Tag Archives: Artificial Intelligence

January 3, 2026 · 11:42

The wannabe influencer?

That is my question at present. In comes a person with the ludicrous title of “Al & loT Expert”. You see, what makes it hilarious was the post I saw ‘fly’ by. He starts off with “OpenAl’s first hardware is… a pen?? (If they don’t call it O-Pen Al they have officially lost the Al race).” So that is what makes him an expert? I am no expert on any of that but I am highly knowledgable on matters including IoT. In some cases and in some places I am known as a guru. I have my niche settings. But what gets to me is that (although I am no OpenAI fan) OpenAI has ‘Yes’ lost the current battle against Google and its Gemini 3, which the media kept from you for weeks. Although I personally never used it, but people who did and are ‘regarded’ as captains of industry think so. So, as I see it, OpenAI lost a battle, but that doesn’t mean the war is over. You see, the war on AI (when it finally comes here) is in no means settled at present. And those who understand that battle know this and mostly unmentioned is the play that is left with IBM because they currently have the inside track, not Oracle, not Snowflake and definitely not Google, Microsoft or Amazon. You see, AI is more then what is out there today. It will rely on larger technological settings. They all have quantum systems, but who is the most advanced in Shallow Circuits? IBM was setting that stage in advanced settings in 2017 all whilst OpenAI hardly barely at that point. IBM was on the ball and the actual winner of what now is referred to as True AI, which is ACTUAL AI will need two additional settings the first is Shallow Circuits, a setting where only IBM is a straight forward contender. With that I say I have no idea where Google stands. And in that the next thing is that a trinary operating system will be required and as far as I know there is no current winner at present. I reckon that both Google and IBM have dabbled in this, but I do not know where they stand and when this comes to pass the winner will work with Oracle to make the connections in a much needed combined effort, because they all agree that Oracle is the one player that can make it work. Snowflake as well, but I have no idea where they stand in all this. What we currently have are DML/LLM solutions that are at times clever and functioning, but in too limited a setting. I call this Near Intelligent Parsing (or NIP), but it is not AI, even thought they all have the marketing calling it so. 

What we have now is a mere shadow of what Alan Turing envisioned half a century ago and leave it to sales teams to wriggle the straw until it bleed revenue, but as the class cases will explode in this year, they are left to ‘apologetically assume the position of miscommunication’, at least that is how I see it. So was this person a wannabe influencer and taking the LinkedIn cloud by humor? 

So this might optionally have been the pen that OpenAI is flaunting, but as I see it, this is their step into audio, which they advertised and having a pen recorder is a pretty contraption (aka gizmo, doohickey, or thingamajig) that propels the setting of OpenAI forward. And I reckon that within a month all wannabe AI experts want one. Audio is the next stage that require harnessing, so OpenAI is not out of the race, they merely got bruised in a race where they had the upper hand for three years. 

Perhaps they get the upper hand in other direction making them overall winner, but that is a mere consideration of option, especially when we realise the inside track that IBM has and where is that in his assessment? So I am not proclaiming the identity of that person, it lacks class and makes him a target. He made himself a target and I do not need to add to his current confusion. 

What is a stage is that there is a chance that OpenAI is moving to capture the stage of Audio enhanced NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing) making them first again and Google will need to play catchup, optionally Oracle (Snowflake too) will now have to adjust their tracks to get audio embedded in their database settings and whilst we do not know where IBM goes, we do know they have the inside track, they might rely on Oracle/Snowflake solving that problem for them and as I am a Snowflake person, I still believe that Oracle is likely to win this war for the mere knowledge that they have been on these tracks long before Snowflake got involved, so they have years and traction in their stride. This is not a certainty, but a presumed advantage. 

That is as good as I can give it to you and I have written other stories on the need for a Trinary operating system. I last did that in ‘Is it a public service’ which I wrote last November (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/11/16/is-it-a-public-service/) so this isn’t coming out of the left field, it was there for almost two months. Oh and to be certain that you do not mistake me for that wannabe influencer. I am in no way an ‘expert’ on AI, I merely have been dabbling in IT and data since 1981. So I have the mileage here, have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

January 2, 2026 · 19:38

Cracking on the down

That is at times the setting, but it is not always clear. As I personally see it, it has nearly always been clear as glass, but the ‘powered that could be’ doesn’t want to hand over any of the greed it can get, and as a result people get scammed. So I have a few issues with the Reuters article (at https://www.reuters.com/investigations/meta-created-playbook-fend-off-pressure-crack-down-scammers-documents-show-2025-12-31/) and as we read its headline ‘Meta created ‘playbook’ to fend off pressure to crack down on scammers, documents show’ we might think that this giant (aka Meta) is the cause of it all, but that isn’t exactly true. To see this we need to look back the last half century, slightly before Meta (then known as Facebook) was born. So as we are given “As regulators press Meta to crack down on rogue advertisers on Facebook and Instagram, the social media giant has drafted a “playbook” to stall them. Internal documents seen by Reuters reveal its tactics, including efforts to make scam ads “not findable” when authorities search for them.” We are shown a half truth that I see as a near blatant lie. You see, in 1961 a man named Luther Simjian came up with the father and mother of the ATM. An experimental Bankograph (as they named it then) was installed in New York City in 1961 by the City Bank of New York, but removed after six months due to the lack of customer acceptance. But on 27 June 1967 it was reintroduced by the actor Reg Varney as a push to control people pressure at Barclay in London. Think of this as the starting point. As security was upgraded, most security was still set to older concepts, they were not bad, but it all comes from this point. And as the law was set to this setting, it fell behind fast. As such things like Two-Factor Authentication are still concepts to be implemented in banking and auto banking and beyond. So as Meta and others are trying to make the sale of advertising ‘easier’ scammers are really happy to bank in on such opportunity. 

Consider three points, the advertiser, its payment and its location are three separate issues, whilst the initial setting is almost never confirmed as these players are set to ease of business and commerce instead of security of business and commerce.

And we see this in the article as “Meta, owner of the two social media platforms, feared Japan would soon force it to verify the identity of all its advertisers, internal documents reviewed by Reuters show. The step would likely reduce fraud but also cost the company revenue.” This is true, but the setting goes far beyond Meta and that is as far as I can tell not set either. So as Reuters gives us “Meta launched an enforcement blitz to reduce the volume of offending ads. But it also sought to make problematic ads less “discoverable” for Japanese regulators, the documents show.” Which bus likely true, but it is a larger field. If the EU, the Commonwealth and America keep shoulder to shoulder to “verify the identity of all its advertisers” we could actually get somewhere, but then the conversation goes into the direction of complication and such, the greed driven are ready to hand victory to the scammers. And as we are given “The documents are part of an internal cache of materials from the past four years in which Meta employees assessed the fast-growing level of fraudulent advertising across its platforms worldwide. Drawn from multiple sources and authored by employees in departments including finance, legal, public policy and safety, the documents also reveal ways that Meta, to protect billions of dollars in ad revenue, has resisted efforts by governments to crack down.” The setting that Japan is trying to overcome, the establishment of identity of advertisers become frightfully clear. And that costs Meta revenue, but it goes far beyond Meta, Amazon is likely to have similar settings and they accept that as the cost of doing business, but the people caught in-between are  settled with the bill of BigTech doing business. So as Sandeep Abraham, a former fraud investigator at Meta gives us “Instead of telling me an accurate story about ads on Meta’s platforms, it now just tells me a story about Meta trying to give itself a good grade for regulators.” We are being told the picture that regulators are part of the problem. In stead of the cold hard question “How is the identity of the advertiser established” the people are told a different picture. It would be regarded as Artsy, but not the truth. So whilst the world is ready to accept “The tactic successfully removed some fraudulent advertising of the sort that regulators would want to weed out. But it also served to make the search results that Meta believed regulators were viewing appear cleaner than they otherwise would have. The scrubbing, Meta teams explained in documents regarding their efforts to reduce scam discoverability, sought to make problematic content “not findable” for “regulators, investigators and journalists.”” The larger question on what happens when these fraudulent go getters get access to more finely trained DML/LLM solutions, to capture the wallets of millions more? That question remains in the background and soon it will be too late, because soon places like America will try nearly anything to keep their shareholders happy and that comes with additional cost of doing business. And that setting is given with “The playbook, as it’s referred to in some of the documents, lays out Meta’s strategy to stall regulators and put off advertiser verification unless new laws leave them no choice.” And again, the lawmakers are shunning their duty, not merely in America, but in Europe and partially the Commonwealth as well. And that is, as I see it, the gist of the setting and whilst we might want to blame Meta, the direct setting is that places like Apple, Google, Microsoft are at least equally guilty. So, as I see it, Microsoft could have done something years ago, but they were chasing Google, instead of becoming real innovators. They might have trailed, but at this point they could have taken a lead and as I see it, they did not.

So as we see Meta, no one is asking where Amazon and Apple were at that time. So how many scammy advertisements did they make way for? I don’t know the number and it will be less than Meta, but is it small enough? I fear not (a speculation on my side).

Oh, and before you think this was all new stuff, consider that I raised this issue in ‘Enabling Crime’ and article I wrote in 2017 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2017/12/02/enabling-crime/) so this has been over 8 years in rotation, 8 years that BigTech and lawmakers did close to nothing and I was taught an issue like “Two-Factor Authentication” in University (aka UTS) in 2012. So it is over a decade where legal Impotency is shown. It was in the trend of non-repudiation where you and you alone could have set this in motion. The law seems uneasier to bind itself and tech doesn’t want to be bound by this. So as I showed close to 13 years of inability to do something about that setting we are given a slightly different setting, not an incorrect one, but one that is slightly larger than anticipated. 

So I wish you all a good day and a lovely time enjoying coffee (I just had mine). Those lazy bastards in Vancouver are likely snoring the night away, it’s half past midnight this morning there.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 25, 2025 · 21:44

The boat has left

That is a weird setting, but that might be the case for a lot of people. It is the Financial Express who gives us (at https://www.financialexpress.com/life/technology-ibm-to-skill-5-million-indian-youth-in-ai-cybersecurity-and-quantum-computing-by-2030-details-inside-4082018/) the headline ‘IBM to skill 5 million Indian youth in AI, cybersecurity and quantum computing by 2030’ you might think it is nothing to get hung over about, but you would be wrong. Even as some ‘claim’ to give good courses (some actually do), it is IBM who has had that inside track in several ways. As such (or perhaps to consider as I see it), the labour market will be drowning in Indian entrepreneurs by 2032 (and a whole before that). I reckon that these people will bolster the Indian go getter market and they will branch out to Saudi Arabia, the UAE and a few other places. As such if you think the US labour market is merely cooling, think again. These people will be highly wanted in India, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, UK, Australia, Canada and the EU long before we get to 2030. There will be an Indian wave of go getters all over the world and the places that needed to get active weren’t for much too long. So as we see “India possesses the talent and ambition to lead the world in AI & Quantum. Fluency in frontier technologies will define economic competitiveness, scientific progress and societal transformation,” said Arvind Krishna, IBM Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer. “Our commitment to skill five million people is an investment in that future. By democratizing access to advanced skills, we are enabling the youth and students to build, innovate and accelerate India’s growth.”” And these people will be highly skilled in all things IBM (perhaps not in IBM Statistics or IBM Miner) but that is little cause for alarm. These people will also bring forth IBM skills and products, so this setting takes care of two pipelines, skills and products. And all that time AWS was hounding the AI field. It is nice, but as these people are highly skilled in whatever IBM holds, there is a mismatch on what is required. OK, that last part is speculative, but that is what I would do.

I reckon that Microsoft and OpenAI also might have a problem here. You see we also get “IBM also continues to strengthen school-level readiness by co-developing the AI curriculum for senior secondary students, along with teaching resources including the AI Project Cookbook, Teacher Handbook and explainer modules. These programs are designed to embed computational thinking and responsible AI principles early, while enabling teachers to deliver AI education confidently and at scale.” As such these people get a schooling in evolved from famous systems like Deep Blue and Watson and as such IBM provides a flexible ecosystem allowing choice from various foundation models (like Granite, Llama, Mistral). Whatever they partnered with doesn’t matter. This is the IBM show, partners take a second stage chair. And as I see it, IBM did something nicely spectacular because they get a choir of 5 million evangelizing Watsoners all over the world and in that instance Watson grows from niche to mainstream and that will feel good for all the shareholders who kept their trust in Arvind Krishna (I will give a nice ‘Well done sir’) in this instance. Because it is starting to look like the old premise ‘When two dogs fight over a bone, the third one takes it gone’ So in the fight we saw with OpenAI and Google, we now see that the future is banked on by IBM. This doesn’t make the others useless in any way, but IBM set the future towards Watson in a rather nice way and that has to count for something.

What a nice end of year this will be this year. Because at the drop of a hat, it wasn’t merely Google or OpenAI, as I see it now IBM because the third major player in this duet and as I see innovation, this is how innovative strides are made, by having to refocus your tasks, that is the real innovation maker in this world. 

A lovely ending to Christmas Day. Have a great upcoming boxing day you all.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 25, 2025 · 01:07

They had twins

Yup, it happens. At times we have kids, progeny so to speak and some get two for a simple roll in the hay. Yet this isn’t about kids. It is about Gemini 3, Googles seemingly finest product. It is so great that Microsoft barred Google Chrome from installing and they blamed it on some weird parenting setting. And then the media lacked looking at it, probably some revenue driven courtesan issue. All speculation, but I would prefer to set this to presumption, still I have no evidence. So it is all allegedly, but the settings on Gemini are clear. I read it myself (so it must be true). I will start with FXLeaders who (at https://www.fxleaders.com/news/2025/12/23/google-stock-heads-to-record-highs-as-gemini-3-outperforms-chatgpt/) gives us ‘Google Stock Heads to Record Highs as Gemini 3 Outperforms ChatGPT’, as such it is now the fifth time Microsoft loses. There was Sony, There was AWS, There was Google and now there is Google again. It sucks to be Microsoft. And the howling continues. 

So FXLeaders gives us two bullets that matters.

  • The launch of Gemini 3 has intensified competitive pressures in the AI sector, while regulatory concerns add complexity to the investment landscape.
  • Insider selling and a cautious market sentiment suggest that near-term upside may be limited, but long-term support from institutional investors remains strong.

So as we are given “Alphabet emerged as one of the standout megacap performers in November, delivering a decisive breakout that carried shares through the $300 mark and to a fresh all-time high near $329. The move completed a strong rebound from a late-September pullback and reinforced confidence in the company’s long-term growth trajectory. The rally was fueled by sustained institutional demand and growing optimism around Google’s artificial intelligence roadmap. For much of October and November, Alphabet benefited from its unique position at the intersection of digital advertising dominance and AI platform leadership.”

As well as “The rollout of Gemini 3—trained primarily on Google’s in-house chips rather than external hardware—has sparked renewed debate around vertical integration in artificial intelligence. Supporters view this as a long-term strategic advantage, potentially lowering costs and reducing reliance on third-party suppliers while optimizing performance. Recent benchmark results, where Gemini 3 reportedly outperformed ChatGPT in several categories, have added to that narrative and intensified competitive pressure across the sector.” So wonder about how the media could not get you this two weeks ago and wonder now why I refer to the media (the larger part) as the Courtesans of the digital dollar. This should have been know and tested for by several parties directly, and I don’t care who won, we were not informed. As I see it, Microsoft has too powerful a hold on the media and the media who shunned their jobs need to be named and shamed. Sound simple, doesn’t it? As such I also present a second source, so there is a little more data drivenness to the fold. It is a story (at https://www.startuphub.ai/ai-news/ai-research/2025/google-gemini-3-redefines-ai-reasoning-and-efficiency/) where StartupHub.AI gives us “The core of Gemini 3’s impact lies in its unprecedented reasoning and multimodal understanding. According to the announcement, Gemini 3 Pro, Google’s most powerful model to date, not only topped the LMArena Leaderboard but also achieved breakthrough scores on challenging benchmarks like Humanity’s Last Exam and GPQA Diamond. These tests are designed to assess an AI’s ability to truly think and reason like humans, indicating a sophisticated capacity to process and synthesize information across various modalities, moving closer to genuine comprehension. Furthermore, its gold-medal standard performance in international mathematics and coding contests, powered by its Deep Think capabilities, signals a new era for AI in complex problem-solving, pushing the boundaries of what automated systems can achieve in abstract domains.” So as we wonder what some of them mean, the benchmarks were available to pretty much all the media, so what prevented them to report on it? Simple question, isn’t it?

And you might wonder why I care, or why I believe these sources. There is a setting that sets up a lot of consideration and that is right, but the media isn’t informing us and they aren’t making any tests, even though I gave one test to the world (not necessarily a good one) but the media did NOTHING. They allegedly value the digital dollars too much and they rely on players like the Microsoft stakeholders to fund their gravy train (as I personally see it) So am I right, am I wrong? I would love to be wrong, but I have seen this before (more than once). But as I see these results there is a larger play in motion. Is Google actually that good? I am not debating it, I am asking and it comes with an answer. It is either Yes, No, or it is under advisement. The first two are simple and it can begotten by showing the evidence, but the Media did nothing of the sort, perhaps some did, but the larger groups are abstaining from involvement (it sounds better then ‘They cower the results if involved’ because that makes them sound like actual pussies. So why am I so angry about this? It is a result we were entitled to and it requires OpenAI to divulge its heading and not cater to asking for more value when there is none to be had (at present). And as such investors are duped into not receiving the evidence they need to make financial decisions. But perhaps I am over simplifying the problem here.

Whatever you consider and whatever you decide is yours to do and you are entitled to the best information to make these decisions and the media is no longer able to do that. I don’t care if you embrace ChatGPT and OpenAI. That’s fine, I am not choosing favorites, I actually don’t care, but I do care about lacking media, lacking results and hiding behind some stakeholder whilst the people have a right to know. They use that as their battle drum, so they can be held to that as well. It is a simple setting as I see it.

Have a great Christmas Day, 23 hours until boxing day for me.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 21, 2025 · 22:59

The dice fell snake eyes

It is the setting I predict a few weeks ago and more less recent in the story ‘Eric Winter is a god’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/07/05/eric-winter-is-a-god/) in July 2023. I saw it coming this early in the race, why? Mainly because AI doesn’t yet exist, so whomever sells whatever solution they have as AI will set themselves up for a rather huge and nasty fall. In 2023 it was easy, in 1980 the movie the Changeling was released, giving the timelines then, the movie was made in 1979 and Eric Winter was born 17 July 1976, so what was a 2 year old doing in that movie? That is the simple setting of validating your data and that is why there is a case with what some now call AI. So now we get (at https://decrypt.co/353227/openai-microsoft-sued-over-chatgpt-connecticut-murder-suicide) ‘OpenAI, Microsoft Sued Over ChatGPT’s Alleged Role in Connecticut Murder-Suicide’ so when we see the setting in that case, there is more than just the bare minimums. This will imply engineers who programmed the setting, as we are given “In the latest lawsuit targeting AI developer OpenAI, the estate of an 83-year-old Connecticut woman sued the ChatGPT developer and Microsoft, alleging that the chatbot validated delusional beliefs that preceded a murder-suicide—marking the first case to link an AI system to a homicide.” I expected that we would have until 2026, but it never got that far and when the first trial starts, we will see aq whole range of class actions and other legal battles start, because as we are taught in Torts, go where the money is and OpenAI/Microsoft have plenty. As such there will be a whole range of cases being started. I reckon that there is a whole flock of ambulance chasers who will see this as their golden opportunity. And the more data is thrown around, the more intense the legal battles begin to emerge. A setting that was clear two years ago for me and as I found more than one setting that favors this, we merely have to look at sentences like “We rely on our AI to bring you [X]” the legal eagles see that as their way into your coffers and they have greedy hands, because that is what they were instructed to do. And when you consider “OpenAI faces numerous lawsuits, primarily revolving around copyright infringement for using vast amounts of online content (news, books, lyrics) to train AI models like ChatGPT, with major cases from The New York Times (NYT) and authors seeking damages and content bans, plus a recent German court ruling against lyric reproduction.” We see the setting that they either settle, or lose whatever data they have and there are numerous other settings that are thrown into the mix. And whatever is in the design law database, because there is every indication that these trademarks were also broken in numerous places and Microsoft has no place to turn, they are in it for the big bucks and whilst some are ‘driven’ to reconsider their options, the amount of people who are not considering that, is a growing amount of people smelling the scent of dollars and they are hungry. I reckon that those non-Americans are even more driven to those dollars than the Americans are. It comes down to (a massive speculation) that gets them up to 100 billion and that was before Sam Altman was hoping for a $800B incentive. That is the short and sweet of it, so as we look at the article seeing

““This is the first case seeking to hold OpenAI accountable for causing violence to a third-party,” J. Eli Wade-Scott, managing partner of Edelson PC, who represents the Adams estate, told Decrypt. “We also represent the family of Adam Raine, who tragically ended his own life this year, but this is the first case that will hold OpenAI accountable for pushing someone toward harming another person.”” You see, “first case that will hold OpenAI accountable for pushing someone toward harming another person” is a deeper step than some lawyer pushing that OpenAI was driving a person to some extend, that is no harm, or merely applied harm to self, do you have any idea how many lawyers will demand to see the algorithm and the programmer who wrote it? That will be a mess that takes almost years to sort out, in that same time, Google will progress Gemini 3 much further making OpenAI lose investors and they are as sketchy as they will ever be.

So whilst we see the sparks come, we will see a lot more issues surface and they are not all on OpenAI, but I reckon that some lawyers will play it that way, because that is where the money is. 

So you all have a great day, it is still 39 degrees in my living room so I am placing my mattress in the freezer, not sure how, but I need to get some sleep at this point.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 20, 2025 · 02:18

With media assistance

That is what I see and I might be wrong, but judge for yourself. There is plenty of evidence around. It all started with an article in Forbes (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2025/12/18/microsoft-updates-windows-to-stop-users-downloading-google-chrome/) where we were shown ‘Microsoft Updates Windows ‘To Stop Users From Downloading Google Chrome’’ so that doesn’t sound at all ominous. And it kinda reflects the setting I gave over 2 years ago with ‘Are they really?’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/09/01/are-they-really/) which I gave onboard September 1st 2023. We are now given “Here we go again. “Microsoft is trying a new way to stop users from downloading Google Chrome.” We have seen this before. Just as with Apple, the two tech giants are pushing hard to keep users within their own walled gardens, on Safari and Edge. The latest news comes from Windows Report. “If you open the Chrome download page in Microsoft Edge, you may see a new banner at the top.” Instead of just presenting the usual Edge versus Chrome comparison, “Microsoft now focuses on protection.”” I would be the first to state that the statement is missing and they are actually meaning “Microsoft now focuses on protection of self” and it is a slippery slope. They can find the expert in France to find evidence that the bra size of Kim Kardassian is increasing, but they are not able to get a clear independent view of whatever OpenAI gives us against Gemini 3? Go Figure.

As such Forbes gives us “What’s most interesting is that Microsoft has usually stressed that Edge is built on the same Chromium base as Chrome, with all the benefits of Chrome, only better. “This time, those points are missing. The message stays centered on built-in safety features.”” Og course it is, Microsoft cannot allow for the people to gives them grounds of taking sides in that war, they have far too much riding on out, the revitalization of Clippy is on the line and if people (who are speculatively likely) to select Gemini 3 over OpenAI, the walls of Microsoft come crumbling down. They have trillions riding on this and as I see it (I have zero evidence) is that OpenAI underwhelmed whist Google is riding high, as such they have trillions riding on their bad sense of innovation.

And as I see it, it is really bad when they are repeating some of the settings they had in 2023 when edge was on the line, I reckon together with Xbox and Gemini they now lost for the third time, four times if you count AWS versus Azure. The once so highly Microsoft has now lost against Android, Google Search, Sony, Amazon and now against Gemini. A five times loser of technology. So whilst the media ‘accepts’ “Microsoft now focuses on protection.” The truth is predominantly ugly, the truth is that Microsoft is basically done for. 

And the media can hide behind their timelines when they ‘suddenly’ reveal an independent tester (one that meets with the approval of Microsoft) But it might be too little and too late for the media as well. 

So whilst Microsoft hides behind “Chrome attracts more security threat headlines than any other browser. This year, Cybersecurity News says, “Google addressed a significant wave of actively exploited zero-day vulnerabilities affecting its Chrome browser, patching a total of eight critical flaws that threatened billions of users worldwide.”

All these vulnerabilities were “high severity with CVSS scores averaging 8.5,” with the world’s most popular browser targeted “by sophisticated threat actors, including state-sponsored groups and commercial surveillance vendors.”” And weirdly enough, my Android is flying high using Google, the only threat I had for a while was influencers pushing me against my will towards Edge. As such there might be truth in the last statement, but I think Microsoft is overselling that idea. And as the evidence s shown to us, I really believe I am right all along. So as you might realise that Forbes hides behind their final words “As you see, none of this is clear cut.” I believe it is and it requires a true independent test of Gemini versus OpenAI. But perhaps I am oversimplifying the problem. I apparently tend to do that and it has nothing to do that I have been in IT for over 45 years. So you all have a great day, I finally look forward to some sleep. The temperature has dropped from over 30 degrees to 24 degrees and it is 02:00. And did you catch the one element Microsoft is leaving alone? It is that Apple is less of a threat than Google is, is it the 26 profiles of their Alphabet? I let you decide. I have seen the light and the seas of snores are beckoning me.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 18, 2025 · 23:58

The wrong focus

Two messages passed me by today. The first one was given to us by CNBC (at https://www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2025/12/17/oracle-stock-blue-owl-michigan-data-center.html) with the headline ‘Oracle stock dips 5% as Blue Owl Capital pulls out of funding $10 billion data center’ and I wonder why the headline wasn’t ‘Blue Owl Capital pulls out of funding $10 billion data center’ with the optional added “the project remains “on schedule” but that Blue Owl was out of funding talks.” And as we see “Blue Owl had been in talks with Oracle about funding a 1-gigawatt facility for OpenAI in Saline Township, Michigan, according to the Financial Times.” And when we see “the plans fell through due to concerns about Oracle’s rising debt levels and extensive artificial intelligence spending, the FT reported, citing people familiar with the matter. This comes as some investors raise red flags about the funding behind the rush to build ever more data centers. The concern is that some hyperscalers are turning to private equity markets rather than funding the buildings themselves, and entering into lease agreements that could prove risky.” I am wondering why the focus is Oracle and not Blue Owl Capital. Even as others give us ‘Blue Owl Capital (OWL) Is Down 7.1% After Liquidity And BDC-Merger Lawsuits Surface – What’s Changed’ (at https://simplywall.st/stocks/us/diversified-financials/nyse-owl/blue-owl-capital/news/blue-owl-capital-owl-is-down-71-after-liquidity-and-bdc-merg/amp) with “Blue Owl Capital has faced multiple securities class action lawsuits alleging that it misled investors about liquidity pressures tied to redemptions and the planned merger of its business development companies, following weaker-than-expected third-quarter 2025 results and contentious merger terms for OBDC II shareholders.” As well as “Beyond the legal claims, the controversy has highlighted how liquidity constraints, redemption limits, and potential valuation “haircuts” inside key private credit vehicles can affect confidence in Blue Owl’s broader fee-based asset management model.” So the setting could be “Oracle dips because Capital Asset Management cannot get their settings right” it is a speculative statement, but it does hold water in light of what we are shown, so why CNBC focusses on Oracle and not on Blue Owl Capital is beyond me. Is it because kicking a true innovator is more sexy than a Capital Asset Management player? I feel slightly protective of real innovators and as far as I can tell Oracle has been a power for innovation for over 45 years (yes I am that old).

So when we see “Blue Owl Capital’s narrative projects $4.2 billion revenue and $5.1 billion earnings by 2028. This requires 17.5% yearly revenue growth and about a $5.0 billion earnings increase from $75.4 million today.” And there is the real culprit, players like Blue Owl need to make money and the entire setting for what they call ‘AI’ will not show revenue for over 2 years and that is what is hampering these players (as I personally see it).

So when we see “The person added that Blue Owl was also concerned that local politics in Michigan would cause construction delays. Oracle later responded to the FT report, saying the project was moving forward and that Blue Owl was not part of equity talks.” I reckon that Blue Owl will move out of at least one other project, as such some players need to step up and it goes without saying that these ‘money makers’ will see stretch marks in their projected revenue womb and it will be a nasty setting for those that are relying on profit per quarter and that was the setting I foresaw almost a year ago and a setting that will bare scrutiny because there are trillions invested and some makers of money will start to realise that as they aren’t making enough money for their shareholders, they will become nervous and as I see it, Google has the inside track now and those relying on OpenAI and Sam Altman will start to see their revenue falter, it is no longer a one player game and that is before we consider where Huawei is going in all this. 

The second article ‘Amazon Set to Waste $10 Billion on OpenAI’ (at https://247wallst.com/technology-3/2025/12/17/amazon-set-to-waste-10-billion-on-openai/) the question becomes. Is it really wasted? We see the first setting “OpenAI, which until recently has been the leading artificial intelligence (AI) company in the world, has raised money from a long list of investors. Some are venture capitalists who are simply writing checks to get returns. However, another list consists of money or strategic deals with Microsoft, Oracle, Softbank, Nvidia, and, soon, Disney.” This part raises a question “Some are venture capitalists who are simply writing checks to get returns” the question is part of a timeline. When they get the money is another part of this equation and time is  the factor that holds these money loving parties in check, or not as the timeline shifts towards 2028/2029. So as we consider “Bloomberg reports, “OpenAI is in initial discussions to raise at least $10 billion from Amazon.com Inc. and use its chips, a potential win for the online retailer’s effort to broaden its AI industry presence and compete with Nvidia Corp.” Amazon is a tiny player in the AI chip business. Nvidia Corp. (NASDAQ: NVDA) dominates, with a market cap of $4.33 trillion, which makes it the most valuable company in the world. Put plainly, the Amazon deal is part of the dangerous “round tripping” that goes on in the industry. One company invests in another. The company that gets the investment uses the money to buy products or services from the investor.” I see something else. Whilst we get that $4.33 trillion is an important part, the larger setting is becoming “Amazon deal is part of the dangerous “round tripping” that goes on in the industry” this implies that “a company selling “an unused asset to another company, while at the same time agreeing to buy back the same or similar assets at about the same price.”” I see it as double dipping, so we have now (apparently ) arrived to the point where the double dipping is greedily seen on 10 billion, whist the invested setting is over 900 times larger. I personally see that as a new venue towards the bottom of the creamy barrel that everyone wants to dip their wallet in, the setting is spend and the money is gone (or at least locked into a set stage of non-revenue) and that is the second setting I see breaking the economic settings apart in 2026, because this will erupt into something a lot less nice long before we reach 2027 and that is close to 2 years ahead of incoming revenue. Do you still think I am boasting? This is not a boast. It is disappointment, because that setting was clear to me almost a year ago when I wrote ‘And the bubble said ‘Bang’’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/01/29/and-the-bubble-said-bang/) So I saw this coming a mile away and the others were in the dark? I am not that intelligent, I am pretty clever sop these high paid economists should have see this long before me, or were they hoping that THIS time they could outsmart others? Greed is a vicious circle and will only propagate further greed a game without winners and all who play it lose, or they sell others down the river to get their goods. So how did that end in 2008? The movie Inside Job has a few markers, but who ended the game with a full purse tended to be awfully little and they wasted trillions on that idea and now we get a setting more intense and with more money at play all whilst the previous setting is still hurting a lot of people. Now, the impact will be a lot more dangerous with too many people relying on the setting others give whilst not giving them the full story. How does that usually go over?

A stage that could sink America as I see it, but perhaps I am just a radical depressed individual. Have a great day you all. My Friday begins in less than 5 minutes.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 13, 2025 · 21:10

Orchestration

That was on my mind when I was considering a few settings. Orchestration by the media no less. To get the full view to this, I need to explain a few items. The media has NO responsibility to print (or news talk) on any given subject. And there is something called Defamation by omission. 

While defamation typically involves publishing a false statement that harms a reputation, an omission of facts can potentially give rise to liability if what is published is rendered misleading or defamatory as a result. The test is whether the omission gives a defamatory meaning to the published material that would not otherwise be present.

So it does exist, but the setting is extremely difficult to prove. There are more provisions, but they will not be applicable to this setting. As such I leave them by themselves. So two weeks ago we got all that Code Red settings in regards to OpenAI, they were not giving us that they would have to WOW the audience, or was that me saying that? So a few days ago ChatGPT released 5.2 and as far as I can tell there are several dozens of articles, but only Wired gives us some of the goods

With: “OpenAI has introduced GPT-5.2, its smartest artificial intelligence model yet, with performance gains across writing, coding, and reasoning benchmarks. The launch comes just days after CEO Sam Altman internally declared a “code red,” a company-wide push to improve ChatGPT amid intense competition from rivals. “We announced this code red to really signal to the company that we want to marshal resources in one particular area, and that’s a way to really define priorities,” said OpenAI’s CEO of applications, Fidji Simo, in a briefing with reporters on Thursday. “We have had an increase in resources focused on ChatGPT in general.”” Publication and presentation talk, Sam Altman is great at that. But the media? Where are they? Who actually looked at them for the last few days? Where are those articles? 

I am not out for blood, or out to get Sam Altman, I am out to get the media. They are all about the danger setting, but this is becoming out of balance and the media loves their digital dollar raking, but enough is enough. They need to fess up to the settings and do something about it all. If ChatGPT 5.2 is great, fine. I don’t mind, but I want to get the goods and the media is falling short in several ways. Venezuela, OpenAI, Israel, Saudi Arabia and that list goes on, they are (as I personally see it) catering to their need for digital dollars as long as it agrees with the stakeholders they are reporting to.

The Wall Street Journal (at https://www.wsj.com/articles/openai-updates-chatgpt-amid-battle-for-knowledge-workers-995376f9) gives us “The release comes about a week after Chief Executive Sam Altman declared a “code red” effort to improve the quality of ChatGPT and to delay development of some other initiatives, including advertising. The company has been on high alert from the rising threat of Google’s latest Gemini AI model, which outperformed ChatGPT on certain benchmarks including expert-level knowledge, logic puzzles, math problems and image recognition. The new OpenAI model was described by the company as better at math, science and coding benchmarks.” And as I see it, nearly all the media gives exactly the same lines and no one is actually looking into how good ChatGPT is now, or even whether it is or is not. There are investors with Trillions on the line and the media is playing the “distancing game”, only when things go bad they are tripping over each other giving us the lines and at that point the stakeholders have the like it or lump it.

Is no one noticing that part of the equation? 

So, is GPT-5.2 the WOW result everyone is banking on? Did it defeat Gemini 3? I don’t know but the media should have been all over this and they aren’t. As I see it, this is a form of orchestration but to where I don’t know. Is it about the trillions invested (I see that as liability towards investors) is it about the absence of excellence (I see that as liability towards both Google and OpenAI) and there is the liability towards the readers or listeners of whoever they service. So this isn’t defamation, because in all, the media did nothing really wrong. But they sold us short whilst claiming they are there for us and they are not.

So is it me? Or is there is larger setting that is ignored by too many?

I know that some will not agree with me, but after the days of the Code Red, where are the media results of what OpenAI/Sam Altman produced? Not the same hundred words they all seemingly give us, but the real results, the real tests and the real impressions. I haven’t seen one result from them. Even with my limited knowledge (I never used ChatGPT) I could drum up a few tests in seconds and I would put both Gemini 3 and ChatGPT5.2 on the road. I could let them lose on a few of my articles and see what they both come up with and how long it takes them. Something EVERY baboon working in media (sorry, not sorry) could have come up with in mere seconds. Isn’t it lovely that they never came up with that? Think about that for a moment when they give you another runaround on Oracle, like Quartz ‘Oracle’s big AI dreams are freaking out Wall Street’ and Forbes with ‘Oracle Stock Down 14%. Why Higher Risk Makes $ORCL A Sell’ all whilst no one is looking at the true and real value of Oracle. No, the investors must be spooked (for whatever reason). So you all have a great day, we are nearly all in Saturday now and I am a mere 170 minutes away from Sunday. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 8, 2025 · 22:58

A Peter Sellers world

That is what hit me when I saw ‘How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bubble’ (source: Bloomberg) which comes from Dr Strangelove where we get “How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb” it started a larger set of thoughts. 

I didn’t use that article as Bloomberg uses a paywall. And it starts with yesterdays article in FXLeaders (at https://www.fxleaders.com/news/2025/12/07/oracles-ai-bubble-bursts-peak-glory-at-345-now-a-217-hangover/) where we see ‘Oracle’s AI Bubble Bursts: Peak Glory at $345, Now a $217 Hangover’ we are given “ORCL ended the week at $217.58, up 1.52 percent, but it still had a 37 percent hangover from its 52-week high of $345.72. This is a microcosm of growing concerns about debt loads, AI infrastructure spending, and whether the “infinite demand” narrative for AI compute can withstand real-world economics.” As well as “Oracle’s recent decline in stock value reflects broader market concerns regarding the high valuations of AI-related companies, as its forward price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio exceeds 33. The company projects revenues of $166 billion from cloud infrastructure and $20 billion. Investors adopted a “sell the news” mentality, raising questions about the sustainability of these forecasts. Oracle’s fundamentals remain solid. The company experienced  52% growth in cloud infrastructure and has $455 billion in remaining performance obligations (RPO), largely due to its partnership with OpenAI. Currently, the stock is trading at 13.9 times projected earnings for the end of this decade, leading some investors to view the decline as a potential buying opportunity.”

As I see it Oracle passed their burst bubble setting. And whilst we see ups and downs, I would unreservedly trust the Oracle stock to be a beacon of steadiness. It might not be sexy, but it is a trustworthy sign for those who need a decent return on investment.

Or as Peter sellers would say:
“As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden. Yes! There will be growth in the spring!” (Source: Being there) it was a better time and weirdly enough the age of Peter Sellers applies to the days that 2025 brings. And from that setting we get to MyNews (at https://sc.mp/ihj4g) where we see ‘Why 2026 will be the year AI hype collides with reality’ an opinion piece that gives me “The reckoning ahead for the AI bubble promises to reprice expectations, force economic trade-offs and call out circular deals” but the stronger setting is given with “Speculative assumptions guiding trillions of US dollars in AI investments are colliding with real-world obstacles. Escalating costs, stratospheric stock valuations, tenuous collaborations and energy bottlenecks are compounding the inevitable challenges when new technologies struggle for profitability. Many are worried the bubble may be bursting. Morgan Stanley projects that the cumulative amount spent worldwide on data centers could exceed US$3 trillion by year-end 2028. China’s AI investment could hit 700 billion yuan (US$99 billion) this year, 48 per cent more than last year, according to Bank of America, with the government supplying US$56 billion.” There is a setting for both ‘AI investments are colliding with real-world obstacles’ and ‘worldwide on data centers could exceed US$3 trillion by year-end 2028’ the weird feeling I have that it will not get this far, this entire setting will implode before the end of 2027, investors will stop feeling lovingly towards the boom that is not coming and will start feeling pressured that the terms required that will grow erratic setting for the need for greed and that is the setting that comes along long before 2027 is reached. 

Then we get to AOL who gives us (at https://www.aol.com/finance/goldman-sachs-issues-warning-ai-103249744.html) where we are given ‘Goldman Sachs issues a warning to AI stock investors’ where we are given ““Our discussions with investors and recent equity performance reveal limited appetite for companies with potential AI-enabled revenues as investors grapple with whether AI is a threat or opportunity for many companies. While we expect the AI trade will eventually transition to Phase 3, investors will likely require evidence of a tangible impact on near-term earnings to embrace these stocks. Unlike Phase 2, there will likely be winners and losers within Phase 3,” Goldman Sachs US equity strategist Ryan Hammond wrote in a new note on Friday. Hammond thinks AI investment as a percentage of capital expenditures could be nearing a climax. In turn, that sets the stage for overly upbeat AI investors to be let down if earnings don’t come in strongly in future quarters.” As I see it, when we are given these settings everyone seems to get concerned, so when we get in addition “Salesforce (CRM) and Figma (FIG) got drilled on Thursday after their earnings reports didn’t wow. It’s clear that the hype on their earnings calls wasn’t enough to paper over soft areas of the earnings reports. Growing concern on the Street centers around the pace of AI demand by corporations, given what looks to be a slowing US economy.” As I stated this before, the need for greed overwhelmed everything. When the setting of NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing) is not clearly laid out and it is caught in the waves of board of directors and Investors believing that they have the AI solution everyone is looking for you gets a larger setting, consider that and consider what happens when OpenAI “fails to wow” the investors, or even a delay and it all comes to a large shutdown and that is even before we see 9 News giving us “A Sydney data centre that will host ChatGPT is being hailed as a win for Australia, but an expert warns the country lacks the energy supply needed to power it reliably” I gave a few months ago that there would be an energy problem on numerous levels and now we are seeing that whilst we are dealing with the the fallout of other settings. And less than an hour ago Deutsche Welle gives us ‘Google raises AI stakes as OpenAI struggles to stay on top’  with “Given those strengths, Adrian Cox sees “a very high probability” Google will have the leading model at least into next year — not OpenAI. OpenAI’s priority, he says, is identifying a business model capable of funding a user base that could soon approach a billion people per week.” This is not about OpenAI, I did that already, the larger frame is set in the perception of whatever the bubble is and I believe that there are two factors that the media doesn’t want or is avoiding to include. First there are the doom sayers trying to early burst confidence in favor of short gains and then there are people trying to short on whatever they can so that they can get another jolt of profit and they are all out trying to set social media on their side. 

So if this is the prologue of what is about to unfold we are in for a jolly good time, and as I see it, there is a chance that Christmas for some will be a disaster.

I wanted to include more of Peter sellers, like the Party or the Pink Panther but I am running out of juice. But there was one more thing and I got it from the Independent about an hour ago. It states ‘OpenAI rushes out new AI model in ‘code red’ response to fears about Google’ (at https://ca.news.yahoo.com/openai-rushes-ai-model-code-105822611.html) that was the snippet I was hoping for. With “The ChatGPT creator will unveil GPT-5.2 this week, The Verge reported, after OpenAI CEO Sam Altman declared a “code red” situation following the launch of Google Gemini 3 last month. Google’s latest AI model surpassed ChatGPT in several benchmark tests, including abstract and visual reasoning, as well as advanced knowledge across scientific disciplines.” But that comes in a setting, you see, I stated in ‘TBD CEO OpenAI’ two days ago (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/12/06/tbd-ceo-openai/) “in a software release any of a hundred things can go wrong and they all need to go right at present.” And when things are rushed out things will go wrong. But there is a snag, for this to happen The Independent article had to be correct and as they are the only one giving us this, there is no real verification available. But when you are in a stage when bubbles go boom (or plop) all the available facts become important. And I massively wish that a Peter sellers setting would help me out. And perhaps in view of this, his classic phrase “It’s no matter. When you’ve seen one Stradivarius, you’ve seen them all.” Especially when looking at NIP software. But that is also the snag. I have seen excellent applications and I have seen lesser ones. I reckon that it amounts to who plays the violin, if it is a creative person that person will find new life in whatever that person. applies NIP to, if it is a salesperson it will be about maximizing greed and that setting tends to have limitations on several degrees. In addition we are given “The new model was originally scheduled to launch in late December, but will now be released as early as 9 December.” I understand the pressures that come with this but they better understand that early launch bring dangers and investors don’t really like to be spooked (they also don’t like them) What we see is open to interpretation and it is a valid thought that my views are also open to interpretation. 

So in this I leave you all with a presenting view not unlike Peter sellers would say “To see me as a person on screen would be one of the dullest experiences you could ever wish to experience” and 

As you I have never been in a movie (at least I don’t remember being in one) you are spared that dull experience. So have a great day and don’t forget to love the bubble (if you haven’t invested your wealth there).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 6, 2025 · 20:40

TBD CEO OpenAI 

That is the thought I had, yesterday, 5 hours after I wrote my piece, I still saw the news appear all over the media, some on it was getting a ridiculous amount of attention, so I decided to take another look at some of this. First there was the Business insider (at https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-code-red-chatgpt-advertising-google-search-gemini-2025-12) giving us ‘OpenAI’s Code Red: Protect the loop, delay the loot’ where we see “Focus on improving ChatGPT, and pause lower-priority initiatives. The most striking pause is advertising. Why delay such a lucrative opportunity at a moment when OpenAI’s finances face intense scrutiny? Because in tech, nothing matters more than users.” This was followed by “Every query and click fed a feedback loop: user behavior informed ranking systems, which improved results, which attracted more users. Over time, that loop became an impenetrable moat. Competing with it has proven nearly impossible.

ChatGPT occupies a similar position for AI assistants. Nearly a billion people now interact with it weekly, giving OpenAI an unmatched new window into human intent, curiosity, and decision-making. Each prompt and reply can be fed back into model training, evaluations, and reinforcement learning to strengthen what is arguably the world’s most powerful AI feedback loop.” All this makes sense, it comes with the nearly mandatory “Google’s Gemini 3 rollout has lured new users. If ChatGPT’s quality slips or feels cluttered, defecting to Google becomes easier. Introducing ads now risks exactly that. Even mildly irritated users could view ads as one annoyance too many.” Whilst in the background we are ‘sensitive’ to “OpenAI has already committed to spending hundreds of billions of dollars on infrastructure to serve ChatGPT at a global scale. At some point, those bills will force the company to monetize more aggressively.

If OpenAI manages to build even half of Google’s Search ads business in an AI-native form, it could generate roughly $50 billion in annual profit. That’s one way to fund its colossal ambitions.” This gives OpenAI a two sided blade in the back. It was a good ploy, but that ploy is deemed to be counter productive and I get that, but dropping the ads might sting with the investors as It was the dimes that they were seeing coming their way and ChatGPT needs to make a smooth entry all the way to the next update, which will be near impossible to avoid in several ways. Google has the inside track now and whilst there are a few settings that are ‘malleable’ for the users, the smooth look is essential for ChatGPT to continue. And that is before other start looking at the low quality data it verifies against. Google has, as I see it, exactly the same problem, but as I see it, ChatGPT gets it now in advance. 

Newcomer (at https://www.newcomer.co/p/openais-code-red-shows-the-power) gives us “In truth, as Newcomer’s Tom Dotan wrote back in April, Google, with all of its formidable assets, was never very far behind. Nor is it currently very far ahead. Anthropic too has always been essentially neck-and-neck with OpenAI on the core technology. The capabilities of the big foundation models, and even some lighter ones like DeepSeek, are broadly similar. Marc Benioff, himself a skilled practitioner in the arts of attention, even claimed this week that the big models will be interchangeable commodities, like disk drives. Yet the perception of who’s on top matters quite a lot at a moment when consumers, enterprise technology buyers, and investors are all deciding where to place some highly consequential long-term bets. That brings us back to Altman’s “Code Red.”” Is a truth in itself, but the next part “while the alarm came in a company-wide memo that wasn’t officially announced publicly, we can stipulate that the “leak” of the memo, if not necessarily orchestrated, was almost certainly part of the plan. A media maestro like Altman surely knew that a memo going out to thousands of employees with charged language like “Code Red” was all but guaranteed to make its way to the press. Publicizing a panicked internal reaction to a competitor’s new product might seem like a counter-intuitive way to maintain your reputation as the industry leader.” As I see it, someone in Microsoft marketing earned his dollars in marketing that day, but this is a personal feeling, I have no data to back it up. It is now up to Sam Altman to deliver his ‘new’ version in the coming week and it better the a great new release, or as I see it, there will be heads rolling all over the floor and Sam Altman knows that the pressure is up. I don’t think he is scared as some media says, but he is definitely worried, because this setting will set the record of $13 billion straight, into or away from Microsoft and Sam Altman knows this, as such he is probably a little worried and in a software release any of a hundred things can go wrong and they all need to go right at present. 

Then we get “Altman and OpenAI are so good at making news that it’s sometimes hard to tell what’s real.” So, isn’t that the setting all the time? I have always seen Sam Altman as a bad second hands car salesman, That is my take, but I have had a healthy disgust for salespeople for over 30 years. I am a service person, Technical support, customer support. That was always my field. I am not against sales, merely against cleaning up their messes. At times this comes with the territory, shit happens, but those salespeople overselling something just so that they can fill their pipeline and make their numbers are not acceptable to me. To illustrate this, A little setting (devoid of names and brands) “A salesperson came to me with what he needed. We could not do that and I told him, so off he goes calling every technical support person on the planet until he found one that agreed with him and then he sold the solution to the customer and hung that persona name on this. I had to clean up the mess and set up a credit invoice, but after I went through the whole 9 yards making it over 30 days ensuring him that he kept his commission” that is the type I am disgusted with because the brands as a whole suffers, all for the need of greed. It is short sighted thinking. I goes nowhere, but his monthly revenue was guaranteed. And I feel that Sam Altman is not completely like that, but it is the ‘offset’ of salespeople that I carry within me. For me protecting the product and the customer are first and foremost on my mind. 

Then we get Futurism (at https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/openai-is-suddenly-in-major-trouble) where we see ‘OpenAI Is Suddenly in Major Trouble’ OK, is this true? We are given “The financial stakes are almost comical in their magnitude: The company is lighting billions of dollars on fire, with no end in sight; it’s committed to spending well over $1 trillion over the next several years while simultaneously losing a staggering sum each quarter. And revenues are lagging far behind, with the vast majority of ChatGPT users balking at the idea of paying for a subscription.” I don’t agree with this setting. You either pay, or you see advertisement that is the setting. There are no free rides and the sooner you realise this, the easier this gets. Then we are given “Meanwhile, Google has made major strides, quickly catching up with OpenAI’s claimed 800 million or so weekly active ChatGPT users as of September. Worse yet, Google is far better positioned to turn generative AI into a viable business — all while minting a comfortable $30 billion in profit each quarter, as the Washington Post points out.” I agree with the setting the Washington Post sets out with and Google does have an advantage, but that is still relying on the fact that Sam Altman does not get his new version seen as stellar in the coming week. He still has a much larger issue, but that is for later. All this comes at the price of being in the frontrunner team. Easy does it, there is no other way and the stakes are set rather high. So then we are given “In a Thursday note, Deutsche Bank analyst Jim Reid estimated staggering losses for OpenAI amounting to $140 billion between 2024 and 2029.” This is probably true, but where are the numbers. $140 billion over 5 years is one, but what revenue is set against it? Because if this is still set against a revenue number that OpenAI keeps making they are going decently sweet, the numbers were never in debate, the return on investment was and these stakes are high and there is no debating that, these numbers are either given or they are not. 

Then we are given something that makes sense ““OpenAI may continue to attract significant funding and could ultimately develop products that generate substantial profits and revolutionize the world,” he wrote, as quoted by WaPo. “But at present, no start-up in history has operated with expected losses on anything approaching this scale.” “We are firmly in uncharted territory,” Reid added.” I agree, in several ways, but the revenue is not given as such the real deal is absent. Consider YouTube, did anyone see the upside of a $1.65 billion acquisition 20 years ago? It now generates $36.1 billion in annual revenue (2024), Microsoft and OpenAI are banking on that same setting and Microsoft needs it to get a quality replacement for Clippy and they are banking on ChatGPT, this will only happen if they win over Google and I have my doubts on this. There is no real evidence because the new version isn’t ready yet, but it really needs one hitch to make it all burn down and Altman knows this. The numbers or better, the statistics are not on his side. And as I haven’t see a decent software price fight for a while, so I am keeping my thumbs up for Altman (I am however a through and through Google guy). This is a worthy fight watching and I am wondering how this might evolves over the next week.

The stakes are high, the challenge is high, lets see if Sam Altman rises to the occasion. It’s almost Sunday for me so have a great day you all, I reckon that Ryan Reynolds is about 6 hours from breakfast in Vancouver now.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,