2834 stories
·
0 followers

Who Is Nick Bilton?

1 Share

Yesterday CBS’s Temu Leni Riefenstahl Bari Weiss fired everyone at 60 Minutes who had demonstrated they were willing to stand up to her and her paymasters David Ellison, his daddy Larry Ellison, and the Ellisons’ daddy Donald Trump. Then Weiss announced her new pick to lead the show: Nick Bilton.

The two reactions to this news were either “who?” or “him?” depending on how closely you followed tech journalism in the twenty-teens. If you weren’t following it, good call! Luckily you know a guy who was following it and regrettably that is me. Let’s visit the archives.

Who is Nick Bilton?

Bilton was born at the New York Times and grew up as “a design editor in the newsroom and a researcher in the research and development labs,” which are real jobs according to Wikipedia, before he became a Times technology columnist writing asinine takes like “what if Trayvon Martin had been wearing Google glasses when he was murdered” and “is your smartwatch giving you CANCER?” The latter was roasted so hard by The Verge’s Russell Brandom that it accreted a full page of editorial notes and corrections walking back the entire premise of the piece.

In 2013 Bilton published a book about the founding of Twitter and an anonymous hater collected some of the clunkiest sentences in a Tumblr titled “Nick Can’t Write.” Bilton was a pioneer of the kind of baffling metaphor that now plagues so much A.I. writing, such as:

In “Nick Bilton’s series of technology columns for idiots” he was also ahead of his time in producing the kind of aggressively vapid A.I. doom-marketing that has since become omnipresent. In a 2014 piece about the risks of out of control machine super-intelligence, he wrote:

Ok! You might expect him nail down a little more specifically what he means by “A.I.” but that’s not Bilton’s vibe. Instead he barrels ahead with speculation about a hypothetical cancer-curing medical robot, “self-replicating nanobots,” and autonomous weapons, apparently unaware that the first real victims of A.I. would turn out to be writers of baffling metaphor.

In 2016 Bilton left his childhood home, The New York Times, and went off to Vanity Fair where they let him pretend he discovered the Theranos fraud that John Carreyrou actually discovered, and ask “Will Mark Zuckerberg Be Our Next President?” You can tell that’s a serious question because the first sentence of the subhed is: “It’s a serious question.” He returned to A.I. again in 2023 seemingly for the first time, asking the same questions he had asked in 2014 but this time about technologies “most of which have been realized in just under six months.” Which six months did he mean, of the intervening decade? Who knows. Bilton’s post-Times style got so florid and overwrought that while I was writing about it in Tabs:

There may only be a single person about whom me, hyperglocal thinkfluencer Professor Jeff Jarvis, and circa 2014 Leah Finnegan would all say “wow, that guy sucks” and it’s Nick Bilton. He was the kind of tech commentator anti-talent who makes a smooth and remunerative career for himself by being enthusiastic about gadgets while seeming think-y and writing at a low fourth grade level. Sometimes these guys ascend to their proper heaven and become venture capitalists, like Josh Constine. Sometimes they stick it out in print media and torment us for decades, like Kevin Roose. Not smart enough for the former or likable enough for the latter, instead Nick Bilton went into TV.

Nick’s Television Experience

Michael Calderone, Bilton’s former editor at Vanity Fair now at New York Magazine, reported that Bilton has “a decade of experience in documentaries.” I guess! In the New York Times Benjamin Mullin and Michael Grynbaum summarized his film career this way:

And he told Semafor’s Max Tani much the same thing:

This is all true, as far as it goes. Bilton has been involved in a couple of documentary projects in the last few years. But oddly I haven’t seen him mention his highest profile television credit: staff writer for all five episodes of Sam Levinson and Abel “The Weeknd” Tesfaye’s egregious 2023 flop “The Idol.” The Guardian called it “one of the worst shows ever made,” and the Hollywood Reporter said it was “dogged by a thin plot and an incoherent narrative.” Rolling Stone reported that a member of the production described the show as: “like any rape fantasy that any toxic man would have,” and eventually even The Weeknd himself admitted it was very bad.

Bilton’s new job at CBS leaves the status of his upcoming collaboration with Martin Scorsese and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson in “Untitled Hawaii-Set Crime Drama” up in the air unless Scorsese can find another writer to take over—perhaps a rhesus macaque with a severe brain injury, or Claude.

Walking into this building and putting my name on this job is the honor of my career,” wrote Bilton in his characteristically almost-but-not-quite-coherent introductory message to 60 Minutes’ staff. “There are more red flags flying over this memo than a Soviet military parade” observed Hamilton Nolan, who points out that the only reason someone so unqualified gets hired for a job like this is as a hatchet man, just like Bari Weiss was herself. In a parenthetical Nolan also writes:

Weiss has already made the CBS Evening News dumb and pointless, and CBS has replaced Stephen Colbert with something dumb and pointless, so I don’t think it’s particularly speculative to say Weiss is now hard at work doing the same to 60 Minutes. Max Read pointed out the essentially confusing nature of the hire: “Has the 60 Minutes well has been so poisoned that Bilton was the biggest name they could convince take the job on the terms offered? Or do they actually think he will do a good job on the merits, such as they are?” As the adage goes: “A’s hire A’s, and B’s hire C’s.” Bari Weisses hire Nick Biltons. It’s hard to imagine what kind of people Nick Bilton will hire.

Today’s Song: Elliott Smith, “Ballad of a Big Nothing”

You can do what you want to, there’s no one to stop you…

This kind of deep historical perspective on the terrible people that are running hog wild in our collapsing society doesn’t just happen by itself. It takes a lot of coffee and snacks and mortgage payments to review just one dopey tech columnist’s entire career of bad tabs. Please help fund it, by becoming a paid subscriber.



Read the whole story
huskerboy
1 hour ago
reply
Seattle
Share this story
Delete

2026 Toyota Tacoma Pricing: Every Trim Level Explained

1 Share
  • 2026 Tacoma pricing starts at $34,190, including the destination charge.
  • The most expensive 2026 Tacoma you can buy is almost double the starting price, at over $66,000.
  • SR, TRD Sport, and TRD Off-Road models offer a manual gearbox, while many others offer a hybrid. 

The 2026 Toyota Tacoma brings with it a ton of different configurations and trim levels to choose from. With the availability of both a gutsy hybrid powertrain, a manual gearbox on select models, and several levels of off-road readiness, Toyota has ensured that the fourth-generation Tacoma can be tailored to meet a broad scope of buyer preferences. 

Prices range from $34,190 for the low-frills SR to $66,395 for the rough and tumble TRD Pro, while the new $65,395 Trailhunter trim brings an overlanding vibe to its off-road tune. But regardless of which model you choose, the Tacoma benefits from a thorough redesign that debuted in 2024, an effort that brought much-needed modernization to Toyota’s venerable midsize truck.  

Here's how the Tacoma pricing breaks down by trim. All prices include the $1,745 destination charge.

Tacoma SR: $34,190

As the least expensive Tacoma model on offer, the SR essentially plays the role of the no-nonsense work truck, but that doesn't mean it's bare bones. An 8-inch touchscreen with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto connectivity is standard, and if you opt for the Double Cab configuration, you can choose between an eight-speed automatic or a six-speed manual gearbox. Selecting the former also equates to a significant increase in power, as the 2.4-liter turbocharged inline four-cylinder engine's output jumps from 228 horsepower and 243 lb-ft of torque to 270 hp and 310 lb-ft. 

Tacoma SR5: $38,280

Available as an XtraCab with a six-foot bed or a Double Cab with a 5-foot bed, the SR5 builds on the template established by the SR with upgrades like 17-inch alloy wheels, a standard eight-speed automatic transmission, and a version of the 2.4-liter inline-four that makes 278 hp and 317 lb-ft of torque. Although it's a jump of more than $4,000 over the SR, the SR5's included standard equipment is well worth the added expense. 

Tacoma TRD PreRunner: $40,780

Inspired by the specially designed vehicles that scout the terrain on desert race courses before an official event, the TRD PreRunner is exclusively offered in the XtraCab (two doors and no rear seats) configuration with a 6-foot bed. Motivation is provided by a 278-hp version of the turbocharged inline four-cylinder engine, and it's paired with an eight-speed automatic transmission. Other standard features on this rear-wheel-drive model include a front suspension lift, 32-inch all-terrain tires, and an electronically controlled locking rear differential. 

Tacoma TRD Sport: $42,060

Offered in Double Cab form with either a 5-foot or 6-foot bed, the TRD Sport features performance-tuned twin-tube shocks, 18-inch alloy wheels, and a 12.3-inch digital gauge cluster. Available in both rear-wheel-drive and on-demand four-wheel-drive configurations, the TRD Sport can be outfitted with either an eight-speed automatic or a six-speed manual. 

The automatic-equipped TRD Sport gets a 2.4-liter turbocharged inline-four with 278 hp and 317 lb-ft, while a version of the engine that's paired with a manual gearbox produces 270 horsepower and 310 lb-ft of torque. The TRD Sport also has the distinction of being the least expensive trim that ditches the rear leaf-spring suspension found on lower trims in favor of a coil-spring multi-link rear setup. It's also the cheapest model that can be optioned with the hybrid powertrain, which makes 326 horsepower and 465 lb-ft of torque. The TRD Sport strikes one of the best balances of costs and feature availability on the lineup, though one step up gets you a lot of off-road-ready kit. 

Tacoma TRD Off-Road: $44,460

Also offered in Double Cab form with either a 5-foot or 6-foot bed, the TRD Off-Road takes a more comprehensive approach to the Tacoma's go-anywhere capability by equipping an electronically controlled locking rear differential, all-terrain tires, and four-wheel drive as standard. The TRD Off-Road can also be optioned with an electronically controlled front sway bar disconnect system for greater suspension articulation as well as the more sophisticated off-road driving modes that come as part of the Multi-Terrain Select system. 

Like the TRD Sport, the TRD Off-Road can be outfitted with either an eight-speed automatic gearbox or a six-speed manual, and that choice determines whether the 2.4-liter inline-four makes 278 horsepower or 270 hp, respectively. Alternatively, the TRD Off-Road can also be optioned with a hybrid powertrain that delivers 326 hp and 465 lb-ft. We had one in our One-Year Road Test fleet and the vast majority of our staffers weren't just impressed by the TRD Off-Road, it ended up being a true crowd favorite. 

Tacoma Limited: $55,215

The Tacoma Limited is a decidedly more luxurious affair than the SR and TRD-badge models we've looked at so far, and that swankier approach comes with a price jump of more than $10,000. For the added coin, you get niceties like an adaptive suspension system, a power-operated tailgate, and running boards that extend and retract automatically. Four-wheel drive, an eight-speed automatic transmission, and a 278-hp version of the turbo inline-four are standard equipment. For those seeking more power as well as improved efficiency, the hybrid powertrain is also available. 

On the inside, there's a more upscale cabin with synthetic leather upholstery and a larger 14-inch touchscreen display that's paired with a 10-speaker JBL audio system. The Limited makes sense if you need your pickup to do double-duty as your daily driver and need creature comforts, but it does feel like it loses a pickup truck's more utilitarian nature with its transformation to a more civilized cruiser.

Tacoma Trailhunter: $65,395

The Trailhunter marks another substantial jump in starting MSRP, but you do admittedly get a pretty awesome-looking truck for the additional outlay, and it's far from just a cosmetic affair. Designed with overlanding in mind, the Trailhunter trim is new for the fourth-generation Tacoma and boasts unique position-sensitive monotube shocks with rear piggyback reservoirs, 18-inch wheels wrapped in 33-inch rugged-terrain tires, and other off-road-oriented upgrades like rock rails, recovery hooks, and a high-clearance front bumper. 

Four-wheel drive, an eight-speed transmission, and a 2.4-liter inline-four hybrid powerplant making 323 horsepower and 465 lb-ft of torque are all standard equipment here as well, as are heated and ventilated front seats, wireless phone charging, and a 14-inch touchscreen display with JBL audio. 

Tacoma TRD Pro: $66,395

Currently positioned at the top of the Tacoma model range, the TRD Pro goes all in when it comes to off-road capability. 2.5-inch Fox internal bypass shocks with rear piggyback reservoirs, 33-inch rugged terrain tires, and the wild IsoDynamic front suspension seats (which are heated, ventilated and power-adjustable) are all part of the deal. Offered exclusively in Double Cab configuration with a 5-foot bed, the TRD Pro also visually stands out from other Tacoma models thanks to its unique two-tone color options and its bold red synthetic leather upholstery. 

Black upholstery is also offered as a no-cost option. Like the Trailhunter, the TRD Pro also comes standard with four-wheel drive, an eight-speed transmission, and a hybrid powerplant, though here the electrically assisted inline-four offers up 326 hp. And it should come as no surprise that the other off-road-oriented features found on less expensive trims — like the locking rear differential, sway bar disconnect and Multi-Terrain Select system — are standard for the TRD Pro as well. 

2026 Toyota Tacoma Buying Guide

Read the whole story
huskerboy
4 days ago
reply
Seattle
Share this story
Delete

Activate Your Continuous Learning Flywheel With Post-Incident Reviews in PagerDuty UI by Cristina Dias

1 Share

Earlier this year at our H1 2026 launch, we announced PagerDuty’s vision for autonomous operations: a future where AI agents learn from every incident, prevent failures before they happen, and progressively automate so teams can focus on innovation instead of firefighting. Central to that vision is the continuous learning flywheel: a systematic approach where every incident becomes organizational intelligence that feeds back into your operations, making your systems smarter and more resilient over time.

For years, we’ve been thought leaders in blameless postmortems and Failure Fridays through our Postmortems feature and our Jeli acquisition. We’ve learned a lot from customers, and we’re evolving the post-incident experience to help you break the cycle of repeated incidents, save time, and build more resilient operations. Now, we’re taking the next step on that journey with Post-Incident Reviews in PagerDuty UI, now rolling out in Early Access.

Are Your Incident Learnings Getting Lost in the Chaos?

You know that learning from incidents is the only way to improve resilience over time. But we often hear from customers that their teams struggle with completion and follow-through. Post-incident reviews (PIR) get skipped, action items don’t get done, and the same incidents keep happening. Your team burns out and you’re stuck in reactive mode.

  • Context-switching loses details. Teams jump between monitoring tools, Slack, ticketing systems, and documentation platforms. By the time someone writes the PIR, critical context has evaporated.
  • Manual work takes too long. Writing comprehensive reviews from scratch takes hours that exhausted responders don’t have.
  • Insights stay siloed. Even completed PIRs rarely feed back into systems that could prevent future incidents.

The result? Repeated incidents and missed opportunities to build more resilient operations.

The new Post-Incident Reviews, directly available in the PagerDuty UI, solve this by bringing the entire PIR workflow directly into the incident experience. Here’s a preview of what’s available today for Early Access customers.

Capture Learnings Without Leaving PagerDuty

Post-Incident Reviews are built directly into the incident experience in the PagerDuty UI. When your team resolves an incident, whether in Slack or the web interface, a post-incident review is automatically available with full incident context already accessible.

What you get:

  • Start PIRs from where you work. Kick off a review directly from Slack when you resolve an incident, or from the incident detail page in the web UI. No separate tools or logins required. PIRs are automatically created when an incident is resolved, so your team never has to remember to start one manually.

  • All context in one place. Every PIR includes the complete incident timeline, responder actions, service information, and alert data. PagerDuty automatically ingests context from Slack conversations, Scribe Agent summaries, and Incident Lifecycle Events (ILE), so everything documented in those locations is already there in the PIR. This means that to generate an initial PIR, there’s no need to hunt through Slack channels, dig through logs, or try to remember who did what. The incident history and context are right there when you open the PIR.

Post-incident review in incident page, including timeline, summary, etc

  • Real-time collaboration. Multiple team members can work on the same review simultaneously with live cursors showing who’s editing what. No more version conflicts or lost edits, as everyone can see changes as they happen. Whether you’re the incident commander adding the timeline, an engineer documenting the root cause, or a manager reviewing the impact, everyone can contribute at the same time without stepping on each other’s work.

Real-time collaboration in Post-Incident Reviews (PIR)

  • Structured templates. Guide your team through consistent, thorough analysis with customizable templates that ensure nothing gets missed. Create templates with sections like “What Happened,” “Root Cause,” “Impact,” and “Lessons Learned” to standardize your PIR process across teams. You can customize these to match your organization’s specific needs and ensure every review captures the information that matters most to you.

Post-incident review template

Instead of treating post-incident reviews as an afterthought, they become a natural part of closing out every incident.

We’re establishing the baseline for the continuous learning flywheel. When teams can capture learnings immediately without friction, those insights become the fuel that powers smarter operations.

Let AI Do the Heavy Lifting

Coming soon in the next phase of the EA program, we’ll supercharge your PIRs with AI-generated content that turns hours of manual work into minutes of refinement.

What’s coming in our future plans:

  • Instant AI-generated drafts. AI will automatically generate PIR content (summaries, key timeline moments, root causes, and suggested follow-ups) based on full incident context.
  • Import Slack conversations with one click. You’ll be able to selectively import all messages or just pinned messages directly into your PIR narrative.
  • Add attachments for deeper analysis. You’ll be able to upload runbooks, screenshots, logs, or supporting documentation to enrich your PIRs.
  • Collaborate with comments and @mentions. You’ll be able to tag stakeholders, ask questions, and refine the narrative together. Keep cross-functional teams aligned on what happened and what needs to happen next.
  • Create actionable follow-ups with AI assistance and Jira sync. Follow-up actions are available today in PagerDuty. Soon, you’ll get AI-suggested follow-up actions and the ability to sync them to Jira to track remediation work alongside your existing development workflows.
  • Customize AI prompts. You’ll be able to create account-specific templates with custom AI prompts tailored to your organization’s PIR format. Mark sections as required and control AI generation on a section-by-section basis.
  • Feed insights back into SRE Agent memory. PIR learnings will automatically feed back into PagerDuty SRE Agent’s memory, improving future incident response and helping developers assess deployment risk to prevent incidents before they occur.

The result is a continuous learning flywheel in action. Comprehensive learnings get captured in minutes instead of hours, feeding intelligence back into your operations to build more resilient operations.

Built for the Way You Work

Post-Incident Reviews in PagerDuty UI integrate seamlessly into your existing workflows:

  • Slack-native experience. Start PIRs in Slack with the click of a button, import channel data, and collaborate.
  • Web UI for deep analysis. Access the full PIR experience in the PagerDuty web interface with rich editing, timeline visualization, and valuable incident context.
  • Jira integration (coming soon). Sync follow-up actions to Jira to track remediation work alongside your existing development workflows.
  • API access (coming soon). Programmatically access PIR data to build custom integrations, analytics dashboards, or feed insights into other systems.

Ready to Get Started?

Post-Incident Reviews in PagerDuty UI is rolling out now in Early Access for customers on Professional plans and above.

Sign up for Early Access to start turning your incidents into prevention.

____________________________________________

Safe Harbor

This blog contains forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this blog, including statements as to future results of operations and financial position, planned products and services, business strategy and plans, objectives of management for future operations of PagerDuty, Inc. (“PagerDuty” or the “Company”), market size and growth opportunities, competitive position and technological and market trends, are forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “believe,” “hope,” “target,” “project,” “goals,” “estimate,” “potential,” “predict,” “may,” “will,” “might,” “could,” “intend,” “shall” or the negative of these terms or other similar words. You should not rely upon-forward looking statements as predictions of future events.

The outcome of events described in these forward-looking statements contained in this blog is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other factors that may cause PagerDuty’s actual results, performance or outcomes to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, including: the effect of uncertainties related to the COVID-19 pandemic on U.S. and global markets, our business, operations, revenue results, cash flow, operating expenses, demand for our solutions, sales cycles, customer retention and our customers’ businesses; our ability to achieve and maintain future profitability; our ability to attract new customers and retain and sell additional functionality and services to our existing customers; our ability to sustain and manage our growth; our dependence on revenue from a single product; our ability to compete effectively in an increasingly competitive market; and general market, political, economic, and business conditions.

The forward-looking statements contained in this blog are also subject to additional risks, uncertainties, and factors, including those more fully described in PagerDuty’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Forward-looking statements represent PagerDuty’s management’s beliefs and assumptions only as of the date such statements are made. PagerDuty undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements made in this blog to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this blog or to reflect new information or the occurrence of unanticipated events, except as required by law.

This blog also contains estimates and other statistical data made by independent parties and by the Company relating to market size and growth and other industry data. These data involve a number of assumptions and limitations, and you are cautioned not to give undue weight to such estimates. The Company has not independently verified the statistical and other industry data generated by independent parties and contained in this blog and, accordingly, it cannot guarantee their accuracy or completeness. In addition, projections, assumptions and estimates of its future performance and the future performance of the markets in which the Company competes are necessarily subject to a high degree of uncertainty and risk due to a variety of factors. These and other factors could cause results or outcomes to differ materially from those expressed in the estimates made by the independent parties and by PagerDuty. 

For further information with respect to PagerDuty, we refer you to our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC. In addition, we are subject to the information and reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and, accordingly, file periodic reports, current reports, proxy statements and other information with the SEC. These periodic reports, current reports, proxy statements and other information are available for review at the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

The post Activate Your Continuous Learning Flywheel With Post-Incident Reviews in PagerDuty UI appeared first on PagerDuty.

Read the whole story
huskerboy
11 days ago
reply
Seattle
Share this story
Delete

The big AI companies are going to see their margins disappear

1 Share
OPINION The future of AI is unwritten, but the writing is on the wall – your margin is my opportunity. Amazon founder Jeff Bezos said as much more than a decade ago in support of the e-souk's low-price, low-margin sales strategy. That opportunity exists in the AI training and inference business. But perhaps not for long. Two leading American AI companies, Anthropic and OpenAI, are not actually profitable at this point, but their pitch to investors is something along the lines of "just hang in there a few more years and keep sending cash." Given reports that Claude Code subscribers paying $200 a month can potentially consume $5,000 worth of tokens and that OpenAI is also losing money on subscriptions, it starts to become a bit clear why Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft have already started pushing customers toward metered usage pricing. AI revenue needs to go up for frontier model makers to survive. And then AI adoption needs to grow. Government agencies and large corporations that don't keep a close eye on fees may be terrified enough of AI-enabled exploitation to pay a premium for models like Anthropic's Mythos and OpenAI's GPT-5.5. But more price-sensitive folk may shop for cheaper tokens. And they're likely to find them. Benedict Evans, among the more astute industry observers, expects AI models will be commoditized. In his recently updated presentation, "AI eats the world," he suggests that the AI supply/demand imbalance will ease and the pricing power of leading AI labs will dissipate. He argues that models will become commodity infrastructure and that innovation and pricing power will have to move up the stack. That's already evident in Anthropic's efforts to keep developers interacting through its own tools like the Claude Code CLI and desktop app, and through services that sit atop its models like Claude Cowork, Claude Design, and Claude for Creative Work. But it's more apparent in US companies lobbying for regulatory intervention as a defense against competition from China, some of which has taken the form of copying AI models via a process called distillation. Zilan Qian, a research associate at the Oxford China Policy Lab, recently explored how software developers in China are acquiring AI tokens for pennies on the dollar. She writes that despite the fact that leading US model makers try to prevent people in China from using US models, everyone who wants access can get it through API proxies. "The logs they generate may have become a commodity, traded for purposes ranging from model training to targeted fraud," Qian wrote. "Meanwhile, every layer of control frontier US AI companies have added (geoblocking, phone verification, credit card requirements, and now live biometric KYC checks) has produced a corresponding layer of evasion infrastructure." This process may not be savory or sustainable – Qian posits these token sellers are just trying to acquire customers and obtain data – but it points to the difficulty US firms will have maintaining their margins and their exclusivity. Open weight models like GLM-5.1, Kimi K2.6, DeepSeek V4-Pro, and Qwen3-Coder-Next are already adequate for less demanding software development work and some, like Qwen3.6-27B, run quite well on suitably provisioned local hardware. US companies are estimated to have a lead of about seven months on Chinese AI companies. But that race will not go on forever. Even if US AI models continue to improve at their current pace, open weight models from China and elsewhere should match current leaders Claude Opus 4.7 and OpenAI GPT-5.5 by the end of 2026. At that point, better benchmarks will no doubt be welcomed, but they won't be necessary. Commodity AI will be good enough for enterprise and entrepreneurial software development. And maybe other uses will emerge, but coding right now is what people are paying for. As noted by Andreessen Horowitz, annualized AI spending by enterprises reached $3 billion annually for coding. In other categories (legal $500 million, support $400M, and medical/health $300M), adoption is significantly less. Looking at Evans's "AI eats the world" figures, promoting AI adoption will be a challenge. The tech industry is the only US workplace sector where more than 25 percent use AI on a daily basis. In finance, professional services, healthcare, retail, manufacturing, and government, there's less daily usage. And in the consumer space, only five percent of ChatGPT’s 900 million-plus weekly users pay for the privilege. Among software developers, most of those using AI are not trying to apply it to cutting-edge research or to develop complex attack chains. They're using it for fairly well understood software applications and workflows, or they're experimenting with AI agents. And increasingly, it looks like they can buy tokens at a discount if that matters. Anthropic and OpenAI need pricing and adoption to go up in order to thrive. Their margin is their vulnerability. They're going to strike deals with incumbents to make their models available on desktop and mobile hardware, particularly given the space and power constraints of phones. That will come at a cost. The likely winners will be the companies that control software distribution and delivery – operating system vendors like Apple, Google, and Microsoft, and cloud service providers like Amazon, Google, and Microsoft. Absent regulatory or legal barriers, supply constraints, or practical obstacles, prices face downward pressure where margins are high. And when you're many billions in the hole like Anthropic and OpenAI, that makes escape more difficult. In his presentation, Evans observes, "Sometimes software eats the world, and sometimes it only nibbles." ®

Read the whole story
huskerboy
12 days ago
reply
Seattle
Share this story
Delete

Ronda Rousey And Gina Carano Deliver Shittiest Women’s MMA Fight In History

1 Share

Ronda Rousey and Gina Carano fought for 17 seconds longer than they should have over the weekend.

Their brief Saturday encounter in a Southern California hexagon, a comeback for both after ridiculously long layoffs yet still promoted by Jake Paul’s MVP outfit as the biggest women’s MMA fight in history, ended as soon as Rousey set Carano up for an arm bar, the ex-judoka’s trademark finishing move from back when she was relevant. Carano, who gave up the cage for acting and right-wing mouthpiecing, tapped quicker than Fred Astaire

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg4OWWAEoCY


Read the whole story
huskerboy
12 days ago
reply
Seattle
Share this story
Delete

“I have travelled all over the world in the last 30...

1 Share

“I have travelled all over the world in the last 30 years, and have never seen anything like the density of assholes I just encountered in Japan, [i.e.] tourists being an unbearable menace specifically while on and around their phones.”

Read the whole story
huskerboy
12 days ago
reply
Seattle
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories