Palantir Rattles the Windows in the Nuclear Industry

June 30, 2025

This dinobaby asked ChatGPT about Palantir. Interesting output.

“Palantir Partners to Develop AI Software for Nuclear Construction” caught me by surprise. I did not think the company founded in 2003 was an artificial intelligence company with expertise in the nuclear field. The cited article reports:

Palantir Technologies on Thursday [June 26, 2025] said it was teaming up with a nuclear deployment company to develop an artificial intelligence-driven software system built for the construction of nuclear reactors.

I have paid much attention to Palantir, but I did own a small amount of Palantir stock but I dumped it.

Screenshot of the ChatGPT output on June 27, 2025, at 855 am US Eastern

Today I wanted to refresh my memory about the company. I navigated to OpenAI’s ChatGPT and plugged in key words and this is what the Sam Altman system generated for me. Note: It is unlikely that the ChatGPT system can output the same report because probability doesn’t work the way users of the system think it does.

Remember: The quoted passage is copied directly from the ChatGPT response. ChatGPT told me:

Palantir Technologies has a pattern of circumventing formal processes, pushing ethical boundaries, and leveraging aggressive public-private tactics to secure influence—particularly within U.S. defense and intelligence communities.

Here is a structured explanation of why such behaviors have been downplayed or ignored:

1. Operational Utility Overrides Bureaucratic Violations

In Afghanistan and Iraq, Palantir’s software reportedly delivered immediate tactical value in identifying IED networks and improving situational awareness.
By deploying software and engineers directly to the field without formal contracts, Palantir created facts on the ground—a working product that soldiers wanted, and field commanders endorsed.
Pentagon leadership faced a dilemma: challenge Palantir for its violations or continue using a system that operators said worked better than the legacy alternatives (e.g., DCGS-A).
This “bottom-up demand” shielded Palantir from early procurement blowback.

2. Information Warfare and Lobbying

Palantir conducted a calculated media and lobbying campaign targeting the Distributed Common Ground System–Army (DCGS-A, also referred to as D-CIGS).
By discrediting IBM and other legacy defense contractors, Palantir positioned itself as the modern, Silicon Valley alternative.
This messaging resonated with Congress, think tanks, and parts of the press, framing Palantir as a disruptor, not a rule-breaker.
Lobbying disclosures show Palantir spent millions courting lawmakers and decision-makers.

3. Legal Maneuvering and Settlements

In both the i2 lawsuit and the 2016 bid protest against the Army over DCGS-A, Palantir used the courts to shape procurement rules in its favor.
The Court of Federal Claims sided with Palantir in 2016, affirming that the Army violated federal acquisition regulations by excluding commercial solutions from its process ([Palantir USG v. United States, 129 Fed. Cl. 218 (2016)]). This set a precedent that indirectly legitimized Palantir’s aggressive tactics.

4. Shift in Public Attention and National Security Prioritization

Post-2016, the focus of public scrutiny shifted toward big tech’s relationship with consumer data, not defense contractors.
Palantir successfully repositioned itself as a key player in pandemic response, immigration enforcement, and border security—domains where national interest arguments silence criticism.
The company also leaned into its identity as a pro-Western, anti-authoritarian force, which further insulated it from deeper ethical scrutiny.

5. Opacity and Media Fatigue

Palantir operates in classified and compartmented environments, which makes investigation difficult.
Many journalists lack the access or technical background to track the nuance of procurement violations or reverse engineering disputes.
After years of unresolved criticism, media fatigue set in—journalists moved on, and watchdog groups prioritized new targets (e.g., TikTok, Clearview AI, etc.).

Conclusion:

Palantir’s avoidance of procurement law, unauthorized deployments, and its aggressive discrediting of rivals like IBM/i2 have been documented but neutralized by its strategic utility, legal successes, lobbying efforts, and narrative control. The firm masks tactical rule-breaking with patriotic branding, which has proved highly effective in suppressing deeper accountability.

True, false, reality, or hallucinatory? I don’t know. Nuclear in the context of this ChatGPT output that suggests the Palantir outfit is definitely operating in a very interesting manner. What would Palantir’s AI say about the company?

Stephen E Arnold, June 30, 2025

Written by Stephen E. Arnold · Filed Under AI, Business strategy, News, Technology

Comments

Got something to say?

Search the site
Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive

Stephen E. Arnold monitors search, content processing, text mining and related topics from his high-tech nerve center in rural Kentucky. He tries to winnow the goose feathers from the giblets. He works with colleagues worldwide to make this Web log useful to those who want to go "beyond search". Contact him at sa [at] arnoldit.com. His Web site with additional information about search is arnoldit.com.