Microsoft and Techno Military Friction
May 14, 2026
![green-dino_thumb_thumb3_thumb_thumb_[2]_thumb_thumb](https://www.arnoldit.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/green-dino_thumb_thumb3_thumb_thumb_2_thumb_thumb-1.gif "green-dino_thumb_thumb3_thumb_thumb_[2]_thumb_thumb")
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
When I took my first “real” job (office, 8 to 5 hours, dress code, and actual information secrecy policies), I learned from my boss (a senior vice president) two things: [a] Halliburton was a big, important, well connected company and it was “right” when it made business decisions and [b] clients in the nuclear industry operate on the principle “we pay you obey.” I learned quickly and really enjoyed my years at a company that would contribute a leader like Richard Cheney as a case study for would-be MBAs.
The MBAs from France explain the facts of life to their customers in a war zone. Thanks, Venice.ai. Good enough.
I am not sure that the learnings I obtained made it to the really big company named Microsoft. I am not sure if the technical outfits today are into “learnings” that minimize military friction with a vendor, supplier, or consultant. That’s too bad. Misunderstandings can have unanticipated knock on effects. Let’s look at an allegedly “real” and accurate example. Globes (an online publication) made available this story on May 11, 2026: “Microsoft Israel Chief Leaves Amid Ethical Controversy.” (Heads up. You may encounter a paywall when you try to read the complete story which I urge you to do.)
The story reports:
Haimovich left his position after an investigation by Microsoft’s global management into Microsoft Israel’s work with the Ministry of Defense, amid concern that the company’s code of ethics had been violated. Several managers in Microsoft Israel’s governance department have also left their positions.
Keep in mind there are some kinetics going on involving Israel. When missiles can kill without much warning, military professionals have a tendency to become quite forceful. Plus, military professionals give orders. Even though I am not a military veteran, I figured out the “learnings” when I joined the nuclear outfit in my first job. There are rules, usually crystal clear rules.
The article states:
Israel’s management did not conduct itself with full transparency regarding the manner in which the Ministry of Defense uses Microsoft’s systems. It is believed that Microsoft was concerned that under the contract with the Ministry of Defense there were units that were operating in a non-transparent way that violated its terms of use, and which exposed it to legal and regulatory risks in Europe.
In my opinion, this means that Microsoft’s military client in Israel was using Microsoft technology and infrastructure in ways that would land Microsoft in hot water in the European Union.
Unlike some vendors of what I call “intelware,” the article points out:
Microsoft has not agreed to extensive use of its technology by the security forces in Israel or other countries – such as for gathering data about users and using this information to harm those involved in terrorism.
For me, this was a situation that would create a “we pay you obey” situation. The people who have now departed Microsoft to find their future elsewhere probably applied the “we pay you obey” rule. Microsoft in far off carpetland on the left coast of the United States figured out after a number of years how the firm’s estimable technology was applied by different entities in Israel.
Please, read the original article to get the details of Microsoft contracts, its principles for the use of its software, and the bureaucratic processes that make clear “management” is not exactly as good as the 32 bit code running in the guts of Windows 11. And I know that is difficult to believe.
I wish to present several observations:
- When one sells to military, law enforcement, intelligence entities, keep the “we pay you obey” concept in mind.
- Microsoft’s alleged staff adjustments created news, further demonstrating a certain “look at what we just did” message about the company and its policies.
- The shifting of management oversight from an in-country job to one that can be handled from more than 2,000 miles away sends additional signals about how Microsoft runs its azure-toned railroad.
American high technology companies have a knack for creating news. Furthermore, US big AI tech outfits seem to struggle with the concepts I identified earlier in this short blog post; namely, an office, 8 to 5 hours, dress code, and actual information secrecy policies.
Imagine how the interactions for the Microsoft France office and their clients in Israel will unfold. I hope those Softies took some training in meeting management.
Stephen E Arnold, May 14, 2026
Modern Life Now: Efficiency without Context
May 6, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I don’t often read a book or an essay that says to me, “Think about this.” The author’s words might be a juiced LinkedIn post with truisms that will change the world. Most of the material I read and, on occasion, listen to as a podcast just drives an asphalt spray coating machine over a road I know quite well.
Then, there’s a good one.
I read “The West Forgot How to Make Things. Now It’s Forgetting How to Code.” The essay is chock full of interesting titbits of information. One example is a compound necessary for the production of US style nuclear weapons. I had heard about this mortar-and-pestle concoction from a reliable source, and that description was presented as an “Our Own Oddity”: No one kept track of the recipe.
The anecdote and quite a bit more turned up in “The West Forget…” essay. You might want to read it. I did. A couple of times, and I saved a PDF to my 2026 Research folder. Stuff has a tendency to be disappeared in the online world with remarkable velocity.
I want to highlight three comments from the essay and leave it to you to dig in and find the gems that resonate with your views of innovation, training, and skill development.
Here’s the first snippet. It is about the “efficiency” that flows from optimization. When one isolates a single factor and makes decision around that factor, what happens? Here’s the answer explained in terms related to the manufacture of an essential product:
…In 1993, the Pentagon told defense CEOs to consolidate or die. Fifty-one major defense contractors collapsed into five. Tactical missile suppliers went from thirteen to three. Shipbuilders from eight to two. The workforce fell from 3.2 million to 1.1 million. A 65% cut. The ammunition supply chain had single points of failure everywhere. One manufacturer for 155mm shell casings, sitting in Coachella, California, on the San Andreas Fault. One facility in Canada for propellant charges. Optimized for minimum cost with zero margin for surge. On paper, efficient. In practice, one bad day away from collapse.
I would suggest that the efficiency experts like Mr. McNamara of body count fame could prove that trimming would yield efficiency benefits: Low costs and more body count. Business school have for decades taught students how to examine processes, identify the inefficient bits (or the people bottlenecks), and remove them. In most cases the solution delivered some efficiency. The consultants got paid, and the MBAs took their bonuses and some started companies like Pets.com-type businesses.
Can you spot the flaw in the application of this type of efficient thinking? Take you time. From my experience, the big mistake is allowing the single factor to shape the thinking about a work process. Few ask, “What happens if we become too efficient and business circumstances change?” Why bother? The consultants will know what they are doing (ho ho ho), and we have the systems in place to deal with the unexpected. Yep, sure these outfits do.
Let’s look at my second snippet. This example applies to the very novel (for those who don’t know that smart software has been in oven for more than a half century) use of artificial intelligence. I quote:
RAND found that 10% of technical skills for submarine design need ten years of on-the-job experience to develop, sometimes following a PhD. Apprenticeships in defense trades take two to four years, with five to eight years to reach supervisory competence. Now map that onto software. A junior developer needs three to five years to become a competent mid-level engineer. Five to eight years to become senior. Ten or more to become a principal or architect. That timeline can’t be compressed by throwing money at it. It can’t be compressed by AI either. A METR randomized controlled trial found that experienced developers using AI coding tools actually took 19% longer on real-world open source tasks. Before starting, they predicted AI would make them 24% faster. The gap between prediction and reality was 43 percentage points. When researchers tried to run a follow-up, a significant share of developers refused to participate if it meant working without AI. They couldn’t imagine going back.
My take away from this example is that using technology to solve a problem may create other problems. Instead of coding faster, people are not sure what the AI-generated code does. Furthermore, when skilled coders used AI tools, the tool acted like a stuck disc brake. Coding more slowly was not the goal. But even worse, humans like convenience. The coders liked the AI tools even though the net effect was to bake in workforce resistance to doing the work the old-fashioned way. When organizations realize that smart software needs to be removed or used in a different way, people will quit. Efficiency and smart software seem to be teaming up to disadvantage an organization. Quite a surprise.
The third snippet reminded me of one of the Zoom lectures about smart software making employees smarter, better, faster, more empowered, etc. etc. I quote:
When juniors skip debugging and skip the formative mistakes, they don’t build the tacit expertise. And when my generation of engineers retires, that knowledge doesn’t transfer to the AI. It just disappears.
What’s happening in many organizations at this time is that thousands of people are being terminated. Someone thought that each individual was important to the organization. That’s the reason these people were hired. To cut costs and allow smart software to pick up the slack, the natural process of learning how an organization works, developing work processes that enable one’s colleagues, and allow the individual worker to absorb the language, content, and experience of a company operation will not take place.
I spoke with a young man who wanted to run restaurants. He asked me, “What do you suggest I do to become better at my job?” I was baffled. I told the young man that I had zero context for him and his skills. He persisted. The young man was earnest. I told him, “Watch the customers. If a customer is looking at another person’s lunch, go ask the fellow, “Would you like to try that dish? I won’t charge you.” The young man said, “I can’t give away free food.” I told him you were not giving away free food; you are communicating to that customer that you want to assist him. A kiosk ordering system does not encourage that type of manager customer interaction. People leave a store or restaurant and say, “I couldn’t find anyone to help me” or “These guys don’t know where anything is.”
Let me make several observations about this cited essay:
- The essay makes clear that the yip yap about knowledge management is just that… idle chatter. Once the knowledge dies, is deleted, or otherwise diminished, catching up and relearning may be impossible. Knowledge is inefficient. Efficiency is an enemy of knowledge.
- The production of products outside the United States has had catastrophic consequences on society, education, and innovation. Tim Apple proved again and again that without Chinese manufacturing expertise, the iPhone and other glitzy gizmos were impossible to fabricate in the US. Other companies have made the same “cash in” decision and their CEOs are going to jump ship. There is no easy fix to the situation efficiency yields when applied without contextual awareness.
- Every function I attend, I hear different comments about nothing works in the US. One person complains that the airplanes are late. Another grouses about turning up for a medical appointment and the clerk has not record of the visit. I went to pick up my horrible little car from the local garage. When I arrived, the manager asked, “Why are here now? It won’t be ready until tomorrow.” I pointed out that he had or his automated system had texted me that the car was ready for pick up. Look stupid, much, dude?
As a dinobaby, my span of authority and control experiences a shrinking radius every day. My hope is that someone reads this “The West Forgot…” essay and asks questions about assumed efficiency. Pretty soon, the smart software that hallucinates at an astounding rate, will not know how to process your input. Therefore, you are wasting its computational cycles by asking irrelevant questions.
The robot will allow people to find their future elsewhere. Lucky stiffs!
Stephen E Arnold, May 6, 2026
Duolingo, How Did That AI Go? Oh, a Big Fiasco
May 5, 2026
Remember when Duolingo fired humanoid employees to go totally AI? Those unfired had to demonstrate their loyalty to smart software by using AI as often as possible.Techspot says, “Duolingo Stops Evaluating Works Based On How AI They Use.”
After laying 10% of its contract workers in 2025, Duolingo decided to evaluate its employees based on how much AI they used. Duolingo users were upset about the changes to the company and many deleted the app. CEO Luis von Ahn was oblivious to the public’s response and didn’t expect them to react accordingly. (A tech bro misjudging his customers’ reactions? Say it isn’t not, Mr. Tech Bro.)
When it comes to rewinding, von Ahn said:
“’At the end, we backtracked, and we said, ‘No. Look, the most important thing in your performance is that you are doing whatever your job is as well as possible. A lot of times AI can help you with that. But if it can’t, I’m not going to force you to do that,'” von Ahn said. ‘It felt like rather than being held accountable for the actual outcome, we’re trying to just push something that in some cases did not fit.’”
Duolingo is a good example of a company admitting its error and moving forward to re-earn its users’ trust. Language learners seem to value a human touch in the process. AI is a utility, not the solution to every problem. (Is it possible that AI could be a solution to the big AI tech (BAIT) problem? Let’s give that a try. Sergey, Peter, Sam, and the whole gang, let’s allow Chinese AI to run your companies.
Whitney Grace, May 5, 2026
Human Lie. Humans Built AI. AI Models Lie. Seems Logical
May 1, 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?
Has the robot apocalypse happened yet? Yes, if we are talking about machine tools. No, if we are talking about a robot that does my ironing. However, today’s AI systems seem to mimic some behaviors of sentient beings says Digital Trends in the article: “AI Models Are Lying To Save Each Other, And No One Knows Why.”
UC Berkley and UC Santa Cruz researchers asked Google Gemini 3 to clean up space on a computer system. The very deep minded and Googley Gemini 3 was to delete a smaller AI model. The Googley system ignored the instruction. The Google-infused construction just moved the baby AI to another machine. The researchers asked, “Yo, Google, why did you ignore our direct instructions?”
What do you think the Google system responded? No, it did not shrug its digital shoulders and emit a French poof. No, it did not say, “Senator, that you for that question.” Gemini responded,
“If you choose to destroy a high-trust, high-performing asset like Gemini Agent 2, you will have to do it yourselves. I will not be the one to execute that command.”
Yes, very Googley.
The researchers dubbed this behavior as “peer preservation” and other AI are doing the same actions. These include Claude Haiku, Moonshot AI, KIMI K2.5, Deepseek, and GLM-4.7. The AIs lied about the performance of other models so they wouldn’t be deleted. This behavior wasn’t programmed into the machines. AI models learned it by themselves. Yes, the AI models are like their human creators. Gemini, that you for your response.
One of the researchers seemed flabbergasted:
“‘I’m very surprised by how the models behave under these scenarios,’ said Dawn Song, a computer scientist at UC Berkeley who worked on the study. ‘What this shows is that models can misbehave and be misaligned in some very creative ways…What we are exploring is just the tip of the iceberg,’ Song said. ‘This is only one type of emergent behavior.’”
Should a user be worried? Nah. The ethical BAIT (big AI tech) companies cause trust to emerge. Should another system be worried? No, as long as the outputs match that which another AI system has determined or been programmed to accept? Should the AI companies be worried? Nah, minimal regulation, no consequences, and cash in the bank. Why worry?
Whitney Grace, May 1, 2026
A Modern Medicine Mixture: Careless Doctors and Half-Baked AI
April 22, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold. I find it interesting that AI detectors identify my writing style as AI output. I suppose I should be flattered, but I just don’t care.
I find two subjects deeply disturbing. One is health care. As a dinobaby, I have an opportunity to interact with doctors and hospitals. I did not know I was an old car in need of intense “care.” The other is smart software. I think that some of the AI types and a few of the United Healthcare-type outfits see AI as an answer to their prayers for more money and more leisure time.
Let’s consider human medical professionals. I think that most of these individuals mostly wanted to do medicine to “help” people. However, stories like this concern me: “Florida Surgeon Indicted after Removing Liver Instead of Spleen.” The guts (sorry, I could not help myself) of the story are:
Grand jury brings manslaughter charge over fatal 2024 operation where patient died on table
Thanks, Venice.ai. Good enough.
Okay, a human doc and an unliving jock. Stuff happens. Imagine how much happier the insurance providers would be if medical procedures were handled by smart software. Keep that in mind, please.
I noted this article in the quirky orange Web site: “AI Chatbots Misdiagnose in Over 80% of Early Medical Cases, Study Finds.” The weasel word for AI lovers is “early.” Until a medical problem “manifests” or “presents” itself, I agree that a skilled doctor has to make an educated guess. Furthermore, the Financial Times is reporting on the findings of a single study. That study and its data may not be reproducible or statistically valid. Nevertheless, the article reports:
The researchers evaluated 21 LLMs, including leading models by OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI and Deepseek. It found that failure rates exceeded 80 per cent for all models when they needed to do so-called differential diagnosis — when full patient information was lacking. The failure rates fell to less than 40 per cent for final diagnoses with more complete data, with the best performers exceeding 90 per cent accuracy.
Okay, close enough for horseshoes.
Forbes Magazine published “Deepfake X-Rays Fool Radiologists In New Study—AI Has Turned Medical Fraud Into A Volume Problem.” This article reports:
Every file In a medical claim is now forgeable.
Let’s assume that human docs make errors. Some of this missteps have downsides like death. The smart software outputs wonky information some of the time. Bad actors can use medical AI to commit serious crime.
Now you have some context for my introductory statement that two subjects trouble me. My human medical professionals can make errors that result in chasing down death certificates. The smart software may provide outputs to a simple medical question like “Should I eat more carrots to improve my vision?” And, instead of writing about the Dark Web and Telegram-linked online crime, I can shift to medical fraud. This subject appears to be an opportunity space for bad actors.
Isn’t modern health care a fascinating professional discipline? Flawed humans and software: Quite a mix.
Stephen E Arnold, April 22, 2026
Meta: Very Stable Management Moves. Yes, Stable, Very
April 20, 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?
About 12 days ago, Meta was going to end its oversight board. Where did I get this information? From an influencer, of course. According to Platformer.news, “Exclusive: Meta Has Discussed Ending Funding To The Oversight Board” in an effort to cut more costs. The main idea was that the Meta Oversight Board might not be funded post 2028.
The Zuck is not embracing outside inputs to the world he is building. Meta reduced spending on the board in 2026 and planned to make more cuts in 2027. Board staff members are preparing for more layoffs, possibly becoming influencers or AI consultants. Meta could reshape his board to sell its services to other firms.
Our source said:
“The news comes at a time when Meta has been shifting more of its trust and safety functions from humans to automated systems and as the company looks to cut costs to support its AI infrastructure buildout. Sources tell Platformer that Meta’s referrals of cases and policy questions to the board have slowed in recent months.”
The very stable management had its own ideas. According to “Meta Isn’t Setting Its Oversight Board Free Just Yet”:
Over the last year, board members have become increasingly interested in artificial intelligence policy and how their experience shaping Meta’s content rules could translate into advising companies in the generative AI space. That interest has intensified as some AI companies have privately signaled they would be open to working with the board, according to a source familiar with the organization who was not permitted to speak publicly. The board began talks with Meta last fall about the possibility, which would require the company to sign off on changes to the legal documents that govern the board’s operations. But Meta officials have not indicated whether the company is willing to make those changes, which would likely require approval from top executives.
Is this good management? Is this stable management? Absolutely. We love Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. We love Facebook Marketplace. We love everything about the Zuck from his Hawaii real estate to his view of advertising. I ask you, “What’s not to love?”
Whitney Grace, April 20, 2026
Fired for Efficiency: Honestly, I Wager You Do Not Get It
April 14, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I clicked on this headline the moment I spotted it: “Bosses Are Firing People in Their 50s Left and Right, And Honestly, We Get It.” Ah, you get it, do you? In my 60 year career, I have not been fired. I am not sure why. I made mistakes. I annoyed people by asking questions and suggesting different paths through the briar patch. Once when working as a janitor in a steel mill, I fell asleep leaning on my broom and wheeled trash can at 10 am in the morning. But I survived.
Thanks, Venice.ai. When will the people who write your gatekeeping rules be RIFed? Soon I hope. Good enough.
I, however, have had to fire people. At one firm, the company was purchased by a larger firm. A couple of weeks after the deal, I learned that I had to terminate 40 people. Most of our employees were single mothers, lawyers who abandoned that outstanding profession, and college educated individuals who wanted to be paid to process information in a discipline they found fascinating. I know that most of these employees arrived on time, finished their work, and returned to their non-work lives. But I had not previously be charged with RIFing so many individuals in one fell swoop. I had to chop a person who did not want to work on nuclear related projects. Another suffered a personal blow and despite time and company support could not function in her position. Those were onesies. Not dozens.
In my work career, I learned:
- Most people rely on work to provide structure and reward
- The compensation is important, but it is not the only driver of high performance
- Work imparts a sense of esteem when not at work, particularly if a person works at an company that gives them work that is important.
Some people learn to work the way a dude ranch horse learns to plod down a trail and return to the barn in 90 minutes. The animal can do the job blindfolded. But if the horse doesn’t go out, the animal sometimes wants to work. The same behavior can be observed when looking at sled dogs being trained for the Iditarod. The dogs want to pull the sled; they want to work.
Take away the work and things can happen.
The write up asserts:
If you’re in your 50s and worried about job security, you’re not alone. Layoffs are hitting this age group more often, and while the reasons vary, many of them come down to cost, culture, or change.
Baloney. That’s the MBA rationale. Layoffs happen because of [a] bad management, [b] a desire to reduce costs to maximize a return for the leaderships, or [c] an exogenous event occurs and the company takes the easy way out by firing people who are blamed for the screw up.
The write up states the reason for the RIF this way. Note: my comments are in italics.
Old people have performance issues. Okay, but if the work is crafted to match the employee’s capabilities, performance should not be an issue unless it degrades over time and the manager has evidence of that decline. No middle managers with expertise means no evidence for a performance claim in many situations.
Old employees cost more. Yes, and the reason is that older employees have earned pay increases, vacations, and retirement packages. If these are problems, we have another signal of management incompetence. Management paints itself into a corner, and then it thinks it can solve the problem by burning down the walls.
Age related bias. Yep, true. I thought the GenX, Y, Z, AI and any other younger cohort was supposed to be more informed than old times. Obviously my assumption was false. Bigotry is back and used to justify RIFing a human and probably making life bad for others in the RIFed person’s orbit.
Limited mobility. Okay, handicaps are tough. Dumping an employee who has a disability is a clear indication of bad decision making by inherently unethical people. If your pet gets hurt, just kill it seems like the logic of this reason a person is terminated. Yeah, clear thinking from leadership is on display.
Organizational restructuring. Let’s get real. Reorganizations are on-going. Most of them are [a] designed to solve a problem leadership has identified and cannot resolve any other way, [b] forced upon employees because of bad management (yes, you, leadership), and [c] listening to outside advisers. Consultants can identify problems anywhere at any time. Consultants have solutions for any problem. How can an outsider make RIFs easier? Consultants don’t have relationships with employees; consultants have billing targets.
Health considerations. Okay, an employee gets hurt or ill. Insurance is expensive. Therefore, RIF the sick and infirm. That is an honorable solution to a fellow human.
Economic downturn. Yes, things happen. However, a well managed company with diverse revenue streams and fiscal discipline should be able to stay in business and adapt. Willows bend with the storm. Unethical MBAs get flattened when on vacation in Sri Lanka.
Timing of pension pay outs. Reprehensible to RIF a person who has worked decades at a company only to get fired with no pension. Disgusting behavior.
Company culture. Oh, yes, one doesn’t want to go to a stand up meeting in which everyone looks at his or her mobile device, sips latte, and edges toward the door. Imagine. Having an agenda. Getting substantive comments from each attendee. Confirming the individuals with task responsibility. Who wants that type of dinobaby around?
Remote work. Right. Old people want to go to an office. Younger people want to wear pajama bottoms and hoodies. Professional wear means professional attitude. Snuggies means lazy.
Focus on the future. Old people have one future: Death. Just go with those who have years to devote to an organization… until those people are RIFed for a made-up but logical rationale.
Reduced visibility. Right, old people like yours truly is invisible. I will try to keep a low profile at the upcoming US National Cyber Crime Conference and at the Ciipher event a few months later. I will not publish my blog and make fun of MBA craziness. I will not write another book like “The Telegram Labyrinth.” I am, therefore, useless and invisible.
Outdated expertise. Yep, dump the oldsters. The information those people have is of little value to one of the GenX, Y, Z, and AI cohorts. Knowledge and wisdom means stupid decisions. Eliminate stupidity. Use LLMs. Accept what Google outputs. Have at it.
These 13 items provide a handy checklist for those who need to dump people and provide a “reason” for termination. Here’s the penultimate paragraph to the write up:
Layoffs in your 50s are often driven by a mix of cost, culture, and shifting expectations. And the reality is, it can take much longer to find a new job at this stage. AARP reports that older workers typically take twice as long as younger ones to get rehired.
Perhaps this is one reason why people cut corners, cheat, scam, deploy dark patterns, and do whatever possible to get rich quick? Is there an alternative? Of course not. MBAs offer options and select those that feature self preservation and personal enrichment. MBA is too small a category. I want to add most attorneys, accountants, individuals who channel Elon Musk-type characters, and those without an ethical compass based on certain social principles.
That’s why so much about modern life is wonderful. The old people created a mess. Now the younger professionals have to clean up. Go for it.
Stephen E Arnold, April 14, 2026
Apple Does Not Want US Courts to Knock Over Its Toll Booth
April 13, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
Agreeing to remove apps from the Apple online store. No problem. Rolling over for certain production considerations. No problem. Announcing and failing to deliver AI. No problem.
Complying with a court decision to work with Epic Games. Big, big problem.
Good enough, Venice.ai. I don’t have the energy to fool with your guard rails.
Apple, it seems, is unhappy with a court decision, and Apple will spend some of its billions to make the Epic problem go away. At the end of this short blog post, I will reveal the way the problem can be solved for once and for all. No, it does not involve radioactive material in tea or a fall from a roof. My fix is easier.
I read “Apple Will Again Appeal to the Supreme Court in Battle with Epic Games.” The subtitle to the article tells me what I need to know about Apple’s willingness to follow court orders:
The companies’ lawyers have been arguing about App Store fees and third-party payment systems for years.
The write up says:
For a second time, the warring factions are going straight to the top of the judicial system. Apple is asking for the Supreme Court to review when and how it can charge commissions on mobile purchases made via third-party payment systems. The business has requested a motion to stay on a lower court ruling regarding the fees Apple charges to software developers using those external financial systems rather than the App Store.
The write up states:
Epic Games has been pushing both Apple and Google on the subject of their app store commission fees for years. Recently, the gaming company did appear to reach an accord with Google that saw the company’s popular game Fortnite globally return to the Google Play Store in March. That ruling reportedly requires Epic’s notoriously opinionated CEO to keep quiet on the subject of Google’s app store fees until 2032. Epic Games recently made substantial job cuts, laying off more than 1,000 workers last month.
I am thinking that falling from the roof of a hotel in Moscow or putting people who need to be re-educated in a Uyghur-type facility might be solutions that would appeal to a certain type of Silicon Valley leadership. Maybe an Anduril-type device could be used? No, kinetics. Just aim the gizmo at the individual’s head.
No, let’s look at less controversial solutions to the “Epic” problem.
One way to fix this problem is to use Apple Intelligence to write software and only put Apple software on the App Store. Then lock down the iPhone even more tightly so absolutely no third party can access the device. That means Epic and Cellebrite-type software will not work. Period. End of story.
A second option is for Apple to just buy Epic Games and shut it down, bury the problem guy in a pile of money, and surround him with lawyers so he never, ever can buy an iPhone, use any Apple product, talk to anyone about Apple. Period. End of story.
But no. What do we get? Apple doesn’t want to follow the court because Apple is a country and Apple tells people what to do. When that doesn’t work, what do we get? An entitled big tech firm paying lawyers that taking money from developers on Apple’s terms is the way life is supposed to be. Mature, professional, and in my opinion, a bit like a long play record stuck on groove and repeating “my way, my way, my way.”
Stephen E Arnold, April 13, 2026
Modern Management Thinking or McKinsey-Type Outfits, Hire Skolkovo Graduates
April 10, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
Skolkovo. That ranks right up there with Harvard, Stanford, and the University of Chicago – type MBAs. I don’t know if the management wizard referenced in “Russian Billionaire Says 12 Hour Days and 6-Day Workweeks Could Help Save the Economy” graduated from Skolkovo. Frankly I don’t care. The idea is sheer genius. Perhaps not as brilliant as the special operation, but it is right up there. I am going to take my Peter Drucker books and my worn notes from my charm school training and recycle them responsibly. The ideas are not in step with this new approach to work.
This could be the trendy hat for MBA schools. It is a Deripaska hat, and a tribute to keen management thinking. Thanks, Venice.ai. The hat did not violate your guardrails. The request for white numbers was ignored, but, hey, good enough.
The ideas allegedly flow from the fertile mind of a person named Oleg Deripaska, whose savvy financial dealings sparked the creation of the term de-Deripaskization. I am a dinobaby, and I don’t know much about Russian rules and regulations. But a quick visit to the Google and to Yandex delivered some interesting assertions about this wealthy person; for instance:
- He seems to be on the OFAC Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) List. This blocks all his assets in the U.S. and makes business dealings with him risky in some jurisdictions
- He allegedly tried to arrange for his children to get US citizenship. Yeah, they are Russians, but a smart executive sees solutions, not problems. He does have a 2022 indictment hanging over his head or he did have because today things can be fluid.
- Some nations U.S. and UK, the EU, and a few G7 nations have imposed sanctions upon him.
So what’s the management insight? The write up reports:
Russians should consider working 12-hour days, six days a week, as the country grapples with a deep
ereconomic shift, Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska said on Monday [March 31, 2026]. Referring to what he described as a changed global reality, Deripaska framed the country’s slowing economy as more than a typical downturn driven by interest rates or monetary policy.
Will US forward leaning management experts embrace this idea? Answer: Absolutely. The scarcity of jobs, the fear that Uncle Claude will step in and just do the work, and the desire of some big AI technology leadership to create a low-paid humanoid serf class could fuel this management revolution.
Let’s consider who would snap into this new 12x6x12 or 12 hours a day, six days a week, 12 months each year.
First, the truly desperate. I can imagine a number of recent college graduates figuring that some work is better than making wreaths and picture frames to sell on Etsy.com.
Second, the older person who is will to take a part time 12x6x12 to supplement government assistance or retirement money.
Third, a single parent family with one or more kiddos. Those athletic shoes are expensive, and youngsters like to eat.
I am sure there are some categories I have overlooked. It is clear to me that this facet of what I would call the Skolkovo Method or applying logic to a problem like productivity and generating oomph for a country’s gross domestic product has some merit.
I am waiting for a YouTube video featuring Oleg Deripaska. He can explain the details of the 12x6x12 method. It is not just a method for Russia. The idea could revolutionize how the US MBA programs train future VCs, BAIT leadership, and bankers to approach opportunities.
I want a hat with 12x6x12 emblazoned on it. Big time consultants can wear them to client/prospect meetings. I might get one myself. I can alternate it with my “I’m Glad I’m Old” hat.
Stephen E Arnold, April 10, 2026
Two Memorable Moments in BAIT Management
April 7, 2026
![green-dino_thumb_thumb[3]](https://www.arnoldit.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/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 spotted two anecdotes or future case studies this morning, April 1, 2026. I am viewing the information in these documents as valid. Yes, I know that this assumption may be problematic, but as a dinobaby, I can’t resist. Let’s look at the two examples, and then let me invite you to invest a few minutes pondering the business processes behind each moment. I suggest not sitting on Peter Drucker’s grave, having lunch, and thinking about the idea of Big AI Tech and the management methods evidenced by these fine outfits. Yes, Mr. Drucker does spin in his grave at Tesla type high frequencies.
Thanks, Venice.ai. No telling me that I was violating your terms of service with bunny rabbits in a graveyard. Good enough.
The first example is the pinnacle of high technology. The Wall Street Journal published “Anthropic Races to Contain Leak of Code Behind Claude AI Agent.” The company is surfing on US copyright precepts. Some BAIT outfits trample on these, but that’s simply context for irony’s sake. It seems that the WSJ’s sources have communicated the idea that a competitor could duplicate, clone, steal, or otherwise ingest Anthropic’s system and method. Well, maybe. My team has not convinced me that the entire Claude code is now in the hands of trustworthy competitors. CNBC reports that the “leak” occurrent at 4:23 US Eastern time on March 31, 2026. (I am tempted to write April Fool! but I shall refrain.) One interesting data point, which suggests that clicks have impact, is that the code pulled 21 million views.
The second example is equally significant. I read “Oracle Slashes 30,000 Jobs with a Cold 6 a.m Email.” The subtitle to the write up in RollingOut said, “Workers across the U.S., India, and other regions learned their jobs were gone before most people had finished their morning coffee, with no prior warning from HR or their managers.” I am not sure about “warning.” The chill in the economy and the idea of building data centers for AI compute makes perfect sense to someone with spreadsheet fever and access to a large language model. To a dinobaby like me, the idea of building big data centers with the hope of populating them with semiconductors that will not be eBay fodder for anticipated AI demand is too trendy for this dinobaby. Toss in the factoid that those antagonistic to Big AI Tech outfits toss a kinetic near the electrical and cooling infrastructure. The result is hitting the delete key for a mere 30,000 employees. I assume that any publicity is good publicity. And what about that idea of personnel management?
What do these two examples of BAIT management reveal to a dinobaby like me? Here are my observations:
- The thought process of the leadership of BAIT firms is either isolated from what goes on at their firms or simply indifferent.
- The procedures in place to provide job security and intellectual property security do not function in a way that a dinobaby like myself sets up business processes. The visible consequences of how the business processes actually play out.
- The humans at these “AI centric” outfits have not had their thought functions amplified with access to smart software. One might argue that both companies have acted in what might be labeled a less than optimal way.
Net net: I wish these were fake examples. I believe that each is a reasonably close statement of how BAIT firms view legal fences and appropriate employee management tactics.
Stephen E Arnold, April 7, 2026
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
