The Gospel According to Peter Thiel: Understanding the Engineer Svengali’s Obsession with the Antichrist

Greetings! Welcome to TechScape. Over the past week, I’ve been deep in thought about billionaire Peter Thiel’s intricate reflections on the Antichrist and Armageddon. I can’t help but absorb it all at this stage.

You might be questioning why billionaire perspectives on the Antichrist are significant. That’s a great inquiry!

To my team, aiding us in understanding Johana Bhuiyan, Dara Carr, and Nick Robbins – Early, we covered a series of talks by Thiel, an influential billionaire and political strategist.

Last month, Mr. Thiel conducted four lectures along San Francisco’s waterfront, delving into who he believes the Antichrist may be and cautioning that Armageddon is on the horizon. Thiel, who identifies as a “little Orthodox Christian,” suggests that the signs of the apocalypse could already be present, claiming that international institutions, environmentalism, and technological oversight may accelerate its occurrence. This is a notable discourse that sheds light on the interests of one of Silicon Valley’s and the United States’ most prominent figures.

Long before Silicon Valley shifted rightward during President Donald Trump’s second term, Thiel was a key player in conservative politics. He forged close ties with Trump nearly a decade ago, is credited with endorsing J.D. Vance for vice president, and is financing the Republican midterm campaign for 2026. Thiel, who co-founded PayPal and gained significant wealth at a young age, has also invested early in Facebook alongside SpaceX, OpenAI, and others through his firm, Founders Fund. His co-founded company, Palantir, has secured billions in government contracts for software development for the Department of Defense, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the UK’s NHS. With unprecedented attention and political influence, Thiel is attempting to share a message about the Antichrist, although his political acumen and investments are better recognized than his theological insights.

During his third lecture, Thiel stated, “I’m a libertarian, or a classical liberal, but I diverge in some minor ways, and I am concerned about the Antichrist.”

Thiel’s lectures were lengthy and diverse, weaving in biblical verses, contemporary history, and philosophy, while often veering toward conspiracy theories. He blended references to video games and television with discussions about J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, recalled exchanges with Elon Musk and Benjamin Netanyahu, and criticized Bill Gates as a “very terrible person.”

Read more: Inside tech billionaire Peter Thiel’s off-the-record lecture on the Antichrist

First off, these revelations possess such sensational qualities that they are entertaining to read. It’s bizarre that a $20 billion mogul gives sprawling lectures that resemble the ramblings of a perplexed graduate student.

However, that alone doesn’t justify this as a story. Journalists encounter various oddities that often go unreported.

While editing the piece on Thiel’s lecture, I grew concerned that The Guardian might inadvertently promote Thiel’s ideologies instead of genuinely informing its audience. The boundary between the two can be quite tenuous. Reporters covering Trump have navigated this path for much of the past decade.

A reporter who covered Thiel suggested that his speech was a method for raising funds and demonstrating that he was a “crazy contrarian.” There may be ulterior motives behind his lectures on the hidden Antichrist.

“I’m worried about the Antichrist”… Peter Thiel. Illustration: Guardian Design/Getty Images

Thiel remarked, “If you want people to hear about something without letting anyone into the room, that’s an effective marketing technique.” This indicates that labeling these lectures as off-the-record can generate considerable intrigue. Secretive ideas tend to attract undue attention due to their perceived exclusivity. What transpires behind closed doors is often more compelling than public occurrences. Have we inadvertently played into Thiel’s strategy by covering his talk?

Our reporting approach was twofold. One article, referenced and linked above, outlines the facts of the meeting. Thiel hosted these lectures and made statements which are extensively quoted. I included the following note with the article: The Guardian publishes meaningful quotes with contextual annotations to keep the public informed regarding influential figures in politics and technology speaking behind closed doors.

This approach allows you to assess what this eccentric billionaire has to say and whether it resonates with you. Once you are aware of his positions, they can be scrutinized. Are you at ease with this individual wielding significant influence over the Vice President in the U.S. or impacting the healthcare system in the U.K.?

In the context of Trump, it is valuable to hear him directly. Labeling the president’s statements as “shocking” or “unprecedented” without quoting them may prevent readers from genuinely grasping the impact of his words and could evoke backlash against news outlets perceived as narrow-minded or paternalistic. Allow the audience to evaluate for themselves. Conversely, reprinting the president’s two-hour address in its entirety isn’t necessarily beneficial. Digesting, structuring, and summarizing information is a critical function of journalism, and reporters need to encompass the entire speech to extract the most relevant portions. We applied these principles from political journalism to Thiel’s lecture.

Our second article on this matter – Peter Thiel’s off-the-record Antichrist Lecture reveals more about him than Armageddon – published alongside the first, took a different perspective. This piece interpreted Thiel’s lecture without extensive quotes, integrating his viewpoints on behalf of the reader to elucidate the significance of his remarks. While his nearly nonsensical interpretations of Revelation and other texts may appear to be the lecture’s primary focus, the essential content reveals more about how a highly influential man perceives his own authority.

In a critique of Thiel’s lecture, Stanford professor Adrian Daub meticulously examined the venture capitalist’s “strange thicket of his own references and interests,” often referred to as “the private world of the autodidact.”

In these winding discussions, it’s evident that Thiel seeks to emulate the mixed-thinking style he admires in philosopher René Girard, whom he encountered at Stanford and has long esteemed. Unfortunately, Thiel often resembles Dan Brown.

The overarching impression of Thiel that emerges from these discussions portrays someone striving to conceal his true essence from his own capabilities. While interpreting a Japanese manga, he conveyed to the audience, “As you might have noticed, my interpretation is… that it is somewhat like the Antichrist that governs the world.” Here stands a man, alongside a few Silicon Valley eccentrics, who would restore a fallen caudillo manifestly unfit for presidential office, using the considerable power of the U.S. government to reshape society and the globe. These are the individuals who exploit your data to finance companies that determine who gets their personal information collected, deported, or subjected to drone strikes, and who support far-right movements seeking to transform the landscape of liberal democracy.

This casts my mind back to a scene in Apocalypse Now where Martin Sheen’s character encounters a platoon and questions who is in charge. “Don’t you?” Peter, don’t you operate the world? If it’s not you, then who?

Read more: Peter Thiel’s Antichrist lecture reveals more about him than Armageddon

Skip past newsletter promotions

US tariffs on China threaten electronics supply chain once more

Panic triggered by AI bubble

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen in Copenhagen last week. Photo: Mads Claus Rasmussen/EPA

Australia’s disapproval of social media has reached Denmark. From my colleague Miranda Bryant: “Danish Prime Minister has unveiled a ban on social media for those under 15, accusing mobile devices and social networks of ‘stealing children’s childhoods.’ Mette Frederiksen announced the initiative on Tuesday during a speech at the opening of the Danish Parliament Folketing, stating: ‘We have unleashed a monster.’ ‘Never before have so many children and adolescents suffered from anxiety and depression,’ added Frederiksen, who aims for the ban to be enacted next year. This rationale echoes Jonathan Haidt’s alarming bestseller, An Anxious Generation, yet I find it neither compelling nor convincing.

In November 2024, Australia enacted a law mandating that social networks implement strict measures to prevent children under 16 from creating accounts. The ban has faced various uncertainties over age verification, yet is still slated to begin on December 10 of this year, displeasing Meta Platforms and others.

The continued existence of this non-binding bill aimed at regulating social media companies has sparked similar legislative initiatives globally. Numerous state governments in the U.S. have introduced laws requiring social networks and other websites to confirm the ages of their users. In many of these states, pornographic websites have been disabled due to the requirements to validate user ages.

Wider TechScape

Source: www.theguardian.com

How the World Works: A Compelling Case for Becoming an Engineer

Microfluids enable chips such as this to simulate biological organs

Wladimir Bulgar/Science Photo Library

How the World Flows

(Oxford University Press, by Albert Folch, now available)

What do rainbows, inkjet printers, human skin, pregnancy tests, and fish gills have in common?

To explore this, you must delve into what Albert Folch, a bioengineering professor at the University of Washington, terms the “liliptian fluid world.” Here, we encounter the fascinating realm of microfluidics, which manages liquids at a miniature scale—from tiny veins in the human body to microchannels etched into lab chips.

Folch’s new book, How the World Flows: Microfluids from Raindrops to COVID Tests, is an astonishing journey through the numerous ways microfluidics influence our world. He credits his neurobiologist wife in the acknowledgments for encouraging him to write about not just microfluidic chips, which have become crucial in chemistry, biology, and medical research, but also about the “device” of microfluidics found in nature.

This allows the book to paint broader pictures, examining both current technologies and historical examples, from handheld DNA sequencing devices to how the tallest trees draw nutrients from the soil. Folch also explains phenomena like capillarity in paper—enabling writing—and discusses the fundamental mechanics of a candle and the workings of an automobile engine.

Each of the 18 chapters is brief and introductory, starting with a personal story about a historical figure, such as inventors, athletes, and chefs, making the material more relatable.

Physics concepts in How the World Flows, like viscosity, surface tension, and gravity, are presented without complex equations but instead through straightforward explanations rooted in real-world contexts.

At times, I’ve yearned for deeper detail regarding the devices and processes Folch discusses. Additionally, the coverage of recent innovations, including chip-sized devices that replicate entire organs, feels somewhat limited compared to the wealth of historical context.

Nevertheless, as I read, I felt I was absorbing a wealth of knowledge about everyday phenomena. Microfluids have become essential in understanding our bipedalism due to sweat, why lakes don’t drain into the Earth, and how all vertebrates can perceive each other’s calls. There’s even a section on the complex engineering found in a mosquito’s proboscis!

Folch’s writing exudes enthusiasm and warmth, though he occasionally slips into the realm of popular science writing that can obscure the overall tone of the book. For instance, many scientific contributions are intertwined with childhood anecdotes, which can shift from relatable to hagiography.

I also found it remarkable that a book could make microfluidics accessible to those without rigorous educational backgrounds.

Despite this, the strength of How the World Flows lies in its diverse cast of characters and its emphasis on the significance of microfluidics in shaping our world.

Above all, this book has the potential to inspire young readers to consider a future in engineering. It also serves as a reminder of the intricate complexity and wonder of any object under a microscope, fueling our curiosity.

Source: www.newscientist.com

Were you able to solve it? Thinking like an engineer in mathematics

Today, we have two questions about fascinating objects that we will share with you along with their answers.

1. Pythagoras’ Cup

Pythagoras, a Greek mathematician and mystic, created a cup with interesting properties:

1) When filled to a certain point, it acts like a regular cup.

2) If you pour above that level, the liquid drains out through a hole in the bottom of the cup.

Can you illustrate how this cup works?

The cup has a simple internal mechanism with no moving parts. It’s a clever metaphor for moderation in life – overflow even slightly, and you lose it all.

Solution:




Cross-section of a Pythagorean cup filled with water. At B, the liquid in the cup can be drunk, but at C, the liquid flows down due to the siphon effect. Illustration: Nevit Dilmen

The cup has a central chamber that fills from the bottom, and when it overflows, a siphon is formed to empty the water. This mechanism is similar to flushing toilets and fabric softener trays in washing machines.

2. A Backwards Old Car

Design a simple mechanism for a toy car with four wheels that moves forward when a string is pulled backward.

Solution:

To achieve this, you need a pulley system as shown in the video. A string is wrapped around a shaft, and when it unwinds, it moves a belt connected to the wheel axle.

We hope you enjoyed today’s puzzles, and we’ll be back in 2 weeks!

Since 2015, we’ve been sharing puzzles every other Monday. If you have any suggestions, feel free to email us!

Source: www.theguardian.com

Palestinian-American engineer claims Meta fired him due to his content related to Gaza

A former Meta engineer filed a lawsuit on Tuesday accusing the company of discriminatory practices in handling content related to the Gaza war. He claimed that he was fired by Meta for trying to fix a bug that was throttling Palestinian Instagram posts.

Feras Hamad, a Palestinian-American engineer on Meta’s machine learning team since 2021, sued the social media giant in California, alleging discrimination and wrongful termination over his firing in February.

Hamad accused Meta of bias against Palestinians, citing the removal of internal communications mentioning deaths of Gaza Strip relatives and investigations into the use of a Palestinian flag emoji.

The lawsuit alleged the company did not investigate employees posting Israeli or Ukrainian flag emojis in similar situations. Meta did not immediately respond to the allegations.

These allegations align with ongoing criticism from human rights groups about Meta’s moderation of Israel-Palestine content on its platform, including an external review in 2021.

Since last year’s conflict outbreak, Meta has faced accusations of suppressing support for Palestinians. The conflict erupted in Gaza in October after Hamas attacks, resulting in casualties and a humanitarian crisis.

Earlier this year, about 200 Meta employees raised similar concerns in a letter to CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other leaders.

Hamad’s firing seems linked to a December incident involving a troubleshooting procedure at Meta. He raised concerns about restrictions affecting Palestinian content on Instagram.

The lawsuit mentioned a case where a video by a Palestinian photojournalist was wrongly classified as explicit, sparking further issues.

Skip Newsletter Promotions

Hamad faced conflicting instructions on resolving the SEV issues, leading to his investigation and subsequent termination by Meta.

He claimed Meta cited a rule violation related to a photojournalist, but he denied any personal connection to the individual.

Source: www.theguardian.com