Here are some of the the major AI trends shaping 2026 — based on current expert forecasts, industry reports, and recent developments in technology. The material is analyzed using AI tools and final version hand-edited to this blog text:
1. Generative AI Continues to Mature
Generative AI (text, image, video, code) will become more advanced and mainstream, with notable growth in:
* Generative video creation
* Gaming and entertainment content generation
* Advanced synthetic data for simulations and analytics
This trend will bring new creative possibilities — and intensify debates around authenticity and copyright.
2. AI Agents Move From Tools to Autonomous Workers
Rather than just answering questions or generating content, AI systems will increasingly act autonomously, performing complex, multi-step workflows and interacting with apps and processes on behalf of users — a shift sometimes called agentic AI. These agents will become part of enterprise operations, not just assistant features.
3. Smaller, Efficient & Domain-Specific Models
Instead of “bigger is always better,” specialized AI models tailored to specific industries (healthcare, finance, legal, telecom, manufacturing) will start to dominate in many enterprise applications. These models are more accurate, legally compliant, and cost-efficient than general models.
4. AI Embedded Everywhere
AI won’t be an add-on feature — it will be built into everyday software and devices:
* Office apps with intelligent drafting, summarization, and task insights
* Operating systems with native AI
* Edge devices processing AI tasks locally
This makes AI pervasive in both work and consumer contexts.
5. AI Infrastructure Evolves: Inference & Efficiency Focus
More investment is going into inference infrastructure — the real-time decision-making step where models run in production — thereby optimizing costs, latency, and scalability. Enterprises are also consolidating AI stacks for better governance and compliance.
6. AI in Healthcare, Research, and Sustainability
AI is spreading beyond diagnostics into treatment planning, global health access, environmental modeling, and scientific discovery. These applications could help address personnel shortages and speed up research breakthroughs.
7. Security, Ethics & Governance Become Critical
With AI handling more sensitive tasks, organizations will prioritize:
* Ethical use frameworks
* Governance policies
* AI risk management
This trend reflects broader concerns about trust, compliance, and responsible deployment.
8. Multimodal AI Goes Mainstream
AI systems that understand and generate across text, images, audio, and video will grow rapidly, enabling richer interactions and more powerful applications in search, creative work, and interfaces.
9. On-Device and Edge AI Growth
10. New Roles: AI Manager & Human-Agent Collaboration
Instead of replacing humans, AI will shift job roles:
* People will manage, supervise, and orchestrate AI agents
* Human expertise will focus on strategy, oversight, and creative judgment
This human-in-the-loop model becomes the norm.
Sources:
[1]: https://www.brilworks.com/blog/ai-trends-2026/?utm_source=chatgpt.com “7 AI Trends to Look for in 2026″
[2]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2025/10/13/10-generative-ai-trends-in-2026-that-will-transform-work-and-life/?utm_source=chatgpt.com “10 Generative AI Trends In 2026 That Will Transform Work And Life”
[3]: https://millipixels.com/blog/ai-trends-2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com “AI Trends 2026: The Key Enterprise Shifts You Must Know | Millipixels”
[4]: https://www.digitalregenesys.com/blog/top-10-ai-trends-for-2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com “Digital Regenesys | Top 10 AI Trends for 2026″
[5]: https://www.n-ix.com/ai-trends/?utm_source=chatgpt.com “7 AI trends to watch in 2026 – N-iX”
[6]: https://news.microsoft.com/source/asia/2025/12/11/microsoft-unveils-7-ai-trends-for-2026/?utm_source=chatgpt.com “Microsoft unveils 7 AI trends for 2026 – Source Asia”
[7]: https://www.risingtrends.co/blog/generative-ai-trends-2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com “7 Generative AI Trends to Watch In 2026″
[8]: https://www.fool.com/investing/2025/12/24/artificial-intelligence-ai-trends-to-watch-in-2026/?utm_source=chatgpt.com “3 Artificial Intelligence (AI) Trends to Watch in 2026 and How to Invest in Them | The Motley Fool”
[9]: https://www.reddit.com//r/AI_Agents/comments/1q3ka8o/i_read_google_clouds_ai_agent_trends_2026_report/?utm_source=chatgpt.com “I read Google Cloud’s “AI Agent Trends 2026” report, here are 10 takeaways that actually matter”
2,322 Comments
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://futurism.com/space/math-spacex-ipo-virtually-impossible
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.kdnuggets.com/anthropics-complete-guide-to-claude-skills-building
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://simonwillison.net/2026/Jun/9/claude-fable-5/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://go.thoughtspot.com/analyst-report-gartner-predicts-intelligent-applications.html
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://coderabbit.ai/blog/fable-5-model-review
Tomi Engdahl says:
AI is incredibly useful for taking care of all the boring, time-wasting tasks, allowing us to do something creative. Are you suggesting we use it to do creative things so we can focus on the boring tasks?
Tomi Engdahl says:
Anthropic said it believed the US government had become aware of a potential means of jailbreaking Fable 5.
https://l.euronews.com/8hFF
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.securityweek.com/anthropic-disputes-fable-5-ai-jailbreak/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.securityweek.com/anthropic-says-it-has-taken-its-latest-ai-models-offline-to-comply-with-new-export-controls/
Tomi Engdahl says:
That’s AI tycoons against golf tycoons. Sometimes against themselves. Fair fight?
https://www.facebook.com/share/1DyyYB3LU7/
A new Amazon report claims its data centers withdrew approximately 2.5 billion gallons of water globally in 2025 — a figure that sounds enormous until compared to the 117 trillion gallons withdrawn in the US alone in 2015, or the 531 billion gallons used annually by US golf courses. Google’s data centers withdrew more than 6.1 billion gallons in 2024, Microsoft about 2.75 billion, and Meta about 1.4 billion. A 2021 Nature study estimated all US data centers combined consumed roughly 163 billion gallons that year — a number that has grown since. Even so, aggregate data center water use remains a small fraction of national totals. The real concern is local, not global. A single Meta data center in Newton County, Georgia now accounts for about 10% of the entire county’s water supply. The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin estimates data centers account for 8% of total water consumption in the region — a figure that could reach 29% by 2050. Critically, 40% of planned and existing US data centers are located in areas with high or extremely high water scarcity, according to the World Resources Institute. Amazon says it is funding projects expected to return 5.8 billion gallons annually to local communities; Google has committed to replenishing more than 19 billion gallons per year by 2030.
#DataCenters #AI #Water #Environment #BigTech
– comments
Data centers don’t CONSUME water. They draw water from the supply, exchange the heat dissipated by the hardware, and cool the water by evaporation or exchange. Evaporated water is returned via the hydrologic cycle, and exchanged water is returned to the source. Mass is conserved.
but that “does” mean diverting water.
Golf courses can use recycled gray water. Data centers use fresh water
data centers recycle the water, golf courses use it
If they use closed loop cooling they do, if they use evaporative cooling it *drumroll* evaporates.
Evaporative cooling is technically air cooling the facility by drawing in fresh air through fresh water mist and expelling the hot air. It’s really expensive to buy millions of gallons a day but the upfront cost is lower having tubing connecting water blocks to radiators. Most AI servers don’t even have water blocks as an option from the factory so air cooling it is.
80% of data centers built today use closed loop. It’s 90+% for AI DC.
I work in the industry. I’m aware of how it works.
About 10-20 percent of data centers are closed-loop systems. They will probably all be closed-loop systems in a few years.
I agree with closed loop. But, that’s an if…Texas needs water, Florida not far behind. And, not every company does closed loop. It’s not about the future. It’s about the now.
Major players are already making the move.
Tomi Engdahl says:
SSD-ohjain viritettiin tekoäly-PC välimuistiksi
https://etn.fi/index.php/13-news/19058-ssd-ohjain-viritettiin-tekoaely-pc-vaelimuistiksi
Tekoäly-PC suorituskyky ei riipu vain prosessorista, grafiikkapiiristä tai NPU-kiihdyttimestä. Kun paikalliset kielimallit ja tekoälyagentit kasvavat, pullonkaulaksi voi nousta myös tallennus. Silicon Motion vastaa tähän uudella SM2524XT-ohjainpiirillä, joka on suunnattu PCIe Gen5 -SSD-levyihin.
SM2524XT on ilman erillistä DRAM-välimuistia toimiva SSD-ohjain. Se on tarkoitettu erityisesti tekoälypäättelyyn ja niin sanottuihin KV-välimuistikuormiin. KV-välimuistiin tallennetaan kielimallin aiemmin laskemaa dataa, jotta mallin ei tarvitse käsitellä kaikkea uudelleen jokaisen vastauksen yhteydessä.
Silicon Motionin mukaan juuri tämä muuttaa SSD roolia tekoäly-PCä. Perinteisessä kuluttajakäytössä on korostettu ennen kaikkea peräkkäislukua ja -kirjoitusta. Tekoälykuormissa tärkeämmäksi nousevat pienet, hajanaiset ja viiveherkät satunnaisoperaatiot. Niitä syntyy erityisesti silloin, kun paikallinen kielimalli käsittelee pitkiä kehotteita tai agenttimaisia tehtäviä.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Bloomberg:
Canadian PM says the Anthropic ban shows the dangers of “over-reliance on certain models”, and compares the risks to those that led to the 2008 financial crisis — Prime Minister Mark Carney said the US export ban blocking all foreign access to Anthropic PBC’s latest artificial …
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-06-14/carney-says-anthropic-ban-shows-risk-of-relying-on-big-ai-models?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc4MTQ2MTY5NiwiZXhwIjoxNzgyMDY2NDk2LCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJUR01OVUNUOU5KTFMwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiIzNTk2NzdDODA0QTY0N0JGQTZDQTdEMzgzM0VCNjRCQSJ9.OzXfSkJgnmoOJl5CkNCcdvGTQ8QjlYe9tIkUCsrQA8I&leadSource=uverify%20wall
Tomi Engdahl says:
New York Times:
A profile of UC Berkeley professor Hany Farid, the world’s leading digital forensics expert for 20+ years, who says he is now struggling to identify AI fakes
The World’s Leading Deepfake Expert No Longer Trusts His Own Eyes
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/14/us/ai-deepfake-hany-farid.html?unlocked_article_code=1.qFA.A6Fe.SMasD7T0VSmU&smid=bs-share
“Anyone can create a video of anything or anybody, doing or saying anything,” Farid wrote back. “This will take a little time.”
For more than two decades, Farid, 60, had been the world’s leading expert in the field of digital forensics, but in the last six months he’d stopped trusting his own eyes. He’d made a career of differentiating visual reality from deepfakes as he fielded requests each day from governments, human rights organizations, journalists, law enforcement and thousands of others who were increasingly confused and deceived by the online world. Farid’s own research had proven that most people could no longer distinguish a real photograph from a digital creation, a real voice from an A.I. clone, a real video clip from a wholesale fabrication. Lately, he was failing his own tests.
“I feel like I’m going blind,” Farid said, and he worried that A.I. was obscuring the truth, distorting reality, fracturing democracies and slowly breaking him, too. He and his wife had begun making plans to leave California and trade the tech culture of Silicon Valley for a farm in rural Vermont.
He restarted the video and played the clip again. Sky. Bomb. Smoke. Screams. In the last hour, at least a dozen media organizations had emailed him to ask about the video. It had been published and shared by an official Iranian news agency, but that didn’t mean much to Farid, because recently he had seen deepfakes created and shared by foreign governments and by staffers at the White House. He geolocated the video using a database of millions of images from around the globe, and it pointed to a street in Minab, Iran, several hundred feet from an elementary school.
Maybe the video itself was real, Farid thought, except that someone had inserted a Tomahawk missile into the frame. He stabilized the video to get rid of the shaking and then charted the missile through a series of still frames, hunting for inconsistencies.
Sky, bomb, smoke, screams. He watched at least 100 more times, doubting his instincts and rechecking his math. For most of his career, he had been charged with identifying the rare fake in a world of shared truths. But now fakes were the norm and truth was elusive. Even after a full day of analysis and consultation with other visual experts — all of which confirmed the video’s authenticity — he couldn’t quite bring himself to declare it real.
“Overall, we find no compelling evidence that the video is fake or has been manipulated,” Farid wrote.
“You can’t kill 100 schoolgirls and just say ‘whoopsie,’” he wrote to a colleague, as he read through social media posts. Some people were citing Farid’s analysis to confirm the video was real. Others dismissed Farid as somehow biased and said the video looked fake. Several new A.I.-generated videos about the bombing had already begun to appear online, showing fake generals giving orders or fake parents mourning fake schoolgirls. The internet was already moving on from what would turn out to be one of the deadliest bombings of the war, and now Farid saw a new request arrive in his inbox. It was a different video, showing another explosion in a separate part of the world.
“I miss the days when it was a grainy video of a shark swimming up the street,” Farid said one night, as he sat on the back deck of his house with his wife, Emily Cooper. He put down his phone and poured a whiskey. “The technology is getting so good. It takes me to a dark place.”
“Because you can’t tell just by looking anymore?” Cooper asked.
“Because nobody can,” Farid said. “I don’t trust anything. Every image I see, I’m drawing lines for shadows and doing geometry in my head, trying to figure out what I’m looking at. It’s over. Within a year or two, our whole visual system will be utterly useless.”
“And then what? You give up? You retire?”
“I don’t know,” he said.
His father had worked for 50 years as a chemist at Eastman Kodak, and Farid had grown up visiting the darkroom, watching photographs develop in chemical baths and harden into evidence. He went on to help design a digital fingerprint that found child pornography hiding on the internet — a technology that led to more than 30 million abuse reports each year, hundreds of arrests and several rescues. As deepfakes began spreading online, he built software to catch the moment a speaker’s mouth moved out of sync with the audio. He co-founded a company, GetReal Security, and helped invent tools to measure lighting, shadows and vanishing points, checking online visuals against the physics of the real world.
Cooper was a leading vision scientist at Berkeley. She researched how humans perceive reality, while her husband investigated how that reality could be faked. They’d collaborated on studies about deepfakes, but in the last months that research had begun to follow them home. Instead of dealing with one case every few weeks, Farid was working as an adviser and an expert witness, juggling up to a dozen cases each day. For the first time in his career, he’d become not just an analyst but also a victim, when someone spoofed his cellphone number and used A.I. to clone his voice. The hacker made calls to one of Farid’s colleagues on a sensitive case, impersonating Farid and pressing for confidential information. Now Farid and Cooper had decided never to take their identity for granted. They invented a safe word to confirm they were real at the start of any sensitive phone call.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Wall Street Journal:
As “nudify” tools proliferate, unleashing a new form of bullying among kids, parents and schools are struggling to protect young victims from AI deepfakes
AI Supercharges Deepfake Nudes—Unleashing a New Form of Bullying Among Kids
As ‘nudify’ tools proliferate online, parents and schools are struggling to protect young victims
https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai-deepfake-nudes-bullying-school-d242b8d4?st=LWUjEG&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
AI has made it trivially easy for anyone with a phone to digitally undress people and post the content online. Called explicit deepfakes, these images, and sometimes videos, are unleashing a new form of bullying and harassment among young people.
Artificial-intelligence “nudify” tools are evolving and multiplying. Laws cracking down on them have lagged behind cases and aren’t always enforced. Schools don’t know how to handle them. Parents are left trying to help their children regain a sense of safety as they try to scrub the images from the internet.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Reuters:
EU says it is looking at the practical consequences of US restricting Anthropic’s models, notes such measures “should not be discriminatory against partners”
EU Commission looking at practical consequences of Anthropic decision, spokesperson says
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/eu-commission-looking-practical-consequences-anthropic-decision-spokesperson-2026-06-14/
BRUSSELS, June 14 (Reuters) – The European Commission said on Sunday that it is assessing the practical implications of a U.S. export control directive impacting artificial intelligence company Anthropic and that measures should not be discriminatory against partners.
Anthropic said on Friday it would “abruptly disable” its most advanced AI models for all users after the U.S. government ordered it to suspend access to the models for foreign nationals, citing national security concerns.
“We are seeing a new generation of highly capable AI models reach the market. These models offer significant benefits, including for cyber-defence, but they also raise serious cybersecurity concerns that need to be addressed,” European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier said in a statement.
“This development is a further illustration of why Europe needs to strengthen its technological sovereignty,”
Tomi Engdahl says:
The Information:
Sources: Amazon CEO Andy Jassy is among tech leaders who raised concerns with Trump officials about Mythos 5, setting in motion new export restrictions
https://www.theinformation.com/articles/amazons-jassy-raised-concerns-anthropic-model-trump-crackdown
Tomi Engdahl says:
Mark Gurman / Bloomberg:
Siri AI is good enough to ease Apple’s AI crisis; sources: the ability to tap third party AI models beyond OpenAI’s is already active in internal iOS 27 builds — The company prepares for the foldable iPhone and touch-screen MacBook. — Apple’s new Siri AI, despite mainly delivering …
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2026-06-14/siri-ai-hands-on-review-ios-27-macos-27-details-iphone-fold-touch-macbook
Tomi Engdahl says:
Satya Nadella / @satyanadella:
Satya Nadella says companies must own their AI “learning loops” to compound human and token capital, or risk ceding all value to a handful of frontier models — I’ve been thinking a lot about the future of the firm in an AI-driven economy. This transition is different than any previous platform shift.
https://x.com/satyanadella/status/2066182223213293753
Tomi Engdahl says:
James Franey / New York Post:
President Trump says he warned Emmanuel Macron to drop France’s 3% digital services tax on US tech giants, or face a 100% tariff on French champagne and wine — See more of our coverage in your search results. — Add The New York Post on Google — President Trump warned that France …
Trump warns France in exclusive interview with The Post: Kill tech tax or face 100% wine tariffs: ‘I have no choice’
https://nypost.com/2026/06/15/business/trump-warns-france-in-exclusive-interview-with-the-post-kill-tech-tax-or-face-100-wine-tariffs/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Reuters:
Sources: ByteDance is in talks with Shanghai-based Iluvatar CoreX to purchase AI inference GPUs, and is also considering a deal to buy Baidu’s Kunlunxin chips — Chinese technology company ByteDance is in talks with Shanghai-based Iluvatar CoreX (9903.HK) to purchase AI chips for inference work …
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/bytedance-talks-with-chinas-iluvatar-corex-purchase-ai-chips-sources-say-2026-06-15/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Erica Ryan / Reporters’ Lab:
Duke Reporters’ Lab reports a global drop in fact-checking projects from 464 in 2024 to 441 in 2025; US projects fell from 65 in 2024 to 61 in 2025 — Three times as many fact-checking projects stopped as started in 2025, but the majority are weathering money woes, political attacks
2026 census: Fact-checking losses continue amid funding pressure, but most projects persist
https://reporterslab.org/2026/06/12/2026-census-fact-checking-losses-continue-amid-funding-pressure-but-most-projects-persist/
Three times as many fact-checking projects stopped as started in 2025, but the majority are weathering money woes, political attacks
Staying Afloat
Despite the challenging times, the vast majority of projects have continued their work of countering false political claims and debunking social media misinformation. The Reporters’ Lab’s overall count is down about 4 percent since last June.
The number of fact-checking projects is still more than double what it was 10 years ago. There were about 180 fact-checking projects at the end of 2016, compared to nearly 440 today.
More than 80 projects are fact-checking in countries judged particularly dangerous for journalism by Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index. Among them are about two dozen projects in India and multiple outlets in Bangladesh, Hong Kong and Egypt.
About 30 percent of organizations responding to the IFCN survey said they faced government pressure or interference from authorities, and almost two-thirds received harassment.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Aidan Ryan / The Boston Globe:
A look at an AI-reliant news site for 19 towns south of Boston, which uses public meeting transcripts and LLMs to produce stories and has 350 paid subscribers
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2026/06/12/business/south-shore-local-news-ai/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.facebook.com/share/1PKhvEHjXw/
Before AI agents, she’d see her task list and know she had to do everything on it. Now she asks herself: “What items can I hand off to AI so I can find even more meaningful problems to solve?”
(Credit: Courtesy of Kristi Edleson)
#ai #aiagents #careers
I’m the only nontechnical employee at an AI startup. There are still some tasks I won’t trust AI to handle. : https://mrf.lu/9Y8_
Tomi Engdahl says:
Kuolleet venäläissotilaat ilmestyivät AI-videoille
Tekoälyvideot kaatuneista venäläissotilaista kaupallistavat surun ja tukevat Kremlin sankarikuvastoa.
https://yle.fi/a/74-20224430
Tomi Engdahl says:
We can no longer ignore the growing threat of fully autonomous weapons. The world must either act to ban them or accept that they are the future of war.
Read here: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2530304-killer-robots-are-here-we-must-finally-decide-whether-to-accept-them/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1B8U2ZZq17/
OpenAI says China ran a covert AI campaign to turn Americans against the development of data centers.
According to a June 2026 threat report, OpenAI disrupted a covert Chinese influence operation that bypassed geographical blocks to weaponize ChatGPT. Posing online as ordinary Americans, the threat actors generated localized content designed to exploit economic anxieties. The campaign falsely claimed that the rapid buildout of domestic AI data centers would spike electricity demand and dramatically drive up utility bills for everyday households.
Ultimately, the campaign was entirely ineffective. OpenAI assessed the activity at the lowest level of its impact scale, noting the social media posts generated little to no organic engagement and completely failed to shift public opinion.
You can see the OpenAI report here: https://openai.com/index/prc-linked-influence-operations-ai-debates/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/18GtevvVT3/
A Kill Switch for Frontier AI
The government is using export control law to force Anthropic to cut access to its most powerful models. The legal authority is plausible but the facts remain murky.
On Friday, June 12, at 5:21 p.m. Eastern Time, Anthropic received a letter from the U.S. Commerce Department. Citing national-security authorities, the government ordered the company, as Anthropic describes it, “to suspend all access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 by any foreign national, whether inside or outside the United States, including foreign national Anthropic employees.” Because Anthropic cannot reliably sort its users by nationality, the practical effect was a global kill switch: Within hours, the company pulled both of its newest and most powerful models for everyone.
Unlike the government’s legally dubious attempt to brand Anthropic a “supply chain risk” earlier this year, there is at least a facially plausible legal framework in this case. Although the legal basis for the order has not been made public, Commerce is most likely relying on the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), which its Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) administers under the Export Control Reform Act of 2018. In addition to physical goods, the EAR covers intangible “technology,” and its deemed-export rule treats releasing controlled technology to a foreign person inside the United States as an export to that person’s home country. To avoid the delay of notice-and-comment rulemaking, BIS can send a company an “is informed” letter that imposes a license requirement immediately, with no notice-and-comment rulemaking—a tool it has previously used to block advanced-chip sales to China.
These regulations around the chip markets have been nearly the whole of export control law’s application to AI. The Biden administration’s AI Diffusion Rule briefly put model weights—the billions of numbers that make up a model and allow anyone with enough computing power to run their own copy—on the control list, but President Donald Trump immediately rescinded the rule on retaking office. The current situation thus marks the first time that export controls have been enforced to control access to an AI model. The applicability of such controls depends on how far they purport to reach: to the model’s weights alone, to the potentially dangerous content the model can produce, or (as Anthropic’s broad description of the directive suggests) to any access to the running model at all.
The model weights are the cleanest fit for the export control authorities, since they are the actual technology item itself. But, for a model served over an API, the weights never leave Anthropic’s servers, so a control on them would not reach ordinary users. Those it would reach are those employees at Anthropic who are neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents. In the short term, such a control might counterproductively bar model access to some of the very researchers needed to fix the problems the government is worried about. In the long term, it would make it very difficult for Anthropic and other frontier AI companies to secure the foreign talent that is key to AI’s development, thus threatening America’s position as the leading AI power.
Beyond the weights themselves, the government is clearly seeking to control specific categories of dangerous outputs from Fable and Mythos as exports—for example, outputs that might enable adversary cyberattacks. Because the EAR defines “technology” as any “information necessary” for the “development” or “use” of items otherwise covered by the EAR (e.g., equipment and software for conducting cyberattacks), this arguably sweeps in outputs from AI models.
Whether concern over specific categories of output justifies a blanket ban on all foreign access to the models depends on whether Anthropic’s query filters work—because it is far from clear that remote use of a model is itself an “export” under the EAR. Export controls have not traditionally applied to foreign access to U.S. software as a service (SaaS), which is why, in January, the House felt it necessary to pass the Remote Access Security Act, which would extend export jurisdiction to foreign remote access of controlled U.S. technology.
If, as Anthropic’s public statement suggests, Commerce has ordered it to disable all foreign access to Fable and Mythos, Commerce would need to justify that blanket ban on prophylactic grounds—that Anthropic’s current guardrails are insufficient, a factual point on which the two sides disagree.
The government’s position, as described by David Sacks, the former White House AI czar, is that a “highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG” (reportedly Amazon, which is both a major investor in and compute provider for Anthropic) demonstrated a jailbreak of Fable’s guardrails, leading the administration to ask Anthropic to fix the vulnerability or pull the model, a request Anthropic refused. The vulnerability, on this account, is grave—Sacks describes the jailbreak as enabling the “operability of a cyber weapon”—and the export control is a reluctant last resort against a company that “prioritized the continued offering of the consumer model over safety.”
Anthropic’s position, by contrast, is that a tester found a narrow jailbreak that surfaced a handful of minor vulnerabilities—ones both previously known to the government before Fable’s release and present in other public models, including OpenAI’s flagship GPT-5.5. From this perspective the government’s action looks at best like an overreaction and at worst like another chapter in a vindictive campaign to punish Anthropic. The government reportedly has no plans to apply similar export controls to other models with comparable cyber capabilities, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth celebrated the export control, writing that “every passing day proves why that was the right move” for the Pentagon to have “kicked [Anthropic] out of our building—forever.”
Both sides have signaled that they want to resolve the dispute quickly—Anthropic for obvious reasons, and the government because a prolonged ban on a frontier model could shake confidence in the U.S. AI industry as a whole. But even if Anthropic persuades the government to lift the control, the deeper question will remain: whether there should be, and if so under what circumstances, a licensing regime for frontier AI. If Washington is going to treat frontier models as national-security assets it can switch on and off, Congress will have to step in and establish a proper framework with meaningful standards and a defined process.
It is a framework, as it happens, that Anthropic’s own CEO called for days before the letter arrived. In an essay on AI policy this month, Dario Amodei argued that “the government should have the power to block or deter deployment” of a frontier model found, “in light of third-party assessment, to present unacceptable risks.” But Amodei also stressed the need for “protective measures against political favoritism or arbitrary decisions,” and the current crisis—a standardless export letter based on contested technical facts and personality conflicts, against the backdrop of a Pentagon blacklisting that his company is still fighting in court—is presumably not what he had in mind.
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/a-kill-switch-for-frontier-ai
Tomi Engdahl says:
The age of “tokenmaxxing” didn’t last long. https://trib.al/h5jsMAq
Frugal Infection
CEOs Now Being Forced to Reverse Course, Cut AI Spending
The age of “tokenmaxxing” didn’t last long.
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/ceos-reverse-course-ai-spending?fbclid=IwdGRjcASdRVpjbGNrBJ1FMGV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHjv2zwj6z5gy3EdthOGvJZLH3q-OAUdkiJtqBGuNWAmMXQTpUe8J33Ss5I2B_aem_Ox2GVMDeT_q4Ufid47bvlQ
The era of AI maximalism is grinding to a halt. It was only months ago that CEOs were forcing employees to use AI as much as possible for tasks like coding. But at some point during their AI binge, the big wigs stopped to check their tab, and are now having second thoughts. Their employees are hooked on AI coding tools, but the costs of using them are spiraling out of control.
How businesses go about reconciling these costs with their AI evangelism is “going to be an absolute nightmare,” an unnamed big tech executive told The Economist.
It’s an ironic reversal of fortunes for companies in the tech sphere, which have become one of the main adopters of AI. Bosses have been happy to slash their workforces and replace them with AI coding agents that can churn out mountains of code, encouraging their surviving employees to make use of AI help as much as possible. Some, like Amazon, instituted a leaderboard ranking employees by the number of AI tokens they used, as if they were competing in a video game. Meta also even factored AI usage into performance reviews.
This wasn’t an entirely top-down phenomenon. AI bros have embraced this maximalism in tongue-in-cheek fashion, giving it the aptly meme-y named ethos of “tokenmaxxing.”
All of this has backfired in predictable fashion. At one business, a single employee spent over $150,000 a month on AI tokens. An Nvidia executive admitted that he was spending more on AI costs for his research team than what he pays the actual employees. One unfortunate company reportedly blew through $500 million in a month on Claude usage fees. On average, new research from the Ramp AI Index found that the most “AI-pilled” businesses are spending around $7,500 per employee every month on AI.
AI isn’t the problem, of course, but how you use it. Experts have advised imposing token limits on employees, being more selective about where AI is deployed, and using cheaper models. Signaling the vibe shift, Amazon and Meta have ditched those AI leaderboards, and a top Uber executive said AI wasn’t yielding clear productivity gains compared to their expensive costs; soon after those comments, Uber imposed a $1,500 monthly token cap per employee.
That AI customers are already reeling from AI costs and tapering off usage doesn’t bode well for the model makers. Token costs right now could be the cheapest they’ll ever be, as they’re effectively subsidized by the companies providing the models to get customers on board.
But can AI companies afford to keep their prices low, when their road to profitability remains elusive? It’s a question that OpenAI might be speeding headlong into answering. While many raise their rates and switch over to usage based billing, the Sam Altman-led firm is reportedly considering slashing its rates to launch a price war with arch rival Anthropic, in anticipation of it doing the same.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The Grunt Work Will Continue Until Morale Improves
Meta’s Super Expensive New AI Team Is Already a Complete Catastrophe
“It’s literally the gulag.”
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/meta-new-ai-team-catastrophe?fbclid=IwVERDUASdRkxleHRuA2FlbQIxMABzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAwzNTA2ODU1MzE3MjgAAR6J6J4Wt-F1HF_9K9KPM8gaArpN9w6aMbLQ3pbLSQfMco7TRgfeYZXROlmUzA_aem_pGP0VH6bjvF66eJ2sIN12w
Tomi Engdahl says:
The new method detects when machine vision drifts from images. https://bit.ly/4eJ1Sty
Tomi Engdahl says:
Well done, everyone. https://trib.al/q9ErdW6
Insulting Firm
Consulting Firm’s Report on How Awesome AI Is Found to Contain Idiotic AI Hallucinations
Well done, everyone.
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/consulting-firms-ai-report-hallucinations?fbclid=IwdGRjcASdVvJjbGNrBJ1Wy2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHm068WxIHloWrTnMQ75CJpfJ9CHhZpqfp_jwGGXvv9F7AlXz27hvPupMLiOl_aem_wB-ALIPz1ddO1yYJQw5J1Q
A new report that was supposed to be a shining panegyric to how useful AI is was caught loaded with fake claims that appear to be AI hallucinations, the Financial Times reports — a blunder that may have unintentionally demonstrated AI’s most compelling use case: bullsh*tting your job.
Titled “Redefining excellence in the age of agentic AI,” the report was released October by KPMG, one of the big four consulting firms, making the mishap an all the more embarrassing indictment of elite Wall Street professionals’ mindless enthusiasm for the tech.
It claimed that numerous big organizations are already making extraordinary use of the tech, with the takeaway that you should be deploying AI, too, lest you become one of those dinosaurs that still relies on the fleshy circuitry of the brain to synthesize information.
The global wealth manager UBS “integrates AI agents across investment advisory, risk management and compliance monitoring,” it stated. The Swiss Federal Railways has AI agents that “help users plan, book, and optimize journeys based on preferences, real-time conditions and carbon impact, turning SBB into a holistic mobility orchestrator,” it further asserted. And the Transport for London was using AI agents “to predict and manage congestion, personalize commuter updates and co-ordinate multimodal transport.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Nearly a third of China’s university programmes have been impacted
China’s universities cut thousands of ‘obsolete’ arts degrees in AI overhaul
Nearly a third of China’s university programmes have been impacted
https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/china-ai-university-arts-degree-b2995940.html?fbclid=IwdGRjcASd4a9jbGNrBJ3hh2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHmgRLW0v4nUpi3MhoL2KkBJkq2A8mYYL_CzFcHeRqAfeX5EoeHNczxnkUCfA_aem_O9JvlTGuyYR_vcYfeGevDg
Tomi Engdahl says:
China: AI, do we need to foster imagination for innovation?
AI: No, you can just recycle like I do.
China: Excellent, yes, cut all that out.
China 2030: what, no innovation or new concepts or even a betterment of what is existing? Why not? So confused…
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.facebook.com/share/1BMX9s9j1G/
Just days after IPO, SpaceX said they are buying AI coding startup Cursor for $60 billion in enterprise push. Cursor has $2.6 billion in annualised business-to-business revenue from enterprise customers.
More info https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/spacex-buy-anysphere-60-billion-2026-06-16/
Tomi Engdahl says:
“I’m not sure that this company supports a hackathon culture anymore.” https://trib.al/1PBRqaW
Employees have been roiling from multiple rounds of major layoffs. Last month alone, the Mark Zuckerberg-led company laid off a whopping 8,000 workers, roughly ten percent of its workforce, as part of its chaotic refocusing efforts around AI.
Many of those who remain are now forced to perform the grunt work to train AI models, weekly busywork that’s already driving some of them up the wall, as Wired reports.
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/mark-zuckerberg-employees-fun-hackathon-layoffs?fbclid=IwdGRjcASeP3xjbGNrBJ4_QGV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHqNqHVyvQzzLGzUJrKxKEFhI1eRh9lVoEFEN2mI8xnok9oNefrxAtbxGhP8b_aem_eRH7vD0NQtXnDBktAUl58g
Tomi Engdahl says:
“They’ve kind of taken the crack approach to AI. Give it to people for free, get them hooked, then jack up prices.” https://trib.al/zXMX7ob
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/198vDPHb1Q/
This is how much your ChatGPT usage costs OpenAI
It’s the all-you-can-eat buffet model. They’re betting most people won’t fill their plates. The light users subsidize the heavy ones.
bait and switch, addiction model as used by drug dealers.
Get em hooked cheap and ramp up the cost.
Wow, and it’s actually worth $2 for what it can do for you if you have no clue how to use it
Tomi Engdahl says:
A $200 ChatGPT subscription could cost OpenAI $14,000 if you actually used it to its full potential
OpenAI starts losing money on ChatGPT Plus once usage tops 11%, Anthropic’s Claude is no different
https://www.techspot.com/news/112759-openai-anthropic-cant-afford-have-everyone-use-ai.html
Bottom line: The math behind AI subscriptions is starting to look uncomfortable. Flat monthly pricing helped fuel the rapid adoption of tools like ChatGPT and Claude, but new analysis suggests those fees may not come close to covering the actual cost of heavy use. As users push these systems harder and more demanding AI workflows take hold, the gap between revenue and compute costs is becoming difficult to ignore.
SemiAnalysis has calculated how big that gap really is. After testing subscription tiers from both OpenAI and Anthropic – running long-horizon coding and agentic tasks until weekly limits were exhausted – the firm found that the cost of theoretical maximum usage of these plans if priced at standard API rates far exceeds what users actually pay.
A $200 ChatGPT Pro 20x subscription could cost as much as $14,000 in API pricing if fully utilized. Anthropic’s Claude Max 20x plan, also priced at $200 per month, has a comparable ceiling, with potential usage totaling roughly $8,000 in token costs.
Those figures help explain why utilization rates matter so much to the AI companies offering them. According to SemiAnalysis, Anthropic breaks even on Claude Pro and Claude Max 5x at around 20% utilization. OpenAI’s margin is thinner. It begins losing money on ChatGPT Plus and ChatGPT Pro 5x once usage climbs above 11.4%.
The economics get tighter at the high end. Anthropic reaches zero gross margin at roughly 10% utilization on its top-tier plans, while OpenAI crosses into negative territory at just 5.7%. It doesn’t take extreme use for these subscriptions to turn unprofitable.
Adjusting pricing or restricting access is not a straightforward fix. Subscription models have been central to user growth, and pulling back risks slowing momentum in a market where capabilities remain a key competitive differentiator.
// Related Stories
Microsoft Office 2019 for Mac will no longer edit documents after July 13
ChatGPT becomes the fastest app to reach 1 billion monthly active users
Part of the pressure comes from how AI is actually being used. Token consumption is rising quickly, especially with agentic systems that can require up to 1,000 times more tokens than a standard prompt. That kind of demand is already forcing large organizations to rethink how freely these tools should be deployed.
Microsoft, Meta, and Amazon have reportedly pulled back from internal efforts that encouraged heavy usage after costs escalated. In one widely cited example, a company burned through $500 million in a single month using Anthropic’s Claude, largely because it failed to put limits on employee access.
That kind of overspending is pushing companies toward more controlled approaches. One strategy gaining traction is to shift workloads between models depending on the task. More complex queries go to expensive frontier models, while routine work is handled by cheaper alternatives.
The savings can be substantial. A Wall Street Journal report found that routing tasks this way can cut costs by up to 95%. “You don’t need a model that knows quantum gravity,” Columbia University vice dean Vishal Misra told the publication. “These open-source models are very capable, and the ability to charge a big premium for AI is going to diminish.”
Some companies have already made the shift. Flo Crivello, founder and CEO of AI assistant startup Lindy, announced that the company moved 100% of its traffic to DeepSeek V4, switching entirely away from Anthropic’s models. DeepSeek V4 proved comparable to Claude Sonnet at a fraction of the cost, and the move has “saved the company millions of dollars,” Crivello said.
Others are going further by building their own AI systems on top of open-source models trained on internal data. While that requires more upfront investment, it offers tighter cost control and reduces dependence on third-party providers. In some cases, these tailored systems may even outperform general-purpose frontier models for specific use cases.
There is some expectation that costs will ease over time. As infrastructure expands and newer models replace older ones, the cost of running mid-tier systems should decline. SemiAnalysis suggests that models at the Opus 4.8 level could eventually be delivered profitably for around $20 per month.
That does not apply to the most advanced systems, though. Frontier models, including those still in development, remain expensive to run. Their highest-end capabilities may increasingly be priced via APIs rather than bundled into consumer subscriptions.
For now, AI providers are juggling two forces: users want powerful tools at low, predictable monthly prices, but the infrastructure to run them remains costly and highly sensitive to usage. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has acknowledged the tension, noting that rising token costs are becoming a serious issue and that the company is working to help users “get more value for less spend” when using ChatGPT.
25 comments
5.9K likes and shares
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1u5ufgs/a_200_chatgpt_subscription_could_cost_openai/
Tomi Engdahl says:
The economics get tighter at the high end. Anthropic reaches zero gross margin at roughly 10% utilization on its top-tier plans, while OpenAI crosses into negative territory at just 5.7%. It doesn’t take extreme use for these subscriptions to turn unprofitable.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.axios.com/2026/06/16/microsoft-copilot-cowork-tokenmaxxing-cowork
https://seekingalpha.com/news/4604119-microsoft-considering-using-deepseek-models-for-low-cost-copilot-report
Tomi Engdahl says:
Donald Trump’s administration turned to Elon Musk’s Grok chatbot to launch thousands of missiles in Iran, according to a top defense official.
Pentagon used Elon Musk’s Grok AI to fire 2,000 missiles at Iran, official says
Top defense official says data centers powering trillionaire’s chatbot are critical to national security
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/elon-musk-grok-ai-iran-war-b2996939.html?fbclid=IwdGRjcASfBVxjbGNrBJ8FQ2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHsx3TchfB_B5cBb_cx-Ss-E7aocNk_u8UXUJmMThRoB3piin83y5Yn8VFlsQ_aem_xvW7xzHpK6HH4JsqWHTyBQ
Donald Trump’s administration turned to Elon Musk’s Grok chatbot to launch thousands of missiles in Iran, according to a top defense official.
In a sworn statement defending the trillionaire from a lawsuit alleging xAI data centers are illegally polluting Black communities, the Pentagon’s artificial intelligence chief said the chatbot’s continued operation is “a matter of paramount national security” — and was used to fire more than “2,000 munitions at 2,000 distinct targets within 96 hours.”
Grok, a generative artificial intelligence chatbot developed by xAI, is among four AI models “currently capable of supporting national security applications,” according to Cameron Stanley, the Pentagon’s chief digital and artificial intelligence officer.
The chatbot is also one of three products “equipped to support mission-critical operation
The filing appears to be the first explicit admission from an administration official that the government is using Musk’s AI to bomb Iran, joining several other AI systems that have come under intense scrutiny after U.S.-led attacks killed hundreds of civilians, including children.
Outside analysts have suggested that the Pentagon’s AI-driven targeting — in addition to human error that failed to check whether target maps were up to date — may have played a role in the bombing.
The targets for Operation Epic Fury were identified with the aid of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency’s Maven Smart System, which uses AI to lay out data on a dashboard to support officials in their decision-making.
Those AI products do not explicitly create targets but work within Maven to identify potential points of interest for military intelligence.
In court filings on Monday, the Pentagon said it relies on xAI’s Grok Gov Model
The Trump administration is asking a federal judge in Mississippi to toss out a lawsuit brought by the NAACP, which claims Musk’s xAI is violating the Clean Air Act by running dozens of gas-burning turbines despite lacking permits for them.
Several Democrats in Congress are proposing legislation to restrict the military’s use of AI
“The most critical decisions affecting our national security and the lives of our service members must always be made by human beings, not unaccountable machines,”
“Right now, the Pentagon is moving toward deploying incredibly powerful AI technology without commonsense guardrails in place, which could have catastrophic consequences that make all of us less safe,”
AI company Anthropic failed to reach an agreement with the Pentagon after finding that the administration did not guarantee against the use of its model Claude for domestic surveillance or autonomous drones
The Pentagon then designated Anthropic a “supply-chain risk to national security” that could endanger the company’s future contracts with the government, sparking an ongoing legal battle.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Operaattorit eivät saa ulkoistaa älyään
https://etn.fi/index.php/opinion/19069-operaattorit-eivaet-saa-ulkoistaa-aelyaeaen
MWC 2026 -tapahtumassa yksi asia kävi selväksi: eurooppalaiset teleoperaattorit eivät enää kysy, tuleeko tekoäly osaksi verkkoja. Ne kysyvät, kuinka nopeasti se saadaan käyttöön, kirjoittaa Lenovon laiteratkaisuista Pohjoismaissa vastaava Mike Creutzer.
Lenovon Eurooppaa ja Lähi-itää koskevan CIO Playbook 2026 -raportin mukaan 97 prosenttia teleoperaattoreista odottaa tekoälyltä positiivisia vaikutuksia liiketoimintaan. Keskimääräisen tuoton arvioidaan olevan noin 230 prosenttia sijoitettua dollaria kohden. Luvut ovat kovia, mutta niiden taakse kätkeytyy paljon suurempi kysymys: kuka lopulta hallitsee tulevaisuuden televerkon älyä?
Operaattorit ovat tottuneet hallitsemaan kriittistä infrastruktuuria. Ne rakentavat, ylläpitävät ja turvaavat verkkoja, joiden varassa yhteiskunta toimii. Tekoälyn aikakaudella tämä ei kuitenkaan enää riitä. Verkkojen arvo ei synny vain mastoista, kuituyhteyksistä, konesaleista ja radiolaitteista, vaan yhä enemmän siitä ohjelmisto- ja tekoälykerroksesta, joka ohjaa niiden toimintaa.
Tässä piilee todellinen strateginen riski. Jos operaattori ulkoistaa tekoälykyvykkyytensä liian pitkälle ulkopuolisille alustoille, se voi kyllä saada nopeita hyötyjä. Samalla se voi kuitenkin luovuttaa keskeisen osan tulevasta kilpailukyvystään jonkun muun hallintaan. Riippumattomuus ei ole ominaisuus, joka voidaan lisätä jälkikäteen. Se täytyy rakentaa arkkitehtuuriin alusta alkaen.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://etn.fi/index.php/13-news/19060-ericsson-vie-tekoaelyn-tukiasemaan
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://etn.fi/index.php/13-news/19062-verkkokaupan-seuraava-askel-on-ostava-tekoaelyagentti
Salolainen Virtasenkauppa pilotoi verkkokauppaa, jossa asiakas voi tilata tuotteen keskustelemalla tekoälyagentin kanssa. Agentti käsittelee tilauksen ja lähettää ostajalle MobilePay-maksupyynnön. Kyse on pienestä pilotista, mutta se näyttää konkreettisesti, mihin verkkokauppa on siirtymässä: tekoäly ei enää vain neuvo asiakasta, vaan alkaa osallistua itse ostotapahtumaan.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Tähän on tultu: tekoälyagentit kirjoittivat jo lähes kaiken koodin
https://etn.fi/index.php/13-news/19065-taehaen-on-tultu-tekoaelyagentit-kirjoittivat-jo-laehes-kaiken-koodin
Vincit kertoo asiakasprojektista, jossa tekoälyä ei käytetty vain kehittäjän apurina, vaan ohjelmistokehityksen varsinaisena työvoimana. Quattro Liningin PTS-Kompassi-palvelu rakennettiin kahdessa kuukaudessa mallilla, jossa tekoälyagentit vastasivat lähes kaikesta koodin ja dokumentaation kirjoittamisesta.
Palvelu liittyy viemärisaneerausten suunnitteluun. Se arvioi taloyhtiön viiden vuoden viemärikorjaukset ja laskee niille korjausvelkaprosentin lähes miljoonan kuvatun viemäriputkimetrin dataan perustuen. Vincitin mukaan tekoälyä hyödynnettiin projektissa kaikissa keskeisissä työvaiheissa määrittelystä arkkitehtuuriin, käyttöliittymään, koodaukseen, testaukseen ja dokumentointiin.
- Tässä projektissa käytettiin tekoälyagentteja laajasti ohjelmistokehityksen eri vaiheissa. Tekoälyagentit vastasivat lähes kaikesta koodin ja dokumentaation kirjoittamisesta, sanoo hankkeen pääkehittäjä Jukka Mähönen.
Käytännössä työ eteni niin, että ensin tekoälyagentteja käytettiin määrittelydokumentaation tuottamiseen. Sen jälkeen vaatimuksista tehtiin tekninen toteutussuunnitelma, jossa kuvattiin myös tarvittavat arkkitehtuurimuutokset. Ihmiskehittäjä luki ja hyväksyi suunnitelman ennen kuin se annettiin tekoälyagentille toteutettavaksi.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Google haluaa AI-koodauksen avoimeksi
https://etn.fi/index.php/13-news/19067-google-haluaa-ai-koodauksen-avoimeksi
Tekoäly muuttaa nopeasti tapaa, jolla ohjelmistoja kirjoitetaan, testataan ja ylläpidetään. Samalla kehitystyökalujen taustalla olevasta infrastruktuurista on tullut aiempaa kriittisempää. Google haluaa varmistaa, että seuraavan sukupolven AI-kehitysympäristöt rakentuvat avoimelle ja toimittajariippumattomalle pohjalle.
Google on liittynyt Eclipse Foundationin strategiseksi jäseneksi. Yhtiö kertoo liittymisen tapahtuneen jo huhtikuussa 2026. Samalla Google alkaa tukea Open VSX -rekisteriä, joka on avoin ja toimittajariippumaton lisäosarekisteri VS Code -laajennusrajapintaa käyttäville kehitystyökaluille.
Open VSX on nousemassa tärkeäksi osaksi AI-koodauksen työkalupinoa. Googlen mukaan sitä käyttävät jo muun muassa Google Antigravity, AWS Kiro, Cursor ja Windsurf. Kyse ei siis ole vain perinteisestä lisäosakaupasta, vaan infrastruktuurista, jonka varassa uudet AI-avusteiset kehitysympäristöt löytävät ja asentavat laajennuksia.
Google osallistuu jatkossa Eclipse Foundationin hallitukseen ja tekniseen neuvostoon. Yhtiön mukaan tavoitteena on tukea avointa infrastruktuuria, avoimen lähdekoodin turvallisuutta ja sääntelyn vaatimusten täyttämistä. Googlen Open Source Programs Officen amanda casari sanoo, että AI muuttaa perustavalla tavalla sitä, miten kehittäjät kirjoittavat, julkaisevat ja ylläpitävät ohjelmistoja.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Eleanor Mueller / Semafor:
Sources: Trump officials discussed ways to structure government equity stakes in AI companies, with Commerce Secretary Lutnick favoring a sovereign wealth fund
Exclusive / Trump advisers weigh structure of potential AI stakes
https://www.semafor.com/article/06/17/2026/trump-advisers-weigh-structure-of-potential-ai-stakes
Senior Trump administration officials had weighed how to structure potential government equity stakes in major AI companies before the government’s export controls on Anthropic further roiled the industry.
Two top Cabinet members had discussed different ideas, people familiar with the talks told Semafor: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent favored using equity in AI firms to seed Trump Accounts, while Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s preference was that any equity be directed to a type of sovereign wealth fund.
The talks about possible AI stakes ceded to the government are still in the early stages, with no decision made yet — and a meeting with industry CEOs that President Donald Trump previewed earlier this month yet to emerge.
Given that, it’s still unclear where the Trump administration could ultimately land on an idea that remains an extremely tough sell for most of the industry beyond OpenAI, which first pitched it last year. Executives at firms like Microsoft and Meta have turned a cold shoulder in the last week alone.
Tomi Engdahl says:
How a group of teens might have just used AI to accurately predict this year’s exam questions
As the excitement around the new technology cools among the younger generations over concerns that it will steal their future careers, some are using it to level the playing field. Chloe Combi speaks to a group of students who generated the questions on their upcoming test, and how it could turn our education system upside down
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ai-predict-exam-questions-gcse-a-level-b2994632.html?fbclid=IwdGRjcASfXoZjbGNrBJ9d-mV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHvuoNMK1CpFkfBsdZtZmXNk_eqWhTDUJ8b8XNVVyFcDe3iqAC2gfr_XN-3tQ_aem_qJ2-s5AcAA0n0Tbex_51rA
Tomi Engdahl says:
“Take a stance against war profiteering. Tell the Google CEO that he is not welcome.” https://trib.al/xgieSqf