• Tech billionaires are making a risky bet with humanity’s future

    “The best way to predict the future is to invent it,” the famed computer scientist Alan Kay once said. Uttered more out of exasperation than as inspiration, his remark has nevertheless attained gospel-like status among Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, in particular a handful of tech billionaires who fancy themselves the chief architects of humanity’s future. 

    Sam Altman, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and others may have slightly different goals and ambitions in the near term, but their grand visions for the next decade and beyond are remarkably similar. Framed less as technological objectives and more as existential imperatives, they include aligning AI with the interests of humanity; creating an artificial superintelligence that will solve all the world’s most pressing problems; merging with that superintelligence to achieve immortality; establishing a permanent, self-­sustaining colony on Mars; and, ultimately, spreading out across the cosmos.

    While there’s a sprawling patchwork of ideas and philosophies powering these visions, three features play a central role, says Adam Becker, a science writer and astrophysicist: an unshakable certainty that technology can solve any problem, a belief in the necessity of perpetual growth, and a quasi-religious obsession with transcending our physical and biological limits. In his timely new book, More Everything Forever: AI Overlords, Space Empires, and Silicon Valley’s Crusade to Control the Fate of Humanity, Becker calls this triumvirate of beliefs the “ideology of technological salvation” and warns that tech titans are using it to steer humanity in a dangerous direction. 

    “In most of these isms you’ll find the idea of escape and transcendence, as well as the promise of an amazing future, full of unimaginable wonders—so long as we don’t get in the way of technological progress.”

    “The credence that tech billionaires give to these specific science-fictional futures validates their pursuit of more—to portray the growth of their businesses as a moral imperative, to reduce the complex problems of the world to simple questions of technology,to justify nearly any action they might want to take,” he writes. Becker argues that the only way to break free of these visions is to see them for what they are: a convenient excuse to continue destroying the environment, skirt regulations, amass more power and control, and dismiss the very real problems of today to focus on the imagined ones of tomorrow. 

    A lot of critics, academics, and journalists have tried to define or distill the Silicon Valley ethos over the years. There was the “Californian Ideology” in the mid-’90s, the “Move fast and break things” era of the early 2000s, and more recently the “Libertarianism for me, feudalism for thee”  or “techno-­authoritarian” views. How do you see the “ideology of technological salvation” fitting in? 

    I’d say it’s very much of a piece with those earlier attempts to describe the Silicon Valley mindset. I mean, you can draw a pretty straight line from Max More’s principles of transhumanism in the ’90s to the Californian Ideologyand through to what I call the ideology of technological salvation. The fact is, many of the ideas that define or animate Silicon Valley thinking have never been much of a ­mystery—libertarianism, an antipathy toward the government and regulation, the boundless faith in technology, the obsession with optimization. 

    What can be difficult is to parse where all these ideas come from and how they fit together—or if they fit together at all. I came up with the ideology of technological salvation as a way to name and give shape to a group of interrelated concepts and philosophies that can seem sprawling and ill-defined at first, but that actually sit at the center of a worldview shared by venture capitalists, executives, and other thought leaders in the tech industry. 

    Readers will likely be familiar with the tech billionaires featured in your book and at least some of their ambitions. I’m guessing they’ll be less familiar with the various “isms” that you argue have influenced or guided their thinking. Effective altruism, rationalism, long­termism, extropianism, effective accelerationism, futurism, singularitarianism, ­transhumanism—there are a lot of them. Is there something that they all share? 

    They’re definitely connected. In a sense, you could say they’re all versions or instantiations of the ideology of technological salvation, but there are also some very deep historical connections between the people in these groups and their aims and beliefs. The Extropians in the late ’80s believed in self-­transformation through technology and freedom from limitations of any kind—ideas that Ray Kurzweil eventually helped popularize and legitimize for a larger audience with the Singularity. 

    In most of these isms you’ll find the idea of escape and transcendence, as well as the promise of an amazing future, full of unimaginable wonders—so long as we don’t get in the way of technological progress. I should say that AI researcher Timnit Gebru and philosopher Émile Torres have also done a lot of great work linking these ideologies to one another and showing how they all have ties to racism, misogyny, and eugenics.

    You argue that the Singularity is the purest expression of the ideology of technological salvation. How so?

    Well, for one thing, it’s just this very simple, straightforward idea—the Singularity is coming and will occur when we merge our brains with the cloud and expand our intelligence a millionfold. This will then deepen our awareness and consciousness and everything will be amazing. In many ways, it’s a fantastical vision of a perfect technological utopia. We’re all going to live as long as we want in an eternal paradise, watched over by machines of loving grace, and everything will just get exponentially better forever. The end.

    The other isms I talk about in the book have a little more … heft isn’t the right word—they just have more stuff going on. There’s more to them, right? The rationalists and the effective altruists and the longtermists—they think that something like a singularity will happen, or could happen, but that there’s this really big danger between where we are now and that potential event. We have to address the fact that an all-powerful AI might destroy humanity—the so-called alignment problem—before any singularity can happen. 

    Then you’ve got the effective accelerationists, who are more like Kurzweil, but they’ve got more of a tech-bro spin on things. They’ve taken some of the older transhumanist ideas from the Singularity and updated them for startup culture. Marc Andreessen’s “Techno-Optimist Manifesto”is a good example. You could argue that all of these other philosophies that have gained purchase in Silicon Valley are just twists on Kurzweil’s Singularity, each one building on top of the core ideas of transcendence, techno­-optimism, and exponential growth. 

    Early on in the book you take aim at that idea of exponential growth—specifically, Kurzweil’s “Law of Accelerating Returns.” Could you explain what that is and why you think it’s flawed?

    Kurzweil thinks there’s this immutable “Law of Accelerating Returns” at work in the affairs of the universe, especially when it comes to technology. It’s the idea that technological progress isn’t linear but exponential. Advancements in one technology fuel even more rapid advancements in the future, which in turn lead to greater complexity and greater technological power, and on and on. This is just a mistake. Kurzweil uses the Law of Accelerating Returns to explain why the Singularity is inevitable, but to be clear, he’s far from the only one who believes in this so-called law.

    “I really believe that when you get as rich as some of these guys are, you can just do things that seem like thinking and no one is really going to correct you or tell you things you don’t want to hear.”

    My sense is that it’s an idea that comes from staring at Moore’s Law for too long. Moore’s Law is of course the famous prediction that the number of transistors on a chip will double roughly every two years, with a minimal increase in cost. Now, that has in fact happened for the last 50 years or so, but not because of some fundamental law in the universe. It’s because the tech industry made a choice and some very sizable investments to make it happen. Moore’s Law was ultimately this really interesting observation or projection of a historical trend, but even Gordon Mooreknew that it wouldn’t and couldn’t last forever. In fact, some think it’s already over. 

    These ideologies take inspiration from some pretty unsavory characters. Transhumanism, you say, was first popularized by the eugenicist Julian Huxley in a speech in 1951. Marc Andreessen’s “Techno-Optimist Manifesto” name-checks the noted fascist Filippo Tommaso Marinetti and his futurist manifesto. Did you get the sense while researching the book that the tech titans who champion these ideas understand their dangerous origins?

    You’re assuming in the framing of that question that there’s any rigorous thought going on here at all. As I say in the book, Andreessen’s manifesto runs almost entirely on vibes, not logic. I think someone may have told him about the futurist manifesto at some point, and he just sort of liked the general vibe, which is why he paraphrases a part of it. Maybe he learned something about Marinetti and forgot it. Maybe he didn’t care. 

    I really believe that when you get as rich as some of these guys are, you can just do things that seem like thinking and no one is really going to correct you or tell you things you don’t want to hear. For many of these billionaires, the vibes of fascism, authoritarianism, and colonialism are attractive because they’re fundamentally about creating a fantasy of control. 

    You argue that these visions of the future are being used to hasten environmental destruction, increase authoritarianism, and exacerbate inequalities. You also admit that they appeal to lots of people who aren’t billionaires. Why do you think that is? 

    I think a lot of us are also attracted to these ideas for the same reasons the tech billionaires are—they offer this fantasy of knowing what the future holds, of transcending death, and a sense that someone or something out there is in control. It’s hard to overstate how comforting a simple, coherent narrative can be in an increasingly complex and fast-moving world. This is of course what religion offers for many of us, and I don’t think it’s an accident that a sizable number of people in the rationalist and effective altruist communities are actually ex-evangelicals.

    More than any one specific technology, it seems like the most consequential thing these billionaires have invented is a sense of inevitability—that their visions for the future are somehow predestined. How does one fight against that?

    It’s a difficult question. For me, the answer was to write this book. I guess I’d also say this: Silicon Valley enjoyed well over a decade with little to no pushback on anything. That’s definitely a big part of how we ended up in this mess. There was no regulation, very little critical coverage in the press, and a lot of self-mythologizing going on. Things have started to change, especially as the social and environmental damage that tech companies and industry leaders have helped facilitate has become more clear. That understanding is an essential part of deflating the power of these tech billionaires and breaking free of their visions. When we understand that these dreams of the future are actually nightmares for the rest of us, I think you’ll see that senseof inevitability vanish pretty fast. 

    This interview was edited for length and clarity.

    Bryan Gardiner is a writer based in Oakland, California. 
    #tech #billionaires #are #making #risky
    Tech billionaires are making a risky bet with humanity’s future
    “The best way to predict the future is to invent it,” the famed computer scientist Alan Kay once said. Uttered more out of exasperation than as inspiration, his remark has nevertheless attained gospel-like status among Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, in particular a handful of tech billionaires who fancy themselves the chief architects of humanity’s future.  Sam Altman, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and others may have slightly different goals and ambitions in the near term, but their grand visions for the next decade and beyond are remarkably similar. Framed less as technological objectives and more as existential imperatives, they include aligning AI with the interests of humanity; creating an artificial superintelligence that will solve all the world’s most pressing problems; merging with that superintelligence to achieve immortality; establishing a permanent, self-­sustaining colony on Mars; and, ultimately, spreading out across the cosmos. While there’s a sprawling patchwork of ideas and philosophies powering these visions, three features play a central role, says Adam Becker, a science writer and astrophysicist: an unshakable certainty that technology can solve any problem, a belief in the necessity of perpetual growth, and a quasi-religious obsession with transcending our physical and biological limits. In his timely new book, More Everything Forever: AI Overlords, Space Empires, and Silicon Valley’s Crusade to Control the Fate of Humanity, Becker calls this triumvirate of beliefs the “ideology of technological salvation” and warns that tech titans are using it to steer humanity in a dangerous direction.  “In most of these isms you’ll find the idea of escape and transcendence, as well as the promise of an amazing future, full of unimaginable wonders—so long as we don’t get in the way of technological progress.” “The credence that tech billionaires give to these specific science-fictional futures validates their pursuit of more—to portray the growth of their businesses as a moral imperative, to reduce the complex problems of the world to simple questions of technology,to justify nearly any action they might want to take,” he writes. Becker argues that the only way to break free of these visions is to see them for what they are: a convenient excuse to continue destroying the environment, skirt regulations, amass more power and control, and dismiss the very real problems of today to focus on the imagined ones of tomorrow.  A lot of critics, academics, and journalists have tried to define or distill the Silicon Valley ethos over the years. There was the “Californian Ideology” in the mid-’90s, the “Move fast and break things” era of the early 2000s, and more recently the “Libertarianism for me, feudalism for thee”  or “techno-­authoritarian” views. How do you see the “ideology of technological salvation” fitting in?  I’d say it’s very much of a piece with those earlier attempts to describe the Silicon Valley mindset. I mean, you can draw a pretty straight line from Max More’s principles of transhumanism in the ’90s to the Californian Ideologyand through to what I call the ideology of technological salvation. The fact is, many of the ideas that define or animate Silicon Valley thinking have never been much of a ­mystery—libertarianism, an antipathy toward the government and regulation, the boundless faith in technology, the obsession with optimization.  What can be difficult is to parse where all these ideas come from and how they fit together—or if they fit together at all. I came up with the ideology of technological salvation as a way to name and give shape to a group of interrelated concepts and philosophies that can seem sprawling and ill-defined at first, but that actually sit at the center of a worldview shared by venture capitalists, executives, and other thought leaders in the tech industry.  Readers will likely be familiar with the tech billionaires featured in your book and at least some of their ambitions. I’m guessing they’ll be less familiar with the various “isms” that you argue have influenced or guided their thinking. Effective altruism, rationalism, long­termism, extropianism, effective accelerationism, futurism, singularitarianism, ­transhumanism—there are a lot of them. Is there something that they all share?  They’re definitely connected. In a sense, you could say they’re all versions or instantiations of the ideology of technological salvation, but there are also some very deep historical connections between the people in these groups and their aims and beliefs. The Extropians in the late ’80s believed in self-­transformation through technology and freedom from limitations of any kind—ideas that Ray Kurzweil eventually helped popularize and legitimize for a larger audience with the Singularity.  In most of these isms you’ll find the idea of escape and transcendence, as well as the promise of an amazing future, full of unimaginable wonders—so long as we don’t get in the way of technological progress. I should say that AI researcher Timnit Gebru and philosopher Émile Torres have also done a lot of great work linking these ideologies to one another and showing how they all have ties to racism, misogyny, and eugenics. You argue that the Singularity is the purest expression of the ideology of technological salvation. How so? Well, for one thing, it’s just this very simple, straightforward idea—the Singularity is coming and will occur when we merge our brains with the cloud and expand our intelligence a millionfold. This will then deepen our awareness and consciousness and everything will be amazing. In many ways, it’s a fantastical vision of a perfect technological utopia. We’re all going to live as long as we want in an eternal paradise, watched over by machines of loving grace, and everything will just get exponentially better forever. The end. The other isms I talk about in the book have a little more … heft isn’t the right word—they just have more stuff going on. There’s more to them, right? The rationalists and the effective altruists and the longtermists—they think that something like a singularity will happen, or could happen, but that there’s this really big danger between where we are now and that potential event. We have to address the fact that an all-powerful AI might destroy humanity—the so-called alignment problem—before any singularity can happen.  Then you’ve got the effective accelerationists, who are more like Kurzweil, but they’ve got more of a tech-bro spin on things. They’ve taken some of the older transhumanist ideas from the Singularity and updated them for startup culture. Marc Andreessen’s “Techno-Optimist Manifesto”is a good example. You could argue that all of these other philosophies that have gained purchase in Silicon Valley are just twists on Kurzweil’s Singularity, each one building on top of the core ideas of transcendence, techno­-optimism, and exponential growth.  Early on in the book you take aim at that idea of exponential growth—specifically, Kurzweil’s “Law of Accelerating Returns.” Could you explain what that is and why you think it’s flawed? Kurzweil thinks there’s this immutable “Law of Accelerating Returns” at work in the affairs of the universe, especially when it comes to technology. It’s the idea that technological progress isn’t linear but exponential. Advancements in one technology fuel even more rapid advancements in the future, which in turn lead to greater complexity and greater technological power, and on and on. This is just a mistake. Kurzweil uses the Law of Accelerating Returns to explain why the Singularity is inevitable, but to be clear, he’s far from the only one who believes in this so-called law. “I really believe that when you get as rich as some of these guys are, you can just do things that seem like thinking and no one is really going to correct you or tell you things you don’t want to hear.” My sense is that it’s an idea that comes from staring at Moore’s Law for too long. Moore’s Law is of course the famous prediction that the number of transistors on a chip will double roughly every two years, with a minimal increase in cost. Now, that has in fact happened for the last 50 years or so, but not because of some fundamental law in the universe. It’s because the tech industry made a choice and some very sizable investments to make it happen. Moore’s Law was ultimately this really interesting observation or projection of a historical trend, but even Gordon Mooreknew that it wouldn’t and couldn’t last forever. In fact, some think it’s already over.  These ideologies take inspiration from some pretty unsavory characters. Transhumanism, you say, was first popularized by the eugenicist Julian Huxley in a speech in 1951. Marc Andreessen’s “Techno-Optimist Manifesto” name-checks the noted fascist Filippo Tommaso Marinetti and his futurist manifesto. Did you get the sense while researching the book that the tech titans who champion these ideas understand their dangerous origins? You’re assuming in the framing of that question that there’s any rigorous thought going on here at all. As I say in the book, Andreessen’s manifesto runs almost entirely on vibes, not logic. I think someone may have told him about the futurist manifesto at some point, and he just sort of liked the general vibe, which is why he paraphrases a part of it. Maybe he learned something about Marinetti and forgot it. Maybe he didn’t care.  I really believe that when you get as rich as some of these guys are, you can just do things that seem like thinking and no one is really going to correct you or tell you things you don’t want to hear. For many of these billionaires, the vibes of fascism, authoritarianism, and colonialism are attractive because they’re fundamentally about creating a fantasy of control.  You argue that these visions of the future are being used to hasten environmental destruction, increase authoritarianism, and exacerbate inequalities. You also admit that they appeal to lots of people who aren’t billionaires. Why do you think that is?  I think a lot of us are also attracted to these ideas for the same reasons the tech billionaires are—they offer this fantasy of knowing what the future holds, of transcending death, and a sense that someone or something out there is in control. It’s hard to overstate how comforting a simple, coherent narrative can be in an increasingly complex and fast-moving world. This is of course what religion offers for many of us, and I don’t think it’s an accident that a sizable number of people in the rationalist and effective altruist communities are actually ex-evangelicals. More than any one specific technology, it seems like the most consequential thing these billionaires have invented is a sense of inevitability—that their visions for the future are somehow predestined. How does one fight against that? It’s a difficult question. For me, the answer was to write this book. I guess I’d also say this: Silicon Valley enjoyed well over a decade with little to no pushback on anything. That’s definitely a big part of how we ended up in this mess. There was no regulation, very little critical coverage in the press, and a lot of self-mythologizing going on. Things have started to change, especially as the social and environmental damage that tech companies and industry leaders have helped facilitate has become more clear. That understanding is an essential part of deflating the power of these tech billionaires and breaking free of their visions. When we understand that these dreams of the future are actually nightmares for the rest of us, I think you’ll see that senseof inevitability vanish pretty fast.  This interview was edited for length and clarity. Bryan Gardiner is a writer based in Oakland, California.  #tech #billionaires #are #making #risky
    WWW.TECHNOLOGYREVIEW.COM
    Tech billionaires are making a risky bet with humanity’s future
    “The best way to predict the future is to invent it,” the famed computer scientist Alan Kay once said. Uttered more out of exasperation than as inspiration, his remark has nevertheless attained gospel-like status among Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, in particular a handful of tech billionaires who fancy themselves the chief architects of humanity’s future.  Sam Altman, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and others may have slightly different goals and ambitions in the near term, but their grand visions for the next decade and beyond are remarkably similar. Framed less as technological objectives and more as existential imperatives, they include aligning AI with the interests of humanity; creating an artificial superintelligence that will solve all the world’s most pressing problems; merging with that superintelligence to achieve immortality (or something close to it); establishing a permanent, self-­sustaining colony on Mars; and, ultimately, spreading out across the cosmos. While there’s a sprawling patchwork of ideas and philosophies powering these visions, three features play a central role, says Adam Becker, a science writer and astrophysicist: an unshakable certainty that technology can solve any problem, a belief in the necessity of perpetual growth, and a quasi-religious obsession with transcending our physical and biological limits. In his timely new book, More Everything Forever: AI Overlords, Space Empires, and Silicon Valley’s Crusade to Control the Fate of Humanity, Becker calls this triumvirate of beliefs the “ideology of technological salvation” and warns that tech titans are using it to steer humanity in a dangerous direction.  “In most of these isms you’ll find the idea of escape and transcendence, as well as the promise of an amazing future, full of unimaginable wonders—so long as we don’t get in the way of technological progress.” “The credence that tech billionaires give to these specific science-fictional futures validates their pursuit of more—to portray the growth of their businesses as a moral imperative, to reduce the complex problems of the world to simple questions of technology, [and] to justify nearly any action they might want to take,” he writes. Becker argues that the only way to break free of these visions is to see them for what they are: a convenient excuse to continue destroying the environment, skirt regulations, amass more power and control, and dismiss the very real problems of today to focus on the imagined ones of tomorrow.  A lot of critics, academics, and journalists have tried to define or distill the Silicon Valley ethos over the years. There was the “Californian Ideology” in the mid-’90s, the “Move fast and break things” era of the early 2000s, and more recently the “Libertarianism for me, feudalism for thee”  or “techno-­authoritarian” views. How do you see the “ideology of technological salvation” fitting in?  I’d say it’s very much of a piece with those earlier attempts to describe the Silicon Valley mindset. I mean, you can draw a pretty straight line from Max More’s principles of transhumanism in the ’90s to the Californian Ideology [a mashup of countercultural, libertarian, and neoliberal values] and through to what I call the ideology of technological salvation. The fact is, many of the ideas that define or animate Silicon Valley thinking have never been much of a ­mystery—libertarianism, an antipathy toward the government and regulation, the boundless faith in technology, the obsession with optimization.  What can be difficult is to parse where all these ideas come from and how they fit together—or if they fit together at all. I came up with the ideology of technological salvation as a way to name and give shape to a group of interrelated concepts and philosophies that can seem sprawling and ill-defined at first, but that actually sit at the center of a worldview shared by venture capitalists, executives, and other thought leaders in the tech industry.  Readers will likely be familiar with the tech billionaires featured in your book and at least some of their ambitions. I’m guessing they’ll be less familiar with the various “isms” that you argue have influenced or guided their thinking. Effective altruism, rationalism, long­termism, extropianism, effective accelerationism, futurism, singularitarianism, ­transhumanism—there are a lot of them. Is there something that they all share?  They’re definitely connected. In a sense, you could say they’re all versions or instantiations of the ideology of technological salvation, but there are also some very deep historical connections between the people in these groups and their aims and beliefs. The Extropians in the late ’80s believed in self-­transformation through technology and freedom from limitations of any kind—ideas that Ray Kurzweil eventually helped popularize and legitimize for a larger audience with the Singularity.  In most of these isms you’ll find the idea of escape and transcendence, as well as the promise of an amazing future, full of unimaginable wonders—so long as we don’t get in the way of technological progress. I should say that AI researcher Timnit Gebru and philosopher Émile Torres have also done a lot of great work linking these ideologies to one another and showing how they all have ties to racism, misogyny, and eugenics. You argue that the Singularity is the purest expression of the ideology of technological salvation. How so? Well, for one thing, it’s just this very simple, straightforward idea—the Singularity is coming and will occur when we merge our brains with the cloud and expand our intelligence a millionfold. This will then deepen our awareness and consciousness and everything will be amazing. In many ways, it’s a fantastical vision of a perfect technological utopia. We’re all going to live as long as we want in an eternal paradise, watched over by machines of loving grace, and everything will just get exponentially better forever. The end. The other isms I talk about in the book have a little more … heft isn’t the right word—they just have more stuff going on. There’s more to them, right? The rationalists and the effective altruists and the longtermists—they think that something like a singularity will happen, or could happen, but that there’s this really big danger between where we are now and that potential event. We have to address the fact that an all-powerful AI might destroy humanity—the so-called alignment problem—before any singularity can happen.  Then you’ve got the effective accelerationists, who are more like Kurzweil, but they’ve got more of a tech-bro spin on things. They’ve taken some of the older transhumanist ideas from the Singularity and updated them for startup culture. Marc Andreessen’s “Techno-Optimist Manifesto” [from 2023] is a good example. You could argue that all of these other philosophies that have gained purchase in Silicon Valley are just twists on Kurzweil’s Singularity, each one building on top of the core ideas of transcendence, techno­-optimism, and exponential growth.  Early on in the book you take aim at that idea of exponential growth—specifically, Kurzweil’s “Law of Accelerating Returns.” Could you explain what that is and why you think it’s flawed? Kurzweil thinks there’s this immutable “Law of Accelerating Returns” at work in the affairs of the universe, especially when it comes to technology. It’s the idea that technological progress isn’t linear but exponential. Advancements in one technology fuel even more rapid advancements in the future, which in turn lead to greater complexity and greater technological power, and on and on. This is just a mistake. Kurzweil uses the Law of Accelerating Returns to explain why the Singularity is inevitable, but to be clear, he’s far from the only one who believes in this so-called law. “I really believe that when you get as rich as some of these guys are, you can just do things that seem like thinking and no one is really going to correct you or tell you things you don’t want to hear.” My sense is that it’s an idea that comes from staring at Moore’s Law for too long. Moore’s Law is of course the famous prediction that the number of transistors on a chip will double roughly every two years, with a minimal increase in cost. Now, that has in fact happened for the last 50 years or so, but not because of some fundamental law in the universe. It’s because the tech industry made a choice and some very sizable investments to make it happen. Moore’s Law was ultimately this really interesting observation or projection of a historical trend, but even Gordon Moore [who first articulated it] knew that it wouldn’t and couldn’t last forever. In fact, some think it’s already over.  These ideologies take inspiration from some pretty unsavory characters. Transhumanism, you say, was first popularized by the eugenicist Julian Huxley in a speech in 1951. Marc Andreessen’s “Techno-Optimist Manifesto” name-checks the noted fascist Filippo Tommaso Marinetti and his futurist manifesto. Did you get the sense while researching the book that the tech titans who champion these ideas understand their dangerous origins? You’re assuming in the framing of that question that there’s any rigorous thought going on here at all. As I say in the book, Andreessen’s manifesto runs almost entirely on vibes, not logic. I think someone may have told him about the futurist manifesto at some point, and he just sort of liked the general vibe, which is why he paraphrases a part of it. Maybe he learned something about Marinetti and forgot it. Maybe he didn’t care.  I really believe that when you get as rich as some of these guys are, you can just do things that seem like thinking and no one is really going to correct you or tell you things you don’t want to hear. For many of these billionaires, the vibes of fascism, authoritarianism, and colonialism are attractive because they’re fundamentally about creating a fantasy of control.  You argue that these visions of the future are being used to hasten environmental destruction, increase authoritarianism, and exacerbate inequalities. You also admit that they appeal to lots of people who aren’t billionaires. Why do you think that is?  I think a lot of us are also attracted to these ideas for the same reasons the tech billionaires are—they offer this fantasy of knowing what the future holds, of transcending death, and a sense that someone or something out there is in control. It’s hard to overstate how comforting a simple, coherent narrative can be in an increasingly complex and fast-moving world. This is of course what religion offers for many of us, and I don’t think it’s an accident that a sizable number of people in the rationalist and effective altruist communities are actually ex-evangelicals. More than any one specific technology, it seems like the most consequential thing these billionaires have invented is a sense of inevitability—that their visions for the future are somehow predestined. How does one fight against that? It’s a difficult question. For me, the answer was to write this book. I guess I’d also say this: Silicon Valley enjoyed well over a decade with little to no pushback on anything. That’s definitely a big part of how we ended up in this mess. There was no regulation, very little critical coverage in the press, and a lot of self-mythologizing going on. Things have started to change, especially as the social and environmental damage that tech companies and industry leaders have helped facilitate has become more clear. That understanding is an essential part of deflating the power of these tech billionaires and breaking free of their visions. When we understand that these dreams of the future are actually nightmares for the rest of us, I think you’ll see that senseof inevitability vanish pretty fast.  This interview was edited for length and clarity. Bryan Gardiner is a writer based in Oakland, California. 
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    535
    2 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • Trump says he has no desire to fix his relationship with Musk, even after the former 'first buddy' deletes his X posts

    President Donald Trump and Elon Musk had a very public spat this week.

    Jeff Bottari/Zuffa LLC via Getty Images

    2025-06-07T19:13:48Z

    d

    Read in app

    This story is available exclusively to Business Insider
    subscribers. Become an Insider
    and start reading now.
    Have an account?

    President Donald Trump says he has no desire to repair his relationship with Elon Musk.
    He also said Musk would face "serious consequences" if he funds Democrats.
    Meanwhile, Musk deleted some of his most incendiary X posts on Saturday.

    It seems Elon Musk won't be President Donald Trump's "first buddy" again anytime soon.Trump told NBC News on Saturday that he has no plans to repair his relationship with Musk after it imploded this week. When asked if their relationship is done, Trump said, simply, "I would assume so, yeah."Trump said he doesn't intend to speak with Musk and said the tech billionaire was "disrespectful to the office of the President.""I think it's a very bad thing, because he's very disrespectful. You could not disrespect the office of the President," Trump said.The epic and very public fallout began after Musk criticized Trump's tax bill, which the president calls his "One Big Beautiful Bill."During Thursday's dramatic exchange, which took place mostly on the social media networks each billionaire owns, Trump threatened to terminate Musk's government contracts and subsidies. Musk shot back that Trump was in the so-called "Epstein files" in a now-deleted post.In the NBC interview on Saturday, Trump warned Musk against funding Democratic candidates running against GOP members voting in favor of the bill, saying there will be "serious consequences.""If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that," Trump said. "He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that."Last month, Musk said he would spend "a lot less" on political campaigns in the future. He spent hundreds of millions in support of Trump in 2024."If I see a reason to do political spending in the future, I will do it," Musk said at the Qatar Economic Forum last month. "I do not currently see a reason."Trump's remarks on Saturday came after Musk deleted some X posts from his account. He deleted the post referencing the Epstein files and a video he re-posted that appeared to show Trump partying with Epstein in the 1990s. Musk also deleted an X post in which he called a Trump comment an "obvious lie" and another post saying SpaceX would decommission its Dragon spacecraft "immediately."White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Business Insider that passing the tax bill is the president's priority."President Trump and the entire Administration will continue the important mission of cutting waste, fraud, and abuse from our federal government on behalf of taxpayers, and the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill is critical to helping accomplish that mission," Leavitt said in a statement.Representatives for Musk did not respond to a request for comment from BI.The repercussions from Musk and Trump's dispute were swift, affecting the price of Tesla stock and Dogecoin. A senior White House official told BI that Trump is now considering selling his Tesla.On Saturday, Vice President JD Vance said it was a "huge mistake" for Musk to "go after the president" during the newest episode of "This Past Weekend w/ Theo Von.""I'm not saying he has to agree with the bill or agree with everything that I'm saying," Vance said. "I just think it's a huge mistake for the world's wealthiest man, I think one of the most transformational entrepreneurs ever — that's Elon — to be at this war with the world's most powerful man."During the interview, Vance said he thinks everything will be fine between the pair if Musk "chills out a little bit.""Hopefully Elon figures it out and comes back into the fold," Vance said, adding that Trump had been a "little frustrated" with Musk's recent criticisms."But I think he's been very restrained because the president doesn't think that he needs to be in a blood feud with Elon Musk, and I actually think if Elon chilled out a little bit, everything would be fine," Vance said.Musk responded to Vance's comment on X on Saturday, writing, simply, "Cool."

    Recommended video
    #trump #says #has #desire #fix
    Trump says he has no desire to fix his relationship with Musk, even after the former 'first buddy' deletes his X posts
    President Donald Trump and Elon Musk had a very public spat this week. Jeff Bottari/Zuffa LLC via Getty Images 2025-06-07T19:13:48Z d Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? President Donald Trump says he has no desire to repair his relationship with Elon Musk. He also said Musk would face "serious consequences" if he funds Democrats. Meanwhile, Musk deleted some of his most incendiary X posts on Saturday. It seems Elon Musk won't be President Donald Trump's "first buddy" again anytime soon.Trump told NBC News on Saturday that he has no plans to repair his relationship with Musk after it imploded this week. When asked if their relationship is done, Trump said, simply, "I would assume so, yeah."Trump said he doesn't intend to speak with Musk and said the tech billionaire was "disrespectful to the office of the President.""I think it's a very bad thing, because he's very disrespectful. You could not disrespect the office of the President," Trump said.The epic and very public fallout began after Musk criticized Trump's tax bill, which the president calls his "One Big Beautiful Bill."During Thursday's dramatic exchange, which took place mostly on the social media networks each billionaire owns, Trump threatened to terminate Musk's government contracts and subsidies. Musk shot back that Trump was in the so-called "Epstein files" in a now-deleted post.In the NBC interview on Saturday, Trump warned Musk against funding Democratic candidates running against GOP members voting in favor of the bill, saying there will be "serious consequences.""If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that," Trump said. "He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that."Last month, Musk said he would spend "a lot less" on political campaigns in the future. He spent hundreds of millions in support of Trump in 2024."If I see a reason to do political spending in the future, I will do it," Musk said at the Qatar Economic Forum last month. "I do not currently see a reason."Trump's remarks on Saturday came after Musk deleted some X posts from his account. He deleted the post referencing the Epstein files and a video he re-posted that appeared to show Trump partying with Epstein in the 1990s. Musk also deleted an X post in which he called a Trump comment an "obvious lie" and another post saying SpaceX would decommission its Dragon spacecraft "immediately."White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Business Insider that passing the tax bill is the president's priority."President Trump and the entire Administration will continue the important mission of cutting waste, fraud, and abuse from our federal government on behalf of taxpayers, and the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill is critical to helping accomplish that mission," Leavitt said in a statement.Representatives for Musk did not respond to a request for comment from BI.The repercussions from Musk and Trump's dispute were swift, affecting the price of Tesla stock and Dogecoin. A senior White House official told BI that Trump is now considering selling his Tesla.On Saturday, Vice President JD Vance said it was a "huge mistake" for Musk to "go after the president" during the newest episode of "This Past Weekend w/ Theo Von.""I'm not saying he has to agree with the bill or agree with everything that I'm saying," Vance said. "I just think it's a huge mistake for the world's wealthiest man, I think one of the most transformational entrepreneurs ever — that's Elon — to be at this war with the world's most powerful man."During the interview, Vance said he thinks everything will be fine between the pair if Musk "chills out a little bit.""Hopefully Elon figures it out and comes back into the fold," Vance said, adding that Trump had been a "little frustrated" with Musk's recent criticisms."But I think he's been very restrained because the president doesn't think that he needs to be in a blood feud with Elon Musk, and I actually think if Elon chilled out a little bit, everything would be fine," Vance said.Musk responded to Vance's comment on X on Saturday, writing, simply, "Cool." Recommended video #trump #says #has #desire #fix
    WWW.BUSINESSINSIDER.COM
    Trump says he has no desire to fix his relationship with Musk, even after the former 'first buddy' deletes his X posts
    President Donald Trump and Elon Musk had a very public spat this week. Jeff Bottari/Zuffa LLC via Getty Images 2025-06-07T19:13:48Z Save Saved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? President Donald Trump says he has no desire to repair his relationship with Elon Musk. He also said Musk would face "serious consequences" if he funds Democrats. Meanwhile, Musk deleted some of his most incendiary X posts on Saturday. It seems Elon Musk won't be President Donald Trump's "first buddy" again anytime soon.Trump told NBC News on Saturday that he has no plans to repair his relationship with Musk after it imploded this week. When asked if their relationship is done, Trump said, simply, "I would assume so, yeah."Trump said he doesn't intend to speak with Musk and said the tech billionaire was "disrespectful to the office of the President.""I think it's a very bad thing, because he's very disrespectful. You could not disrespect the office of the President," Trump said.The epic and very public fallout began after Musk criticized Trump's tax bill, which the president calls his "One Big Beautiful Bill."During Thursday's dramatic exchange, which took place mostly on the social media networks each billionaire owns, Trump threatened to terminate Musk's government contracts and subsidies. Musk shot back that Trump was in the so-called "Epstein files" in a now-deleted post.In the NBC interview on Saturday, Trump warned Musk against funding Democratic candidates running against GOP members voting in favor of the bill, saying there will be "serious consequences.""If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that," Trump said. "He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that."Last month, Musk said he would spend "a lot less" on political campaigns in the future. He spent hundreds of millions in support of Trump in 2024."If I see a reason to do political spending in the future, I will do it," Musk said at the Qatar Economic Forum last month. "I do not currently see a reason."Trump's remarks on Saturday came after Musk deleted some X posts from his account. He deleted the post referencing the Epstein files and a video he re-posted that appeared to show Trump partying with Epstein in the 1990s. Musk also deleted an X post in which he called a Trump comment an "obvious lie" and another post saying SpaceX would decommission its Dragon spacecraft "immediately."White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Business Insider that passing the tax bill is the president's priority."President Trump and the entire Administration will continue the important mission of cutting waste, fraud, and abuse from our federal government on behalf of taxpayers, and the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill is critical to helping accomplish that mission," Leavitt said in a statement.Representatives for Musk did not respond to a request for comment from BI.The repercussions from Musk and Trump's dispute were swift, affecting the price of Tesla stock and Dogecoin. A senior White House official told BI that Trump is now considering selling his Tesla.On Saturday, Vice President JD Vance said it was a "huge mistake" for Musk to "go after the president" during the newest episode of "This Past Weekend w/ Theo Von.""I'm not saying he has to agree with the bill or agree with everything that I'm saying," Vance said. "I just think it's a huge mistake for the world's wealthiest man, I think one of the most transformational entrepreneurs ever — that's Elon — to be at this war with the world's most powerful man."During the interview, Vance said he thinks everything will be fine between the pair if Musk "chills out a little bit.""Hopefully Elon figures it out and comes back into the fold," Vance said, adding that Trump had been a "little frustrated" with Musk's recent criticisms."But I think he's been very restrained because the president doesn't think that he needs to be in a blood feud with Elon Musk, and I actually think if Elon chilled out a little bit, everything would be fine," Vance said.Musk responded to Vance's comment on X on Saturday, writing, simply, "Cool." Recommended video
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    590
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • The Download: China’s AI agent boom, and GPS alternatives

    This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.

    Manus has kick-started an AI agent boom in China

    Last year, China saw a boom in foundation models, the do-everything large language models that underpin the AI revolution. This year, the focus has shifted to AI agents—systems that are less about responding to users’ queries and more about autonomously accomplishing things for them.There are now a host of Chinese startups building these general-purpose digital tools, which can answer emails, browse the internet to plan vacations, and even design an interactive website. Many of these have emerged in just the last two months, following in the footsteps of Manus—a general AI agent that sparked weeks of social media frenzy for invite codes after its limited-release launch in early March.As the race to define what a useful AI agent looks like unfolds, a mix of ambitious startups and entrenched tech giants are now testing how these tools might actually work in practice—and for whom. Read the full story.

    —Caiwei Chen

    Inside the race to find GPS alternatives

    Later this month, an inconspicuous 150-kilogram satellite is set to launch into space aboard the SpaceX Transporter 14 mission. Once in orbit, it will test super-accurate next-generation satnav technology designed to make up for the shortcomings of the US Global Positioning System.

    Despite the system’s indispensable nature, the GPS signal is easily suppressed or disrupted by everything from space weather to 5G cell towers to phone-size jammers worth a few tens of dollars. The problem has been whispered about among experts for years, but it has really come to the fore in the last three years, since Russia invaded Ukraine.Now, startup Xona Space Systems wants to create a space-based system that would do what GPS does but better. Read the full story.

    —Tereza Pultarova

    Why doctors should look for ways to prescribe hope

    —Jessica Hamzelou

    This week, I’ve been thinking about the powerful connection between mind and body. Some new research suggests that people with heart conditions have better outcomes when they are more hopeful and optimistic. Hopelessness, on the other hand, is associated with a significantly higher risk of death.

    The findings build upon decades of fascinating research into the phenomenon of the placebo effect. Our beliefs and expectations about a medicinecan change the way it works. The placebo effect’s “evil twin,” the nocebo effect, is just as powerful—negative thinking has been linked to real symptoms.

    Researchers are still trying to understand the connection between body and mind, and how our thoughts can influence our physiology. In the meantime, many are developing ways to harness it in hospital settings. Is it possible for a doctor to prescribe hope? Read the full story.

    This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.

    The must-reads

    I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.

    1 Elon Musk threatened to cut off NASA’s use of SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraftHis war of words with Donald Trump is dramatically escalating.+ If Musk actually carried through with his threat, NASA would seriously struggle.+ Silicon Valley is starting to pick sides.+ It appears as though Musk has more to lose from their bruising breakup.2 Apple and Alibaba’s AI rollout in China has been delayedIt’s the latest victim of Trump’s trade war.+ The deal is supposed to support iPhones’ AI offerings in the country.3 X’s new policy blocks the use of its posts to ‘fine-tune or train’ AI modelsUnless companies strike a deal with them, that is.+ The platform could end up striking agreements like Reddit and Google.4 RJK Jr’s new hire is hunting for proof that vaccines cause autismVaccine skeptic David Geier is seeking access to a database he was previously barred from.+ How measuring vaccine hesitancy could help health professionals tackle it.5 Anthropic has launched a new service for the militaryClaude Gov is designed specifically for US defense and intelligence agencies.+ Generative AI is learning to spy for the US military.6 There’s no guarantee your billion-dollar startup won’t failIn fact, one in five of them will.+ Beware the rise of the AI coding startup.7 Walmart’s drone deliveries are taking offIt’s expanding to 100 new US stories in the next year.8 AI might be able to tell us how old the Dead Sea Scrolls really are Models suggest they’re even older than we previously thought.+ How AI is helping historians better understand our past.9 All-in-one super apps are a hit in the Gulf They’re following in China’s footsteps.10 Nintendo’s Switch 2 has revived the midnight launch eventFans queued for hours outside stores to get their hands on the new console.+ How the company managed to dodge Trump’s tariffs.Quote of the day

    “Elon finally found a way to make Twitter fun again.”

    —Dan Pfeiffer, a host of the political podcast Pod America, jokes about Elon Musk and Donald Trump’s ongoing feud in a post on X.

    One more thing

    This rare earth metal shows us the future of our planet’s resources

    We’re in the middle of a potentially transformative moment. Metals discovered barely a century ago now underpin the technologies we’re relying on for cleaner energy, and not having enough of them could slow progress. 

    Take neodymium, one of the rare earth metals. It’s used in cryogenic coolers to reach ultra-low temperatures needed for devices like superconductors and in high-powered magnets that power everything from smartphones to wind turbines. And very soon, demand for it could outstrip supply. What happens then? And what does it reveal about issues across wider supply chains? Read our story to find out.

    —Casey Crownhart

    We can still have nice things

    A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day.+ Sightings of Bigfoot just happen to correlate with black bear populations? I smell a conspiracy!+ Watch as these symbols magically transform into a pretty impressive Black Sabbath mural.+ Underwater rugby is taking off in the UK.+ Fed up of beige Gen Z trends, TikTok is bringing the 80s back.
    #download #chinas #agent #boom #gps
    The Download: China’s AI agent boom, and GPS alternatives
    This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology. Manus has kick-started an AI agent boom in China Last year, China saw a boom in foundation models, the do-everything large language models that underpin the AI revolution. This year, the focus has shifted to AI agents—systems that are less about responding to users’ queries and more about autonomously accomplishing things for them.There are now a host of Chinese startups building these general-purpose digital tools, which can answer emails, browse the internet to plan vacations, and even design an interactive website. Many of these have emerged in just the last two months, following in the footsteps of Manus—a general AI agent that sparked weeks of social media frenzy for invite codes after its limited-release launch in early March.As the race to define what a useful AI agent looks like unfolds, a mix of ambitious startups and entrenched tech giants are now testing how these tools might actually work in practice—and for whom. Read the full story. —Caiwei Chen Inside the race to find GPS alternatives Later this month, an inconspicuous 150-kilogram satellite is set to launch into space aboard the SpaceX Transporter 14 mission. Once in orbit, it will test super-accurate next-generation satnav technology designed to make up for the shortcomings of the US Global Positioning System. Despite the system’s indispensable nature, the GPS signal is easily suppressed or disrupted by everything from space weather to 5G cell towers to phone-size jammers worth a few tens of dollars. The problem has been whispered about among experts for years, but it has really come to the fore in the last three years, since Russia invaded Ukraine.Now, startup Xona Space Systems wants to create a space-based system that would do what GPS does but better. Read the full story. —Tereza Pultarova Why doctors should look for ways to prescribe hope —Jessica Hamzelou This week, I’ve been thinking about the powerful connection between mind and body. Some new research suggests that people with heart conditions have better outcomes when they are more hopeful and optimistic. Hopelessness, on the other hand, is associated with a significantly higher risk of death. The findings build upon decades of fascinating research into the phenomenon of the placebo effect. Our beliefs and expectations about a medicinecan change the way it works. The placebo effect’s “evil twin,” the nocebo effect, is just as powerful—negative thinking has been linked to real symptoms. Researchers are still trying to understand the connection between body and mind, and how our thoughts can influence our physiology. In the meantime, many are developing ways to harness it in hospital settings. Is it possible for a doctor to prescribe hope? Read the full story. This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here. The must-reads I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology. 1 Elon Musk threatened to cut off NASA’s use of SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraftHis war of words with Donald Trump is dramatically escalating.+ If Musk actually carried through with his threat, NASA would seriously struggle.+ Silicon Valley is starting to pick sides.+ It appears as though Musk has more to lose from their bruising breakup.2 Apple and Alibaba’s AI rollout in China has been delayedIt’s the latest victim of Trump’s trade war.+ The deal is supposed to support iPhones’ AI offerings in the country.3 X’s new policy blocks the use of its posts to ‘fine-tune or train’ AI modelsUnless companies strike a deal with them, that is.+ The platform could end up striking agreements like Reddit and Google.4 RJK Jr’s new hire is hunting for proof that vaccines cause autismVaccine skeptic David Geier is seeking access to a database he was previously barred from.+ How measuring vaccine hesitancy could help health professionals tackle it.5 Anthropic has launched a new service for the militaryClaude Gov is designed specifically for US defense and intelligence agencies.+ Generative AI is learning to spy for the US military.6 There’s no guarantee your billion-dollar startup won’t failIn fact, one in five of them will.+ Beware the rise of the AI coding startup.7 Walmart’s drone deliveries are taking offIt’s expanding to 100 new US stories in the next year.8 AI might be able to tell us how old the Dead Sea Scrolls really are Models suggest they’re even older than we previously thought.+ How AI is helping historians better understand our past.9 All-in-one super apps are a hit in the Gulf They’re following in China’s footsteps.10 Nintendo’s Switch 2 has revived the midnight launch eventFans queued for hours outside stores to get their hands on the new console.+ How the company managed to dodge Trump’s tariffs.Quote of the day “Elon finally found a way to make Twitter fun again.” —Dan Pfeiffer, a host of the political podcast Pod America, jokes about Elon Musk and Donald Trump’s ongoing feud in a post on X. One more thing This rare earth metal shows us the future of our planet’s resources We’re in the middle of a potentially transformative moment. Metals discovered barely a century ago now underpin the technologies we’re relying on for cleaner energy, and not having enough of them could slow progress.  Take neodymium, one of the rare earth metals. It’s used in cryogenic coolers to reach ultra-low temperatures needed for devices like superconductors and in high-powered magnets that power everything from smartphones to wind turbines. And very soon, demand for it could outstrip supply. What happens then? And what does it reveal about issues across wider supply chains? Read our story to find out. —Casey Crownhart We can still have nice things A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day.+ Sightings of Bigfoot just happen to correlate with black bear populations? I smell a conspiracy!+ Watch as these symbols magically transform into a pretty impressive Black Sabbath mural.+ Underwater rugby is taking off in the UK.+ Fed up of beige Gen Z trends, TikTok is bringing the 80s back. #download #chinas #agent #boom #gps
    WWW.TECHNOLOGYREVIEW.COM
    The Download: China’s AI agent boom, and GPS alternatives
    This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology. Manus has kick-started an AI agent boom in China Last year, China saw a boom in foundation models, the do-everything large language models that underpin the AI revolution. This year, the focus has shifted to AI agents—systems that are less about responding to users’ queries and more about autonomously accomplishing things for them.There are now a host of Chinese startups building these general-purpose digital tools, which can answer emails, browse the internet to plan vacations, and even design an interactive website. Many of these have emerged in just the last two months, following in the footsteps of Manus—a general AI agent that sparked weeks of social media frenzy for invite codes after its limited-release launch in early March.As the race to define what a useful AI agent looks like unfolds, a mix of ambitious startups and entrenched tech giants are now testing how these tools might actually work in practice—and for whom. Read the full story. —Caiwei Chen Inside the race to find GPS alternatives Later this month, an inconspicuous 150-kilogram satellite is set to launch into space aboard the SpaceX Transporter 14 mission. Once in orbit, it will test super-accurate next-generation satnav technology designed to make up for the shortcomings of the US Global Positioning System (GPS). Despite the system’s indispensable nature, the GPS signal is easily suppressed or disrupted by everything from space weather to 5G cell towers to phone-size jammers worth a few tens of dollars. The problem has been whispered about among experts for years, but it has really come to the fore in the last three years, since Russia invaded Ukraine.Now, startup Xona Space Systems wants to create a space-based system that would do what GPS does but better. Read the full story. —Tereza Pultarova Why doctors should look for ways to prescribe hope —Jessica Hamzelou This week, I’ve been thinking about the powerful connection between mind and body. Some new research suggests that people with heart conditions have better outcomes when they are more hopeful and optimistic. Hopelessness, on the other hand, is associated with a significantly higher risk of death. The findings build upon decades of fascinating research into the phenomenon of the placebo effect. Our beliefs and expectations about a medicine (or a sham treatment) can change the way it works. The placebo effect’s “evil twin,” the nocebo effect, is just as powerful—negative thinking has been linked to real symptoms. Researchers are still trying to understand the connection between body and mind, and how our thoughts can influence our physiology. In the meantime, many are developing ways to harness it in hospital settings. Is it possible for a doctor to prescribe hope? Read the full story. This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here. The must-reads I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology. 1 Elon Musk threatened to cut off NASA’s use of SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraftHis war of words with Donald Trump is dramatically escalating. (WP $)+ If Musk actually carried through with his threat, NASA would seriously struggle. (NYT $)+ Silicon Valley is starting to pick sides. (Wired $)+ It appears as though Musk has more to lose from their bruising breakup. (NY Mag $) 2 Apple and Alibaba’s AI rollout in China has been delayedIt’s the latest victim of Trump’s trade war. (FT $)+ The deal is supposed to support iPhones’ AI offerings in the country. (Reuters) 3 X’s new policy blocks the use of its posts to ‘fine-tune or train’ AI modelsUnless companies strike a deal with them, that is. (TechCrunch)+ The platform could end up striking agreements like Reddit and Google. (The Verge) 4 RJK Jr’s new hire is hunting for proof that vaccines cause autismVaccine skeptic David Geier is seeking access to a database he was previously barred from. (WSJ $)+ How measuring vaccine hesitancy could help health professionals tackle it. (MIT Technology Review) 5 Anthropic has launched a new service for the militaryClaude Gov is designed specifically for US defense and intelligence agencies. (The Verge)+ Generative AI is learning to spy for the US military. (MIT Technology Review) 6 There’s no guarantee your billion-dollar startup won’t failIn fact, one in five of them will. (Bloomberg $)+ Beware the rise of the AI coding startup. (Reuters) 7 Walmart’s drone deliveries are taking offIt’s expanding to 100 new US stories in the next year. (Wired $) 8 AI might be able to tell us how old the Dead Sea Scrolls really are Models suggest they’re even older than we previously thought. (The Economist $)+ How AI is helping historians better understand our past. (MIT Technology Review) 9 All-in-one super apps are a hit in the Gulf They’re following in China’s footsteps. (Rest of World) 10 Nintendo’s Switch 2 has revived the midnight launch eventFans queued for hours outside stores to get their hands on the new console. (Insider $)+ How the company managed to dodge Trump’s tariffs. (The Guardian) Quote of the day “Elon finally found a way to make Twitter fun again.” —Dan Pfeiffer, a host of the political podcast Pod Save America, jokes about Elon Musk and Donald Trump’s ongoing feud in a post on X. One more thing This rare earth metal shows us the future of our planet’s resources We’re in the middle of a potentially transformative moment. Metals discovered barely a century ago now underpin the technologies we’re relying on for cleaner energy, and not having enough of them could slow progress.  Take neodymium, one of the rare earth metals. It’s used in cryogenic coolers to reach ultra-low temperatures needed for devices like superconductors and in high-powered magnets that power everything from smartphones to wind turbines. And very soon, demand for it could outstrip supply. What happens then? And what does it reveal about issues across wider supply chains? Read our story to find out. —Casey Crownhart We can still have nice things A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or skeet ’em at me.) + Sightings of Bigfoot just happen to correlate with black bear populations? I smell a conspiracy!+ Watch as these symbols magically transform into a pretty impressive Black Sabbath mural.+ Underwater rugby is taking off in the UK.+ Fed up of beige Gen Z trends, TikTok is bringing the 80s back.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Angry
    Sad
    552
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε
  • The Trump-Elon Musk Feud Creates More Problems for Tesla

    Already suffering from steep declines in sales and profit, the carmaker could now face the president’s wrath.
    #trumpelon #musk #feud #creates #more
    The Trump-Elon Musk Feud Creates More Problems for Tesla
    Already suffering from steep declines in sales and profit, the carmaker could now face the president’s wrath. #trumpelon #musk #feud #creates #more
    WWW.NYTIMES.COM
    The Trump-Elon Musk Feud Creates More Problems for Tesla
    Already suffering from steep declines in sales and profit, the carmaker could now face the president’s wrath.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    663
    0 Σχόλια 0 Μοιράστηκε