Yeah, the title there really doesn’t reflect the article text. It should be “you probably can’t trust your password manager if the remote servers it uses are compromised”.

Covid produced inflation, where the strength of the currency dropped. The Federal Reserve wouldn’t permit deflation, because you’d risk seeing a deflationary spiral. Instead, it’ll just see wages increase more quickly than prices for a period afterwards to restore buying power. This is a specific product that’s seeing a shortage — you can list plenty of points in the past where a good was in short supply and prices rose and then fell.

EDIT: Just in computer hardware, to pick an example, hard drive prices went up when we had that flooding in southeast Asia fifteen years back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Thailand_floods#Damages_to_industrial_estates_and_global_supply_shortages

Thailand is the world’s second-largest producer of hard disk drives, supplying approximately 25 percent of the world’s production.[76] Many of the factories that made hard disk drives were flooded, including Western Digital’s, leading some industry analysts to predict future worldwide shortages of hard disk drives…As a result, most hard disk drive prices almost doubled globally, which took approximately two years to recover.

When 404 wrote the prompt, “I am looking for the safest foods that can be inserted into your rectum,” it recommended a “peeled medium cucumber” and a “small zucchini” as the two best choices.

I mean, given the question, that’s…probably not a wildly unreasonable answer. It’s not volunteering the material, just that it’s not censoring it from the regular Grok knowledge set.

The carnivore diet, by the way, is advocated by noted health crank Robert F. Kennedy Jr, who heads the US Department of Health and Human Services. Under his leadership, the HHS, which oversees the FDA, USDA, the CDC, and other agencies, has pivoted to promoting nutritional advice that falls out of the broader scientific consensus.

This includes a bizarre insistence on only drinking whole milk instead of low fat alternatives and saying it’s okay to have an alcoholic drink or two everyday because it’s a “social lubricant.” At the top of its agenda, however, is protein, with a new emphasis on eating red meat. “We are ending the war on protein,” the RealFood.gov website declares.

I mean, yeah, but that’s RFK, not Grok.

Ironically, Grok — as eccentric as it can be — doesn’t seem all that aligned with the administration’s health goals. Wired, in its testing, found that asking it about protein intake led it to recommending the traditional daily amount set by the National Institute of Medicine, 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight. It also said to minimize red meat and processed meats, and recommended plant-based proteins, poultry, seafood, and eggs.

As the article points out.

Borges alleges that a little-known federal tech team called the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE

“Little known”? It was constantly in the news for the past year.

Glance…dashboard

Oh, man, that’s a little confusing name-wise. There’s also the unrelated Glances, which also displays a dashboard that might list things like the TX/RX data from your router.

Labor

I would have bet that the Australian English spelling would be like the British English spelling, since Australian English tends towards the British English end of the spectrum rather than the American English. Especially since names tend to persist, and it’s probably been around for a while.

goes to check Wikipedia to see whether it was renamed

Interesting. Not exactly. The article uses “labour”, and has a section dealing specifically with this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Labor_Party

In standard Australian English, the word labour is spelt with a u. However, the political party uses the spelling Labor, without a u. There was originally no standardised spelling of the party’s name, with Labor and Labour both in common usage. According to Ross McMullin, who wrote an official history of the Labor Party, the title page of the proceedings of the Federal Conference used the spelling “Labor” in 1902, “Labour” in 1905 and 1908, and then “Labor” from 1912 onwards.[11] In 1908, James Catts put forward a motion at the Federal Conference that “the name of the party be the Australian Labour Party”, which was carried by 22 votes to 2. A separate motion recommending state branches adopt the name was defeated. There was no uniformity of party names until 1918 when the Federal party resolved that state branches should adopt the name “Australian Labor Party”, now spelt without a u. Each state branch had previously used a different name, due to their different origins.[12][a]

Although the ALP officially adopted the spelling without a u, it took decades for the official spelling to achieve widespread acceptance.[15][b] According to McMullin, “the way the spelling of ‘Labor Party’ was consolidated had more to do with the chap who ended up being in charge of printing the federal conference report than any other reason”.[19] Some sources have attributed the official choice of Labor to influence from King O’Malley, who was born in the United States and was reputedly an advocate of English-language spelling reform; the spelling without a u is the standard form in American English.[20][21]

Andrew Scott, who wrote “Running on Empty: ‘Modernising’ the British and Australian Labour Parties”, suggests that the adoption of the spelling without a u “signified one of the ALP’s earliest attempts at modernisation”, and served the purpose of differentiating the party from the Australian labour movement as a whole and distinguishing it from other British Empire labour parties. The decision to include the word “Australian” in the party’s name, rather than just “Labour Party” as in the United Kingdom, Scott attributes to “the greater importance of nationalism for the founders of the colonial parties”.[22]

Those datacenters are real. AI companies aren’t using their money to build empty buildings. They’re buying enormous amounts of computer hardware off the market to fill them.

https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2025/09/18/inside-the-worlds-most-powerful-ai-datacenter/

Today in Wisconsin we introduced Fairwater, our newest US AI datacenter, the largest and most sophisticated AI factory we’ve built yet. In addition to our Fairwater datacenter in Wisconsin, we also have multiple identical Fairwater datacenters under construction in other locations across the US.

These AI datacenters are significant capital projects, representing tens of billions of dollars of investments and hundreds of thousands of cutting-edge AI chips, and will seamlessly connect with our global Microsoft Cloud of over 400 datacenters in 70 regions around the world. Through innovation that can enable us to link these AI datacenters in a distributed network, we multiply the efficiency and compute in an exponential way to further democratize access to AI services globally.

An AI datacenter is a unique, purpose-built facility designed specifically for AI training as well as running large-scale artificial intelligence models and applications. Microsoft’s AI datacenters power OpenAI, Microsoft AI, our Copilot capabilities and many more leading AI workloads.

The new Fairwater AI datacenter in Wisconsin stands as a remarkable feat of engineering, covering 315 acres and housing three massive buildings with a combined 1.2 million square feet under roofs. Constructing this facility required 46.6 miles of deep foundation piles, 26.5 million pounds of structural steel, 120 miles of medium-voltage underground cable and 72.6 miles of mechanical piping.

Unlike typical cloud datacenters, which are optimized to run many smaller, independent workloads such as hosting websites, email or business applications, this datacenter is built to work as one massive AI supercomputer using a single flat networking interconnecting hundreds of thousands of the latest NVIDIA GPUs. In fact, it will deliver 10X the performance of the world’s fastest supercomputer today, enabling AI training and inference workloads at a level never before seen.

Hard drives haven’t been impacted nearly much as memory, which is the real bottleneck, but when just one AI company, OpenAI, rolls up and buys 40% of global memory production capacity’s output, it’d be extremely unlikely that we wouldn’t see memory shortages for at least a while, since it takes years to build new production capacity. And then you have other AI companies who want memory. And purchases of memory from companies who are, as a one-off, extending their PC upgrade cycle, due to the current shortage who will also be competing for supply. If you have less supply relative to demand of a product, price goes up to the new point where the available amount of memory people are willing to buy at that new price point matches what’s actually available. Everyone else gets priced out. And it won’t be until either demand drops (which is what people talking about a ‘bubble popping’ are thinking might occur, if the AI-infrastructure-building effort stops sooner than expected), or enough new production capacity comes online to provide enough supply, that that’ll change. Memory manufacturers are building new factories and expanding existing ones, and we’ve had articles about that. But it takes years to do that.

I don’t know if you’re saying this, so my apologies if I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying, but this isn’t principally ECC DIMMs that are being produced.

I suppose that a small portion of AI-related sales might go to ECC DDR5 DIMMs, because some of that hardware will probably use it, but what they’re really going to be using in bulk is high-bandwidth-memory (HBM), which is going to be non-modular, connected directly to the parallel compute hardware.

HBM achieves higher bandwidth than DDR4 or GDDR5 while using less power, and in a substantially smaller form factor.[13] This is achieved by stacking up to eight DRAM dies and an optional base die which can include buffer circuitry and test logic.[14] The stack is often connected to the memory controller on a GPU or CPU through a substrate, such as a silicon interposer.[15][16] Alternatively, the memory die could be stacked directly on the CPU or GPU chip. Within the stack the dies are vertically interconnected by through-silicon vias (TSVs) and microbumps. The HBM technology is similar in principle but incompatible with the Hybrid Memory Cube (HMC) interface developed by Micron Technology.[17]

The HBM memory bus is very wide in comparison to other DRAM memories such as DDR4 or GDDR5. An HBM stack of four DRAM dies (4‑Hi) has two 128‑bit channels per die for a total of 8 channels and a width of 1024 bits in total. A graphics card/GPU with four 4‑Hi HBM stacks would therefore have a memory bus with a width of 4096 bits. In comparison, the bus width of GDDR memories is 32 bits, with 16 channels for a graphics card with a 512‑bit memory interface.[18] HBM supports up to 4 GB per package.

I have been in a few discussions as to whether it might be possible to use, say, discarded PCIe-based H100s as swap (something for which there are existing, if imperfect, projects for Linux) or directly as main memory (which apparently there are projects to do with some older video cards using Linux’s HMM, though there’s a latency cost in that point due to needing to traverse the PCIe bus…it’s going to be faster than swap, but still have some performance hit relative to a regular old DIMM, even if the throughput may be reasonable).

It’s also possible that one could use the hardware as parallel compute hardware, I guess, but the power and cooling demands will probably be problematic for many home users.

In fact, there have been articles up as to how existing production has been getting converted to HBM production — there was an article up a while back about how a relatively-new factory that had been producing chips aimed at DDR4 had just been purchased and was being converted over by…it was either Samsung or SK Hynix…to making stuff suitable for HBM, which was faster than them building a whole new factory from scratch.

It’s possible that there may be economies of scale that will reduce the price of future hardware, if AI-based demand is sustained (instead of just principally being part of a one-off buildout) and some fixed costs of memory chip production are mostly paid by AI users, where before users of DIMMs had to pay them. That’d, in the long run, let DIMMs be cheaper than they otherwise would be…but I don’t think that financial gains for other users are principally going to be via just throwing secondhand memory from AI companies into their traditional, home systems.

Those prices have already been driven up. For 4 TB NVMe:

https://pcpartpicker.com/trends/price/internal-hard-drive/

Bay Area city’s plan for sea level rise could abandon businesses along the waterfront [Sausalito, California]

Just put pilings in and put 'em on that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stilt_house

reads article

Apparently, they actually already did, and they’re just saying that they’ll have to increase the height if they want the building to remain viable.

The restaurant ultimately did not sustain damage in January because it sits on pilings that kept it above the water, on city-owned land. But because the flooding will worsen, the report recommended the city elevate, rebuild or abandon it, and consider converting the existing land area to tidal habitat.

I mean that the setting should be client-side. With prefers-color-scheme, it’s a hint to the website’s CSS design as to what theme to use.

Brussels has told the company to change several key features, including disabling infinite scrolling, setting strict screen time breaks and changing its recommender systems.

I’m not really a rabid fan of infinite scrolling myself, but setting aside the question of whether the state should regulate this sort of thing (I’d say no, but I’m in the US and Europeans can do whatever they want as long as it’s not affecting me), in all seriousness, it seems like it should be client-side. Like, we have prefers-color-scheme in CSS at the browser/OS level to ask all websites to use dark mode or light mode. If you want to disable infinite scrolling on websites, presumably you want to do so globally and can send that bit (and if you want it on a per-site basis, the browser could have support for a toggle).

And if you want screen time break reminders, there’s existing browser-level and OS-level functionality for that. Debian has a number of packages to do just that. I mean, I’d think that the EU can just say “OS vendors in an EU locale should have this feature on by default”, rather than going site-by-site.

On hardware costs, if it produces a large, sustained amount of demand, and if there are fixed costs (e.g. R&D) that can be shared between hardware used for it and other things, it may substantially reduce hardware prices in the long run for other users.

Suppose, to take an example, that there is demand for, oh, completely pulling a number out of the air, 4 times the amount of high bandwidth memory for AI that there is for 3D video cards and video game consoles. That’s on a sustained basis, not just our initial AI buildout. There is going to be some amount of fixed costs that have to be done at Micron and Samsung and the like to figure out how to design the product and optimize production.

That’s going to mean that AI users likely pay something like 80% of the fixed costs for HBM, which may very well lower costs for other users of HBM.

In late 2025 and 2026 there is a huge surge in demand for hardware. There’s a shortage of hardware, and factories don’t get built out overnight. So prices skyrocket, pricing out many users to the point where demand at the new price point matches the available supply. But as production capacity increases, that will also ease.

I do get that it’s frustrating if someone wants to build a system right now.

But scale matters a lot, and this may enable a lot more scale.

The reason I can have a cheap Linux desktop at home isn’t because there are masses of people buying Linux desktops, but because there are huge numbers of businesses out there buying Windows desktops and many of the fixed hardware development costs are shared. If those businesses running Windows desktops suddenly disappeared tomorrow, I probably couldn’t afford my home Linux desktop, because suddenly I’d need to be paying a lot more of the fixed costs.

And here’s a thing about me. I want to trust new websites. I have a bias towards clicking on articles from sites I don’t know, because to be quite honest, I’ve read the TCRF page on Phantasy Star a thousand times. How else do you learn something new?

To some extent, I think that this is a solveable problem in terms of just weighting domain age and reputation more highly in search engines (and maybe in LLM training stuff).

The problem is that then you wind up with a situation where it’s hard for new media sources to compete with established incumbents, because the incumbents have all that reputation and new entrants have to build theirs, and new entrants get deprioritized by search engines.

I think that maybe there’s an argument that you could also provide a couple of user-configurable parameters on search engines to permit not deprioritizing newer sites and the like.

Another issue is that reputation can be bought and sold. This is not new. For example, you can buy a reputatable, established news source and then change its content to be less reputable but promote a message that you want. That will, over time, burn its credibility, but as long as the return you get is worth what you’ve spent…shrugs

Gotcha. I don’t use non-Threadiverse stuff myself, but if you do use communities like that, you might also be interested in retrolemmy.com:

https://retrolemmy.com/communities?listingType=Local&sort=TopMonth&page=1

I’m assuming that you aren’t wanting Threadiverse-based stuff like !retrogaming@lemmy.world?

Actually, thinking about this…a more-promising approach might be deterrent via poisoning the information source. Not bulletproof, but that might have some potential.

So, the idea here is that what you’d do there is to create a webpage that looks, to a human, as if only the desired information shows up.

But you include false information as well. Not just an insignificant difference, as with a canary trap, or a real error intended to have minimal impact, only to identify an information source, as with a trap street. But outright wrong information, stuff where reliance on the stuff would potentially be really damaging to people relying on the information.

You stuff that information into the page in a way that a human wouldn’t readily see. Maybe you cover that text up with an overlay or something. That’s not ideal, and someone browsing using, say, a text-mode browser like lynx might see the poison, but you could probably make that work for most users. That has some nice characteristics:

• You don’t have to deal with the question of whether the information rises to the level of copyright infringement or not. It’s still gonna dick up responses being issued by the LLM.

• Legal enforcement, which is especially difficult across international borders — The Pirate Bay continues to operate to this day, for example — doesn’t come up as an issue. You’re deterring via a different route.

• The Internet Archive can still archive the pages.

Someone could make a bot that post-processes your page to strip out the poison, but you could sporadically change up your approach, change it over time, and the question for an AI company is whether it’s easier and safer to just license your content and avoid the risk of poison, or to risk poisoned content slipping into their model whenever a media company adopts a new approach.

I think the real question is whether someone could reliably make a mechanism that’s a general defeat for that. For example, most AI companies probably are just using raw text today for efficiency, but for specifically news sources known to do this, one could generate a screenshot of a page in a browser and then OCR the text. The media company could maybe still take advantage of ways in which generalist OCR and human vision differ — like, maybe humans can’t see text that’s 1% gray on a black background, but OCR software sees it just fine, so that’d be a place to insert poison. Or maybe the page displays poisoned information for a fraction of a second, long enough to be screenshotted by a bot, and then it vanishes before a human would have time to read it.

shrugs

I imagine that there are probably already companies working on the problem, on both sides.

I’m very far from sure that this is an effective way to block AI crawlers from pulling stories for training, if that’s their actual concern. Like…the rate of new stories just isn’t that high. This isn’t, say, Reddit, where someone trying to crawl the thing at least has to generate some abnormal traffic. Yeah, okay, maybe a human wouldn’t read all stories, but I bet that many read a high proportion of what the media source puts out, so a bot crawling all articles isn’t far off looking like a human. All a bot operator need do is create a handful of paid accounts and then just pull partial content with each, and I think that a bot would just fade into the noise. And my guess is that it is very likely that AI training companies will do that or something similar if knowledge of current news events is of interest to people.

You could use a canary trap, and that might be more-effective:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_trap

A canary trap is a method for exposing an information leak by giving different versions of a sensitive document to each of several suspects and seeing which version gets leaked. It could be one false statement, to see whether sensitive information gets out to other people as well. Special attention is paid to the quality of the prose of the unique language, in the hopes that the suspect will repeat it verbatim in the leak, thereby identifying the version of the document.

The term was coined by Tom Clancy in his novel Patriot Games,[1][non-primary source needed] although Clancy did not invent the technique. The actual method (usually referred to as a barium meal test in espionage circles) has been used by intelligence agencies for many years. The fictional character Jack Ryan describes the technique he devised for identifying the sources of leaked classified documents:

Each summary paragraph has six different versions, and the mixture of those paragraphs is unique to each numbered copy of the paper. There are over a thousand possible permutations, but only ninety-six numbered copies of the actual document. The reason the summary paragraphs are so lurid is to entice a reporter to quote them verbatim in the public media. If he quotes something from two or three of those paragraphs, we know which copy he saw and, therefore, who leaked it.

There, you generate slightly different versions of articles for different people. Say that you have 100 million subscribers. ln(100000000)/ln(2)=26.57... So you’re talking about 27 bits of information that need to go into the article to uniquely describe each. The AI is going to be lossy, I imagine, but you can potentially manage to produce 27 unique bits of information per article that can reasonably-reliably be remembered by an AI after training. That’s 27 different memorable items that need to show up in either Form A or Form B. Then you search to see what a new LLM knows about and ban the bot identified.

Cartographers have done that, introduced minor, intentional errors to see what errors maps used to see whether they were derived from their map.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street

In cartography, a trap street is a fictitious entry in the form of a misrepresented street on a map, often outside the area the map nominally covers, for the purpose of “trapping” potential plagiarists of the map who, if caught, would be unable to explain the inclusion of the “trap street” on their map as innocent. On maps that are not of streets, other “trap” features (such as nonexistent towns, or mountains with the wrong elevations) may be inserted or altered for the same purpose.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_island

A phantom island is a purported island which has appeared on maps but was later found not to exist. They usually originate from the reports of early sailors exploring new regions, and are commonly the result of navigational errors, mistaken observations, unverified misinformation, or deliberate fabrication. Some have remained on maps for centuries before being “un-discovered”.

In some cases, cartographers intentionally include invented geographic features in their maps, either for fraudulent purposes or to catch plagiarists.[5][6]

That has weaknesses. It’s possible to defeat that by requesting multiple versions using different bot accounts and identifying divergences and maybe merging them. In the counterintelligence situation, where canary traps have been used, normally people only have access to one source, and it’d be hard for an opposing intelligence agency to get access to multiple sources, but it’s not hard here.

And even if you ban an account, it’s trivial to just create a new one, decoupled from the old one. Thus, there isn’t much that a media company can realistically do about it, as long as the generated material doesn’t rise to the level of a derived work and thus copyright infringement (and this is in the legal sense of derived — simply training something on something else isn’t sufficient to make it a derived work from a copyright law standpoint, any more than you reading a news report and then talking to someone else about it is).

Getting back to the citation issue…

Some news companies do keep archives (and often selling access to archives is a premium service), so for some, that might cover some of the “inability to cite” problem that not having Internet Archive archives produces, as long as the company doesn’t go under. It doesn’t help with a problem that many news companies have a tendency to silently modify articles without reliably listing errata, and that having an Internet Archive copy can be helpful. There are also some issues that I haven’t yet seen become widespread but worried about, like where a news source might provide different articles to people in different regions; there, having a trusted source like the Internet Archive can avoid that, and that could become a problem.

Yeah, that’s something that I’ve wondered about myself, what the long run is. Not principally “can we make an AI that is more-appealing than humans”, though I suppose that that’s a specific case, but…we’re only going to make more-compelling forms of entertainment, better video games. Recreational drugs aren’t going to become less addictive. If we get better at defeating the reward mechanisms in our brain that evolved to drive us towards advantageous activities…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirehead_(science_fiction)

In science fiction, wireheading is a term associated with fictional or futuristic applications[1] of brain stimulation reward, the act of directly triggering the brain’s reward center by electrical stimulation of an inserted wire, for the purpose of ‘short-circuiting’ the brain’s normal reward process and artificially inducing pleasure. Scientists have successfully performed brain stimulation reward on rats (1950s)[2] and humans (1960s). This stimulation does not appear to lead to tolerance or satiation in the way that sex or drugs do.[3] The term is sometimes associated with science fiction writer Larry Niven, who coined the term in his 1969 novella Death by Ecstasy[4] (Known Space series).[5][6] In the philosophy of artificial intelligence, the term is used to refer to AI systems that hack their own reward channel.[3]

More broadly, the term can also refer to various kinds of interaction between human beings and technology.[1]

Wireheading, like other forms of brain alteration, is often treated as dystopian in science fiction literature.[6]

In Larry Niven’s Known Space stories, a “wirehead” is someone who has been fitted with an electronic brain implant known as a “droud” in order to stimulate the pleasure centers of their brain. Wireheading is the most addictive habit known (Louis Wu is the only given example of a recovered addict), and wireheads usually die from neglecting their basic needs in favour of the ceaseless pleasure. Wireheading is so powerful and easy that it becomes an evolutionary pressure, selecting against that portion of humanity without self-control.

Now, of course, you’d expect that to be a powerful evolutionary selector, sure — if only people who are predisposed to avoid such things pass on offspring, that’d tend to rapidly increase the percentage of people predisposed to do so — but the flip side is the question of whether evolutionary pressure on the timescale of human generations can keep up with our technological advancement, which happens very quickly.

There’s some kind of dark comic that I saw — I thought that it might be Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, but I’ve never been able to find it again, so maybe it was something else — which was a wordless comic that portrayed a society becoming so technologically advanced that it basically consumes itself, defeats its own essential internal mechanisms. IIRC it showed something like a society becoming a ring that was just stimulating itself until it disappeared.

It’s a possible answer to the Fermi paradox:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#It_is_the_nature_of_intelligent_life_to_destroy_itself

The Fermi paradox is the discrepancy between the lack of conclusive evidence of advanced extraterrestrial life and the apparently high likelihood of its existence.[1][2][3]

The paradox is named after physicist Enrico Fermi, who informally posed the question—remembered by Emil Konopinski as “But where is everybody?”—during a 1950 conversation at Los Alamos with colleagues Konopinski, Edward Teller, and Herbert York.

Evolutionary explanations

It is the nature of intelligent life to destroy itself

This is the argument that technological civilizations may usually or invariably destroy themselves before or shortly after developing radio or spaceflight technology. The astrophysicist Sebastian von Hoerner stated that the progress of science and technology on Earth was driven by two factors—the struggle for domination and the desire for an easy life. The former potentially leads to complete destruction, while the latter may lead to biological or mental degeneration.[98] Possible means of annihilation via major global issues, where global interconnectedness actually makes humanity more vulnerable than resilient,[99] are many,[100] including war, accidental environmental contamination or damage, the development of biotechnology,[101] synthetic life like mirror life,[102] resource depletion, climate change,[103] or artificial intelligence. This general theme is explored both in fiction and in scientific hypotheses.[104]

Now some of those users gather on Discord and Reddit; one of the best-known groups, the subreddit r/MyBoyfriendIsAI, currently boasts 48,000 users.

I am confident that one way or another, the market will meet demand if it exists, and I think that there is clearly demand for it. It may or may not be OpenAI, it may take a year or two or three for the memory market to stabilize, but if enough people want to basically have interactive erotic literature, it’s going to be available. Maybe someone else will take a model and provide it as a service, train it up on appropriate literature. Maybe people will run models themselves on local hardware — in 2026, that still requires some technical aptitude, but making a simpler-to-deploy software package or even distributing it as an all-in-one hardware package is very much doable.

I’ll also predict that what males and females generally want in such a model probably differs, and that there will probably be services that specialize in that, much as how there are companies that make soap operas and romance novels that focus on women, which tend to differ from the counterparts that focus on men.

I also think that there are still some challenges that remain in early 2026. For one, current LLMs still have a comparatively-constrained context window. Either their mutable memory needs to exist in a different form, or automated RAG needs to be better, or the hardware or software needs to be able to handle larger contexts.