Name the Happiest Family in AI. Give Up?
August 20, 2026
Drama is supposed to come from Hollywood, the British royal family, and rich people.? ? It’s interesting to note that Big Tech people bring their own drama, but I guess they do qualify as rich people.? ? The person in question is Sam Altman and his sister says source MSN: “Sam Altman’s Sister Amends Lawsuit Accusing OpenAI CEO Of Sexual Abuse.”
This case was tossed out, but now it has come back as Sam Altman’s sister accuses him of sexually abusing her over twenty years ago. A judge advised Altman’s sister that she could pursue the case under Missouri’s child sexual abuse statute. She filed her amended case in St. Louis federal court and her brother is countersuing her for defamation.? ?
Here’s the just of the case:
“Annie Altman has accused her brother of sexually abusing and raping her at various times between 1997 and 2006 at the family home in suburban Clayton, Missouri.? ? She said the abuse began when she was three and he was 12.? ? Sam Altman is now 40. On March 20, U.S. District Judge Zachary Blueston in St. Louis said Annie Altman’s standalone sexual assault and sexual battery claims expired in 2008., the Missouri statute let some accusers sue over alleged abuse from long ago.”
Sam Altman’s defamation suit says that his sister posted harmful posts on social media.? ? The Altman family says that Annie has mental health challenges, they’re helping her financially and in other ways, and that the lawsuit is extortion.
Oh, Altman is worth billions. Yet another case of a happy family.
Whitney Grace, August 20, 2026
The Cloud Is Great Until the Tech Bros Go South and Use Legal Eagles Instead of Common Sense
August 17, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I found this news item in Current.org a signal about a horizon event. Okay, what’s a “signal.” In my lingo this is an observable or capturable event that when grouped with similar items can be a predictor of the future. What’s a “horizon event.” In my lectures, a “horizon event” is an action that seems (based on available information) to suggest that a certain outcome is likely to occur in the next six to 18 months. You can critique my approach, but it works for me. Don’t like my method? Hire someone who lectures at the Institute of the Mathematical Sciences of the America.
Thanks, MidJourney. Good enough.
The article is “Nine PBS Sues Iron Mountain Over Blocked Access to Archival Data”. The essay explains that a public TV / radio outfit cannot download its content. The organization’s online provider went out of business. That online provider is one of those enablers that hook a broadcast outfit to a third party running a system on which the broadcaster’s data reside. The intermediary went south (that is, failed as a business) and the third party provider says, “Hey, your public TV crowd cannot access your data.”
Thanks, MidJourney. Good enough.
This is 21st century code for letting lawyers resolve the problem. Common sense suggests that the third party vendor (an outfit that once made money putting paper in caves) locked the people with nice hair out of their data. The write up says:
Iron Mountain has refused to return the materials to the station because its client, OSS, technically owned “the physical services housing the data” within Iron Mountain, according to the complaint.
Nice thinking by an outfit comfortable putting boxes filled with documents in cold storage. How long has Iron Mountain had this broadcaster as a client? Just decades. Plus those public broadcast outfits are tricky with their membership drives, public service announcements, and distinctive speech styles. Definitely up to no good so Iron Mountain has to be really, really careful.
And Iron Mountain knows it is just doing what its lawyers suggest:
Iron Mountain did not respond to a request for comment.
So what’s the signal? I think there are several in this anecdote:
- A cloud vendor may be a chain of companies. The client deals with one link and is essentially clueless about what vendor possesses the client’s data. Rules of access are not discussed so the broadcaster is at fault. Common sense suggests otherwise, but this is 2026, and you know what that means.
- Putting data in once place is a very bad idea. I have an aversion to the cloud because I spent years wrangling with Dialog Information Services about the data my employer uploaded to the third party system. Nope. Exclusives are handing control and power to the vendor. That’s not going to happen. We placed the same data on multiple online services. If one used Iron Mountain logic, no big deal.
- Who will own any data input to an online service that features smart software or interactions with large language models and a client’s agents or humanoids? Answer: Unless the user adds explicit language to the contract, the vendor will control access. Examples of chat inputs are reported to be turning up in the darnedest places like Web search results. You don’t own anything unless you have a legal document that says you do.
Net net: Cloud services may seem cheap, benign, caring, and friendly today. On the horizon those cheerful entities become Darth Vader’s nasty brothers, sisters, and cousins. Cloud vendors have light sabers. Cloud customers have legal filings.
Stephen E Arnold, August x, 2026
EU Issues New AI Rules: AI Tech Bros Yawn
August 14, 2026
Big Tech might be able to make its own laws in the United States, but the European continent is one they have yet to conquer. When it comes to AI, the European Union wants to enforce new rules and Engadget explains that latest on, “EU Announces New Rules On AI Transparency.” The new AI transparency rules are meant to protect the little guy or those unable to tell the difference between AI and real. As the technology progresses it will be harder to tell the difference between reality and AI -generated, so Article 50 of the AI Act requires content publishers to label certain AI-generated content. They are also supposed to inform users when they are interacting with a chatbot instead of a real person.
The types of content that will be labeled are “authentic-looking” deepfake content or text, such as images, videos, or music. The European Commission said that, “‘The goal is simple: whenever AI plays a vital role, you are entitled to know.’”
There are steep penalties for anyone breaking the new rules:
“The new law has some teeth, with fines up to €15 million or three percent of global annual revenue for companies and €750k for EU institutions, bodies and agencies.”
Europe has the most regulations when it comes to AI and Big Tech is crying about how it is interfering with their development. The European Commission thinks differently:
“However, Europe’s tech regulator stated that the rules will simplify development for AI providers by creating a single market with harmonized rules. ‘It also addresses potential risks to people’s health, safety, and fundamental rights, while safeguarding democracy and the rule of law,’ the EC wrote. ‘Ensuring its effective implementation is now a key priority for the Commission.’”
Hats off to Europe for taking a stand against deep fake shenanigans and not bowing to the pressure that comes from Big Tech.? ? Will Europe be able to enforce the rules though? April’s fools in August 2026. Tech bros like jokes.
Whitney Grace, August 14, 2026
The Meta Way: Look for a Pattern, Please
August 12, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
Meta (formerly Facebook) makes money. Attention has shifted from its very cool founder to Chinese AI, Google’s management antics, and US smart software that hacks into other computers without any human guidance.
How does one recapture the headlines?
According to Futurism, the brilliant Zuckerberg discovers that his smart software does the exact same thing? “Jealously Watching OpenAI and Anthropic, Meta Claims That Its AI Went on a Hacking Spree Too.” Does that word “jealously” suggest a motive for this not-too-surprising assertion? I don’t know.
Thanks, Midjourney. Good enough.
According the write up:
the Mark Zuckerberg-led tech giant is claiming that during a recent test of one of its AI model conducted by an independent company, the AI accessed the internet and hacked a third-party service — an narrative that’s starting to get awfully familiar at this point.
Meta’s model, called Muse Spark 1.1:
breached an unidentified company’s systems and changed its internal environment. Meta claims a “misconfiguration” during the hacking test had allowed its model to escape.
As a dinobaby, I believe everything I read on the Internet. Therefore, if Anthropic broke out and hacked, it follows that OpenAI’s smart software broke out and wandered around off the reservation. When Meta reveals its smart software did exactly the same thing, I know something is up.
Is that up really smart software doing its thing or is it a few engineers fooling around in order to see what their sporty creations can deliver to a hacker, an intelligence team, an industrialized criminal gang, or some geniuses trapped in the bodies of 20 somethings with the maturity of a 16 year old gifted student?
Meta’s me-too captured some headlines.
But the evergreen way for Meta to capture headlines is via the courts. Here’s a recent example from TechSpot. “Meta’s Child-Safety Failures Will Cost It Another $567 Million As Total Bill Reaches Almost $1 Billion” captures a powerhouse for Mr. Zuckerberg’s publicity machine.
The TechSpot write up says:
Meta’s defeat in New Mexico’s landmark child-safety case is going to cost the company close to one billion dollars. A state judge has ordered Facebook’s parent to place $567 million into a fund addressing harm its platforms caused young people. That’s on top of the $375 million civil penalty imposed in March, meaning its total bill now stands at $942 million. The decision resolves the second phase of New Mexico’s case against Meta.
There are more charges to be adjudicated. The article uses the phrases “a public nuisance.” Now that’s a label guaranteed to put a company, its leader, and its ethical compass in the news.
A third component to Meta’s capture-attention strategy appears in “Inside the Political Debate Over How to Protect Louisianans from Paying for Meta’s Power Needs.” The Meta data center initiative is generating news and pulling eyeballs to the company’s impact on local communities.
Is a pattern emerging? Based on my decades of experience in corporate activities, yes, I see one. Meta continues to move fast, break things, and allegedly pay fines after the appeals run out. The company me-too’s in the smart software sector. It moves aggressively with its data center initiative. When I ad these up, Meta obviously operates by a moral compass of astounding precision. The company can be counted on beating a direct path to the true north when money, public attention, and user behavior produce a 21st-century management marvel.
Net net: Don’t forget to log out of Meta’s online properties. Wait. Someone told me that might not make any difference. Oh, well, it’s a great outfit.
Stephen E Arnold, August 12, 2026
Naked Something, Elon Musk, and Minnesota
August 3, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I have a segment in my upcoming lectures in September about Elon Musk and his push for an everything app. The term “super app” was not sufficiently inclusive for Mr. Musk. Minnesota appears to be insufficiently inclusive for Mr. Musk and his vision for his software that cranks out humanoids without clothing.
MidJourney. Good enough. Tasteful too.
Mr. Musk should wander down the halls of an old-age home about 730 am and peek in the rooms. He can say, “I am looking for my Aunt Mable. What room is she in?” In a few minutes, Mr. Musk would learn that keeping people clothed is a genuinely good idea. He apparently has a different opinion and he wants to sue the state of Minnesota to make sure humanoids without clothes are just what Mr. Musk desires.
I learned about this alleged litigation in Gizmodo’s article “Grok Creator SpaceXAI Sues Minnesota AG to Stop Ban on Nudification.” Gizmodo included a comment from Minnesota governor Tim Walz, who tweeted or x’ed:
See you in court, creep.
So what’s up?
Gizmodo states:
Minnesota has a new law on its books that bans Nudification apps and websites—any tech that takes images of clothed people and automatically makes them nude, generally with AI. The law, HF 1606, bans the act of using the software, and penalizes the companies themselves—allowing the state to levy fines, and opening the door to lawsuits from victims.
Mr. Musk, whom some view as a genius entrepreneur and the wealthiest humanoid on earth whether clothed or nudified, believes the Minnesota law to be deeply flawed. The basic idea is that naked humanoids are an important aspect of some disciplines, subjects, and individuals with interesting notions of what’s appropriate.
The write up reports:
According to the suit, the new law’s penalty structure creates a situation in which outputting ten images as theoretically harmless as the Trump reflecting pool slop pic could result in $5 million in penalties for the company queried in order to generate them. “And a business whose users created a hundred thousand images covered by HF 1606 (not at all unlikely for a publicly available program with millions of users generating billions of images) could owe an eye-popping $50 billion dollars,” the suit claims.
Financial penalties. Are not those the preferred method of making a point to some big tech companies ignoring EU laws? When one is a wealthy person, why not use financial penalties to create awareness of the consequences of illegal behavior. Mr. Musk is unlikely to visit Duluth in February where he could be detained. Mr. Musk will probably avoid Minneapolis as well. Why make it easy for the governor to pick him up for a chat.
It appears that Mr. Musk’s lawsuit was timed to prevent the law from taking effect. Very smart people can be quite crafty.
Several observations:
- I am quite tired of this “laws don’t apply to me” type of thinking. Social structures depend on laws. Ignoring laws erodes what makes life and commerce possible. But I am a dinobaby. I like to follow the rules. I find it amusing that Mr. Musk is a defender of the Constitution as long as it meshes with his ideas.
- Mr. Musk’s quest for an everything app means that anything goes; for example, payment rails for cyber crime, deep fake fraud, and other interesting online applications. Categorical affirmatives don’t make me comfortable, but they seem to be okay for the world’s richest humanoid.
- Governor Walz stayed out of bounds when he name-called the estimable Mr. Musk. There are other appropriate ways to address the owner of SpaceX and possessor of dreams about the colonization of Mars. (Ooops. Scratch that. Now Mr. Musk wants to go to the moon. His everything appears to have some bounds.) I would suggest the phrase “Sci-Fi Guy.”
Net net: My hunch is that Mr. Musk can delay this law by going slow, appeals, and eventually involving higher authorities. Minnesota tried, and it might just fail to keep clothes on those nudified via Grok and disseminated via X.com.
Stephen E Arnold, August 3, 2026
Pavel Durov: A GOAT Tug of War
July 30, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
Pavel Durov is now a person of interest to the Russian security services. He is now the GOAT (the greatest of all time in Russian technology) wanted by the French and authorities in his Motherland. You can read our view of this Pavel predicament in our Telegram Notes publication.
Midjourney allocated a few cycles to my art request. What I wanted was two different governments tugging on the tethered goat. What I got is a weird illustration, one tether, and two government officials with donkey ears. Nice work.
In a nutshell here’s the hot pelmeni in which the goat may be cooked. The French charges focus on a litany of serious online crimes. I am not going to run through the shopping list, but it contains the kiddo pix and fraud allegations about Telegram’s benign indifference to French requests for investigative support. His trial date is just hanging above his head like a small thunderstorm. Are the French rushing this case forward? Are you kidding? Have you tried to rush any French government agency? Pavel is a French citizen, and he has to report to French authorities and ask permission to travel.
The Russian security services have slapped a terrorism allegation on the GOAT. I am not sure how serious this charge is because the Russian security services can pick up the GOAT’s brother, ring up Pavel, and introduce the genius with two Ph.D.’s to a blow torch. That type of pressure often evokes cooperation. But for now, the GOAT is accused of allowing certain security services to recruit young people to commit terrorist acts within Russia.
How will this play out for the GOAT? That’s a good question. We try to provide some ideas in the full article “Pavel in a Hot Pelmeni: Alleged Terrorism.” Have you had a hot pelmeni? Pick a reputable restaurant. Baa, baa, baa.
Stephen E Arnold, July 30, 2026
The Frisky French: Snag Durov, Summon Musk, and Step on Social Media
July 29, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I have a gizmo
In rural Kentucky, France means eating frogs, nasty waiters, and crazy drivers. To those who have a bit more exposure to la belle France, the country values its language, its historical culture, and education. (Yep, French shopkeepers can make change. I know that sounds crazy to someone from Kentucky.)
France also watches, thinks, and then acts. In the thrashing about American big tech outfits, France took a couple of notable actions. First, the French judiciary picked up Pavel Durov, the self-proclaimed GOAT (greatest of all time) Russian innovator, held him for a few days, and explained that he would [a] have to check in with the J3 unit each week, [b] could not leave the borders of France without a note from Madame Brousse (one of the French judiciary officials not amused by online crime), and [c] would be standing trial for a numbers of criminal acts. As a French citizen, France just arrested Durov.
Tech bros get invited to go with a French law enforcement officer. The police van is the weird white vehicle chock full of other officers. Thanks, Midjourney. The van is old fashioned but good enough.
Then France raided the offices of one of Elon Musk’s companies. As part of that legal action, France summoned Mr. Musk and a former member of the Musk “leadership” to an interview. Musk and his former colleague did not show up. As a result, a quick trip to Cannes to catch some sun and a nice dinner could result in the arrest of Mr. Musk. The ensuring legal process would be interesting to observe as the world’s richest person and his legal team poke their hands into the Nutty Putty of the French criminal system.
“French Lawmakers Approve a Sweeping Social Media Ban for Children under 15” reports that France is taking direct action against what is another manifestation of American big tech. The write up reports:
France banned children under 15 from using social media on Tuesday, becoming the first country in the European Union to pass a blanket ban on the platforms as concerns grow worldwide over the harmful effects of digital content on kids. Both chambers of the Parliament voted in favor of the measure, a flagship initiative of French President Emmanuel Macron’s second term. The bill also bans the use of mobile phones in high schools.
The news article contains what I think the true message of this action is. The AP report quotes M. Macron as saying (presumably in French but translated by the AP system):
We will keep on going.
The news stories don’t ask what is to me the big question, “What’s the next French move that is aimed at online crime and US big tech?” The Telegram crowd has learned that keeping its founder and GOAT on a tether has not boosted the fortunes of the firm. Musk and his acolyte have not been given first hand exposure to the French legal system. The youth and the enablers who allow kids to doomscroll have not been directly affected by these unilateral French actions.
Therefore, I want to speculate, based on my limited experience, interacting with the French firms over the decades:
- The French Foreign Legion marches at a slower pace than most special military groups. The menacing beat of the blood sausage means, in my vernacular, “Here we come. Get out of the way or you get stepped on, maybe killed.” You can listen to the tune on the social media superstar platform YouTube. (Are you listening, Google?) France is making clear that it will do more than just terminate Palantir Technologies’ hopes of selling licenses to the French government.
- When the French turn their attention to platforms that do not assist the government in enforcing the ban, my hunch is that the offices of these firms will be raided, executives arrested, and American leadership summoned. Obviously some big tech AI companies will ignore the French requests. However, that creates the potential for excitement when one of these high fliers enters France and possibly one of those cute little police vans.
- French officials will make certain that appropriate, low key reports about the ban mechanics are communicated to other European Union states, Europol, and probably to other key entities; for example, EU data center operators and the authorities in the countries in which the data centers are domiciled.
How will these actions affect the futures of big tech outfits? The Durov arrest has allowed Telegram to demonstrate some cracks in its 13 year super structure. The xAI facilities in Paris are obviously attentive to what the French judiciary is doing. The US social media companies are probably adding the ban to the agenda of one of those Silicon Valley type executive meetings.
Net net: France is taking action. Other, less bold countries, are likely to follow suit. Social media is synonymously with US technology. I think there are some storm clouds visible on the horizon.
Stephen E Arnold July 29, 2026
PS. Here’s a segment of the lyrics to Le boudin (the blood sausage):
(French)
Nous sommes des dégourdis,
Nous sommes des lascars,
Des types pas ordinaires,
Nous avons souvent notre cafard,
Nous sommes des légionnaires.(Google Translate English)
We are resourceful,
We are tough guys,
Not your ordinary types,
We often feel down,
We are legionnaires.
Getting Google While the Getting Is Good… Now the Hard Part: Getting the Money
July 28, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I just translated “EU Fines Google £759m for Breaching Competition Laws on Search and App Store” into a language more easily understandable here in rural Kentucky. The headline means, “Ka-Ching.” (That’s the sound of an old-fashioned cash register ringing up about a billion dollars in scoff law fines.) The EU needs to be aware that Google was cash flow negative in the last quarter; therefore, sending an invoice and getting the money are two quite different things. But I think that for the EU, it is the thought that counts.
Thanks, Midjourney. Accounting seems to be working late. Good enough.
The write up in a UK “real” newspaper said:
Google has been fined 890 million euros (£759 million) by the EU for breaching its laws including by giving more prominence to its own services such as shopping, hotels and sports scores in search results.
My reaction is, “This is a new Google business strategy?”
The article continues:
It [Google] did this [pushing its own products] by displaying them more prominently in search results, such as by bumping them up to the top of the page or by using enhanced visuals and filters, which others do not get. The commission also found that Google prevented app developers from offering cheaper offers to customers in the Google Play app store.
The GOOG has been using essentially the same game plan for more than 20 years. I am surprised that the EU has not been more attentive to how the company deploys its tools to win the game. I think (and I may be wrong because I am an 82 year old dinobaby) that somewhere along the line, Google was identified as a monopoly.
The Google typically responds to legal matters on which it is the loser by letting loose additional flights of legal eagles. The write up points out (very gently I wish to note) that:
Google recently lost its appeal against a 4.1 billion euro (£3.5 billion) fine imposed by the EU for limiting competition and reducing consumer choice through the dominance of its mobile Android operating system. Henna Virkkunen, the European Commission’s executive vice-president for tech sovereignty, security and democracy, said: “Google must now bring the non-compliance to an end and to refrain from continuing it in the future. “Today’s decisions send a clear message: we will not hesitate to use our tools to safeguard business and innovation opportunities opened up by the Digital Markets Act.”
That’s scary? I don’t think so. Google is not being treated fairly. From Google’s point of view, anything that impedes the game plan is unfair. Laws are not supposed to get the way when Googzilla decides it needs to snack on a revenue flow. The write up includes this memorable quote from a Googler:
Regulation should improve products, not make them worse.
Does this phrase evoke another memorable quotation: In order to save this village, we must destroy it. I am not sure who uttered this interesting candidate for Baby Boomer quotations, but it strikes me as sharing some foundational assumptions about how some people view obstacles.
Net net: Let me know when the EU gets its cash. My hunch it won’t be processed by Google Pay too quickly if at all.
Stephen E Arnold, July 28, 2026
xAI and Grok: Management Magic
July 24, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
Two stories. Two examples of management magic. How lucky can I get with one scan of my newsfeed.
The first item comes from Engadget and its article “xAI Sues Grok User for Generating Nonconsensual Sexualized Deepfakes.” This write up informed me that:
The defendant used Grok to create sexualized images of adults and children, xAI says.
Let me make sure I understand this statement. The Elon Musk Grok AI allows users to create kiddo pix and other material the French judiciary has determined are possible violations of French law. If my recollection is correct, the J3 unit has rousted the offices of Elon Musk’s high-tech outfits and wishes to “interview” him. Just ask Pavel Durov what “interview” means. If you don’t want second hand information, catch a flight to Paris, and spray paint obscenities on the facades of the Palais de Justice de Paris. If you aren’t sure of its address, grab an Uber to the the Île de la Cité and exit at 4 Boulevard du Palais. Let me know how you assess your French interview.
Thanks, MidJourney. Good enough.
I concluded that Grok includes the capability to generate kiddo pix and other oddments of certain personalities. However, the controls in place to prevent the creation and dissemination of the aforementioned kiddo pix do not work. Therefore, the Grok customer used the Elon Musk system to create offensive and possibly illegal images.
To me, the chain of events seems to be: Grok produces kiddo pix. —> Controls either [a] are shams, [b] don’t work, or [c] can be easily sidestepped. —> Grok sues a customer for use of Grok.
The Engadget article states:
The company [xAI] said that Grok refused to follow his prompts on “numerous occasions” but that he repeatedly submitted edited prompts to circumvent the AI’s safeguards. In one example mentioned in the filing, xAI said Harwood uploaded the photo of a fully dressed girl around 10 to 11 years old and then asked Grok to remove all of her clothing and make her do a “Playboy model impression” as she laid in bed. Grok refused his request, the lawsuit said, but he kept on submitting modified requests. As Reuters notes, this is one of the first lawsuits brought by an AI company against one of its users, and it sends a message that xAI will sue over the misuse of Grok.
Grok enables. Customers uses Grok. Grok sues. I have a number of observations, of course, but I shall set forth just one: “How crazy is this?”
The second item has no title but appears to carry this moniker: Simon Willison Weblog. Sponsored by: Teleport. This will have to do because the write up does not display a time and date or much substantive information. Obviously I believe everything I read on the Internet, so I will treat this “weblog” item as actual factual.
The SWWSBT (shorthand for the non titled “weblog”) asserts:
xai-org/grok-build, now open source (via) xAI’s grok CLI tool faced severe community backlash yesterday when it became apparent that running the command in a directory could upload that entire directory to xAI’s Google Cloud buckets. One user reported running it in their home directory and seeing it upload “my SSH keys, my password manager database, my documents, photos, videos, everything”.
Let’s see if I understand this “weblog”. A person used Grok. The Grok command line interface when run in a directory would transfer everything in that directory to Grok cloud storage.
Is this amusing or not? I think it is a knee slapper. A user, presumably one who assumes that Grok and, by extension, Mr. Musk’s xAI value privacy, user trust, and local control of where data goes and when, had the data taken, removed without permission, or, more colloquially, stolen. As a dinobaby, I am not sure which of these terms is appropriate. However, I assume the person who lost the data could sue Mr. Musk and the appropriate corporate entity linked to him for theft. Is that a hoot or what?
Several observations about these two unrelated articles, united only by the estimable Mr. Musk and his management methods; to wit:
- The failure to control the Grok software appears to be a characteristic of the xAI AI. This is a mellifluous way to reference these corporate entities. A failure to control suggests that management processes are possibly flawed or non-existent.
- The first example makes the customer the victim of safeguards, apparently nearly useless safeguards put in place by management. The second example illustrates a failure of routine management controls for commercial software for professional developers. The glue sticking these examples together strikes me as management.
- The incident with the customer making kiddo pix is likely to be brought to the attention of the French judiciary. It proves that Grok has made its system in a way that allows pornography and other distasteful images to be created. Combined with the fact that Grok is seeking legal protection from victims indicates that the action of the French judiciary was pretty much spot on. Should Mr. Musk and his co-conspirator participate in an interview with the French judiciary, excitement may ensue.
Net net: I have great admiration for a professional who carries a chainsaw on stage at a televised gathering. That professional touch is visible in the firm’s technical AI system, its apparent admission that it cannot control what people do with a public facing software, and the suave handling of the French judiciary’s summons. Madam Brousse is probably looking forward for an opportunity to chat with Mr. Musk. If in Paris, Mr. Musk could look up Mr. Durov and get some first-hand information about the J3 unit, the smooth flow of French justice, and insight into how French legal procedures function.
Stephen E Arnold, July 24, 2026
Is It Time to Certify Ransomware Consultants?
July 24, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
Anyone can be a consultant. Clients have problems; otherwise, why rely on a stranger possibly located via a Facebook post? Solve your own problems, pilgrim. I found this Ars Technica story a reminder that one should consider the intangible trust in the business and digital datasphere.
Ars Technica published “Ransomware Negotiator Hired To Represent Victims Was Working For The Attackers.” The alleged “ransomware negotiator” found a six year prison sentence, not a juicy bonus from his client. The write up reports:
“As a ransomware negotiator for the company DigitalMint, Florida resident Angelo Martino’s job was “to negotiate with cybercriminals to mitigate the ransoms paid by [DigitalMint’s] clients,” the US government said in a sentencing memorandum on Tuesday. “Instead, Martino provided the cybercriminals with confidential negotiation information to maximize the ransoms in exchange for a portion of the ransom payments. Five of the victims whom Martino was supposed to help paid over $75 million to ransomware affiliates, including likely millions of dollars in ransom demands inflated as a result of the confidential information provided by Martino.”
The clever Martino person pled guilty to the charges and asked for a light sentence of two years, because he assisted in the indictment of the two co-defendants. They were Ryan Goldberg, a Sygnia incident manager, and Kevin Martin, ransomware negotiator for DigitalMint. Both go-fast professional received four years in prison.
As part of his penance, Martino must forfeit property and pay ten percent of the salary he earns after release. He received millions of cryptocurrency dollars from the illegal negotiator job. Authorities seized Martino’s holdings but not before he bought two houses in Florida, a boat, and several vehicles. Maybe one rule for bad people is to move fast.
What about those who were duped. The write up says:
“Victims of the scheme paid ransoms ranging from $213,000 to $26.8 million between April 2023 and September 2023. Besides the financial loss, the conspiracy “affected the ability of victims including companies in the financial services and health industry to provide services to customers,” the US said. Victims included a hospitality company, a nonprofit, a financial services company, a retail company, and a medical company, all of which had hired DigitalMint.”
Cyber security means more than just assuming that the Internet is a safe and warm place to learn and doomscroll. My hunch is that Martino will be a person with whom cyber criminals in the facility will want to meet, engage, and share information about online crime. Knowledge is power.
Whitney Grace, July 24, 2026
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
