Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Every Fortune 500 executive is buying AI subscriptions and calling it a strategy. Palantir CEO Alex Karp has a word for that. Karp: “The general approach of just buying models is going to be essentially self-pleasuring for an enterprise at the cost of the enterprise.” Karp: “You buy some... large language model, you party with it basically, and the next day you have a hangover.” The entire corporate world is mispricing the AI transition. They are renting intelligence with no foundation to run it on. A raw model floating in a vacuum hallucinates over your unstructured data, generates the illusion of work, and executes nothing. The party ends. The hangover begins. Nothing changed. Karp identified exactly where the value actually goes. Karp: “All the value in the market is going to go to chips and what we call ontology.” Not the models. Not the subscriptions. Not the chatbot interfaces layered on top of them. The ontology. The precise digital architecture of how an organization actually operates. Its security permissions. Its supply chain physics. It’s operational logic. Karp: “The ontology will allow you to take a large language model and use it, refine it, and then impose it on your enterprise in the logic of your enterprise, in the security model of your enterprise.” When you bind a frontier model to the strict underlying logic of a specific enterprise, something fundamental shifts. It stops generating text. It starts generating action. Karp: “We’re using it on the battlefield, we’re using it to compress margins. We’re making engineers better engineers. We’re making people who are not engineers into engineers using our ontology and a large language model.” The traditional engineering bottleneck does not slow down. It disappears. Karp: “We are sitting on the only thing that actually creates quantifiable, transformational value.” The companies renting models are paying for the feeling of transformation. The companies building ontologies are executing the actual thing. One of them will define the next decade. The other will wake up in 2030 wondering where their market share went. Exactly like a hangover.show more

Dustin

35,632 subscribers

210,359 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik Wissenschaft & Technologie

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on why the model is not the moat. The application layer is: "To make them valuable in an enterprise, like a battlefield, regulated, or manufacturing context, you have to have what's called an application layer." "We have this thing called ontology that now everyone's copying. It takes a large language model and makes it safe and useful and precise." "Safe because it doesn't touch your underlying data." "Safe because it prevents the large language model from caching your data and replicating your business." The tell for any enterprise AI pitch: ask what sits between the model and your data. If the answer is nothing, you are not buying leverage. You are renting a fast way to hand your business to whoever owns the weights. Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, on CNBC.

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on why the model is not the moat. The application layer is: "To make them valuable in an enterprise, like a battlefield, regulated, or manufacturing context, you have to have what's called an application layer." "We have this thing called ontology that now everyone's copying. It takes a large language model and makes it safe and useful and precise." "Safe because it doesn't touch your underlying data." "Safe because it prevents the large language model from caching your data and replicating your business." The tell for any enterprise AI pitch: ask what sits between the model and your data. If the answer is nothing, you are not buying leverage. You are renting a fast way to hand your business to whoever owns the weights. Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, on CNBC.

Karl Mehta

31,447 Aufrufe • vor 7 Tagen

$PLTR Karp called it years ago: - “All the value in the market will go to chips & ontology” - “We are sitting on the only thing that actually creates quantifiable, transformational value, in an enterprise” We are watching this unfold in real time.

$PLTR Karp called it years ago: - “All the value in the market will go to chips & ontology” - “We are sitting on the only thing that actually creates quantifiable, transformational value, in an enterprise” We are watching this unfold in real time.

Jack Prescott

51,138 Aufrufe • vor 10 Tagen

Palantir CEO Alex Karp says people think we’re in an AI bubble because a lot of AI just doesn’t work: “If you just buy LLMs off the shelf and try to do any of this, it won’t work.” “It’s not precise enough. You can’t do underwriting. You can’t do these things that are regulated.” “People have tried things that just can never work. You buy a LLM, put it on your stack, and wonder why it’s not working.” “What you’re going to see, especially in America, is people trying to do something like Ontology by hand.” “Once you build a software layer to orchestrate and manage the LLMs in a language your enterprise understands, you actually can create value.” “There’s a lot of discussion on if we’re in an AI bubble. What is the meaning of this bubble? If anything, we’re just in a lag. There’s a lot of AI, some of it works.” “Go back to the battlefield context: everybody in the world assumed this would not work. But now it does work. Now the question is, ‘How can I get it to work for my country?’” “Palantir barely has a sales force. In fact, it seems to be getting smaller and smaller every time I go see them.”

Palantir CEO Alex Karp says people think we’re in an AI bubble because a lot of AI just doesn’t work: “If you just buy LLMs off the shelf and try to do any of this, it won’t work.” “It’s not precise enough. You can’t do underwriting. You can’t do these things that are regulated.” “People have tried things that just can never work. You buy a LLM, put it on your stack, and wonder why it’s not working.” “What you’re going to see, especially in America, is people trying to do something like Ontology by hand.” “Once you build a software layer to orchestrate and manage the LLMs in a language your enterprise understands, you actually can create value.” “There’s a lot of discussion on if we’re in an AI bubble. What is the meaning of this bubble? If anything, we’re just in a lag. There’s a lot of AI, some of it works.” “Go back to the battlefield context: everybody in the world assumed this would not work. But now it does work. Now the question is, ‘How can I get it to work for my country?’” “Palantir barely has a sales force. In fact, it seems to be getting smaller and smaller every time I go see them.”

Jawwwn

695,318 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

“All the value in the market is going to go to chips, and what we call ontology” — Alex Karp in 2024 $PLTR

“All the value in the market is going to go to chips, and what we call ontology” — Alex Karp in 2024 $PLTR

Jack Prescott

26,858 Aufrufe • vor 19 Tagen

The Chairman and CEO of AIG spent over a minute talking about how critical the Ontology is to deploying LLMs in the enterprise 💪 “Ontology is critical for deploying large language models. It brings together the relevant data sets that define the components of our insurance business, integrates and sequences them and then models how they relate to one another. Our ontology will create a clear record of any actions taken, which will inform business logic and provide the ability to audit agents activities.”

The Chairman and CEO of AIG spent over a minute talking about how critical the Ontology is to deploying LLMs in the enterprise 💪 “Ontology is critical for deploying large language models. It brings together the relevant data sets that define the components of our insurance business, integrates and sequences them and then models how they relate to one another. Our ontology will create a clear record of any actions taken, which will inform business logic and provide the ability to audit agents activities.”

Chad Wahlquist

23,869 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

The market is about to learn what Palantir CEO Alex Karp has been saying for years: “The large language model is essentially a commodity”. Swap Claude out with whatever model. It doesn’t matter. The value will come from the infrastructure (Palantir) that allows users to orchestrate the model. The effectiveness of Palantir’s Maven Smart System will remain unchanged; reinforcing the $PLTR thesis. Model agnostic.

The market is about to learn what Palantir CEO Alex Karp has been saying for years: “The large language model is essentially a commodity”. Swap Claude out with whatever model. It doesn’t matter. The value will come from the infrastructure (Palantir) that allows users to orchestrate the model. The effectiveness of Palantir’s Maven Smart System will remain unchanged; reinforcing the $PLTR thesis. Model agnostic.

Jack Prescott

776,101 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on the Wealth Tax: "It just punishes." "It starts with the billionaires." "Every single person at this table is going to be paying a wealth tax only to punish us." "And the reason for it is—these models have been completely, irresponsibly oversold." " And the sell is, 'It's dangerous for everyone—which is why I can give it to all your adversaries, but I can't give it to the Department of War." "Or, I can't safely give it to an enterprise in this country without being certain that the alpha of that business could transfer to this model tomorrow." "At every single enterprise I deal with, these people are livid." "They're like, 'I'm paying for tokens that create no value. These people are stealing the weights and alpha of my business, and they're creating a wealth tax that does not help the poor." Via CNBC

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on the Wealth Tax: "It just punishes." "It starts with the billionaires." "Every single person at this table is going to be paying a wealth tax only to punish us." "And the reason for it is—these models have been completely, irresponsibly oversold." " And the sell is, 'It's dangerous for everyone—which is why I can give it to all your adversaries, but I can't give it to the Department of War." "Or, I can't safely give it to an enterprise in this country without being certain that the alpha of that business could transfer to this model tomorrow." "At every single enterprise I deal with, these people are livid." "They're like, 'I'm paying for tokens that create no value. These people are stealing the weights and alpha of my business, and they're creating a wealth tax that does not help the poor." Via CNBC

Jawwwn

304,026 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen

Alex Karp went on TV and said his enterprise customers are done letting AI companies quietly steal the alpha out of their business, and the CEO of Together AI explained on CNBC exactly how that theft works. Karp said his customers are livid. They feel they pay for tokens that create nothing while handing over the secret sauce of their own company. Then Vipul Ved Prakash laid out the mechanism. Every time you send your data to a company with very smart models, you hand them the recipe to rebuild what you do. Your data is the thing that makes you money. And you are pushing it straight into a competitor's system. The smarter the models get, the more they learn from what you feed them. This is why companies are moving to open models, and it was never really about price. You can download an open model, run it inside your own walls, and never let your data leave the building. It scores 81 against the top closed model's 85, and runs up to sixty times cheaper. Half the Fortune 500 is already running open models from Hugging Face. The story was that the labs win because they own the best models. The companies paying them just realized they owned the best data the whole time.

Alex Karp went on TV and said his enterprise customers are done letting AI companies quietly steal the alpha out of their business, and the CEO of Together AI explained on CNBC exactly how that theft works. Karp said his customers are livid. They feel they pay for tokens that create nothing while handing over the secret sauce of their own company. Then Vipul Ved Prakash laid out the mechanism. Every time you send your data to a company with very smart models, you hand them the recipe to rebuild what you do. Your data is the thing that makes you money. And you are pushing it straight into a competitor's system. The smarter the models get, the more they learn from what you feed them. This is why companies are moving to open models, and it was never really about price. You can download an open model, run it inside your own walls, and never let your data leave the building. It scores 81 against the top closed model's 85, and runs up to sixty times cheaper. Half the Fortune 500 is already running open models from Hugging Face. The story was that the labs win because they own the best models. The companies paying them just realized they owned the best data the whole time.

Ihtesham Ali

17,433 Aufrufe • vor 9 Tagen

“Can AI make one human five humans? Can an LLM — combined with our Ontology — make a human 10x their output in half the time?” Palantir CEO Alex Karp at AIG Investor Day about the reality of AI, the Ontology, and LLMs on the modern enterprise.

“Can AI make one human five humans? Can an LLM — combined with our Ontology — make a human 10x their output in half the time?” Palantir CEO Alex Karp at AIG Investor Day about the reality of AI, the Ontology, and LLMs on the modern enterprise.

Palantir

115,374 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Alex Karp went on CNBC and absolutely torched Anthropic & OpenAI. He is a bit biased, but he isnt totally wrong here either. Many enterprises went all-in on AI tokens thinking usage as it meant progress. More prompts, more agents, more tokens, more and more tokens. Real question still remains: What actual workflow changed? How much was the cost? What decision got better? What alpha stayed inside the company? Was the data cached on the model provider’s servers? That is where the frustration seems to be building among enterprise CEOs. The problem is enterprises are paying more and more to rent intelligence, while still worrying about their data, IP, workflows, and overall control. Karp is calling it a “wealth tax on business” The next phase of enterprise AI in his words is by reading between the lines is, Deployment, Security, Data control, Workflow integration, Actual ROI. Model + Application layer (Ontology) + compute Reason why Palantir is pushing for a model agnostic sovereign AI on top of their ontology in partnership with Nvidia $NVDA This essentially means enterprises and customers will, 1. Own their data 2 Control their data. 3. Keep their alpha rather than transferring it to the model providers. Karp is talking his book. But the points he made aren’t wrong either. Must watch! 🍿 $PLTR

Alex Karp went on CNBC and absolutely torched Anthropic & OpenAI. He is a bit biased, but he isnt totally wrong here either. Many enterprises went all-in on AI tokens thinking usage as it meant progress. More prompts, more agents, more tokens, more and more tokens. Real question still remains: What actual workflow changed? How much was the cost? What decision got better? What alpha stayed inside the company? Was the data cached on the model provider’s servers? That is where the frustration seems to be building among enterprise CEOs. The problem is enterprises are paying more and more to rent intelligence, while still worrying about their data, IP, workflows, and overall control. Karp is calling it a “wealth tax on business” The next phase of enterprise AI in his words is by reading between the lines is, Deployment, Security, Data control, Workflow integration, Actual ROI. Model + Application layer (Ontology) + compute Reason why Palantir is pushing for a model agnostic sovereign AI on top of their ontology in partnership with Nvidia $NVDA This essentially means enterprises and customers will, 1. Own their data 2 Control their data. 3. Keep their alpha rather than transferring it to the model providers. Karp is talking his book. But the points he made aren’t wrong either. Must watch! 🍿 $PLTR

Anand

32,482 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen

Palantir CEO Alex Karp: AI = American Intelligence 🇺🇸 “The AI revolution is uniquely American.” “Every company—all the model providers that are relevant, and the Ontology that makes them valuable, and the chips they run on, are built in this country.”

Palantir CEO Alex Karp: AI = American Intelligence 🇺🇸 “The AI revolution is uniquely American.” “Every company—all the model providers that are relevant, and the Ontology that makes them valuable, and the chips they run on, are built in this country.”

Jawwwn

22,619 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

CNBC interviewer asked Palantir CEO Alex Karp how he would defend Wall Street’s concern that AI could replicate what Palantir is doing. Karp defended by basically saying that AI companies may have great engineers, but they do not deeply understand the messy, high-stakes enterprise problems Palantir solves on the ground. ------ Alex Karp: "No one in enterprise factually is worried. I've spent all my life, for better or worse, dealing with the most complicated, most interesting enterprises. I'm on the ground floor of that, probably like no one else. Those kinds of engineers are great engineers, and I'm telling you, they don't talk to the enterprises or understand the technical challenge. If you want to manufacture a car and you need a part, or you want to send a rocket to the moon, or you want to put a missile on your adversary's head and bring America home safely, that stuff doesn't ship. And by the way, there is not a single high-end enterprise like that that would ever put that in place. That is before you even get to the cultural impasse." ---- From "CNBC Television" YouTube channel, (link in comment)

CNBC interviewer asked Palantir CEO Alex Karp how he would defend Wall Street’s concern that AI could replicate what Palantir is doing. Karp defended by basically saying that AI companies may have great engineers, but they do not deeply understand the messy, high-stakes enterprise problems Palantir solves on the ground. ------ Alex Karp: "No one in enterprise factually is worried. I've spent all my life, for better or worse, dealing with the most complicated, most interesting enterprises. I'm on the ground floor of that, probably like no one else. Those kinds of engineers are great engineers, and I'm telling you, they don't talk to the enterprises or understand the technical challenge. If you want to manufacture a car and you need a part, or you want to send a rocket to the moon, or you want to put a missile on your adversary's head and bring America home safely, that stuff doesn't ship. And by the way, there is not a single high-end enterprise like that that would ever put that in place. That is before you even get to the cultural impasse." ---- From "CNBC Television" YouTube channel, (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

97,629 Aufrufe • vor 8 Tagen

Alex Karp just said out loud what Washington refuses to. The AI race is not a competition. It is a war. And there are exactly two sides. Karp: “We are going to be the dominant player, or China’s going to be the dominant player, and there will just be very different rules depending on who wins.” No third option in that sentence. No coalition. No shared framework. No handshake at Davos that splits the future down the middle. One side writes the rules. The other lives under them. The entire debate around AI safety assumes America is making decisions in a vacuum. It is not. Karp: “No decision is without risk. And the risk we have to absorb here is going long on this because it’s not… like we’re not doing this in a vacuum.” Every month spent perfecting guardrails is a month your adversary spends building weapons. Every regulation designed to slow deployment does not slow deployment globally. It slows deployment here. The difference is fatal. And when someone pressed Karp on the danger of going too fast, he did not answer the question. He replaced it. Karp: “You will have far fewer rights if America’s not in the lead.” That is the sentence the privacy crowd pretends they never heard. They are terrified of what American AI might do to civil liberties. They have never once stopped to consider what Chinese AI will do to civil liberties. Because that conversation ends their entire argument before it starts. You do not protect rights with inferior technology. You do not preserve freedom by throttling your own intelligence while your adversary sprints. The nightmare is not that America builds AI too fast. The nightmare is that America builds it too slow and wakes up inside infrastructure it does not own, running on rules it did not write. Karp: “We cannot rely on anyone else to do this in our network of allies because Europe has given up on technology.” No diplomatic softening. No footnote. Just the verdict. Europe is out. The alliance structure that defined eighty years of Western dominance has one functioning technology engine left. If that engine stalls, the West does not get a second one. The doomers want to stop. The optimists refuse to worry. Karp is telling you both camps are hallucinating. The risk is real. The danger is real. And you absorb it anyway. Because the only thing more dangerous than an AI that breaks for you is an AI that works perfectly for the country that wants to bury you. That is not a policy debate. That is a survival calculation. And there is exactly one correct answer.

Alex Karp just said out loud what Washington refuses to. The AI race is not a competition. It is a war. And there are exactly two sides. Karp: “We are going to be the dominant player, or China’s going to be the dominant player, and there will just be very different rules depending on who wins.” No third option in that sentence. No coalition. No shared framework. No handshake at Davos that splits the future down the middle. One side writes the rules. The other lives under them. The entire debate around AI safety assumes America is making decisions in a vacuum. It is not. Karp: “No decision is without risk. And the risk we have to absorb here is going long on this because it’s not… like we’re not doing this in a vacuum.” Every month spent perfecting guardrails is a month your adversary spends building weapons. Every regulation designed to slow deployment does not slow deployment globally. It slows deployment here. The difference is fatal. And when someone pressed Karp on the danger of going too fast, he did not answer the question. He replaced it. Karp: “You will have far fewer rights if America’s not in the lead.” That is the sentence the privacy crowd pretends they never heard. They are terrified of what American AI might do to civil liberties. They have never once stopped to consider what Chinese AI will do to civil liberties. Because that conversation ends their entire argument before it starts. You do not protect rights with inferior technology. You do not preserve freedom by throttling your own intelligence while your adversary sprints. The nightmare is not that America builds AI too fast. The nightmare is that America builds it too slow and wakes up inside infrastructure it does not own, running on rules it did not write. Karp: “We cannot rely on anyone else to do this in our network of allies because Europe has given up on technology.” No diplomatic softening. No footnote. Just the verdict. Europe is out. The alliance structure that defined eighty years of Western dominance has one functioning technology engine left. If that engine stalls, the West does not get a second one. The doomers want to stop. The optimists refuse to worry. Karp is telling you both camps are hallucinating. The risk is real. The danger is real. And you absorb it anyway. Because the only thing more dangerous than an AI that breaks for you is an AI that works perfectly for the country that wants to bury you. That is not a policy debate. That is a survival calculation. And there is exactly one correct answer.

Dustin

26,046 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Karp has been saying it for years: The Large Language Model is a commodity

Karp has been saying it for years: The Large Language Model is a commodity

Jack Prescott

38,838 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Alex Karp just said the one thing the entire Western establishment agreed to never say out loud. For twenty years, the foreign policy class ran on a single assumption. All cultures are equal. All systems are interchangeable. And American power is something to apologize for and quietly dismantle. An entire generation of leaders was raised to feel shame about the very power that built the world they inherited. Karp told them to stop. Alex Karp: “Give an unfair advantage to America. Do not treat all cultures as equal.” That sentence ends careers in Washington. It gets you blacklisted from every think tank, exiled from every faculty lounge, erased from every editorial board in the country. Karp said it on camera. Without flinching. Because he does not operate in theory. He builds the software American soldiers use to find threats before those threats find them. His entire company exists at the fault line between artificial intelligence and national survival. You do not get to pretend the world is a symposium when your product is the reason the symposium still exists. The neocons believed something adjacent. They believed American power should be projected aggressively. But they made one catastrophic miscalculation. They thought you could export democracy at the barrel of a gun. Karp: “Do not get on the whole neocon make the whole world like America thing, cause it doesn’t work.” Trillions spent. Thousands buried. And the nations we tried to rebuild are worse off than before we touched them. The neocon failure was not in believing America should lead. It was in believing America should convert. Karp is proposing something else entirely. Not ideology. Not intervention. Dominance so total that the question of conflict never reaches the table. Karp: “Technology will be the determinant variable in who runs the world.” Not diplomacy. Not trade agreements. Not the United Nations. The next century belongs to whoever builds the most advanced AI, deploys it first, and embeds it deepest into the architecture of national power. This is not a political debate. It is a math problem. And the answer is binary. You either lead or you are led. Every era of sustained peace in recorded history shares one feature. Not cooperation. Not goodwill. Disparity so massive that aggression becomes irrational. The Pax Americana did not hold for eighty years because the world admired our values. It held because the cost of challenging them was unthinkable. That is what Karp is building toward. Not war. The obsolescence of war. Technological superiority so complete that no rational actor would ever test it. The critics call him dangerous. The people who need his software to come home alive call him necessary. Everyone wants America to play fair. Karp understands that the moment a superpower plays fair, it is no longer a superpower. It is a memory. An unfair advantage is not a moral failing. It is the only thing standing between your children and a world that does not care about their rights.

Alex Karp just said the one thing the entire Western establishment agreed to never say out loud. For twenty years, the foreign policy class ran on a single assumption. All cultures are equal. All systems are interchangeable. And American power is something to apologize for and quietly dismantle. An entire generation of leaders was raised to feel shame about the very power that built the world they inherited. Karp told them to stop. Alex Karp: “Give an unfair advantage to America. Do not treat all cultures as equal.” That sentence ends careers in Washington. It gets you blacklisted from every think tank, exiled from every faculty lounge, erased from every editorial board in the country. Karp said it on camera. Without flinching. Because he does not operate in theory. He builds the software American soldiers use to find threats before those threats find them. His entire company exists at the fault line between artificial intelligence and national survival. You do not get to pretend the world is a symposium when your product is the reason the symposium still exists. The neocons believed something adjacent. They believed American power should be projected aggressively. But they made one catastrophic miscalculation. They thought you could export democracy at the barrel of a gun. Karp: “Do not get on the whole neocon make the whole world like America thing, cause it doesn’t work.” Trillions spent. Thousands buried. And the nations we tried to rebuild are worse off than before we touched them. The neocon failure was not in believing America should lead. It was in believing America should convert. Karp is proposing something else entirely. Not ideology. Not intervention. Dominance so total that the question of conflict never reaches the table. Karp: “Technology will be the determinant variable in who runs the world.” Not diplomacy. Not trade agreements. Not the United Nations. The next century belongs to whoever builds the most advanced AI, deploys it first, and embeds it deepest into the architecture of national power. This is not a political debate. It is a math problem. And the answer is binary. You either lead or you are led. Every era of sustained peace in recorded history shares one feature. Not cooperation. Not goodwill. Disparity so massive that aggression becomes irrational. The Pax Americana did not hold for eighty years because the world admired our values. It held because the cost of challenging them was unthinkable. That is what Karp is building toward. Not war. The obsolescence of war. Technological superiority so complete that no rational actor would ever test it. The critics call him dangerous. The people who need his software to come home alive call him necessary. Everyone wants America to play fair. Karp understands that the moment a superpower plays fair, it is no longer a superpower. It is a memory. An unfair advantage is not a moral failing. It is the only thing standing between your children and a world that does not care about their rights.

Dustin

59,732 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

At AIPCon 10, Palantir CEO Alex Karp shares our secret to sales: “We’re hoping that you’ll go to a large language model company and learn that they don’t care about you at all.” “What you will find is there are a myriad of problems that these very important models solve, and there are even bigger problems that they create.” “We’re in the business of giving you the ability to solve those problems for yourself and own the means of production.”

At AIPCon 10, Palantir CEO Alex Karp shares our secret to sales: “We’re hoping that you’ll go to a large language model company and learn that they don’t care about you at all.” “What you will find is there are a myriad of problems that these very important models solve, and there are even bigger problems that they create.” “We’re in the business of giving you the ability to solve those problems for yourself and own the means of production.”

Palantir

59,044,387 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Alex Karp just explained why the smartest people on Earth are engineering their own destruction. Silicon Valley is erasing every white-collar job in America while telling the US military they want nothing to do with it. You are dismantling the livelihoods of the people who write the laws and fund the campaigns. While antagonizing the one entity on Earth with the monopoly on force. Karp: “If Silicon Valley believes we are going to take away everyone’s white collar job, meaning primarily democratic shaped people whom I grew up with, highly educated people who went to elite schools, and you’re going to screw the military. If you don’t think that’s going to lead to nationalization of our technology, you’re retarded.” You think genius-level IQ is leverage against the state. It’s not. It just means you’ll understand exactly what’s happening to you while it happens. Karp: “You might be particularly retarded because you have a 160 IQ, but this is where that path is going.” AGI is not a product. It is the most consequential asset in the history of civilization. No government in recorded history has ever watched a private entity hold the ultimate weapon and said “we’re fine with that.” Not once in thousands of years. You don’t own the most powerful technology ever built. You just built it for the people who will.

Alex Karp just explained why the smartest people on Earth are engineering their own destruction. Silicon Valley is erasing every white-collar job in America while telling the US military they want nothing to do with it. You are dismantling the livelihoods of the people who write the laws and fund the campaigns. While antagonizing the one entity on Earth with the monopoly on force. Karp: “If Silicon Valley believes we are going to take away everyone’s white collar job, meaning primarily democratic shaped people whom I grew up with, highly educated people who went to elite schools, and you’re going to screw the military. If you don’t think that’s going to lead to nationalization of our technology, you’re retarded.” You think genius-level IQ is leverage against the state. It’s not. It just means you’ll understand exactly what’s happening to you while it happens. Karp: “You might be particularly retarded because you have a 160 IQ, but this is where that path is going.” AGI is not a product. It is the most consequential asset in the history of civilization. No government in recorded history has ever watched a private entity hold the ultimate weapon and said “we’re fine with that.” Not once in thousands of years. You don’t own the most powerful technology ever built. You just built it for the people who will.

Dustin

24,244 Aufrufe • vor 8 Tagen

Dr. Karp on what's behind Palantir's dominance in AI 👇🏻 "we were years ahead for lots of reasons, anticipating what operational AI would mean, meaning AI where you make more money or your revenue goes up and your costs go down. Our platforms are built to use large language models and machine learning in a way in that is actually operationally effective... [we] built this thing called an ontology, which manages large language models in a way where they become crazily useful, both commercially and actually on the battlefield."

Dr. Karp on what's behind Palantir's dominance in AI 👇🏻 "we were years ahead for lots of reasons, anticipating what operational AI would mean, meaning AI where you make more money or your revenue goes up and your costs go down. Our platforms are built to use large language models and machine learning in a way in that is actually operationally effective... [we] built this thing called an ontology, which manages large language models in a way where they become crazily useful, both commercially and actually on the battlefield."

Eliano A. Younes

47,859 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Dario Amodei keeps warning that open-source AI models are dangerous and need to be restricted. David Sacks David Sacks answered with a rhetorical question: "Dangerous to whom?" It was the sharpest thing said on the latest All-In The All-In Podcast. Not dangerous to the enterprise that wants to keep control of its own data. Open weights are what finally give that enterprise a choice. It is dangerous to Anthropic's business model. That model only works if customers have no real alternative at the model layer. So the safety argument starts to look like a moat argument wearing a lab coat. Line it up with the rest of the strategy. Dominate the layer everyone builds on. Launch Claude into science, security, legal, finance, and design, the verticals your own customers used to own. And campaign to restrict the open models that would hand those customers the exit. Here is the giveaway. When the person selling you safety also needs you to have no other option, you are not who is being kept safe.

Dario Amodei keeps warning that open-source AI models are dangerous and need to be restricted. David Sacks David Sacks answered with a rhetorical question: "Dangerous to whom?" It was the sharpest thing said on the latest All-In The All-In Podcast. Not dangerous to the enterprise that wants to keep control of its own data. Open weights are what finally give that enterprise a choice. It is dangerous to Anthropic's business model. That model only works if customers have no real alternative at the model layer. So the safety argument starts to look like a moat argument wearing a lab coat. Line it up with the rest of the strategy. Dominate the layer everyone builds on. Launch Claude into science, security, legal, finance, and design, the verticals your own customers used to own. And campaign to restrict the open models that would hand those customers the exit. Here is the giveaway. When the person selling you safety also needs you to have no other option, you are not who is being kept safe.

Fireside Alpha

10,037 Aufrufe • vor 8 Tagen