⚡️Karp is right about the battlefield and he is self serving about the solution. The battlefield does not care about your values statement. It cares about uptime, accuracy, and whether you stay in the fight when the PR cycle turns hostile. Any vendor that can be politically shut off is a strategic weakness. The warfighter will route around that every time. His move is to turn that truth into a monopoly wedge. He is framing the choice as Palantir or chaos. He is packaging moral durability as a product. He is saying we will do the controversial work and we will not flinch. That signal is aimed at procurement, not Twitter. The deeper layer. AI governance will be won by whoever controls three choke points: Data pipelines Deployment surfaces Liability routing The winner is whoever makes themselves impossible to remove. Once a model is inside planning, targeting, logistics, and intel fusion, replacement becomes operationally risky. That is how permanence is built. Not by persuasion. By dependency. The part people miss. Everyone talks about autonomous weapons. The real shift is decision acceleration. Humans stay in the loop in name while the loop speed outruns human comprehension. You become the rubber stamp on a recommendation stack you cannot fully audit in real time. That is where “who decides” quietly becomes “who designed the interface.” Karp is betting on that. He wants the state to own the moral responsibility, while Palantir owns the implementation reality. That is the cleanest liability structure. Government signs. Contractor ships. Soldier executes....