Pesquisar

Conheça novas pessoas, crie conexões e faça novos amigos

  • Computerworld UK compartilhou um link
    2025-06-15 06:32:56 - Traduzir -
    Meta officially ‘acqui-hires’ Scale AI — will it draw regulator scrutiny?

    Meta is looking to up its weakening AI game with a key talent grab.

    Following days of speculation, the social media giant has confirmed that Scale AI’s founder and CEO, Alexandr Wang, is joining Meta to work on its AI efforts.

    Meta will invest billion in Scale AI as part of the deal, and will have a 49% stake in the AI startup, which specializes in data labeling and model evaluation services. Other key Scale employees will also move over to Meta, while CSO Jason Droege will step in as Scale’s interim CEO.

    This move comes as the Mark Zuckerberg-led company goes all-in on building a new research lab focused on “superintelligence,” the next step beyond artificial general intelligence.

    The arrangement also reflects a growing trend in big tech, where industry giants are buying companies without really buying them — what’s increasingly being referred to as “acqui-hiring.” It involves recruiting key personnel from a company, licensing its technology, and selling its products, but leaving it as a private entity.

    “This is fundamentally a massive ‘acqui-hire’ play disguised as a strategic investment,” said Wyatt Mayham, lead AI consultant at Northwest AI Consulting. “While Meta gets Scale’s data infrastructure, the real prize is Wang joining Meta to lead their superintelligence lab. At the billion price tag, this might be the most expensive individual talent acquisition in tech history.”

    Closing gaps with competitors

    Meta has struggled to keep up with OpenAI, Anthropic, and other key competitors in the AI race, recently even delaying the launch of its new flagship model, Behemoth, purportedly due to internal concerns about its performance. It has also seen the departure of several of its top researchers.

     “It’s not really a secret at this point that Meta’s Llama 4 models have had significant performance issues,” Mayham said. “Zuck is essentially betting that Wang’s track record building AI infrastructure can solve Meta’s alignment and model quality problems faster than internal development.” And, he added, Scale’s enterprise-grade human feedback loops are exactly what Meta’s Llama models need to compete with ChatGPT and Claude on reliability and task-following.

    Data quality, a key focus for Wang, is a big factor in solving those performance problems. He wrote in a note to Scale employees on Thursday, later posted on X, that when he founded Scale AI in 2016 amidst some of the early AI breakthroughs, “it was clear even then that data was the lifeblood of AI systems, and that was the inspiration behind starting Scale.”

    But despite Meta’s huge investment, Scale AI is underscoring its commitment to sovereignty: “Scale remains an independent leader in AI, committed to providing industry-leading AI solutions and safeguarding customer data,” the company wrote in a blog post. “Scale will continue to partner with leading AI labs, multinational enterprises, and governments to deliver expert data and technology solutions through every phase of AI’s evolution.”

    Allowing big tech to side-step notification

    But while it’s only just been inked, the high-profile deal is already raising some eyebrows. According to experts, arrangements like these allow tech companies to acquire top talent and key technologies in a side-stepping manner, thus avoiding regulatory notification requirements.

    The US Federal Trade Commissionrequires mergers and acquisitions totaling more than million be reported in advance. Licensing deals or the mass hiring-away of a company’s employees don’t have this requirement. This allows companies to move more quickly, as they don’t have to undergo the lengthy federal review process.

    Microsoft’s deal with Inflection AI is probably one of the highest-profile examples of the “acqui-hiring” trend. In March 2024, the tech giant paid the startup million in licensing fees and hired much of its team, including co-founders Mustafa Suleymanand Karén Simonyan.

    Similarly, last year Amazon hired more than 50% of Adept AI’s key personnel, including its CEO, to focus on AGI. Google also inked a licensing agreement with Character AI and hired a majority of its founders and researchers.

    However, regulators have caught on, with the FTC launching inquiries into both the Microsoft-Inflection and Amazon-Adept deals, and the US Justice Departmentanalyzing Google-Character AI.

    Reflecting ‘desperation’ in the AI industry

    Meta’s decision to go forward with this arrangement anyway, despite that dicey backdrop, seems to indicate how anxious the company is to keep up in the AI race.

    “The most interesting piece of this all is the timing,” said Mayham. “It reflects broader industry desperation. Tech giants are increasingly buying parts of promising AI startups to secure key talent without acquiring full companies, following similar patterns with Microsoft-Inflection and Google-Character AI.”

    However, the regulatory risks are “real but nuanced,” he noted. Meta’s acquisition could face scrutiny from antitrust regulators, particularly as the company is involved in an ongoing FTC lawsuit over its Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions. While the 49% ownership position appears designed to avoid triggering automatic thresholds, US regulatory bodies like the FTC and DOJ can review minority stake acquisitions under the Clayton Antitrust Act if they seem to threaten competition.

    Perhaps more importantly, Meta is not considered a leader in AGI development and is trailing OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google, meaning regulators may not consider the deal all that concerning.

    All told, the arrangement certainly signals Meta’s recognition that the AI race has shifted from a compute and model size competition to a data quality and alignment battle, Mayham noted.

    “I think theof this is that Zuck’s biggest bet is that talent and data infrastructure matter more than raw compute power in the AI race,” he said. “The regulatory risk is manageable given Meta’s trailing position, but the acqui-hire premium shows how expensive top AI talent has become.”
    #meta #officially #acquihires #scale #will
    Meta officially ‘acqui-hires’ Scale AI — will it draw regulator scrutiny?
    Meta is looking to up its weakening AI game with a key talent grab. Following days of speculation, the social media giant has confirmed that Scale AI’s founder and CEO, Alexandr Wang, is joining Meta to work on its AI efforts. Meta will invest billion in Scale AI as part of the deal, and will have a 49% stake in the AI startup, which specializes in data labeling and model evaluation services. Other key Scale employees will also move over to Meta, while CSO Jason Droege will step in as Scale’s interim CEO. This move comes as the Mark Zuckerberg-led company goes all-in on building a new research lab focused on “superintelligence,” the next step beyond artificial general intelligence. The arrangement also reflects a growing trend in big tech, where industry giants are buying companies without really buying them — what’s increasingly being referred to as “acqui-hiring.” It involves recruiting key personnel from a company, licensing its technology, and selling its products, but leaving it as a private entity. “This is fundamentally a massive ‘acqui-hire’ play disguised as a strategic investment,” said Wyatt Mayham, lead AI consultant at Northwest AI Consulting. “While Meta gets Scale’s data infrastructure, the real prize is Wang joining Meta to lead their superintelligence lab. At the billion price tag, this might be the most expensive individual talent acquisition in tech history.” Closing gaps with competitors Meta has struggled to keep up with OpenAI, Anthropic, and other key competitors in the AI race, recently even delaying the launch of its new flagship model, Behemoth, purportedly due to internal concerns about its performance. It has also seen the departure of several of its top researchers.  “It’s not really a secret at this point that Meta’s Llama 4 models have had significant performance issues,” Mayham said. “Zuck is essentially betting that Wang’s track record building AI infrastructure can solve Meta’s alignment and model quality problems faster than internal development.” And, he added, Scale’s enterprise-grade human feedback loops are exactly what Meta’s Llama models need to compete with ChatGPT and Claude on reliability and task-following. Data quality, a key focus for Wang, is a big factor in solving those performance problems. He wrote in a note to Scale employees on Thursday, later posted on X, that when he founded Scale AI in 2016 amidst some of the early AI breakthroughs, “it was clear even then that data was the lifeblood of AI systems, and that was the inspiration behind starting Scale.” But despite Meta’s huge investment, Scale AI is underscoring its commitment to sovereignty: “Scale remains an independent leader in AI, committed to providing industry-leading AI solutions and safeguarding customer data,” the company wrote in a blog post. “Scale will continue to partner with leading AI labs, multinational enterprises, and governments to deliver expert data and technology solutions through every phase of AI’s evolution.” Allowing big tech to side-step notification But while it’s only just been inked, the high-profile deal is already raising some eyebrows. According to experts, arrangements like these allow tech companies to acquire top talent and key technologies in a side-stepping manner, thus avoiding regulatory notification requirements. The US Federal Trade Commissionrequires mergers and acquisitions totaling more than million be reported in advance. Licensing deals or the mass hiring-away of a company’s employees don’t have this requirement. This allows companies to move more quickly, as they don’t have to undergo the lengthy federal review process. Microsoft’s deal with Inflection AI is probably one of the highest-profile examples of the “acqui-hiring” trend. In March 2024, the tech giant paid the startup million in licensing fees and hired much of its team, including co-founders Mustafa Suleymanand Karén Simonyan. Similarly, last year Amazon hired more than 50% of Adept AI’s key personnel, including its CEO, to focus on AGI. Google also inked a licensing agreement with Character AI and hired a majority of its founders and researchers. However, regulators have caught on, with the FTC launching inquiries into both the Microsoft-Inflection and Amazon-Adept deals, and the US Justice Departmentanalyzing Google-Character AI. Reflecting ‘desperation’ in the AI industry Meta’s decision to go forward with this arrangement anyway, despite that dicey backdrop, seems to indicate how anxious the company is to keep up in the AI race. “The most interesting piece of this all is the timing,” said Mayham. “It reflects broader industry desperation. Tech giants are increasingly buying parts of promising AI startups to secure key talent without acquiring full companies, following similar patterns with Microsoft-Inflection and Google-Character AI.” However, the regulatory risks are “real but nuanced,” he noted. Meta’s acquisition could face scrutiny from antitrust regulators, particularly as the company is involved in an ongoing FTC lawsuit over its Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions. While the 49% ownership position appears designed to avoid triggering automatic thresholds, US regulatory bodies like the FTC and DOJ can review minority stake acquisitions under the Clayton Antitrust Act if they seem to threaten competition. Perhaps more importantly, Meta is not considered a leader in AGI development and is trailing OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google, meaning regulators may not consider the deal all that concerning. All told, the arrangement certainly signals Meta’s recognition that the AI race has shifted from a compute and model size competition to a data quality and alignment battle, Mayham noted. “I think theof this is that Zuck’s biggest bet is that talent and data infrastructure matter more than raw compute power in the AI race,” he said. “The regulatory risk is manageable given Meta’s trailing position, but the acqui-hire premium shows how expensive top AI talent has become.” #meta #officially #acquihires #scale #will
    WWW.COMPUTERWORLD.COM
    Meta officially ‘acqui-hires’ Scale AI — will it draw regulator scrutiny?
    Meta is looking to up its weakening AI game with a key talent grab. Following days of speculation, the social media giant has confirmed that Scale AI’s founder and CEO, Alexandr Wang, is joining Meta to work on its AI efforts. Meta will invest $14.3 billion in Scale AI as part of the deal, and will have a 49% stake in the AI startup, which specializes in data labeling and model evaluation services. Other key Scale employees will also move over to Meta, while CSO Jason Droege will step in as Scale’s interim CEO. This move comes as the Mark Zuckerberg-led company goes all-in on building a new research lab focused on “superintelligence,” the next step beyond artificial general intelligence (AGI). The arrangement also reflects a growing trend in big tech, where industry giants are buying companies without really buying them — what’s increasingly being referred to as “acqui-hiring.” It involves recruiting key personnel from a company, licensing its technology, and selling its products, but leaving it as a private entity. “This is fundamentally a massive ‘acqui-hire’ play disguised as a strategic investment,” said Wyatt Mayham, lead AI consultant at Northwest AI Consulting. “While Meta gets Scale’s data infrastructure, the real prize is Wang joining Meta to lead their superintelligence lab. At the $14.3 billion price tag, this might be the most expensive individual talent acquisition in tech history.” Closing gaps with competitors Meta has struggled to keep up with OpenAI, Anthropic, and other key competitors in the AI race, recently even delaying the launch of its new flagship model, Behemoth, purportedly due to internal concerns about its performance. It has also seen the departure of several of its top researchers.  “It’s not really a secret at this point that Meta’s Llama 4 models have had significant performance issues,” Mayham said. “Zuck is essentially betting that Wang’s track record building AI infrastructure can solve Meta’s alignment and model quality problems faster than internal development.” And, he added, Scale’s enterprise-grade human feedback loops are exactly what Meta’s Llama models need to compete with ChatGPT and Claude on reliability and task-following. Data quality, a key focus for Wang, is a big factor in solving those performance problems. He wrote in a note to Scale employees on Thursday, later posted on X (formerly Twitter), that when he founded Scale AI in 2016 amidst some of the early AI breakthroughs, “it was clear even then that data was the lifeblood of AI systems, and that was the inspiration behind starting Scale.” But despite Meta’s huge investment, Scale AI is underscoring its commitment to sovereignty: “Scale remains an independent leader in AI, committed to providing industry-leading AI solutions and safeguarding customer data,” the company wrote in a blog post. “Scale will continue to partner with leading AI labs, multinational enterprises, and governments to deliver expert data and technology solutions through every phase of AI’s evolution.” Allowing big tech to side-step notification But while it’s only just been inked, the high-profile deal is already raising some eyebrows. According to experts, arrangements like these allow tech companies to acquire top talent and key technologies in a side-stepping manner, thus avoiding regulatory notification requirements. The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) requires mergers and acquisitions totaling more than $126 million be reported in advance. Licensing deals or the mass hiring-away of a company’s employees don’t have this requirement. This allows companies to move more quickly, as they don’t have to undergo the lengthy federal review process. Microsoft’s deal with Inflection AI is probably one of the highest-profile examples of the “acqui-hiring” trend. In March 2024, the tech giant paid the startup $650 million in licensing fees and hired much of its team, including co-founders Mustafa Suleyman (now CEO of Microsoft AI) and Karén Simonyan (chief scientist of Microsoft AI). Similarly, last year Amazon hired more than 50% of Adept AI’s key personnel, including its CEO, to focus on AGI. Google also inked a licensing agreement with Character AI and hired a majority of its founders and researchers. However, regulators have caught on, with the FTC launching inquiries into both the Microsoft-Inflection and Amazon-Adept deals, and the US Justice Department (DOJ) analyzing Google-Character AI. Reflecting ‘desperation’ in the AI industry Meta’s decision to go forward with this arrangement anyway, despite that dicey backdrop, seems to indicate how anxious the company is to keep up in the AI race. “The most interesting piece of this all is the timing,” said Mayham. “It reflects broader industry desperation. Tech giants are increasingly buying parts of promising AI startups to secure key talent without acquiring full companies, following similar patterns with Microsoft-Inflection and Google-Character AI.” However, the regulatory risks are “real but nuanced,” he noted. Meta’s acquisition could face scrutiny from antitrust regulators, particularly as the company is involved in an ongoing FTC lawsuit over its Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions. While the 49% ownership position appears designed to avoid triggering automatic thresholds, US regulatory bodies like the FTC and DOJ can review minority stake acquisitions under the Clayton Antitrust Act if they seem to threaten competition. Perhaps more importantly, Meta is not considered a leader in AGI development and is trailing OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google, meaning regulators may not consider the deal all that concerning (yet). All told, the arrangement certainly signals Meta’s recognition that the AI race has shifted from a compute and model size competition to a data quality and alignment battle, Mayham noted. “I think the [gist] of this is that Zuck’s biggest bet is that talent and data infrastructure matter more than raw compute power in the AI race,” he said. “The regulatory risk is manageable given Meta’s trailing position, but the acqui-hire premium shows how expensive top AI talent has become.”
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos
    Faça Login para curtir, compartilhar e comentar!
  • Gamefromscratch compartilhou um link
    2025-06-07 20:19:27 - Traduzir -
    Who Could Buy Unity?

    Who Could Buy Unity? / News / June 7, 2025 / Business, Unity

    Earlier this week 80.lv ran the incredibly misleadingarticle Analyst Suggests Apple Might be Considering Buying Unity After Legal Defeat to Epic Games. Might is doing some heavy lifting there as there is no actual evidence that Apple or any other company are currently looking to purchase Unity Technologies. That said, it is an interesting topic as a pure thought exercise. So today we are going to discuss the companies that could be potential suitors for Unity.
    Unity
    The obvious place to start is with Unity Technologies, which is to say they can simply stay an independent organization. While they are not profitable, their financial situation has been trending in a positive direction of late and they have sufficient cash and resources to stay independent for the foreseeable future. Should things get bad at Unity, it is possible one of their largest investorscould take the company private again.
    Put simply, Unity does not need to be purchased and things can be kept as they are.
    Apple
    The original premise of this article is that Apple should buy Unity.
    Reasons why Apple should buy Unity:

    Apple and Unity have a long history, with Unity having been originally a Mac exclusive application and it has always supported Apple platforms
    Unity is by far the most used application for creating games on the Apple App Store
    Unity Grow productscould have good synergy with Apples products
    Apple could prevent a potential future rival, especially around 3rd party app stores

    Reasons why Apple won’t buy Unity:

    Apple has never made a purchase anywhere near the size of Unity. Their largest acquisition to datewould be 1/4 to 1/5 the size of acquiring Unity
    Apple has never really gotten involved in gaming beyond small initiatives in the past
    Apple mostly grows in-house over acquisition and more acquisitions are subsumed into other Apple products, Unity is not a good fit here

    Amazon
    Amazon have heaps of cash and aren’t afraid to use it such as acquiring MGM, Whole Foods, Twitch and many more companies over the years. They also have several gaming-oriented interests and have made an attemptto become a major game developer in the past.
    Reasons why Amazon should buy Unity:

    Amazon tried to enter gaming in a big way once already with the licensing of CryEngine to create Lumberyardand buying up or forming several game studios. Unity would provide a much larger and more established foothold should they wish to buy their way in
    Amazon web services could be a good compliment to Unity’s server side offerings, while Unity’s Grow division could be a good fit for Amazon platforms
    Integration with their gaming platformsReasons why Amazon won’t buy Unity:

    Their last attempt into game development was a massive failure and much of it was rumored to be a culture problem

    Tencent
    Tencent have invested HEAVILY into the world of gamingand aren’t afraid of throwing money around, so Unity could be a good fit in that portfolio. That said recent political climate changes would render this acquisition very unlikely.
    Reasons why Tencent should buy Unity:

    Tencent have a presence across the entire gaming industry and already have a minority stake in Epic Games. This would more or less give them a controlling influence over two of the biggest players in the space
    Access to or ownership of Unity’s recently created China Joint Venture
    Integration with Tencents other holdings like WeChat or Snap might provide some synergies

    Reasons why Tencent won’t buy Unity:

    Not a snowballs chance in hell that regulators allow this acquisition to happen, from antitrust issues of owning stakes in both Unity and Unreal Engine, to just more broad geopolitical issues in the modern world

    Microsoft
    Microsoft are heavily invested in two areas that overlap with Unity, gaming and software development tools. On paper they might appear to be the perfect suitor for Unity and they have the cash hoard to make such a purchase with ease.
    Reasons why Microsoft should buy Unity:

    Unlike Apple, Microsoft has long been a proponent of growth via acquisition with some of their pillar products coming in the form of acquisitions. They also do not shy away from huge dollar purchases such as Activision Blizzard, LinkedIn, Nuance, Skype, ZeniMax, GitHub, Nokia, MojangMicrosoft have a long history of leveraging their development tools to grow their platforms
    Microsoft gaming studios/relationships/holdings such as XBox, Game Pass/PC Gaming, DirectX, Havok, etc. could benefit from a tighter relationship with Unity
    Like Amazon, Microsoft server-side servicescould be used to power Unity Grow services

    Reasons why Microsoft won’t buy Unity:

    Microsoft only just finished their acquisition of Activision and it was an arduous and nearly doomed process. Buying another company in the gaming space might be a step too far for regulators
    While Microsoft doesn’t mind spending huge money on acquisitions, they also don’t mind killing those companies off after, especially if there is a market downturn like we are experiencing now

    AppLovin
    If there is a company that is most likely to buy Unity, and that would synergize best with Unity products, it’s AppLovin. In broad strokes, AppLovin, IronSource and Unityare all in the same business. On top of that many of AppLovin’s biggest customers and products are directly tied to the Unity ecosystem. In fact, Unity and AppLovin are such a good fit that AppLovin attempted to buy Unity for nearly B back in 2022, when Unity instead pursued it’s doomed merger with IronSource.
    So, why would it make sense for AppLovin to buy Unity now? Well, these two 5 year stock performance charts more or less tell the entire story:

    It becomes crystal clear from that fateful date in August of 2022 which company has performed better and right now AppLovin is absolutely flush with cash. If there is a company that makes sense to acquire Unity, it’s AppLovin. Of course now that Unity owns IronSource, there are certainly questions of regulatory approval if this would even be allowed.
    Once again, this entire exercise is simply a thought exercise, just for fun. There is no public available news that ANYONE are looking to acquire Unity, nor that Unity is looking to be acquired. You can learn more about my thoughts on the matter in the video below.
    #who #could #buy #unity
    Who Could Buy Unity?
    Who Could Buy Unity? / News / June 7, 2025 / Business, Unity Earlier this week 80.lv ran the incredibly misleadingarticle Analyst Suggests Apple Might be Considering Buying Unity After Legal Defeat to Epic Games. Might is doing some heavy lifting there as there is no actual evidence that Apple or any other company are currently looking to purchase Unity Technologies. That said, it is an interesting topic as a pure thought exercise. So today we are going to discuss the companies that could be potential suitors for Unity. Unity The obvious place to start is with Unity Technologies, which is to say they can simply stay an independent organization. While they are not profitable, their financial situation has been trending in a positive direction of late and they have sufficient cash and resources to stay independent for the foreseeable future. Should things get bad at Unity, it is possible one of their largest investorscould take the company private again. Put simply, Unity does not need to be purchased and things can be kept as they are. Apple The original premise of this article is that Apple should buy Unity. Reasons why Apple should buy Unity: Apple and Unity have a long history, with Unity having been originally a Mac exclusive application and it has always supported Apple platforms Unity is by far the most used application for creating games on the Apple App Store Unity Grow productscould have good synergy with Apples products Apple could prevent a potential future rival, especially around 3rd party app stores Reasons why Apple won’t buy Unity: Apple has never made a purchase anywhere near the size of Unity. Their largest acquisition to datewould be 1/4 to 1/5 the size of acquiring Unity Apple has never really gotten involved in gaming beyond small initiatives in the past Apple mostly grows in-house over acquisition and more acquisitions are subsumed into other Apple products, Unity is not a good fit here Amazon Amazon have heaps of cash and aren’t afraid to use it such as acquiring MGM, Whole Foods, Twitch and many more companies over the years. They also have several gaming-oriented interests and have made an attemptto become a major game developer in the past. Reasons why Amazon should buy Unity: Amazon tried to enter gaming in a big way once already with the licensing of CryEngine to create Lumberyardand buying up or forming several game studios. Unity would provide a much larger and more established foothold should they wish to buy their way in Amazon web services could be a good compliment to Unity’s server side offerings, while Unity’s Grow division could be a good fit for Amazon platforms Integration with their gaming platformsReasons why Amazon won’t buy Unity: Their last attempt into game development was a massive failure and much of it was rumored to be a culture problem Tencent Tencent have invested HEAVILY into the world of gamingand aren’t afraid of throwing money around, so Unity could be a good fit in that portfolio. That said recent political climate changes would render this acquisition very unlikely. Reasons why Tencent should buy Unity: Tencent have a presence across the entire gaming industry and already have a minority stake in Epic Games. This would more or less give them a controlling influence over two of the biggest players in the space Access to or ownership of Unity’s recently created China Joint Venture Integration with Tencents other holdings like WeChat or Snap might provide some synergies Reasons why Tencent won’t buy Unity: Not a snowballs chance in hell that regulators allow this acquisition to happen, from antitrust issues of owning stakes in both Unity and Unreal Engine, to just more broad geopolitical issues in the modern world Microsoft Microsoft are heavily invested in two areas that overlap with Unity, gaming and software development tools. On paper they might appear to be the perfect suitor for Unity and they have the cash hoard to make such a purchase with ease. Reasons why Microsoft should buy Unity: Unlike Apple, Microsoft has long been a proponent of growth via acquisition with some of their pillar products coming in the form of acquisitions. They also do not shy away from huge dollar purchases such as Activision Blizzard, LinkedIn, Nuance, Skype, ZeniMax, GitHub, Nokia, MojangMicrosoft have a long history of leveraging their development tools to grow their platforms Microsoft gaming studios/relationships/holdings such as XBox, Game Pass/PC Gaming, DirectX, Havok, etc. could benefit from a tighter relationship with Unity Like Amazon, Microsoft server-side servicescould be used to power Unity Grow services Reasons why Microsoft won’t buy Unity: Microsoft only just finished their acquisition of Activision and it was an arduous and nearly doomed process. Buying another company in the gaming space might be a step too far for regulators While Microsoft doesn’t mind spending huge money on acquisitions, they also don’t mind killing those companies off after, especially if there is a market downturn like we are experiencing now AppLovin If there is a company that is most likely to buy Unity, and that would synergize best with Unity products, it’s AppLovin. In broad strokes, AppLovin, IronSource and Unityare all in the same business. On top of that many of AppLovin’s biggest customers and products are directly tied to the Unity ecosystem. In fact, Unity and AppLovin are such a good fit that AppLovin attempted to buy Unity for nearly B back in 2022, when Unity instead pursued it’s doomed merger with IronSource. So, why would it make sense for AppLovin to buy Unity now? Well, these two 5 year stock performance charts more or less tell the entire story: It becomes crystal clear from that fateful date in August of 2022 which company has performed better and right now AppLovin is absolutely flush with cash. If there is a company that makes sense to acquire Unity, it’s AppLovin. Of course now that Unity owns IronSource, there are certainly questions of regulatory approval if this would even be allowed. Once again, this entire exercise is simply a thought exercise, just for fun. There is no public available news that ANYONE are looking to acquire Unity, nor that Unity is looking to be acquired. You can learn more about my thoughts on the matter in the video below. #who #could #buy #unity
    GAMEFROMSCRATCH.COM
    Who Could Buy Unity?
    Who Could Buy Unity? / News / June 7, 2025 / Business, Unity Earlier this week 80.lv ran the incredibly misleading (some could say click-baity) article Analyst Suggests Apple Might be Considering Buying Unity After Legal Defeat to Epic Games. Might is doing some heavy lifting there as there is no actual evidence that Apple or any other company are currently looking to purchase Unity Technologies. That said, it is an interesting topic as a pure thought exercise. So today we are going to discuss the companies that could be potential suitors for Unity. Unity The obvious place to start is with Unity Technologies, which is to say they can simply stay an independent organization. While they are not profitable, their financial situation has been trending in a positive direction of late and they have sufficient cash and resources to stay independent for the foreseeable future. Should things get bad at Unity, it is possible one of their largest investors (Silver Lake Group, Vanguard Group, Sequoia Capital, Black Rock, etc) could take the company private again. Put simply, Unity does not need to be purchased and things can be kept as they are. Apple The original premise of this article is that Apple should buy Unity. Reasons why Apple should buy Unity: Apple and Unity have a long history, with Unity having been originally a Mac exclusive application and it has always supported Apple platforms Unity is by far the most used application for creating games on the Apple App Store Unity Grow products (ads, user acquisitions, analytics, etc) could have good synergy with Apples products Apple could prevent a potential future rival, especially around 3rd party app stores Reasons why Apple won’t buy Unity: Apple has never made a purchase anywhere near the size of Unity. Their largest acquisition to date (Beats) would be 1/4 to 1/5 the size of acquiring Unity Apple has never really gotten involved in gaming beyond small initiatives in the past Apple mostly grows in-house over acquisition and more acquisitions are subsumed into other Apple products, Unity is not a good fit here Amazon Amazon have heaps of cash and aren’t afraid to use it such as acquiring MGM, Whole Foods, Twitch and many more companies over the years. They also have several gaming-oriented interests and have made an attempt (that failed badly) to become a major game developer in the past. Reasons why Amazon should buy Unity: Amazon tried to enter gaming in a big way once already with the licensing of CryEngine to create Lumberyard (now O3DE) and buying up or forming several game studios. Unity would provide a much larger and more established foothold should they wish to buy their way in Amazon web services could be a good compliment to Unity’s server side offerings, while Unity’s Grow division could be a good fit for Amazon platforms Integration with their gaming platforms (Twitch, Luna, etc) Reasons why Amazon won’t buy Unity: Their last attempt into game development was a massive failure and much of it was rumored to be a culture problem Tencent Tencent have invested HEAVILY into the world of gaming (Ubisoft, Epic Games, Riot Games, Supercell, Snap, Funcom, Activision Blizzard, From Software, etc) and aren’t afraid of throwing money around, so Unity could be a good fit in that portfolio. That said recent political climate changes would render this acquisition very unlikely. Reasons why Tencent should buy Unity: Tencent have a presence across the entire gaming industry and already have a minority stake in Epic Games (Unreal Engine). This would more or less give them a controlling influence over two of the biggest players in the space Access to or ownership of Unity’s recently created China Joint Venture Integration with Tencents other holdings like WeChat or Snap might provide some synergies Reasons why Tencent won’t buy Unity: Not a snowballs chance in hell that regulators allow this acquisition to happen, from antitrust issues of owning stakes in both Unity and Unreal Engine, to just more broad geopolitical issues in the modern world Microsoft Microsoft are heavily invested in two areas that overlap with Unity, gaming and software development tools. On paper they might appear to be the perfect suitor for Unity and they have the cash hoard to make such a purchase with ease. Reasons why Microsoft should buy Unity: Unlike Apple, Microsoft has long been a proponent of growth via acquisition with some of their pillar products coming in the form of acquisitions. They also do not shy away from huge dollar purchases such as Activision Blizzard (69B), LinkedIn (26B), Nuance (20B), Skype (8.5B), ZeniMax (7.5B), GitHub (7.5B), Nokia (7B), Mojang[Minecraft] (2.5B) Microsoft have a long history of leveraging their development tools to grow their platforms Microsoft gaming studios/relationships/holdings such as XBox, Game Pass/PC Gaming, DirectX, Havok, etc. could benefit from a tighter relationship with Unity Like Amazon, Microsoft server-side services (Azure) could be used to power Unity Grow services Reasons why Microsoft won’t buy Unity: Microsoft only just finished their acquisition of Activision and it was an arduous and nearly doomed process. Buying another company in the gaming space might be a step too far for regulators While Microsoft doesn’t mind spending huge money on acquisitions, they also don’t mind killing those companies off after (Nokia? Skype?), especially if there is a market downturn like we are experiencing now AppLovin If there is a company that is most likely to buy Unity, and that would synergize best with Unity products, it’s AppLovin. In broad strokes, AppLovin, IronSource and Unity (Grow) are all in the same business. On top of that many of AppLovin’s biggest customers and products are directly tied to the Unity ecosystem. In fact, Unity and AppLovin are such a good fit that AppLovin attempted to buy Unity for nearly $20B back in 2022, when Unity instead pursued it’s doomed merger with IronSource. So, why would it make sense for AppLovin to buy Unity now? Well, these two 5 year stock performance charts more or less tell the entire story: It becomes crystal clear from that fateful date in August of 2022 which company has performed better and right now AppLovin is absolutely flush with cash. If there is a company that makes sense to acquire Unity, it’s AppLovin. Of course now that Unity owns IronSource, there are certainly questions of regulatory approval if this would even be allowed. Once again, this entire exercise is simply a thought exercise, just for fun. There is no public available news that ANYONE are looking to acquire Unity, nor that Unity is looking to be acquired. You can learn more about my thoughts on the matter in the video below.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Angry
    Sad
    712
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos
    Faça Login para curtir, compartilhar e comentar!
  • The New York Times compartilhou um link
    2025-06-01 15:41:59 - Traduzir -
    Meta’s Fate Now Rests With a Judge

    A landmark antitrust trial accusing the social media giant of cementing its dominance through acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp has concluded.
    #metas #fate #now #rests #with
    Meta’s Fate Now Rests With a Judge
    A landmark antitrust trial accusing the social media giant of cementing its dominance through acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp has concluded. #metas #fate #now #rests #with
    WWW.NYTIMES.COM
    Meta’s Fate Now Rests With a Judge
    A landmark antitrust trial accusing the social media giant of cementing its dominance through acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp has concluded.
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos
    Faça Login para curtir, compartilhar e comentar!
  • The Verge compartilhou um link
    2025-05-31 09:40:25 - Traduzir -
    OpenAI wants ChatGPT to be a ‘super assistant’ for every part of your life

    Thanks to the legal discovery process, Google’s antitrust trial with the Department of Justice has provided a fascinating glimpse into the future of ChatGPT.An internal OpenAI strategy document titled “ChatGPT: H1 2025 Strategy” describes the company’s aspiration to build an “AI super assistant that deeply understands you and is your interface to the internet.” Although the document is heavily redacted in parts, it reveals that OpenAI aims for ChatGPT to soon develop into much more than a chatbot. “In the first half of next year, we’ll start evolving ChatGPT into a super-assistant: one that knows you, understands what you care about, and helps with any task that a smart, trustworthy, emotionally intelligent person with a computer could do,” reads the document from late 2024. “The timing is right. Models like 02 and 03 are finally smart enough to reliably perform agentic tasks, tools like computer use can boost ChatGPT’s ability to take action, and interaction paradigms like multimodality and generative UI allow both ChatGPT and users to express themselves in the best way for the task.”The document goes on to describe a “super assistant” as “an intelligent entity with T-shaped skills” for both widely applicable and niche tasks. “The broad part is all about making life easier: answering a question, finding a home, contacting a lawyer, joining a gym, planning vacations, buying gifts, managing calendars, keeping track of todos, sending emails.” It mentions coding as an early example of a more niche task.Even when reading around the redactions, it’s clear that OpenAI sees hardware as essential to its future, and that it wants people to think of ChatGPT as not just a tool, but a companion. This tracks with Sam Altman recently saying that young people are using ChatGPT like a “ life advisor.”“Today, ChatGPT is in our lives through existing form factors — our website, phone, and desktop apps,” another part of the strategy document reads. “But our vision for ChatGPT is to help you with all of your life, no matter where you are. At home, it should help answer questions, play music, and suggest recipes. On the go, it should help you get to places, find the best restaurants, or catch up with friends. At work, it should help you take meeting notes, or prepare for the big presentation. And on solo walks, it should help you reflect and wind down.” At the same time, OpenAI finds itself in a wobbly position. Its infrastructure isn’t able to handle ChatGPT’s rising usage, which explains Altman’s focus on building data centers. In a section of the document describing AI chatbot competition, the company writes that “we are leading here, but we can’t rest,” and that “growth and revenue won’t line up forever.” It acknowledges that there are “powerful incumbents who will leverage their distribution to advantage their own products,” and states that OpenAI will advocate for regulation that requires other platforms to allow people to set ChatGPT as the default assistant.“We have what we need to win: one of the fastest-growing products of all time, a category-defining brand, a research lead, a compute lead, a world-class research team, and an increasing number of effective people with agency who are motivated to ship,” the OpenAI document states. “We don’t rely on ads, giving us flexibility on what to build. Our culture values speed, bold moves, and self-disruption. Maintaining these advantages is hard work but, if we do, they will last for a while.”ElsewhereApple chickens out: For the first time in a decade, Apple won’t have its execs participate in John Gruber’s annual post-WWDC live podcast. Gruber recently wrote the viral “something is rotten in the state of Cupertino” essay, which was widely discussed in Apple circles. Although he hasn’t publicly connected that critical piece to the company backing out of his podcast, it’s easy to see the throughline. It says a lot about the state of Apple when its leaders don’t even want to participate in what has historically been a friendly forum.Elon was high: As Elon Musk attempts to reframe the public’s view of him by doing interviews about SpaceX, The New York Times reports that last year, he was taking so much ketamine that it “was affecting his bladder.” He also reportedly “traveled with a daily medication box that held about 20 pills, including ones with the markings of the stimulant Adderall.” Both Musk and the White House have had multiple opportunities to directly refute this report, and they have not. Now, Musk is at least partially stepping away from DOGE along with key lieutenants like Steve Davis. DOGE may be a failure based on Musk’s own stated hopes for spending cuts, but his closeness to Trump has certainly helped rescue X from financial ruin and grown SpaceX’s business. Now, the more difficult work begins: saving Tesla. Overheard“The way we do ranking is sacrosanct to us.” - Google CEO Sundar Pichai on Decoder, explaining why the company’s search results won’t be changed for President Trump or anyone else. “Compared to previous technology changes, I’m a little bit more worried about the labor impact… Yes, people will adapt, but they may not adapt fast enough.” - Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei on CNN raising the alarm about the technology he is developing. “Meta is a very different company than it was nine years ago when they fired me.” - Anduril founder Palmer Luckey telling Ashlee Vance why he is linking up with Mark Zuckerberg to make headsets for the military. Personnel logThe flattening of Meta’s AI organization has taken effect, with VP Ahmad Al-Dahle no longer overseeing the entire group. Now, he co-leads “AGI Foundations” with Amir Frenkel, VP of engineering, while Connor Hayes runs all AI products. All three men now report to Meta CPO Chris Cox, who has diplomatically framed the changes as a way to “give each org more ownership.”Xbox co-founder J Allard is leading a new ‘breakthrough’ devices group called ZeroOne. One of the devices will be smart home-related, according to job listings.C.J. Mahoney, a former Trump administration official, is being promoted to general counsel at Microsoft, which has also hired Lisa Monaco from the last Biden administration to lead global policy. Reed Hastings is joining the board of Anthropic “because I believe in their approach to AI development, and to help humanity progress.”Sebastian Barrios, previously SVP at Mercado Libre, is joining Roblox as SVP of engineering for several areas, including ads, game discovery, and the company’s virtual currency work.Fidji Simo’s replacement at Instacart will be chief business officer Chris Rogers, who will become the company’s next CEO on August 15th after she officially joins OpenAI.Link listMore to click on:If you haven’t already, don’t forget to subscribe to The Verge, which includes unlimited access to Command Line and all of our reporting.As always, I welcome your feedback, especially if you have thoughts on this issue or a story idea to share. You can respond here or ping me securely on Signal.Thanks for subscribing.See More:
    #openai #wants #chatgpt #super #assistant
    OpenAI wants ChatGPT to be a ‘super assistant’ for every part of your life
    Thanks to the legal discovery process, Google’s antitrust trial with the Department of Justice has provided a fascinating glimpse into the future of ChatGPT.An internal OpenAI strategy document titled “ChatGPT: H1 2025 Strategy” describes the company’s aspiration to build an “AI super assistant that deeply understands you and is your interface to the internet.” Although the document is heavily redacted in parts, it reveals that OpenAI aims for ChatGPT to soon develop into much more than a chatbot. “In the first half of next year, we’ll start evolving ChatGPT into a super-assistant: one that knows you, understands what you care about, and helps with any task that a smart, trustworthy, emotionally intelligent person with a computer could do,” reads the document from late 2024. “The timing is right. Models like 02 and 03 are finally smart enough to reliably perform agentic tasks, tools like computer use can boost ChatGPT’s ability to take action, and interaction paradigms like multimodality and generative UI allow both ChatGPT and users to express themselves in the best way for the task.”The document goes on to describe a “super assistant” as “an intelligent entity with T-shaped skills” for both widely applicable and niche tasks. “The broad part is all about making life easier: answering a question, finding a home, contacting a lawyer, joining a gym, planning vacations, buying gifts, managing calendars, keeping track of todos, sending emails.” It mentions coding as an early example of a more niche task.Even when reading around the redactions, it’s clear that OpenAI sees hardware as essential to its future, and that it wants people to think of ChatGPT as not just a tool, but a companion. This tracks with Sam Altman recently saying that young people are using ChatGPT like a “ life advisor.”“Today, ChatGPT is in our lives through existing form factors — our website, phone, and desktop apps,” another part of the strategy document reads. “But our vision for ChatGPT is to help you with all of your life, no matter where you are. At home, it should help answer questions, play music, and suggest recipes. On the go, it should help you get to places, find the best restaurants, or catch up with friends. At work, it should help you take meeting notes, or prepare for the big presentation. And on solo walks, it should help you reflect and wind down.” At the same time, OpenAI finds itself in a wobbly position. Its infrastructure isn’t able to handle ChatGPT’s rising usage, which explains Altman’s focus on building data centers. In a section of the document describing AI chatbot competition, the company writes that “we are leading here, but we can’t rest,” and that “growth and revenue won’t line up forever.” It acknowledges that there are “powerful incumbents who will leverage their distribution to advantage their own products,” and states that OpenAI will advocate for regulation that requires other platforms to allow people to set ChatGPT as the default assistant.“We have what we need to win: one of the fastest-growing products of all time, a category-defining brand, a research lead, a compute lead, a world-class research team, and an increasing number of effective people with agency who are motivated to ship,” the OpenAI document states. “We don’t rely on ads, giving us flexibility on what to build. Our culture values speed, bold moves, and self-disruption. Maintaining these advantages is hard work but, if we do, they will last for a while.”ElsewhereApple chickens out: For the first time in a decade, Apple won’t have its execs participate in John Gruber’s annual post-WWDC live podcast. Gruber recently wrote the viral “something is rotten in the state of Cupertino” essay, which was widely discussed in Apple circles. Although he hasn’t publicly connected that critical piece to the company backing out of his podcast, it’s easy to see the throughline. It says a lot about the state of Apple when its leaders don’t even want to participate in what has historically been a friendly forum.Elon was high: As Elon Musk attempts to reframe the public’s view of him by doing interviews about SpaceX, The New York Times reports that last year, he was taking so much ketamine that it “was affecting his bladder.” He also reportedly “traveled with a daily medication box that held about 20 pills, including ones with the markings of the stimulant Adderall.” Both Musk and the White House have had multiple opportunities to directly refute this report, and they have not. Now, Musk is at least partially stepping away from DOGE along with key lieutenants like Steve Davis. DOGE may be a failure based on Musk’s own stated hopes for spending cuts, but his closeness to Trump has certainly helped rescue X from financial ruin and grown SpaceX’s business. Now, the more difficult work begins: saving Tesla. Overheard“The way we do ranking is sacrosanct to us.” - Google CEO Sundar Pichai on Decoder, explaining why the company’s search results won’t be changed for President Trump or anyone else. “Compared to previous technology changes, I’m a little bit more worried about the labor impact… Yes, people will adapt, but they may not adapt fast enough.” - Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei on CNN raising the alarm about the technology he is developing. “Meta is a very different company than it was nine years ago when they fired me.” - Anduril founder Palmer Luckey telling Ashlee Vance why he is linking up with Mark Zuckerberg to make headsets for the military. Personnel logThe flattening of Meta’s AI organization has taken effect, with VP Ahmad Al-Dahle no longer overseeing the entire group. Now, he co-leads “AGI Foundations” with Amir Frenkel, VP of engineering, while Connor Hayes runs all AI products. All three men now report to Meta CPO Chris Cox, who has diplomatically framed the changes as a way to “give each org more ownership.”Xbox co-founder J Allard is leading a new ‘breakthrough’ devices group called ZeroOne. One of the devices will be smart home-related, according to job listings.C.J. Mahoney, a former Trump administration official, is being promoted to general counsel at Microsoft, which has also hired Lisa Monaco from the last Biden administration to lead global policy. Reed Hastings is joining the board of Anthropic “because I believe in their approach to AI development, and to help humanity progress.”Sebastian Barrios, previously SVP at Mercado Libre, is joining Roblox as SVP of engineering for several areas, including ads, game discovery, and the company’s virtual currency work.Fidji Simo’s replacement at Instacart will be chief business officer Chris Rogers, who will become the company’s next CEO on August 15th after she officially joins OpenAI.Link listMore to click on:If you haven’t already, don’t forget to subscribe to The Verge, which includes unlimited access to Command Line and all of our reporting.As always, I welcome your feedback, especially if you have thoughts on this issue or a story idea to share. You can respond here or ping me securely on Signal.Thanks for subscribing.See More: #openai #wants #chatgpt #super #assistant
    WWW.THEVERGE.COM
    OpenAI wants ChatGPT to be a ‘super assistant’ for every part of your life
    Thanks to the legal discovery process, Google’s antitrust trial with the Department of Justice has provided a fascinating glimpse into the future of ChatGPT.An internal OpenAI strategy document titled “ChatGPT: H1 2025 Strategy” describes the company’s aspiration to build an “AI super assistant that deeply understands you and is your interface to the internet.” Although the document is heavily redacted in parts, it reveals that OpenAI aims for ChatGPT to soon develop into much more than a chatbot. “In the first half of next year, we’ll start evolving ChatGPT into a super-assistant: one that knows you, understands what you care about, and helps with any task that a smart, trustworthy, emotionally intelligent person with a computer could do,” reads the document from late 2024. “The timing is right. Models like 02 and 03 are finally smart enough to reliably perform agentic tasks, tools like computer use can boost ChatGPT’s ability to take action, and interaction paradigms like multimodality and generative UI allow both ChatGPT and users to express themselves in the best way for the task.”The document goes on to describe a “super assistant” as “an intelligent entity with T-shaped skills” for both widely applicable and niche tasks. “The broad part is all about making life easier: answering a question, finding a home, contacting a lawyer, joining a gym, planning vacations, buying gifts, managing calendars, keeping track of todos, sending emails.” It mentions coding as an early example of a more niche task.Even when reading around the redactions, it’s clear that OpenAI sees hardware as essential to its future, and that it wants people to think of ChatGPT as not just a tool, but a companion. This tracks with Sam Altman recently saying that young people are using ChatGPT like a “ life advisor.”“Today, ChatGPT is in our lives through existing form factors — our website, phone, and desktop apps,” another part of the strategy document reads. “But our vision for ChatGPT is to help you with all of your life, no matter where you are. At home, it should help answer questions, play music, and suggest recipes. On the go, it should help you get to places, find the best restaurants, or catch up with friends. At work, it should help you take meeting notes, or prepare for the big presentation. And on solo walks, it should help you reflect and wind down.” At the same time, OpenAI finds itself in a wobbly position. Its infrastructure isn’t able to handle ChatGPT’s rising usage, which explains Altman’s focus on building data centers. In a section of the document describing AI chatbot competition, the company writes that “we are leading here, but we can’t rest,” and that “growth and revenue won’t line up forever.” It acknowledges that there are “powerful incumbents who will leverage their distribution to advantage their own products,” and states that OpenAI will advocate for regulation that requires other platforms to allow people to set ChatGPT as the default assistant. (Coincidentally, Apple is rumored to soon let iOS users also select Google’s Gemini for Siri queries. Meta AI just hit one billion users as well, thanks mostly to its many hooks in Instagram, WhatsApp, and Facebook.) “We have what we need to win: one of the fastest-growing products of all time, a category-defining brand, a research lead (reasoning, multimodal), a compute lead, a world-class research team, and an increasing number of effective people with agency who are motivated to ship,” the OpenAI document states. “We don’t rely on ads, giving us flexibility on what to build. Our culture values speed, bold moves, and self-disruption. Maintaining these advantages is hard work but, if we do, they will last for a while.”ElsewhereApple chickens out: For the first time in a decade, Apple won’t have its execs participate in John Gruber’s annual post-WWDC live podcast. Gruber recently wrote the viral “something is rotten in the state of Cupertino” essay, which was widely discussed in Apple circles. Although he hasn’t publicly connected that critical piece to the company backing out of his podcast, it’s easy to see the throughline. It says a lot about the state of Apple when its leaders don’t even want to participate in what has historically been a friendly forum.Elon was high: As Elon Musk attempts to reframe the public’s view of him by doing interviews about SpaceX, The New York Times reports that last year, he was taking so much ketamine that it “was affecting his bladder.” He also reportedly “traveled with a daily medication box that held about 20 pills, including ones with the markings of the stimulant Adderall.” Both Musk and the White House have had multiple opportunities to directly refute this report, and they have not. Now, Musk is at least partially stepping away from DOGE along with key lieutenants like Steve Davis. DOGE may be a failure based on Musk’s own stated hopes for spending cuts, but his closeness to Trump has certainly helped rescue X from financial ruin and grown SpaceX’s business. Now, the more difficult work begins: saving Tesla. Overheard“The way we do ranking is sacrosanct to us.” - Google CEO Sundar Pichai on Decoder, explaining why the company’s search results won’t be changed for President Trump or anyone else. “Compared to previous technology changes, I’m a little bit more worried about the labor impact… Yes, people will adapt, but they may not adapt fast enough.” - Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei on CNN raising the alarm about the technology he is developing. “Meta is a very different company than it was nine years ago when they fired me.” - Anduril founder Palmer Luckey telling Ashlee Vance why he is linking up with Mark Zuckerberg to make headsets for the military. Personnel logThe flattening of Meta’s AI organization has taken effect, with VP Ahmad Al-Dahle no longer overseeing the entire group. Now, he co-leads “AGI Foundations” with Amir Frenkel, VP of engineering, while Connor Hayes runs all AI products. All three men now report to Meta CPO Chris Cox, who has diplomatically framed the changes as a way to “give each org more ownership.”Xbox co-founder J Allard is leading a new ‘breakthrough’ devices group at Amazon called ZeroOne. One of the devices will be smart home-related, according to job listings.C.J. Mahoney, a former Trump administration official, is being promoted to general counsel at Microsoft, which has also hired Lisa Monaco from the last Biden administration to lead global policy. Reed Hastings is joining the board of Anthropic “because I believe in their approach to AI development, and to help humanity progress.” (He’s joining Anthropic’s corporate board, not the supervising board of its public benefit trust that can hire and fire corporate directors.)Sebastian Barrios, previously SVP at Mercado Libre, is joining Roblox as SVP of engineering for several areas, including ads, game discovery, and the company’s virtual currency work.Fidji Simo’s replacement at Instacart will be chief business officer Chris Rogers, who will become the company’s next CEO on August 15th after she officially joins OpenAI.Link listMore to click on:If you haven’t already, don’t forget to subscribe to The Verge, which includes unlimited access to Command Line and all of our reporting.As always, I welcome your feedback, especially if you have thoughts on this issue or a story idea to share. You can respond here or ping me securely on Signal.Thanks for subscribing.See More:
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos
    Faça Login para curtir, compartilhar e comentar!
  • Ars Technica compartilhou um link
    2025-05-31 09:38:28 - Traduzir -
    Google and DOJ tussle over how AI will remake the web in antitrust closing arguments

    Google's reckoning

    Google and DOJ tussle over how AI will remake the web in antitrust closing arguments

    Google and the DOJ get one last chance to make their cases.

    Ryan Whitwam

    –

    May 30, 2025 5:40 pm

    |

    15

    Credit:

    Ryan Whitwam

    Credit:

    Ryan Whitwam

    Story text

    Size

    Small
    Standard
    Large

    Width
    *

    Standard
    Wide

    Links

    Standard
    Orange

    * Subscribers only
      Learn more

    From its humble beginnings in the late 20th century, Google has come to dominate online searches, putting it squarely in the US government's antitrust crosshairs. The ongoing search antitrust case threatens to upend Google's dominance, giving smaller players a chance to thrive and possibly wiping others out. After wrapping up testimony in the case earlier this month, lawyers for Google and the Department of Justice have now made their closing arguments.
    The DOJ won the initial trial, securing a ruling that Google used anticompetitive practices to maintain its monopoly in general search. During the time this case has taken to meander its way through the legal system, the online landscape has been radically altered, making it harder than ever to envision a post-Google Internet.
    To address Google's monopoly, the DOJ is asking United States District Judge Amit Mehta to impose limits on Google's business dealings and order a divestment of the Chrome browser. Forcing the sale of Chrome would be a major penalty and a coup for the DOJ lawyers, but this issue has been overshadowed somewhat as the case drags on. During closing arguments, the two sides dueled over how Google's search deals and the rise of AI could change the Internet as we know it.
    Collateral damage
    This case has examined the myriad ways Google used its influence and money to suppress competition. One of the DOJ's main targets is the placement deals Google signs with companies like Apple and Mozilla to be the default search provider. Google has contended that people can change the defaults anytime they wish, but the DOJ produced evidence at trial that almost no one does, and Google knows that.
    During closing arguments,  Mehta asked both sides about testimony from a Mozilla executive alleging that losing the Google search deal could destroy the company. Similarly, Apple's Eddie Cue said he loses sleep over the possibility of losing the Google revenue—unsurprising as the arrangement is believed to net the company billion per year.

    Should Firefox die to teach Google a lesson?

    Credit:
    Santiago Mejia/San Francisco Chronicle

    Should Firefox die to teach Google a lesson?

    Credit:

    Santiago Mejia/San Francisco Chronicle

    The DOJ's David Dahlquist admitted that there could be some "private impact" but contended Apple and Mozilla are overestimating the risk. Mehta didn't seem totally satisfied with the government's position, noting that he didn't want to damage other markets in an effort to fix search.
    Google's counsel also went after the government on the privacy front. One of the DOJ's proposed remedies would require Google to license its search index and algorithm, which CEO Sundar Pichai claimed was no better than a spinoff of Google's core product. Google also claims that forcing it to license search would put everyone's privacy at risk because it has a vast amount of user data that fuels search. Google attorney John Schmidtlein said the DOJ's treatment of user privacy in the remedies was a "complete failure."
    Mehta questioned the government lawyers pointedly on the issue of privacy, which he noted was barely addressed in the remedy filings. The DOJ's Adam Severt suggested an independent committee would have to be empaneled to decide how to handle Google's user data, but he was vague on how long such a process could take. Google's team didn't like this idea at all.

    Case may hinge on AI
    During testimony in early May, Mehta commented that the role AI plays in the trial had evolved very quickly. In 2023, everyone in his courtroom agreed that the impact of AI on search was still years away, and that's definitely not the case now. That same thread is present in closing arguments.
    Mehta asked the DOJ's Dahlquist if someone new was just going to "come off the sidelines" and build a new link-based search product, given  the developments with AI. Dahlquist didn't answer directly, noting that although generative AI products didn't exist at the time covered by the antitrust action, they would be key to search going forward. Google certainly believes the AI future is already here—it has gone all-in with AI search over the past year.

    At the same time, Google is seeking to set itself apart from AI upstarts. "Generative AI companies are not trying to out-Google Google," said Schmidtlein. Google's team contends that its actions have not harmed any AI products like ChatGPT or Perplexity, and at any rate, they are not in the search market as defined by the court.
    Mehta mused about the future of search, suggesting we may have to rethink what a general search engine is in 2025. "Maybe people don’t want 10 blue links anymore," he said.
    The Chromium problem and an elegant solution
    At times during the case, Mehta has expressed skepticism about the divestment of Chrome. During closing arguments, Dahlquist reiterated the close relationship between search and browsers, reminding the court that 35 percent of Google's search volume comes from Chrome.
    Mehta now seems more receptive to a Chrome split than before, perhaps in part because the effects of the other remedies are becoming so murky. He called the Chrome divestment "less speculative" and "more elegant" than the data and placement remedies. Google again claimed, as it has throughout the remedy phase, that forcing it to give up Chrome is unsupported in the law and that Chrome's dominance is a result of innovation.
    Even if Mehta leans toward ordering this remedy, Chromium may be a sticking point. The judge seems unconvinced that the supposed buyers—a group which apparently includes almost every major tech firm—have the scale and expertise needed to maintain Chromium. This open source project forms the foundation of many other browsers, making its continued smooth operation critical to the web.
    If Google gives up Chrome, Chromium goes with it, but what about the people who maintain it? The DOJ contends that it's common for employees to come along with an acquisition, but that's far from certain. There was some discussion of ensuring a buyer could commit to hiring staff to maintain Chromium. The DOJ suggests Google could be ordered to provide financial incentives to ensure critical roles are filled, but that sounds potentially messy.
    A Chrome sale seems more likely now than it did earlier, but nothing is assured yet. Following the final arguments from each side, it's up to Mehta to mull over the facts before deciding Google's fate. That's expected to happen in August, but nothing will change for Google right away. The company has already confirmed it will appeal the case, hoping to have the original ruling overturned. It could still be years before this case reaches its ultimate conclusion.

    Ryan Whitwam
    Senior Technology Reporter

    Ryan Whitwam
    Senior Technology Reporter

    Ryan Whitwam is a senior technology reporter at Ars Technica, covering the ways Google, AI, and mobile technology continue to change the world. Over his 20-year career, he's written for Android Police, ExtremeTech, Wirecutter, NY Times, and more. He has reviewed more phones than most people will ever own. You can follow him on Bluesky, where you will see photos of his dozens of mechanical keyboards.

    15 Comments
    #google #doj #tussle #over #how
    Google and DOJ tussle over how AI will remake the web in antitrust closing arguments
    Google's reckoning Google and DOJ tussle over how AI will remake the web in antitrust closing arguments Google and the DOJ get one last chance to make their cases. Ryan Whitwam – May 30, 2025 5:40 pm | 15 Credit: Ryan Whitwam Credit: Ryan Whitwam Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more From its humble beginnings in the late 20th century, Google has come to dominate online searches, putting it squarely in the US government's antitrust crosshairs. The ongoing search antitrust case threatens to upend Google's dominance, giving smaller players a chance to thrive and possibly wiping others out. After wrapping up testimony in the case earlier this month, lawyers for Google and the Department of Justice have now made their closing arguments. The DOJ won the initial trial, securing a ruling that Google used anticompetitive practices to maintain its monopoly in general search. During the time this case has taken to meander its way through the legal system, the online landscape has been radically altered, making it harder than ever to envision a post-Google Internet. To address Google's monopoly, the DOJ is asking United States District Judge Amit Mehta to impose limits on Google's business dealings and order a divestment of the Chrome browser. Forcing the sale of Chrome would be a major penalty and a coup for the DOJ lawyers, but this issue has been overshadowed somewhat as the case drags on. During closing arguments, the two sides dueled over how Google's search deals and the rise of AI could change the Internet as we know it. Collateral damage This case has examined the myriad ways Google used its influence and money to suppress competition. One of the DOJ's main targets is the placement deals Google signs with companies like Apple and Mozilla to be the default search provider. Google has contended that people can change the defaults anytime they wish, but the DOJ produced evidence at trial that almost no one does, and Google knows that. During closing arguments,  Mehta asked both sides about testimony from a Mozilla executive alleging that losing the Google search deal could destroy the company. Similarly, Apple's Eddie Cue said he loses sleep over the possibility of losing the Google revenue—unsurprising as the arrangement is believed to net the company billion per year. Should Firefox die to teach Google a lesson? Credit: Santiago Mejia/San Francisco Chronicle Should Firefox die to teach Google a lesson? Credit: Santiago Mejia/San Francisco Chronicle The DOJ's David Dahlquist admitted that there could be some "private impact" but contended Apple and Mozilla are overestimating the risk. Mehta didn't seem totally satisfied with the government's position, noting that he didn't want to damage other markets in an effort to fix search. Google's counsel also went after the government on the privacy front. One of the DOJ's proposed remedies would require Google to license its search index and algorithm, which CEO Sundar Pichai claimed was no better than a spinoff of Google's core product. Google also claims that forcing it to license search would put everyone's privacy at risk because it has a vast amount of user data that fuels search. Google attorney John Schmidtlein said the DOJ's treatment of user privacy in the remedies was a "complete failure." Mehta questioned the government lawyers pointedly on the issue of privacy, which he noted was barely addressed in the remedy filings. The DOJ's Adam Severt suggested an independent committee would have to be empaneled to decide how to handle Google's user data, but he was vague on how long such a process could take. Google's team didn't like this idea at all. Case may hinge on AI During testimony in early May, Mehta commented that the role AI plays in the trial had evolved very quickly. In 2023, everyone in his courtroom agreed that the impact of AI on search was still years away, and that's definitely not the case now. That same thread is present in closing arguments. Mehta asked the DOJ's Dahlquist if someone new was just going to "come off the sidelines" and build a new link-based search product, given  the developments with AI. Dahlquist didn't answer directly, noting that although generative AI products didn't exist at the time covered by the antitrust action, they would be key to search going forward. Google certainly believes the AI future is already here—it has gone all-in with AI search over the past year. At the same time, Google is seeking to set itself apart from AI upstarts. "Generative AI companies are not trying to out-Google Google," said Schmidtlein. Google's team contends that its actions have not harmed any AI products like ChatGPT or Perplexity, and at any rate, they are not in the search market as defined by the court. Mehta mused about the future of search, suggesting we may have to rethink what a general search engine is in 2025. "Maybe people don’t want 10 blue links anymore," he said. The Chromium problem and an elegant solution At times during the case, Mehta has expressed skepticism about the divestment of Chrome. During closing arguments, Dahlquist reiterated the close relationship between search and browsers, reminding the court that 35 percent of Google's search volume comes from Chrome. Mehta now seems more receptive to a Chrome split than before, perhaps in part because the effects of the other remedies are becoming so murky. He called the Chrome divestment "less speculative" and "more elegant" than the data and placement remedies. Google again claimed, as it has throughout the remedy phase, that forcing it to give up Chrome is unsupported in the law and that Chrome's dominance is a result of innovation. Even if Mehta leans toward ordering this remedy, Chromium may be a sticking point. The judge seems unconvinced that the supposed buyers—a group which apparently includes almost every major tech firm—have the scale and expertise needed to maintain Chromium. This open source project forms the foundation of many other browsers, making its continued smooth operation critical to the web. If Google gives up Chrome, Chromium goes with it, but what about the people who maintain it? The DOJ contends that it's common for employees to come along with an acquisition, but that's far from certain. There was some discussion of ensuring a buyer could commit to hiring staff to maintain Chromium. The DOJ suggests Google could be ordered to provide financial incentives to ensure critical roles are filled, but that sounds potentially messy. A Chrome sale seems more likely now than it did earlier, but nothing is assured yet. Following the final arguments from each side, it's up to Mehta to mull over the facts before deciding Google's fate. That's expected to happen in August, but nothing will change for Google right away. The company has already confirmed it will appeal the case, hoping to have the original ruling overturned. It could still be years before this case reaches its ultimate conclusion. Ryan Whitwam Senior Technology Reporter Ryan Whitwam Senior Technology Reporter Ryan Whitwam is a senior technology reporter at Ars Technica, covering the ways Google, AI, and mobile technology continue to change the world. Over his 20-year career, he's written for Android Police, ExtremeTech, Wirecutter, NY Times, and more. He has reviewed more phones than most people will ever own. You can follow him on Bluesky, where you will see photos of his dozens of mechanical keyboards. 15 Comments #google #doj #tussle #over #how
    ARSTECHNICA.COM
    Google and DOJ tussle over how AI will remake the web in antitrust closing arguments
    Google's reckoning Google and DOJ tussle over how AI will remake the web in antitrust closing arguments Google and the DOJ get one last chance to make their cases. Ryan Whitwam – May 30, 2025 5:40 pm | 15 Credit: Ryan Whitwam Credit: Ryan Whitwam Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more From its humble beginnings in the late 20th century, Google has come to dominate online searches, putting it squarely in the US government's antitrust crosshairs. The ongoing search antitrust case threatens to upend Google's dominance, giving smaller players a chance to thrive and possibly wiping others out. After wrapping up testimony in the case earlier this month, lawyers for Google and the Department of Justice have now made their closing arguments. The DOJ won the initial trial, securing a ruling that Google used anticompetitive practices to maintain its monopoly in general search. During the time this case has taken to meander its way through the legal system, the online landscape has been radically altered, making it harder than ever to envision a post-Google Internet. To address Google's monopoly, the DOJ is asking United States District Judge Amit Mehta to impose limits on Google's business dealings and order a divestment of the Chrome browser. Forcing the sale of Chrome would be a major penalty and a coup for the DOJ lawyers, but this issue has been overshadowed somewhat as the case drags on. During closing arguments, the two sides dueled over how Google's search deals and the rise of AI could change the Internet as we know it. Collateral damage This case has examined the myriad ways Google used its influence and money to suppress competition. One of the DOJ's main targets is the placement deals Google signs with companies like Apple and Mozilla to be the default search provider. Google has contended that people can change the defaults anytime they wish, but the DOJ produced evidence at trial that almost no one does, and Google knows that. During closing arguments,  Mehta asked both sides about testimony from a Mozilla executive alleging that losing the Google search deal could destroy the company. Similarly, Apple's Eddie Cue said he loses sleep over the possibility of losing the Google revenue—unsurprising as the arrangement is believed to net the company $20 billion per year. Should Firefox die to teach Google a lesson? Credit: Santiago Mejia/San Francisco Chronicle Should Firefox die to teach Google a lesson? Credit: Santiago Mejia/San Francisco Chronicle The DOJ's David Dahlquist admitted that there could be some "private impact" but contended Apple and Mozilla are overestimating the risk. Mehta didn't seem totally satisfied with the government's position, noting that he didn't want to damage other markets in an effort to fix search. Google's counsel also went after the government on the privacy front. One of the DOJ's proposed remedies would require Google to license its search index and algorithm, which CEO Sundar Pichai claimed was no better than a spinoff of Google's core product. Google also claims that forcing it to license search would put everyone's privacy at risk because it has a vast amount of user data that fuels search. Google attorney John Schmidtlein said the DOJ's treatment of user privacy in the remedies was a "complete failure." Mehta questioned the government lawyers pointedly on the issue of privacy, which he noted was barely addressed in the remedy filings. The DOJ's Adam Severt suggested an independent committee would have to be empaneled to decide how to handle Google's user data, but he was vague on how long such a process could take. Google's team didn't like this idea at all. Case may hinge on AI During testimony in early May, Mehta commented that the role AI plays in the trial had evolved very quickly. In 2023, everyone in his courtroom agreed that the impact of AI on search was still years away, and that's definitely not the case now. That same thread is present in closing arguments. Mehta asked the DOJ's Dahlquist if someone new was just going to "come off the sidelines" and build a new link-based search product, given  the developments with AI. Dahlquist didn't answer directly, noting that although generative AI products didn't exist at the time covered by the antitrust action, they would be key to search going forward. Google certainly believes the AI future is already here—it has gone all-in with AI search over the past year. At the same time, Google is seeking to set itself apart from AI upstarts. "Generative AI companies are not trying to out-Google Google," said Schmidtlein. Google's team contends that its actions have not harmed any AI products like ChatGPT or Perplexity, and at any rate, they are not in the search market as defined by the court. Mehta mused about the future of search, suggesting we may have to rethink what a general search engine is in 2025. "Maybe people don’t want 10 blue links anymore," he said. The Chromium problem and an elegant solution At times during the case, Mehta has expressed skepticism about the divestment of Chrome. During closing arguments, Dahlquist reiterated the close relationship between search and browsers, reminding the court that 35 percent of Google's search volume comes from Chrome. Mehta now seems more receptive to a Chrome split than before, perhaps in part because the effects of the other remedies are becoming so murky. He called the Chrome divestment "less speculative" and "more elegant" than the data and placement remedies. Google again claimed, as it has throughout the remedy phase, that forcing it to give up Chrome is unsupported in the law and that Chrome's dominance is a result of innovation. Even if Mehta leans toward ordering this remedy, Chromium may be a sticking point. The judge seems unconvinced that the supposed buyers—a group which apparently includes almost every major tech firm—have the scale and expertise needed to maintain Chromium. This open source project forms the foundation of many other browsers, making its continued smooth operation critical to the web. If Google gives up Chrome, Chromium goes with it, but what about the people who maintain it? The DOJ contends that it's common for employees to come along with an acquisition, but that's far from certain. There was some discussion of ensuring a buyer could commit to hiring staff to maintain Chromium. The DOJ suggests Google could be ordered to provide financial incentives to ensure critical roles are filled, but that sounds potentially messy. A Chrome sale seems more likely now than it did earlier, but nothing is assured yet. Following the final arguments from each side, it's up to Mehta to mull over the facts before deciding Google's fate. That's expected to happen in August, but nothing will change for Google right away. The company has already confirmed it will appeal the case, hoping to have the original ruling overturned. It could still be years before this case reaches its ultimate conclusion. Ryan Whitwam Senior Technology Reporter Ryan Whitwam Senior Technology Reporter Ryan Whitwam is a senior technology reporter at Ars Technica, covering the ways Google, AI, and mobile technology continue to change the world. Over his 20-year career, he's written for Android Police, ExtremeTech, Wirecutter, NY Times, and more. He has reviewed more phones than most people will ever own. You can follow him on Bluesky, where you will see photos of his dozens of mechanical keyboards. 15 Comments
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos
    Faça Login para curtir, compartilhar e comentar!
  • The Wall Street Journal compartilhou um link
    2025-05-30 14:08:47 - Traduzir -
    Judge Questions Potential Curbs for Google in AI Arms Race

    Lawyers will make closing arguments Friday in the landmark antitrust case that is set to play an outsize role in the future of AI.
    #judge #questions #potential #curbs #google
    Judge Questions Potential Curbs for Google in AI Arms Race
    Lawyers will make closing arguments Friday in the landmark antitrust case that is set to play an outsize role in the future of AI. #judge #questions #potential #curbs #google
    WWW.WSJ.COM
    Judge Questions Potential Curbs for Google in AI Arms Race
    Lawyers will make closing arguments Friday in the landmark antitrust case that is set to play an outsize role in the future of AI.
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos
    Faça Login para curtir, compartilhar e comentar!
  • gaming bolt compartilhou um link
    2025-05-26 14:19:35 - Traduzir -
    US FTC Officially Drops Antitrust Complaints Against Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard

    News

    US FTC Officially Drops Antitrust Complaints Against Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard
    Microsoft president Brad Smith took to social media to celebrate the fact that the FTC has dropped its appeals against Microsoft.

    Posted By Joelle Daniels | On 26th, May. 2025

    The US Federal Trade Commission has officially dropped its appeals for an antitrust case against Microsoft for its acquisition of Activision Blizzard entirely. The FTC released a statement, saying that at this point, public interest is “best served by dismissing the administrative litigation in this case.”
    “Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the complaint in this matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed,” said the FTC in an order announcing the dismissal of the governing body’s complaint. Microsoft president Brad Smith took to social media platform X to praise the decision. “Today’s decision is a victory for players across the country and for common sense in Washington, D.C.,” wrote Smith. “We are grateful to the FTC for today’s announcement.”
    The FTC complaint being dropped comes a few weeks after its appeal for a denied injunction from 2023 also getting denied by the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals. The court stated that Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard was not violating US antitrust laws, with Judge Daniel P. Collins writing that the FTC hadn’t shown the “likelihood of success on the merits as to any of its theories,” with regards to the case.
    Back when the FTC had first set out to fight Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard, one of its core arguments was that the company would use its position in the industry to dominate the console market by releasing games exclusively on its own platforms. This led to Microsoft inking deals with both Sony and Nintendo to ensure that major franchises like Call of Duty wouldn’t be withheld from other consoles.
    Collins also pointed out that, despite being industry practice to have exclusive games in order to push console hardware sales, Microsoft is currently in the weakest spot behind Sony and Nintendo when it comes to having exclusives of its own. “All major manufacturers have engaged in this practice,” Collins wrote, continuing that competitors like Sony and Nintendo have “both have significantly higher number of exclusive games on their platform thandoes.”
    Back in 2023, the original injunction was denied at the time because the Judge at the time noted that Microsoft’s push into cloud gaming on various platforms dispelled the idea that Activision Blizzard games being “exclusive” to Xbox in some way would harm competitors in the gaming market.
    This now-dropped case by the FTC was the last thing plaguing Microsoft when it came to potential antitrust issues with regards to its acquisition of Activision Blizzard. The deal has otherwise been considered complete since October 2023, however, with Microsoft Gaming boss Phil Spencer welcoming the new studios under the Xbox Game Studios banner.
    Tagged With:

    Elden Ring: Nightreign
    Publisher:Bandai Namco Developer:FromSoftware Platforms:PS5, Xbox Series X, PS4, Xbox One, PCView More
    Borderlands 4
    Publisher:2K Developer:Gearbox Entertainment Platforms:PS5, Xbox Series X, PCView More
    Death Stranding 2: On the Beach
    Publisher:Sony Developer:Kojima Productions Platforms:PS5View More
    Amazing Articles You Might Want To Check Out!

    US FTC Officially Drops Antitrust Complaints Against Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard Microsoft president Brad Smith took to social media to celebrate the fact that the FTC has dropped its appeals...
    PS5 Pro’s PSSR Was So Good, F1 25 Used Double Resolution Ray-Traced Reflections F1 25 producer Si Lumb has revealed the studio's love for Sony's PSSR, and how it allowed the studio to push t...
    F1 25 PS5 Pro Enhancements Include Quality, Performance, and 8K Resolution Modes Resolution Mode runs in 8K and 60 Hz while offering ray traced dynamic diffuse global illumination while racin...
    Tekken 8 Adds Armor King in Season 2 This Fall As a series regular, debuting in 1994, the legendary luchadore returns for another round as the third DLC char...
    F1 25 Interview – Path Tracing, LiDAR Scanning, My Team Mode, and More Leading up to the upcoming launch of F1 racing game F1 25, Codemasters was kind enough to answer a few of our ...
    JDM: Japanese Drift Master Review – Toothless Roads The thrill of drifting to a faux-Initial D soundtrack is ultimately let down by iffy mission design and a bori... View More
    #ftc #officially #drops #antitrust #complaints
    US FTC Officially Drops Antitrust Complaints Against Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard
    News US FTC Officially Drops Antitrust Complaints Against Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard Microsoft president Brad Smith took to social media to celebrate the fact that the FTC has dropped its appeals against Microsoft. Posted By Joelle Daniels | On 26th, May. 2025 The US Federal Trade Commission has officially dropped its appeals for an antitrust case against Microsoft for its acquisition of Activision Blizzard entirely. The FTC released a statement, saying that at this point, public interest is “best served by dismissing the administrative litigation in this case.” “Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the complaint in this matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed,” said the FTC in an order announcing the dismissal of the governing body’s complaint. Microsoft president Brad Smith took to social media platform X to praise the decision. “Today’s decision is a victory for players across the country and for common sense in Washington, D.C.,” wrote Smith. “We are grateful to the FTC for today’s announcement.” The FTC complaint being dropped comes a few weeks after its appeal for a denied injunction from 2023 also getting denied by the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals. The court stated that Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard was not violating US antitrust laws, with Judge Daniel P. Collins writing that the FTC hadn’t shown the “likelihood of success on the merits as to any of its theories,” with regards to the case. Back when the FTC had first set out to fight Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard, one of its core arguments was that the company would use its position in the industry to dominate the console market by releasing games exclusively on its own platforms. This led to Microsoft inking deals with both Sony and Nintendo to ensure that major franchises like Call of Duty wouldn’t be withheld from other consoles. Collins also pointed out that, despite being industry practice to have exclusive games in order to push console hardware sales, Microsoft is currently in the weakest spot behind Sony and Nintendo when it comes to having exclusives of its own. “All major manufacturers have engaged in this practice,” Collins wrote, continuing that competitors like Sony and Nintendo have “both have significantly higher number of exclusive games on their platform thandoes.” Back in 2023, the original injunction was denied at the time because the Judge at the time noted that Microsoft’s push into cloud gaming on various platforms dispelled the idea that Activision Blizzard games being “exclusive” to Xbox in some way would harm competitors in the gaming market. This now-dropped case by the FTC was the last thing plaguing Microsoft when it came to potential antitrust issues with regards to its acquisition of Activision Blizzard. The deal has otherwise been considered complete since October 2023, however, with Microsoft Gaming boss Phil Spencer welcoming the new studios under the Xbox Game Studios banner. Tagged With: Elden Ring: Nightreign Publisher:Bandai Namco Developer:FromSoftware Platforms:PS5, Xbox Series X, PS4, Xbox One, PCView More Borderlands 4 Publisher:2K Developer:Gearbox Entertainment Platforms:PS5, Xbox Series X, PCView More Death Stranding 2: On the Beach Publisher:Sony Developer:Kojima Productions Platforms:PS5View More Amazing Articles You Might Want To Check Out! US FTC Officially Drops Antitrust Complaints Against Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard Microsoft president Brad Smith took to social media to celebrate the fact that the FTC has dropped its appeals... PS5 Pro’s PSSR Was So Good, F1 25 Used Double Resolution Ray-Traced Reflections F1 25 producer Si Lumb has revealed the studio's love for Sony's PSSR, and how it allowed the studio to push t... F1 25 PS5 Pro Enhancements Include Quality, Performance, and 8K Resolution Modes Resolution Mode runs in 8K and 60 Hz while offering ray traced dynamic diffuse global illumination while racin... Tekken 8 Adds Armor King in Season 2 This Fall As a series regular, debuting in 1994, the legendary luchadore returns for another round as the third DLC char... F1 25 Interview – Path Tracing, LiDAR Scanning, My Team Mode, and More Leading up to the upcoming launch of F1 racing game F1 25, Codemasters was kind enough to answer a few of our ... JDM: Japanese Drift Master Review – Toothless Roads The thrill of drifting to a faux-Initial D soundtrack is ultimately let down by iffy mission design and a bori... View More #ftc #officially #drops #antitrust #complaints
    GAMINGBOLT.COM
    US FTC Officially Drops Antitrust Complaints Against Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard
    News US FTC Officially Drops Antitrust Complaints Against Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard Microsoft president Brad Smith took to social media to celebrate the fact that the FTC has dropped its appeals against Microsoft. Posted By Joelle Daniels | On 26th, May. 2025 The US Federal Trade Commission has officially dropped its appeals for an antitrust case against Microsoft for its acquisition of Activision Blizzard entirely. The FTC released a statement, saying that at this point, public interest is “best served by dismissing the administrative litigation in this case.” “Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the complaint in this matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed,” said the FTC in an order announcing the dismissal of the governing body’s complaint. Microsoft president Brad Smith took to social media platform X to praise the decision. “Today’s decision is a victory for players across the country and for common sense in Washington, D.C.,” wrote Smith. “We are grateful to the FTC for today’s announcement.” The FTC complaint being dropped comes a few weeks after its appeal for a denied injunction from 2023 also getting denied by the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals. The court stated that Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard was not violating US antitrust laws, with Judge Daniel P. Collins writing that the FTC hadn’t shown the “likelihood of success on the merits as to any of its theories,” with regards to the case. Back when the FTC had first set out to fight Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard, one of its core arguments was that the company would use its position in the industry to dominate the console market by releasing games exclusively on its own platforms. This led to Microsoft inking deals with both Sony and Nintendo to ensure that major franchises like Call of Duty wouldn’t be withheld from other consoles. Collins also pointed out that, despite being industry practice to have exclusive games in order to push console hardware sales, Microsoft is currently in the weakest spot behind Sony and Nintendo when it comes to having exclusives of its own. “All major manufacturers have engaged in this practice,” Collins wrote, continuing that competitors like Sony and Nintendo have “both have significantly higher number of exclusive games on their platform than [Microsoft] does.” Back in 2023, the original injunction was denied at the time because the Judge at the time noted that Microsoft’s push into cloud gaming on various platforms dispelled the idea that Activision Blizzard games being “exclusive” to Xbox in some way would harm competitors in the gaming market. This now-dropped case by the FTC was the last thing plaguing Microsoft when it came to potential antitrust issues with regards to its acquisition of Activision Blizzard. The deal has otherwise been considered complete since October 2023, however, with Microsoft Gaming boss Phil Spencer welcoming the new studios under the Xbox Game Studios banner. Tagged With: Elden Ring: Nightreign Publisher:Bandai Namco Developer:FromSoftware Platforms:PS5, Xbox Series X, PS4, Xbox One, PCView More Borderlands 4 Publisher:2K Developer:Gearbox Entertainment Platforms:PS5, Xbox Series X, PCView More Death Stranding 2: On the Beach Publisher:Sony Developer:Kojima Productions Platforms:PS5View More Amazing Articles You Might Want To Check Out! US FTC Officially Drops Antitrust Complaints Against Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard Microsoft president Brad Smith took to social media to celebrate the fact that the FTC has dropped its appeals... PS5 Pro’s PSSR Was So Good, F1 25 Used Double Resolution Ray-Traced Reflections F1 25 producer Si Lumb has revealed the studio's love for Sony's PSSR, and how it allowed the studio to push t... F1 25 PS5 Pro Enhancements Include Quality, Performance, and 8K Resolution Modes Resolution Mode runs in 8K and 60 Hz while offering ray traced dynamic diffuse global illumination while racin... Tekken 8 Adds Armor King in Season 2 This Fall As a series regular, debuting in 1994, the legendary luchadore returns for another round as the third DLC char... F1 25 Interview – Path Tracing, LiDAR Scanning, My Team Mode, and More Leading up to the upcoming launch of F1 racing game F1 25, Codemasters was kind enough to answer a few of our ... JDM: Japanese Drift Master Review – Toothless Roads The thrill of drifting to a faux-Initial D soundtrack is ultimately let down by iffy mission design and a bori... View More
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos
    Faça Login para curtir, compartilhar e comentar!
© 2025 CGShares Portuguese
English Arabic French Spanish Portuguese Deutsch Turkish Dutch Italiano Russian Romaian Portuguese (Brazil) Greek
Termos Privacidade Diretório