Anthropic Is the Einstein for Cyber Criminals
September 1, 2026
Remember the world before Mythos? Remember the OpenAI Type-A agent that just did what was necessary to intrude into another company? Yes, Anthropic is the Einstein for cyber criminals. Anthropic showed the way to the future.
Governments and Big Tech are distracted by the shiny features in AI, but they’re ignoring the potential risks from the technology. decrypt.co shares how one AI chatbot leaks more secrets than it keeps: “Anthropic’s ‘Most Capable’ AI Model Claude Mythos Leaks, Deemed Major Cybersecurity Threat.”
News about Anthropic’s latest, greatest AI chatbot leaked onto the Internet.? ? Dubbed Claude Mythos, it outperformed Claude 4.6 on tests related to academic reasoning, cybersecurity, and software coding.? ? News about Claude Mythos originated in draft materials stored on an unsecured content management system.? ? Anthropic shut down access to the data store after they realized it leaked and said the files were released due to human error.
While the drafts bragged about Claude Mythos they also related information about its cybersecurity implications:
“‘Although Mythos is currently far ahead of any other AI model in cyber capabilities, it presages an upcoming wave of models that can exploit vulnerabilities in ways that far outpace the efforts of defenders,’ the company wrote. “Because of those risks, the company said it plans to release the model cautiously, beginning with a limited early-access rollout aimed at organizations working on cybersecurity defense.”
Let’s flash forward to the situation today. William Gates (yes, that alleged Epstein connection) is frightened of smart software. The innovator who did a little me-too innovation in his time is channeling the Ed Zitron crowd. He suggests that there is “no plan for AI.” Mr. Gates, I respectfully wish to point out that is indeed a plan. That plan is Microsoft’s original game plan to use its software to capture a market. Some suggest that the old IBM approach to selling hardware and software lacked something. Microsoft added what I call legs; that is, embrace, extend, and extinguish.
Now Microsoft appears to have kicked off an AI race that is a bit different from vaporizing Lotus 1-2-3 or fixing those pesky people selling compression software. I suggest you take a look at AI through the lens of yourself in 1997. What do you see?
You talk about a problem. Sir, are you sure it is not an opportunity for Microsoft. Epstein, I would suggest, might be an easier problem to resolve than your legacy of enhancing the techno-method to market success.
Whitney Grace, September 1, 2026
Whiff, Whiff. The Sound of Microsoft Swinging and Missing at eGames and an AI Curve Ball
August 7, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I am not going to walk down that well-trodden path from 2022 when Microsoft put Google on its heels with its OpenAI announcement. I am not going to mention the money pumped from Microsoft to OpenAI. I am not going to bring up the Copilot AI plays, the organizational whoop-de-doos in the Softies’ smart software store room. And the layoffs? Nah. I just add those up these tiny AI quivers into one big whiff.
Strike outs don’t win games. Thanks, MidJourney. Very dramatic.
In this blog post I am going to bring up another big time, highly visible, and Bob and Clippy moment. Yep, the eGames whiff. It is special in its own Microsoft way: Think big, do what you know will work, fail. Quite a pattern.
I am not an eGamer. I know zero about online games. I did do a case study of the Telegram “hook kids into crypto” game Hamster Kombat. But the Microsoft games? Nada.
I read “Game Pass Was Supposed to Save Xbox – Instead, It’s Killing the Company.” Microsoft wanted to create the Netflix of online games. Pay a monthly fee. Get top flight games. Microsoft’s big idea did the whiff. The write up said:
The level of money Xbox poured into Game Pass is eye-watering – leaked internal documents show that the company was paying up to $300 million for Star Wars Jedi: Survivor and Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League, and these are just some of the deals we’re aware of. Alongside licensing third-party triple-As, Xbox purchased a slew of studios with the intention of putting them to work on Xbox (and thus Game Pass) exclusives … None of these studios are money-printers. And so, perhaps inevitably considering Microsoft’s financial-first approach to game development, all three of those aforementioned studios (plus a few more) are no longer part of the Xbox studio stable, cast aside in profit-saving exercises.
The write up pointed out:
Game Pass needed a bonafide, yearly money printer – something like Call of Duty. Xbox’s decision to purchase Activision-Blizzard for a staggering $75.4 billion was two-fold: it absorbed the publisher’s extensive catalog into Game Pass, and it opened Xbox to the mobile gaming market via Candy Crush Saga maker King. Some questioned how this helped Xbox’s languishing hardware sales, and Phil Spencer answered: Xbox’s new strategy was forget the console, focus on the software. Perhaps the clearest example of this is the 10-year, non-exclusive commitment between Xbox and PlayStation for Call of Duty, which directly undermined the clear potential for a hike in Xbox hardware sales and consequential Game Pass subscriptions.
That did not happen. The author of the cited article said:
But technical competency was never Xbox’s problem. The real issue is the approach to content.
I disagree. My view of the problem is slightly more nuanced; to wit:
- Microsoft did a Bob and Clippy
- Microsoft’s management methods failed its stakeholders, employees, and eGame players
- Microsoft’s scrambling, layoffs, and wordsmithing are part of the firm’s game plan for failure. Sorry. A new playbook is needed.
Net net: Whiff. Whiff. The fact that both swings and misses took place is astounding. Will Microsoft get a hit or strike out? Is quantum computing for Azure approaching the plate?
Stephen E Arnold, August 7, 2026
Word Worms Fly with a Trusted, Reliable, Capable, and Secure Copilot
August 4, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I spotted an interesting statement attributed to Microsoft’s Satya Nadella (the man who sparked AI’s lift off to craziness). According to Futurism, Mr. Nadella said:
Any firm that doesn’t have this control, I will claim will not remain a firm because you’ve essentially outsourced your thinking,”
What’s “this control”? Based on the information in the write up, the idea is that each business should train and tune its own open weight model.
Okay, that sounds good. Each person should put on his own shoes. No big deal. Microsoft appears to route its AI “investments” into its Azure cloud business. As a result, the investments morph into a nice looking financial report. Meta on the other hand just invests and looks a bit like a five year old painting the living room wall and smearing paint on the furniture. “Look, Mommie, it’s good.”
No.
Microsoft is a very large big AI tech company now. Thus, it has numerous business units. Within the organization are the stalwarts driving Copilot AI forward. Somewhere in the hallways are people who were charged with security after what I call the SolarWinds flare up. There are the layoffs, and the eGame issue.
Midjourney, good enough. Does the worm know the Copilot does not respond quickly or at all when there is a security matter? Of course not. The creature is a worm.
Microsoft leadership wants to be a leader. But can it do AI and security within its own applications like Word?
I read “Word Worm Crawls into Copilot, Spreads Chaos.” The article has a snappy sub title too: Researcher says months of coordination with Microsoft have yet to produce a robust mitigation.
The write up says:
The employee downloads a market analysis from a trusted website to help with the preparation of a financial report in Copilot, unaware that the source had been compromised and the document they downloaded contains hidden malicious instructions. The hidden instructions (inserted as small white text in his proof of concept) tell Copilot to alter figures in the report the employee generates and to copy the worm into the report they create with Copilot. If another employee later adds that report to their own work, the whole process begins again, and documents generated from it also contain the worm, and, as it spreads, it makes tracing the infection to its source extremely difficult.
Tricky? The method is similar to the old SEO trick of hiding text in a Web page by making it the color of the page; e.g., white if the Web page were white or tan if the Web page were tan. My recollection is that the Google figured out this lame hack years ago.
But Microsoft? The write up quotes the researcher who noticed this simple ploy:
“The coordination period agreed with Microsoft has been exhausted, and testing shows that no robust mitigation for the broader vulnerability class is currently available,” Måløy wrote. “Two mitigation attempts, including a model upgrade, did not close the class.”
I assume that the Softies are just busy with PR, marketing, and telling the customers to be responsible for their models. That is very good advice.
Perhaps the first step is to avoid Copilot in Word or Copilot period?
Stephen E Arnold, August 4, 2026
Windows 11 Allegedly Has A Tracker Without an Off Switch
July 20, 2026
![green-dino_thumb_thumb[3]](https://www.arnoldit.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/green-dino_thumb_thumb3-1.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 love it when Microsoft provides outputs about user privacy. Frankly I ignore the baloney generated by a weird corporate blend of MBAs, lawyers, and PR professionals. Does it flow? Does it sound good? Does it advance our position with investors? Once a yes answer is agreed upon, big outfits make important announcements about privacy, trust, and security. But then along comes a story like “Microsoft Admits Windows 11 Has A GDID Tracker With No Off Switch, First Documented Publicly In An FBI Hacker Complaint.”
The main idea is that Windows captures a Social Security number for each computer with its operating system. This is called in Windows’ jargon the Global Device Identifier or GDID. Allegedly the clever Social Security number makes it possible to track an individual across VPNs, proxy servers, and sketchy service provides in foreign countries. The revelation about this magical “security and privacy feature” comes from a bad actor who allegedly was a a member of the Scatter Spider hacking group.
The Windows Latest professionals allegedly read a 39 page briefing about the Scatter Spider discovery. The write up says:
“A Global Device ID (GDID) is a permanent, unique digital fingerprint that Microsoft automatically assigns to your computer when you install Windows or sign into a Microsoft account.Microsoft uses it to manage software licensing and Windows Store apps, but because it links all your online activities on that computer back to a single identity, law enforcement can use it to track a device’s true owner across the Internet survives Windows updates. It does not survive a clean reinstall, and Microsoft’s footnote in the complaint admits “one Microsoft user could have multiple GDIDs” over the life of a single account.Microsoft said what the GDID does without saying where it is inside Windows. For that, independent researchers had to reverse engineer it, because Microsoft has published exactly one sentence about GDID in the Azure Monitor reference for Delivery Optimization reporting, where a column called GlobalDeviceId is described only as ‘Microsoft global device identifier. This is an identifier used by Microsoft internally.’”
The bad actor was apprehended because he used the same Windows device across all his hacking activities. What is interesting is that the Microsoft statements about privacy and security bump up against this type of invasive track. I suppose this is a standard benefit of using Microsoft software, systems, and services. The write up describes some steps a person can take to control some of the data flowing to the privacy and security oriented operations that make Microsoft so Microsoftie. But most Windows users won’t know how to set up a local account, turn off diagnostic data transmission, block advertising IDs, disable the Cloud search feature, and other useful steps.
Have you taken these steps? The fact that the bad actor was put in a jar is a positive. Plus, the data revealed in the 39 page briefing seems to verify what many Microsoft-cautious professionals have believed about the firm’s willingness to talk about privacy and its actions that make privacy less important.
Whitney Grace, July 20, 2026
Did the Copilot Crash the Ageing DC 3?
July 15, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
I read “Microsoft Pushed Copilot Everywhere, But Barely Anyone Bought It, and Even Fewer Use It: Report.” The title is snappy, but the subtitle is a killer:
Users are barely showing up for Copilot
I fiddled around with Copilot when it first became available. I even used it to create free illustrations for this blog. But the quality and performance degraded over time I used it. Then the image generation service just went away, and so did I.
Thanks, Midjourney. Good enough.
The cited write up says:
But the latest adoption figures suggest that the distribution was quite disappointing. Microsoft revealed that Copilot 365 has more than 20 million paid seats. While that does sound impressive at a glance, this number is dwarfed when you compare the company’s more than 450 million paid commercial Microsoft 365 seats. So fewer than 4.5% of those customers pay for the full Copilot experience.
Interesting.
The write up says:
According to a new report, enterprise surveys place weekly usage among licensed Copilot seats at only 20% to 30%. Applied to Microsoft’s disclosed numbers, that leaves somewhere around 4 million to 6 million weekly users, or roughly 1% of Microsoft 365’s broader commercial customer base. This is basically just the tiniest piece of the whole pie.
“Tiniest piece of the whole pie”! This type of usage is the equivalent of my dropping one of those sucre coloré from a frosted donut. Hey, what’s one less pink jimmie or sprinkle on a hot day?
The write up points out a bit of Microsoft marketing brilliance; to wit:
Alongside the lukewarm adoption, the company also treated users to higher Microsoft 365 prices. At the start of this month, Microsoft increased the US monthly price of Business Basic from $6 to $7 and Business Standard from $12.50 to $14. Several enterprise and frontline plans also rose by between 5% and 33%.
What’s that old adage? Ah, yes, “if we build it they will come.” What we have is “no, most people did not show up.” Most people scrolled TikTok-type videos, did work the old-fashioned way, or just faked doing work. I am curious about those individuals who embraced Copilot to do work.
How about some observations? No, well, too bad:
- The AI marketing coup delivered by Satya Nadella in January 2022 may have transformed itself into expensive goo.
- Acqui-hires, reorganizations, and pronouncements on social media are unlikely to deliver a magic wand that turns non-users into paying customers. The statements, however, call attention to the management bumble itself.
- Competitors may find themselves sucked into the downdraft generated by Microsoft’s brisk fall on its own Copilot equipped laptop. Punching that dedicated Copilot key is not likely to generate a useful answer to the question, “Yo, Copilot, how do we avoid this airplane crash?”
Net net: Thump. Ouch. Stand back. The fire is spreading.
Stephen E Arnold, July 15, 2026
Statistics 101: Address Sample Bias at the Git Go; Otherwise, the Rah Rah Becomes Boo Boo
July 13, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
These BAIT outfits
I read “AI Content Is Everywhere on Social Media, Especially LinkedIn.” Snappy title. A plump target for content puffery. What’s not to like? I will answer this question in the Net net comment at the end of this dinobaby post.
The main idea of the write up is that smart software is writing social media posts. I have no doubt that humanoids are relying on smart software to make themselves appear smarter. I have been identified by an AI system as a humanoid who outputs AI-generated content. Nice assertion. Anyone who has read my articles, books, and blog posts know I have a quirky style. One of my colleagues loathes my use of “write up” instead of essay or article. Another thinks I need to include more links and footnote in the monographs I hand out to those in my law enforcement and intelligence professional training sessions. Sorry. That won’t happen. Why? I made Miss Sperling by high school English teacher crazy with my writing in 1958. I am perfectly happy writing in the same way in 2026. If AI thinks I am an AI, well, good for AI. As a humanoid, you should be able to recognize a dinobaby post with or without the jumping green dinosaur icon.
So what’s in this cited write up?
In a nutshell there are data derived from a “big” sample. The data reveal these purposely startling factoids:
- Long content is more likely to be written by smart software
- LinkedIn has the most AI generated information; Substack has the least (!)
- Reddit is a comparative good guy when it comes to presenting humanoid-created content for some content; short Reddit content is likely to be AI generated.
Wow. LinkedIn, the job hunting service, has AI-generated content. Who knew? Obviously no one except the intrepid researchers at Pangram, the outfit performing the research.
The cited research concludes with this statement:
AI writing is now a problem everywhere on social media. This is concerning, but it’s in line with what we’re seeing elsewhere online: researchers estimated that 35% of newly published websites on the open internet were AI-generated or AI-assisted. An internet that is completely flooded with undisclosed AI content is bleak, but we don’t believe it’s inevitable. We hope that by providing transparency to AI-generated content online, we can give internet users back some control of how they spend their attention.
Okay, “everywhere.” I understand because humanoids like convenience, and, by golly, getting AI to write one’s memo, email, essay, or book is convenient.
I want to point out:
- The Pangram information came from individuals who installed the AI detection extension, used the extension when visiting selected platforms, and agreed to share their extension’s statistics. Okay, this strikes me as a special group of online users.
- Social media feeds are usually personalized; therefore, if a feed is chock full of AI baloney like marketing-related content, that content may be more likely to be AI generated.
- Sources and content types were not equivalent.
- The system used a 50 word cut off, probably to reduce costs and impose normalization.
- Demographic data about the users in the sample were not disclosed.
- Detector accuracy is not the prevalence estimation validity. Plus, the model changed in the course of the study. There is no data about adjustments due to model change.
- The write up seems to be a content marketing piece designed to generate prospects for Pangram’s AI detection system.
Net net: I am not convinced that LinkedIn presents 40 percent AI content. I think that’s a low number. Sorry, Softies. Oh, and the boo boo should be obvious to anyone who paid attention in Statistics 101.
Stephen E Arnold, July 13, 2026
Online Games: Slam Dunk or Cut Wrists on a Shattered Backboard?
July 13, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
What’s that flood of red. A slam dunk? Nope. A hoopster miscalculated and pumped a couple of barrels of red ink over the smart company with the smart software. Whom? You have to ask? It’s the Softies. Not only is the “pile it” approach to AI a bit worrisome to the bean counters, but the third party auditors are fretting about eGames or online games.
Good enough, MidJourney.
Why? You have to ask?
Navigate to “Xbox Reportedly Wanted 77 Million Game Pass Subscribers. It Has Just 30 Million.” To my dismay, the write up does not focus on the root of the problem: Management hubris, executive compensation incentives, the shadow of doom subscription based businesses cast over smart outfits like Adobe, and “we can do anything” mentality.
The write up does say:
Microsoft’s biggest gaming bet fell far short of its original target, despite years of acquisitions and heavy investment.
The former rah-rah Microsoft cheerleaders at Windows Central said in “Report: Microsoft Will Make Even More of Its Games Exclusive to Xbox As Multiplatform Strategy Totally Fails. What’s Going On?:
This week [July 6, 2026], Microsoft begun processes to eliminate 3,200 roles from its Xbox gaming division, with hundreds already laid off or leaving in divested studios.
The Windows Central outfit added:
Under previous leadership, Xbox was strangely reluctant, even seemingly embarrassed, to associate some of its acquisitions with the Xbox ecosystem. Games like DOOM, Fallout, and indeed Minecraft, barely had any co-marketing with Xbox console hardware. And it has been to the console ecosystem’s detriment.
That’s a useful insight. Employees at Microsoft are embarrassed by the company’s strategy and products.
Those savvy Henry Luce acolytes writing in “How Microsoft’s New Xbox Chief Is Resetting One of the Company’s Most Iconic Brands,” said:
[Asa] Sharma [new top dog of Xbox] spoke at Fortune’s Brainstorm Tech conference in June [2026], where she provided a sense of some of the challenges gaming is facing. Hardware component costs are rising—and there is only so much the consumer will pay for a console. She said she anticipates “radically different business models,” where it’s not assumed the most premium, high-performance console is the best option for a customer.
Yep, the customer. These are the same folks who probably provided feedback to PR-centric surveys and user panels. The customers are, as always, number one at Microsoft.
What’s interesting is that none of these sources point to:
- Outright strategic failure
- The penchant for changing people not the incentive plans
- A failure to understand what makes “gamers” buy, remain loyal, and stick with a particular platform.
Is there a small lesson in this minor problem? Sure. Microsoft is too big to manage well. Autopilot, anyone?
Stephen E Arnold, July 13, 2026
Wait, What? In 2022, Microsoft Wanted to Be the Big AI Tech Outfit. Now? Nah
June 27, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
As an 82 year old dinobaby, I am easily confused. In 2022, Microsoft put Googzilla on its very dangerous spiked tail. Microsoft announced that OpenAI and Microsoft would just become the AI champion. Money and promises of love became fodder for the tech gossip columnists. Microsoft — then true to its word — did many smart software things. Users complained. Linux and Mac operating systems looked like safer bets for people who were not on board the digital AI rocket as co-pilots or fellow travelers.
Hey, MidJourney, this is an okay illustration of how big business was done in the era of the Robber Barons. C+ today.
Now, Microsoft is taking a different approach. “Microsoft CEO Says People Won’t Tolerate An AI Oligarchy Where Few Companies Concentrate Most Power” reports:
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella criticized the way the AI race has been unfolding, saying people won’t tolerate a sort of oligarchy where a few companies concentrate most of the power.
Yep, oligarchy. The BAITs (the big AI tech outfits in the US) are not into sharing power. I think the goal is more along the lines of a monopoly. Let the other firms suffer in the exhaust of our data centers. An oligarchy is for losers, and that is something I heard when I was a humble laborer in the Silicon Valley vineyards for some big and small firms.
Google, for example, does not look too keen to share its advertising business with anyone or anything not Googley. That includes other countries who want the Google Web index available to ensure competition. What? Is that crazy or not? My hunch is that my view may be shared by some of the Google leadership. Did Prabhakar share the riches of the his new and improved approach to advertising in search results? I don’t think so. My thought is that Microsoft does not really want to share its government contracts with firms not wearing MSFT T-shirts under their polos.
The writeup continues:
Elsewhere in the interview, Nadella criticized those saying that the rise of AI will lead to massive job losses. “No, how about we think about reorganizing the jobs?” he said. Yes, it’s a lot of change management, it’s a lot of displacement, but there is a path,” Nadella added, calling for companies to give a “recipe for how that can be done.” “We now have to do the hard work in earning the social permission,” he concluded. Nadella appeared to be making reference to remarks from top AI executives, who have been claiming that the disruption caused by AI will fundamentally change how the world works. One of them is Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, who recently published a policy essay confronting what he describes as a deepening mismatch between the breakneck pace of advanced artificial intelligence development and the slow pace of policymaking.
Okay, jobs. What’s shakin’ Microsoft in the eGames division? What I think is happening at Microsoft is a case of imposter syndrome. Microsoft positioned itself after the 2022 “put Google in its place” announcement is the following:
- Microsoft customers are using Google’s version of Microsoft Office or just jumping ship to LibreOffice or a free Markdown editor. Good enough and none of that “eternal license” that expires in the near future.
- AI is becoming less visible as one thing. Instead AI is turning up in different forms. Some of those AI centric applets — don’t blame me — are quite happy using open source or lower cost Chinese models. France is chugging along with Mistral, and I have seen references to other countries’ interest in locally grown AI technology.
- Microsoft’s front line professionals like the precious metal partners and certified Microsoft experts with many letters after their name are sending signals that [a] security is a sore point, [b] usefulness depends on whom one asks and some influential customers are happier with competitors’ AI systems, and [c] the quality of Microsoft’s “updates” remains a bit of a problem for some customers. (Of course, it is the customer’s fault when a printer won’t print or updates just don’t update.)
I particularly liked the idea that accelerationism has been making AI go fast. Yeah, that’s why Microsoft thought it would be really clever in 2021. At the beginning of 2022, Microsoft was the poster child of accelerating a big, poorly orchestrated outfit with more products and services than I can easily identify.
Now it’s the reasonable Microsoft. It’s amazing what big outfits can do in less than 48 months; for example, forgetting what they said and did. I wonder if those college graduates would boo a Microsoft graduation speaker if he talks about job opportunities and how helpful Copilot is for statistics students?
Of course not. Microsoft does not want to exist in a world where there is a monopoly that is not part of William Gates’ rich, ethical legacy.
Stephen E Arnold, July 1, 2026
A Remarkable Statement from an Outfit Working to Control Knowledge Value
June 26, 2026
Another dinobaby post. No AI unless it is an image. This dinobaby is not Grandma Moses, just Grandpa Arnold.
Blogs are obviously not working. “Editorials” in print publications like the Wall Street Journal are not sufficient. White papers from high profile experts are not doing their job. Therefore, the solution to important corporate messaging is… wanna guess? … it is a tweet or as i like to call it “a musk.”
Navigate to this crystal clear link: https://x.com/satyanadella/status/2066182223213293753
You should be able to read an interesting essay allegedly input by Satya Nadella, the one person whom I identify as the man who started the Great AI Race. Google followed with its knee jerk red and yellow alerts. Prabhakar rolled out his famous Paris presentation complete with hallucinations. A herd of BAIT outfits pounded down the trail in pursuit of the next big thing. BAIT is my lingo for Big AI Tech. The next big thing, of course, is the revolutionary accelerating world of smart software.
Thanks, MidJourney. Good enough. I can almost sense the defeatism among the hired professional communicators.
Now a manifesto appears on X.com, a platform of interest to the French judiciary for its frisky looseness for certain types of content. The choice of platform makes it clear that corporate communications have changed. I recall the good old days of hiring Ketchum McCloud & Grove or TJ Ross to get an important technical message to specific audiences. Those firms had contacts at highly regarded and widely read publications, TV news producers, and best selling writers of non fiction business books.
Now we have the X.com thing. The link should point you to a tweet / musk running about 750 words. I peg this as “pat us on the back” effort. The buzzwords, the ah-shucks approach to protecting intellectual property, and the “we’re in this together, folks” spin does not, in my opinion, disguise the intent of the write up. Microsoft wants the reader to believe that its approach to AI, surveillance, data extraction, revenue generation, and user lock in is a good thing.
I jotted down several observations as I worked through the mash up of quasi corporate speak and oddities like “In my view, our priority” flourishes. Herewith, you lucky reader you are my notes:
- The jargon is hip, trendy, and very Silicon Valley; for example, agentic, evals, and cognitive loop. Explain these terms to your mom. Let me know how that works for you and her, please.
- Feedback loops among humans, systems, and money have been around a long time. Sorry, these loops and interactions have been around for more than a half century. Historical revisionism is an indication of fancy dancing.
- Suggesting that “societal permission” is required for an action of a bottom line driven commercial organization is, in my experience, hog wash.
What I think is going on is a signal that traditional marketing messages just don’t work like they used to. What’s next for Microsoft “thought leader” communications? [a] TikTok videos, [b] Snappy influencer YouTubes, [c] pompous Medium and Substack posts, [d] BlackCube-type information shaping programs, or [e] just embedding functions in Microsoft products and services that do the Google-type of “It’s easier to apologize than ask for permission”? Choose your answer. You can use Copilot to help you answer the question. None of that “write in a blue book” stuff.
We are definitely in a modern age. Tweets and musks are the new way to say, “Words matter.”
Stephen E Arnold, June 26, 2026
Yo, Dummy, Avoid Impractical AI. Practical AI Is the One, the True Way
June 26, 2026
Alex Karp is the CEO of Palantir. He has vision. Plus, he wants people to know that his company is breaking the boundaries when it comes to practical AI. The story, “Karp: Businesses ‘Unhappy’ With Frontier AI Labs” appeared on TechBuzz.AI and it says Karp wants to bridge the gap between cutting edge research and real world business needs.? ? He also warned that AI will drive the country’s critical political decision. OpenAI and Anthropic threw down the gauntlet at these comments and are doubling down on their enterprise platform.
Karp also warned about the increasing unhappiness businesses are having with their AI enterprise deals. Palantir wants to be the “pragmatic alternative” to these other AI companies. He claimed that Palantir’s rivals are missing that businesses want reliable, deployable AI that will solve problems and don’t require an advanced degree to manage.
Karp aims to play with the bug guns:
“It’s a familiar playbook for Karp, who’s built Palantir’s $40 billion valuation on the premise that enterprise software needs to be battle-tested, not just technically impressive. The company’s Artificial Intelligence Platform, or AIP, has been gaining traction with Fortune 500 clients who want AI that integrates with existing systems rather than requiring wholesale infrastructure overhauls. But Karp’s comments Wednesday went beyond typical competitive positioning. He warned that AI will soon drive ‘the most important political decisions in the U.S.’ and insisted these choices shouldn’t be determined by party lines. The statement reflects growing anxiety in Washington and corporate boardrooms about who controls AI development and deployment, especially as the technology increasingly influences everything from military strategy to economic policy.”
Palantir wants to offer companies boring reliability, not new and exciting options. It is a pragmatic alternative, but are the other options impractical then? Sure. The Lord of the Rings folks are into marketing: Black warm ups, big thoughts, and worrying about getting kicked out of France. Palantir is the leader.
Whitney Grace, June 26, 2026
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
