MattCampagna 🎬

Huge win for gamers and consumer rights! The California State Assembly just passed AB 1921, the Protect Our Games Act. It passed on the floor by a vote of 43 to 16. The bill would force video game companies to give players a heads-up before they shut down the servers for a game. It would also make them provide a way for people to keep playing afterward, like adding offline mode or letting community servers take over. Quick recap of what the bill does: >60-day advance notice before any server shutdown or major service change that would make a game unplayable in its “ordinary use.” >Companies must then provide a workable solution so players can keep playing, usually an offline mode/patch, community server support, or (in some cases) a full refund. >Applies to digital games first sold or substantially re-released in California after January 1, 2027. >Does not affect subscription games, free-to-play titles, or games that are already permanently offline/single-player. >Enforceable by the Attorney General or district attorneys. In short: If you buy a game, you should still be able to play it even after the company moves on. No more “purchase” turning into a rental that expires when the servers die.

I don’t want to hear about my carbon footprint ever again. x.com/SawyerMerritt/…

Wow. “Low T cell counts”, huh? That’s one in every 6 Americans. I wonder if there might just be, you know, a disease that knocks down your T cell counts for several months at a time, which you can get maybe once a year if you refuse to take any precautions? 🤔

And the winner is… Doctor’s offices with the worst Air quality measured in CO2 levels.

🚨 The AI ROI numbers are starting to look very ugly. Even under "best case" assumptions — assuming zero costs, just revenue against capex — the Financial Times calculated the implied return on hyperscaler AI investment from 2025 to 2030. Only one of them clears positive. Implied return on AI investment (FT / Panmure Liberum) – Microsoft: -9.2% – Alphabet: -15.7% – Amazon: +7.2% – Meta: -28.8% – Oracle: -35.6% And remember: that's assuming zero costs. In reality, GPUs depreciate, power bills run, salaries get paid. The real returns are worse. This is exactly why the dot-com comparison keeps coming up. Incredible technology does not automatically mean sustainable economics. The internet survived. Most internet companies didn't. Two anecdotes from this week alone Vivek Garipalli, Fortune 20 insider: a CEO asked for $1B in AI-driven opex savings this year. The team spent $200M on tokens chasing it. The results? Modest customer service savings and slightly less hiring in engineering. The CEO has now ordered token costs to be dramatically slashed because the ROI isn't there. Axios: an AI consultant reported a single client spent half a billion dollars in one month after forgetting to put usage limits on Claude licenses for employees. Right now hyperscalers are spending trillions hoping future demand catches up to present capex. That's not certainty. That's a leveraged bet. The technology is real. The infrastructure buildout is real. The eventual winners will be real. But "AI is transformative" and "every hyperscaler will earn its capex back" are two completely different statements. In 2000, the internet was real too. Cisco has recovered. After 26 years…

Can we PLEASE get AI to actually pick plastic out of the ocean, or do all the robots have to become screenwriters?

If you need to partner with AI to get a greenlight on your project, it ain't worth it. I know it's super frustrating out there rn but nothing makes replacing your peers with automated garbo justified. Nothing. We gotta hold the line on this one or we're f*cked.

No, we shouldn’t just accept AI because it’s here. We shouldn’t just embrace it because there’s no other options. Fuck that. Fight back and fight for better. Demand better of this world instead of succumbing to it.

@Vivek4real_ These thieves stole the dataset in the first place — GenAi is all one huge copyright infringement until artists and rights holders opt-in and are paid royalties and licensing fees. That’s why every copyright holder from Stephen King to CNN is suing these techbro criminals.

LARRY ELLISON: AI IS RAPIDLY COMMODITIZING BECAUSE MOST MODELS ARE TRAINED ON THE SAME PUBLIC INTERNET DATA. THE REAL COMPETITIVE EDGE ISN’T THE MODEL ANYMORE — IT’S ACCESS TO EXCLUSIVE, PROPRIETARY DATASETS. THAT MAY BE THE ONLY MOAT LEFT.

How on earth is it controversial to suggest that a person who used AI to write their book did not actually write a book? They didn’t. This isn’t a hot take. It’s a fact.

44% of every dollar companies spend on AI goes directly to fixing bugs that the AI itself created. A report from Entelligence AI across 2,444 companies shows that for every $1 spent on AI tokens, $0.44 goes to bug fixes, $0.27 to rewriting AI-generated code, and $0.11 disappears into review and merge delays. Companies spending $100,000 on AI tokens and only $18,000 worth is reaching production. The other $82,000 is overhead generated by the tool itself. Lightrun's 2026 report found that 43% of all AI-generated code still requires manual debugging in production even after passing every quality test. Not a single engineering leader surveyed said they were fully confident AI code would behave correctly once deployed. Wall Street is pricing AI as a productivity tool and the data says 82% of the spend never reaches the actual product. SOURCE: @Aiswarya_Sankar

Dear Streamers / Studios If you don’t release it on physical media we will do it for you Signed Movie fans

Steven Spielberg just exposed why theaters feel dead now… and I’m here for it. That shared big-screen magic used to be everything. Movies in theaters were straight FUN back then. Nowadays? High prices, endless streaming, internet spoilers and phones ruining the vibe. What went wrong for real?

Yes. The #AiCrash is inevitable. Get out while you can.

AI sloppists out here like "y-y-you artists just think you're better than us!!!" and like. Yes, yes I do. Every artist is better than you.

As Google pushes AI deeper into Search, more users are seeking simpler, more traditional alternatives. DuckDuckGo reported that visits to its AI-free search page jumped 22.7% on average last week, peaking at 27.7%. The company also saw an 18% increase in US mobile app installs. This suggests not everyone wants AI-generated answers and many users still prefer clean results and more control over browsing. Though Google still dominates with roughly 85% US market share compared to DuckDuckGo’s 2%

None of this is satire. → A company spent $500,000,000 on Claude in one month because nobody set usage limits → Uber ran leaderboards ranking engineers by how much AI they used, not what they shipped → Uber burned their entire 2026 budget by April. Their COO said he can’t connect any of it to consumer features → A CTO told Axios employees were using enterprise AI to check the weather → Microsoft canceled most Claude Code licenses because the token bill spiraled → Companies are now laying people off to pay the AI bill. Not because AI replaced the work. Because the bill replaced the headcount.

Breaking: Andover New Jersey cancels data center project and passes complete ban!! Rural NJ is fighting back against Big Tech!

@LePapillonBlu2 Was he on it at the time?

Jeff Bezos’ new Blue Origins Glenn rocket has exploded on it’s launch pad in Cape Canaveral, Florida.

The AI numbers are starting to look very ugly. Even under "best case" assumptions, FT's own data shows Microsoft AI ROI at -9%, Google at -15%, Meta at -28%, Oracle at -35%. Only Amazon barely comes out positive. This is exactly why I keep comparing this to the dot-com era. Incredible technology does not automatically mean sustainable economics. The internet survived. Most internet companies didn't. Right now hyperscalers are spending trillions hoping future demand catches up to present capex. That's not certainty. That's a leveraged bet.