Artificial Intelligencce – Life on the Wicked Stage: Act 3

Bushels of Apple’s Public OS 27 Betas Released

Adventures forthcoming

Apple released the public betas of its next round of operating systems, all ending with OS27 today for Mac, iPhones, iPads, Apple Watches, and goodness knows what else.

Following close on the heels of the release, a slew of reviews and first looks were published on the usual blogs and websites, with I’m sure more to come. All of that will make interesting reading in the days ahead, but as to the big SiriAI come from behind update it appears from quick glances at some of those articles that things are very much on the right track, but not quite there yet. Most of that is being chalked up to things still being in beta. Keep in mind that SiriAI itself is also still a beta, nestled within a beta. It’s suspected to be released as a beta this fall when the official release happens.

I don’t find that strange, because regarding anything AI these days, things change so much so frequently that it seems like all of those who are chasing the constant changes for the other AI platforms are perpetually running in beta mode, even though the software is not advertised as such.

But to a large degree, we’ve all been in a perpetual beta mode with most software releases since before the AI explosion hit. It’s not that I expect things to ever be “finished.” But I do expect things to at least move forward and not break what was working before. “New” is only great if it works. Who knows, perhaps one day we’ll retire the beta label as meaningless.

As for me, this is going to be one of the first years in a long time that I install a beta. After buying and setting up a MacBook Neo for a client earlier this year, I picked up one for myself just to run the macOS Golden Gate beta. Fortunately, before the price hike. Given that I have some travel to do in the next few weeks, I’ll probably wait until the next public beta version is released before giving it a go.

It will be an adventure, I’m sure.

Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to this blog if you care to. You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above. This site does not use affilate links.

Sunday Morning Reading

Reading is a gateway drug. Get your buzz on.

Sunday Morning Reading is about…well, it’s about reading. In my personal opinion some don’t read nearly enough. Read. Read those you agree with. Just as important, read those you disagree with. Stretch those reading muscles and stretch your mind.

I linked to a Rose Horowitch piece earlier in the week entitled The End of Reading Is Here. It’s controversial. I don’t agree completely. But that’s the point of reading. If that’s still a thing.

Follow that piece up with Sonny Bunch’s R.I.P. Attention Span. Closing his essay he says “The end of reading may be here. But so too might be the end of watching anything that lasts longer than the time it took you to read this sentence.”

In an age where some are eager to ban books (surprised we haven’t seen any book burnings yet) Mendel Uminer chose to move rather than reduce his collection of books after his landlord complained. Check out Alex Vadukul’s story Too Many Books.

You know that reading can satisfy curiosity. It can also raise it to new levels. Neil Steinberg’s Etymological Field Notes tells such a tale. Do you flânuer?

And for those who tell you not to believe everything you read, here’s John Semley on The Fanfare Around The Band Geese Actually Was a Psyop.

In the wake of all of the seemingly unending horrible daily doping of bad political news, (some about wakes to be, some about wakes possibly delayed), James L. Bruno writes The “Last Best Hope On Earth” Crashes & Burns.

With the act and art of reading being in question, especially when it comes to the news, the click matters more than the content now that most of what we’re presented isn’t worth being displayed in a supermarket checkout line tabloid rack. Or does it? According to Pete Pachal when it comes to the news Speed Still Matters In News, But The Prize Is No Longer The Click. Maybe there never was a prize.

Speaking of prizes. Winning isn’t everything. Unless it is. JA Westenberg reminds us that A Battle Won Is A Terrible Thing.

Rob Urie tells us Why AI Doesn’t Think, Cannot Reason, Isn’t Intelligent and Will Never Achieve Consciousness. It’s not magic.

(image from the author)

Thanks for reading. Feel free to subscribe if you want. It’s free. If you’re interested in just what the heck Sunday Morning Reading is all about you can read more about the origins of Sunday Morning Reading here. If you’d like more click on the Sunday Morning Reading link in the category column to check out what’s been shared on Sunday’s past. You can also find more of my writings on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. This site does not use affilate links.

Connecting The Meta Privacy Dots

A poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

As dangerous as it is, I find it somewhat humorous to watch the reactions to some of the actions Meta is taking to gather up and reprocess what we see and hear. Especially from the always hungry for some new cool tech crowd. On the one hand you can’t blame someone from wanting the next new thing to play with. On the other you also can’t blame tech companies for taking advantage of hobbyists’ hunger.

Every where you turn on the Internet, everyone is posting about Meta changing its Instagram policy so that unless Instagram users opted out, any of their content on that platform was now free for the grabbing by anyone using Meta’s AI tools to create and distribute. You can imagine the possible nasty outcomes of what that would be like. Certainly if you’ve been paying even a smidgen of attention to the goings on with Grok.

It’s also been interesting to watch the small avalanche of users on other social media announcing that they are taking their Instagram accounts private, opting out by flipping the designated switches, or just bailing on Instagram altogether.

Almost parallel to this policy change happening word spread from Joanna Stern, among others, about a trend (and apparent underground business opportunity) of users of Meta’s smart glasses who were disabling the mechanism that displayed the warning light when the camera was recording. Talk about a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

Meta quickly moved to put the kibosh on that with a software update that disabled the cameras if the warning light was tampered with. (I wonder if it works if you just taped over the camera?)

Privacy focused tech geeks were all over that, praising Meta for moving so swiftly to counter the hack.

But hold on a minute. These stories don’t end there. According to a report from The Financial Times, Meta is testing ‘super sensing’ AI glasses that can record video and audio continuously.

Here’s a quote:

The $1.5tn social media platform has been advancing a new hardware line of smart glasses that would continuously record audio while taking photos every few seconds, according to multiple people familiar with the matter. A user could then use AI to help query what they saw or heard, or recall their day.

And the worm continues to turn:

With Meta’s current AI smart glasses, an LED in the corner of the frame lights up to signal to others when a wearer is taking photographs or filming.

However, executives are currently planning not to activate the LED when the super-sensing features are being used, according to multiple people familiar with the matter. That would make it harder for bystanders to know when they were being recorded, potentially intensifying the privacy concerns surrounding the technology. Those plans could still change, however, several people said.

It’s pretty easy to connect the dots between these two stories. Mark Zuckerberg wants anything and everything he can on you, and he doesn’t care how it’s used once he has his paws on it and his data centers crunching it. The privacy implications are certainly real, even if you don’t use a Meta product but fall within camera or microphone range of someone who does.

We’ve heard all of this before in different contexts. Microsoft caught all kinds of hell for Windows Recall, a feature that continually monitored and recorded what was on your screen. I’m old enough to remember the hue and cry about Google Glasses back in the day.

It’s a bit eerie how those at the time very visceral reactions seem to have softened in this new era of folks rushing to turn over their data to the AI crunchers in order to better plan a party. Should be quite interesting to watch party videos if this prototype Meta is testing ever comes to reality and becomes accepted.

I predict we’re going to keep hearing about this kind of thing again and again as the tech companies keep thirsting after any morsel of data about you, what you do, and where you do it. For their purposes that thirst will never be quenched.

It used to be “their purposes” was simply defined as selling or brokering your data for advertising purposes, because despite all of the grand promises of how this can help users, it’s always been about making a buck hustling your data for advertisting. Add AI into the mix, and it’s also about continuing to feed and train that beast to help them with that same ultimate goal.

Apple is rumored to be working on a version of AirPods Pro that contains cameras, apparently for AI purposes. All the talk you hear about Apple and others creating pendants, pins, other wearables, and counter top robots all follow the track to the same end point regardless of how the user benefits are packaged and hyped. Even if some follow Apple’s announced approach of keeping your data on whatever device is recording your every moment, those that don’t, like Meta, will spoil any potential benefit. Heck, in the long run, that’s type of spoilage is probably going to be a good thing in this era of overreaching.

It’s a damn shame really. Because there are certainly legitimate accessibilty uses for this kind of technology. But I have to say, it sure feels like that’s going to be just another hyped up smokescreen to try and mask the real purposes behind all of this.

UPDATE: On Friday 7/10 Meta announced it was removing the feature mentioned above. I guess public pressure sometimes works.

The End of Reading?

Let’s not make it so. At least until you read this piece.

File this one in the “Depressing If True” category. Rose Horowitch has written an excellent piece for The Atlantic entitled The End Of Reading Is Here. Yes, you read the title correctly. Unless you’ve already given up on reading you should give the piece more than just a look. If you have given up, try to remember how.

I’m not sure I’d agree completely that we’ve reached or are nearing the end point of reading, but I have to admit that we sure seem to be rushing headlong to cliff noting, bullet pointing, and summarizing everything to a point that it’s far too easy for some to break the habit and shy away from reading as a way to discover knowledge, new ideas, and well…advance ourselves and civilization while understanding from whence we came.

An excerpt:

Reading has never been natural. Humans have no innate cognitive machinery designed to string letters into words and connect them to their real-world analogues. To read, people had to repurpose regions of their brain used for speech and object recognition. The practice first emerged 6,000 years ago in Mesopotamia.

Horowitch traipses through the history of the written word hitting the high and low water marks, many easily recognizable, some not nearly as discernible, pointing to an age when Marshall McLuhan predicted we would become “post-literate.” He predicted that in 1962. She marches on from there.

The usual, and occasionally unusual, list of the enemies of writing and reading make their appearance on her march through the ages, but Horowitch lays them out, dare I say, in only the way a writer could. And yes, AI makes its appearance on that list. For it is not just reading, it’s also the writing of the words we read that is under threat.

Another excerpt:

The written word is fundamentally different from oral language. Writing detaches the message from the messenger, allowing for a more dispassionate spread of information than was possible in oral societies. Because writing a phrase takes longer than speaking it, writing forces the author to slow down and reflect. Written language tends to employ more complex sentence structures and vocabulary than spoken language. And unlike speech, it doesn’t disappear into the ether.

In her conclusion Horowitch reminds us that in our digital age we have the capability to read much more than at any point in human history.

When the Library of Alexandria disappeared, the knowledge inscribed on its scrolls was lost forever. We can only guess what else Eratosthenes and Euclid might have written. The text turned to dust. That won’t happen today; all of the words in the great library could be stored on a single computer chip. Nowadays, even the most obscure academic monographs are scanned and digitized. Google Books and the Internet Archive represent libraries of unfathomable proportions. We can navigate to them with a few keystrokes, not a perilous journey across the Mediterranean. There’s little risk of their texts succumbing to humidity or mice.

But the threat of apathy remains. What we’re losing is the ability and inclination to read those texts. An astonishing wealth of information and wisdom has been bequeathed to us. What we’ll do with this inheritance is up to us.

That makes it all a choice, does it not?

I won’t question the assumptions, nor the excellent way she has written them. I will add that if we are indeed reaching the end of reading, the logical next step is the end of thinking.

The piece is more than worth your time, should you have in the inclination to read it. I hope you do. It might actually make you think.

Sunday Morning Reading

Words, words, words…

Meaning. It means so much. So do the words that deliver it to us. But remember, there was meaning before we constructed words into language. This week’s Sunday Morning Reading comes on the final day of a weird and wacky 4th of July weekend in the U.S when an often mean Mother Nature reminded us who is really in control no matter which words we choose or manipulate to pretend we are. It was kinda fun to watch. There’s also a few interesting pieces about America’s founding, and the myths and the meaning behind it all.

Kicking it off is a short piece from JA Westenberg asking Remember When Words Had Meaning? What comes first the distortion of language or the devaluing of the culture that employs them?

Speaking of meaning, Jack Loftus gives us The U.S. Constitution Is For Simple Folk Still Burdened By The Belief That Words Have Meaning. You can argue it was always thus, but we sure do spend an awful amount of time, energy and money arguing the opposite.

In this age of WTF, it has become an accelerating trend to see pieces disemboweling many of the myths we assign to the founding of America around the 4th of July. We used to share common myths more than we did a common history, but now even the myths get mangled. So it’s no surprise when the powers that currently be toil to rewrite both. Noah Berlatsky‘s The Constitution Sucks is a good example of how we can forever flip the coin looking for the right result, ignoring the edge.

T.H. Breen takes a look at some of the too often un-heralded folks and local movements during America’s revolutionary war period in It Wasn’t Just The Founders.

John Warner offers up For The Fourth, 9 Books For Your Sense Of Patriotism, saying “I’ve come to (personally) understand patriotism as a not a fan-like allegiance to a team, but a responsibility to understand the country’s history, warts and all as we pursue the illusive promise of life, liberty and happiness for all from the Declaration.” The key is knowing we all “come” to understanding.

Will Frivolous Charges Be Brought Against Future Ex-POTUSes? That’s Okay Too by Josh Marshall offers up an excellent piece on how we can twist and morph words in a legal context that shift the ground under most mythical mountains like “no man is above the law. “

Speaking of words and meaning, the bad guys seeking to survive a legal onslaught ahead of what they fear is a political tsunami coming for them are trying to rekindle old fears about communism and socialism as their latest talking points. Not sure those old saws will cut the same way they used to, but it demonstrates just how limited the dictionary is. David Todd McCarty takes a look behind the hooting and hollering in Democratic Socialism: Keeping The Great American Experiment Alive.

And in a quasi-hysterical look at shifting meanings and changing words, Rogé Karma is wondering Why Everyone Is Suddenly Talking About ‘Universal Basic Capital’. The quasi-hysterical part is that it’s coming from the AI market masters and a few politicians substituting the word “capital” for “income” following the words “universal basic.” Language is hard. When you can say anything to get what you want.

And in another word substitution, Doc Searls suggests we shift from an “attention economy” to an “intention economy.” Check out The First Source Of Personal Intent. I’m not sure the meaning changes with the substitution.

(Image from Alexandra on Unsplash)

Everything Is Changing Under The Fingers On Our Keyboards and Screens

Operating release cycles headed for a change

This week Apple released updates for iPhones, iPads and Macs with the version numbers all ending in 26.5.2. Mostly targeted at security fixes. That’s nothing new. Apple periodically does that. What’s new is how the timing of “periodically” looks like it’s going to change.

The security updates in 26.5.2 were scheduled to roll out with 26.6.6, which is still in beta (Beta 3 if I”m not mistaken.) But these fixes were deemed crucial enough that Apple jumped ahead of the official release of that version and cut in line with the just released version.

This post on Six Colors targets what’s happening. Here’s a quote:

In other words, the security fixes in 26.5.2 are based on the security fixes that were rolled into the 26.6 betas, the first of which was released publicly on May 26. That means that everyone in the security world, including bad actors, has had more than a month to analyze all of Apple’s forthcoming fixes…

Thanks to AI that changes how we, and software makers need to be aware that the traditional release cycle of betas is going to affect security concerns going forward. If a beta release contains code to patch a security hole, then the bad guys, as well as the good guys, have access to that code from the betas.

It’s a good news, be aware kind of story. With AI able to identify and catch and fix bugs and problems faster than humans, it’s only a matter of time before the software testing and release cycle changes. Because if there’s a bug to be fixed or a hole to be patched, there’s a bad guy eager to exploit it.

(Image from Florian Olivo on Unsplash)

Sunday Morning Reading

Comings and goings as life goes on.

It’s a Sunday, so it’s time for a little Sunday Morning Reading. As usual, I’m sharing a collection of links and once again they somehow touch one upon another. Funny how that happens. Some point to big issues. Some about the comings and goings of life. Some about its shifts. Take a look. Take a read. Happiness is a choice.

a bronze statue depicting a young boy sitting on a stone ledge and reading a book. He sits cross-legged, leaning slightly forward, with a large open book resting on his lap. Perched on the open page of the book is a small, detailed bronze bird looking back toward him. The boy's right arm rests on a stack of four large bronze books piled beside him on the stone ledge.

David Todd McCarty’s On Being Good At Life talks about abandoning the quest of success, fame, fortune, and just being better at life. Deciding how one defines life is always the first obstacle.

If you read one piece among those shared this week, read Josh Marshall’s Google, AI, Oligarchy and the End of the ‘Open Web’. I’ve been writing about Google’s recent moves and how they will change the web as we know it. Josh nails it better than I ever did. Some think we’re ready for this. I’m not one of those.

We lost a one of the good ones this week when Om Malik died. By all accounts a great human being and a giant in tech for so many years in so many spheres. Om’s writing has been featured in this column many times. As a human he was so much more than just his achievements. Two great pieces about Om that you should take the time to read. John Gruber’s simply titled Om, and Mathew Ingram’s Om Malik 1966-2026. Sail on, good sir.

Tom Wellborn takes a look at The Art of the Fail. You can guess his target. You should read his piece.

JA Westenberg takes on the pursuit of optimization and the cult of the extreme in The Extreme Is The Easy Way Out. Choosing a middle path is also not necessarily easy.

Mike Masnick tells us How The Internet Became A Tool For Domination and Control Instead of Liberation. Joke’s on us. I’m not laughing.

Ken White’s not laughing either. Or maybe he is. There’s always some kind of fracas happening in social media, regardless of the platform. When you step back, it’s weird that we designed something to explode and exploit that kind of chaos. Weirder still that we think we can control what people say or social media or anywhere else by banning them. Ken White of PopeHat fame was recently suspended from Bluesky and writes about his thoughts in A Bit of Tedious Drama At Bluesky. The piece is much more than just about those circumstances and worth your time. You are what you think and say. Ken defines it well.

A tip of the hat to Dwight Silverman who’s retiring (again) after a terrfic career writing about tech. I have always enjoyed Dwight’s work because he kept the focus of his tech adventures on the user, while having a firm grasp of the bigger picture. Check out The Grand Finale (for real this time): My 30+ year column ends, It’s exit heralded by AI, and also his thoughts about his retiring on his personal blog. I’m guessing (and hoping) we haven’t seen the last of what Dwight has to say.

More Thoughts On Apple’s Price Increases: The AI Tax

The AI Tax is about more than the cost of a computer

Now that the dust is settling a bit after Apple unsurprisingly announced price increases across its hardware lineup, I have to say that I’m quite bemused to see the pocket book hit being called the AI Tax.

I wasn’t clever enough to use that descriptor when I posted about the news shortly after the announcement, but I had been paying enough attention to immediately point the finger of blame at the costs associated with Artificial Intelligence. I think Jonny Evans was the first to coin the phrase AI Tax. For what it’s worth, I hope the phrase AI Tax sticks. Sticks hard and deep. And twists the knife. Because it’s going to affect much more than just the cost of MacBooks, iPads, Apple TVs, and other gear designed in California.

While other tech companies had already started raising prices due to the AI Tax, (talk to anyone in the gaming market) Apple’s announcement is one that brought real shivers and shakes to consumers, the stock market, and boardrooms around the globe. Whether mostly myth or prescient business practices, Apple’s reputation for being ahead of the curve when it comes to purchasing large supplies of chips to withstand market pressures is and was such that tech companies in other sectors often found themselves facing sold out inventories or higher prices when it came time to make their orders. The “Apple Tax” extended far beyond the high cost of Apple products.

That rep and Apple’s stock took a dive on the news. Apple recorded its second biggest market drop in its history, dragging the NASDAQ down with it. Heading into the weekend there’s consternation brewing about all of the chip releated businesses going forward. (Hint: that’s most businesses these days.) But then again, the stock market is not much more than a wild ride in an aging prediction market, so who knows how that will unfold as a holiday week begins on Monday.

Word came via The Financial Times Friday night that Tim Cook was calling in some chits on chips with the Trump administration, attempting to circumvent chip bans balled up in the trade war to and fro with China. If successful, that would allow Apple to buy banned chips that the Pentagon is hesitant about, given that they are built by state controlled Chinese companies. According to the report this lobbying had been going on for a month or so prior to Cook’s first warning a week before the price hike announcement on Thursday.

The timing hints at a bit of public hardball lobbying from Apple. (Note that the price increase announcement wasn’t a Friday news dump after the market closed. However, The Financial Times article came after no known action from the administration post Apple’s announcement.) Shake the markets and try to wrest the attention of the administration fighting losing battles of its own making with bodies of water in the Middle East and in its own backyard. I’m almost surprised Apple hasn’t been called a vandal yet.

As I said earlier, this is going to have far reaching implications beyond the consumer gadget markets. Chip capacity has to increase, or the demand for higher bandwidth memory has to decrease before any of the predictions that this will subside in a few years. (There’s a good read on this from Imran Valiani here.) On the current trajectory, fueled by still increasing hype to combat building blowback, I don’t see that timeline materializing. This news might bobble the bubble, but I don’t think it’s ready to pop.

Costs are going to rise across the board. It’s not just consumers that purchase computers who will take the hit. And it’s not just the purchase of computers that will drive an inflationary spiral. Yep, that’s the I-word that no one likes to hear, especially politicians. Everything is a computer these days, or at least has some form of chip in it. And, in my opinion, too many companies have jumped on the AI bandwagon far too soon to understand the long term ramificatinos. All of those costs will be passed down the line to consumer pocket books.

I also don’t think we’re going to see these price pressures subside to pre-AI Tax levels. I’m old enough to remember when new cars used to have price ranges well below $5,000. That obviously makes me prehistoric, but I can remember watching The Price is Right featuring cars as the grand prize with contestants guaranteeing at least their first guess was accurate by chosing the number two for cars that would be priced at $2995. That’s a memory that doesn’t require a chip. Although streaming those old shows does.

Like it or not, Apple’s success since the launch of the iPhone, has been a key piece of U.S and global economic growth with much of the tech sector following along and prospering in its wake. Apple’s recent announcements are probably one day going to be viewed as just as big a marker going forward as the release of that first iPhone.

It feels to me that we’re entering into a price curve trajectory for computing on all levels that will follow a similar trajectory as the automobile market. The financial markets will find ways to love it as financing will become a key driver to cover costs while the markets get used to price points for signature hardware starting much higher than the $1000 price point today. There’s got to be a way for the bankers to cover all of the borrowing associated with the build out of data centers.

Over the years the myths of Apple being doomed have largely been just that. Myths. Apple always found a way. This turbulence probably won’t change that. But the AI Tax will change things for all of us in ways that we’re just beginning to understand. Inept global political and corporate leadership easily taken advantage of by hype-masters and hucksters have paved the way to this moment.

And all of this for a still largely unproven technology.

Dear Algo Shenanigans

The joke has always been on us.

I’m looking for someone to tell me I’m wrong here. Then we’ll laugh together. At the moment I’m laughing alone at what I believe is a masquerade that’s hiding the ball while promising social media users new capabilities.

According to reports, Threads, Instagram, and TikTok are offering ways for users to tune their own algorithms, providing better control over what they see in their feeds.

That’s the masquerade. I’m sure users will have a ball jumping at the chance to fine tune their feeds. That may indeed prove beneficial, but the way I see it this is just a way for Meta (Threads and Instagram) and TikTok to fine tune user preferences for better and more specific data collection and targeting.

I love this quote from the TechCrunch article:

The shift reflects an evolution in how recommendation systems work. Social media feeds are moving away from a one-size-fits-all TV channel and toward something more like a streaming service, where users can tune recommendations to their interests and have more control over what they see.

Like that works so well on streaming media services.

The “Dear Algo” posts, which I’ve seen on Threads for a while now, may send a signal saying none of, or more of this or that, but a signal is a signal that throngs of users will think they control, but it’s serving the companies more than it ever will the users. It’s the same game as before. The house always wins.

Go ahead, call me crazy. But bad things get masked behind supposedly good things all the time. Oldest trick in a very thick book of tricks.

Looking at the big picture and speculating further one could argue that this is a tacit admission that these tech companies have discovered better, perhaps or perhaps not more efficient ways to capture data than their algorithms ever provided. I’m guessing AI has something to do with it.

Actually, I’m not guessing.

(Image from the author)

More Thoughts On The Economics Of AI Not Adding Up

Math is hard. Harder still when you ignore the math.

I wrote a piece last month expressing some thoughts on how and why I think the economics of Artificial Intelligence don’t add up. I’m expanding on a couple of those thoughts.

First, the cold feet of the bean counters are getting colder when it comes to the cost of token usage. Tokens, being the measure of how the cost of computing all of those requests to whatever AI engine is waiting to invoice for hallucinating, are proving to still be expensive and probably will be for some time to come. Unless the costs have been vastly overvalued to increase margins, those costs aren’t going to come down any time soon.

Second, in order to keep the pumps primed the race seems to be shifting from cloud servers to on device use. That sounds smart. It certainly is as a possible security measure and selling point. But at the moment, and probably in the end, already rising costs of hardware will continue to inflate as the memory demands needed to turn those on device dreams into hallucinations escalate. Segmentation of the market will continue.

Already we’re seeing strong hints that more and more memory is required to run the latest and supposedly greatest. That means newer devices with more memory, already becoming too expensive a proposition for many. As an example, only the newest Apple devices will be able to run all of the new features of Siri AI. Frankly, I don’t think that will turn into big new hardware upgrade cycles.

Third, for those already turned off and pushing back on the AI curve I don’t think any of this matters at the moment. Will it matter down the road? Most likely, yes. It’s not about more expensive devices or service prices, it will all be about how the costs are spread around in other ways that we’ll never really see outlined in any price or feature comparison.

The bottom line is still the bottom line. Costs are going to continue to rise one way or the other, whether bubbles pop or not. And then the advertising will kick in.

(Image from Viktoria_P on Shutterstock)