Contact Me By Email

Sunday, December 28, 2025

From A.I. to Chips, Big Tech Is Getting What It Wants From Trump

From A.I. to Chips, Big Tech Is Getting What It Wants From Trump


“The president has backed policies that allow the industry to grow unfettered. The mutually beneficial alliance is causing concern among some conservatives.

Álvaro-Bernis

Before President Trump returned to the White House in January, the titans of the tech industry went all out to win him over with inauguration donations and pilgrimages to Mar-a-Lago.

Yet upon taking office, Mr. Trump vowed to continue a fight to break up Meta, imposed tariffs that would raise the costs of Apple’s supply chains and restricted the exports of artificial intelligence chips from Nvidia and other chip makers. It seemed that the tech industry’s efforts to woo the president would not pay off.

Now, however, the biggest tech companies have gotten almost everything they wanted from Mr. Trump.

Since the summer, he has eliminated many limits on A.I. chip exports, fast-tracked the building of data centers that power A.I. development and pushed legislation that gave government approval to a type of cryptocurrency. This month, Mr. Trump signed an executive order to kill A.I. restrictions set by states and greenlighted sales of a more powerful Nvidia chip to America’s top rival, China.

While walking on tarmac at night, President Trump lifts a phone in his left hand so it faces the camera.
President Trump showed reporters that he was on a phone call with Nvidia’s chief executive, Jensen Huang, before boarding Air Force One in North Carolina this month.Eric Lee for The New York Times

“The conservative party stands for the free market and not picking winners and losers,” said Isabel Sunderland, who works on technology policy at Issue One, a nonpartisan political advocacy group, “yet what we’ve seen so far in the Trump administration is an administration that has picked the tech industry to win in ways that is contrary to his own base.”

Assiduously courted by tech companies and their leaders, Mr. Trump has effectively cemented his relationship with the wealthiest and most powerful U.S. industry into a mutually beneficial alliance. How long this entente might last is unclear, as Mr. Trump can be unpredictable. Yet the evolution could have implications for fast-growing technologies like A.I. and has already raised new issues that are likely to play into next year’s midterm elections.

Mr. Trump has used support from the tech companies to bolster his goal of U.S. leadership in A.I. and crypto, while securing victories for his America First economic agenda. This year, Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Nvidia, OpenAI and Oracle announced a combined $1.4 trillion in spending on domestic data centers and manufacturing projects, according to a tally by The New York Times.

OpenAI’s Stargate data center project in Abilene, Texas. The boom in data center construction has caused consternation in some communities.Scott Ball for The New York Times

For Silicon Valley, the alliance with Mr. Trump has meant a bonanza. Freed from potential regulation and aided by industry-friendly policies, Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla have seen their shares soar. Bitcoin, the most popular cryptocurrency, hit record highs. And tech companies can continue developing A.I. largely unfettered.

But the relationship has also driven a wedge through the right, dividing Republican lawmakers and drawing criticism from conservative think tanks and populist figures like Steve Bannon, a former Trump adviser. Mr. Trump has let tech billionaires run rampant through his administration, they said, enabling policies that further enrich the industry while leaving other Americans behind with no tech safeguards.

“Big Tech is not a natural ally to our coalition,” said Wes Hodges, the head of tech policy at the right-leaning Heritage Foundation. “Our work is to keep the memory of Big Tech and their unique concentration of power that is a threat against conservatives.”

Liz Huston, a White House spokeswoman, said Mr. Trump’s relationship with the tech industry would help America prosper. “President Trump is leveraging his close relationships with private-sector titans to cement American technological dominance for the rest of the 21st century,” she said.

The tech industry’s spoils this year have followed a dogged lobbying campaign by the companies. When Elon Musk, the head of Tesla and SpaceX, left his advisory position in the Trump administration in May, other tech companies saw an opening.

David Sacks, a venture capitalist who is the White House’s A.I. and crypto czar, and other Silicon Valley insiders helped open the door for executives like Nvidia’s Jensen Huang to directly lobby the president. Other tech companies unabashedly threw themselves behind Mr. Trump’s projects, with Amazon, Meta, Google, Palantir and Coinbase donating to the effort to replace the White House’s East Wing with a ballroom.

Tech leaders at Mr. Trump’s inauguration in January included, from right, Sundar Pichai of Google, Jeff Bezos of Amazon and Mark Zuckerberg of Meta.Kenny Holston/The New York Times

“We’re seeing an industry that knows how to work the president,” said Jessica González, a co-chief executive of Free Press, a consumer and media advocacy group.

The flourishing relationship was evident in September at a White House dinner for tech leaders. Seated with Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg and the Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, Mr. Trump declared that the executives were “leading a revolution in business” and called them “the most brilliant people.”

In response, Sam Altman, OpenAI’s chief executive, praised Mr. Trump for being a “pro-business” president. Sundar Pichai, Google’s chief executive, commended Mr. Trump for his “leadership” on A.I., and Tim Cook, Apple’s chief executive, thanked the president for “setting the tone” for domestic manufacturing.

(The New York Times has sued OpenAI and Microsoft, claiming copyright infringement of news content related to A.I. systems. The companies have denied those claims.)

As Mr. Trump grew closer with the tech industry, some Republicans became concerned about what the relationship would mean for issues such as A.I. safety for children, A.I.’s effect on jobs and the proliferation of energy-gobbling data centers powering A.I.

In July, Republicans overwhelmingly voted against a provision in a congressional spending package that would have blocked states from imposing regulations on A.I. The provision had been proposed by Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, and backed by Mr. Sacks, who helped revive the idea through the executive order that Mr. Trump signed this month.

Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, a Republican, blasted the efforts to curb states from having their own A.I. laws. “We have a right to do this,” he said after the executive order was signed.

David Sacks, gesturing in the Oval Office this month, is Mr. Trump’s A.I. and crypto czar.Doug Mills/The New York Times

Lawmakers including Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican of Georgia, also ramped up their criticism. “States must retain the right to regulate and make laws on AI and anything else for the benefit of their state,” she posted on social media last month. “Federalism must be preserved.”

In a November poll of American voters by the Institute for Family Studies, a right-leaning think tank, 57 percent — including 43 percent of those who identified as Trump voters — said they opposed federal efforts to block state laws on A.I.

In many places around the country, Mr. Trump’s policies encouraging construction of data centers have also become contentious. Meta, Amazon, Microsoft and others have been on a building spree of the large computing facilities, which consume energy and water and have been blamed for driving up people’s utility bills.

Two Democrats won seats last month on the Georgia Public Service Commission, which regulates the state’s electric utility, with a message of affordability amid the boom in data centers.

In Port Washington, Wis., three residents were arrested this month when they participated in a demonstration against a $15 billion data center project by OpenAI and Oracle. Locals fear the project will lead to large tax breaks for the tech companies and hog supplies of fresh water, residents said.

“There are lots of long-term costs for residents,” said Michael Beaster, a Port Washington resident who is part of a group trying to oust the mayor over the construction of the data center.

Others are concerned that Mr. Trump’s alliance with the tech industry could overshadow concerns about A.I.’s effects on child safety and speech. OpenAI and other A.I. companies have been sued by parents whose children died by suicide after, they said, forming unhealthy relationships with A.I. chatbots.

Lori Schott, far left, protested Mr. Sacks with other parents in Washington this month on the eve of a House hearing on children’s online safety.Jason Andrew for The New York Times

“It should not be at odds to say we are pro-American A.I. and also need to protect kids,” said Evan Swarztrauber, a senior fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation, a think tank, and a former adviser to Brendan Carr, the chair of the Federal Communications Commission.

Lori Schott, a lifetime Republican from Colorado, was part of a group of parents who recently lobbied on Capitol Hill for social media and A.I. child safety laws. Her daughter, Annalee, took her own life at age 18 and left journals showing her struggle with exposure to toxic social media content.

Ms. Schott said “grass roots” Republicans like herself were struggling to reconcile the Trump administration’s overt friendliness with tech executives. “Our votes will reflect a party that puts kids’ safety first,” she said.

Cecilia Kang reports on technology and regulatory policy for The Times from Washington. She has written about technology for over two decades.“ 

Sunday, December 14, 2025

Can OpenAI Respond After Google Closes the A.I. Technology Gap?

 

Can OpenAI Respond After Google Closes the A.I. Technology Gap?

“OpenAI released GPT-5.2, claiming it surpasses Google’s Gemini 3 and other competitors in real-world applications. Despite the competition, OpenAI remains focused on improving ChatGPT, its main revenue source, while also exploring monetization strategies for its free version and expanding into business software. The company faces financial challenges, with significant expenses projected for computing power, and is working to close the gap between its revenue and expenses.

A new technology release from OpenAI is supposed to top what Google recently produced. It also shows OpenAI is engaged in a new and more difficult competition.

A vase sits on a table in front of a green wall with the name OpenAI in picture frames.
OpenAI’s newest technology comes after Google claimed it had topped its young competitor.Aaron Wojack for The New York Times

Just before Thanksgiving, Google boasted that its new and improved artificial intelligence model, Gemini 3, had surpassed the technology from its young rival OpenAI and was now the best in the world.

Less than a month later, OpenAI has released a new model of its own, GPT-5.2, and has claimed that it is “the best model yet for real-world, professional use.” In a blog post, the company said that the technology topped several industry standard benchmarks involving computer programming, math and science.

But for many industry experts, the real story was that the technical gap between OpenAI’s so-called foundational A.I. model and everyone else had become practically nonexistent. And this tightening of the A.I. race has arrived at a precarious time for OpenAI, as it tries to close a yawning gap between how much money is heading out the door and how much it is taking in.

By the end of 2025, OpenAI expects to reach monthly revenues that translate to $20 billion in income each year, according to Sam Altman, the company’s chief executive. But OpenAI is still a long way from being profitable. Over the next several years, the company says it is committed to spending $1.4 trillion on the computing power it needs to build and deploy its many A.I. technologies.

When OpenAI set off the A.I. boom with the release of its ChatGPT chatbot in late 2022, the San Francisco start-up had a clear lead on its rivals. It maintained that lead for more than two years. But over the past 12 months, companies in the United States and China have built technologies that match or even exceed what OpenAI’s leading models can do.

“The overall shape and form of what it takes to build foundational models is well understood — and is happening roughly the same way inside every major A.I. lab,” said Rayan Krishnan, the chief executive of Vals AI, a company that tracks the performance of the latest A.I. technologies.

A week after the arrival of Google’s new A.I. model, the San Francisco start-up Anthropic also released a new model, Claude Opus 4.5, that was on par with OpenAI’s technology. Earlier on Thursday, the New York start-up Runway unveiled a model that exceeded the performance of OpenAI’s video generation technology, Sora, according to standard industry benchmarks.

But like its rivals, OpenAI continues to push its technology forward. The new GPT-5.2 model showed particular improvements in generating computer code and performing tasks in other specific areas, including health care and finance. The company said that it would charge customers roughly 40 percent more to use the new model compared to previous technologies. The model arrived just hours after Disney announced an investment in OpenAI and that it had agreed to license its characters for use by Sora.

After Google unveiled its improved chatbot in mid-November, Mr. Altman sent a “code red” memo to OpenAI employees urging them to focus on improvements to ChatGPT and to move newer projects to the back burner, according to a person familiar with the memo who spoke on the condition of anonymity because details had not been made public. He was intent on protecting a key part of the company’s business. More than 800 million people use ChatGPT each week, which translates to a 76 percent market share, according to the research firm Similarweb.

“Consumer A.I. is OpenAI,” Mr. Krishnan said. “If that disappears for them, the company would not be nearly as valuable.”

With his memo, Mr. Altman pressed OpenAI employees to improve the speed of ChatGPT, reduce the number of questions it declined to answer and give people more ways of personalizing the chatbot for their particular needs. These changes, he said, should take priority over the company’s newer efforts involving advertising, shopping and health care.

He said the company would move some employees, at least temporarily, from other teams onto this multiweek push to improve ChatGPT.

Aspects of Mr. Altman’s memo were previously reported by The Information and The Wall Street Journal.

ChatGPT is OpenAI’s main source of revenue, as about 6 percent of those 800 million people shell out $20 a month to use more advanced versions of the chatbot. And, as Mr. Altman alluded to in his memo, the company aims to make money from the free version of ChatGPT, too.

The plan is to prioritize the development of ChatGPT for the next several weeks. After the release of its new GPT-5.2 model this week, the company is working toward a larger release early next year.

(The New York Times has sued OpenAI and Microsoft, claiming copyright infringement of news content related to A.I. systems. The two companies have denied the suit’s claims.)

Mr. Altman often sends rally-the-troops memos to his company. The latest was similar to one he sent after the Chinese start-up DeepSeek wowed the worldwith its chatbot technology in January. After the threat from DeepSeek, OpenAI focused on improving its own chatbot for several weeks, then returned its attention to newer efforts.

Those newer efforts include projects that aim to make money from the free version of ChatGPT.

Some early OpenAI employees took pride in the notion that the start-up was different from ad-driven competitors like Google and Meta. But as OpenAI works to offset its enormous cash burn, it has been exploring the possibility of serving ads on ChatGPT.

But chatbots are not as conducive to ads as a traditional webpage or search. A chatbot delivers prose rather than a list of blue links that is expanded with a few internet addresses from advertisers, and OpenAI has long experimented with various ways of delivering ads unobtrusively.

The company is also exploring a more focused form of advertising that allows people to shop for goods and services via the chatbot. When someone uses the chatbot to buy a ceramic vase from a seller on Etsy, for instance, OpenAI will take a cut of the transaction.

Although Mr. Altman’s memo underlined the importance of ChatGPT to the company’s future, the consumer chatbot is only part of what the company is working on. Using the same A.I. technology that underpins ChatGPT, OpenAI is pushing into the market of business software.

Inside OpenAI, executives describe the start-up as two companies — one that makes money from consumers and another that makes money from businesses. They argue that A.I. technology will remake practically every category of business software.

Over the past 12 months, OpenAI has used a technique called reinforcement learning to improve the performance of its A.I. models in specific areas like mathand computer programming. In essence, the models learned particular skills through trial and error.

Technologies designed specifically to generate computer code have become another important source of revenue for the company. Some software developers and researchers pay $200 a month to use OpenAI’s most advanced coding technologies. The company’s latest model is in part an effort to improve the company’s performance in this particular field.

Now, OpenAI is using similar techniques to train its models for use in areas like health care and finance, so that it can sell products to businesses in these markets, too.

“Coding technologies are really changing how people in the Valley do things,” said Wei-Lin Chiang, a founder and the chief technology officer of LMArena, a company that tests the performance of A.I. systems. “This will also happen in other industries, too.”

OpenAI’s models outperform the other leading systems in tasks involving both legal work and finance, according to the latest benchmark tests from Vals AI, showing that OpenAI has focused efforts on these fields. OpenAI has also worked to build an enterprise software division, much like those at tech giants like Google, that sells these products to businesses.

The start-up is at a disadvantage when it competes with the likes of Google. As it sells to businesses, Google can bundle its newer A.I. technologies with all sorts of older office apps, like Google Docs and Gmail.

The young company, however, is working to change that disadvantage. This fall, it introduced its own web browser designed specifically for use with its A.I. technologies, directly challenging the Chrome browser offered by Google.

“It is a race that will be fought on many fronts,” Mr. Krishnan said.

Cade Metz is a Times reporter who writes about artificial intelligence, driverless cars, robotics, virtual reality and other emerging areas of technology.

Mike Isaac is The Times’s Silicon Valley correspondent, based in San Francisco. He covers the world’s most consequential tech companies, and how they shape culture both online and offline.“

Friday, December 05, 2025

MSNBC will change its name to MS NOW as part of split from NBC | PBS News (This has already happened)

MSNBC will change its name to MS NOW as part of split from NBC

Media-MSNBC-Name Change

"Television’s MSNBC news network is changing its name to My Source News Opinion World, or MS NOW for short, as part of its corporate divorce from NBC.

The network, which appeals to liberal audiences with a stable of personalities including Rachel Maddow, Ari Melber and Nicole Wallace, has been building its own separate news division from NBC News. It will also remove NBC’s peacock symbol from its logo as part of the change, which will take effect later this year.

READ MORE: NBC’s Lester Holt to step down as ‘Nightly News’ anchor after a decade

The name change was ordered by NBC Universal, which last November spun off cable networks USA, CNBC, MSNBC, E! Entertainment, Oxygen and the Golf Channel into its own company, called Versant. None of the other networks are changing their name.

MSNBC got its name upon its formation in 1996, as a partnership then between Microsoft and NBC.

Name changes always carry an inherent risk, and MSNBC President Rebecca Kutler said that for employees, it is hard to imagine the network under a different name. “This was not a decision that was made quickly or without significant debate,” she said in a memo to staff.

“During this time of transition, NBC Universal decided that our brand requires a new, separate identity,” she said. “This decision now allows us to set our own course and assert our indepedence as we continue to build our own modern newsgathering organization.”

Still, it’s noteworthy that the business channel CNBC is leaving “NBC” in its name. MSNBC argues that CNBC has always maintained a greater separation and, with its business focus, is less likely to cover many of the same topics.

Still, the affiliation between a news division that tries to play it safe and one that doesn’t hide its liberal bent has long caused tension. President Donald Trump refers to the cable network as “MSDNC,” for Democratic National Committee. Even before the corporate change, NBC News has been reducing the use of its personalities on MSNBC.

Some NBC News personalities, like Jacob Soboroff, Vaughn Hillyard, Brandy Zadrozny and Antonia Hylton, have joined MSNBC. The network has also hired Carol Leoning, Catherine Rampell and Jackie Alemany from the Washington Post, and Eugene Daniels from Politico.

Maddow, in a recent episode of Pivot, noted that MSNBC will no longer have to compete with NBC News programs for reporting product from out in the field — meaning it will no longer get the “leftovers.”

“In this case, we can apply our own instincts, our own queries, our own priorities, to getting stuff that we need from reporters and correspondents,” Maddow said. “And so it’s gonna be better.”

A free press is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy."

MSNBC will change its name to MS NOW as part of split from NBC | PBS News

Netflix to Buy Warner Bros in $83 Billion Deal - The New York Times

Netflix to Buy Warner Bros in $83 Billion Deal


https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/05/business/warner-brothers-discovery-netflix.html

Netflix announced plans on Friday to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery’s studio and streaming business, in a deal that will send shock waves through Hollywood and the broader media landscape.

The cash-and-stock deal values the business at $82.7 billion, including debt. The acquisition is expected to close after Warner Bros. Discovery carves out its cable unit, which the companies expected be completed by the third quarter of 2026. That means there will be a separate public company controlling channels like CNN, TNT and Discovery.

Netflix is already the world’s largest paid streaming service, with more than 300 million subscribers. Bulking up with Warner Bros. Discovery assets would create a colossus with greater leverage over theater owners and entertainment-industry unions. It could force smaller companies to merge as they scramble to compete.

The acquisition would also complete the conquest of Hollywood by tech insurgents. Instead of acquiring studios, tech companies have mostly grown under their own steam in Hollywood. In 2022, Amazon closed its $8.5 billion acquisition of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, home to James Bond and Rocky franchises.

“In a world where people have so many choices, more choices than ever on how to spend their time, we can’t stand still,” Ted Sarandos, Netflix’s co-chief executive said on a conference call. “We need to keep innovating and investing in stories that matter most to audiences, and that’s what this deal is all about. The combination of Netflix and Warner Bros. creates a better Netflix for the long run.”

The deal came after a bidding war that pitted Netflix, Comcast and Paramount against one another. The three companies submitted sweetened bids this week. Netflix offered mostly cash.

Comcast has also been bidding for Warner Bros. Discovery’s studios and HBO Max streaming service. David Ellison, the Paramount chief executive armed with billions from his father, has been trying to buy all of Warner Bros. Discovery, including traditional television channels like CNN and TNT.

The pitch from Netflix was notable in part because it included a pledge to continue theatrical releases for movies from Warner Bros. Discovery. That is a significant development for Netflix, which pioneered at-home viewing and has so far avoided going all in at the box office.

Netflix has never tried an acquisition even remotely close to this size.

The emergence of Netflix as a formidable bidder for Warner Bros. Discovery’s assets surprised many in the industry because of how it contradicts the streaming giant’s ethos as a company. “We come from a deep heritage of being builders rather than buyers,” a co-chief executive, Greg Peters, said in October at the Bloomberg Screentime conference in Los Angeles.

Any deal would need approval from federal regulators. How the Trump administration evaluates antitrust concerns in any of the proposed deals will depend in part on how it defines the key participants in a media industry that is rapidly evolving as technology giants like Apple and Amazon become rivals to legacy players.

Politics have also seeped into some deal approvals during the Trump administration. Mr. Ellison has cultivated a relationship with President Trump, who has praised his family’s ownership of Paramount. Brian Roberts, the chief executive of Comcast, has found himself at odds with Mr. Trump, with the president calling him a disgrace to broadcasting.

If the deal falls through because of a failure to get the necessary approvals, Netflix would pay a $5.8 billion break fee to Warner Bros. Discovery. If the agreement was broken by a delay or change of heart by Warner Bros. Discovery, it would owe Netflix $2.8 billion.

On Thursday, a group of anonymous feature film producers sent a letter to Congress with “grave concerns” about Netflix buying Warner Bros. Discovery. “Netflix views any time spent watching a movie in a theater as time not spent on their platform,” the letter said. “They have no incentive to support theatrical exhibition, and they have every incentive to kill it.”

The letter also voiced worry about “monopolistic control” of the streaming market. The producers said they didn’t sign their names to the letter out of “fear of retaliation.”

More than any movie company, Warner Bros. symbolizes the romance of Old Hollywood. Bette Davis and James Cagney acted on its soundstages. Its 100-year-old library includes “Casablanca,” “The Maltese Falcon,” “Bonnie and Clyde,” “Dirty Harry,” “The Shining” and “Chariots of Fire.” As a result of deal making in the 1990s, Warner Bros. also controls MGM classics like “The Wizard of Oz” and “Gone With the Wind.”

Over the spring and summer, Warner Bros. had one of the most successful box office runs in its history, delivering eight hits in a row, including Ryan Coogler’s “Sinners” and Paul Thomas Anderson’s “One Battle After Another,” both of which are expected to be a force at the coming Academy Awards.

HBO has long been the No. 1 premium television operation in Hollywood. Its roster of current hits includes “Euphoria,” “The Gilded Age” and “The White Lotus.”

By swallowing all of this and more — Warner Bros. also controls Bugs Bunny and television colossuses like “Friends” and “Game of Thrones” — Netflix would greatly strengthen its content hand.

Netflix has shown that it can create hits like “Stranger Things” and “KPop Demon Hunters” from unproven intellectual property. But it has lacked the kind of “enduring, multigenerational franchises that drive recurring engagement from both first-time and longtime viewers,” Robert Fishman, a MoffettNathanson analyst, wrote in a report last month.

Brooks Barnes covers all things Hollywood. He joined The Times in 2007 and previously worked at The Wall Street Journal.

Lauren Hirsch is a Times reporter who covers deals and dealmakers in Wall Street and Washington.

Nicole Sperling covers Hollywood and the streaming industry. She has been a reporter for more than two decades."


Netflix to Buy Warner Bros in $83 Billion Deal - The New York Times