Last month, I wrote an article about how schools were not prepared for ChatGPT and other generative AI tools, based on thousands of pages of public records I obtained from when ChatGPT was first released. As part of that article, I asked teachers to tell me how AI has changed how they teach. The response from teachers and university professors was overwhelming. In my entire career, I’ve rarely gotten so many email responses to a single article, and I have never gotten so many thoughtful and comprehensive responses.  One thing is clear: teachers are not OK. 

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland demanded that President Trump turn over the names of the guests at the White House dinner for top investors in his meme coin.

The problem isn’t just Penguin RandomHouse. It’s that we’ve created a system where sitting Justices routinely may have significant financial relationships with entities that appear before the Court. Book deals, speaking fees, luxury trips—the conflicts are everywhere, and historically (as we’ve learned) some Justices just ignored them.

When techies describe their experience of AI, it sometimes sounds like they're describing two completely different realities – and that's because they are. For workers with power and control, automation turns them into centaurs, who get to use AI tools to improve their work-lives. For workers whose power is waning, AI is a tool for reverse-centaurism, an electronic whip that pushes them to work at superhuman speeds. And when they fail, these workers become "moral crumple zones," absorbing the blame for the defective products their bosses pushed out in order to goose profits. As ever, what a technology does pales in comparison to who it does it for and who it does it to.

It's so emblematic of the moment we're in, the Who Cares Era, where completely disposable things are shoddily produced for people to mostly ignore.

"Say I tell you that you have my permission to move a book I wrote (and am thus the copyright holder for) from your Kindle to another device. If the Kindle book has DRM, you're still not allowed to move it. The fact that I am the copyright holder has no impact on whether Amazon—a company that didn't create or invest in my book—can prevent you from moving that book outside of its walled garden...In fact, if I supply you with a tool to remove DRM (like some versions of Calibre), then I commit a felony and Amazon can have me sent to prison for five years for giving you a tool to move my book from the Kindle app to a rival app like Kobo," [Cory Doctorow] wrote.

Unusual situations produce unusual action on the Supreme Court's "shadow docket"; ICE arrests a mayor, then DOJ charges a congresswoman; James Comey visits with the Secret Service.

I decided to finally give vibe coding a try. I’ve barely written any code since I hired developers at Puppet in like 2009. And I’ve been a staunch AI/LLM skeptic. But I figured I should at least be an educated skeptic. After a false start, and a couple of months of periodic usage, I’ve come to some conclusions about it. The first one is the most important: You should treat AI like an untrustworthy consultant.

The emissions from individual AI text, image, and video queries seem small—until you add up what the industry isn't tracking and consider where it's heading next.

Whatever else one might think about stablecoins or the GENIUS Act, its insolvency provisions are an absolute mess, both conceptually and in drafting. If the GENIUS Act becomes the law, we're in for a FUBAR situation when a stablecoin issuer ends up insolvent. Even more concerning, if a bank custodian for a stablecoin issuer's reserves ends up insolvent, the claims of the stablecoin investors will come ahead of the bank depositors. That's right. Crypto comes ahead of ma-and-pa.  The effect: stablecoins are being subsidized by bank deposits. Now that's GENIUS.