I’m still sullen about napster. It didn’t change anything about music sharing- other than to take music sharing into the spotlight. I.e., they got greedy and gained the attention of the media.

Uh. This is not a good picture my journalism dudes. It’s strap-on; what kind of tasks are we talking about here?

Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. More importantly, that text isn’t “clickable”, so they can’t be measuring raw engagement either.

It’s not A/B testing if they aren’t getting feedback.

LMG says they didn’t do a thing

Yes, please show me this language.

And I never said I was waiting for proof, thanks. Feel free to read the whole thing.

I really key in on the language of these types of releases. First is,

To ensure a fair investigation, LMG did not comment or publicly release any data and asked our team members to do the same.

So… keeping yo mouth shut is not ensuring a “fair investigation.” It’s protecting yourself.

Next, phrases like,

Claims of bullying and harassment were not substantiated.

Is not proof of anything- other than there was no proof. That’s why you hire a third party to speak for you. Instead of you saying, “I didn’t do it,” (which of course almost anyone would - true or not) the “independent” investigator can say, “I didn’t find any proof.”

The strongest language here,

Allegations that sexual harassment were ignored or not addressed were false.

…is interesting. I guess it depends on what they mean by “addressed.” If I slapped a colleague on the back and said, “That was hilarious!”, I hardly ignored it. You could even say I addressed it.

I’m not saying I believe I’ve way or the other. All I’m pointing out is this means basically nothing.

I’ve heard the early Internet age referred to as the future dark ages. When all the work, information and content is digitized, it’s prone to being lost to history forever.

This doesn’t sound like a subscription, so much as consumption based billing. They make their money back by cornering the building-level market (perhaps landlords can put in competing chargers?) and charging a higher charging fee… okay that’s confusing. Charging a higher “fillup” fee.

Wrong button, oops. Lol #420

Starting an international corporate race to carve up the moon seems like a good choice.

We subsidize exports? Show me.

To that end, this means we would need to lower standards, use some forced labor, and increase taxes to increase subsidies in order to compete.

Republicans would shoot down the subsidies.

Then China shouldn’t subsidize its manufacturers’ exports while increasing the burden for foreign companies to compete internally. If anyone thinks China cornering the global EV market is a good long term plan, they are naive.

The blog is obviously targeted towards advertisers. The future looks amazing and full of possibilities. Just think about how your 8 hours of sleep alone could be turned into product placement opportunities for nestle.

Probably worth the longer read, but I’m on my way out the door and I know I’ll forget later… I had one of the robots gen up a tldr.

TLDR;

The article discusses the internal challenges and strategic shifts at Google, particularly around the management and prioritization of its search engine functionality versus advertising revenue. It starts with a “code yellow” alert raised due to declining search revenue, a term derived humorously from the color of a tank top worn by a former VP. This crisis led to a focus shift towards maximizing revenue, often at the expense of user experience and search quality.

Ben Gomes, a foundational figure in Google Search, and others expressed concerns about the increasing influence of advertising demands over search integrity. This tension resulted in significant leadership changes, with Prabhakar Raghavan taking over as the head of Google Search. The narrative suggests that Raghavan, who had a controversial tenure at Yahoo, brought a similar growth-focused approach to Google, prioritizing revenue over product quality. This shift is portrayed as part of a broader problem in tech, where managerial focus on growth and profits undermines the quality and utility of technology products.

The author uses these events at Google as a microcosm of larger issues in Silicon Valley, critiquing the pervasive “Rot Economy” mindset that prioritizes financial metrics over genuine innovation and user satisfaction. The story serves as a cautionary tale about the consequences of allowing revenue-driven management to dictate the direction of tech companies, potentially leading to a decline in product quality and innovation.

Edit: I especially like how it kept the detail about the yellow shirt. This is the context we need.

50,000 cycles

Wow, a lifetime of 137 years at one cycle per day. This could make off-grid systems mainstream.

Paywall

Note they did not say 1.2 million times faster than fiber. Instead they compared it to the broadband definition; an obvious choice of clickbait terminology.

I see where this is going. FSD 2.0 will use human in the loop, saving money on cameras and LIDAR.

🪙