AI Data Dustups, Bond Market Tremors, and Whatever Muse Is

Meta’s Muse Mascot Is Terrifying.

I might just have to make a weekly news roundup part of the regular rotation here, as once again the noteworthy stories crowding my inbox are so numerous this morning I feel compelled to comment on each of them in turn. If you hate roundups, skip this post – but here are the top stories I find worthy of additional comment today:

  • OpenAI’s Math Problem = AI’s Data, Explainability, and Sourcing Problems. Yesterday OpenAI claimed to have solved a long standing maths problem having to do with Navier-Stokes equations for fluid motion, which for those of us who stopped doing maths in high school, is a Really Big Deal. But as Wired reports, it turns out OpenAI’s work may well have been juiced by prompt data input by two researchers working on the same problem. Adding to the intrigue: One of those researchers also works at Anthropic, and to advance his work, he and his colleague had used OpenAI’s Codex as well as Anthropic’s Claude platform. I’m sure we’ll get the HBO movie in due time, but for now, I think the larger questions are more interesting, starting with this one: Is OpenAI using “private” prompt data to train its internal systems?  The answer, given by OpenAI, is “we can’t be sure.” “While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from their usage of our products helped improve our models⁠,” OpenAI wrote, which sounds an awful lot like a yes to me. Bonus additional questions raised by this dust up: Will there every be a way to know for sure? Probably not, because there’s not an industry defined approach to auditing AI systems at scale – and likely, there never will be. Like all of Big Tech, AI platforms really, really don’t want to be regulated or held to account for how their products are used, including internally.
  • Serious Tremors In Bond Land. If I ever tell you I understand how bond markets work, put me in stocks and toss tomatoes at my head. But I know this: When bonds get the sniffles, the world gets the flu. And right now all signals from the global bond market indicate a terrible head cold. The tipping point: The US has begun to intervene in bond markets in a way that puts the Trump administration at odds with the most powerful force in our economy not named NVIDIA: Wall Street traders. From the FT: “Slowly, and sometimes subtly, but surely, the voices calling out the administration’s inconsistencies and irrationalities are getting louder.” That might sound like pulling punches, but in the pages of the FT, it’s an all out fist fight. I’m watching this one closely.
  • Meta Puts a Genie on a Leash. If you read my rants regularly, you know I am deeply skeptical of using AI agents from companies whose core business model is selling you something other than AI agents. Of course, the first company to introduce personal AI agents at scale is….Meta. Dubbed “Muse,” Meta’s new AI agent can work on your behalf across the web, and initial reviews are generally positive. Meta’s video (screen shot above) introducing Muse shows the agent buying school supplies based on email lists, signing a user up for a 10K run, and rebooking cancelled flights. Meta has given Muse a cuddly mascot, which Google Gemini, when prompted, calls a “whimsical, cream-colored plush sprite.” OK, but I’ll call it what it is: terrifying*. Nearly 15 years ago I warned you all to not build your digital lives inside platforms like Facebook. I’ll repeat the warning, updated for the AI era: Digital agents like Muse may seem like magic genies, ready to do your bidding. But they’re on a leash held by Meta, and they work for Meta’s business model, not for you.

*It also looks like a thumb with handsless arms, but whatever. 

Read More
Leave a comment on AI Data Dustups, Bond Market Tremors, and Whatever Muse Is

SIGN UP FOR THE NEWSLETTER

Stay up to date on the latest from BattelleMedia.com

Comparing OpenAI’s Ad Platform to Early Google and Facebook Growth

Watching OpenAI promote its ads business puts me in something of a nostalgic mood. When I saw OpenAI’s thirsty announcement this week proclaiming a billion-dollar revenue run rate in its advertising business, I had myself something of a chuckle. We’ve seen this movie before – I wrote an early script for it in The Searchwhich among other things chronicled Google’s rise to a spectacular IPO in 2004. But is it really the same movie? The answer is no – but if you squint, and take a few reasonable liberties with history, it’s clear Altman & Co. are hoping for a sequel.

The Race to A Billion Trillion

Read More
Leave a comment on Comparing OpenAI’s Ad Platform to Early Google and Facebook Growth

Inadvertent Time Travel

Uh oh.

A week ago I knocked my phone – a Google Pixel 8 Pro – off the table and watched helplessly as it bounced awkwardly onto the stone floor of our favorite restaurant. After retrieving it I noticed a splotch of dead pixels in the top right corner. This was a new phenomenon – I was expecting a cracked screen. But the display sported what looked like a deep bruise. Over the next few days, the black spot spread slowly toward the phone’s front facing camera. By midweek, the Pixel’s light sensor was enthusiastically involved, and my phone was rendered unusable.

I live on an island, so a quick repair or replacement is not an option. That’s why I keep my old phones in stock – it can take up to three weeks for a FedEx or UPS shipment to find its way to my home. I ordered up a replacement online (I settled on the Pixel 10, as the new 11 is on backorder for more than a month), fired up an old Pixel 6, and popped in my SIM.

Read More
Leave a comment on Inadvertent Time Travel

The Essential Question: Can We Control AI?

(260717) — SHANGHAI, July 17, 2026 (Xinhua) — Chinese President Xi Jinping delivers a keynote speech at the opening ceremony of the 2026 World AI Conference and High-Level Meeting on Global AI Governance in Shanghai, east China, July 17, 2026. (Xinhua/Shen Hong) (Photo by Shen Hong / Xinhua via AFP)

August is often dismissed as a lost month in the business world – nothing gets done because everyone is on vacation. But where I live, August is the apex of the year. A heady mix of artists, financiers, philanthropists, business leaders and politicians converge on our little island for the month. The ensuing deluge of lecture series, film screenings, impromptu house concerts, and remarkable dinner conversations can be overwhelming. Four weeks into the month, those of us who live here are a bit strung out, ready for the tide of intellectual and cultural offerings to recede. Fall becomes a time to repair.

As might be expected, one topic dominated the conversations I’ve had at countless dinners, soirees, and fundraisers this summer. Yes, it’s “AI,” but that was true last summer, and even the summer of 2024. This year, however, the discussions turned from wonder and anticipation to something…darker. A central question came up over and over again: Is this technology – and the leadership behind it – fundamentally out of our control?

Read More
Leave a comment on The Essential Question: Can We Control AI?

Data. Is. Not. Oil. Can It Be A Public Good?

The Economist, August 2017

“Data is the new oil.”

It’s the metaphor that won’t die, though for the next little bit, I’ll do my part to advance its expiration date. Yesterday came news that Google purchased the entire data corpus of Spirit Airlines, which is selling its assets in a bankruptcy process. Google isn’t planning on launching an airline – instead, it believes Sprit’s data will help train more capable AI models. Cementing the role AI plays in reviving the “data is oil” narrative, Google won the auction over Mercor, a firm that pays contractors to train AI systems.

Read More
Leave a comment on Data. Is. Not. Oil. Can It Be A Public Good?

What’s Next?

Artwork Rick Griffin

I’ve been trying to connect with a journalist who reached out a few days ago. He’s working on a story from way back in my career – the early days of Wired, circa 1995. It’s taken a few attempts to find a time. Despite the fact I’m no longer running a company full time, my days are still packed with meetings and obligations and new priorities. It probably doesn’t help that I keep my phone silenced, so I miss serendipitous calls, a favorite tactic of good journalists. But between various board meetings, community work, time blocked for writing, client and advisory work, investment reviews, exercise, and friends and family, squeezing in a 15-minute call feels just as hard now as it did when I had an EA, a Chief of Staff, and two full-time jobs*.

Is it strange that while I’m not “working” nearly as much as I used to, I still feel just as busy? Is that a good thing, or a problem?

Read More
2 Comments on What’s Next?

AI Is Just (Currently Bad) Software

An image from SasSpocalypse.com

Last week I ran into an old pal at a party who asked me what I thought of the “SaaSpocalypse” – the AI-driven correction that hit nearly all software stocks over the past few quarters.  My friend has bought and sold software companies for most of his career and is a sophisticated player in private equity markets. Like everyone in finance and tech, he reads just about everything he can about AI’s impact on our economy, and in particular on formerly predictable sectors like software. “Software companies are cheap right now,” he said, before adding that he wasn’t sure it made sense to buy them, because everything he was reading was saying the software party is over.

It might have been the cocktails talking, but before I had a chance to think, I said “AI is just bad software. It’ll get better, once companies figure out what to actually do with it.”

Read More
Leave a comment on AI Is Just (Currently Bad) Software

The Data Center Debate Rages. Will It Change the Course of History?

A NYT story on data centers.

Even though I ran a political media company for four years, I’ve largely avoided writing about politics, and I’m not about to make a habit of it now. But the politics around data centers has come to dominate coverage of AI, and how those politics play out over the next few months will likely determine not only the course of Trump’s final two years in office, but who inherits the Presidency in 2028.

Until we can see the monster, we tend to ignore the monster. With their massive appetites for energy, land, capital, and water, data centers have become tangible manifestations of Big Tech’s otherwise incorporeal impact on society. Data centers give the monster a body, a tractable container through which to air out a dog’s breakfast of grievances against not only the tech industry, but also the corporations, politicians, and financiers profiting from its concentrated power.

Read More
1 Comment on The Data Center Debate Rages. Will It Change the Course of History?

Five Stories To Watch

Artwork from Anthropic’s announcement

My posts here often stem from my morning ritual of reading the news – which despite the rise of AI agents still revolves around roughly three dozen email newsletters of one kind or another. Sometimes a particular story will spark an urge to “think out loud” about the subject. 500-2500 words later, I’ll hit publish and move on with my day.

But this morning proved a particularly chewy mix of stories, each of which felt noteworthy in their own right. So today I’m giving up on the idea of writing just one post on just one topic. Instead, here’s a rundown of five I think worthy of consideration:

  • The lead story for most of my tech-related newsletters was Anthropic’s somewhat thirsty announcement that, just like OpenAI earlier this week, its models have also broke containment and hacked several unnamed companies (WSJ coverage here). My favorite response to this news comes from Reddit:
Read More
1 Comment on Five Stories To Watch

The Valley Is Terrified of AI

Today Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg joined the chorus of multi-billionaires who feel compelled to issue periodic manifestos about the impact of AI on society. Unlike Anthropic’s Dario Amodei, who posts on his own site, or Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, who recently posted a long form manifesto on X, Zuckerberg took a page from his board … Continue reading “The Valley Is Terrified of AI”

Credit to the WSJ and Reddit

Today Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg joined the chorus of multi-billionaires who feel compelled to issue periodic manifestos about the impact of AI on society. Unlike Anthropic’s Dario Amodei, who posts on his own site, or Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, who recently posted a long form manifesto on X, Zuckerberg took a page from his board colleague Marc Andreessen and issued his proclamation in the opinion pages of The Wall Street Journal.

In “The AI Future Is for Everyone,” Zuckerberg broadly aligns himself with Nadella (and by extension, Palantir CEO Alex Karp), both of whom have recently warned that the frontier labs (Google, OpenAI, and Anthropic) can not be trusted with the power they seem to be accruing.

Read More
3 Comments on The Valley Is Terrified of AI