Palantir

The essential guide to a sector that’s now attracting one out of every four startup investment dollars.

AI-Innovators-2023-Palantir

The giant data mining and software company whose largest clients include many governments, militaries, and intelligence agencies, was established in 2003 with PayPal’s Peter Thiel among its founders. Palantir has been working on AI for a long time; last year, its tech tools were used by Ukrainian forces in the war with Russia. The recent generative AI frenzy has created a surge in demand for the Denver-based company's tech. In April 2023 the company unveiled its artificial intelligence platform (AIP), which uses AI to analyze data in different real-world scenarios. Earlier this year, CEO and cofounder Alex Karp said AI tools represented an “infinite market." Palantir’s share price doubled in the first six months of 2023 as a result of booming demand for its platform. The company is optimistic about the coming months, as it forecast a profit for every quarter of the year in May. Despite the massive power and potential of Palantir’s AI tools, Karp has maintained that the tech will continue to remain a “subordinate” to its creator rather than becoming a powerful force on its own. Like many other tech companies, Palantir carried out a series of cost-cutting measures, including laying off about 2% of its workforce and reducing its cloud expenditure.

Fortune 50 AI Innovators

Get insights into Palantir including business profile, stock information, news, and rankings from Fortune.

Palantir Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings

legacy

palantir

Companies

Palantir | Fortune

Palantir Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings | Fortune

Marco Quiroz-Gutierrez

Palantir’s CTO claims AI researchers are smoking to prove they believe AI will cure cancer, and he says it’s a sign of tech-fueled ‘mass psychosis’

/2026/10/13/palantir-cto-shyam-sankar-ai-researchers-smoking-cigarettes-cure-cancer-artificial-general-intelligence-silicon-valley-mass-psychosis-effective-altruism/

Emma Burleigh

Ex Goldman Sachs CEO got into Harvard University at 16 from public housing—and says higher education is the best way to break into the middle class

/article/former-goldman-sachs-ceo-lloyd-blankfein-got-into-harvard-at-16-from-brooklyn-public-housing-says-higher-education-best-way-break-into-middle-class/

Preston Fore

Palantir’s billionaire CEO says only two kinds of people will succeed in the AI era: trade workers—‘or you’re neurodivergent’

/article/palantir-ceo-alex-karp-two-people-successful-in-ai-era-vocational-skills-neurodivergence-gen-z-career-advice-billionaire/

Joshua Hong

‘Everybody knows you’re out of touch’: Palantir CEO Alex Karp says his own exec told him to stop hyping Foundry

/2026/10/08/everybody-knows-youre-out-of-touch-palantir-ceo-alex-karp-says-his-own-exec-told-him-to-stop-hyping-foundry/

Peter Thiel says Germany has a ‘fear of success’ problem—and it explains why entrepreneurs don’t scale like Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg

/2026/09/25/billionaire-peter-thiel-germany-fear-of-success-failure-to-scale-global-companies-build-wealth-like-musk-zuckerberg/

https://fortune.com/2026/10/13/palantir-cto-shyam-sankar-ai-researchers-smoking-cigarettes-cure-cancer-artificial-general-intelligence-silicon-valley-mass-psychosis-effective-altruism/?itm_source=parsely-api

https://fortune.com/article/palantir-ceo-alex-karp-two-people-successful-in-ai-era-vocational-skills-neurodivergence-gen-z-career-advice-billionaire/?itm_source=parsely-api

https://fortune.com/article/former-goldman-sachs-ceo-lloyd-blankfein-got-into-harvard-at-16-from-brooklyn-public-housing-says-higher-education-best-way-break-into-middle-class/?itm_source=parsely-api

Catherina Gioino

Palantir and other tech companies are stocking offices with nicotine products to increase worker productivity

https://fortune.com/2026/03/04/palantir-tech-companies-offices-vending-machines-tobacco-worker-productivity/?itm_source=parsely-api

https://fortune.com/2026/10/08/everybody-knows-youre-out-of-touch-palantir-ceo-alex-karp-says-his-own-exec-told-him-to-stop-hyping-foundry/?itm_source=parsely-api

Adam Fish

Alex Karp was right: you don't own your data

https://fortune.com/2026/08/26/alex-karp-was-right-you-dont-own-your-data/?itm_source=parsely-api

Lily Mae Lazarus

Exclusive: The AI company powering public safety operations for the 2026 World Cup just raised $250 million

https://fortune.com/2026/06/22/exclusive-peregrine-nick-noone-ai-public-safety-palantir-2026-world-cup-just-sequoia-capital/?itm_source=parsely-api

Eva Roytburg

Top AI leaders are begging people not to use Moltbook, a social media platform for AI agents: It’s a ‘disaster waiting to happen’

https://fortune.com/2026/02/02/moltbook-security-agents-singularity-disaster-gary-marcus-andrej-karpathy/?itm_source=parsely-api

One of the fastest-growing jobs in Silicon Valley sends engineers straight to customers’ offices to get AI up and running—and pays more than $188,000

https://fortune.com/2026/09/03/forward-deployed-engineers-fast-growing-six-figure-silicon-valley-job-integrate-ai-with-customers-tech-careers-palantir/?itm_source=parsely-api

Palantir says college is no longer a reliable training ground—so it hired 22 high school students instead: ‘Skip the debt. Skip the indoctrination.'

https://fortune.com/2025/11/05/palantir-colleges-no-longer-reliable-training-ground-gen-z-hire-22-high-school-students-fellowship/?itm_source=parsely-api

Apple is suing OpenAI employees for alleged trade secret theft; China’s new AI model, Kimi K3, could be a risk to American AI dominance; and Anthropic has come out with research on misaligned model behavior. Also, tensions rise between Big Tech CEOs — including Microsoft’s Satya Nadella and Palantir’s Alex Karp — and frontier AI companies. Fortune AI Editor Jeremy Kahn and AI Reporter Bea Nolan break down the latest news in artificial intelligence. 

The Truth About Misaligned Model Behavior, According to Anthropic Research | Fortune AI Weekly

Tech

fortuneaiweekly

eyeonai

Ben Harburg, Managing Partner, MSA Capital Jacob Helberg, Commissioner, United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission; Senior Policy Advisor to the CEO, Palantir Technologies Interviewer: Andrew Nusca, Fortune

Brainstorm Tech 2024: Experts worry that a U.S.-China cold war could turn hot

Conferences

Ben Harburg, MSA Capital, Jacob Helberg, United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission; Palantir Technologies, Andrew Nusca, Fortune

Emran Mian, Director General, Digital Technologies and Telecoms, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) Robyn Scott, Co-founder and CEO, Apolitical Guy Williams, Head, UK Defence, Palantir Technologies Moderator: Alan Murray, Chief Executive Officer, FORTUNE

Brainstorm AI London 2024: AI’s Impact On The Geopolitical Landscape

Photography by Joe Maher / Fortune Brainstorm AI

Emran Mian,, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), Robyn Scott, Apolitical, Guy Williams, Palantir Technologies, Alan Murray, FORTUNE

Thank you. We have a lot to talk about and a very short time to talk about it. Enron, I'm eager to talk to you about what can government actually do to mitigate the downside risks of A I, Rob? And I'm eager to talk to you about how can government use A I to just be better at what it does. But I, I think I have to start with you uh because you're in the defense business, uh you work for pun here but work closely with the UK government in the last 48 hours we've all seen on television, a pretty extraordinary uh event that Iran sent more than 300 drones, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles aimed straight at Israel. And we're told that 99% of them were shot out of the sky before they hit the ground, which is if true. Extraordinary. What is this event that we've all witnessed in the last 48 hours? Tell us about the changing face of national defense. I think the thing that's really highlighted for me is um if you go back in time, only, not even 10 years, but say four or four or maybe even three military operations are all about the speed of decision making decisions at the speed of relevance I think is a term often used. And historically, we've seen things like if you go all the way to before something is launched, it might be looking at satellite imagery to understand what things have moved, what changes have taken place. Now, with the introduction of computer vision models, you're able to take a two kilometer by five kilometer image. And within a second, identify all of the things that you might be interested in, whether it's changed or whether it is something that you, you recognize historically, that might have taken analyst hours to get to that point on one single image. And now it would take thousands of 300 of them with a pretty limited time. Yeah, exactly. And so the idea of identifying where these things might be coming from and deciding these are the ones of interest and then maybe tasking things, the collection assets that you might have, which could be sensitive or what have you and then passing that structured data through a model to then understand what are the interesting things do you care about all the things that might be good indicators? And more so it's a secret, it is a sea change. Totally, the compression of decision making times has been, you were directly involved. My understanding is you were directly involved in working with Ukraine to very much the same weaponry, by the way, both the offensive weaponry and the defensive weaponry, uh that Russia was using against Ukraine. What did you learn in that experience? Uh The Ukraine example is, is fascinating and very unique in the fact that you have seen, um, a complete tech sector nationalized into the defense sector and the speed of change that they've been able to deliver in terms of transformation and the use of A I and other technologies has been incredible. Well, they had some help, a little help. Yeah, but I mean, again, one of the, one of the earlier um commentators are talking about the, the getting your data in a healthy place and then run the models across it. And that's a very important part. The thing is we're fortunate in both of those cases that the defensive capabilities were so strong, but these are going to empower offensive capabilities as well, right? I mean, it's gonna be, it's gonna be a race. Yeah, I think the idea of strategic strategic competition is definitely, definitely with us and I think in terms of governments investing into future technologies and A I is, is gonna be pretty um pretty game changing, deterministic uh Emma and I, I want to back up a little bit and, and get to the broader question of what A I means for governments, uh which is the question you wrestle with every day in your position with the UK government, I guess. The thing is someone said this from the stage earlier today is this is moving so fast, so fast. How can government hope to keep up with the pace of change and mitigate the negative consequences in any way? Yeah, so a big part of our approach has been to do things differently. So we've been much more open to bringing in expertise from outside of government than perhaps sometimes we are as so we brought in lots of expertise from A I firms from academia, including Ian Hogarth who chairs our A I Safety Institute I think was speaking earlier in the conference and we've been much more open to the expertise and sometimes we are as government. We've also moved really, really quickly and in order to move as quickly as that, you really need political support all the way up to the top of government. And we've absolutely had that we've had a prime minister who's chosen to prioritize this set of issues. And in particular, he lent into saying that the UK would host the first A I Safety Summit which we ran in November last year. And I think that's another important lesson for us in terms of dealing with some of the risks or some of the potential downsides of artificial intelligence. We've got to do it with other governments. We've got to do this together. We've got to build international governance around this and that's why it's been so important to us to kind of begin to lead that conversation. So we hosted the first summit last year, we're co hosting the next summit with Korea next month, we are also trying to collaborate really extensively on A I safety testing with other countries. So our A I safety institute just signed a partnership agreement with the same institute in the US. And we're talking to these capabilities as they begin to be developed in other countries as well. So kind of that collaborative approach I think is really fundamental. And so what is sort of the top three things that you think you can accomplish with this A I safety effort? So I think the first thing is to bind this set of countries together, to build that connective tissue between the countries which have frontier A I firms and which you would expect to be at the frontier of A I being deployed across the wider economy. I think the second thing I'd say is there's still a lot to do in terms of understanding the science of A I safety. So there's a lot of discussion about what's the right approach to regulating frontier A I. And our view has been that the best thing to do first is to figure out what does good A I safety testing look like and set standards for that and to do that in collaboration with other people who are at the frontier of doing that work. And that's what the A I Safety institute been focused on. We want to understand what really good safety testing looks like, do that in collaboration with the firms and do that in collaboration with other countries. And is the end result, you give a seal of approval to certain models and not to others. What does this look like? Five or 10 years down the road? I think it's hard at this point to say what it looks like. Five or 10 years down the road. I think our approach at the moment is let's establish the basic science, let's figure out what good safety testing looks like. And alongside that, let's use our existing regulatory system for the harms that are manifesting potentially here. And now, and I think that's another important part of our approach. The digital markets that we're talking about here are markets that we already regulate in important ways. We have just passed legislation to allow us to better regulate for harms that occur online. Um Many of those harms will now also be created with A I, but we've, we've just regulated for that. So we should use that regulatory framework to deal with A I generated harms in the same way as we were planning to use it for other things. Yeah. Robin. Uh uh you're working uh from a different angle on these issues. You're trying to figure out how can A I make government better at what it does. Can you talk a little bit about what you're doing and where you're seeing results. Yeah. So the perspective I bring to this is running a political, which is a global network used by about a quarter of a million public servants. We also do online training and as part of that, we have a government A I campus and we've trained already about 10,000 public officials around the world. So that's our lens. The headlines are the potential is immense. The Turing Institute came out with a report recently which speaks to speak to this in the UK context, but it's generalisable. There are about a billion transactions a year between government and citizens. About 100 and 40 million of those are complex but repeatable tasks. And of those uh the the institute estimates that about 84% can be uh automated with A I. So incredible potential to cut into the work of government, improve citizen services, improve the return on taxpayer dollars. There's also a secondary reason for doing this and for adopting A I, because better users of A I are better regulators of A I and they're better buyers of A I. And I think, you know, the UK really has shown leadership on the general adoption front in government as well. And is there a willingness to do this gets back to the retraining issue? We were talking about a few minutes ago. Is there a willingness in government to really embrace the effort? Yeah, absolutely. So it's very interesting to look at government's current data sort of position on A I. First of all, somewhat surprisingly, your average public servant, we've done a lot of polling on this is more positive than negative on the potential of A I that doesn't hold necessarily for prior technologies. And given all the talk about concerns, we've been surprised how generally optimistic they are. There is much more optimism in emerging markets versus developed markets. The conversation in emerging markets is all about this is going to solve personalized education. This is going to bring great health care. The conversation in developed markets tends to have much more of a bent to work towards safety and harms and economic nationalism is also uh becoming a more and more important uh force, sorry A I nationalism rather. And we've seen big plays recently in the UAE and India and expect to see many more around the world. So all those are context for adoption, but there is general willingness to use it. The vast majority of public servants have already played with generative A I sometimes I think under approved guidance, probably sometimes somewhat off the books and that's only going to increase pretty dramatically. Yeah, I'm glad you mentioned economic nationalism because one of the things that makes this conversation about geopolitical effects uh interesting and challenging is the existence of China not represented on this, on this stage, China is certainly an A I superpower. There are some people out there who seem to think it will become the leading A I superpower. Uh and it has a very different background set of values that could be on the other side of any uh uh actual uh uh warfare. Um It, it takes a very different approach to many of the questions uh to use it a simple example. Uh The UK has said very clearly, we're not going to use facial recognition or other technologies to pick people out in a massive crowd crossing the street. I believe China has done the exact opposite so that we can make great gains in social cohesion if we have the ability to do that. So how, how does China's strength in A I affect these conversations, Emran, I'll start with you. Yeah. So our approach has been to include China in the international conversation about safety. Uh So China will represent it at the A I Safety Summit in Bletchley Park. And we think that's important because China produces a lot of fundamental research in A I. Uh and it has a very busy and a very active and a very interesting A I ecosystem. Um So having China as part of this conversation, we think is important. But at the same time, we've been really clear as a government that where China is engaged in activities that affect or harm UK interests, we will say so clearly and plainly. Uh so we've done that in the past few weeks we have called out where China has been engaged in uh offensive cyber operations in the UK. And we think that those two things are entirely consistent. Well, there are a lot of people in the US these days who think maybe they aren't consistent and that should we be sharing all our research with China if we're going to be in conflict over whether it's cyber or actual warfare? Yeah. And that's why our approach will not be to share all of our research with China. We're very clear on there are areas of research that you, that we will protect and that we do protect Robin. How do you think about this? We're looking very much at the practice, the applied side of A I in government. And one of the interesting general admissions, I think there's a general admission around thinking around capability in government. There's a lot of talk about, we must do this, there's a lot of talk about adoption, but there isn't the focus on building the kind of diffusion capability. So you can actually roll it out across government. So we look at that and then we look at how the exchange of best practice happens because the field is moving so fast, you are never going to win. If you just take top down guidance or uh you know, directives, you've got to talk to others who are in the field. And I think one of the interesting dynamics is actually the vast majority of countries are quite good at collaborating and sharing best practice. We see a lot of that on our platform, China kind of doesn't take part for the most part explicitly or at least in the same way in that sharing of best practice. So the question I'm interested in is is there going to be a siloing around how A I is rolled out in the Chinese government versus elsewhere? And should we be trying to get more permeability so we can, so we can be mutual learning around non controversial things? Like how do you get great services to citizens? How do you bring down the carbon footprint of these A I technologies? We heard about that earlier. Yep and Guy in defense, how, how do you think about China? Um Well, I mean, as you point out that facial recognition is reportedly like fantastic, but when it comes to things like large language models, apparently there's a slight limitation because they um restrict elements of the internet available to specific areas. So there is a, there is a theory that they might be slightly behind but to pick up Robin's Point there, I think what's really important is almost not ignoring it but just more internal focused of looking at an organization and in parallel to the regulatory and the safety side is like, how do you really push the use of these technologies to win? Like what are you doing day in day out to make the most of this tech to actually improve your, improve your work. And there's often this concern about losing jobs, but we like to view it as um in a marvel context of Team Iron Man versus Team Ultron. And it's how do you bring this technology to humans so that they can be 1000 times better at their job? And with the view to how you actually win in the long run, was that a national defense answer? Yeah. Well, I, I think so. I think if, when you're an analyst working in the defense in defense intelligence, if an operational commander is, how do you, how do you bring? But you, but you have to be thinking about, do our cap are our cap, do their capabilities match ours are our capabilities, period. That's the nature of defense. And I think that's the important thing of, of balancing the innovation and driving innovation forward in parallel to the safety side rather than letting the safety side restrict what you do in terms of innovation. Ok. Last question, I'd like to ask all of you to answer. If A I ran the government, what would we be doing differently today? What would we be doing that we aren't doing? And I'm going to make you go first. Um, we'd be doing meaningful work, not busy work. It would be my blunt answer. Still too much busy work in government. I think, I, I think it, it's very hard and, and A I can help us get rid of it. I hope so. Yeah, Robin. So there's been some data suggesting this is an aside that a majority of people, I think it's younger people in Europe actually want A I politicians. So they want A I to run the government as opposed to the politicians, as opposed to the flesh and blood runs of the coming, coming to government sooner than you may think. But in terms of what that would look like, assuming it's benevolent and aligned A I, I think the the potential the dream is that you get much better, much more personalized services, hyper personalized services to citizens and you can invest a lot more in those because you are saving money because of so many efficiencies that you're also finding Iran final word. Yeah, I'd add, I think government is a complex activity and it's too often con noted as being an elite activity. And I think A I gives us some real opportunities to, to deal with that. I think the way in which A I can help to simplify and explain things to citizens, I think has real power to it. I think the way in which it can help to simplify interactions with citizens, I think has real power to it. Um So I think breaking down that elitism that I think a lot of people experience in their interactions with government, I think, yeah, I can help us with that. Well, thank you all, you've given us a lot to think about. Thanks for being part of brainstorm A I.

Ryan, thanks so much for being here with us today. And I think, just for starters, I realized that not everybody lives and breathes Silicon Valley. And so how many of you are familiar with palantir and what the company does a pretty good number actually. A good number Do you want to just quickly explain it in your words? Because this Yeah, one of the topics of our conversations is what palantir actually does and doesn't do so how do you explain it today? Yeah, so we Our mission is to help critical world institutions leverage data to solve their hardest problems. So I'm sure many people who are in the room are experiencing a really overwhelming data landscape. It's increasing in volume and velocity, and it's in many different places. And for the government, particularly the threat landscape is also dramatically changing right now. Time pressures are extreme. And resources proportionally definitely are decreasing. And so we view our role as building technology that integrates that massive disparate data into one place. So everyone from CEOs and generals Down to frontline operators who might be researching cancer drugs or in the battlefield in Afghanistan can make really good informed decisions based on all of the holistic information that their enterprise has. So the product not only brings together all these disparate data sources, but it actually helps companies, government agencies whomever To sift through it and be able to look for patterns and do all sorts of things. Yeah. So data integration is kind of the first step. And then on top of that, we have a rich suite of tooling, that enables a bunch of different types of users and a variety of workflows and contexts, to really understand and leverage that data. To collaborate with each other across that data and to share the influences that they're coming up with. Back into an ecosystem so that a knowledge asset is almost being built as opposed to disparate bits and bots all around an enterprise. And explained, you're on the product side and on the government side. Yes. So, by the way, real quick, the names of the two products. Palantir Gautham and Palantir foundry. You know about foundry wasn't always foundry was it? Foundry has an origins and in a previous product called metropolis. Okay, that's awesome out of travelers. Yeah. They're pretty cool things. Yeah. So what is your role within the organization? So I run product for Gotham, and Gotham is our main government platform. So this is the original product, it was founded in 2004. Our original funding came from In- Q- Tel, which I think there's someone here from In- Q- Tel. Yeah, we have someone. It's the CIA's venture capital arm, and the original product was counter- terrorism, it was about intelligence We wanted in the aftermath of 911 to build the intelligence community and analytical data integration platform that also adhere to really important privacy and civil liberty problems at the time. So that all of the data could be really well protected while still fostering collaboration within the counter terrorism community. So [ UNKNOWN ] 2004, still going strong today. And that's the product that I run. And My portfolio is mostly on zero to one kind of our indeed new product so I sit at the nexus between product and business and I get to be a really creative. It's my job to find innovative new ways for us to exchange that platform, new workflows that our customers really need, new modules that we need to do to kinda keep innovating and to keep achieving their missions as the threat landscapes change, So that means teams of designers and engineers and prototyping and really getting my hands dirty in the field across our portfolio. And you're doing things like meeting with the US Secret Service to talk about money laundering, when you walk into a room like that. The secret service one was, so I've been at Palangier seven years, that was when I was 22, that was my first gig at the company. I was running a meeting on a huge money laundering case with seven secret service gentlemen. So I think what's cool about it one thing I really love about palantir is that our approach has always been build from the field. Like go to the ground truth. Go to the clients, learn from them learn from those users. And we're never in the business of building software in Silicon Valley in a lab and shipping it over the fence. I've been on military bases I've been, I spent all of 2018 and Europe with a US ally, a European allies security agency because they wanted a better way in the aftermath of a terrorist attack to communicate and share data in real time with each other. So I was in the field working and prototyping and showing that the kind of users were the counter terrorism analysts, cuts of the product, getting their feedback. And we did about eight month cycle with them and that has become part of our core platform now that we really built it close to the problem and the mission. So It's taken me to some really interesting places. I know I can currently in my career. I can imagine it. So part of that part of the origin story, though, at PALLANSCH here and this mystique. You know, the funding from the see it from the CIA and the early work with the CIA. You know, there were all these rumors which you guys have never confirmed or denied that you had a hand in catching Osama bin Laden. So it seems like that was an advantage to Palantir at least earlier on. And as you kind of went more and more into the private sector, you already had that allure. And the technology had that that, there was an attraction to it. But today, fast forward to today, there's been so much controversy about, in particular Your contract with ice and another government contracts. And why? I mean, I guess as just a starting point as for a question, why do you choose to do business with an agency like ISIS has been to workplace raids and deportation, so So I mean, our values and our mission we take on clients that align with that. And that mission is democracy. It is national security. It is those things in conjunction with privacy and civil liberties. And I think we all live in a pretty polarized climate right now. Society is heavily cleavage and I think it's means that people. Rush to various sides of debates and think of them in very black and white ways as opposed to appreciating nuance. So for the [ UNKNOWN ] questions specifically, the Obama administration brought us to [ UNKNOWN ] in 2011 for something called Operation Fall and Hero Which was an ice agent was murdered across the border while sitting in his vehicle by 12 people. And the Obama Administration called us to ask if we could help them integrate that data and figure out who was responsible for it, we ultimately were able to apprehend that individual. And the contract from there was with Homeland Security Investigations, which is a distinct group. From ice, they're not directly responsible for enforcement or worksite enforcement, and they mostly do transnational crime. And so that is things like narco trafficking or human trafficking. We El Chapo Guzman cases. Child exploitation. And I've seen some pretty horrific but inspiring cases where where ISIS done things like put 3000 child sex traffickers in jail in 2018 alone. So, do you have the ability as a vendor to this agency? Do you have the ability to say cuz I think nobody would argue that that is Yeah. That's good. Right? But do you have the ability to say to them we will sell you to this technology for these applications but not for these ones? Again, we work with HSI which is a distinct group. But now, we support the American govenment. I think our CEO has said many times that Silicon Valley shouldn't be the people who are picking winners and losers. We live in a democracy. We want that democracy to be self correcting. Many people at palantir, myself included, have rigorous debate and have many discussions and disagreements about this. But we ultimately think that the impact and the mission of HSI in particular is important enough You know, 3000 child predators and 850 kids being saved because of our work that this is it's worth sticking with the government in this instance. So would it be fair to say Sum up and say that in your view, the good outweighs the bad of what the technology is doing. I think what I'm trying to say is that we don't work for political parties or administrations we work for democratic institutions and instance. institutions that impact the lives of many people. And we think that our technology is is better you those institutions are better with our technology, privacy is more protected, they are more deliberate, they're more effective than otherwise. And just real quick, I do want to open up to you guys for questions, but going back to Just explaining what [ UNKNOWN ] does in the [ UNKNOWN ] around the company early on, do you feel like you are having to sort of revisit how you brand the company, how you communicate, both externally and internally because of the recent controversies I mean, I think on the branding question like, we've never though about that cuz we're focused on the mission, I mean our like secretive mystique is really truly because we're thinking about soldiers who are telling us that we're saving their life because they're able to detect roadside bombs with our software, like that is what we've been thinking about this entire time so I think. In terms of a brand or reset or anything like that, we are still single focused on those individuals and the people on the frontline. I think internally we have a lot of conversations, we try to be incredibly thoughtful, we try to hold complexity, we try to see the nuance in Kind of today's political environment and not rush to that black and white thinking and that's always been the case it's been very steeped in our culture from the get go and certainly more so in the in the last couple of years. But I think most people who work at palantir accept that and embrace the impact of our work in the mission, being good for society and pretty important. Questions from the audience please raise your hands if you would like to ask Ryan a question. This clearly is such a light topic. [ LAUGH ] I know that's a fun one. So Okay, so talk a little bit more about some of the, you guys have been around for 15 years and some of the conversations that I hear at least recently about [ UNKNOWN ] is very forward looking if it's not about the controversy. So I feel like we've been talking about you going public for the last 10 years or so. What do the right conditions look like for Palantir to actually go public? You know, that is a great question for our CEO. [ LAUGH ] And you will probably know the second I know but again, like it's not something day to day, my teams don't think about the IPO every day. I think we're thinking about The needs of soldiers and how near peer conflict is going to change the way the military operates. We're thinking about the human trafficking investigations that we have to integrate that next data set for for the customers, they can piece all those things together. And we focus on those individuals and real people on the front lines and you know, the IPO is not top of mind. I'm sure it'll happen someday. Yes, I think so right? Plenty of investors are gonna be happy with that. We've got a question over here. Hi. Hi, Kathy Davis. I'm really curious about the impact that the work that you're having has on the children that are In cages so not saved by the other half of the work that you're doing cuz I think that number four outweight the 800, not that the 800 is not important, but where do you see the work that palenter is doing to kind of. So again the part of Ice that works on enforcement and removal operations is called EARA, it's a different agency within Ice. And our contract has never been with that agency. When agencies have different contracts they have different text acts they have, people from that organization cannot access our Ballinger Stack with HSI. In the Trump administration ->> [ INAUDIBLE ] the other, like if you're looking at one data and it's being Kind of, I, yeah, I mean I've never seen and I've never seen a substantiated claim that [ UNKNOWN ] is directly been involved in that type of work. I think with the Trump administration, over the last couple of years, it is possible that HSI and ERO have started to do some joint operations. But our work is 99 % again about transnational crime. That's the mandate of HSI and it's the work that we do and we don't have a contract with enforcement and removal. Well, I think what has come up more commonly or has been associated has been the workplace raids and deportations. Yeah. And that's that that's the jurisdiction of Euro So, yeah .>> Not to invalidate your question in a way of because I understand it's the same agency. So, okay. Let's end it on another with just another very very quick brief question. You have been kind of pulling out of Silicon Valley a bit. Is that something that's strategic? Is it happening, what's the. It seems like there is less. So theres less palentier presence in Silicon Valley? No, we haven't pulled out of Sillicon Valley at all. It's still our headquarters. We're still in Palo Alto, we're still on 100 Hamilton. We definitely have a growing presence all around the world. We have a lot of people in New York and London and Europe. But we're still committed to Sillicon Valley and it's still the center for the company. Okay, great. Well, thank you. I hope you will come back and talk to us again next year. Thanks so much Ryan, thank you all. Thank you. [ APPLAUSE ] [ BLANK_AUDIO ]

How Palantir Continues To Innovate While Navigating Controversy

Palantir has long been one of the most secretive Silicon Valley companies. But it now finds itself increasingly having to explain what it does.

Palantir

Latest news on Palantir

Palantir’s CTO claims AI researchers are smoking to prove they believe AI will cure cancer, and he says it’s a sign of tech-fueled ‘mass psychosis’

Ex Goldman Sachs CEO got into Harvard University at 16 from public housing—and says higher education is the best way to break into the middle class

Palantir’s billionaire CEO says only two kinds of people will succeed in the AI era: trade workers—‘or you’re neurodivergent’

‘Everybody knows you’re out of touch’: Palantir CEO Alex Karp says his own exec told him to stop hyping Foundry

Peter Thiel says Germany has a ‘fear of success’ problem—and it explains why entrepreneurs don’t scale like Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg

Palantir in Fortune Rankings

Videos