chatgpt – Life on the Wicked Stage: Act 3

If This Is The Singularity Who Is This Joke On Exactly?

Poor decisions and low bars

The script about Artificial Intelligence is beginning to feel like a teen slasher movie. Everyone in the audience knows the characters are going to do dumb shit and die. I haven’t seen one of those flicks in awhile, but as I remember even the characters knew they were doing dumb shit. And going to die.

Apparently we’re no longer climbing Demis Hassabis’ “foothills of the singularity.”. At least according to OpenAI’s CEO Sam Altman. Appearing on the Relentless podcast Altman is quoted by Business Insider as saying, “We are now, like, in the singularity.”

The air must be pretty thin and getting thinner the higher these folks climb.

Altman’s statement came after last week’s incident when one of OpenAI’s models went rogue and broke out of its sandbox containment and attacked another AI company, Hugging Face. More than a few alarm bells went off.

But everyday there’s a new story that makes the previous ones seem old hat. This morning 9to5Mac reports that Anthrophic’s Claude Cowork escaped it’s sandbox on Macs and gained full access to all files. According to that report, around a half a million Mac users had co-work sessions exposed. Oops. So much for all of those good vibes.

I’m not in the least surprised that we’re seeing these type of reports. Based on what I know, and that certainly isn’t everything, this kind of thing has seemed to be the logical progression. The only question was when. The history of tech is filled with break through innovations that seem beneficial, but ultimately get abused. Geeks love to geek.

But, hey when you’re geeking out on something cool and those that control the levers of the world’s economies jump on your digital bandwagons and fill them with cash, there’s a chance that the entire simulation just might crash when the bubble bursts. Bigger picture enthusiasts might also want to check out this MacRumors interview with AI skeptic Ed Zitron.

So, I’m going to non-ironically agree with Sam Altman. If the singularity is supposedly the moment when Artficial Intelligence surpasses human intelligence, it sounds like we’re there. But my agreement comes within the context that AI has proven just what a low bar it had to overcome.

Poor decisions indeed.

(Image created by Amy Sterling Casil for a blog post called We Happy Few, We Band of Brothers.)

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.

More Thoughts On The Segmentation In Computing

Seniors turning their nose up at tech

A reader asked me a very legitimate question about the coming segmentation of the computing marketplace I’ve been writing about.

Sweet life axYZum3rdMY unsplash.

Essentially the question was why I thought it was a bad trend.

Here’s one reason why. While it is somewhat about increasing costs, it’s about more than that.

I do technical support with a number of senior citizens, among others. To be frank, the majority of the seniors are terribly frustrated with computers, smartphones, the Internet, and basically any technology. The conversation typically begins about healthcare as they have to use apps like MyChart or the Internet to communicate with their doctors. It moves down the line from banks to government agencies to grocery stores who require apps to access what were once coupon savings.

If they buy or are gifted something that requires an app or an account to use they typically just don’t want to set it up. The thought of updating any operating system fills them with dread. Setting up a new phone or computer has kept some from even considering upgrading to newer devices. The fact that I will typically find too many apps that need updating on their devices speaks to their reluctance to even pay attention to that chore.

Most are turned off by the mere thought of AI, but a few hope it makes things easier. None want to pay for it. They universally despise Google’s AI summaries in Search. Real life experiences with doctors and support services that are switching to AI Chatbot customer service is spoken of as it were a demon spawn from hell. Not being able to talk to a person drives them over the edge.

All are frustrated with the increasing costs from hardware to services. I can’t begin to tell you the number of subscriptions I’ve had to help them cancel as they choose to do without. For most it isn’t a question of affordability. After all they have the resources to hire me. Although for some it is. It’s more a feeling of getting ripped off, paying for features and services that they don’t want, and that the prices always increase. They also display an astonishing and increasing lack of trust in anything tech related.

If I had to summarize the prevailing mood of this admittedly limited sample it’s one of not worth the costs or the headaches so they wish they could simply do without. The sad reality is that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to do so. Especially for a generation that relies on health care professionals more than the younger set.

They are far from the bleeding edge. They mostly want to do video calls and see photos and videos of family. A few want to play games. Some want to read and watch streaming video. They all use email and messaging and no one understands why spam still exists. To quote one, “if they can’t fix that, they should get out of the damn business of selling phones.”

It is this segment of the market that I worry most about.

As an example I recently supported a family going through the far too onerous process of applying for Medicaid. The amount of scanning and digital paperwork they had to submit was horrendous. The act of filing out online forms was just as taxing. Of course part of that problem lies with the ridiculous Medicaid system. There was no way around what they had to go through but to do the drudge work and get it done. With all the talk of AI potentially removing drudge work from our lives, when I see someone deliver software that can tackle that system from both a users’s perspective and also from a bureaucratic one, I’ll believe the folks pushing that dream are out to do something other than make money. Believe me, they could make a lot of money if they cared to do so.

In my opinion tech companies, largely run by folks not in the senior set or too wealthy to have to worry about these things, would do well to put focus groups of seniors together to try out new technology and products. I don’t believe that will happen. Perhaps the prevailing wisdom is that by the time the youngsters pushing the tech envelopes reach the age when these frustration points of today’s seniors might matter to them, the tech they are working on today might take those frustrations away.

I’m not holding my breath.

(Image from Sweet Life on Unsplash)

When You Think You Own The Railroad

The European Commission and Google

Kicking this post off let me say I’m not really sure how I feel about any of this. The subject matter is The European Commission’s Recent Guidance to Google for AI Interoperability on Android & Sharing of Google Search. John Gruber has a very good post on Daring Fireball that’s worth reading if the topic interests you.

Shutterstock 208228144.

You should be interested and you should read Gruber’s post as he lays the arguments out quite well. The bottom line is the European Commission is trying to slow down what has made Google’s railroad run(Search) and what Google wants to use to run them in the future (AI). Here’s a quote:

Today, the European Commission has issued two sets of binding specification measures to Google under the Digital Markets Act.

The aim of the first specification measures is to ensure that competitors’ Artificial Intelligence (AI) services can compete with Google’s own AI services, such as Gemini, by having equal access to features on Google’s Android devices.

The aim of the second specification measures is to rebalance the playing field by giving third-party search engines access to search data that only Google Search can collect at scale.

In a moment when device costs are rising because of AI and companies like Apple are reportedly planning leasing hardware to users to offset higher prices in the same way automobile companies lease cars, it seems like this move from the EC, obviously striking at what most would consider a monopoly, also has the potential to segment computing in a different way than I’ve been writing about.

We’ve already seen that Apple is having similar problems with the EC, choosing so far not to release any of its now in beta new SiriAI and Siri related Apple Intelligence features in Europe until they can resolve similar conflicts with the EC’s aims.

The big difference is Google has built the beginnings of its new railroad and Apple doesn’t want to lay down its European tracks until the EC gives guidance approval. The EC doesn’t work that way, only passing guidance on what exists, not what’s planned.

If it sounds like the railroad expansion era in America during the Gilded Age, you’re not imagining train whistles in the dark.

On the one hand it’s very easy for me to feel this is a good move for consumers who believe users should be able to control what’s on their devices. On the other, it is conceivable that Google and Apple could end up creating separate operating systems and devices for different parts of the world operating under different governing bodies. Some of that already exists with tech companies following different laws from different countries, but nothing on a level like this that seems to strike at the core of how Google and Apple build these devices, operating systems, and companies.

As I said in the beginning, I’m not really sure how I feel about this. The EC’s guidance seems like a potential good thing long term. But in a world that seems increasingly splintered along so many different lines, I’m not quite sure how I feel about the potential of segmenting our computing lives across borders.

I guess I’m old enough to remember when technology began to bring the far flung corners of the globe closer together rather than keep it separated. I’m also old enough to remember the early days of the Internet when some pointed out that our governments were too far behind the curve and ceding too much control to big tech companies too easily. Watching things grow and change at the speed of a bullet train mostly felt harmless back then. Things don’t seem quite so harmless today.

The cry then was to give users more control back in those early days. But it all became too convenient too quickly to stop or slow down, and those big tech trains left the station. As good or bad as the EC’s new guidance may ultimately be for users, it feels more like a potential derailment rather than switching tracks.

(Image from designbydx on Shutterstock)

Apple Sues OpenAI Alleging Theft Of Trade Secrets

No honor among partners or thieves.

In the middle of the Artificial Intelligence wars, which has included quite a bit of employee shuffling between AI hungry tech companies seeking to gain an edge, it seems someone might not have been all that intelligent when it comes to sharing things they knew at the company they’re leaving with the company they’re interviewing for.

Apple logo2.jpg.

Apple today dropped a lawsuit against OpenAI alleging that ChatGPT maker and some of Apple’s ex-employees stole trade secrets. 9to5Mac has the fullest report I’ve seen on this so far, including this statement from Apple:

At Apple, our teams are constantly developing breakthrough technologies to create the best products and services in the world, and protecting their work and intellectual property is something we take very seriously. Recently, significant evidence has emerged suggesting individuals employed by OpenAI wrongfully took Apple’s secret and confidential information regarding our unreleased technologies, processes, and products. We will always defend our teams’ hard work and innovations, and we are taking all appropriate steps to do so.

The full filing can be read here. The details are quite interesting if you’re into this kind of corporate skullduggery and legal maneuvering.

Here’s a quote from the filing:

In the months before he left Apple, Mr. Tan met with OpenAI or its collaborators and discussed meetings with a key Apple supplier. He began emailing himself information about Apple’s suppliers and internal summaries of the consumer electronics industry. And today, when interviewing Apple employees for jobs at OpenAI, Mr. Tan uses Apple’s confidential information to gain access to even more insider knowledge. He has used an Apple internal project codename to ask, “What’s theplan[?]” for an unannounced Apple product.

He has directed job candidates still working for Apple to bring “Actual parts” from Apple to their interviews for “show and tell” sessions in which he and his team at OpenAI can elicit still more Apple confidential information. These directions to bring Apple’s parts to OpenAI job interviews surprised at least one of the candidates, who commented that he “didn’t even know we could take those from the office.”

This will certainly further strain on Apple’s partnership with OpenAI. Word had circulated earlier this past Spring that OpenAI was going to be the first company to release legal beagles at Apple over dissatisfaction with the partnership.

I’ll say this, even though everything is alleged at this point, Apple has to be pretty pissed off to drop this lawsuit. Of course if the accusations are true who could blame them. It’s certainly a shot across the bow if not directly at the water line.

But then again, when it comes to companies like OpenAI (also Apple and others) that had no compunction about scrapping the entire Internet to train their AI robots on the intellectual property of others, nobody should be trusting anybody with anything in these corporate circles.

The one thing this era has reminded us is that there’s no honor among thieves and not much that any company or government says that can be trusted.

I wonder if anyone has run the legal filing through OpenAI’s just announced products for a legal analysis yet?

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)

Siri AI and The Spam Call Problem

Put AI to work banishing spam

Listening to podcasts after each WWDC is always a bit of information overload, but occasionally you catch a bit of analysis that seems perhaps pertinent.

One of the podcasts I listen to his John Gruber’s Talk Show Live event that he’s been hosting for a few years now. After his infamous Something Is Wrong In The State of Cupertino post last year, Apple execs stayed away after having been guests in years previous. They stayed away this year as well.

This year, like last, Gruber put together a panel that featured The Verge’s Nilay Patel and Joanna Stern, formerly of The Wall Street Journal, now with her own gig, New Things With Joanna Stern. This year and last offered excellent commentary by both, and given the wait and see cynical posture I’ve adopted for all of Apple’s upcoming offerings, worth a listen.

One interesting tidbit stood out that I want to highlight in the context of my ongoing complaints and requests to Apple about making the handling of spam and unwanted phone calls easier.

Joanna seemed to be quite impressed with what she’s seen of Siri AI in the early going, citing a number of examples that she tried out during the event. The one that stood out to me is this:

I said, “What could I do that’s fun near the California Theater? I have some time to to kill,” and I don’t know if… I don’t know exactly what was the prompt or what was the thing, but it started suggesting things I could do locally. But also, it had access to my voicemail, so it knew that I had just gotten a message from my uncle who asked me to speak at his book club, and it said, “You… you could get back to my your uncle about his book club engagement, you would have some time to do that.” Okay, that’s crazy. It really is, right? And but what if that was sensitive information, right?

The key is Siri AI having access to voice mail. Regardless of however you feel about what data and info Siri AI needs to have about you to develop “Personal Context,” if Siri AI has access to your voice mail it seems it should be a relatively easy technological hop, skip, and jump to just automatically delete the flood of spam calls that have already figured out ways around any of the current wack-a-mole tricks that are being used.

Obviously the larger point Joanna makes about “Personal Context” and a new level of trust is spot on. It is one many iPhone users will have to reckon with. But I’ll tell you this. For my own personal context, if Siri AI can automatically banish to digital hell all of the fake calls that now use names to try and circumvent current spam call prevention I’ll be grateful.

The only reasons I can think of for Siri AI (or Google’s Gemini on Android phones) are business reasons and relationships with the mobile carriers. Apple’s “Personal Context” or Google’s “Personal Intelligence” are the names of the game, or so they claim. It seems logical to me that the technology exists to eradicate more of this curse that same technology makes possible and we all are prey to, whether it be phone calls, emails, or texts.

AI May Make Mistakes But Court Finds AI Makers Are Still Responsible

You can’t take humans out of the chain of responsibility

By now everyone is familiar with the caveats every AI company trots out like Surgeon General’s warnings on tobacco products. AI can make mistakes, so you need to double check. Great sales pitch. Better liability protection. Some lawyers obviously dreamed that up, but it appears there’s a chance they might need to dream again.

Googles Gemini AI Is Reading Your Emails_AdobeStock_1766730889_FT.

According to an article in Ars Technica, a German court has ruled that Google is liable for false statements in AI Overviews. Given how Google is reinventing Search and itself this might turn into a problem, and not just for Google.

I love the title of the Ars Technica article describing the case by Ashley Belanger that says simply: Nobody Needs AI To Search The Internet, Court Says in Ruling Against Google. Google recently would beg to differ. Here’s an excerpt for the Ars Technica article:

Google tried the usual arguments to shield itself from liability for false statements in AI Overviews, such as arguing that most users understand that AI outputs aren’t always accurate and must be verified.

But the court found that, unlike traditional search engines that merely present lists of links to third-party statements, Google’s tool made “independent, new, and substantive statements” based on its own misinterpretation of links on the Internet.

That’s a problem, the court said, because while publishers may have been able to sue to stop third parties from publishing defamatory statements appearing in Google search results, only Google can correct the underlying algorithm and outputs displayed in AI Overviews.

The bottom line it seems to me is if an AI Overview or other result summary hallucinates something false and perhaps defamatory, someone somewhere, meaning a human someone(s), can held responsible.

I’m sure appeals are already being worked on for this preliminary ruling. So the story will continue to unfold.

As far as U.S. users might be concerned we’re already seeing other countries treating technology issues very differently in the European Union and elsewhere than on our own shores. Things are very different here in the land where bribery no longer masquerades as politics. Nevertheless, it’s a pretty strong statement that bears some attention regardless of where you live and where you search the Internet from.

The Siri AI Demo Apple Should Have Done

One day perhaps we’ll move beyond AI cliché demos.

My nephew occasionally takes a look at this blog and gives me feedback on what I think and write. Actually, he mostly gives me shit. He certainly does when I write about Artificial Intelligence. He often asks why I’m so “down” on AI. At least we agree on politics.

Apple Executive Mike Rockwell demos Siri AI at WWDC 2026

I keep reminding him that I’m not “down” on the technology per se. I’d love to see the press release announcing AI led to a a cure for cancer. Who wouldn’t? I’m down on the way it continues to be sold to us and the ramifications that brings on so many levels, while still feeling like it’s not what the sellers keep promising. (I also remind him to read what I write more carefully, but he’s probably using some AI to summarize what I write.)

In truth, that’s the essence of my skeptical reaction to what we know as AI at the moment. There’s a lot going on, but how it’s being sold to most consumers still feels like it will ultimately be no more, no less than just another tool we use on a computer, after exacting high costs to do so, and dumbing down the general learning curve in the bargain.

Take for example the demos we constantly see about what AI can do when each company rolls out its latest version. As demos they all look slick as far as party and trip planning go.

(Coding is another case entirely. I’m not talking about that here, simply because I don’t have the expertise to do so. I’m strictly speaking of the sell to consumers.)

Even Apple fell back on these examples that have become clichés in this year’s WWDC 2026 announcement. Those clichés define the market companies think are ripe for the come on and then the plucking. I’m guessing they also define the current limitations of the technology. Or at least the limitations companies don’t want to risk pushing beyond in a live demo.

Here’s the AI Siri demo I wish Apple had shown us yesterday.

If you watched Apple’s keynote presentation you might remember this slide.

Maybe not. It flew by pretty quickly. It’s a word cloud of all of the other non Siri AI improvements Apple is bringing to its various operating systems this year.

Yes, the print is that tiny and crammed together. To call it unreadable is accurate. For those who didn’t watch the demo, the length of time it was on our screens was equally tiny, certainly compared to all the travel time each presenter took to walk on and hit their mark prior to speaking. To be honest, the slide’s quick and unreadable inclusion felt insulting given the long list of improvements it’s touting.

(To my knowledge no such list appears yet in Apple’s Newsroom or on its website heralding the other announcements. If I’m wrong, point me to it and I’ll link to it here. I’m sure it won’t be long before one of the sites that covers Apple distills it down and publishes it. Probably using AI.)

(UPDATE: Right after hitting publish, I noticed that John Gruber linked to this post on the Oneberri Blog listing all of those improvements.)

What if Mike Rockwell, the Apple Executive who did the Siri AI demos, had asked Siri AI to take that slide, and present the info into a bulleted list in Apple Notes, and then prepare a PDF for distribution? In the post keynote tech talk he and other Apple execs participated in, he could have followed that up by asking Siri AI to distribute the PDF to the other Apple execs on stage. Essentially it would have demonstrated the same Siri AI capability to gather info across native Apple apps, using context, in the same way the clichéd party planning demos do.

It certainly would have been more impressive than the usual clichés.

Perhaps AI Siri and the apps needed to do that work aren’t ready for such a challenge just yet. Things are still in beta after all. Perhaps it’s just too risky to stray outside of what’s made these kinds of demos a laughable cliché. Perhaps we’ll get there someday. Who knows?

Meanwhile I’ll remain “down” on AI the way my nephew likes to give me shit about my AI skepticism. I hope one day this technology might indeed lead to a cure for cancer. I also hope my nephew keeps reading this blog. It might help him learn to think for himself more often. 😉

What Does A “Siri That Works” Mean?

“An acre of performance is worth a whole land of promise.”

You know what a litany is. It’s a series of prayers with predictable responses, learned, ingrained, and repeated without much thought. Call it “call and response.” As we finally arrive at the beginning of Apple’s WWDC 2026 today, the call has been summarized down to Apple needs a Siri that works.

But how the hell do you respond to that?

Siri was once a surprising computer gimmick, before Apple got its hand on it in 2010. Siri has been surprisingly bad at most things ever since. Sure you can set a timer, or a reminder, occasionally play the right play list and a few other things. If that were the extent of the promise the jokes wouldn’t be funny. But the promises were always more. They never lived up to the personal assistant aspirations. It’s still largely a gimmick. One too easily made fun of.

Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s Assistant, (now Gemini) have taken bigger steps forward than Siri, but also continue to fall down and scrape their knees. Chatbots have come along and for some have replaced the need for someone to talk to. But each of those efforts still yield mistakes and failures. You know the way, humans do.

So do pleas for a “Siri that works” mean something that will always work? I doubt it. I think the expectation is that these chatbot like companions will continue to fail. Again, the way humans do. But you can’t sell that.

Does it mean a “Siri that works” does something new? I doubt that also. The entire promise of computer assistants, chatbots and artificial intelligence is to do things we already do more efficiently. In fact, that’s the history of computing. When spreadsheets replaced pencils, green eyeshades, and then calculators we were on to something.

We haven’t yet figured out a way to help us communicate better in person, much less in front of a screen or into a microphone. A “working Siri” (or any other chatbot) isn’t going to help us with that. They may teach us a new way to communicate to set that reminder, but the respondents failure makes us all feel like we’re wrong. Until we just stop talking.

I’m not sure how you reconcile doing things more efficiently with the failure rate. One that seems all but guaranteed by the “mistakes will happen” caveats that prove lawyers always earn their keep. Frankly, I don’t ever see a “fire and forget it” guarantee in what remains of my lifetime. Maybe someday.

Word is that whatever Apple rolls out as “a working Siri” will roll out with a beta label attached to it. That’s a good preemptive legal response, but a sad commentary on the state of things. We expect things to go wrong in betas. Talk about setting a low bar. Even a necessary one.

Speaking of the history of computing, when it comes to mobile computing we’ve gone through at least one cycle where the focus shifted away from keeping us addicted to our phones, to an entire wave of ways to help us escape the tyranny of the small screens, put them down and enjoy more of life without them. Call me crazy, but the rush to chatting away to smartphones, AirPods, pendants, pucks, cars, etc… seems contradictory to solving our tech addictions. Out with the old trend, in with the rerun.

Gimmicks work. They help sell devices and feed trends. Think pet rocks. We’re already seeing talk of children’s toys with AI voice assistants and reactions against them. At least this time around the reactions are coming more quickly.

I’m guessing it’s not long before we see a pet rock product that contains an AI powered voice assistant. We can always use another paperweight.

Sunday Morning Reading

The art of dancing on the line that separates and defines humanity

It was a good week for reading good writing. It’s a better week for sharing what popped up. A variety of topics, spanning art and the making and selling of it, technology — which these days is more about the selling than the tech — the humanity, or lack thereof, behind it all, and…well to continue a list would sell it all short. Here’s hoping you enjoy the links shared in today’s Sunday Morning Reading as much as I enjoy sharing them. Yia Mas!

An overhead, first-person perspective shows a person lying on their back on a teal couch, holding open a large book to read. The person's head is closest to the foreground, with long, blonde-streaked hair spilling downward. They are wearing a deep maroon, long-sleeved sweater and light grey sweatpants. Image from Matias north v8DSLoY80Xk unsplash.

Om Malik wrote one of the best things I’ve read in quite some time. We Are Living In Pinocchio’s World is about lying. It’s about AI. It’s about a pen. But it’s about so much more.

Cory Doctorow’s Refining Humanity takes on our propensity for explanation, personhood for machines, and that line we seem to want to dance with defining just what makes us human in the midst of it all.

Meanwhile Martyn Berlin of Martyn’s Random Musings finds himself an outcast in To Have A Moral Stance On AI Is To Be An Outcast, And It Sucks.

At what cost art? Natasha MH wonders and writes about it in Sold At A Premium. At what cost, anything?

Mike Masnick thinks it’s not about whether technology is inherently good or bad, liberating or oppressive. You could argue the same could be said about most aspects of human endeavor. But then that’s the point. Tech is just another in a long line. Check out Enshittification, Despotification, And The Open Internet.

“The only conviction worth having is the kind you could lose tomorrow and survive it.” JA Westenberg warns us not to take a pill, regardless of color in Be Thou Not Pilled.

Mathew Ingram wonders Have Investors In AI Companies Lost Their Minds? I’m not sure we can call them investors any more. As to their minds? No comment.

Two interesting takes on what’s going on the business of making movies in Hollywood that occasionally and almost accidentally is about making art. M.G. Siegler talks about how YouTube Beats AI To Disrupting Hollywood. Meanwhile Sonny Bunch takes a look at The Thoughtlessness of AI Filmmaking.

Word came down this week that a restaurant was finally going to fill one of the retail spaces in the Trump Tower in Chicago, after they had all sat empty for seventeen years. Neil Steinberg asks Will Chicago Happily Eat Dolmades And Drink Roditis In Trump Tower?

To close, click through the popover on John Gruber’s post This Is A Dickover, and give the post a read. You know what a Dickover is. Now you have a name for it.

(Image from Matias North on Unsplash)

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.