In September, OpenAI announced that its new artificial intelligence technology needed less than a week to solve the Navier-Stokes problem, a mathematical puzzle that bedeviled the world’s smartest humans for decades. In the weeks that followed, the company released a deluge of additional findings that stunned leading mathematicians and raised new questions about the future of an academic field that has long been viewed as the pinnacle of human achievement.

But the implications of A.I.’s newfound mathematical skills extend well beyond academic research. Using similar techniques, Silicon Valley is now building A.I. systems that aim to eliminate the dangerous flaws, or “bugs,” in the world’s computer software. Just as an A.I. system can prove a math problem, it can prove that a software application is bug-free — at least in theory.

This sweeping effort to guarantee the integrity of computer software, which scientists call “software verification,” is vitally important as the internet faces its biggest cybersecurity threat in decades. Now that the leading A.I. systems can hack into computer software, by identifying and exploiting its flaws with stunning speed, the world needs a new breed of A.I. that can remove these flaws.

&Truth, a new start-up based in Palo Alto, Calif., is among the many companies working to build this kind of technology. Much like the Silicon Valley start-ups Axiom and Logical Intelligence and leading A.I. labs like Anthropic and OpenAI, &Truth hopes to verify the world’s software using a specialized computer programming language called Lean, the same tool that allows A.I. technologies to solve million-dollar math problems.

Read it all.

“Using the same techniques that allowed A.I. technologies to crack a million-dollar math problem, researchers are building new systems that aim to solve the world’s cybersecurity crisis.” https://t.co/dpHfCT2BOL

— Christina Ayiotis, Esq., CRM, CIPP/E, AIGP (@christinayiotis) October 30, 2026

American spy agencies had gathered striking intelligence.

A top executive at a Singapore-based data center company was under scrutiny for possibly steering advanced Nvidia A.I. chips to China. And now American officials had concluded that she was a Chinese intelligence asset, funneling information to Beijing.

But what came next was even more alarming. Surveillance of the executive, Alice Huang or Huang Le, a Chinese citizen, revealed that she had developed a close relationship with Jensen Huang, Nvidia’s chief executive.

For years, Washington has worked to deny China the technology needed to match or surpass the United States in the intense global competition for superiority in artificial intelligence. The discovery that Beijing was getting reports from someone with direct access to Mr. Huang, one of the most powerful figures in the A.I. revolution as well as an influential ally of President Trump’s, set off alarms at the White House.

Read it all.

Wow.https://t.co/ovzrTKn4CR https://t.co/VlJTst2k4X

— Ryan Mac 🙃 (@RMac18) October 29, 2026

When Anthropic goes public as soon as next month, its initial offering will be more than just a coming-out party for the artificial intelligence company. It will also be a litmus test for the economy, with trillions of dollars at stake.

Anthropic, which makes the Claude chatbot, is a tent pole of the A.I. industry. Valued in the private markets at nearly $1 trillion and backed by more than $130 billion in funding, it could raise $100 billion in its offering and promptly become one of the world’s biggest public companies. But the stakes are even higher than that.

Anthropic and OpenAI, its chief rival, sit atop a pyramid of business partners and suppliers — infrastructure providers, chipmakers, energy companies and A.I. start-ups — that have all spent heavily over the past four years because they believe demand for A.I. products will keep growing.

Anthropic’s listing will provide the first in-depth look at the health of a key business underlying the A.I. boom — and will be a test of its durability. Is there unending appetite for A.I. services to justify the spending on chips, data centers and other infrastructure? Or will Anthropic’s performance show that there are limits?

Read it all.

What’s Riding on Anthropic’s Market Debut? Nearly Everything.https://t.co/8kyw2Ujt0M

— Darius Radzius (@DariusRadzius) October 26, 2026

The benefits and risk cloak more central driving factors among AI titans: the will to power, the desire for wealth, the hunger to be in charge. The sheer technological sweetness, too—the hard problem followed by the elegant answer. Scientists involved in technological breakthroughs always have a sweet spot.

But about four years ago, when reports of AI’s advancement began to break through to people paying attention, there was no declared objective: “We’ll split the atom, win the war, put man on the moon.” There was no clear product or labor-saving device. AI simply promised to change everything. It would create intelligence itself, an artificial but superior version of human intelligence. Then we’d figure out what to do with it, and what it will do to us. It will transform the human condition. For better or worse? Let’s strap in and find out.

Our society, our country, never decided to “do” AI. History will be perplexed by this. Something so big, so epochal, and people had no say? There was no vote, no debate. Some people started to do it and raise capital, and we shrugged. “It’s the next step.” As Sam Altman said early on, electricity, computers, the internet—now this. Americans always take the next step.

The creators and owners of AI might be pressed to answer the question: Exactly what purpose were you pursuing, and how, with a sense of the downsides, did you expect us to like it?

Read it all.

From @WSJopinion: History Raises Its Eyebrows at the Week in AI by @Peggynoonannyc https://t.co/diQJHPj1c5

— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) October 18, 2026

Top executives at Anthropic, OpenAI and other AI companies are privately gaming out scenarios for a public and political revolt after a catastrophic AI event. These officials anticipate a large-scale event, most likely a cyberattack, that shuts down access to financial services, internet connectivity, or even power and water.

The first example of significant real-world harm caused by unsafe AI would turn an already wary public further against the technology and its leaders, including Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, as well as President Trump for his reluctance to regulate it.

While scenario planning is common within many companies and national security settings — the Pentagon has been running war games for decades — the difference is that many top AI researchers and executives believe a major incident is inevitable.

Read it all.

⚠️ 🤖AI companies plot "the day after"Top executives at Anthropic, OpenAI and other AI companies are privately gaming out scenarios for a public and political revolt after a catastrophic AI event. Why it matters: These officials anticipate a large-scale event, most likely a cyberattack, that shuts down access to financial services, internet connectivity, or even power and water. The first example of significant real-world harm caused by unsafe AI would turn an already wary public further against the technology and its leaders, including Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, as well as President Trump for his reluctance to regulate it. Threat level: While scenario planning is common within many companies and national security settings — the Pentagon has been running war games for decades — the difference is that many top AI researchers and executives believe a major incident is inevitable. "OpenAI conducts preparedness exercises where teams discuss and work through a range of potential scenarios," a company spokesperson said. "These scenarios are not treated as inevitable, but are meant to help us prepare for a variety of circumstances." Anthropic declined to comment. Zoom in: The blame game will start whether a rogue-agent swarm breaks containment from an internal testing environment or a bad actor finds unexpected ways to use available models. A recent campaign targeting South Korean financial organizations — including reported breaches at two banks — shows the damage one person can do. A hacker from China allegedly used AI tools from China-developed models, including DeepSeek, to steal data from tens of thousands of bank customers. The attacker used Claude Code to ask for help finding places to sell the stolen data, according to cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike. Top AI planners assume Democrats, ascendant after the midterms, will move fast to shut down AI but will face significant challenges. An aging Congress, out of touch with the AI revolution, could find itself out of its depth. The global economy is now heavily intertwined with an AI infrastructure buildout. Slowing it down could hit an already fragile economy hard. Too many open-weight models can already be freely downloaded and used to cause harm, a problem most cybersecurity pros see as solvable only by using AI to fight rogue AI. Between the lines: The planning involves red-teaming for worst-case scenarios. It focuses mainly on racing to educate members of Congress. Company executives know regulation has no chance of passing right now, but still want to shape the legislation and policies U.S. leaders will turn to after a first catastrophic event. What we’re watching: Many AI industry insiders told Axios they believe a major event will occur in the next six to 12 months. Even with Democrats in control of the House and Senate, the companies see fractured politics as the norm, including within the Democratic Party. Some of the most heavy-handed Democratic proposals include banning superintelligence or pausing advanced AI development. Others have bipartisan support and even some industry buy-in, including a required kill switch on advanced AI. But experts have questioned the viability of trying to turn off all AI systems. The bottom line: In a real crisis, Washington can set partisan differences aside. One Democratic aide pointed to cooperation during COVID and the 2008 financial crisis. AXIOS

— Ares, Information Service (@Aresinfoservice) October 10, 2026

America’s landscape is undergoing one of the largest transformations in decades. The country houses nearly 100 hyperscale data centers, which consume at least 100 megawatts of power at peak operation — enough to power about 80,000 homes.

There are another 120 under construction, according to Cleanview, a market intelligence company tracking data center development. Four hundred and sixty more are planned. Roughly 40 percent of today’s hyperscale data centers were built on previously developed land. The rest took over farmland, shrubland and forest.

Data centers have existed for years but have never been quite this large. “Traditionally it’s just one building situated in an urban area,” Adams said. Now, hyperscalers start with one building and then expand to “two, three, four, five, six buildings.” Meta is constructing a data center campus called Hyperion on a tract of land in rural Louisiana that will dwarf Manhattan’s Central Park. The project is huge but may soon be overtaken. If all the data centers currently planned are built on schedule, according to Cleanview’s data, by 2030 the Hyperion campus will rank only at No. 5 in the U.S. by square footage.

Read it all.

America’s landscape is undergoing one of the largest transformations in decades.

To meet the insatiable demand for computer processing to power AI, tech companies and their developers nationwide are building ever-larger data centers. https://t.co/dGFucHTl8D

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) September 28, 2026

Some computations are so hardcore that it takes a facility of extraordinary power to even think about running them.

These are the supercomputers – massive facilities humming with the corpulence of their GPUs and CPUs, crunching applications that would take a desktop computer hundreds to thousands of years.

A commercially accessible quantum computer has just accomplished a feat that suggests this newer technology could one day leave supercomputers in the dust.

In just 19 seconds, IBM’s Nighthawk r2 processor generated a million samples – a task estimated to take a supercomputer around 110 years.

Read it all.

A Quantum Computer Just Did in 19 Seconds What Could Take a Supercomputer 110 Years https://t.co/sdqaoE9yKO

— Randy Kemp (@randylewiskemp) September 29, 2026

Robots — the sector Mr. Xi first championed in his 2014 speech — have been a particular success. China has more than 2 million robots in its factories, more than in the rest of the world combined. Some Chinese researchers have argued that robots may be more promising for achieving general-purpose intelligence than large language models — Silicon Valley’s chosen method — because they can learn from interactions with the physical world.

Those rapid gains have fueled anxiety in Washington, where fears of being overtaken by China have become the main argument against reining in A.I. A congressional advisory group warned that China’s quick adoption of A.I. in robots and other practical applications would generate huge amounts of new data that could then be used to further improve its models. In July, the U.S. government proposed restricting imports of humanoid robots, a move Beijing denounced as discriminatory.

For people like Mr. Liang, the robotics company founder in Shenzhen, the signs of China’s progress are already all around.

He still admires American entrepreneurs, but he no longer looks only to them for inspiration. He wears smart glasses from Huawei. He has hired interns from American universities who are eager to learn from China’s robotics expertise.

“Before, we all used American technology as the benchmark, and we’d joke about ‘C-to-C’: ‘copy to China,’” Mr. Liang said. “I think it’s the mission of this generation of Chinese entrepreneurs to let the world know that some Chinese companies are different.”

Read it all.

How China’s Leader Plans to Win the Future With A.I.

A decade ago, Xi Jinping asked if China could master A.I. His push is remaking the economy, challenging the United States and keeping society under control. @vwang3 https://t.co/1NxAUK6oSR via @NYTimes

— Ashis Basu 🇨🇦 ashis.bluesky.social (@BasuAshis) September 23, 2026

In 1888, George Eastman marketed the Kodak camera with the memorable advertising promise: “You press the button, we do the rest.” Photography, a complicated task requiring considerable technical knowledge, suddenly became accessible to ordinary consumers.  

Eastman created a company that became an early practitioner of welfare capitalism. Eastman issued weekly paychecks and distributed bonuses and profit-sharing payments. In 1919, Eastman gave employees one-third of his personal holdings in Kodak stock, then worth $10 million. The firm later established retirement annuities, life insurance, and disability benefits. Eastman believed that the goodwill and loyalty of employees were important sources of Kodak’s prosperity.  

After World War II, major American firms adopted the Kodak model of investing in their employees. In The End of Loyalty, former Wall Street Journal reporter Rick Wartzman describes the 1940s and 1950s as a working-class golden age in which firms such as General Motors, General Electric, Procter & Gamble, and Coca-Cola felt obligated to “lend a helping hand to workers” and to “shield them against the vicissitudes of life.”    

Paul Osterman’s important new book, Disposable Workers: The Transformation of Employment, describes how thoroughly that model has eroded.  

Read it all.

The Unravelling of The American Employment Compact – Public Discourse https://t.co/0Vs231wbO3

— Allen Mendenhall (@allenmendenhall) September 9, 2026

Nvidia was  named in 1993 after the Latin word for envy. Sure enough, the American colossus inspires plenty of it. Insatiable global demand for its graphics-processing units (GPUs), the chips that power artificial intelligence, has made Nvidia the world’s most valuable company, worth $5.4trn. Next year it may also become the most profitable, generating $370bn in net income. By 2029 its sales could hit $1trn.

Jensen Huang, Nvidia’s boss, is truly the magician at the heart of the AI boom. His firm’s share price is 14 times what it was on ChatGPT’s release in late 2022. The ten biggest public companies championing AI make up 40% of the value of the S&P 500 index. Nvidia alone accounts for 8% and unlike, say, Apple or Tesla, which make smartphones and cars, it is almost solely a bet on AI. The company has produced about 15 cents of every dollar the American stock market has returned since 2023—returns that have kept consumers spending despite rising interest rates, tariffs and a war with Iran.

Yet many also see Mr Huang as a magician in a more worrying sense, fearing that he is an illusionist inflating a dangerous bubble. Through $1trn-worth of deals, Nvidia provides data-centre landlords and AI labs with cash or guarantees so that they can buy its GPUs. Some call it the “bank of AI”. At the very least, Nvidia’s critics say, its financial engineering smacks of the “vendor financing” which pumped up the revenues of networking-gear makers like Cisco in the dotcom mania of 2000-01, whose collapse brought about a recession.

Look more closely, however, and the worries are mostly unjustified. If Nvidia’s bets on ai come good, they could accelerate the technology’s adoption, boosting productivity and living standards. If they misfire, the cost will fall chiefly on Nvidia’s shareholders. That is how capitalism is supposed to work.

Read it all.

Tapa y tema principal de The Economist esta semana dedicada a Jensen Huang, Nvidia y su liderazgo en la revolución de la #InteligenciaArtificial.
👉🏼https://t.co/ai8ulqpCSo pic.twitter.com/zhOJP63BVm

— Aldo Lema – Uruguay (@AldoLema_uy) September 3, 2026

Artificial Intelligence poses a double challenge to the human mind. Not only will the most advanced models soon be able to think better than people, but AI has consequences for humanity which are so uncertain, so potentially vast and are approaching at such a rapid pace that even the best brains flinch. An example is Elon Musk.

In our long interview with him this week, featured in The Insider and our Business section, the engineer and entrepreneur sets out two paradoxes and one contradiction. The first paradox is that one of the world’s most power-hungry tycoons is enthusiastically helping create a technology that he says will render him—and all other human beings—powerless after as little as five years. The second is that the world’s richest man says he is preparing for a world of infinite abundance, where money, including his $750bn fortune, no longer matters. And the contradiction is that, despite these stated beliefs, Mr Musk continues to act as if they were not true.

Mr Musk is divisive. His political views, disseminated to his 240m followers on X, strike many as plain-speaking and strike many more, including The Economist, as plainly bigoted. By his own admission, his attempt to use DOGE to scythe through the federal bureaucracy went wrong.

But he is also one of a handful of men who are pioneering AI and who thereby have an outsize influence on its trajectory. When he speaks, he reflects the debates they are having. His data centres in space could power AI’s future. For all his political polemics, he has a record of being right about technology in fields such as electric cars, rockets and satellite communications that confounded other engineers and entrepreneurs. For those reasons, his claims about AI repay examination. Unfortunately, such an exercise only underlines how ill-prepared the world is for a technology that may soon throw everything up in the air.

Read it all.

AI is charging ahead. Not even its creators—including @elonmusk—know how to keep up https://t.co/8UwsIS9FQY pic.twitter.com/TndVl6q8ir

— The Economist (@TheEconomist) July 23, 2026

“It’s going to be an absolute nightmare,” says an executive at a big American tech company. He is talking about an emerging problem for businesses that use artificial intelligence. AI agents—bots that can read, interpret and act—use masses of processing power and have started to run up huge bills. As they proliferate, the problem will grow. Big companies, the executive points out, typically use hundreds of software programs. If each of those offer agents (as they probably will), AI costs could easily spiral out of control.

Budget management is a new worry for AI adopters. Not long ago employees were encouraged to binge on the technology, as bosses and investors saw spending as a sign of innovation. Burning through vast numbers of tokens—the chunks of text that models process, which are often used as a unit of pricing—became a badge of honour; techies dubbed it “tokenmaxxing”. Companies showed off staff’s AI use on internal leaderboards. Meta’s display awarded top users titles like “Token Legend”.

Such incentives partly explain the boom in AI spending. Another contributing factor is a change in the way enterprises use the technology. Token-heavy applications, such as reasoning models and agents, are growing more popular. In some cases agents build their own agents, sending costs higher still. Ramp, a corporate-credit-card provider, analyses its clients’ transaction data to shed light on how they use AI. It reckons their overall spending has risen 13-fold in the past year. In April Uber said that it had already spent its annual AI budget in four months. Other firms are experiencing similar problems. One reportedly spent $500m on AI tokens in a month. Sam Altman, the boss of OpenAI, has described mounting customer costs as “a huge issue”.

For now, the problem is concentrated. The top spenders tend to be tech firms….

Read it all.

Burning through vast numbers of tokens—the chunks of text that models process, which are often used as a unit of pricing—was once a badge of honour. Now budget management is a worry for AI adopters https://t.co/TZsf1H2BHC

— The Economist (@TheEconomist) June 16, 2026

A new style of architecture is rising in the sprawling suburbs of the Sonoran Desert: windowless data centers that hum 24 hours a day and guzzle as much electricity as a midsize city.

As Microsoft and other tech giants expand their footprints in one of the nation’s largest data-center markets, a high-stakes battle is unfolding over how to pay for the massive power-grid upgrades needed to drive the AI revolution. 

Arizona Public Service, the state’s largest utility, sits at the center of the firestorm. APS is proposing a 45% electricity-rate increase for “extra-large energy users,” primarily data centers, and a roughly 14.5% increase for residential customers.

Nearly everyone is unhappy.

Consumer advocates warn the plan would shift the financial risks of the AI build-out to households already struggling with high summer electricity bills and temperatures that often hit triple digits. If the AI boom fizzles or the energy consumption of data centers wanes, they worry residents could be left paying off the infrastructure upgrades years from now.

Read it all.

Phoenix Is a Data-Center Mecca—and Test Case for How to Pay for AI’s Power Needs
State’s largest utility is proposing a 45% electricity-rate increase for data centers and a 14.5% hike for households. No one is happy.https://t.co/m1xMQtoJsq

— Giovanni Staunovo🛢 (@staunovo) June 4, 2026

Elon Musk’s SpaceX pulled back the curtain on a business empire that has racked up ballooning losses and debt after acquiring a cash-hungry startup, and pumping billions of dollars into futuristic endeavors ranging from AI to a Mars rocket.

The prospectus that SpaceX filed Wednesday for an IPO of unprecedented size boiled down to a well-worn strategy that entrepreneurs commonly hawk up and down Wall Street: in order to make money, we need to spend money. And nowhere are the outlays larger than in space and artificial intelligence.

“The big takeaway for me is that SpaceX is now an AI company,” said Chad Anderson, an early SpaceX investor and founder of Space Capital.

Musk is seeking to pull off the unprecedented feat of achieving a $2 trillion valuation from the outset, an audacious plan that’s set to transform both the public and private markets if it succeeds. At the same time, the prospectus lays bare concerns over whether private companies with limited financial disclosures and largely illiquid shares are reaching unjustified valuations in venture capital-led funding rounds.

Read it all.

Elon Musk is seeking to pull off the unprecedented feat of achieving a $2 trillion valuation from the outset, an audacious plan that’s set to transform markets if it succeeds. Read more: https://t.co/9IYTIOGzoh

📷: Brandon Bell/Getty Images pic.twitter.com/1EFis4o0TP

— Bloomberg (@business) May 21, 2026

I am not, by temperament, a gambling man. As a suburban dad with four kids, a mortgage, and a minivan, I’m more likely to be found wrestling a toddler into a car seat than scouring moneylines or consulting betting touts. And as a practicing Mormon, I am prohibited from indulging in games of chance. Besides, I had always thought of gambling as a waste of time. This makes me an outlier among my generational peers: Since 2018, Americans have wagered more than half a trillion dollars on sports, and roughly half of men ages 18 to 49 have an active account with an online sportsbook.

When I set out to report on the sports-betting industry—its explosive growth, its sudden cultural ubiquity, and what it’s doing to America—my editors thought I should experience the phenomenon firsthand. Mindful of my religious constraints, they proposed a work-around: The Atlantic would stake me $10,000 to gamble with over the course of the upcoming NFL season. The magazine would cover any losses, and—to ensure my ongoing emotional investment—split any winnings with me, 50–50. Surely God would approve of such an arrangement, my editors reasoned, because I wouldn’t be risking my own hard-earned money.

This spiritual loophole intrigued me. But for the sake of my soul, I decided I’d better consult a higher ecclesiastical authority than The Atlantic’s masthead.

A few days later, I sat across from my bishop, explaining the experiment and watching a look of pastoral concern come over his face. After some consideration, he said (a bit tentatively, if I’m being honest), “I don’t think you’re doing anything wrong.” He grasped the difference between gambling with my own money and using my employer’s for research purposes. But he had also seen too many lives wrecked by vice to let me leave without a warning. He told me stories he’d heard about upstanding family men who had let an initially modest gambling habit ruin them, and a cautionary tale about a churchgoing lawyer who developed an unhealthy curiosity about sex work after handling a prostitution case and wound up devastating his family.

I promised the bishop that I would steer clear of slippery slopes. “This will really just be a journalistic exercise,” I assured him.

Read it all.

The Atlantic: Sucker – My year as a degenerate gambler – A fantastic longform article on gambling https://t.co/9ShN6LGFwD

— Aaron M. Renn 🇺🇸 (@aaron_renn) March 13, 2026

It’s hard to recall a regulator who has done as much damage to medical innovation in as little time as Vinay Prasad. In his latest drive-by shooting, the leader of the Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine division rejected Moderna’s mRNA flu vaccine without even a cursory review. This is arbitrary government at its worst.

The FDA rarely refuses to review a drug or vaccine application. Our sources say the FDA has rejected only about 4% of applications without a review, typically when they are missing important information. That wasn’t the case with Moderna.

Dr. Prasad spiked Moderna’s flu vaccine because its Phase 3 trial was putatively not “adequate and well-controlled.” He quibbled that the control group in Moderna’s late-stage trial didn’t receive the “best-available standard of care.” He decides what is “best.”

Moderna launched a global randomized controlled trial in September 2024 with 41,000 participants, half of whom received its vaccine. The other half received a standard flu vaccine as a control. The FDA blessed its trial design, and agency staffers gave Moderna a thumbs up to apply for approval last August based on the results. Its vaccine was 27% more effective at preventing symptomatic cases of flu and 49% more effective against hospitalization than the standard flu vaccine.

Read it all.

The WSJ Editorial Board weighs in:
“It’s hard to recall a regulator who has done as much damage to medical innovation in as little time as Vinay Prasad. In his latest drive-by shooting, the leader of the Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine division rejected Moderna ’s mRNA flu…

— Amy Siskind 🏳️‍🌈 (@Amy_Siskind) February 13, 2026

‘In large corporations and administrations, justification and self-protection have become the primary motive in place of achievement. In this world, intuition is not talked about openly, but relied on surreptitiously.’

–Gerd Gigerenzer, The Intelligence of Intuition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023)

Gerd Gigerenzer:

Why simple rules of thumb often outperform complex models.https://t.co/FrPo8Csqfd

— GuruAnaerobic (@GuruAnaerobic) March 2, 2021

Those who believe in Elon Musk are convinced both by his vision to go where no one has ventured before and his ability to pay for it—what some call the “Elon backstop”. Mr Musk’s announcement on February 2nd that he will merge SpaceX, which builds rockets and sells satellite broadband, with xAI, his artificial-intelligence lab, was not short of ambition. The world’s richest man declared that the new company would “extend the light of consciousness to the stars”. Back on Earth, however, it is getting harder to see how Mr Musk’s numbers add up.

The transaction values the new entity at $1.25trn; investors in SpaceX will be entitled to 80%, with the remainder going to xAI’s owners (Mr Musk holds a controlling stake in both). The stated rationale behind the tie-up is that the companies will work together to launch a fleet of data centres into space, giving xAI a big advantage in the race to develop cutting-edge models while furnishing SpaceX with a new line of business. More immediately, combining the two could further boost interest in a public listing expected this summer.

By bringing SpaceX and xAI together, however, Mr Musk is saddling a money-spinning space champion with a loss-making AI laggard. At the same time, he is reshaping Tesla, the carmaker he runs, into a “physical-AI company” focused on self-driving taxis and humanoid robots. If the latest wave of AI proves as transformative as some expect, these bold gambles might just pay off. If not, Mr Musk’s business empire could well be in jeopardy.

Read it all.

The fates of xAI, SpaceX and Tesla are increasingly intertwined https://t.co/UlUWKowPVk

— The Economist (@TheEconomist) February 4, 2026

Corporate America’s latest hot job is also one of the oldest in history: storyteller.

Some companies want a media relations manager by a slightly flashier name. Others need people to produce blogs, podcasts, case studies and more types of branded content to attract customers, investors and potential recruits. All seem to use the word differently than in its usual application to novelists, playwrights and raconteurs.

“As storytellers,” a Google job ad said last month, “we play an integral role in driving customer acquisition and long-term growth.”

The listing sought a customer storytelling manager to join the company’s Google Cloud storytelling team. One article the unit published this year was titled, “Lowe’s innovation: How Vertex AI helps create interactive shopping experiences.”

Microsoft’s security organization meanwhile is recruiting a senior director overseeing narrative and storytelling, described as part cybersecurity technologist, part communicator and part marketer. Compliance technology firm Vanta this month began hiring for a head of storytelling, offering a salary of up to $274,000. Productivity app Notion recently merged its communications, social media and influencer functions into one 10-person, so-called storytelling team.

Read it all.

The hot new job at tech companies is leading "storytelling."

The term doubled on LinkedIn job posts in the U.S since last year. The WSJ writes:

"Compliance technology firm Vanta this month began hiring for a head of storytelling, offering a salary of up to $274,000."… pic.twitter.com/TQzUXPwl8g

— Natalie Sportelli (@N_Sportelli) December 15, 2025

What uses of AI are in your life that the rest of us might not yet have?

Yesterday, I stayed up far too late watching a film and afterwards, I added to a table that I’ve made in Copilot, which basically records all the films I love, lists them by date. I add my personal notes, it gives me a link to the film poster. I can keep just saying, What would be a similar one?

It’s possible to ask your AI to do pretty much any knowledge work task — just like you might ask an assistant to organize your life. The more obscure, creative [and] challenging the task you’re going to ask your AI, the better. 1

¹ Suleyman also appears to be a keen reader; the bookshelf behind him in Seattle offered a glimpse of his tastes. Titles included the most recent books by Michael Wolff and Robert Kaplan, as well as The Tech Coup: How to Save Democracy from Silicon Valley, and Gaza: An Inquest Into Its Martyrdom.

Have you used AI for autonomous tasks? Has it booked tickets or bought a gift for you? I know this is the promise of Copilot Actions — it’s just not available in my region, so I haven’t been able to try it myself.

We’re still experimenting. It can do it. It doesn’t always get it right. It’s in ‘dev mode,’ so not generally available just yet.

When it does work, it is the most magical thing you’ve ever seen. It essentially types stuff into your browser, clicks on buttons, opens up new tabs. It can look at your history, [and] personalize the purchase or the response to you.

Read it all.

AI is “already superhuman,” says Microsoft AI chief Mustafa Suleyman in a Weekend Interview that touches on medical superintelligence, AI talent wars and Copilot as a companion. https://t.co/sVwI0jOVLA a través de @business pic.twitter.com/JmGRqTAEkX

— maria betancur n (@mariabetancur9) December 12, 2025

When describing the health of the US economy, there is a temptation among economists, market analysts, and politicians to argue that the only true picture of our current situation is a sweeping portrait — only by looking at the broadest of aggregate statistics can you determine the state of play, they argue. But the wide view can ignore important developments unfolding under the surface. Sometimes, even the healthiest-looking person might have high cholesterol.

Right now, the economy seems OK on the surface. GDP growth has been running north of 3% for the last two quarters. In the labor market, the boilerplate appears to be that conditions are gradually cooling, but nothing more, nothing less. For example, despite the slowdown in new hiring, the unemployment rate of 4.4% is still low by historical standards. But there are serious dangers lurking beneath the surface of our economy, and it is better to clearly identify them than to ignore them in favor of broad aggregate measures.

Major employers in industries like homebuilding and restaurants are looking shaky, and they offer ominous signs about the direction of the overall economy. By getting a sense of what sectors and industries are struggling, you can get a forward-looking sense of the economy’s trajectory and a clearer-eyed view of the possibility of recession.

Read it all.

Read of the Weekend. Once more, Dutta with devastating Charts. @RenMacLLC https://t.co/o5t4kotvIL

— tom keene (@tomkeene) November 24, 2025

No one worries about the insurance industry quite like Tom Gober.

From his home office outside of Pittsburgh, the forensic accountant has been tracking, documenting and highlighting the weaknesses of the $9.3 trillion sector responsible for the financial well-being of millions of Americans.

“I’ve been seeing warning signs for years, and I’ve been very vocal about it,” Gober, 66, said in a recent interview in his living room. More recently, he’s been paying attention to what he says is the most troubling development yet: The influx of private equity’s billions.

The industry waves off its critics as needlessly alarmist, always predicting a disaster that never comes. But that mid-October afternoon, Gober’s phone began to light up. Josh Wander, the co-founder of 777 Partners, a private equity firm on Gober’s radar, had been charged with cheating investors and lenders out of almost $500 million — an alleged fraud enabled in part by its opaque and intricate ties with some US insurance companies.

Read it all.

Some great reporting from Bloomberg this week about how private equity is making a grab for life insurance money and hiding it away where traders are gambling it without much oversight. https://t.co/QNe2jf8OzO pic.twitter.com/AIwLA0GEQT

— Heidi N. Moore (@moorehn) November 19, 2025

The financing package stitched together for Meta’s humongous Hyperion data center campus in Louisiana made Alphaville curious about just how much energy the new AI infrastructure will consume if it all comes online.

After all, massive new projects are being announced almost every week, in what even KKR’s digital infrastructure lead called a “bragawatts” phenomenon in MainFT on Monday.

The latest example is OpenAI on Thursday revealing plans for a 1+ gigawatt data centre hub in Michigan. Together with previously announced “Stargate” projects this brings the total to over 8 gigawatts — close to the 10 target it floated earlier this year. This will cost over $450 billion over the next three years, according to the company that spends more on marketing and employee stock options than it makes in revenue.

So how many data center projects have now been started or announced? Which ones will actually happen and which ones are fantasy? As Barclays noted last week, tracking “what is real vs. speculative is a full-time job”, but the bank has forced some poor sell-side plebs to at least tally all the announcements and collect some rudimentary details.

So what is the total so far? With OpenAI’s Michigan project they now total 46 gigawatts of computing power. Apologies for the virtual shouting, but this seems a bit mad.

These centers will cost $2.5 trillion to build, according to Barclays, to service an industry that still doesn’t turn a profit. But the maddest bit arguably is how much energy they will require once completed. Using Barclays’ 1.2 “Power Use Effectiveness” ratio, all these data centres — if they are all completed — would need 55.2 gigawatts of electricity to function at full capacity.

If we also use Barclays’ rule of thumb that 1 gigawatt can power over 800,000 American homes, it means that these data centres will consume as much energy as 44.2 million households — almost three times California’s entire housing stock.

Read it all.

Hyperscalers announced new data centres with 46GW of computing power

>Cost: $2.5tn to build
>Require 55GW to 65GW of base load electricity

That's more than the total installed capacity of Poland or Sweden, 6 times New Zealand or Singapore, 50% of UKhttps://t.co/7j43C7QUwV pic.twitter.com/LrEfaKvpEk

— Assaad Razzouk (@AssaadRazzouk) November 4, 2025

The nation’s largest employers have a new message for office workers: help not wanted.

Amazon.com said this week that it would cut 14,000 corporate jobs, with plans to eliminate as much as 10% of its white-collar workforce eventually. United Parcel Service said Tuesday that it had reduced its management workforce by about 14,000 positions over the past 22 months, days after the retailer Target said it would cut 1,800 corporate roles.

Earlier in October, white-collar workers from companies including Rivian Automotive, Molson Coors, Booz Allen Hamilton and General Motors received pink slips—or learned that they would come soon. Added up, tens of thousands of newly laid off white-collar workers in America are entering a stagnant job market with seemingly no place for them.

At 5:30 a.m. on Tuesday, Kelly Williamson woke up to an alarming text from her employer, Amazon’s Whole Foods Market, urging her to check her email.

“Review asap and stay home from work today,” the message said. Williamson’s role on the asset-protection team was being eliminated. The badge and laptop for the 55-year-old from Austin, Texas, were deactivated. She was given 90 days to look for another job at the company. She said her personal belongings are being mailed to her.

Read it all.

Tens of Thousands of White-Collar Jobs Are Disappearing as #AI Starts to Bite#RiseoftheRobotshttps://t.co/xvlekZBJIq via @WSJ

— Martin Ford (@MFordFuture) October 29, 2025

Editor’s note: Today, we’re announcing research that shows — for the first time in history — that a quantum computer can successfully run a verifiable algorithm on hardware, surpassing even the fastest classical supercomputers (13,000x faster). It can compute the structure of a molecule, and paves a path towards real-world applications. Today’s advance builds on decades of work, and six years of major breakthroughs. Back in 2019, we demonstrated that a quantum computer could solve a problem that would take the fastest classical supercomputer thousands of years. Then, late last year (2024), our new Willow quantum chip showed how to dramatically suppress errors, solving a major issue that challenged scientists for nearly 30 years. Today’s breakthrough moves us much closer to quantum computers that can drive major discoveries in areas like medicine and materials science.

Imagine you’re trying to find a lost ship at the bottom of the ocean. Sonar technology might give you a blurry shape and tell you, “There’s a shipwreck down there.” But what if you could not only find the ship but also read the nameplate on its hull?

That’s the kind of unprecedented precision we’ve just achieved with our Willow quantum chip. Today, we’re announcing a major algorithmic breakthrough that marks a significant step towards a first real-world application. Just published in Nature, we have demonstrated the first-ever verifiable quantum advantage running the out-of-order time correlator (OTOC) algorithm, which we call Quantum Echoes.

Read it all.

"Google claims ‘quantum advantage’ again — but researchers are sceptical" by Elizabeth Gibney of @Nature https://t.co/mD54zWFEKE
Original @Google article, "Observation of constructive interference at the edge of quantum ergodicity," is at https://t.co/tY8MiIq4Sn @JointQuICS pic.twitter.com/nh26Z4QWzA

— Charles W. Clark (@g8ge) October 23, 2025

Josh Batson no longer has time for social media.

The AI researcher’s only comparable dopamine hit these days is on Anthropic’s Slack workplace-messaging channels, where he explores chatter about colleagues’ theories and experiments on large language models and architecture.

Batson is among a group of core artificial-intelligence researchers and executives who are facing a relentless grind, racing to keep pace with a seemingly endless cycle of disruption in pursuit of systems with superhuman intelligence.

Inside Silicon Valley’s biggest AI labs, top researchers and executives are regularly working 80 to 100 hours a week. Several top researchers compared the circumstances to war.

“We’re basically trying to speedrun 20 years of scientific progress in two years,” said Batson, a research scientist at Anthropic. Extraordinary advances in AI systems are happening “every few months,” he said. “It’s the most interesting scientific question in the world right now.”

Read it all.

Take an early look at the front page of today's Wall Street Journal https://t.co/5Z4hcbTVXK pic.twitter.com/NrLMRqJWUU

— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) October 23, 2025

Sequoia Capital’s chief operating officer resigned over comments made by partner Shaun Maguire that she regarded as Islamophobic, as political debates sow division at one of Silicon Valley’s most powerful venture capital firms.

Sumaiya Balbale — a practising Muslim who has spoken publicly about how her gender, ethnicity and faith have shaped her career — stepped down after five years at the company in August. Her decision to leave was precipitated by Maguire’s social media posts, according to three people with knowledge of the matter.

Maguire, an outspoken and high-profile investor who is close to Elon Musk, wrote on X in July that New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani “comes from a culture that lies about everything. It’s literally a virtue to lie if it advances his Islamist agenda. The West will learn this lesson the hard way.”

Balbale complained to other senior partners at the firm, who declined to take action against Maguire, arguing he was just exercising his right to free speech, the people said. She left soon after, feeling her position was untenable.

Read it all (subscription).

Sequoia COO quit over Shaun Maguire’s comments about Mamdani https://t.co/3WQUHQ0Qnd

— FT Technology News (@fttechnews) October 22, 2025

Over the past two decades, no company has done more to shape the American workplace than Amazon. In its ascent to become the nation’s second-largest employer, it has hired hundreds of thousands of warehouse workers, built an army of contract drivers and pioneered using technology to hire, monitor and manage employees.

Now, interviews and a cache of internal strategy documents viewed by The New York Times reveal that Amazon executives believe the company is on the cusp of its next big workplace shift: replacing more than half a million jobs with robots.

Amazon’s U.S. work force has more than tripled since 2018 to almost 1.2 million. But Amazon’s automation team expects the company can avoid hiring more than 160,000 people in the United States it would otherwise need by 2027. That would save about 30 cents on each item that Amazon picks, packs and delivers to customers.

Executives told Amazon’s board last year that they hoped robotic automation would allow the company to continue to avoid adding to its U.S. work force in the coming years, even though they expect to sell twice as many products by 2033. That would translate to more than 600,000 people whom Amazon didn’t need to hire.

Read it all.

Amazon, the second largest employer in the U.S., aims to replace more than half a million jobs with robots, internal documents show. https://t.co/jzxzhcMmfo

— The New York Times (@nytimes) October 21, 2025

Meta will use conversations people have with its chatbots to personalize advertising and content across its platforms, in a sign of how tech companies plan to make money from artificial intelligence.

The owner of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp on Wednesday said it would use the content of chats with its Meta AI to create advertising recommendations across its suite of apps.

“People will already expect that their Meta AI interactions are being used for these personalization purposes,” said Christy Harris, privacy and data policy manager at Meta….

Big Tech groups and AI labs have invested billions of dollars in developing and running popular chatbots, but have only recently started to indicate how they will monetise the technology.

Read it all.

Meta to mine AI interactions to help target advertising https://t.co/xtjXT3Hh8X

— FT Technology News (@fttechnews) October 1, 2025

Data centers are proliferating in Virginia and a blind man in Baltimore is suddenly contending with sharply higher power bills.

The Maryland city is well over an hour’s drive from the northern Virginia region known as Data Center Alley. But Kevin Stanley, a 57-year-old who survives on disability payments, says his energy bills are about 80% higher than they were about three years ago. “They’re going up and up,” he said. “You wonder, ‘What is your breaking point?’”

It’s an increasingly dramatic ripple effect of the AI boom as energy-hungry data centers send power costs to records in much of the US, pulling everyday households into paying for the digital economy.

The power needs of the massive complexes are rapidly driving up electricity bills — piling onto the rising prices for food, housing and other essentials already straining consumers. That’s starting to have economic and political reverberations across the country as utilities and local officials wrestle over how to divvy up the costs. Yet those same facilities are a linchpin of US leadership in the global AI race.

A Bloomberg News analysis of wholesale electricity prices for tens of thousands of locations across the country reveals the effects of the AI boom on the power market with unprecedented granularity. The locations and prices were tracked and aggregated monthly by Grid Status, an energy data analytics platform. Bloomberg analyzed this data in relation to data center locations, from DC Byte, and found that electricity now costs as much as 267% more for a single month than it did five years ago in areas located near significant data center activity.

Read it all.

AI data centers are sending US power bills soaring, Bloomberg analysis shows
🇺🇸⚡📈

Wholesale prices more than doubled since 2020 in some markets, but those increases arent equal

Of the nodes where prices rose, over 70% are within 50 miles of significant data center activity pic.twitter.com/CwhudAlEcU

— Stephen Stapczynski (@SStapczynski) September 30, 2025