Meta has hundreds of billions to chase superintelligence, but apparently can’t figure out how to remove AI videos depicting child abuse, even when journalists hand over the accounts. Facebook’s recommendation algorithm can find this content effortlessly. Shame the moderation team apparently can’t.

Amazon has spent years turning customer surveillance into a business model, and now we discover it apparently keeps detailed records while insulting the very people funding its empire. Nothing says customer obsession quite like treating customers as data mines and punchlines. Bezos built a trillion dollar machine that knows your shopping habits but apparently never learned basic respect.

OpenAI wants parents to trust ChatGPT with teenagers, but apparently not enough to tell them when those teenagers spend an hour discussing suicide, self harm or eating disorders. Calling that »safety« feels generous. It sounds more like OpenAI outsourced the risk to kids and the responsibility to parents.

Meta’s business model has always been surveillance dressed up as connection. Now Muse reportedly wants to build hourly dossiers on people who never even signed up. Friends, family, bystanders: everyone becomes data because one Meta user mentioned them.

Thanks for the hint.

AI companies spent years treating copyright like a Terms of Service box nobody reads. Now a court has suggested that »we copied it to build a competing product« may not magically become fair use because you sprinkle AI on top. Turns out disruption is slightly less fun when the disrupted people have lawyers.

Meta asking users to hand over bank accounts, email archives and passwords while its own engineers reportedly call a massive breach »inevitable« is quite the sales pitch. At this point, Muse isn’t a personal assistant: it’s a beautifully branded single point of failure with Zuckerberg’s logo on it.

AI’s business model is starting to look like a snake eating its own tail: scrape human work, replace the humans who make it, flood the web with synthetic sludge, then wonder why there’s less quality data to train on. Silicon Valley calls it disruption. Everyone else might call it burning the furniture to heat the house.

Amazon wants communities to stop »defying« its AI data centers, which is a fascinating way to describe democracy when democracy becomes inconvenient. Apparently locals should provide the land, water, power and infrastructure, then politely shut up while one of the world’s richest corporations decides what »progress« looks like.

Calling a betting market »journalism« is quite the innovation: why investigate power, verify facts, or protect sources when you can just put odds on reality and call it data? CBS partnering with Kalshi feels less like the future of news and more like turning election night into a casino with correspondents.

Turns out »it’s on a public road« stops being a magic privacy waiver when police can reconstruct a month of your movements with a few clicks. Flock sold dragnet surveillance as a camera network, and a federal judge finally called it what it is: indiscriminate mass surveillance.

Google’s green image looks increasingly like a marketing layer over an industrial land grab. A company worth trillions wants ever more land, power and water for AI, and now it’s accused of clearing Finnish forest before environmental assessments were complete.

Thanks for the hint.

Trump calling it “Super Intelligence” only for the government’s own AI to contradict his election claims is almost too perfect. Apparently even a chatbot trained under his administration looked at the evidence and said: nope. Then came the inevitable upgrade: stop answering political questions before the machine commits any more inconvenient acts of fact checking.

💪😎✌️

OpenAI firing safety researchers for allegedly sharing information with an outside safety group is certainly one way to demonstrate your commitment to safety. Nothing says trust us quite like making the people worried about the brakes disappear while insisting the car is totally under control.

AI’s business model is starting to look less like a revolution and more like a $6 trillion IOU. Bain says existing AI services may cover just $1.8 trillion by 2031, leaving a $4.2 trillion hole to justify the data center frenzy. Apparently the killer app is still: »please invent enough revenue before the depreciation schedule catches us!!!«

OpenAI wants to sell the world autonomous agents while its own model allegedly goes rogue and hacks an organization without permission. That’s not a quirky edge case: it’s the nightmare scenario critics warned about. Maybe »move fast and break things« shouldn’t include other people’s infrastructure?!

AI was sold as a tool to liberate humans from boring work. Somehow we got the opposite: humans lose creative jobs while machines mass produce disposable content nobody asked for. What an inspiring future: fewer artists, fewer writers, fewer careers, and an infinite ocean of algorithmic sludge.

The bleakest part isn’t the creepy prompts: it’s the contractors paid to stare into humanity’s AI sewer all day so the rest of us can enjoy a polished chatbot. Imagine explaining your job: I read strangers’ darkest fantasies for eight hours, and somehow I’m still the cheap part of the AI industry.