Technology

Of course it's Palantir. And Peter Thiel is worried about the antichrist. The calls are coming from inside the house, buddy.

"In The Midst Of Unpopular, Catastrophic War Of Choice, Trump Allies Call For Draft" would perhaps not be a totally neutral headline but I feel like it would be more honest, more forthright.

Burn Palantir to the ground

Misleading title. This fascist corps wants to reinstate the draft.

If that "national service" includes Mangione's service to the country, perhaps we should have that conversation.

i wonder if this is why the US is looking at raising the age of enlistment to 42? as soon as the law is passed, Palantir manages to secure some sort of contract, where they get to suck up all that data

White nationalism? Check.

Billionaires should be allowed to do what they want? Check.

War for war's sake? Check.

Class warfare? Check.

Class warfare (again)? Check.

The only thing I agree with is the bit about politicians sending normal folks to war while not sending themselves or their kids.

Fuck Palantir

Shit, I misread and thought they meant universal national healthcare service, lol. Dipshits.

I would rather die than "serve" "my" country.

So everyone gets VA health insurance?

Alex Karp should be flayed alive for my amusement quite frankly

From the article:

Palantir made a post on X about the company's position Saturday saying in part, "Because we get asked a lot. The Technological Republic, in brief" before sharing 22 credos outlined in the book, written by Palantir co-founder Alexander C. Karp along with Nicholas W. Zamiska.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Iow, trust us, we know what's best, your government does not. We should be in charge.  

To which I say, Fuuuuuuuuuuck that.

Compromise: mandatory service for young people, wealth taxes on older people who never had to face mandatory service.

They can go first! Show us how it's done!

This is totally not going to earn you the distrust of the majority.

requiring, or strongly encouraging, all young adults

Half of the all is very far away from "all".