Ten Blue Links, Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it infamy edition

1. Oh Perplexity, why must you test me so?

I have been a big proponent of Perplexity for a while, mostly because I found it incredibly useful as a research tool. Turns out the reason it was useful as a research tool was it was scraping a load of data that it shouldn’t, pretending to be academic researchers to get access to Twitter, and more. Suffice to say, I no longer recommend it. But more than that: organisations which engage in this kind of perfidious conduct should be actively shunned.

2. The cows are lying down

And speaking of AI, 404 Media decided to conduct an experiment: how much would it cost to basically clone their site using LLMs and off-the shelf tools? The answer: $365.63. And they wouldn’t have to employ any of those pesky journalists to do it.

3. Better by you…

What was the internet like 20 years ago? Without coming across like an old git, the answer is just “better”. Like Richard, I started blogging using Radio Userland, a long-forgotten application developed by Dave Winer. Like everything Winer makes, it was really an outliner (when I first worked at Apple in 1989, we used MORE for presentations – it was also a Winer product, and also really an outliner). It was also local: it generated all the HTML for your blog on your Mac and then uploaded the changed files. I still there there’s something in that approach.

4. Are you though? Are you really?

Ever wondered what it’s like being a low-ranking professional tennis player? No, I hadn’t either — but this great piece in The Guardian had me laughing, then shaking my head, then laughing again. My favourite line: ““I am going to fight my natural hand-to-eye coordination, no matter how bad it is, I am going to hit all of these motherfucking balls until I develop a shot. I am going to do this for months and months and months: I am not going to let these rich fucks beat me.”

5. Breakin’ the law, breakin’ the law

Confession time: whenever I buy an ebook which is encumbered with DRM, I crack it and save a local copy. I don’t give it away, loan it, upload it anywhere — but I don’t trust companies to keep their unspoken promise that I will always be able to access that book. Why don’t I trust them to? Here’s why. And yes, I did have books which used this DRM system.

6. And speaking of Microsoft DRM systems

Oops. Repeat after me: DRM is pointless.

7. Creative destruction

Look, in the great long list of terrible things that the Tories have spent fourteen years doing to Britain, the effective destruction of much of the support for the arts that had been built up for decades may not seem like the worst. But in terms of the breadth of people it affects, it’s probably the broadest. Obviously, underfunding organisations and forcing them to spend more time chasing money than supporting creative work is bad. But they have also hammered funding for adult education cources which aren’t “vocational”, which means that drawing, painting and other creative practice classes are not being cut – something disproportionately affects older people. Capitalism hates creativity.

8. PRs: please don’t do this

I don’t get that many unsolicited press releases these days (don’t think of this as a request) and I doubt that even during the Journalism Peak of my career I got as many as Jay Rayner, but I completely sympathise with his public letter asking that PRs do at least the minimum amount of research before sending him stuff.

9. The grumpiest man from Wales is back

God I love John Cale. Way back in the first years of this century I was lucky enough to see him do readings from his book What’s Welsh for Zen? at Komedia in Brighton, and he almost bit the head off an audience member who was trying to video him. In the twenty four years since he’s just got grumpier and he remains a vital creative force. I adore him.

10. The best reason not to use AI

We really do not need another global power crisis while we’re trying to stop the planet burning.

Microsoft 1998 = Apple 2024

Daring Fireball: European Commission Launches Investigation Against Microsoft for Integrating Teams With Office:

My read on this is that the EC’s stance is that its designated gatekeeping companies — all of which happen, by sheer coincidence I’m repeatedly told, to be from the US or Asia — should be forbidden from evolving their platforms to stay on top. That churn should be mandated by law.

Those of us old enough to remember back to the 1990s will recall Microsoft making very similar arguments about how antitrust was going to stifle innovation:

The Microsoft Corporation said today that a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Justice Department and several State Attorneys General is without merit and will hurt consumers and the American software industry, a leading contributor to the U.S. economy. Microsoft said it will vigorously defend the freedom of every American company to innovate and improve its products, a principle that lies at the heart of this case. Microsoft said today’s action by the Government will set a harmful precedent in which government intervention into a healthy, competitive and innovative industry will adversely impact consumers and a U.S. company’s ability to improve its products. The company said it appears that the lawsuit is more in the interest of a single Microsoft competitor than in the interest of American consumers.

Oddly enough, when Microsoft lost its cases' innovation didn't end. What did decline after the settlement of the DOJ and EU trials was Microsoft's browser market share -- a fact which some commentators would have you believe is a complete coincidence and nothing whatever to do with governments forcing Microsoft to stop being an abusive monopolist.

Apple delays AI in the EU. Maybe.

Another day, another spat between Apple and the EU.

I'm not going to focus on the ridiculous idea that the DMA Is too vague, or that someone EU law is about "the spirit of the law" rather than its letter. You have to know nothing about EU law – or, in fact, how any law works – to believe that. Neither am I going to address the nonsensical thought that the EU is making design decisions: if you believe that regulation is "making design decisions" then both Washington and Brussels have been making design decisions in the car industry for decades.

Nor am I going to say much about the hysterical "EU IS BEING JUDGE JURY AND EXECUTIONER!!!" piffle. Just go read Article 45 of the DMA. It won't take you long, and you can read it in many languages.

What I will say, though, is that the idea that companies can't know if a feature is compliant before they release it – an idea that's well-beloved of quite a few pundits – is at best ignorant and at worst downright deception. Article 8(3) of the DMA lays out how companies can engage with the Commission to "determine whether the measures that that gatekeeper intends to implement or has implemented to ensure compliance with Articles 6 and 7 are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances of the gatekeeper."

In other words, companies can engage with the EU before something is released to work out ways to stay within the DMA. The idea that it's just a crap shoot and WHO KNOWS WHAT THOSE CRAZY EUROS WILL WANT is just silly.

And maybe, in fact, that's what Apple is doing behind the scenes – in which case, it should just cut the crap and say it. Part of the mystery about this is we actually already knew some of it. Apple had already announced it wouldn't be released Apple Intelligence except in US English before the end of the year. That means, of course, EU countries weren't going to get it for a while anyway.

In the non-explanation explanation which Apple provider to John Gruber, it said this:

Specifically, we are concerned that the interoperability requirements of the DMA could force us to compromise the integrity of our products in ways that risk user privacy and data security. We are committed to collaborating with the European Commission in an attempt to find a solution that would enable us to deliver these features to our EU customers without compromising their safety.

This of course explains nothing, except stringing together “concern” with “privacy”, making ti sound like the big bad EU is going to force Apple to compromise the privacy of its users. Given the EU's long history of protecting the privacy of its citizens from US tech companies determined to operate in a wild west of personal data, this seems unlikely. And given Apple's own track record of ensuring users can't withhold their own data from Apple when it's beneficial to the company, I know who is on the side of user privacy here.

Apple is happy to cave in to even the most repressive regimes and forget about user privacy when it's beneficial to its bottom line. On the other hand, when user privacy conflicts with Apple's profits, it will go to the mat to defend its right to do what the hell it wants. That's why even if you tick the box marked "disable sharing of analytics", your iPhone will continue sharing analytics with Apple.

I really don't understand what Apple's game is here. Getting into a pissing match with a multinational block that sees the sanctity of free markets as its reason for existence and markets locked down by companies as an existential threat is not going to end well for any company.

Does it think it's going to get the DMA overturned? That a bit of magic PR will encourage a consumer rebellion of iPhone lovers riding to its rescue? I suspect it is still labouring under the impression that it's still considered “the misfits, the crazy ones”, the people who are on the side of consumers. A brand so beloved that even the EU can't touch it.

If so, I think it's become disconnected from reality. We saw with the controversy over the "crush" ad that people are now less likely to give it the benefit of the doubt, less likely to see it as the plucky underdog on the side of creative people.

For all its focus on privacy – and its genuine victories – Apple is no longer trusted in the way it was. It's begun to be considered just another big tech company, one that's prepared to throw its toys out of the pram if it doesn't get its way. When a company's value is in the trillions, it's very hard to credibly say you're on the side of ordinary people.

Ten Blue Links “Liberation Serif is cool now” edition

1. Dell to employees: “screw you”. Employees to Dell: “you first”

Everyone enjoys seeing a few chickens coming home to roost, and especially when the chickens are landing on the roof of a huge corporate entity and crapping all over its well-manicured rooftop executive garden. The latest to find out the hard way is Dell, which ordered its employees to make a choice: become “hybrid” workers travelling to an office 39 times a year (monitored of course) to spend their time on Zoom calls from an empty office, or be “remote” workers. Oh, and if you’re remote, you’re not allowed to get promoted or apply for another role in the company, ever.

No doubt the conversation in the executive suite was about how remote workers weren’t “team players” and so weren’t the kind of people who “deserved” promotion, no matter how well they actually do their job. But it’s turned out that if you choose to wield the stick rather than the carrot, people don’t respond too well: in fact, nearly 50% of employees have chosen collectively to shrug their shoulders and stay at home.

That’s bad enough now, but it’s also really going to choke Dell as a business in the future. Retention is always an issue, and the retention of employees who have no prospects in a company is an almost impossible task. Any competent leader at Dell will be spending a lot of their time in the next year recruiting, while good employees go elsewhere to further their career in remote roles.

And failing to retain costs money: way back in my early career, a slightly drunk finance director told me that when you accounted for the time of managers recruiting, the effort to find someone good, and short-term costs of backfilling vacant roles, you were basically burning about £2000 every time you recruited a replacement. The cost to Dell of increasing employee churn, with around 120,000 employees, is a lot: if this move adds another 5% to its churn rate, it runs into hundreds of millions of dollars.

And for what? Because Michael Dell likes to see a “lively” office? Michael, the 1990s called, and they would like their ideas about business back.

2. It was 20 years ago today…

How can it be 20 years since Cory Doctorow travelled from London to Redmond and into the belly of the beast to deliver the good news that DRM doesn’t work? Cory was right: DRM doesn’t work, and it never has. But the tech companies have managed to use its spiritual successors likes parts pairing and app stores, enabled by exploiting the intersection between bad law and technology, to do things which would have sounded wild to them in 2004. Had Bill Gates thought about a software store on Windows that he got 30% of the cut from for no additional work, he would have probably drooled so much the hydration would have killed him.

3. And the bullshit machine goes marching on

I have to confess that I was pretty enthusiastic about Perplexity, which I’ve used as an example of how a large language model-based tool could actually improve on the existing state of the art. And I still believe that search, in the way we think of it now, is going away and will be replaced by conversational engines giving answers that tap into public data. You shouldn’t have to master how to use a search engine (or the frankly shitty experience that most SEO-led pages now deliver) to find what you want. And where you don’t quite know exactly what you want – such as when you’re buying a product – having a conversation with something that knows about products is a better way to do it.

But oh: it turns out that Perplexity not only just makes stuff up, it has been scraping data it shouldn’t have and trying to cover its tracks. Why are startup people, so often, utter shitheads about stuff like this? It’s just so unnecessary.

4. $325m worth of humans delivering pizza

I absolutely love Joan Westenberg’s writing, and this piece on Zume is a perfect example of how she cuts through the bullshit. Zume, in case you missed their flashy pitch, was going to revolutionise food delivery by cooking the food in ovens on route to you. It started with pizza, but, of course, had the stink of “disruption” about it, the kind of smell that always ends up spreading to a thousand other areas. It turned out, of course, that its magic robot roving ovens made pizza that was just bad – so they ended up having stationary “mobile” ovens and using human delivery drivers to actually take the product to the customer.

In other words, VC’s decided that a company of pizza vans was worth $2.25 billion.

Masters of the universe, my ass.

5. Here we go again

Governments really, really, really hate encrypted messaging. The “good” governments hate it because they think it aids criminals; the bad ones hate it because it aids dissidents. And just because we beat them once, doesn’t mean they’re not going to try it again. Meanwhile, you can find me on Signal.

6. But muh users!

I see that Apple is up to its bullshit again? A terrible shame that it’s not going to get its way.

7. AI is a feature, not a platform, not a product

I’ve seen a few articles floating around about how Apple’s “Apple Intelligence” announcements shows that AI is a feature, not a product or platform (Benedict Evans has written a good one) and there is definitely something to this. But it’s worth remembering that the canonical use of “feature not product” was Steve Jobs telling this to Dropbox. And somehow, Dropbox is not only still around, it’s a good product – and still better than anything Apple has developed. What Apple has done is great: but in terms of the future, general purpose intelligence will probably win out for many tasks. Just because automatic gearboxes exist doesn’t mean sometimes a manual shift isn’t the right option.

8. Developers? Before the app store? THIS CANNOT BE

Someone should tell Tim Cook that a reality distortion field only works if you have the charisma of Steve Jobs.

9. Meanwhile, in Keir Starmer’s inbox…

...will be the terrible state of the universities, several of whom are likely to go bust within the first year of a Labour administration. Lots to do, boss, lots to do.

10. Masters of the universe, Redux

Every day, there’s another piece of evidence suggesting that far from being the Übermensch of their dreams, masters of the universe, probably lords of time, venture capitalists are really quite dumb. You have to love it.

Ten blue links, "what a beautiful day, hey hey" edition

1. Looks like a publisher, is actually an AI content farm

I'm still hearing about publishers who think the answer to their prayers is replacing human writers with large language models. But the real issue, and the one that actually puts the whole publishing model at risk, is the ability of companies to just start up massive "news" websites, win for a few months before Google works out they are are crap, rinse and repeat. BNN was an example o this. I saw it a lot for a while, but then it vanished. Here's the story.

2. Publishers doing the right thing

Over here, a group of publishers are suing Google for rigging the ad market. I don't know, yet, which publishers, but my gut feeling would be it's mostly small ones as larger ones tend not to want to antagonise Google. This is of course a better approach than anything which relies on copyright, news taxes and so on, because it's simply true: Google and Facebook have, between them, stitched up the ad market.

3. Alexa, why does my toothbrush not work?

Things which rely on a connection to the internet to work are always vulnerable to simply being switched off by the people who made the product, and there's no better illustration of this than Oral-B "smart" toothbrush. Part of me thinks that if you bought a toothbrush you could talk to you take a little bit of the blame, but I have also been caught by products which promised to have functionality which later disappeared. So I can't blame you too much if you bought a toothbrush expecting to be able to, erm, use it to manage your smart home.

4. Garry Tan promotes antisemitism

You might not know about Garry Tan yet, but you're likely to hear more about him. He's one of those venture capitalist vultures who seem to believe that having a lot of money makes them smart, but of course he's as dumb as the next arrogant bozo. He's so dumb, in fact, that he has taken to promoting antisemitic conspiracy theories aimed at George Soros. Well, he's either dumb or just a racist. Which is it Garry?

5. Was Jack Dorsey always this awful? Reader, I am adding to this headline purely to avoid my own law, because yes, yes he was

Dorsey doesn't like plebs, doesn't want to take any responsibility for anything and has a shitty beard. That's all.

6. The Tories hate the young, but luckily the young hate the Tories

It's entirely predictable that the Tory manifesto will be full of regressive nonsense, but what they have managed to do in recent elections is dangle just enough carrots towards young people to make them, at least, not bother to vote Labour. Usually this involved some magic incantation involving the word "aspiration". Not so now! Showing once again that Sunak has no political instincts at all, he has instead adopted a "fuck you young people" approach which is likely to get people voting against him, while adding nothing significant to his popularity amongst older voters. Stupidity, he is it.

7. Things I did not realise about my home town

It basically was the place the modern version of Dracula first made his appearance. Go, Derby!

8. Speaking of the undead

Tim Montgomerie, editor of Conservative Home, expects to see a poll which has Reform ahead of the Tories. I wouldn't be surprised either, and it will probably mean the Tories lurch even more to the right. But: they should also remember that they are so far behind in most polls that even adding every single Reform voter to their tally would still see them lose, comfortably. And it would probably alienate what few more moderate Tories they have left.

9. Now that's the right way to do AI

Opt-in. Not opt-out.

10. At last

On one hand, Apple actually building a proper password management app is a good thing. The password keychain functions are a little bit buried at the moment, which discourages people from using them -- and using a password manager is a great way to Do Better Secures. But... Apple's features can be a bit of a roach motel: you can get in, but you'll never get out again. So far, that hasn't been true of passwords, but let's hope no bright spark in Cupertino thinks that now is the time.

Weeknote, Sunday 2nd June 2024

First of all, how the hell is it June already? Is it just me? Is time passing at a ludicrously fast pace?

OK, maybe it is just me.

This week was, in work terms, truncated: A bank holiday plus a day off on Thursday made the week feel even shorter than normal. Since Thursday I have been up in Suffolk for a little mini-gathering of the clan, seeing my niece, her husband, and their two lovely children – the children for the first time ever. They all live over in Adelaide, where my brother and his wife settled over thirty years ago. An outpost of the Betteridge’s, established.

Because I’m quite a bit younger than my siblings being a great-uncle has come pretty early. I’m less than 20 years older than my youngest niece, which means we share quite a few cultural references, probably more than my siblings in some ways. And my niece’s lovely husband (who once managed to absolutely charm my mother, which gives him bonus points) is a wonderful, lovely guy, too.

Spending time away from home is good, but I’m less enamoured of living out of a rucksack than perhaps I would have been twenty years ago. I love being away, but the prospect of being at home in my own bed is what makes travelling special. The journey may indeed be the reward, but being able to soak in my own bath for a couple of hours is also part of the journey, in a way.

This week I have been reading Beyond the light horizon by Ken Macleod, the third in a series which I have quite enjoyed. It’s a nice near-future romp which features submarines which are actually spaceships, a mysterious alien intelligence, and a European Union that’s developed into a more communistic union – and which works better. Thank you Ken for painting a picture of a near future that’s not totally wrecked. I enjoyed the first volume a lot, thought the second lagged a little (as second volumes often do) and am enjoying the third one a lot more so far.

This week I also bought a new iPad, the 11in iPad Pro with the spangly new M4 chip in it. As a bit of background, I actually had two iPads: an M1 12.9in, and a recent iPad mini. Since I bought the MacBook Air M2, the 12.9 – which was intended to be my travelling machine – has hardly had much use. The 11in iPad Pro is intended to replace both, and be the device I take on trips and while commuting.

This trip to Suffolk was its first journey, and it’s done really well. The new keyboard is a delight to type on. While I didn’t mind the previous Magic Keyboard, this is a far better feel and more akin to the excellent MacBook Air keyboard. It’s also – of course – a great book reader, and I have spent a lot of time reading on it. The screen is great, but honestly the screen on every iPad I have ever owned has been great. Is it noticeably better than the older iPad Pro? Not to my old eyes, but that’s because the older iPad Pros already had great screens.

More importantly battery life is good, largely (I think) thanks to the shift to OLED and the power-sipping qualities of the M4. Does it need all that power? No. Will there be applications in the future where it’s required? Almost certainly. Roll on WWDC in a few weeks.

Ten blue links, just when I thought I was out edition

There’s a lot of AI in this edition. Sorry. One day I’ll stop talking about it, probably when silenced by the machines. For those whose interests are less one dimensional, I’ve included some actual culture towards the end.

1. Google zero is icumen in

As Nilay Patel writes, “the entire business of the modern web is built around Google”. We, as publishers and makers of stuff, have allowed the ludicrous situation where a single company has effectively enclosed the web. And it’s not like we weren’t warned. But as Nilay also writes, and I’ve written about extensively, that era is coming to a close. The consequences of this will be huge and painful but the key point for publishers is simple: don’t let it happen again.

2. Reader, they are letting it happen again

Oops.

3. “Publishers lack strategic patience”

Focus on your audience. Do great journalism. Get it to your readers. Don’t sell your Crown Jewels. Jessica Lessin, who has built a successful subscription business based on exactly this process, notes that publishers lack strategic patience, which is one of the reasons they constantly jump into bed with tech platforms then wonder what happened when the platforms treat them as suppliers and not partners. This is completely correct: publishers are not good at strategically cultivating a long-term relationship with their audiences. That would require investment and hard work, rather than focusing on short term revenue.

4. Who amongst us etc etc

And that’s why you end up with companies like AdVon, which specialises in in producing cheap AI-generated affiliate content which gets published on well-known brand sites. How do brands like USA Today or Sports Illustrated end up putting something which is obviously going to damage brands over the long time on their sites? Because they have no long term strategy.

5. Now this makes sense

“A new theory: somewhere in the Silicon Valley universe there’s a cadre of techies who have eidetic memories and they’re feeling them start to slip. Panic time.” Wendy Grossman (who you should read every week) makes me feel a bit seen. I was arguing earlier in the week about how Microsoft’s Recall feature was a boon to people like me who are getting to the point in their lives where memory isn’t as much of a given as it used to be. Is it a good feature? Unknown until we have hands on with the code and implementation. Is the principle that machine learning should happen on-device a good one? Yes.

6. Black boxes you can trust

Now this will be interesting: Apple is rumoured to be planning to implement a black box system for cloud-processed AI features. Given the company’s PR line on privacy, this would make sense – and might actually put some pressure on others to do the same.

7. Fixing old computers is the hotness

The Canon Cat is one of the more fascinating old computers, designed by Jef Raskin after leaving Apple and probably much closer to his original vision for the Macintosh than Steve Jobs’ cut-down Xerox Star. This article goes through restoring one, which means diving deep into the hardware with some interesting historical asides.

8. Under-sung hero of the week

Isabella Blow.

9. “We conflate all these scales of harm”

A fascinating interview that I had missed with RF Kuang, who talks about everything from so-called cancel culture to why she’s very bad at taking holidays (something we share).

10. What was new is old now

I never really got on with New Atheism, for the same reason that I never really got on with hardcore rationalists: it smelled like macho bullshit dressed up in pseudo-scientific clothing. The recent trend of new atheists turning out to be ardent supporters of transphobia and hostility towards pro-Palestinian activists makes me think my gut feeling about them was correct. New atheism was always a conservative and reactionary movement, led by privileged white men as convinced of their own infallibility as the hardcore religious they spent so much energy opposing. “New Atheism will continue to haunt us for as long as we refuse to acknowledge that the way things are always includes the possibility that things could be different.” Amen to that.

Google lies

If you are interested in any way in the worlds of SEO -- black, white, and every shade in between -- you are going to be aware of the massive leak of what looks like internal documentation about search. For an SEO, this is almost Holy Grail level stuff. Although it doesn’t detail how or even which of the factors that Google is collecting data on determines the rank of an individual page, it’s safe to say that it’s all in here, somewhere.

A lot of the initial focus of posts about the leak has been on the fact it shows that many of the factors Google has consistently claimed not to use for ranking signals are, in fact, being collected -- and so are likely to be ranking signals. This includes everything from individual author authority through to the overall authority of a site.

So... Google has been lying. But the reality is I don’t know a single SEO practitioner in the publishing space who believed this stuff anyway. We all knew that making it obvious that a writer had authority in a particular topic would gain you ranking. We all knew that sites themselves had some kind of measure of authority. We all knew that freshness matters (who amongst us has not gamed updates to increase the freshness of content?)

Everyone who has worked around the Google space has known which of the company’s pronouncements to take at face value and which to look at with a raised eyebrow.

I will leave it to others to pick over the bones of this and work out what matters and what doesn’t. While I still keep an eye on the SEO world, part of me thinks that the era of publisher SEO is drawing to a close, as traffic from search inevitably declines and Google turns from the world’s biggest referrer into the global answers machine.

Although its initial foray into AI answers on the page has run headlong into some issues, the direction of travel is clear. I would strongly advise anyone who is spending too much time snickering about dumb answers not to be too complacent. AI probably isn’t going to end up coming for everyone’s jobs, but sooner or later it is going to come for your traffic.

Weeknote, Bank Holiday Monday 27th May 2024 

It’s been a while since I wrote a proper Weeknote. To be honest, I am struggling with them a bit – I’m working at an actual company four days a week, which means what I can talk about is a bit more limited than when I was just mostly home-working freelance. 

The job is at a small business to business publisher and events company, working in the pharmaceuticals and transport spaces. Although I have touched on working with transport before, pharma is totally new to me. That’s not a big deal though: my role is to work with their content team, who don’t have a lot of experience, and get them working in new and exciting ways. 

Experience is a strange thing. By any solid metric, I have a lot of it. I’ve worked many different roles in editorial, content creation, video, podcasting – if it’s a medium, I’ve probably done it. I’ve worked on print, digital, done audience development, SEO, social, and more. And I’ve run teams that varied in size from a handful of people to close to fifty. 

Yet sometimes I feel like I don’t know what to do with that experience. Or rather: it feels hard to demonstrate to people just how valuable that experience is.

I have skills and knowledge that are timeless, but a lot of companies out there seem to overlook them. I have witnessed the evolution and transformation of many industries and markets over the past thirty years, but – perhaps because I have spent the last few years buried deep inside a big corporation – it’s sometimes hard to have much to show for it. 

I have a wealth of stories and insights to share, and when I share them people value the insight, but getting the opportunity is sometimes more difficult. 

But then I looked at Reddit posts from recent graduates, who all seemed to discover that the assurances of high salaries and good jobs they were given if they just graduated were, in fact, not bearing out. And I realise (again) how easy I had – and have – it.

Nearly 40% of 18-year-olds go to university.  When I went, in 1986, that percentage was much lower – only 15% in 1980. Likewise, on my year only three out of 110 students in the cohort got first class honours – 2%. Now the average is 36%. When that many people are graduating, and that large a number are getting top marks, it’s not difficult to see how being a graduate isn’t the guarantee of a better job that it once was. 

If someone with my experience and advantages doesn’t feel like he’s being heard, what chance do people just starting out have?

Ten Blue Links, All Your Computer Screengrabs Are Belong To Us edition

What a weird week. You might have noticed Microsoft had a few announcements. I’m not going to dwell on them – but what I will say is that moving AI from the cloud to the device while preserving privacy is hard, but a lot easier than keeping AI in the cloud. And so to the links…

1. Privacy sandbox is coming, and publishers might be in (more) trouble

Does Google hate publishers? You should know all about “privacy sandbox”, its not-really-private way of using aggregate data to target ads to people, which will just cement its position as Lord of The Ads. One thing that still isn't clear is if, in fact, publishers that don't use it will get downranked in search. At a time when AI answers and Google's general love of all things Reddit are already making them suffer. It will neither confirm or deny this. Which usually means it's going to do exactly that. If you're a user, Kagi is over there (and it's incredibly good).

2. Speaking of the media apocalypse…

This is one of the most depressing things I have read in quite some time. Audience from social media: dying. Audience from Google: dying. CPMs: Hilariously bad. One slight positive: Journalism has always existed with various business models, and it's not always been about scale and advertising.

3. Ben and Satya talk cricket. Oh, and AI

I've always loved Ben Thompson's work, even though I often don't agree with him these days. This long interview with Satya Nadella is worth a read in its entirety, and no, it doesn't feature cricket. Well only a bit. Related: I recently set up a new PC. What sport did it automatically show me in the widgets? Cricket. I see what you did there, Satya.

4. Twenty-four hours

Did you know that the Japanese used to have their own system of timekeeping which had longer or shorter segments depending on the time of year? And they built beautiful, elaborate clocks to tell time in it? I didn't, and now I really want to use that time system myself.

5. Not sent from my iPad

MG Siegler -- who, I am glad to say, is back writing regularly about tech -- hits the nail on the head about the latest iPad, and iPads more broadly. It's frustrating when you hit a wall with software like Safari, and you hit a wall far too often.

6. Reading comprehension and the age of AI

It's not just AI that threatens the truthfulness of our politics and culture: we have also lost, in some cases, the ability to read and comprehend long-form, detailed content. We have become the tldr; society.

7. The coming apocalypse in UK universities

Unless you work in the sector, you might not realise quite how stuffed UK universities are. And when I say “stuffed”, I mean “pretty close to technical bankruptcy and no longer able to carry out their core function”. It's yet another thing which the inevitable Labour government is going to have to pick up and fix, with both short and long-term measures required.

8. No, today's AI isn't sentient (but this article is rubbish)

There are few people with any knowledge of AI who claim that today's large language models (LLMs) are sentient, but that's the straw man this article starts with. Worse, though, is to follow. Despite it being co-written by a proper professional philosopher, the writers seem blissfully unaware that its insistence human-style embodiment is required for AI is one of those points that has been debated for longer than computers have existed. Read, but then read some proper philosophy of AI.

9. Media companies are making the same mistakes with AI they make with all new tech

Jessica Lessin has written a good piece for The Atlantic on how media companies' rush to make deals with the likes of OpenAI to provide access to their content is short-sighted and stupid. She's right: it is. When are media companies going to learn that when tech companies refer to “media partners” they mean “suckers”?

10. How do you become a writer? You write

Oh Ursula, how right you were. She was talking about fiction, but the same is true of any kind of writing. How do you become a journalist? Write journalism.

Hate to say I told you so

I don't think I was the first person by a long way to draw the conclusion that AI posed an existential threat to the publishing industry. While far too many publishers took one look at large language models and saw a way to make the cost of content significantly cheaper, my background in audience development told me straight away that the ability of LLMs to ingest content and spit out a summary was going to fundamentally change search engines, to the long-term detriment of publishers. Why click on a link when Google can give you an answer?

Ben Thompson – still one of the sharpest commentators on the relationship between tech and media – this the nail on the head when he talks about LLMs as an extension of aggregation theory:

LLMs are breaking down all written text ever into massive models that don’t even bother with pages: they simply give you the answer.

Google's announcement at Google I/O that it would roll out AI Overviews on search pages in the US seems to have finally got people's attention. Google is, of course, claiming this will increase clicks to publishers, which seems barely credible -- and the fact it's not giving publishers any way to see if a click originates from AI Overviews in Google Search Console suggests it really doesn't want anyone measuring that claim.

And don't think as a publisher you can opt out. The only way to do that is to opt out of search entirely. While you can opt out of being crawled for use in the Gemini chatbot, you can't opt out of AI Overviews on its own.

Gartner estimates the fall in traffic down to having AI-driven answers on the results page at between 35-60%, which would be a catastrophic fall for most publishers.

I think this is only the start: AI answers are not conversational, and for many situations – especially purchases – a conversational interface is generally superior to a simple text search. Turning search into a conversation is a huge step and it's likely to further impact publishers as a new generation gets used to "talking" to a machine to get exactly the answer they want.

So what should you do? The only way forward is to build direct audience, and focus on owning the relationship between you and the reader without being mediated by the large platforms. That may mean subscription - but it could also mean focusing on a smaller but highly valuable audience, wether that's a niche in the B2B market or focusing on building community rather than giving answers.

Treat your existing ad revenue and affiliate revenue as a cash cow, not a growth market. Although my gut feeling is that AI Overviews won't impact on affiliate content as heavily as the kind of answers-based pages which have been big traffic drivers for the past few years, their time will come too.

Be entertaining – remember that audiences don't just read content for information, they want to be entertained, provoked into thought, and to come away from an article or site feeling like it's really delivered. That probably means raising the quality of your writing – think New Yorker or The Verge.

But most of all: be yourselves. Don't try and be anyone else. For as long as I've been in publishing one of its scourges has been the reverse of "not invented here": a kind of belief that competitors are somehow ahead of you, that they have their strategy straight while you're still stuck in some kind of technological or content strategy dark ages. It's never been true: everywhere I've worked has felt the same way about whoever their competitors were.

You need to know your audience better than Google does, better than Facebook does. Can you do that? I think you probably can.

Some thoughts about Apple’s new iPads

Mark Gurman’s last minute “maybe an M4…” rumour turned out to be absolutely correct.

No one would have batted an eyelid had the company gone with an M3. Instead it chose to skip a generation and bring a new generation of its processors to the iPad before the Mac. The unanswered question (so far) is why?

My gut feeling is there are several drivers for this decision. First, it allows TSMC, who will be manufacturing the M4, to start with relatively small volumes. iPad’s sell well: iPad Pros, on the other hand, are a smaller part of the mix, and probably lower volumes than the MacBook Air or low-end MacBook Pros, which would have been the other option for a new chip.

Second, there is probably a performance price to be paid for that “tandem OLED” screen. Tandem OLED, by the way, is not a new thing. As reported by The Elec back in 2022, it looks like Samsung could be the manufacturer although LG Display also makes tandem OLED, mostly for the automotive market. In addition to brightness, tandem OLED gives increased lifespan and better burn-in resistance, both of which are important with a device that’s designed to be used for long periods of time.

But third is the marketing factor: by putting M4 first in the iPad, it shows that the iPad is still an important platform for the company.

One small point of note: Apple talks about M4 having “up to 10 cores”, but some models have less. The iPad Pros which have less than 1Tb of storage use a nine-core M4, and get 8Gb of RAM rather than the 16Gb of the high-end models.

This makes sense, because those iPad Pros with 1-2Tb of storage are going to be bought either to do video or because the customer has a stupid amount of money and wants “the best”. But Apple is not particularly transparent about this: go to order, and you won’t find a mention of the difference.

Of course there’s a new Apple Pencil Pro, but the second generation Apple Pencil, which a lot of current Pro owners will have, doesn’t work with it (the lower cost USB-C variant does). That means an even more expensive upgrade for existing users, who will also need to buy a new Magic Keyboard.

More importantly than the cost, Apple had a chance here to make a point that the iPad’s modular nature means you don’t have to throw away your accessories every time you upgrade. It chose not to do that, and that’s disappointing.

Another trick that Apple has missed is not improving the battery life, which remains at the usual “ten hours” or “all day battery”. And it’s not that iPad is bad on this score. But the Mac is now so much improved that it’s no longer the go-to device if you want something which is going to reduce your charging anxiety to nothing.

I’ve said it many times now, but the M2 MacBook Air has been a revelation. It turns my computer from being something where I needed to ensure I had a charger with me to a device that gets charged overnight, like my phone. For someone whose first laptop got a couple of hours that is a huge mental shift, so much so that it took me a while to racing to the nearest wall socket once I saw the battery monitor drop down to 50%.

Battery life is the biggest factor which keeps me using the Mac right now. The iPad should get the same length of use, and it just doesn’t.

The iPad Pro’s place in the universe

For a lot of us, technology is as much a hobby and a passion as a tool. We love computers because we love them as objects, not just because of what they allow us to do. I fell in love with the iPad in this way from the first day I got my hands on one, in a car park in Basingstoke where I bought a first generation one for cash from a guy who had just come back from a US trip, before they were released in the UK.

Apple often talks in a way which makes my marketing-cynical eyes roll, but its description of the iPad as a “magical sheet of glass” is, to me, real. A computer that’s just a piece of glass, that you can use as a slate when you want, as a creative powerhouse, as a book, as a TV, and that is capable of transforming its physical form by use of accessories to do all those things well – that’s something amazing.

The iPad should be that one device but somehow, 14 years down the line, it’s still not. My gut feeling is this comes down to the restrictions which Apple continues to place on what developers (and customers!) can do with it compared to the Mac or any real computer. All of the arguments people make about customer benefits to a locked-down ecosystem don’t apply to a computer which is designed to be your main device.

About that ad

I don’t think I have ever known Apple apologise for an ad before. It has quietly withdrawn them (including the What’s a computer? iPad ad, which I liked but you won’t find now on an Apple channel), and it has had duffers that it would rather people didn’t remember.

Like John Gruber, I didn’t really think it was that bad on first viewing, although it did strike me as pretty tone deaf. It definitely didn’t get the message across, which was that the iPad can be all these wonderful creative things. Instead, it focused on the destruction of creative things, which isn’t “at the intersection of technology and the liberal arts” at all.

But thinking about it more, Apple should have predicted the reaction to it. It isn’t the plucky underdog anymore: it’s one of the biggest technology companies in the world, and people are (justifiably in my view) wary of it because of that. Where perhaps 10 years ago people would take its environmental claims at face value and believe it’s control freakery was down to a desire to deliver the best experience for customers, now less people want to give it the benefit of the doubt.

Including, of course, me.

Ten Blue Links, "Did they really crush that lovely piano?" edition

1. Yes, Apple, we're also talking about you

Cal Newport reckons that it's time to dismantle the technopoly. Taking a cue from Neil Postman's (great) book, he defines this as the “submission of all forms of cultural life to the sovereignty of technique and technology.” Postman was writing in 1992(!) but if you think about the technopoly as it exists today, we're really talking about how every single technical development is thought of as an unalloyed good, from AI scraping the whole of human knowledge to Apple crushing creative tools into a product it sells (at a 40% margin). We'll come back to that one later.

2. And speaking of dodgy corporate behaviour

Along comes Google, which – against the orders of the DOJ – routinely destroyed internal communications. The only reasonable conclusion is it did this deliberately. A fine will be just “cost of doing business”. It's time to dismantle corporate repeat offenders.

3. Maybe Facebook might end up interoperable

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has been a target of the far wing for a while, who see it as a charter for “big tech” to stifle their speech (which, of course, means not letting the right stifle the speech of its enemies). But as Cory Doctorow explains, it's also the only thing which stops big tech companies from censoring anything which might cause them to end up in court for libel. More than that, though, a case which is currently going through the courts might end up with Facebook and others being prevented from messing with tools which let you customise your feed on their services – for example, by filtering out all that “for you” crap which the algorithm wants you to get angry about.

4. This week's product I am a little obsessed with

An e-reader that's the size of a phone and runs Android? You have no idea how hard it is for me not to hit the buy button on this one.

5. Hey, so what about that Apple ad?

Like John Gruber, I didn't think too much about Apple's “crush” ad when it was shown as part of the introduction of the new iPad Pros (more on those anon). But the more I thought about it, the more I realised quite how tone deaf it was. The intention was to show all those wonderful creative tools being squished into an iPad, which could do it all. The execution was showing many lovely things being destroyed. How did that get past Apple's senior team? That's the bit which, if I were an Apple shareholder, I would worry about.

6. And so on to the product I'm not obsessed with

Yeah, new iPad Pros. Yeah, M4 processor. Yeah… same old iPadOS. For about the tenth year running, I'm left hoping this will be the year when Apple finally produces an operating system that can make the most of all that power. I suspect I'm going to be disappointed, again.

7. Tesla is doomed, redux

Honestly, if I held Tesla shares, I would be looking to sell them at the earliest opportunity I could take a profit. Unless Western governments intervene plenty of car companies will go to the wall because when it comes to quality EVs, Chinese manufacturers are miles ahead. So why am I mentioning Tesla is particular? Because it's vulnerable, and the stock is still massively overpriced because Musk has managed to convince suckers investors Tesla is a tech leader.

8. Where the world of scams is going

It's going to get really bad. Five years from now, this kind of fake person attack will be both commonplace and convincing, and I really don't know how we combat it.

9. You can't have it both ways, Elon

X Corp. wants it both ways: to keep its safe harbours yet exercise a copyright owner’s right to exclude, wresting fees from those who wish to extract and copy X users’ content.” This is another example of how the safe harbour provisions of US law for internet companies are a double-edge word. On one hand, they protect them from libel based on what their users say. On the other hand, they can't then claim all the intellectual property rights over that content as if they were publishers. X Corp isn't the only company to want a smorgasbord of rights, though: Meta had previously made the same kind of claim, and lost.

10. “Blockchain Rasputin over here is mad that moderation exists

Headline of the week, easily. Moreover, Jack Dorsey man, WTF happened?

That time in the 90s I persuaded a Japanese film crew that my friend was Richard Branson, inadvertently foreshadowing the “geek pie” incident in “Nathan Barley”.

On the iPad becoming a Mac

Jason Snell wants the iPad to be able to be a Mac:

The iPad no longer feels like the future of computing, and that’s fine. The Mac is here to stay, something that didn’t seem like a sure thing five and a half years ago. It feels like it’s time for Apple to accept this state of affairs. macOS isn’t just one of Apple’s platforms—it’s a feature, a secret weapon that it can use to make all its other platforms more powerful when they need to be.

I don’t have any idea if Apple really has any intention of letting macOS run on other devices, whether it’s an iPad or a Vision Pro or even an iPhone plugged into an external display. But it seems to me that if there’s any Apple product that is flexible enough to make it work, it’s the iPad Pro.

I was a big iPad Pro user for quite a while, and a proponent of its simplified but powerful operating system. There are plenty of apps on the iPad which are brilliant, and developers have done a lot with the platform.

Since I got an M2 MacBook Air, though, my use of the iPad Pro has fallen away almost to nothing. While Apple has long billed the iPad Pro as its most versatile computer, capable of being a tablet, a laptop, or whatever, when it comes to the most important thing of all – software – the iPad isn't versatile enough.

I can't install another browser which uses a different rendering engine. All browser plugins have to be installed via an app store. I can't get software of any kind from anywhere except an app store. Although the file system has improved, it's still limited compared to that of a more open platform like the Mac.

And of course, if I ever decided I wanted to take my expensive piece of hardware and install a completely different operating system on it, well… tough.

When people talk about wanting the iPad to be a Mac, what they're ultimately saying is they want the platform to be more open because all of the decisions that Apple has made which lead to it being inferior to the Mac are about keeping it more closed. And I'm going to hazard a guess, given the way Apple has had to be dragged through a legal process just to open up a little, that's not on the company's agenda.

But I would love to be proved wrong.

I’m sure that Nick Bostrom’s move from AI doomer to “maybe AI is going to save us” has absolutely nothing to do with AI making a lot of money for people who he wants to fund him.

www.wired.com/story/nic…

This sounds bad, but kudos to Dropbox for being transparent about it – and from what they say it sounds like other services (i.e. storage) were not affected.

www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/secu…

One of these days I am going to have to write up how I’ve turned Obsidian into the best environment for writing I’ve ever used. Today is not going to be that day though.

Ten Blue Links, Sunday rail replacement bus service edition

I managed not to do any writing at all this week, as I'm off work over the coming days and so didn't have a lot of time. But I can't miss out on my link blog because if I did, the backlog of fun things to write about next week would end up so big I would have to make it 20 blue links. And who wants that? So here we are.

1. Microsoft takes security seriously (again)

Anyone old enough to remember Windows in the 90s knows what an awful, insecure mess it was. In 2002, Bill Gates sent out a memo on “trustworthy computing” and, within a couple of years, Windows security had improved massively. Now, Satya Nadella is doing the same thing – but his memo isn't quite as good. It's overdue: Windows has, once again, become a buggy mess and where there are bugs there are security holes. Why now? Mainly because putting AI into Windows will be the foundation of keeping people on the platform, so an insecure Windows is, once again, a bad thing for Microsoft.

2. Why I don't trust Google with my files, redux

It's not just that I don't trust Google not to scrape the content I create to build some mega profile of me and target ads. Heck, thanks to NextDNS and uBlock Origin, I don't really often see ads unless I want to. It's that I know creating content where you don't have a local backup is a bad idea. And this is why. Yes, you can use Google Takeout to export your Google Docs into formats that other apps can read, but for all that is holy, please don't use their web apps to write the only version of your novel. If you really want to use a browser to write, sign up for a free Nextcloud account and use Collabora Office, which saves files as OpenDocument by default.

3. Hell freezes over

I have always had a lot of time for Paul Thurrott. He's been writing about Microsoft for almost three decades and has always been an unapologetic fan of Windows. But he's also a strong critic of some of Microsoft's business practices, and he's not afraid to talk about the enshittification of Windows 11. And now he's reviewed a 15in MacBook Air and loves it. Everything that Paul says tallies with my experience on the 13in Air. It's an absolutely joyous machine to use, although the base model doesn't have enough storage (forget the complaints about 8Gb memory, for the usage that you're going to put this machine to, it's fine).

4. And they wonder why people are “quiet quitting”

As I occasionally say to young journalists, you owe the company that you work for precisely nothing apart from the work you're contracted to do. If someone comes along with a better offer, don't think you should stay because of “loyalty”. While no employer, I have ever worked for likes laying people off, or in fact has done it except where there's been good reason to do it, neither will any employer avoid making you redundant because you're “loyal”. This person at Tesla seems to have found that out the hard way.

5. Fusion failures

There is no one better at writing about the core technology in the Mac than Howard Oakley, my former colleague at MacUser who spent several decades writing the help section. I don't know how many readers Howard saved from some kind of technical jam, but it's a lot. Howard probably knows more about the Mac than anyone outside of Cupertino (and most likely quite a lot more than most inside Cupertino), and this example looking at the technology of Fusion Drives (and why they fail) is a good example. He's also one of the nicest people it has ever been my privilege to work with.

6. Fast fashion is bad, and Shein is the baddest

OK, maybe not the absolute worst, but there are good reasons to never buy anything from Shein if you want to avoid things like forced labour and the destruction of the planet.

7. And speaking of brutal companies

There are so many reasons why Amazon should be broken up, but this look at its absolutely atrocious business culture and ethics just adds to the pile.

8. You never think it will happen to you, until it happens to you

Gen X -- my people! -- are apparently finding it really tough to get jobs, thanks to a combination of ageism and, well, more ageism. We are, apparently, set in our ways and expensive, which means no one wants to hire us. And, of course, women get it worse than men.

9. The cost of doing business

The headline on this piece from Om says it all: “billions in profits, millions in fines”. Fines will never keep pace with the money that tech and comms companies can make from abusing customers. Only break-ups and active restrictions will ever work. I can't think of a single example where a mere fine has caused a tech business to change its ways.

10. Tech journalism, or just “journalism”?

I left this one until last, and it's a great piece: Asterisk Mag has had a look at the quality of technology journalism in the mainstream and found it wanting. It notes that it often focuses on scandals, personalities and sensationalism due to competitive pressures in the media industry, rather than, you know, actual insight into tech. And they are right, but I think even if you look outside the mainstream it's pretty dire. Try reading the kind of in-depth technical analysis you got in Byte magazine and then looking through even Ars Technica (which is good by today's standards) and you can see the difference. This is mostly down to economic pressure: at least from the perspective of journalists themselves, research shows that when times are tough, quality declines. And times, now, are very, very tough indeed.

Why do people try and forbid linking?

Websites That Forbid Other Websites From Linking to Them – Pixel Envy:

Some of these are even more bizarre than a blanket link ban, like Which? limiting people to a maximum of ten links to their site per webpage. Why would anyone want to prevent links?

I can actually answer this one: it’s an attempt (albeit pointless) to prevent sites linking in a way which Google will define as spammy. Low-quality backlinks used to be a bit of an SEO nightmare, and you used to have to disavow them as toxic in Google Search Console. More than ten links to the same site from a single page is classic link spam, hence Which?’s attempt to stop it.