The rhetoric is really heating up!
The rhetoric surrounding AI is intensifying, with the NY Times dedicating significant front-page coverage to the dangers and need for regulation of AI models. This has led to speculation that it signals the end of a bubble, with companies seeking regulatory capture. Some businesses are now actively looking to move away from frontier models, driven by data privacy concerns, especially after recent controversies like the math problem incident. The coming weeks are anticipated to be interesting, with potential new developments from teams like Qwen.
Time & source
Times shown in UTC
Display time zone: UTC
Local time zone unavailable; showing UTC.
PublishedOffset at this time: UTC+0Sep 13, 2026, 12:41 UTC
IngestedOffset at this time: UTC+0Sep 13, 2026, 15:01 UTC
- Published
- Sep 13, 2026, 12:41
- Ingested
- Sep 13, 2026, 15:01
- Source type
- Dev community
- Tier
- Community
- Source status
- Healthy
Tier is a per-source editorial setting, not a per-item score.
The entire page of the NY Times today above the fold absent one article is AI (the models are just too strong/too dangerous, must be regulated). They forgot to include "Sponsored by OpenAI" at the end of the articles, sure that was just an oversight?
This is what the end of a bubble looks like, desperate attempts to get some sort of regulatory capture in place to keep the business model from collapsing in upon itself. My days next week are 100% booked talking to companies about how to get off frontier models, one large, and a bunch of smaller customers, including one who's flying me out to them to sit down and get a plan in place immediately (the controversy around that math problem really spooked some CEO/CIO's about data privacy using cloud models).
Gonna be an interesting few weeks. Maybe the Qwen team will be nice enough to give me a little breathing room before dropping another hydrogen bomb? :)