Looks like a dupe of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48747772

I read the entire manifesto, and while I understand the anger, I wonder if generational hatred is really necessary. Of course, the older generation dominates, but that's the conclusion most societies reach anyway. The Baby Boomers before me were also dominated by the older generation of their time. This cycle has always existed. The real problem is that the fundamental nature of society has changed—with social friction diminishing, consumption centers converging, and wealth becoming concentrated. This is ultimately a problem of wealth redistribution, not the older generation itself. And among the older generation, unless they're in specific industries, there are many who have failed. They're not people to be excluded—they're part of our society.

There are some points I agree with. I agree with things like intergenerational resource distribution, but overall, this is the anger of young people, and I actually like that anger.

They say it's code vs law, but that code only works on specific platforms. Everyone loves open source, but they forget that the infrastructure to run that open source actually sits on top of large corporations.

It's true that programmers are the designers of power structures. I've also worked on one of the biggest systems in my career—a real-time streaming site for gambling—and I agree with the idea that once you participate in that, your responsibility doesn't just disappear.

Personally, this reads less as an anti-Palantir manifesto and more as anger toward the old guard's power. I think even if Palantir disappeared, as long as demand and data exist, another company would take its place.

So if it's truly an anti-surveillance manifesto, it shouldn't target a specific company name, but rather how data flows and power combine to attack us.

If that were the case, it would also need to attack the contradictions within open source itself. It would have to list Google's wrongdoings, and mention how Google keeps Mozilla Firefox alive just to avoid antitrust laws. In the end, it wouldn't be a simple good vs evil narrative, but something more tangled and complex.

Anyway, I agree with the intent, but there are many points in the manifesto that I find hard to agree with.

I think this manifesto conflates Palantir with:

The CIA

The NSA

JSOC

The US Armed Forces

Weapons Contractors

Law Enforcement

Federal Counter-Intelligence

Various dictatorships

Criminal Enterprises

Hit squads

What about this is unique to Palantir at all? As far as I'm aware, there are many, many more companies deeply embedded with the US intelligence community and law enforcement and Palantir isn't all that special here. Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, etc. all have massive contracts directly supporting the same thing. I don't understand what makes Palantir special here.

Any manifesto of this kind unavoidably contains many naive parts.

The reason is that it is always easy to notice what is bad around you, but it is very difficult to conceive what should be done about it.

The paragraphs of the manifesto about how serious the problem of mass surveillance and unaccountability of private companies has become, are undeniably correct.

Which is the solution for a better future is much less obvious.