South Korea: Not Just Smart Hyundai Venues. It Is Also AI Censoring and Pre-Censoring
June 8, 2026
![green-dino_thumb_thumb[3]](https://www.arnoldit.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/green-dino_thumb_thumb3.gif "green-dino_thumb_thumb[3]")
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I drive a super sexy blue Hyundai Venue. When I drive by an old age horn, the babes wave at me from their walkers and wheelchairs. I know I am cool. My Venue is smart. It beeps when I am in a parking space. It beeps and jerks the wheel when I am navigating roads under construction. Once in a while, the car beeps, flashes a red light, and automatically applies the brakes when I am creeping along in a traffic jam. Yep, South Korea has that smart software nailed.
Pre-censorship and real-time censorship appear to deliver some surprises to a small online publishing firm in South Korea. But AI is good enough, right MidJourney?
The country is now pioneering in a field translated for me by a “free” online translation service: Pre-censoring. I read about this nifty smart software sitting in my Venue as the beeps warned me of some impending disaster. The article is titled in this crystal clear way: “Even If You Upload an Image, Is It Pre-Censored? The Background of the Confrontation of Pros and Cons.” According to the free translation service the write contains this statement, and I quote:
The policy of pre-censoring images posted to the domestic Internet community with artificial intelligence (AI) has also become visible. Public opinion is divided between the need for a social safety net and the violation of freedom of expression.
The amendment to the Telecommunications Business Act, called the Prevention of N-Bang Act, came into effect in 2021. The structure monitors and responds in advance to content uploaded to SNS, messengers, and communities using AI. Until now, it had been limited to video files, but confusion soon grew as it became known that image files were also included in management.
I like the “N-Bang” bound phrase. Usually rules and regulations are less… suggestive. Confused. I poked around and located this article: “South Korean Online Communities Will Need to Scan Every Images with AI Censorship Tools.” The main idea seems to me, if the translation is sort of correct, is:
Due to recent regulation changes… the South Korean government is requiring internet communities and forum owners to scan every user uploaded images and videos on their website, by AI. The hardware to run these AI models are also not provided by government, website owners have to buy datacenter grade Nvidia GPUs by themselves, putting financial pressure to small businesses and forums. Websites will need to implement these hardware and software features, starting immediately from July 1st, [2026]
Several observations seem warranted:
- Will the smart software perform in a manner similar to that in my Hyundai Venue: False beeps, erroneous beeps, and beeps from out of nowhere? (Hey, I’m parked with the motor running, and my Venue just beeped. Because the beeps are the same frequency, I am not sure what the problem is. I will lock my doors.
- AI systems appear to have a few issues; for example, the systems hallucinate. Has South Korea figured out how to make smart software not output erroneous information; for example, an image posted on social media of a father splashing in a pool with his two young children? I am confident that some hallucinations will occur; for example, child cruelty, attempted murder by drowning, an image destined for a CSAM site on a Dark Web service, etc. But I assume South Korea’s AI does not have this problem.
- The pre-processing and the real-time processing computational loads are zero problemo for those in the online delivery chain. We checked a single image online using five “smart” image identification services. It took about 15 minutes to get results in our “image horserace.” I assume that South Korea has engineered a workflow that does add time and cost to an online service that includes images.
Net net: I think the idea of pre- and real-time image filtering is interesting. Zipping through still images, video files, and any other included file type is no problem. Hey, now I am backing out of my parking space. My Hyundai Venue is beeping with false positives. The dog park is empty now, but the Venue is smart. It is protecting me from … something.
Stephen E Arnold, June 8, 2026
How to Win Friends and Influence People: Warn Them. Then …. Well, What?
May 15, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
BAIT (big AI tech) companies take a dim view of any government that does not get with the techno-libertarian power program. I wonder is the information in “Apple Warns EU Against Forcing Google to Open Android to AI Rivals” might be poorly received in Western Europe.
Two BAIT leadership people take comments after their presentation about smart software, mobile devices, and user privacy. Thanks, Midjourney. Good enough.
The 9 to 5 Mac story asserts by quoting Reuters (the trust outfit):
“The DMs (draft measures) raise urgent and serious concerns. ?If ?confirmed, they would create profound risks for user privacy, security, and safety as well as device integrity and performance,” Apple said in its submission. “Those risks are especially acute in the context of rapidly evolving ?AI systems whose ?capabilities, behaviors, ?and threat vectors remain unpredictable as we are now seeing time and again,” it said.
I like the “profound risks,” not just plain vanilla risks. I like the reference to “privacy, security, and safety.” The “device integrity” comment is interesting. I wonder if Apple’s wizards have looked into the capabilities of companies providing specialized services that enable access to mobile devices.
The write up points out:
Apple also reportedly argued that the European Commission is trying to redesign Android based on “less than three months of work,” replacing decisions made by Google’s own engineers over years of developing the operating system.
I am not interested in the back-and-forth that’s been going on between some BAIT outfits and the EU. My perspective is that the attitude of the BAIT companies is that governments like the EU are lost in space, indifferent to the needs of the commercial enterprises that perceive themselves as more important than nation states, and essentially toothless. Sure, the EU fines BAIT outfits, but how much cash changes hands. What happens is that flocks of legal eagles descend, and bureaucracy increases friction. The legal machine coughs and groans like Jack Benny’s recalcitrant Maxwell automobile.
What is the impact of the BAIT push back? Will the EU recognize their shortcomings? Will the elected officials don smart glasses to reveal what their perceptual blind spots distort? Will the EU apologize to the BAIT companies and accept guidance from bright BAIT workers?
My view is:
- Push back from the EU itself will increase. Elon Musk is unlikely to get a warm reception from the J3 unit of the French judiciary. Other executives may find themselves as fellow travelers with Mr. Musk
- European commercial and non-governmental organizations will continue to seek non-US options for certain technologies. The shift is modest in my opinion but going forward the “find an option” thinking will ramp up. The more BAIT outfits push; greater momentum to shift becomes evident
- Individual entrepreneurs are likely to look for ways to avoid stumbling into the BAIT embrace and control approach to technology.
I acknowledge that I may be wrong. I am reasonably confident that BAIT companies supercharged with the Silicon Valley dream of owning a market are unlikely to change. But governments, even ones perceived as weak or just plain wacky, can shut down online services. High profile executives can be put in prison or sit in green and gray rooms waiting to find out when a trial will take place.
Net net: The fact that Apple supports Google communicates a message to me. I think that there will be some in the European Union who see this backpatting is a less than “How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world.”
Stephen E Arnold, May 15, 2026
The French Judiciary Says, “Grok This, Elon”
May 11, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
Some countries want to make life difficult for American tech bros. Russia is pestering Telegram’s users, contractors, vendors, and plyushka serving cafés. France has Pavel Durov on a leash, and now wants to speak with the world’s richest man and tireless proponent of living on Mars, the moon, wherever.
Thanks, MidJourney. Your interface tweaks are indeed baffling. But, as always, good enough.
“French Prosecutors Escalate Probe of Elon Musk and X to Criminal Investigation” makes clear that Elon may want to reconsider a quick trip to Lyon to dine at L’Auberge du Pont de Collonges. (It’s not a meal; it’s a production by the way.) The write up states:
French cybercrime authorities have escalated an investigation of Elon Musk and his social network X to a criminal probe, the Paris prosecutor’s office said Thursday. Musk and former X CEO Linda Yaccarino were issued summons by French authorities for April 20. Both of them declined to appear and answer questions, according to the prosecutor’s office. In February, Musk called the probe a “political attack,” after French authorities raided the Paris office of X.
If anyone needs a social media professional in Paris, my hunch is that the French nationals working for Elon may be open to employment options. Why? France is not the US of A as many American visitors discover when deplaning and heading for a dream vacation in Arles.
The French authorities can identify employees of a company owned by Elon and pick from these administrative tools to further their investigation. Here is a selected list of judiciary buttons and levers:
- Apply pressure through mutual legal assistance. An email usually does the job. The news story points out: “Other international jurisdictions are also investigating X and Grok, as is the California attorney general’s office.” The US government is not going to cooperate, but that left coast golden bear state is in the hunt.
- Summon employees to be questioned in a cheerful judiciary facility and, if warranted, do the garde à vue for a period of time
- Search and search again: Offices, employee homes, digital records, email, financial records. Then the judiciary can repeat the searches to ensure thoroughness.
The cited news story reports:
The probe, requested by French Member of Parliament Éric Bothorel in early 2025, has focused on complaints of algorithmic manipulation by X to influence and interfere in French politics, and allegations that Musk and X knowingly allowed users of the AI chatbot Grok to create and spread Holocaust denials and nonconsensual sexually explicit deepfake images on X.
Elon perceives the investigation as political. He’s right. Politics is France. Bureaucracy is France. Outrage over untoward images is France. But the French judiciary just chugs along because it has the reputation of taking direct action: The phone thing, the arrest and possible ruination of Telegram, and now Elon. I suppose one could ask Grok how long can a criminal proceeding endure in France? My recollection is that a Maurice Papon’s legal hassle lasted from 1981 (the date of my first visit to France) to 1998 (the date of my first visit to Dassault Exalead). I remember this because the newspapers ran the Papon story’s kick off and touchdown coincident with my visits. That’s why I recalled this particular judiciary gauntlet.
One can say, “It’s political.” I would point out that the judiciary’s clock is not powered by French national or regional elections. I think this is a characteristic worth noting. Several other observations are warranted:
- As Pavel Durov and the phone folks have discovered, other jurisdictions follow along behind the French judiciary in certain matters. International crime and allegations of CSAM are of interest to Europol, EU member states, and, as Durov has learned, outliers like Russia. Thus, containment is now difficult for the Elon matter.
- The EU is likely to initiate its own actions. Like it or not, allegations of certain types of illicit imagery are sure fire vote getters. Therefore, the Elon matter is likely to become more political in more jurisdictions over time
- Sympathy for certain BAIT (big AI tech) companies is waning. Anti-American sentiment is evident in a number of European countries. Even in Montpellier, the attitude is, “Bring money and then leave” for some American people and businesses.
Net net: One can use the “tech bros are the new aristocracy” approach in the US. I am not sure the attitude is congruent with the French judiciary’s expectation of appropriate responses to formal orders. (The J3 crowd, based on my information, is not amused by some Silicon Valley methods.)
Stephen E Arnold, May 11, 2026
China Smart. US Dumb: The Misinformation Game the Silicon Valley Way
May 4, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
China has been plugging along with its “China smart, US dumb” influence operation for a number of years. I have documented some of the more interesting variations; for example, a humble young girl working with few tools repairing a large mechanical component. Amazing, right? Yes, because the production hides the assistants, the equipment, and the technical experts who are making the impossible seems trivial to this clever Asian. For an example, check out this Google YouTube confection.
Most of the Chinese AI models enter the US market with a few news releases and stories about each in AI centric blogs. But most people don’t know a QWEN from a GLM. A Deepseek is, based on comments made to me at the National Cyber Crime Conference 2026, is confused with the Googley DeepMind brand.
A group of big AI tech executives ponder the interaction of a a cute panda with a big bird. None of those in the meeting find the illustration amusing. Touching one’s face suggests a need for reassurance and comfort when considering “better, faster, and cheaper.” Thanks, Venice.ai. Good enough.
Some people have noticed that China is providing low cost or no cost AI technology. Earlier this year Anthropic claimed that three Chinese companies “ripped it off,” using its AI tools to train their models. Examples include CNN which stated in April 2026 that the “White House accurses China of copying American AI models in industrial-scale campaign.”
Today my newsfeed displayed an even more interesting twist to this China vs. US AI propaganda or what might be called signaling about impending lobbying or litigation. Wired published a story that reveals that US AI companies are scared of Chinese technology. This is my reading of the carefully worded report “A Dark Money Campaign Is Paying Influencers to Frame Chinese AI As a Threat.” The useful information in the write up is not how China’s penetration of the AI BAIT (big AI tech) theme park has been. The juicy bit is:
Build American AI, a nonprofit linked to a super PAC bankrolled by executives at OpenAI and Andreessen Horowitz, is funding a campaign to spread pro-AI messaging and stoke fears about China.
This type of information output may be labeled content marketing, public relations, disinformation, misinformation, messaging, information warfare, or propaganda. For me, the existence of a nonprofit pumping out shaped information makes clear that someone is nervous. When big money and hard nosed investors are involved, the fear of failure motivates entities to take action. In the old days of the mythical Wild West, one can see dusty camps where workers are confined or smell gun smoke wafting on the late afternoon breeze. For me, I prefer information warfare.
The Wired write up asserts:
Marketing agencies are pitching influencers deals such as $5,000 per TikTok video to amplify Build American AI’s messaging about how China’s technological rise should be seen as a threat.
No kidding. The fact that US AI entities are the “dark money” behind the influence campaign certifies that Chinese AI and China’s tactics for making US technology look ridiculously overpriced and inefficient is working. Hey, those hard working females repairing equipment are turning their Middle Kingdom heritage into working QWENs.
Wired asserts that some well known AI and philosophical Silicon Valley types are funding this US smart, China bad effort; to wit:
Supporters of Leading the Future include OpenAI president and cofounder Greg Brockman, venture capitalist and Palantir cofounder Joe Lonsdale, venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, and AI company Perplexity, according to the PAC.
Wired also includes a lick from the Palantirians and hobbits as well; to wit:
The rhetoric provided to influencers echoes long-standing talking points from companies like OpenAI and Palantir, which have pointed to China’s AI advances as a reason to boost US AI investment and resist tighter domestic regulations on the technology. “We are going to be the dominant player, or China is going to be the dominant player, and there will just be very different rules depending on who wins,” Palantir CEO Alex Karp said on The Axios Show in November.
Palantir is worried. Because if China wins in AI, that means that Palantir will not win. That is indeed bad for those who are helping the White House understand the Chinese AI threat. Silicon Valley — trust me on this — has to win. Those billions and those assertions about the ethical obligation of Silicon Valley are at stake. Silicon Valley AI BAITers have a zeal fueling their interest in advancing US smart software.
Several observations:
- I am not sure where this story originated. Was it the “author” Taylor Lorenz? Was it writers from “Made in China,” a newsletter? Is the story part of an influence campaign? I don’t know. I am reasonably sure that no one will probe too deeply into the Wired branded write up. That tells me something.
- The Wired article and the commentary about it does not bring up the Chinese influence campaign. That also tells me something about the depth of research and analysis invested in this story. My newsfeed determined that the article was important enough to put in under my nose at 9 am on May 2, 2026.
- The AI “revolution” is not a company-level problem in China. In the US, the merger of BAIT and the US government makes policy decisions a bit more like pushing a blob of clay and hoping that something useful emerges from the blog some distance away. China is more direct: Better, faster, and cheaper. Goal: Undermine US AI credibility.
Net net: The Silicon Valley “way” is the target of the Chinese AI push. Believe me. Silicon Valley tech bros are aware of this competitive pressure. Bombast, manifestos, and TikToks are not likely to blunt what has been going on since the AI craziness took off in 2022. Microsoft is already blinking. Critics of AI are getting clicks. Who hasn’t heard about the B to Z guys, Burry and Zitron (b2z0, not the a16z or the Andreessen Horowitz numeronym. Worth watching for someone, not a dinobaby like me.
Stephen E Arnold, May 4, 2026
Winning US Government Contracts: Two Mini-Case Studies
April 28, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
Just for fun, let’s assume that the information in “US Security Agency Is Using Anthropic’s Mythos Despite Blacklist, Axios Reports.” In February 2026, Anthropic (a big AI tech) outfit did not want its technology to be used to kill people. The US government declared Anthropic a “risk,” and that label acted like stepping on the brakes of an outlaw race car. The cited news story is a second hand report, but it strikes me as close enough for horseshoes.
Thanks, Venice.ai. Good enough. No logos on the buildings. That’s a thoughtful touch.
A high-tech outfit is kicked out of the US government procurement line up. What does that company do? First, the firm publicizes that its has ethics. I know that is a strange concept for a Silicon Valley bait outfit, but bear with me. The government decision made Anthropic more visible. If anecdotal reports can be believed, more people signed up because of the firm’s “ethics” play than dumped the outfit. Then Anthropic emitted information about how its Claude programming tool was doing a bang up job. And the coup de grâce. Anthropic had a marvelous, advanced, essential capability: Its system could find hundreds, thousands, and maybe millions of software vulnerabilities. The other BAIT outfits sat on their hands. As if by magic like that filling the pages of the Lord of the Rings, Anthropic is allegedly back in the US government. Representatives of the firm had a meeting in the big White House. And the Reuters’ story cemented the trustworthiness of the report. Remember. Thomson Reuters is the trust outfit. So you know I can trust the cited story.
Clever chess moves. Done in plain sight. Bingo. Anthropic is not just back; it is back in a security agency.
Now contrast this with this scenario for another Silicon Valley company. This firm is old by high technology’s accelerationist standards. Founded in 2003 (in case your math is rusty that’s about a quarter century ago), Palantir landed some projects with a secretive US government agency. The company did some fancy dancing in order to get access to the i2 Ltd. Analyst Notebook’s proprietary file format. (FYI I did a few small and meaningless jobs for i2 Ltd. before it was acquired by Silverlake and then IBM and now Harris.) The fancy dance moves ended up in court. Money changed hands. The proceedings were sealed. But the footwork is important. Then the company ran into some procurement procedural issues and sent forward deployed engineers to areas where military operations were underway. That was supposed to demonstrate how well Palantir’s system worked, but it produced some friction. And then, from out of the blue several years ago, Palantir ran ads in the Wall Street Journal positioning itself as an AI company or in my lingo a BAIT outfit. Finally, Palantir became a cause célèbre in Washington, DC, and promptly became the go-to company for super advanced, super capable, super smart software.
Which company pulled off its return to the US government with more finesse? Was it Anthropic, a firm that essentially issued news releases? Was it Palantir with its NFL approach to getting a touchdown? I will leave it to you to answer this question.
From my point of view, several observations are warranted:
- Becoming a go-to provider of technology is a key to sustainable revenue. If a vendor plays one’s cards correctly, a US government procurement can extend over a number of years. Don’t forget those scope changes and engineering change orders. We are talking big money that will be sucked from the veins of Booz, Allen- and IBM-type companies. The big losers in this BAIT example are the existing providers of services because they now have to become suppliers to the BAIT outfits. Second fiddle is not traditional providers favorite job in the Federal symphony billing orchestra.
- Both of the BAIT outfits demonstrated that decisions related to specific procedural behaviors are malleable. In fact, some vendors can pretty much do anything and still become the golden child watching dump trucks deliver cash to kid’s playpen.
- The technology does not have to work. The technology simply has to be perceived as the greatest thing since sliced bread. The technology must cement an agency’s commitment to innovation. The outputs definitely will be capable of delivering better, safer, faster, and cheaper government outputs. Metrics? Hey, who is counting. When’s the last time you got your hands on the audited numbers from a Federal agency engaged in making America safe, secure, and law abiding? I have worked on government projects since the 1970s and I have not come across such a document and probably never will because I don’t care as an official dinobaby.
My point is that at this point in time, both Anthropic and Palantir have pulled off a remarkable destabilization of the Beltway Bandits; that is, the consulting firms, the hardware and software providers, and the support professionals who have controlled the Beltway for decades. Now the game has changed, and I think one should tip one’s hat to the clever tactics used by the companies that now appear poised to bill billions upon billions for years to come.
Tasty BAIT indeed.
Stephen E Arnold, April 28, 2026
Australia and Its Stimulation of Teen Creativity
April 22, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold. Did you know that the freedom loving cyclist at BearBlog thinks my essays are generated by AI. Censorship is okay, right?
One could be critical and say, “Australia’s social ban is not working.” Then one could say, “Australian teens have found workarounds, thus demonstrating one way to spark innovation.”
According to The Guardian in “Australia’s Teen Social Media Ban Is A Flop. But There’s No Joy In ‘I Told You So,’” seven in ten teens still remain on social media platforms. I think that is of 100 young people, only 30 have just given up on the addictive platforms.
The eSafety report also noted that there hasn’t been any major changes to cyberbullying or image-based abuse reported by children. The ban was supposed to keep kids safe from the potential harms that come with social media: the aforementioned bullying, exploitation by pedophiles and other abusers, and impaired brain development.
Some experts predicted the ban wasn’t going to work. Australia’s eSafety commissioner had doubts and the Australian government knew there was lack of evidence that a ban would deliver the results the government wanted. Requisite legislation was passed. The write up said:
“The fallback argument for the social media ban is that it’s better than nothing. But with results like these, it may be worse than nothing, given it potentially creates new problems. Children will remain online with arguably less supervision and support, new privacy and digital security vulnerabilities seem to have appeared and the worst aspects of social media lay largely unaddressed.”
The Australian government seems to be probing the BAIT outfits (big AI tech and social media firms) to verify that these estimable organizations are following the rules of the Information Highway.
The ban ignored the bigger problem of a commercialized ecosystem, where everything and anything is monetized to generate revenue. The algorithmic reward systems are addictive, exploitative, and designed to function like quicksand: Easy to step into and tough to get out of.
Perhaps the Chinese and Russian approaches will deliver what Australia wants?
Whitney Grace, April 22, 2026
Context for J3, Musk, and Durov: Action Will Ensue
April 20, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I read a short news item. I did a quick online search, and the information in “DOJ Refuses to Help French Authorities in Criminal Probe of X” did not get much “play.” That’s one signal that what seems to be a trivial issue between a BAIT (big AI tech) outfit and French authorities has nothing to do for the price of a six-pack of Coca-Cola. The two news outlets covering the dust up between France and Musk are Reuters and the Wall Street Journal.
Thanks, Venice.ai. Your guardrails did not work for this image: Implied violence, prohibited food items, and an anachronism. Get with it, bro.
The cited article said on April 18, 2026:
As first reported by The Wall Street Journal, the Justice Department characterized the French probe as “an effort to entangle the United States in a politically charged criminal proceeding aimed at wrongfully regulating through prosecution the business activities of a social media platform.”
The investigation kicked off in July 2025. The matters of concern to the French authorities included CP, its algorithm, and “fraudulent data extraction.”
What is not emphasized is that this legal action is coming from France’s judiciary and its J3 unit. For those who follow the activities of this office, J3 was instrumental in the take down and subsequent activities against a dark phone used for criminal purposes. Plus, J3 officers initiated the direct arrest of Pavel Durov, founder and CEO of Telegram, the instant messaging service. Durov awaits trial in France for about a dozen serious online crimes. That trial could occur in 2026 or be postponed to 2027. The French judiciary uses legal processes and time as levers to obtain the information and cooperation it requires.
The important point is that Mme Johanna Brousse is leading the Paris crime unit. She has a well-earned reputation for persistence and legal acumen. Elon Musk has ignored requests to participate in a discussion in Paris. Now the US Department of Justice has reacted to Mme Brousse with a no-cooperation statement.
Several observations are warranted:
- Mr. Musk nor the other individuals identified as persons of interest in this matter should plan on a visit to Paris for shopping and a good dinner. Pavel Durov tried that, and he is now forced to watch his Telegram empire struggle and enter what appears to be a downward flight path.
- Mme Brousse will follow the rules. Mr. Musk is not a French citizen, and he resides in the United States; therefore, her team’s next step is difficult to predict.
- Government officials in other departments of the French government may have ideas about how to engage Mr. Musk with Mme Brousse and her colleagues. I feel like I should remind anyone reading this blog post that the French have a direct action mentality.
If we look at Mme Brousse’s actions to enforce the law, she is operating in a manner that provides a model to other EU states and to the EU itself. Without any further action by Mme Brousse, these governing and rule-making entities may launch their own inquiries into Mr. Musk, Grok, X.com, and any other entities with which he is associated. A simple Tesla accident in Italy could become a higher profile event, not a car park fender bender.
To recap, we have had the raid of the Musk offices in France. We have had a request to the US Department of Justice. What’s next? Pavel Durov followed a similar approach when French authorities sought his assistance in an investigation. Mr. Musk may be too rich and too powerful to arrest. But as the French proverb says:
Petit à petit, l’oiseau fait son nid.
In English, this means “little by little the bird builds its nest.” But at some point, the little bird whispers in the ears of a French Foreign Legion team and c’est domage, en effet. A diplomatic rebuff is not the way to make a pal in Paris.
Stephen E Arnold, April 20, 2026
Give Up And Learn To Love Data Centers
April 20, 2026
Tech Radar shares one story that puts a damper on any good news related to AI technology going carbon neutral or green: “An Ex-Programmer’s Devastating Take On AI Data Centers Is Going Viral — And It’s Hard To Ignore.”
Data centers are also bad for the environment (land and water), takes advantage of tax breaks, and brings few jobs to stimulate local economies. Ravenna, Ohio is a small town that might become home to a new AI data center. An ex-programmer by the name of Hollingsworth delivered an insightful speech about the harms of datacenters at a meeting in Ravenna.
Hollingsworth challenges the idea of closed-loop water systems and believes that the forever cooling chemicals will probably make their way back to the water table despite all the studies that say otherwise. Hollingsworth said:
“Ohio is becoming a major battleground over AI infrastructure, with communities questioning whether the trade-offs are worth it. The push back feels less reactionary from somebody like Hollingsworth because of his credibility as an ex-programmer and working with AI models in the past. He frequently says that he is not against new technology or AI in particular, but the costs required for it to run come at a price, and it’s one that the city and its residents will end up paying if the planning permission is given the go-ahead.”
Some folks are a bit more feisty. “Facing Angry Residents, Minnesota City Halls Are Ground Zero for Data Center Battles” reported:
Just a few years ago, neither cities nor residents had much reason to think about data centers. The facilities have operated at a small scale across the state for decades, often treated like warehouses or light industry. But as AI fuels a data center boom, Minnesota cities face a seemingly exponential number of development proposals without much state regulatory guidance. And residents’ concern over the large facilities and their societal effects are rising just as fast. The charged debate touches on everything from energy and water use to noise and legal risk. City officials are caught in the middle. Some, such as Bloomington and Golden Valley, have passed zoning ordinances to set rules on location, noise and size. Others, including Eagan, Carver and this week, New Brighton, have chosen one-year pauses on new data centers to study their impacts.
My view is that BAIT (big AI tech) outfits will hire legions of attorneys, support political candidates who like the idea of data centers, and promise a green approach. States like Ohio might roll over and let the BAIT outfits scratch their tummies. Other states, possibly Minnesota, might take a different approach.
What’s interesting is that data centers take time to build. Certain components are in short supply and expensive. The permits can be a hassle. But the big issue is technology advances. More efficient algorithms may reduce the need for the data center build out. But the dark thoughts might be: What if AI demand does not meet the projections of the spreadsheet jockeys? What if different methods deliver significant efficiencies? What if someone comes along with a way to leapfrog the Google transformer method.
Poof. The data center problem declines in important. Yep, dark thoughts.
Whitney Grace, April 20, 2026
France Lines Up to Gore Some US Tech Bros
April 13, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
France has élan. My interest in the reactions of people who visit the country for the first time is keen. We live in rural Kentucky, and at get togethers which often involve cooking a freshly killed pig or wearing Derby pins and drinking local beverages, tales of travelers’ experiences are exchanged. Some people love the food, but report the waiters ignored them. Other say, “I entered a bakery and said, ‘Hello,’ and no one waited on me.” The tales of getting a hefty fine on the metro, visiting a small town and finding the shops closed for lunch, and the bafflement when a Kentuckians’ passport and wallet are stolen a few minutes after landing at the Marseille France Airport are far too common.
Venice.ai, you don’t know a French gendarme from a guardrail. Good enough.
Imagine how Americans working at Microslop, sorry, I meant to type Microsoft are reacting to this French decision: “France Says “Au Revoir” to Windows, “Bonjour” to Linux.” To be fair, I don’t know if French people who use Microsoft products will switch. The government agencies will adapt over time. Nevertheless, the decision is delightfully French.
The cited article reports:
France is planning a major shift in its government technology infrastructure, announcing its intention to move away from Microsoft Windows in favor of Linux. The decision marks a significant step in the country’s broader effort to reduce reliance on U.S.-based technology companies and regain control over its digital systems. The transition will begin with government workstations, particularly within key digital agencies, as part of a wider strategy to adopt open-source and locally controlled technologies.
From my point of view, this is just one example of the steps France and other countries will be taking to wean themselves from the tech bros’ approach to computers, online information, and software. Pressure is likely to be exerted on French government contractors to ensure that “digital sovereignty” is part of the work process.
What’s this mean for French technology firms? I would assume that big outfits like Dassault Systèmes-type organizations will comply, probably on a negotiated timeline. Private startups will use whatever is cheaper and does the job. If that means, Microsoft PowerPoint, those firms will do what they can until France ratchets up the pressure. Who can forget the arrest of Pavel Durov in August 2024. That action appears to have put a hitch in the Telegram git-along.
The write up points out:
Government leaders have emphasized the need to regain control over national data, infrastructure, and decision-making systems, rather than depending on foreign technology providers.
The write up adds:
France’s move highlights a growing shift in how nations view technology – not just as a tool for productivity, but as a strategic asset tied to sovereignty, security, and long-term independence.
My take: More bad news for US technology companies is coming. Next up will be actions directed at US firms’ business practices. In fact, at some point, I can see an American tech bro landing his private jet at a French airport. He will be detained and charges will be filed. He will be able to leave France, but the French wheels of justice will grind forward. Many things can result from this type of French direct action.
Today Linux Tomorrow maybe a Silicon Valley luminary. Just a thought.
Stephen E Arnold, April 13, 2026
The French AI Mistral Gets l’Appel Sous Les Drapeaux
April 9, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
The US has Palantir and the AI plumbing that firm provides to the US military. Now the French have called Mistral to service. I learned that Mistral will support decision making for the French military. “France Deploys Mistral AI Across Military to Accelerate Operational Decision-Making” said on March 30, 2026:
France’s Ministry of the Armed Forces awarded Mistral AI a three-year contract to deploy sovereign generative AI across its military…. According to the ministry’s 8 January 2026 press release, the framework was notified on 16 December 2025 and will be steered by the Agence ministérielle pour l’intelligence artificielle de défense, or AMIAD. Access extends not only to the armed services but also to public bodies under ministry authority, including the CEA, ONERA, and the French Navy’s hydrographic and oceanographic service, giving the agreement immediate operational and strategic depth.
Believe it or not, the French Foreign Legion is rumored to put those violating the disciplinary / social codes in wire dog kennels. These miscreants are called les forte têtes. The cages are les cages à poules. These are outside and in the sun. Officers, trainees, and visitors pass these cages as they go about their business. Mistral, no matter how wonky the outputs, is unlikely to end up like the illustrated robot. Thanks, Venice.ai. Good enough, and my prompt did not elicit a red warning that I am asking for an image that is out of bounds. Last week I learned that my request for a messy kitchen, a distraught mother, and an overturned high chair violated the sensitivities of the Venice.ai system. I love AI, don’t you?
The write up makes clear that Mistral is first and foremost a software system for workflow and operational decision making. The announcement steers clear of some of the more kinetic descriptions of smart software used by other nations’ governmental units. Use case examples are positioned to provide knowledge, not body count; specifically:
At the tactical level, the most plausible early uses are equally concrete. Army users could employ Mistral-based tools to exploit captured or open-source documents, translate technical manuals, index lessons learned, draft briefing packs, query large maintenance libraries, and turn scanned field reports into searchable data. In a high-intensity environment, that does not replace command; it shortens the time between collection, understanding, and action, which is often where operational advantage is won or lost. This is an inference from the ministry-wide scope of the framework and from Mistral’s documented tool set.
Furthermore the announcement makes quite clear that Mistral, despite being a product of France, is not perfect. In fact, the article explains:
The limits are real, and senior officers will know it. Generative AI still raises issues of hallucination, bias, data contamination, and cyber exposure, which means any deployment in defense must be governed by strict security accreditation, model evaluation, and human validation. But if AMIAD can impose that discipline, the Mistral framework will not be remembered as a software procurement line. It will be seen as a capability multiplier that helps the French Army move faster, understand more, and preserve sovereign control over the information layer of future warfare.
Like most of France’s explanation of its enforcement, military, and special operations capabilities, the description of Mistral is closer to a utility like a search and retrieval system on steroids. The French, unlike some countries, often understate certain facets of their military, law enforcement, and intelligence capabilities. Few know, for example, that French Foreign Legion specialists train other countries’ special forces in certain specific skills.
My view is that Mistral will find itself inserted to a wide range of military and intelligence activities and processes. I also know for a fact that Mistral, even if it hallucinates at an inopportune time, will not be placed in a dog cage at legion headquarters in Aubagne (Bouches-du-Rhône). These wire dog kennels are affectionately known as les cages à poules. Mistral gets a pass and could be relegated to une cage aux folles in Saint-Tropez.
Stephen E Arnold, April 9, 2026
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
