Beyond Search

Cyber Fraud Takedowns: A French Connection?

2026-07-10T16:04:16Z

Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.

The Interpol news release came from Lyon, France. My first question was, “Did the arrest of Pavel Durov by the French judiciary in August 2024 contribute to this remarkable announcement?” It is not every day that “a global anti-fraud operation involving 97 countries and territories has led to the arrest of 5,811 individuals and the interception of USD 293 million in illicit assets.”

“Over 5,800 Arrests, USD 293 Million Intercepted in Global Fraud Bust” adds:

After an initial period of intelligence collection and exchange, participating countries took part in more than three months of operational activities. This included pro-active action against high-value targets, raiding identified premises, blocking or freezing bank accounts and virtual wallets, requesting INTERPOL Notices and Diffusions and proactively utilizing INTERPOL’s Global Rapid Intervention of Payments (I-GRIP), a stop-payment mechanism that facilitates the swift blocking of illicit financial flows of both fiat and virtual assets.

Okay, MidJourney. Good enough.

A second remarkable fact in the news release was:

Operation First Light 2026 (15 Jan 2026 – 30 April 2026), coordinated by INTERPOL, focused on combatting social engineering scams and associated money laundering activities.

That works out to about 16 weeks. Contrast that with the takedown of Cyberbunker which took more than four years, including the judicial phase.

Let’s think about what may have contributed to this dramatic acceleration of what has been a tedious, time consuming process.

One reason for the acceleration may have been better intelware. At this time, more than 100 companies provide specialized software capable of ingesting large quantities of information, analyzing the data, and generating useful outputs. I personally believe that these intelware advancements have contributed to more efficient law enforcement processes. Therefore, kudos to these innovative and usually low profile firms,.

Another reason may be the better communication flows among agencies and law enforcement units. Based on my experience, the increase in the number of information sharing mechanisms — for instance, fusion centers or similar cross agency structures — have become more effective. The idea is not a new one, of course, but setting up, staffing, and working out procedural mechanisms take time. I would suggest that these structures and the involvement of Interpol have been important components in the turbo-charging of a number of investigations.

A third reason is that training programs for cyber investigators have been improving. The topic coverage and the depth of the instruction has been increasing over time. Based on my personal observations, I would suggest law enforcement is approaching peak instructional capability. There is room for improvement, but cyber training programs are, in general, excellent. One example that comes to mind is the US Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. A high five for this entity is warranted.

There are other contributing factors. These range from certain crypto currency exchanges providing information in a more timely way to the quality of the cyber investigators themselves.

However, I want to raise the possibility of one other contributing factor. I have no first-hand data to support my view. Nevertheless, I want to explore my idea as a hypothetical.

One reason for this remarkable operation as well as a number of others announced since August 2024 is the work of the French judiciary with involvement of other French government professionals. Pavel Durov, owner and founder of Telegram, awaits trial in France. The French judicial system is able to exert its influence over those accused of a crime. The legal and bureaucratic procedures are important. An accused person who is a citizen of France can be kept in a legal plastic baggie for months or, as is the case of Mr. Durov, years. My perception of the impact of the French judiciary’s approach is to allow the defendant to experience a version of sous vide cooking. The water temperature is hot but not too hot. The cooking lasts for some time but not forever. And, only the chef makes the determination when the fish has been cooked. During this complex sequence of bureaucratic moves — think in terms of the procedures a chef learns at Le Cordon Bleu — the defendant may make an effort to cooperate.

In Mr. Durov’s case, he is providing some information to the French judiciary about certain activities taking place on the Telegram platform. Simultaneously he has been releasing technological innovations to make future cooperation with French authorities technically impossible. My view is that he is providing information about relatively low level and mid level online criminal behaviors anchored in the remarkable Telegram platform.

Stated simply, my view is that he offers information to appear to be more cooperative with the French authorities. He checks in with the French judiciary. He obtains permission to travel outside of France. He is doing what his expensive lawyers are advising him. The reality is that Mr. Durov can be kept in limbo in the plastic baggie for an undetermined amount of time. The psychological toll is probably significant even on the magnificent physical and mental specimen of the GOAT of Russian innovation, Pavel Durov.

Net net: I think the French judiciary may be an important factor in reigning in certain types of online criminal activity. I want to be clear. I don’t have any first hand data that proves that the French judiciary contributed to this remarkable operation. But Lyon is in France. The French judiciary is in France. Pavel Durov is in France. Maybe there’s a connection. My caution is that Telegram is working on systems and methods that are likely to enable new variants of online crime. Mr. Durov may be yielding some information. He is not giving up his core principles yet.

Stephen E Arnold, July 15, 2026

Did the Copilot Crash the Ageing DC 3?

2026-07-11T12:42:52Z

Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.

I read “Microsoft Pushed Copilot Everywhere, But Barely Anyone Bought It, and Even Fewer Use It: Report.” The title is snappy, but the subtitle is a killer:

Users are barely showing up for Copilot

I fiddled around with Copilot when it first became available. I even used it to create free illustrations for this blog. But the quality and performance degraded over time I used it. Then the image generation service just went away, and so did I.

Thanks, Midjourney. Good enough.

The cited write up says:

But the latest adoption figures suggest that the distribution was quite disappointing. Microsoft revealed that Copilot 365 has more than 20 million paid seats. While that does sound impressive at a glance, this number is dwarfed when you compare the company’s more than 450 million paid commercial Microsoft 365 seats. So fewer than 4.5% of those customers pay for the full Copilot experience.

Interesting.

The write up says:

According to a new report, enterprise surveys place weekly usage among licensed Copilot seats at only 20% to 30%. Applied to Microsoft’s disclosed numbers, that leaves somewhere around 4 million to 6 million weekly users, or roughly 1% of Microsoft 365’s broader commercial customer base. This is basically just the tiniest piece of the whole pie.

“Tiniest piece of the whole pie”! This type of usage is the equivalent of my dropping one of those sucre coloré from a frosted donut. Hey, what’s one less pink jimmie or sprinkle on a hot day?

The write up points out a bit of Microsoft marketing brilliance; to wit:

Alongside the lukewarm adoption, the company also treated users to higher Microsoft 365 prices. At the start of this month, Microsoft increased the US monthly price of Business Basic from $6 to $7 and Business Standard from $12.50 to $14. Several enterprise and frontline plans also rose by between 5% and 33%.

What’s that old adage? Ah, yes, “if we build it they will come.” What we have is “no, most people did not show up.” Most people scrolled TikTok-type videos, did work the old-fashioned way, or just faked doing work. I am curious about those individuals who embraced Copilot to do work.

How about some observations? No, well, too bad:

The AI marketing coup delivered by Satya Nadella in January 2022 may have transformed itself into expensive goo.
Acqui-hires, reorganizations, and pronouncements on social media are unlikely to deliver a magic wand that turns non-users into paying customers. The statements, however, call attention to the management bumble itself.
Competitors may find themselves sucked into the downdraft generated by Microsoft’s brisk fall on its own Copilot equipped laptop. Punching that dedicated Copilot key is not likely to generate a useful answer to the question, “Yo, Copilot, how do we avoid this airplane crash?”

Net net: Thump. Ouch. Stand back. The fire is spreading.

Stephen E Arnold, July 15, 2026

China: Free and Cheap for Now

2026-07-11T19:59:34Z

China is determined to dominate the world when it comes to AI technology. The Middle Kingdom keeps chugging along and Reuters has a new story about China’s latest breakthrough:

“China’s Meituan Says New AI Model Trained On Domestic Chips.” The Chinese equivalent to DoorDash is called Meituan. Meituan announced that it would release an open source LongCat LLM. The new LongCat LLM, or so Meituan claims, is the world’s first trillion-parameter AI system trained andiron on 50000 clip cluster powered by Chinese made processors.

Meituan is late to join China’s AI revolution. The company also didn’t disclose how LongCat 2.0 would be integrated into its existing businesses. Meituan is attempting to rival Alibaba with? ? that “agentic commerce” and could also be attempting to diversify revenue streams. The company has had weak consumer sentiment and low profit margins.

LongCat 2.0 is a breakthrough for China:

“LongCat-2.0’s reliance on Chinese AI chips ?underscores the growing importance of self-sufficiency in China’s domestic AI market, as DeepSeek, Alibaba, ByteDance and other major players work to reduce dependence on U.S. chips to train their models, following export controls imposed by Washington since 2022. Chipmakers, including Huawei and Enflame, have moved quickly to fill the gap left by U.S. chipmakers, gaining market share through supply deals with AI developers. LongCat-2.0 was trained from scratch using 50,000 domestic chips and can process inputs of up to 1 million tokens, allowing it to handle ultra-long documents, according to the statement. The model is aimed at agentic coding, with its architecture designed to help it handle real-world coding tasks more efficiently and reliably.”

If this continues China will be the top competitor in the AI market. However, let’s take whatever the Land of the Setting Sun with a grain of salt. The country is known to inflate numbers and accomplishments to make themselves look good in the eyes of the rest of the world. This could be another example of such fiction.

Whitney Grace, July 15, 2026

Palantir: Will the Semi-Tolerant Fish Snap? Will the Legal Eagles Swoop? Yes and Yes

2026-07-14T12:23:42Z

Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold. Because the London Review of Books is a cultivated and mostly learned publication, I have tried to add some references to this blog post in honor of the LRB’s commitment to intellectual honesty and knowledge integrity. However, I am not sure those qualities will apply to Silicon Valley, Miami, or a certain stakeholder in Palantir who resides in Argentina.

I don’t know much about fish. When snagged they flip and thrash. What happens when the London Review of Books baits its literary hooks and tries to fry a fish named Karp? I guarantee that the fish and his compatriots will not go gentle into that good night.

What the heck am I referencing?

Navigate to “"It’s Just a Waste of Time": Inside Palantir’s £330m NHS Failure.” If you think that is literary, check out the subtitle:

Our new investigation reveals the problems with Palantir’s NHS tech – and the unrivalled political access that fuelled the firm’s march into the British state.

Does this mean the tender offer was a finger-on-the-scale deal? How could that happen?

Let’s look at what the write up says, shall we? You can dive into the full report, but there is a registration hoop and, of course, a paywall. Writing about a suspect carp is time and resource intensive. (If the link is dead, contact the literary crowd, not me.)

A tribal moment outside the NHS facility in Swindon, lovely Swindon. Don’t let the bombs fall on thee. Thanks, Midjourney. Good enough.

First, I noted this passage:

For Palantir, “the NHS was the holy grail.” Years of lobbying tilted the FDP tender in Palantir’s favour. Shane Tickell, who led a consortium of British businesses in a rival bid, told us Palantir “had all these people to open doors and lobby and pitch long before the procurement started… they used every form of influence.”

I have worked in Washington, DC, on and off in my 60 year work career. Folks, this is consulting and lobbying. Toss in some hobnobbing and toss in some childhood connections and you have the basics of selling to governments. The method works in world capitals based on my observations. The phrase “Beltway Bandits” may ring a bell. Therefore, using “every form of influence” strikes me as a basic formation as described in a sales manual for bizdev types chasing contracts. I assume that the London Review of Books’ team finds this method of doing business a surprise.

Second, I circled this statement:

Many NHS trusts are refusing to switch over to the FDP, seeing it as a downgrade on their existing systems….Privately, health service leaders admit that Palantir software has a “poor user experience” and that learning how to use its system “is a steep learning curve” even for trained professionals.

Let’s keep in mind that the National Health Service has given many vendors an opportunity to deliver improved systems. I heard about one firm providing indexing and data tagging service that found itself in a spot of trouble. The vendor’s system indexed but the system into which the tagged data flowed did not work. I concluded that software and British systems management methods operated in a slightly different way than expected. One group wanted to fill out paper forms. The vendor wanted to use some Professor Mikhail Gromov congruencies. The result was unhappiness and termination. Maybe the issue is the NHS?

Third, I drew a line under this segment in the write up:

The NHS is now locked in a “tribal power struggle” between senior management who are ordering staff to “aggressively press ahead with deployment” and front-line clinicians and data workers who “are giving very honest feedback that the FDP [the Palantir Federated Data Platform that allows the Palantirians to deliver on-point information for athlete’s foot or AI-directed kinetics] in its current state cannot do what the organisation needs,” according to a staffer who is working on the rollout. Some NHS staff have responded by silently boycotting the FDP altogether. Others have joined an internal campaign group called NHS Analysts Together which is calling for the cancellation of the FDP contract, as are two select committees.

A “tribal power struggle”! I like that phrase. I was hoping for a reference to Bronislaw Malinowski and his Kula Ring or his psychological studies of the groups in Polynesia. But, alas, no. We just have tribes and none of that more colorful anthropological spice that makes anthropology so darned relevant to the NHS and its data systems.

Several observations are warranted, and even if you disagree, this dinobaby is going to set them forth:

Agitating Alex Karp and his advocate who allegedly resides in Argentina are likely to respond to the London Review of Books. Sure, there will be podcasts, speeches, and marketing collateral. But I think Mr. Karp and his team will have a sit down with British solicitors. Somewhere in the full report and the Substack essay, there are grounds for legal action. When one has a billionaire living in Argentina, that individual might put more oomph behind defending this Palantir issue than protecting the Falkland Islands.
It appears that Palantir has what might be called a “PR problem” in Western Europe. The Swiss, to cite another country grousing about the Seeing Stone outfit, have been shadow boxing with Palantir. For some reason, Mr. Karp, who speaks a couple of the languages widely used in Switzerland, has not been able to communicate to achieve his sales objectives in a country known for hiring Albert Einstein. My question, “Was hiring Einstein an indication that Switzerland is not smart enough to hire Palantir?”
Palantir is an ageing technology company. It was set up in 2003. One would assume that its systems and methods were refined, productized, and validated. Yet here the dinobaby is in July 2026 reading about customer service issues, users refusing to switch from the old methods to the new, zippy systems, and allegations of tender fancy dancing. In my opinion, the London Review of Books might want to have its team review the history of Palantir Technologies and gather some “field research” from organizations and commercial enterprises who were Palantir customers and then were not. Just a suggestion.

Net net: The London Review of Books might regret diving into the maelstrom of high technology marketing and product performance. Just sayin’ — Writing about a new study of Troilus and Cressida is likely to produce a more positive response.

Stephen E Arnold, July 14, 2026

“Karpe Questum” — The Swiss Ignore the Palantirians

2026-07-10T16:03:02Z

Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.

I read a story that first appeared on July 2, 2026. I read it today (July 4, 2026). I found it amusing, but as a dinobaby I have an untrendy sense of humor. This is not the tale of Europol taking down bad actors. This is not a write up describing how Ukraine has used asymmetric warfare to make a certain “special operation” look ineffectual. Nope. This is a story about a big, well connected US company and what is described as a a “small independent Swiss online magazine.” I mean is a small independent Swiss online magazine a must read in the US? Is the publication even indexed by the giant (but selective) content rock crushers?

Thanks, MidJourney. Good enough. Are you a hobbit?

“Thin-Skinned Palantir Loses Its Big to Bully a Swiss Magazine into Publishing Its Rebuttals to Embarrassing Reporting” asserts:

Palantir knew they couldn’t sue for defamation because, you know, everything Republik reported was true. Instead, they sued, trying to invoke a Swiss “right of reply” law, claiming that because Republik refused to publish the press release Palantir wanted to run in response to the reporting, the magazine had violated the law. As we said at the time, this is the height of entitlement. Palantir doesn’t get to tell Republik how and what it must publish.

Let’s think about this statement. Palantir considers itself part of the Lord of the Rings’ crowd. Some of its executives are “Girarded up”. If you don’t know about René Girard do a Google search. Even sketchy AI systems can spit out some info about M. Girard and his fellow travelers.

The magazine obviously did not get the memo that said, “You must do what Palantirians tell you to do.” This is generally viewed as a typical European Union intellectual deficiency. The Lord of the Rings crowd looked into their seeing stone and saw that its oracular news release should be published by the clueless Republik outfit. In a country with a lot of valleys, the clueless at the Republik should not emulated blank eyed Swiss cows.

One might conclude that small online publications absolutely have to do what a bit American company tells it to do. Even the average American cows understands how life is run on an American farm. An American company is definitely in the know when it comes to the correct, accurate, truthful, well crafted, honest, and ethical information. The “law” is irrelevant because Palantirians are the law. Pull this type of obstinate behavior in Miami or DC, and the Republik employees will understand the power of the hobbits. (These, I believe, are dwarves conceived by a somewhat creative Oxford professor. (ep, dwarves. FYI: The American spelling is “dwarfs.” But I know how Oxford eccentrics approach conventions like spelling. Tolkien used “dwarves” and I too present that spelling. Put that in your lumber room.)

What’s clear to me is that I want to reproduce this paragraph from the TechDirt story:

Anyway, given that Palantir seems really upset about Republik’s reporting, it sure would be a shame if you decided to go read this critical reporting of Palantir’s relentless attempts to win business from the Swiss government.

You know that as a dinobaby, I admire American big tech companies and their smooth integration into the business practices of other countries. The diplomatic Palantirians view Switzerland as an annoying country which speaks Italian and French, not just German. But not even the German speaking Swiss workers at Republik bought into the somewhat wonky belief that a company had a seeing stone. If that gimmick worked, wouldn’t the Palantirians have known the story was going to occur and taken steps to change the firm’s behavior. With foreknowledge via the seeing stone thing, PR could have eliminated the cause of the story.

That raises a question, “Maybe the seeing stone does not exist?” Therefore, Palantir does not see the future. It creates its own future. This particular interaction with a country fond of appropriate behavior determined that those who believe fantasy fiction are, like the original author, a step beyond eccentric. But I am a dinobaby, and I absolutely believe that the high-tech bros should rule the world. Two classes: The elite and the cows or cow like humanoids.

Stephen E Arnold, July 14, 2026

BAIT Biting 101: Apple Chomps Sinks Its Teeth into OpenAI

2026-07-11T12:42:12Z

Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.

These BAIT outfits are indeed remarkable. In my lingo, as you may recall, means “big AI tech.” In my lectures, I like to point out that these companies are becoming increasingly similar. They have realized that the convergence creates the idea opportunity for one big winner to emerge, a second place finisher with a shot at about 60 percent of the revenues of the winner, and the rest of the BAIT outfits fighting over remaining revenue. Therefore, folks, its cage match time.

“Apple Sues OpenAI Alleging Trade Secret Theft, Says Scheme Was at Every Level” reports:

Apple on Friday [July 10, 2026] sued OpenAI in federal court in Northern California, alleging trade secret theft, saying that the artificial intelligence lab took the iPhone maker’s intellectual property in order to develop its own consumer hardware.

How did this work? Did busy little software daemons prowl through Apple’s digital information? Did OpenAI’s smart software launch a thousand and one agents to suck down any content connected to the expanded term “Apple”? Did Sam AI-Man show up in the Apple parking lot, handing out offers to happy Applers?

Nope.

Apple alleged that OpenAI’s hardware chief, Tang Tan, who is a former Apple vice president, has directed Apple employees interviewing at OpenAI to share Apple secrets as part of the interviewing process. Tan is named as a defendant in the suit. “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,” Apple said in the filing. Apple alleged that OpenAI coached departing Apple employees in how to evade security processes when leaving the iPhone maker, and that Chang Liu, a former employee who joined OpenAI, stole an Apple laptop. Liu is named as a defendant in the suit.

Well, that’s subtle. a human thought up the ploy. Information flowed at the humanoid to humanoid level. Tips and tricks to sidestep “security” flew like a hungry turkey (yes, turkeys eat apples, but turkeys do not climb apple trees. Like job hoppers from Apple to OpenAI, the turkeys just go for easy pickings in my opinion).

Okay, I want to make sure I understand this. Apple found itself the defendant in some interesting knowledge transfer litigation. Examples, include the Masimio medical device matter, the VirnetX dispute, the University of Wisconsin (go badger Alumni Research Foundation), and some others. I am not lawyer, so my recollection may be off base. Please, keep in mind that I am a dinobaby and averse to doing legal research.

Assume that one of these instances of Apple taking another firm’s intellectual property is true. Do you find it interesting that Apple is greatly aggrieved that a fellow BAIT outfit is asking potential employees a question like this: “Okay, Sally, do you want some oat milk for your coffee? No, okay. Tell me what expertise you have and include a couple of simple examples?”

Yeah, HR and interviewers never ask this type of question. Let’s stick with the oat milk interrogatory. That’s much more useful in today’s go fast and break things world. Am I correct?

The CNBC story concludes:

Apple is seeking damages, injunctions, and an order to force OpenAI to stop using its trade secrets.

Okay, but I have one question: What’s a trade secret? I usually ask questions when I know the answer or I have a reasonable sense of the answer. Does that mean a person who answers my question has revealed a secret when I already know the answer or have a good idea of the answer?

“That’s not the point,” squawks a legal eagle. I agree. I don’t want to be baited by a BAIT. The unfolding legal drama will be interesting to watch. Snacking on apples in a court may not be permitted.

Stephen E Arnold, July 14, 2026

Meta: What an Outstanding Idea

2026-07-11T20:00:11Z

Okay, so they’re not marketed as gambling games for kids, but we must acknowledge that Meta is going after kids by instilling addictive habits in them. GHacks has another story about Meta’s latest accomplishment in this area: “Meta Tests Pocket, An Experimental App for AI-Generated Mini-Games Called “Gizmos”” Meta is testing a new social app called Pocket that allows users to create, share, and discover AI-generated mini games. Coding skills are not needed.

These AI-generated mini games are called “gizmos.” The app is not available for public download as of yet. Meta also defines gizmos as small, interactive experiences that users can tap and play. Here’s more of detailed description of the game:

“Users do not need any programming experience to build a gizmo. Meta states that the creator simply writes a description of the game they want, and the platform generates the interactive experience based on that prompt. The creator can then refine the prompt before publishing. Pocket is designed as a social app for mini-games, similar to TikTok or Instagram. Users can browse a feed of gizmos created by others, like and comment on them, and save gizmos into playlists, much like saving audio tracks. They can also share playlists with other users and grant access to the phone’s camera and photo gallery, given the necessary permissions. The app’s approach to playlists and sharing positions it more as a social discovery and remix platform than a traditional game distribution service.”

Pocket is based off an app called Gizmo originally designed by Atma Sciences, an AI startup founded by former Snapchat developers. Meta purchased Atma Sciences and received a license for the underlying technology. Pocket is one of many apps that relies on AI:

“Pocket joins an increasing number of Meta apps that rely on generative AI as the main tool for content creation. Meta already has the AI video creation app Vibes, which allows users to generate videos from prompts and browse them through a feed where they can like, comment, and share. Paluzzi has mentioned that Meta is likely to promote Pocket alongside its other apps, including Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp.”

Pocket sounds like fun. TikTok sounded like fun too until it became a nightmare rabbit hole of content addiction aka the same behaviors that promote gambling. Mr. Zuckerberg you are despicable.

Whitney Grace, July 14, 2026

Statistics 101: Address Sample Bias at the Git Go; Otherwise, the Rah Rah Becomes Boo Boo

2026-07-11T13:19:32Z

Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.

These BAIT outfits

I read “AI Content Is Everywhere on Social Media, Especially LinkedIn.” Snappy title. A plump target for content puffery. What’s not to like? I will answer this question in the Net net comment at the end of this dinobaby post.

The main idea of the write up is that smart software is writing social media posts. I have no doubt that humanoids are relying on smart software to make themselves appear smarter. I have been identified by an AI system as a humanoid who outputs AI-generated content. Nice assertion. Anyone who has read my articles, books, and blog posts know I have a quirky style. One of my colleagues loathes my use of “write up” instead of essay or article. Another thinks I need to include more links and footnote in the monographs I hand out to those in my law enforcement and intelligence professional training sessions. Sorry. That won’t happen. Why? I made Miss Sperling by high school English teacher crazy with my writing in 1958. I am perfectly happy writing in the same way in 2026. If AI thinks I am an AI, well, good for AI. As a humanoid, you should be able to recognize a dinobaby post with or without the jumping green dinosaur icon.

So what’s in this cited write up?

In a nutshell there are data derived from a “big” sample. The data reveal these purposely startling factoids:

Long content is more likely to be written by smart software
LinkedIn has the most AI generated information; Substack has the least (!)
Reddit is a comparative good guy when it comes to presenting humanoid-created content for some content; short Reddit content is likely to be AI generated.

Wow. LinkedIn, the job hunting service, has AI-generated content. Who knew? Obviously no one except the intrepid researchers at Pangram, the outfit performing the research.

The cited research concludes with this statement:

AI writing is now a problem everywhere on social media. This is concerning, but it’s in line with what we’re seeing elsewhere online: researchers estimated that 35% of newly published websites on the open internet were AI-generated or AI-assisted. An internet that is completely flooded with undisclosed AI content is bleak, but we don’t believe it’s inevitable. We hope that by providing transparency to AI-generated content online, we can give internet users back some control of how they spend their attention.

Okay, “everywhere.” I understand because humanoids like convenience, and, by golly, getting AI to write one’s memo, email, essay, or book is convenient.

I want to point out:

The Pangram information came from individuals who installed the AI detection extension, used the extension when visiting selected platforms, and agreed to share their extension’s statistics. Okay, this strikes me as a special group of online users.
Social media feeds are usually personalized; therefore, if a feed is chock full of AI baloney like marketing-related content, that content may be more likely to be AI generated.
Sources and content types were not equivalent.
The system used a 50 word cut off, probably to reduce costs and impose normalization.
Demographic data about the users in the sample were not disclosed.
Detector accuracy is not the prevalence estimation validity. Plus, the model changed in the course of the study. There is no data about adjustments due to model change.
The write up seems to be a content marketing piece designed to generate prospects for Pangram’s AI detection system.

Net net: I am not convinced that LinkedIn presents 40 percent AI content. I think that’s a low number. Sorry, Softies. Oh, and the boo boo should be obvious to anyone who paid attention in Statistics 101.

Stephen E Arnold, July 13, 2026

Online Games: Slam Dunk or Cut Wrists on a Shattered Backboard?

2026-07-10T16:02:10Z

Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.

What’s that flood of red. A slam dunk? Nope. A hoopster miscalculated and pumped a couple of barrels of red ink over the smart company with the smart software. Whom? You have to ask? It’s the Softies. Not only is the “pile it” approach to AI a bit worrisome to the bean counters, but the third party auditors are fretting about eGames or online games.

Good enough, MidJourney.

Why? You have to ask?

Navigate to “Xbox Reportedly Wanted 77 Million Game Pass Subscribers. It Has Just 30 Million.” To my dismay, the write up does not focus on the root of the problem: Management hubris, executive compensation incentives, the shadow of doom subscription based businesses cast over smart outfits like Adobe, and “we can do anything” mentality.

The write up does say:

Microsoft’s biggest gaming bet fell far short of its original target, despite years of acquisitions and heavy investment.

The former rah-rah Microsoft cheerleaders at Windows Central said in “Report: Microsoft Will Make Even More of Its Games Exclusive to Xbox As Multiplatform Strategy Totally Fails. What’s Going On?:

This week [July 6, 2026], Microsoft begun processes to eliminate 3,200 roles from its Xbox gaming division, with hundreds already laid off or leaving in divested studios.

The Windows Central outfit added:

Under previous leadership, Xbox was strangely reluctant, even seemingly embarrassed, to associate some of its acquisitions with the Xbox ecosystem. Games like DOOM, Fallout, and indeed Minecraft, barely had any co-marketing with Xbox console hardware. And it has been to the console ecosystem’s detriment.

That’s a useful insight. Employees at Microsoft are embarrassed by the company’s strategy and products.

Those savvy Henry Luce acolytes writing in “How Microsoft’s New Xbox Chief Is Resetting One of the Company’s Most Iconic Brands,” said:

[Asa] Sharma [new top dog of Xbox] spoke at Fortune’s Brainstorm Tech conference in June [2026], where she provided a sense of some of the challenges gaming is facing. Hardware component costs are rising—and there is only so much the consumer will pay for a console. She said she anticipates “radically different business models,” where it’s not assumed the most premium, high-performance console is the best option for a customer.

Yep, the customer. These are the same folks who probably provided feedback to PR-centric surveys and user panels. The customers are, as always, number one at Microsoft.

What’s interesting is that none of these sources point to:

Outright strategic failure
The penchant for changing people not the incentive plans
A failure to understand what makes “gamers” buy, remain loyal, and stick with a particular platform.

Is there a small lesson in this minor problem? Sure. Microsoft is too big to manage well. Autopilot, anyone?

Stephen E Arnold, July 13, 2026

Eheu, Caesar false, cecidisti! Or, Bad Move, Zuck

2026-07-11T19:49:31Z

Zuckerberg acted too rashly when he fired a large portion of his workforce. Okay, he didn’t exactly come out and say he was wrong, but according to Baller Alert he did say that projections for AI are not where he expected them to be. The details are in the article: “Mark Zuckerberg Cut Thousands Of Jobs For AI, Now He Admits Meta’s Agents Are Moving Too Slow.” Meta AI agents are runner slower than Zuckerberg expected and now he, along with the rest of Big Tech, are wondering when they can replace humans with automated systems.

It is embarrassing for Zuckerberg because he had big plans for Meta AI:

“The moment lands awkwardly because Meta has been operating like AI agents were right around the corner. These systems are supposed to complete tasks on behalf of users, assist employees, automate workflows, and eventually make companies leaner. The pitch has been that AI will not just answer questions, but take action. The problem is that getting software to reliably do real workplace tasks is proving much messier than the boardroom hype made it sound.”

Meta fired 10% of its global workforce and reassigned 7000 employees to work on AI-focused teams. That was a a big whoopsie. The employees were either sent to Applied AI or to work on AI agents, such as Agent Data and Optimization and Agent Transformation Accelerator. The Meta workers were told that their moves were not optional. They felt like they had been drafted and were confused about their new roles. They were also worried that Meta’s flexible culture would disappear.

Zuckerberg told his people that the executives are worried that Meta is not moving fast enough. Meta is fearful it is trailing behind its competitors. Meta wants to expand beyond the typical chatbots and make Llama 3.1 405B an integral component in social media platforms, smart glasses, workplace tools, and ads businesses. If that becomes the case then Meta can build an AI system with billions of users.

That is very expensive:

“But the money behind that vision is enormous. The company expects 2026 capital expenditures, including finance lease payments, to land between $125 billion and $145 billion. That raised spending forecast rattled investors, especially as Meta also confirmed May layoffs and continued pouring billions into AI infrastructure.”

Meta employees are also worried about their futures. Mouse tracking software was introduced and they’re worried they are training AI agents as their replacements.

AI is harder to develop than expected. Zuckerberg is a genius, though. In 2022, he thought he had this AI stuff nailed down. Yeah, absolutely.

Whitney Grace, July 13, 2026