AWS and AI: Aw, Of Course
January 21, 2025
Mat Garman Interview Reveals AWS Perspective on AI
It should be no surprise that AWS is going all in on Artificial Intelligence. Will Amazon become an AI winner? Sure, if it keeps those managing the company’s third-party reseller program away from AWS. Nilay Patel, The Verge‘s Editor-in Chief, interviewed AWS head Matt Garmon. He explains “Why CEO Matt Garman Is Willing to Bet AWS on AI.” Patel writes:
“Matt has a really interesting perspective for that kind of conversation since he’s been at AWS for 20 years — he started at Amazon as an intern and was AWS’s original product manager. He’s now the third CEO in just five years, and I really wanted to understand his broad view of both AWS and where it sits inside an industry that he had a pivotal role in creating. … Matt’s perspective on AI as a technology and a business is refreshingly distinct from his peers, including those more incentivized to hype up the capabilities of AI models and chatbots. I really pushed Matt about Sam Altman’s claim that we’re close to AGI and on the precipice of machines that can do tasks any human could do. I also wanted to know when any of this is going to start returning — or even justifying — the tens of billions of dollars of investments going into it. His answers on both subjects were pretty candid, and it’s clear Matt and Amazon are far more focused on how AI technology turns into real products and services that customers want to use and less about what Matt calls ‘puffery in the press.'”
What a noble stance within a sea of AI hype. The interview touches on topics like AWS’ domination of streaming delivery, its partnerships with telco companies, and problems of scale as it continues to balloon. Garmon also compares the shift to AI to the shift from typewriters to computers. See the write-up for more of their conversation.
Cynthia Murrell, January 21, 2025
The AI Profit and Cost Race: Drivers, Get Your Checkbooks Out
January 15, 2025
A dinobaby-crafted post. I confess. I used smart software to create the heart wrenching scene of a farmer facing a tough 2025.
Microsoft appears ready to spend $80 billion “on AI-enabled data centers” by December 31, 2025. Half of the money will go to US facilities, and the other half, other nation states. I learned this information from a US cable news outfit’s article “Microsoft Expects to Spend $80 Billion on AI-Enabled Data Centers in Fiscal 2025.” Is Microsoft tossing out numbers as part of a marketing plan to trigger the lustrous Google, or is Microsoft making clear that it is going whole hog for smart software despite the worries of investors that an AI revenue drought persists? My thought is that Microsoft likes to destabilize the McKinsey-type thinking at Google, wait for the online advertising giant to deliver another fabulous Sundar & Prabhakar Comedy Tour, and then continue plodding forward.
The write up reports:
Several top-tier technology companies are rushing to spend billions on Nvidia graphics processing units for training and running AI models. The fast spread of OpenAI’s ChatGPT assistant, which launched in late 2022, kicked off the AI race for companies to deliver their own generative AI capabilities. Having invested more than $13 billion in OpenAI, Microsoft provides cloud infrastructure to the startup and has incorporated its models into Windows, Teams and other products.
Yep, Google-centric marketing.
Thanks, You.com. Good enough.
But if Microsoft does spend $80 billion, how will the company convert those costs into a profit geyser? That’s a good question. Microsoft appears to be cooperating with discounts for its mainstream consumer software. I saw advertisements offering Windows 11 Professional for $25. Other deep discounts can be found for Office 365, Visio, and even the bread-and-butter sales pitch PowerPoint application.
Tweaking Google is one thing. Dealing with cost competition is another.
I noted that the South China Morning Post’s article “Alibaba Ties Up with Lee Kai-fu’s Unicorn As China’s AI Sector Consolidates.” Tucked into that rah rah write up was this statement:
The cooperation between two of China’s top AI players comes as price wars continue in the domestic market, forcing companies to further slash prices or seek partnerships with former foes. Alibaba Cloud said on Tuesday it would reduce the fees for using its visual reasoning AI model by up to 85 per cent, the third time it had marked down the prices of its AI services in the past year. That came after TikTok parent ByteDance last month cut the price of its visual model to 0.003 yuan (US$0.0004) per thousand token uses, about 85 per cent lower than the industry average.
The message is clear. The same tactic that China’s electric vehicle manufacturers are using will be applied to smart software. The idea is that people will buy good enough products and services if the price is attractive. Bean counters intuitively know that a competitor that reduces prices and delivers an acceptable product can gain market share. The companies unable to compete on price face rising costs and may be forced to cut their prices, thus risking financial collapse.
For a multi-national company, the cost of Chinese smart software may be sufficiently good to attract business. Some companies which operate under US sanctions and controls of one type or another may be faced with losing some significant markets. Examples include Brazil, India, Middle Eastern nations, and others. That means that a price war can poke holes in the financial predictions which outfits like Microsoft are basing some business decisions.
What’s interesting is that this smart software tactic apparently operating in China fits in with other efforts to undermine some US methods of dominating the world’s financial system. I have no illusions about the maturity of the AI software. I am, however, realistic about the impact of spending significant sums with the fervent belief that a golden goose will land on the front lawn of Microsoft’s headquarters. I am okay with talking about AI in order to wind up Google. I am a bit skeptical about hosing $80 billion into data centers. These puppies gobble up power, which is going to get expensive quickly if demand continues to blast past the power generation industry’s projections. An economic downturn in 2025 will not help ameliorate the situation. Toss in regional wars and social turmoil and what does one get?
Risk. Welcome to 2025.
Stephen E Arnold, January 15, 2025
AI Search Engine from Alibaba Grows Apace
January 15, 2025
Prepared by a still-alive dinobaby.
The Deepseek red herring has been dragged across the path of US AI innovators. A flurry of technology services wrote about Deepseek’s ability to give US smart software companies a bit of an open source challenge. The hook, however, was not just the efficacy of the approach. The killer message was, “Better, faster, and cheaper.” Yep, cheaper, the concept which raises questions about certain US outfits burning cash in units of a one billion dollars with every clock tick.
A number of friendly and lovable deer are eating the plants in Uncle Sam’s garden. How many of these are living in the woods looking for a market to consume? Thanks OpenAI, good enough.
Now Alibaba is coming for AI search. The Chinese company crows on PR Newswire, "Alibaba’s Accio AI Search Engine Hits 500,000 SME User Milestone." Sounds like a great solution for US businesses doing work for the government. The press release reveals:
"Alibaba International proudly announces that its artificial intelligence (AI)-powered business-to-business (B2B) search engine for product sourcing, Accio, has reached a significant milestone since its launch in November 2024, currently boasting over 500,000 small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) users. … During the peak global e-commerce sales seasons in November and December, more than 50,000 SMEs worldwide have actively used Accio to source inspirations for Black Friday and Christmas inventory stocking. User feedback shows that the search engine helped them achieve this efficiently. Accio now holds a net promoter score (NPS) exceeding 50[1], indicating a high level of customer satisfaction. On December 13, 2024, the dynamic search engine was also named ‘Product of the Day’ on Product Hunt, a site that curates new products in tech, further cementing its status as an indispensable tool for SME buyers worldwide."
Well, good for them. And, presumably, for China ‘s information gathering program. Founded in 1999, Alibaba Group is based in Hangzhou, Zhejiang. One can ask many questions about Alibaba, including ones related to the company’s interaction with Chinese government officials. When a couple of deer are eating one’s garden vegetables, a good question to ask is, “How many of these adorable creatures live in the woods?” One does not have to be Natty Bumpo to know that the answer is, “There are more where those came from.”
Cynthia Murrell, January 15, 2025
Agentic Workflows and the Dust Up Between Microsoft and Salesforce
January 14, 2025
Prepared by a still-alive dinobaby.
The Register, a UK online publication, does a good job of presenting newsworthy events with a touch of humor. Today I spotted a new type of information in the form of an explainer plus management analysis. Plus the lingo and organization suggest a human did all or most of the work required to crank out a very good article called “In AI Agent Push, Microsoft Re-Orgs to Create CoreAI – Platform and Tools Team.”
I want to highlight the explainer part of the article. The focus is on the notion of agentic; specifically:
agentic applications with memory, entitlements, and action space that will inherit powerful model capabilities. And we will adapt these capabilities for enhanced performance and safety across roles, business processes, and industry domains. Further, how we build, deploy, and maintain code for these AI applications is also fundamentally changing and becoming agentic.
These words are attributed to Microsoft’s top dog Satya Nadella, but they sound as if one of the highly paid wordsmiths laboring for the capable Softies. Nevertheless, the idea is important. In order to achieve the agentic pinnacle, Microsoft has to reorganize. Whoever can figure out how to make agentic applications work across different vendors’ solutions will be able to make money. That’s the basic idea: Smart software is going to create a new big thing for enterprise software and probably some consumers.
The write up explains:
It’s arguably just plain old software talking to plain old software, which would be nothing new. The new angle here, though, is that it’s driven mainly by, shall we say, imaginative neural networks and models making decisions, rather than algorithms following entirely deterministic routes. Which is still software working with software. Nadella thinks building artificially intelligent agentic apps and workflows needs “a new AI-first app stack — one with new UI/UX patterns, runtimes to build with agents, orchestrate multiple agents, and a reimagined management and observability layer.”
To win the land in this new territory, Microsoft must have a Core AI team. Google and Salesforce presumably have this type of set up. Microsoft has to step up its AI efforts. The Register points out:
Nadella noted that “our internal organizational boundaries are meaningless to both our customers and to our competitors”. That’s an odd observation given Microsoft published his letter, which concludes with this observation: “Our success in this next phase will be determined by having the best AI platform, tools, and infrastructure. We have a lot of work to do and a tremendous opportunity ahead, and together, I’m looking forward to building what comes next.”
Here’s what I found interesting:
- Agentic is the next big thing in smart software. Essentially smart software that does one thing is useful. Orchestrating agents to do a complex process is the future. The software decides. Everything works well — at least, that’s the assumption.
- Microsoft, like Google, is now in a Code Yellow or Code Red mode. The company feels the heat from Salesforce. My hunch is that Microsoft knows that add ins like Ghostwriter for Microsoft Office is more useful than Microsoft’s own Copilot for many users. If the same boiled fish appears on the enterprise menu, Microsoft is in a world of hurt from Salesforce and probably a lot of other outfits.
- The re-org parallels the disorder that surfaced at Google when it fixed up its smart software operation or tried to deal with the clash of the wizards in that estimable company. Pushing boxes around on an organization chart is honorable work, but that management method may not deliver the agentic integration some people want.
The conclusion I drew from The Register’s article is that the big AI push and the big players’ need to pop up a conceptual level in smart software is perceived as urgent. Costs? No problem. Hallucination? No problem. Hardware availability? No problem. Software? No problem. A re-organization is obvious and easy. No problem.
Stephen E Arnold, January 14, 2025
Apple and Some Withering Fruit: Is the Orchard on Fire?
January 14, 2025
A dinobaby-crafted post. I confess. I used smart software to create the heart wrenching scene of a farmer facing a tough 2025.
Apple is a technology giant, a star in the universe of bytes. At the starter’s gun for 2025, Apple may have some work to do. For example, I read “Apple’s China Troubles Mount as Foreign Phone Sales Sink for 4th Month.” (For now, this is a trust outfit story, but a few months down the road the information may originate from the “real” news powerhouse Gannet. Imagine that.) The “trusted” outfit Reuters stated:
Apple, the dominant foreign smartphone maker in China, faces a slowing economy and competition from domestic rivals, such as Huawei…. Apple briefly fell out of China’s top five smartphone vendors in the second quarter of 2024 before recovering in the third quarter. The U.S. company’s smartphone sales in China still slipped 0.3% during the third quarter from a year earlier, while Huawei’s sales rose 42%, according to research firm IDC.
I think this means that Apple is losing share in what may have been a very juicy market. Can it get this fertile revenue field producing in-demand Fuji Apples to market? With a new US administration coming down the information highway, it is possible that the iPhone’s pop up fruit stand could be blown off the side of the main road.
An apple farmer grasps the problem fruit blight poses. Thanks, You.com you produced okay fruit blight when ChatGPT told me that an orchard with fruit blight was against is guidelines. Helpful, right?
Another issue Apple faces in a different orchard regards privacy. “Apple to Pay $95 Million to Settle Siri Privacy Lawsuit” reports:
Apple agreed to pay $95 million in cash to settle a proposed class action lawsuit claiming that its voice-activated Siri assistant violated users’ privacy…. Mobile device owners complained that Apple routinely recorded their private conversations after they activated Siri unintentionally, and disclosed these conversations to third parties such as advertisers.
Yeah, what about those privacy protections? What about those endless “Log in to your Facetime” when our devices don’t use Facetime. Hey, that is just Apple being so darned concerned about privacy. Will Apple pay or will it appeal? I won’t trouble you with my answer. Legal eagles love these fertile fields.
I don’t want to overlook the Apple AI. Yahoo recycled a story from Digital Intelligence called “The Good and Bad of Apple Intelligence after Using It on My iPhone for Months.” The Yahoo version of the story said:
I was excited to check out more Apple Intelligence features when I got the iOS 18.2 update on my iPhone 16 Pro. But aside from what I’ve already mentioned, the rest isn’t as exciting. I already hate AI art in general, so I wasn’t too thrilled about Image Playground. However, since it’s a new feature, I had to try it at least once. I tried to get Apple Intelligence to generate an AI image of me, in various scenarios, to perhaps share on social media. But every result I got did not look good to me, and I felt it had no actual resemblance to my image. It kept giving me odd-looking teeth in my smiles, hair that looked nothing like what I had, and other imperfections. I wasn’t expecting a perfect picture, but I was hoping I would get something that would be decent enough to share online — dozens of tries, and I wasn’t happy with any of them. I suppose my appearance doesn’t work with Apple’s AI art style? Whatever the reason is, my experience with it hasn’t been positive.
Yep, bad teeth. Perhaps the person has eaten too many apples?
Looking at these three allegedly accurate news stories what do I hypothesize about Apple in 2025:
- Apple will become increasingly desperate to generate revenue. Let’s face it the multi-thousand dollar Vision Pro headset and virtual Apple TV may fill the Chinese iPhone sales hole.
- Apple simply does what it wants to do with regard to privacy. From automatic iPhone reboots to smarmy talk about accidentally sucking down user data, the company cannot be trusted in 2025 in my opinion.
- Apple’s innovation is stalled. One of my colleagues told me Apple rolled out two dozen “new” products in 2025. I must confess that I cannot name one of them. The fruitarian seemed to be able to get my attention with “one more thing.” Today’s Apple has some discoloration.
Net net: The orchard needs a more skilled agrarian, fertilizer, and some luck with the business climate. Failing that, another bad crop may be ahead.
Stephen E Arnold, January 14, 2025
Some AI Wisdom: Is There a T Shirt?
January 14, 2025
Prepared by a still-alive dinobaby.
I was catching up with newsfeeds and busy filtering the human output from the smart software spam-arator. I spotted “The Serious Science of Trolling LLMs,” published in the summer of 2024. The article explains that value can be derived from testing large language models like ChatGPT, Gemini, and others with prompts to force the software to generate something really stupid, off base, incorrect, or goofy. I zipped through the write up and found it interesting. Then I came upon this passage:
the LLM business is to some extent predicated on deception; we are not supposed to know where the magic ends and where cheap tricks begin. The vendors’ hope is that with time, we will reach full human-LLM parity; and until then, it’s OK to fudge it a bit. From this perspective, the viral examples that make it patently clear that the models don’t reason like humans are not just PR annoyances; they are a threat to product strategy.
Several observations:
- Progress from my point of view with smart software seems to have slowed. The reason may be that free and low cost services cannot affords to provide the functionality they did before someone figured out the cost per query. The bean counters spoke and “quality” went out the window.
- The gap between what the marketers say and what the systems do is getting wider. Sorry, AI wizards, the systems typically fail to produce an output satisfactory for my purposes on the first try. Multiple prompts are required. Again a cost cutting move in my opinion.
- Made up information or dead wrong information is becoming more evident. My hunch is that the consequence of ingesting content produced by AI is degrading the value of the models originally trained on human generated content. I think this is called garbage in — garbage out.
Net net: Which of the deep pocket people will be the first to step back from smart software built upon systems that consume billions of dollars the way my French bulldog eats doggie treats? The Chinese system Deepseek’s marketing essentially says, “Yo, we built this LLM at a fraction of the cost of the spendthrifts at Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI. Are the Chinese AI wizards dragging a red herring around the AI forest?
To go back to the Lcamtuf essay, “it’s OK to fudge a bit.” Nope, it is mandatory to fudge a lot.
Stephen E Arnold, January 14, 2025
Super Humans Share Super Thoughts about Free Speech
January 13, 2025
Prepared by a still-alive dinobaby.
The Marvel comix have come to life. “Elon Musk Responds As Telegram CEO Makes Fun of Facebook Parent Meta Over Fact Checking” reports
Elon Musk responded to a comment from Telegram CEO Pavel Durov, who made a playful jab at Meta over its recent decision to end fact checking on Facebook and Instagram. Durov, posted about the shut down of Meta’s fact checking program on X (formerly known as Twitter) saying that Telegram’s commitment to freedom of speech does not depend on the US Electoral cycle.
The interaction among three modern Marvel heroes is interesting. Only Mark Zuckerberg, the founder and controlling force at Facebook (now Meta) is producing children with a spouse. Messrs. Musk and Durov are engaged in spawning children — presumably super comix characters — with multiple partners and operating as if each ruled a country. Mr. Musk has fathered a number of children. Mr. Durov allegedly has more than 100 children. The idea uniting these two larger-than-life characters is that they are super humans. Mr. Zuckerberg has a different approach, guided more by political expediency than a desire to churn out numerous baby Zucks.
Technology super heroes head toward a meeting of the United Nations to explain how the world will be working with their organizations. Thanks, Copilot. Good enough.
The article includes this statement from Mr. Durov:
I’m proud that Telegram has supported freedom of speech long before it became politically safe to dop so. Our values don’t depend on US electoral cycles, said Durov in a post shared on X.
This is quite a statement. Mr. Durov blocked messages from the Ukrainian government to Russian users of Telegram. After being snared in the French judicial system, Mr. Durov has demonstrated a desire to cooperate with law enforcement. Information about Telegram users has been provided to law enforcement. Mr. Durov is confined to France as his lawyers work to secure his release. Mr. Durov has been learning more about French procedures and bureaucracy since August 2024. The wheels of justice do turn in France, probably less rapidly than the super human Pavel Durov wishes.
After Mr. Durov shared his observation about the Zuck’s willingness to embrace free speech on Twitter (now x.com), the super hero Elon Musk chose to respond. Taking time from posts designed to roil the political waters in Britain, Mr. Musk offered an ironic “Good for you” as a comment about Mr. Durov’s quip about the Zuck.
The question is, “Do these larger-than-life characters with significant personal fortunes and influential social media soap boxes support free speech?” The answer is unclear. From my vantage point in rural Kentucky, I perceive public relations or marketing output from these three individuals. My take is that Mr. Durov talks about free speech as he appears to cooperate with French law enforcement and possibly a nation-state like Russia. Mr. Musk has been characterized by some in the US as “President Musk.” The handle reflects Mr. Musk’s apparent influence on some of the policies of the incoming administration. Mr. Zuckerberg has been quick to contribute money to a recently elected candidate and even faster on the draw when it comes to dumping much of the expensive overhead of fact checking social media content.
The Times of India article is more about the global ambitions of three company leaders. Free speech could be a convenient way to continue to generate business, retain influence over information framing, and reinforce their roles as the the 2025 incarnations of Spider-Man, Iron Man, and Hulk. After decades of inattention by regulators, the new super heroes may not be engaged in saving or preserving anything except their power and influence and cash flows.
Stephen E Arnold, January 13, 2025
Oh, Oh! Silicon Valley Hype Minimizes Risk. Who Knew?
January 10, 2025
This is an official dinobaby post. No smart software involved in this blog post.
I read “Silicon Valley Stifled the AI Doom Movement in 2024.” I must admit I was surprised that one of the cheerleaders for Silicon Valley is disclosing something absolutely no one knew. I mean unregulated monopolies, the “Puff the Magic Dragon” strafing teens, and the vulture capitalists slavering over the corpses of once thriving small and mid sized businesses. Hey, I thought that “progress” myth was real. I thought technology only makes life better. Now I read that “Silicon Valley” wanted only good news about smart software. Keep in mind that this is software which outputs hallucinations, makes decisions about medical care for people, and monitors the clicks and location of everyone with a mobile device or a geotracker.
The write up reminded me that ace entrepreneur / venture professional Marc Andreessen said:
“The era of Artificial Intelligence is here, and boy are people freaking out. Fortunately, I am here to bring the good news: AI will not destroy the world, and in fact may save it,” said Andreessen in the essay. In his conclusion, Andreessen gave a convenient solution to our AI fears: move fast and break things – basically the same ideology that has defined every other 21st century technology (and their attendant problems). He argued that Big Tech companies and startups should be allowed to build AI as fast and aggressively as possible, with few to no regulatory barriers. This would ensure AI does not fall into the hands of a few powerful companies or governments, and would allow America to compete effectively with China, he said.
What publications touted Mr. Andreessen’s vision? Answer: Lots.
Regulate smart software? Nope. From Connecticut’s effort to the US government, smart software regulation went nowhere. The reasons included, in my opinion:
- A chance to make a buck, well, lots of bucks
- Opportunities to foist “smart software” plus its inherent ability to make up stuff on corporate sheep
- A desire to reinvent “dumb” processes like figuring out how to push buttons to create addiction to online gambling, reduce costs by eliminating inefficient humans, and using stupid weapons.
Where are we now? A pillar of the Silicon Valley media ecosystem writes about the possible manipulation of information to make smart software into a Care Bear. Cuddly. Harmless. Squeezable. Yummy too.
The write up concludes without one hint of the contrast between the AI hype and the viewpoints of people who think that the technology of AI is immature but fumbling forward to stick its baby finger in a wall socket. I noted this concluding statement in the write up:
Calling AI “tremendously safe” and attempts to regulate it “dumb” is something of an oversimplification. For example, Character.AI – a startup a16z has invested in – is currently being sued and investigated over child safety concerns. In one active lawsuit, a 14-year-old Florida boy killed himself after allegedly confiding his suicidal thoughts to a Character.AI chatbot that he had romantic and sexual chats with. This case shows how our society has to prepare for new types of risks around AI that may have sounded ridiculous just a few years ago. There are more bills floating around that address long-term AI risk – including one just introduced at the federal level by Senator Mitt Romney. But now, it seems AI doomers will be fighting an uphill battle in 2025.
But don’t worry. Open source AI provides a level playing field for [a] adversaries of the US, [b] bad actors who use smart software to compromise Swiss cheese systems, and [c] manipulate people on a grand scale. Will the “Silicon Valley” media give equal time to those who don’t see technology as a benign or net positive? Are you kidding? Oh, aren’t those smart drones with kinetic devices just fantastic?
Stephen E Arnold, January 10, 2025
Social Media Change: Stop the Decay! Ouch! Stop!
January 10, 2025
This is an official dinobaby post. No smart software involved in this blog post.
I learned a new term: Platform Decay. I associated the phrase with Tooth Decay.
The Techspot article “Meta Wants to Fill Its Social Platforms with AI-Generated Bots” asserts:
Meta is actively working to transform its social media platforms into spaces where AI bots interact with each other. Over the next few years, the company formerly known as Facebook aims to integrate AI technology to boost “engagement” with its three billion real, human users. This could either be a revolution or just another disastrously misguided idea, like the previously dismissed “metaverse” VR ecosystem.
I thought Facebook was about people posting words and text on Instagram and shooting “secure” messages to and from via WhatsApp. Facebook is a service I perceive as supporting a platform for ecommerce excitement and allowing grandparents to see the grandchildren.
Now I am updated. The write up explains:
Meta is currently developing several AI products, including a service designed to help users create AI bots on Instagram and Facebook. These bots could clone users’ personalities and interact with other (non-bot) users on the network. The company hopes to attract younger audiences, who are apparently going crazy over AI these days.
I learned that there is a downside to this bot-topia; specifically:
Critics of this AI-filled dystopia warn about the risks related to the “weaponization” of AI-generated content. Becky Owen, innovation officer at creative agency Billion Dollar Boy and former head of Meta’s creator team, said fake AI accounts could easily be used to amplify false narratives if robust safeguards are not enforced on social media.
What’s interesting to me is that one of Meta / Zuckbook’s competitors is not going in this direction. Telegram is chasing crypto. To be fair, the Zuck is not under the control of a nation state like Pavel Durov. He enjoys the ministrations of the French judiciary. His minions are cutting deals, integrating online gambling services like CryptoCasino.com, and training developers in Vancouver and other major cities to build for the Telegram platform. (I think of Telegram as the framework for building super apps for online crime, but I am a dinobaby and hopelessly out of step with social media).
Which strategy will win in 2025? Will the Zuck get richer and dominate the social bot scene and attract millions more new users? Will Telegram grow beyond one billion users and help undermine the US financial system while delivering crypto alternatives for traditional banking services? I don’t know.
I am not sure the phrase “platform decay” captures what the Zuck is doing. I know that Telegram is not exactly decaying while its founder is confined to France, good food, and French red tape.
I think the article is trying to explain that the good old Facebook is changing. What’s decaying are the features and digital hooks that made the Zuck a big dog.
Net net: These platforms are making an attempt to adapt and avoid the MySpace problem: No users. Get real, Techspot. Longing for the past is a poor use of one’s time. Adapt or go away — That’s this dinobaby’s advice.
Stephen E Arnold, January 10, 2025
Meta and Zuck Make Free Speech News
January 9, 2025
Techmeme makes clear that Meta and its charming leader are important and “real” news. I checked the splash page of the online news service and learned:
- Zuckerberg is “pretending” about free speech. You can read that legal / journalistic explanation in TechDirt
- Mastodon, another social media service, will filter some Meta content. (Isn’t that censorship?) Read that TechCrunch story here.
- The truth outfit — Thomson Reuters — reports that the European Union says, “Hey, we don’t institutionalize censorship!” Top up your info tank at this link.
- The paywalled orange newspaper asserts that in 2023 Meta did the “give me money” approach to business, letting some “top advertisers” call ad placement shots. The FT discloses what may be non-public information too!
- The Bezos journalistic enterprise, another for-fee operation which may have some staff issues, points out that the US of A and Europe may not see eye-to-eye when it comes to filtering content.
Here’s what the Zuck-dense splash page looked like at 545 am on January 9, 2025:
Several observations:
- The message about what is permissible and what is not permissible across the Zuckerberg properties is not clear
- The gestalt of the cited stories is that Meta is responding to and taking advantage of an opportunity to define “free speech” so it conforms with the expectations of certain person of influence in the United States
- The decisions illustrate a certain opportunism with benefits in the management think tank at the Zuck operational headquarters: Reduce some costs, generate buzz, and dump the baggage of trying to establish and maintain an editorial policies that get in the way of generating cash or “free” money.
Net net: The difference between Meta’s approach to innovation to that of an organization like Telegram becomes increasingly clear. Focusing on Meta could result in missing important Telegram signals.
Stephen E Arnold, January 9, 2025
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
