Silicon valley

Silicon Valley is really just a few hundred people connected by favors and money. Most of us rely on this network, but few know how it really functions. This new column reveals the inner wiring of the American tech world. Traditionally, the Valley’s message to Washington has been: keep out. Now Sam Altman is offering the government 5 percent of OpenAI – worth some $43 billion – as a gift. Quite a conversion. The Valley that once worshipped Ronald Reagan now warms to Donald Trump’s economics. The state already owns a slice of Intel and a cut of Nvidia’s chip sales to China. Bernie Sanders, meanwhile, has introduced a bill that would take half the equity of the biggest AI firms in a one-off tax; so for Altman, 5 percent seems a cheap insurance policy.

Many people enjoy ascribing meaning to the behavior and actions of elite politicians, celebrities – and especially billionaires. They read volumes into their every move, like studying tea leaves or predicting whole futures from the position and movement of the stars. So Peter Thiel’s decision to relocate to Argentina has elicited exactly the reaction one would expect. Thiel is the billionaire co-founder of PayPal and Palantir. Whenever he does anything unusual, the speculation begins within hours, growing more and more outlandish with every attempt to explain his actions. Is he finally fleeing the US? Is he seeking refuge from a wealth tax? Is he insuring himself against doomsday in anticipation of civilizational collapse?

A 20-year-old from Spring, Texas, named Daniel Alejandro Moreno-Gama has been charged with attempted murder after he was accused of throwing a Molotov cocktail at the gate of Sam Altman’s San Francisco home on April 10. He then allegedly walked toward OpenAI’s Mission Bay headquarters and told employees he intended to burn the building down as well. He was reportedly carrying a manifesto – a “three-part series,” according to Fox News – that included a list of other AI executives and investors and their home addresses and documents discussing potential risks that AI poses to humanity, with a section titled: “Some more words on the matter of our impending extinction.

If you’ve been paying attention to social media lately, then you already know the score: smartphones are corrupting our children, we need legal intervention immediately. Roughly half of US states have enacted some form of age-gating for social media or pornographic content. Australia banned under-16s from social media platforms outright, France and Indonesia followed suit and the United Kingdom is now asking people for their papers to read moderately offensive blog posts. You don’t need me to rehash this. The phones have nuked the interior lives of Gen Z, Gen A and the hitherto unborn Generations B and C. Every opinion lands somewhere between “protect the children” and “this is Reefer Madness for iPads.

“Censorship is not how we do things in Western civilization”. So said Congressman Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI) of the United Kingdom’s new Online Safety Act (OSA). Its effects on free expression are “dangerous and needs to be addressed,” possibly by means of an international “united front”. The Congressman was fresh from meetings with British and Irish lawmakers and US tech firms, held as part of a House Judiciary Committee fact-finding mission to investigate the impact of the OSA and the European Union’s new Digital Marketing Act on American businesses. The main event was a one-on-one between Committee chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Peter Kyle, the United Kingdom’s Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology.

In the aftermath of the Musk-Trump break-up, many are wondering about the future of the “tech right” and its relationship to the MAGA movement. In 2024, the two groups fought together and won. One definition of the tech right is simply “Technology people who aren’t crazy leftists.” Many in this group shifted right because of the excesses of wokeness and DEI within Silicon Valley. The dysfunction of far-left culture, which attacks merit and excellence, created a lot of apostates. Some were Democrats until quite recently! For my part, I was raised in the tradition of liberty, with an education that included not just Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman, but also Edmund Burke and G.K. Chesterton. Not to insult my friends, but I am not a recent convert.

The future is technological, and this includes human reproduction. In Silicon Valley, a very particular sort of technological pro-natalism is emerging – not a movement to try to persuade ordinary people to have families so much as a push to create genetically superior children. The way they see it, the future of human reproduction is – and should be – increasingly technological. There’s a vast amount of money moving into the reproduction industry. Interestingly, the big players here are often the same people who have been ruthlessly pushing gender ideology – the insane idea that you can change your sex at will. Why would this be? What is the connection between the fad of transgenderism and tech-fatalism?

Money and power have rarely been strangers; often nations are made to shudder when the ruling elites battle each other. Britain’s late empire was divided between liberal manufacturers and aristocratic interests, whose conflicts hastened the rise of the Labour Party and the end of empire. In the United States, opposition to powerful trusts defined progressive politics for decades, ultimately laying the basis for the New Deal and a greater scope for government. In the West today we are witnessing a similar divide among the uber-rich class — epitomized by Elon Musk’s embrace of Donald Trump — that is already reshaping politics. Until 2016 the US establishment, both Republican and Democratic, embraced similar views on national security, global trade and multilateral institutions.