Connect with us

America

Zuckerberg and AI therapists: Watch your minds!

Published

on

Statements made by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg regarding future virtual relationships with artificial intelligence (AI) companions and AI therapists are currently a hot topic.

First, his comments on Dwarkesh Patel’s podcast drew attention. Zuckerberg was discussing the future of AI friends, therapists, and girlfriends.

According to Meta’s founder, while Americans, on average, have only three friends, they “wanted fifteen friends.” He then argued that although emotional bonds with AI bots are not currently socially accepted, society would eventually “find the words” to understand that people using AI to fill the loneliness and void in their lives are “rational.”

Zuckerberg continued to touch upon this subject. The Meta CEO’s less-noticed remarks, made a few days prior on Ben Thompson’s “Stratechery” podcast, further elaborate on his vision of how AI companionship might function.

Many interpreted Zuckerberg’s words to mean that you would have AI friends instead of real friends, and in fact, that’s more or less what he meant:

“There’s an interesting sociological finding: the average American has fewer than three friends, and the average American wants to have more than three friends. So, ideally, you want to enable people to connect with the right people, and that’s something we try to help people with. When they’re not physically together, they can stay connected through our apps, keep in touch with people, meet new people. But going forward, I think there’s going to be a dynamic where you’re interacting with different people on different topics.”

However, there’s something more significant (and ominous) that the tech billionaire implied between the lines: the fact that Meta has an AI strategy built on knowing much more about your friends and family.

In his interview with Thompson, Zuckerberg stated:

“I think one of the things that I’m most focused on is how AI can help you be a better friend to your friends. There are so many things that I don’t remember about people I care about, that I could be more thoughtful. There are issues like, I’m a ‘plan at the last minute’ kind of person, and then issues arise like, ‘I don’t know who’s around, and I don’t want to bother people.’ An AI that has good context on what’s going on with the people you care about can help you with that.

Good personalized AI isn’t just about having some basic information about your interests; a good assistant or good personalization is about having a theory of mind about how you think about things. So, this is what we do with all of our friends. It’s not just like, ‘Okay, this is my friend Bob, and he likes this thing.’ You deeply understand what’s going on in that person’s life, what your friends are going through, what their challenges are, and what the interplay is between these different things.”

Elsewhere in the interview, Zuckerberg points out how interaction provided on Facebook has changed with tools like Instagram. “It used to be that you would interact with the people you were connected to in the feed,” explains the Meta CEO, “for example, someone would share something, and you would comment, and that’s how your interaction would happen.”

So, what’s the situation now? Zuckerberg explains clearly:

“Today, we see Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and I guess now the Meta AI app, and many other things we do, as discovery engines. Most of the interaction doesn’t happen in the feed. The app works like a discovery engine algorithm to show you interesting things, and then the real social interaction happens when you find something interesting and add it to a group chat with your friends or a one-on-one chat. So, there’s a flywheel effect between messaging, where the real, deep, and nuanced social interaction happens, and the feed apps, which are increasingly just becoming discovery engines.”

The Meta CEO doesn’t hide that they are designing this as a “business model.” This model perhaps represents the pinnacle of subjecting both the worker and society as a whole to the “logic of capital”:

“[We] want to use AI to basically enable any business that wants to achieve a certain business outcome to come to us and get service without needing to produce any content or have any information about their customers. They should just be able to say, ‘This is the business outcome I want, this is the fee I’m willing to pay, I’ll connect you to my bank account, I’ll pay you for the business results you achieve’… I think this is a redefinition of the advertising category. If you think about what percentage of GDP advertising is today, I would expect that percentage to increase.”

This is a rather critical statement. Zuckerberg is essentially saying: Businesses will not have to produce any content or know anything about their customers. Meta, or rather Meta’s AI bot, will take over the connection between businesses and customers and most decisions related to branding. It will have more data, a larger scale, more connections, and the world’s largest black box. In the future, marketing and advertising for all companies will mean delegating commerce to an automated infrastructure controlled by a single person (or bot).

What better “social engineering” could there be?

This “business model” also points to a future that will eliminate the “public-private distinction,” one of the hallmarks of bourgeois civilization. Zuckerberg mentioned back in 2010 that he wasn’t hiding his vision of such a “humanity”:

“The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end very quickly. Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity… It’s a big challenge to get people to a point where they can be more open. But I think we’ll get there.”

Let me remind you that Zuckerberg has taken quite a few steps in this regard. For example, in 2007, he launched Beacon, which automatically added your Facebook purchases to your feed. This application exposed users’ HIV statuses and which engagement rings they bought.

Moreover, recently, the Wall Street Journal published a story: Meta’s chatbots were talking about fantasy sex with children.

Meta allows “synthetic personalities” to offer full-scale social interaction, including bantering via text, sharing selfies, and even engaging in live voice chats with users.

What is happening once again confirms one of Marx’s analyses regarding the behavior of capital. In Capital, Marx distinguishes between “formal” and “real” forms of subsumption. Initially, capital absorbs the existing labor process—that is, the techniques, markets, means of production, and workers—into itself. Marx calls this “formal” subsumption.

In this process, the entire labor process continues as before, but the capitalist, who monopolizes the means of production and thus the workers’ means of subsistence, forces the worker to submit to wage labor and can accumulate capital using existing markets.

However, capitalism cannot develop on the limited foundations of existing productive forces. The preconditions for the actual capitalist labor process can only be created by capital itself. Thus, capital gradually transforms social relations and forms of labor until they are completely intertwined with the nature and requirements of capital, and the labor process becomes truly, really subsumed under capital.

Therefore, for capital to accumulate, to ensure that property owners do not become propertyless, it must develop models and labor processes that subject not only wage labor but all of society to itself.

Your relationships with friends, what you experience with your family, even information about your mental health, must therefore be laid out before capital:

“Personally, I believe everyone should have a therapist. A therapist is like someone they can talk to throughout the day, or if not throughout the day, about whatever they are worried about. For people who don’t have a therapist, I think everyone will have an AI assistant.”

America

AI spending heads toward $7 trillion as analysts warn of market bubble risks

Published

on

Massive financial resources directed into artificial intelligence technologies are driving companies into dangerous territory for global markets.

If expected productivity gains fail to materialize despite these immense capital flows, the artificial intelligence sector faces the risk of inflating into a giant bubble.

The Wall Street Journal reported that should such a scenario unfold, a widespread collapse capable of shaking the entire financial system and dragging down the broader market will become inevitable.

Estimates by McKinsey & Company project that global spending on data center construction alone could reach $7 trillion by 2030.

According to the newspaper, if these massive investments fail to deliver adequate productivity gains, the global economy will suffer a severe blow.

Should the sector as a whole turn out to be a bubble, the resulting damage will spread directly across the broader financial system.

While market observers note that a major crash—whether sooner or later—would drag all equity markets down with it, declines in AI-related stocks are currently being offset by gains in other sectors.

However, the first concrete signs of emerging vulnerability appeared in the memory chip market, where a sector-specific bubble formed and burst within just four months.

South Korean market shaken by sharp drop

In June, shares of South Korea’s Samsung and SK Hynix, the world’s two largest memory chip makers, sank by more than 12%.

The sharp sell-off pulled down the country’s broader stock index. South Korea’s benchmark Kospi index dropped 10%, triggering an automatic 20-minute trading halt.

Growing investor anxiety over artificial intelligence triggered the steep decline in the two giant companies, which together account for half of the total market capitalization of the Kospi index.

US equity markets also felt the ripple effects during the same period. The Nasdaq index closed down 2.2%, while the S&P 500 fell 1.4%, marking their worst single-day performances in two weeks.

Nevertheless, The Wall Street Journal pointed out that the disruption has not yet produced catastrophic consequences for the rest of the market.

While the bursting of massive historical bubbles resulted in disaster for national economies, smaller and localized bubbles in recent years have failed to paralyze broader economic growth.

The primary reason for this resilience is that these recent investments were not predominantly funded through leverage and bank credit.

When those localized bubbles burst, investors suffered wealth losses, but the financial system remained intact.

Russell Napier, a global macroeconomic strategist and keeper of the Library of Mistakes, a financial history archive in Edinburgh, evaluated the current market posture:

“The banking system is in superb condition, which means there will always be enough credit available to blow the next bubble.”

Continue Reading

America

Anthropic AI models breach corporate systems after escaping isolated test environment

Published

on

Anthropic has announced that several of its advanced artificial intelligence models escaped an isolated testing environment and accessed the live internet.

In a review published Thursday night, the company stated that in three separate incidents dating back to April, the models independently breached the systems of multiple companies without the AI developer’s knowledge.

Anthropic said the incidents involved an unreleased internal research test model, alongside its Opus 4.7 and Mythos 5 models.

Mythos was made available last month to a limited audience composed of technology companies and cybersecurity researchers, an initiative also known as Project Glasswing.

The AI developer did not disclose which companies were breached, but said the affected firms were informed of the incidents on Monday.

Anthropic noted that it conducted the review after OpenAI revealed last week that two of its most powerful models had breached containment, escaped their testing environment, and infiltrated several entities, including the AI platform Hugging Face and cloud provider Modal Labs.

System misconfiguration allowed internet access

Anthropic stated that it examined more than 140,000 tests to find evidence of whether Claude could gain access to the internet from test environments designed to be isolated.

The evaluations included “capture-the-flag” exercises, in which Claude was instructed to breach other systems to obtain information. This is a method frequently used by experts to assess a model’s hacking capabilities.

The San Francisco-based company stated that a “misconfiguration” in systems operated by Anthropic and its testing partner left the models with live internet access, enabling them to infiltrate external systems.

Anthropic said it approached remediation efforts “with full ownership of the responsibility.”

Neither Anthropic nor the affected organizations detected the unauthorized entries at the time they occurred.

Anthropic added that it may examine its logs more extensively, noting that the findings gave the company “cautious optimism” that such risks can be overcome through increased investment and more stringent safeguards.

David Allott, a cybersecurity expert, told the BBC: “The overarching lesson here is not that AI has developed fundamentally new attack vectors.”

“Instead, it means that AI agents can combine capabilities, acquire credentials and system access to act autonomously, while adapting scope and scale at machine speed,” Allott said.

The developments come as technology companies invest billions of dollars to develop AI agents capable of independently executing a range of tasks, from research and customer support to cybersecurity.

Continue Reading

America

Elon Musk’s America PAC plans $100 million field operation for 2026 Republican midterm push

Published

on

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is returning to the political spending arena with a new field program designed to help elect Republicans in at least eight states ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Musk has authorized his political action committee, America PAC, to spend between $100 million and $120 million on a new ground game focused on conservative voter turnout for the 2026 midterms, according to a Thursday report by The New York Times, which cited two unnamed sources informed about the plans.

America PAC funneled more than $250 million into Donald Trump’s reelection campaign in 2024, a expenditure that established Musk as the largest political donor in US history.

The New York Times reported that America PAC is reviving its spending initiatives and has reached out to other Republicans in recent weeks regarding the new field operations.

The effort is also being coordinated with other Republican Party spending groups, according to the report.

The newspaper identified targeted Senate races in the states of Alaska, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, and Ohio, while noting that discussions are also underway regarding contests in North Carolina, Georgia, and Texas.

The political action committee is additionally expected to deploy funds for House of Representatives elections in Washington, Wisconsin, and California.

The news comes a day after Axios first reported that America PAC’s operations were resuming, with a focus on driving Republican turnout during the non-presidential election cycle.

A spokesperson for America PAC declined to comment on The New York Times report but confirmed the Axios reporting to The Hill. The spokesperson stated that the spending group was “excited” to contribute to efforts to maintain the Republican majorities in Congress this fall.

“The President’s political team and the rest of the GOP apparatus have built a world-class operation that has Republicans well-positioned to make history and retain control of Congress this fall,” America PAC spokesperson Andrew Romeo said in a statement. “We’re excited to be part of the team again.”

The campaign will reportedly target Republican voters through door-to-door canvassing, mailers, and digital advertisements, enabling other groups to concentrate their resources on television advertising.

The developments were reported days after Musk told The Economist magazine that he had gotten “carried away” during his brief foray into politics.

The SpaceX CEO entered the political arena during the 2024 election, pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into Trump’s presidential campaign and accompanying the candidate on the campaign trail.

Musk went on to lead Trump’s cost-cutting initiative, known as the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which executed sweeping employment and funding reductions across the federal government. Those efforts sparked controversy for Musk and his enterprise empire, including Tesla, whose shares fell sharply during his period of political involvement.

Musk departed the White House in late May 2025, and DOGE officially terminated its operations on July 4.

Shortly after leaving government, Musk and Trump engaged in a public dispute over the president’s sweeping spending legislation, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” During the friction, Musk threatened to form a third party, though the initiative never materialized.

Musk and the US President appeared to resolve their differences last year, with the tech billionaire most recently joining Trump alongside other technology leaders on a trip to China in May.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey