time you read someone, we have a hundred times the fan. I'll tell

you why we're the most popular brand in the world. And that's why they attack us

the world. And that's why they attack us often. We're the most popular brand in

often. We're the most popular brand in the world. Cuz I might be crazy. I am

the world. Cuz I might be crazy. I am

saying things you don't want to hear like the West is superior. We need

national service, which means helping out old people. It doesn't mean no uh industry should be fully aligned with the country. Uh we have to fight for

the country. Uh we have to fight for these things. We have real adversaries.

these things. We have real adversaries.

If we're not competent, we'll lose these things. technologies are not perfect and

things. technologies are not perfect and you have to listen to annoying people.

And by the way, you can't blame everything on a country you hate, whatever. Okay? And you know why we're

whatever. Okay? And you know why we're so popular? Because everybody else is

so popular? Because everybody else is telling you, they're only trying to figure out what you want to hear so they can. That's the felt version. And that's

can. That's the felt version. And that's

why when you when politicians in this country or anywhere else say, "Hey, don't believe you're lying eyes on migration. Don't believe you're lying

migration. Don't believe you're lying eyes on nuclear. Don't believe your lying eyes on AI." They get up and they vote for people are like screw these people I'm going to burn down the house.

What you are addressing is I think one of the most important topics. It is

trust. It is about trust. Trust is lost and trust has been lost in large parts of the political uh spectrum and the political scene. And trust has also been

political scene. And trust has also been damaged with regard to media and their credibility. So we could have a long

credibility. So we could have a long discussion about that would be super interesting. But we have to come to an

interesting. But we have to come to an end sooner or later Alex. And that's why I would like to touch upon geopolitics and here the arms race mainly in AI but

not only also in conventional military uh aspects between America and China or perhaps even ideally between America and

Europe on the one side and on the other side China and Russia and Iran and other um evil forces. How do you see that

thing going to develop? uh how high is the chance that America is continuing to have the upper hand on AI and the

developments and how likely is it that China simply because there is no ethical limitation and there is more access to

data of uh an incredibly large population that China is going to let me let me reframe annoyingly it as the inverse

that our moral standards, the advantage America has and Europe does have and I really hope and and Ukraine proves. Um,

so it it's very deep in the European history and can be really exposed is the solving the moral issue often uncovers a technical issue about which you're not aware. So again, Palunteer is the data

aware. So again, Palunteer is the data protection platform. It is the sovereign

protection platform. It is the sovereign platform that drives our revenue. It it

is why Ukrainians did so well, why Israel against Iran overperformed, why America overperformed and then in tech there is an advantage if you've actually been on the battlefield that so that

China has those they're actually disadvantages access to data I I think actually honestly that might be roughly equal given seeant collection on the battlefield.

No, but China has for example uh medical data of 700 million people. China has

full uh you're talking transparency through complete surveillance with regard to behavioral data of their people. I think that's a different

people. I think that's a different quality because there's simply no democratic again we we should have that's a longer technical and it depends whether you mean biioinformatics

machinery or battlefield battlefield I would push back on that um and uh um and I would also also there's not the

correlation between two field too much too much data can also be a problem it really depends on their processing capabilities also the depending on whether Europe and America changes the

the we there's a lot of complexity in that statement. It it's both true and

that statement. It it's both true and not true. It depends on the thing. I

not true. It depends on the thing. I

I'll give you an advantage. I think

China really does have which is these technologies. Pounder has like 4,000

technologies. Pounder has like 4,000 people, 4,200 or something. We're we're

on every major battlefield.

The reality is there are very big hardware projects that are still val still valuable in in in in if you look at Iran as opposed to

Ukraine heavy hardware plane ships other things played a big role those things employ thousands millions of people they they end up with a political constituency one of the biggest problems

we have in the west that China doesn't have is these technologies are clearly the future combined with others but you just are feeding

fewer families and so it's much harder for us to shift the budget to exactly where it should go whereas in a dict like China and also China is run by more

an engineering class so I think they they I would suspect they have a better like if you I I'm pretty sure if you went to the Chinese level like two levels below the person

at the top and you did that in any European country you would find somebody I could explain the technical issues to I don't I don't know though that person is in Europe and it's harder in the west. So I think that that's the

west. So I think that that's the advantage. The disadvantage they have is

advantage. The disadvantage they have is one people like you and me and the people that Europe could recruit really don't want to live in a country where they have no democratic rights or

economic rights. Uh uh two um the actual

economic rights. Uh uh two um the actual again this is where I think the commercial and battlefield thing of American industry is at battle. These

things are not theoretical and chi like America for again I've been against I'm not pro war despite what people think but one of the advantages Ukraine Israel America has just quite frankly is we

know a lot about war what works what doesn't how it works what products work what products don't work um so I would say net net that again the chief

political the chief technological weakness we have in the west is kind of political it's not technical okay but if you had to uh take a bet now. Would you rather bet that China is

now. Would you rather bet that China is going to win the race in 10 years down the road or will the US keep it?

Well, again, it 10 years too far out. We

don't that's impossible to answer because also again I think the chief problem we have is political like would China win if you start banning the ability to pure procure like look again

I'm not saying all the anti-punter stuff is f funded by our adversaries but it's also funded by the adversaries. What is

the best thing that can happen to Russia and China and Iran is you don't buy the things that work. So like that these things and you know who knows this. I

mean these people again they are excruciatingly intelligent and ruthless and if they find out that in your local culture they're people who view technology as witchcraft. You can bet your last dollar they're going to fund those people. And you see this in

those people. And you see this in America on all sorts of issues. You see

it visav us everywhere. like the most innane things that actually kind of work but you know so it's like does the is the west able to continue to produce

these things by the way but again I think Silicon Valley and this country and your people who think they're advocating for sovereignty in Europe are you know could really have to do a

better job um and so but if you asked if we can mitigate that risk by by being more honest and more frontal and and more realistic both in America and Europe about our strengths and weakness

businesses we have a very good chance of winning but it is very good chance like it's like you can't like just take the actual technical links the best open models in the world now are Chinese

that's a problem also because the closed model some of the closed model providers are actually trying to monetize your data and if you have China offering models that are where they're

encouraging an application layer like ours interestingly and you can control the weights and that's why we did this whole thing with with um Nvidia, but

it's like the the the openings here for China are very very real. And again, I'm just repeating myself, but if they can control the political apparatus because

it's one tribe, one person, one gender, and we somehow can't do that. That's a

that's a problem.

It likes the very last question of our conversation. Uh we are living in a

conversation. Uh we are living in a world where most of the centrist uh countries and their leadership is

stumbling or weak where uh populists and autocrats are on the rise. We are

challenged by opportunities and there is a lot of fear and anger and at the same time time uh a lot of opportunity

We have an incredibly unpredictable geopolitical situation.

Wars are part of daily reality.

A couple of years down the road, do you think that what we are experiencing now, all these discussions, uh all these changes are the beginning of the end of

the open society model and we will have in five to 10 years a more autocratic world where strong men and autocrats are

dominant or do you rather think that what we are experiencing now is the healthy wakeup call is the beginning of a reinvention.

of a rejuvenation of the centrist rules-based open society model. Well, thank you.

That's a great way to end. like just if like when I'm saying China and our adversaries have an advantage in procurement because of like very narrow

selection and like what I'm trying to say is we don't know the answer to this question but we have to fight like hell to make sure we are not in societies

where they're like the crazy thing is the functional allies of our adversaries now uh who claim to want these progressive things both actually far

right and far left which are actually structurally very similar are helping to fight for structures that would not include anyone like them like so I want

a society where it is the best people succeed those people every the inputs are very as as equal as they can be the outputs depend on your aptitude and

discipline and honestly unfortunately luck and other variables um where the rule of law is enforced including if you do not like the person. So there's a right of free speech whether you like

the person or not. There's a right of privacy whether you like the person or not. There's a right to put checks on

not. There's a right to put checks on the government whether you know they like you or not where we are able to do creative things and the people who do them get to keep some portion of the

proceeds but where those proceeds are distributed enough so that everybody feels like they're participating. that

we have an idea of national order, but that's actually national but progressive. Like, you know, you get to

progressive. Like, you know, you get to be Swiss if you're Swiss, but you also believe that people who aren't Swiss have a valuable culture. You get to be American if you're, you know, the the

the the people who are working the hardest to destroy that those concepts and are the most effective in destroying those concepts call themselves progressive. they're not progressive or

progressive. they're not progressive or they call themselves, you know, uh I don't know, super faright. They're not

even right-wing. Like, you know, one of the one of the things I think is hilarious though on that score is, you know, I spent a lot of time in Germany uh talking to people who, you know, some of them regretted, some of them didn't

regret their role in in history and dark times. I think they would be very amused

times. I think they would be very amused to know that people who've taken up their mantle on the right are mostly uh uh people of color, gay andor Jewish.

So, we've had some progress in our societies.

[laughter] It's a we we know people on the far right are very diverse on all fronts and uh but um people on the and the people on the far left I think in

the people I hung out with in the Frankfurt school which is a truly was left of center where I was but true progressives would be somewhat not

amused to know that the the the actual phil philosophical background of most modern actual non-progressive progressives is not Marx Haidiger and they're not actually left-wing. They're

actually asking for things that are classically right-wing. What are those

classically right-wing. What are those things? They're asking for we all get to

things? They're asking for we all get to be the same. We're all defined by who we are, by how we were born or what we impute ourselves to be. There are only

rights for a sect of people, the a sector of people. The rights do not apply to people who are not like us because of wealth or because they think differently. and that we want a society

differently. and that we want a society that is essentially looks communal and it is no way these these are like prototypical non-progressive classically right-wing thoughts just

reapplied to people who call themselves progressive and that's the society that Palunteer and I are effectively working against by by how are we working against

it by making people giving people more sovereignty whether they believe it or not giving people uh protecting people from terrorism with civil liberties [music] by making businesses wealthier

better where the businesses keep their actual alpha uh by helping Ukraine, Israel, and America establish a dominant position. That's actually [music]

position. That's actually [music] helping.

That's one of the most beautiful sentences uh of democracy is we agree to disagree. In that case, I have to say we

disagree. In that case, I have to say we agree. Thank you very much for [music]

agree. Thank you very much for [music] take care.