BananaTrifleViolin

Poor Google, demoralised when another monopoly says it’s not going to break into it’s monopoly.

But fortunately Google used it’s search monopoly to aggressively push Chrome, and now all that data that Microsoft used to scrape, Google now does.

Happy ending for the monopoly.

It’s a gold rush which will have consequences a few years down the line. The data centre market will get saturated, and with a probable collapse in the AI market thats driving this (particularly given the “winner takes all” approach all the players are following) and associated massive duplication of data centres running different AI models for different companies, it’s likely to be a collapse, not a soft landing.

Hardware companies investing in expanding their output to service the data centres demand will be over producing once the market swings the other way. Expect prices to collapse and some of these memory producing companies to go bankrupt. This is another classic sign of a bubble: everyone thinks this will keep going and going, so they invest hard in having a chunk of it. But it will inevitably hit a wall - some AI companies will fail and their data centres become redundant, and the market overall will eventually swing away from endless expansion to consolidation. And thats best case scenario; more likely it a catastrophic collapse in which case the market is getting flooded with unneeded 2nd had product from data centres sold off during bankruptcy proceedings.

It’s not a question of if the party will end, it’s just a question of when. Even if people don’t think the AI market will pop, the economics of building more and more data centres by unprofitable competitors in this market is unsustainable and has to end at some point. And the evidence is we’re already well beyond the point of diminishing returns with current AI models in terms of scaling up.

So while times are hard right now for home PC users, I’d expect there to be period in the near future of oversupply and cheap components. This year? Next year? Hard to say exactly when but the writing is on the wall for the AI bubble imo.

I think their best option at present is to push the privacy, interoperability and independence side of their product and target European governments on the basis of digital sovereignty. Yes, it’s based in the US, but the product itself is open source and independent of the big tech giants, and that can be leveraged to get more support in Europe as the only viable alternative to Google’s Chrome ecosystem and Apple’s Safari ecosystem.

It’s difficult for Mozilla, not because of what Firefox is, but because it is financially dependent on Google which makes it harder to be aggressive about calling out just how bad Google and Chrome are for users. Mozilla would ideally be lobbying the EU anti-trust apparatus to stop Google aggressively pushing Chrome, in much the same way Netscape did with Microsoft and Internet Explorer.

Mozilla is stuck, because it’s main threat is also it’s main lifeline. So it really needs to try and diversify itself away from it’s financial dependence on Google. That has been near impossible but European governments may be the way forward. It won’t replace Google, but Trump has created an opportunity in Europe that Mozilla has to aggressively follow.

The headline is a little misleading: the feature has disappeared from consumer chips but AMD is not responding when asked why. As the article itself says: it’s not clear if this is a deliberate decision, or a bug that has caused this issue.

The headline implies it was a deliberate action. Maybe it was, but at the moment we don’t really know. But it is good that Toms Hardware is writing about this and drawing attention to this issue. It’s concerning regardless of the reason, and it’s also concerning how cagey AMD is being about addressing this issue.

That’s not correct - the BBC announced iPlayer in 2003, tested 2004 onwards and finally launched in 2007 after being delayed by lobbying. The iPlayer was held back from full launch due to concerns from commercial competitors - in particular broadband providers lobbied against the iPlayer service because they feared the “pressure” it would put on the broadband infrastructure.

Netflix launched their streaming service in 2007.

Netflix did not originate the idea of streaming (nor did the BBC to be clear), much like Apple didn’t originate the smart phone. Netfiix did however do it better than it’s competitors, particularly the incumbents in the commercial sector.

The addictice liability is due to manipulation by Tech companies that use algorithms to maximise engagement - i.e. you like something, feed you more so you stay on the app.

That’s not an issue with the format or the tech; it’s a major issue with a lack of regulation of social media companies.

This is a fluff article but about a well signposted issue in education: tech in schools may be pushing education backwards.

Many countries have embraced tech in schools - such as laptops for students - and big tech companies in the US have been enthusiastic about getting their tech in front of young people as they will be the consumers of the future. But despite the billions spent it seems to actually be damaging education.

There are educationalists pushing for tech to be taken out of schools and go back to methods that actually do produce consistently good results.

I have little sympathy to be honest.

However what is interesting is this sounds like a company in it’s early death throes. They’re a social media company that’s core products are in decline to competitors like TikTok, and they’re desperately trying to diversify.

The “metaverse” was an expensive flop. Now it’s pivoting to AI by sacking employees to save costs and redirecting large numbers of the rest away from it’s core product. But Meta is way behind in the AI race and seemingly throwing everything at this while ignoring it’s core product.

Meta is becoming like IBM; it probably won’t disappear but it’ll just be another also-ran.