Contact Me By Email

Friday, August 15, 2025

SpaceX Gets Billions From the Government. It Gives Little to Nothing Back in Taxes.

 

SpaceX Gets Billions From the Government. It Gives Little to Nothing Back in Taxes.

SpaceX, Elon Musk’s rocket and satellite internet company, has received billions in federal contracts but has likely paid little to no federal income taxes since its founding in 2002. The company can use over $5 billion in losses to offset future taxable income, a benefit that was extended indefinitely in 2017. While SpaceX’s finances have improved, with Starlink generating substantial revenue, the company’s tax benefits and reliance on federal contracts raise questions about its tax obligations.

Elon Musk’s rocket company relies on federal contracts, but years of losses have most likely let it avoid paying federal income taxes, according to internal company documents.

An illustration of a rocket with Elon Musk’s face on it in front of a collage of social media posts from Mr. Musk and signs for the Internal Revenue Service.
Illustration by Joan Wong, Photographs by Meridith Kohut for The New York Times, Carly Zavala for The New York Times

SpaceX, Elon Musk’s rocket and satellite internet company, has received billions of dollars in federal contracts over its more than two-decade existence.

But SpaceX has most likely paid little to no federal income taxes since its founding in 2002 and has privately told investors that it may never have to pay any, according to internal company documents reviewed by The New York Times.

The rocket maker’s finances have long been secret because the company is privately held. But the documents reviewed by The Times show that SpaceX can seize on a legal tax benefit that allows it to use the more than $5 billion in losses it racked up by late 2021 to offset paying future taxable income. President Trump made a change in 2017, during his first term, that eliminated the tax benefit’s expiration date for all companies. For SpaceX, that means that nearly $3 billion of its losses can be indefinitely applied against future taxable income.

Tax experts consulted by The Times said that not having to pay $5 billion in federal income taxes was substantial and notable for a company that has relied on contracts with the U.S. government to an unusual degree. SpaceX works closely with the Pentagon, NASA and other agencies, giving it a vital role in national security. In 2020, federal contracts generated almost 84 percent of the rocket maker’s revenue, according to the documents, a figure that had not been previously reported.

Larger tech companies — including some that have taken advantage of the tax benefit — often pay billions in federal income taxes. Microsoft, for one, said it expected to pay $14.1 billion in federal income taxes in its last fiscal year.

SpaceX can use the tax benefit even if its business thrives. By one measure of corporate profitability, the company had roughly $5 billion in earnings from its core operations last year, up from $2.6 billion in 2023, according to what the company has privately told some stakeholders.

Danielle Brian, the executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a group that investigates corruption and waste in the government, said the tax benefit had historically been aimed at encouraging companies to stay in business during difficult times.

It was “quaint” that SpaceX was using it, she said, as it “was clearly not intended for a company doing so well.”

Mr. Musk has built SpaceX into one of the world’s most influential companies, which dominates the space industry through its rockets and its Starlink satellite internet service. It has been a jewel in the crown of his business empire and an essential source of his wealth and power, along with his electric vehicle company, Tesla. It has also given Mr. Musk a perch on the world stage, allowing him to weigh in on geopolitics.

A purple and blue sunset is the back drop to a rocket and a building that says “gateway to Mars.”
A SpaceX Starship rocket in Boca Chica, Texas. SpaceX has been a jewel in the crown of Elon Musk’s business empire.Meridith Kohut for The New York Times

Like many tech start-ups, SpaceX lost money as it plowed billions of dollars into building its business. Uber, Amazon, Tesla and other tech firms were also not profitable for years. As SpaceX has grown, the firm has been valued at more than $350 billion, crowning it one of the world’s most valuable private companies, according to the start-up tracker PitchBook. 

Several news organizations have reported on aspects of SpaceX’s finances, which the company discloses to its investors and other stakeholders. But the documents reviewed by The Times — including income statements and balance sheets covering 23 years — offered new insight into SpaceX’s revenue sources, investors and taxes.

SpaceX appears to have paid some income taxes over the years, though likely not to the federal government, according to the documents. In one document, the company said it expected to pay $483,000 in income tax to foreign governments and $78,000 in state income tax in 2021. Separately, it reported paying $6,000 for income taxes in 2020 and 2021, but did not disclose if the payments were for federal, state or local governments.

SpaceX and Mr. Musk did not respond to requests for comment. Mr. Musk has often trumpeted SpaceX’s role in carrying out missions for NASA and other agencies. In June, he proudly posted on social media that the company had reached a milestone, as its “commercial revenue from space will exceed the entire budget of @NASA next year.”

Mr. Musk, who left his role as a close adviser to Mr. Trump in late May, founded SpaceX with the goal of shuttling humans to Mars and colonizing the Red Planet. He owned 44 percent of the company as of 2022, according to the documents.

In May, Mr. Musk departed from his role as a special government employee who worked closely with President Trump.Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times

Getting to Mars is an expensive endeavor, and SpaceX’s losses piled up from the start. In its first year of operation in 2002, the company lost about $4 million, the documents show. The next year, it lost $14.5 million. Those losses ballooned in subsequent years, reaching $341 million in 2020. In 2021, it lost $968 million.

All the while, Mr. Musk and Gwynne Shotwell, the president of SpaceX, pushed the company to grow. It began developing and testing Starship, a reusable rocket that Mr. Musk hopes will one day reach Mars.

By the end of 2021, SpaceX had accumulated almost $5.4 billion in tax losses, according to the most recent figure in the documents. Those losses generated the tax benefit, known as a net operating loss carryforward. It enables SpaceX to avoid federal income taxes on an equivalent amount of future taxable income. The benefit is available to all companies, including start-ups that lose money for years before turning a profit.

In one document, SpaceX told investors that it was “more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized,” meaning it might never pay taxes. The company cited, among other things, its past losses. Such language can be common for companies with a history of losses, and this outlook can be revised if their finances improve, said Robert Willens, an accounting analyst who runs his own firm.

SpaceX also benefited from a sweeping package of tax cuts that Mr. Trump signed in 2017. One change was eliminating a 20-year limit on the use of tax-loss carryforwards, meaning that losses generated after 2017 no longer expired. That change allows SpaceX to apply nearly $3 billion in carryforwards indefinitely.

In addition, the company had $227 million in carryforwards that could offset state income taxes, the documents show. It had more than $1.1 billion in other federal and state tax credits.

The Internal Revenue Service building in Washington. SpaceX has privately told investors that it may never have to pay any federal income taxes.Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times

“Given the size of its net operating loss, the company almost surely didn’t pay any federal tax for years,” said Gregg Polsky, who teaches tax law at New York University School of Law. “And it’s so large, it’s unlikely it has paid taxes even if it has had positive taxable income in recent years.”

The tax benefits may have come in handy in recent years as SpaceX’s finances have improved, at least by one measure. The company has privately said its earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization nearly doubled to roughly $5 billion last year from 2023. That figure, known as EBITDA, is one way of measuring corporate profits but is not the same as the bottom line and does not mean that SpaceX is paying taxes.

Starting in the mid-2000s, SpaceX began landing hundreds of federal contracts, including one with NASA to deliver cargo to the International Space Station and another with a U.S. intelligence agency for $1.8 billion to provide spy satellites. Some contracts are expected to generate substantial revenue for years, according to the documents.

SpaceX has contracts with the Pentagon and other government agencies and plays a role in national security.Kenny Holston/The New York Times

The documents, reviewed by The Times, provide the first insights into how heavily SpaceX depends on federal contracts. In 2020, they generated about $1.4 billion, or 83.8 percent, of the company’s total revenue that year. The next year, federal contracts brought in about $1.7 billion, or 76 percent, of the total revenue, the documents show.

Mr. Musk said in June that he expected SpaceX’s revenue to reach $15.5 billion this year. That is up from about $7.4 billion in 2023, the documents show. (Revenue includes sales of the company’s products.)

A big part of that growth stems from Starlink, which has six million subscribers, according to the company. The documents showed that SpaceX told investors that Starlink had 2.5 million users in 2023 and generated roughly $8 billion in revenue last year, more than double the previous year’s revenue and outpacing SpaceX’s rocket division in both years.

The documents do not include SpaceX’s net profits or losses for the past two years. The Wall Street Journal reported that the company generated $55 million in profit on $1.5 billion in revenue in the first quarter of 2023. Companies can simultaneously report profits to shareholders and tax losses to the I.R.S. in any given year because of the differences in how certain items are treated.

To fund SpaceX, Mr. Musk has relied on longtime investors like Fidelity and Google and friends like Antonio Gracias, who is also a SpaceX board member. The documents reviewed by The Times identified others who had not been publicly associated with the company.

Documents reviewed by The New York Times revealed previously undisclosed investors in SpaceX, including a company connected to the billionaire investor Len Blavatnik.Mark Robinson/Matchroom Boxing, via Getty Images

A company called AI RT SPX Holdings is listed as an investor on a 2020 document. It appears to be affiliated with Access Industries, an investment firm founded by Len Blavatnik, the billionaire investor who was born in Ukraine and raised in Moscow and made his fortune in the privatization era in the 1990s after the Soviet Union collapsed. Now a British and American citizen, he has become a prolific philanthropist and investor in American and European companies.

The document was signed by two Access executives, including Mr. Blavatnik’s brother Alex Blavatnik. It is unclear whether Access Industries remains a SpaceX investor. Through a spokeswoman, Mr. Blavatnik declined to comment.

Chris Anderson, the entrepreneur who is the head of the organization behind TED Talks, appears to have invested in SpaceX through a company called Excalbians. He did not respond to requests for comment. Mr. Musk has delivered several TED Talks in the past.

Susanne Craig is a Times investigative reporter and writes on a variety of topics.

Kirsten Grind is an investigative business reporter for The Times, writing stories about companies, chief executives and billionaires across Silicon Valley and the technology industry.“

Tuesday, August 12, 2025

Elon Musk Threatens Lawsuit Against Apple Over Claims It Favors OpenAI - The New York Times

Elon Musk Threatens to Sue Apple Over Claims It Favors OpenAI

"The billionaire said in posts on X that the consumer tech giant was violating antitrust laws by giving preferential treatment to OpenAI on the App Store.

Elon Musk during a cabinet meeting at the White House in April. He has feuded with Apple and OpenAI before. Eric Lee/The New York Times

Elon Musk claimed late Monday that Apple gave preferential treatment to OpenAI, a prominent competitor of his artificial intelligence company, and he threatened to sue the consumer tech giant for “an unequivocal antitrust violation.”

Mr. Musk’s A.I. company, xAI, released a new version of its chatbot, Grok, last month. Mr. Musk has recently posted on his social media platform, X, about how well his chatbot was doing with rankings in Apple’s App Store.

But on Monday, Mr. Musk started posting that Apple was intentionally favoring OpenAI instead. Apple has a partnership with OpenAI to integrate its chatbot, ChatGPT, into Apple products.

“App Store, why do you refuse to put either X or Grok in your ‘Must Have’ section when X is the #1 news app in the world and Grok is #5 among all apps?” Mr. Musk wrote. “Are you playing politics?”

Hours later, Mr. Musk posted that “Apple is behaving in a manner that makes it impossible for any AI company besides OpenAI to reach #1 in the App Store.”

He added that “xAI will take immediate legal action.”

Mr. Musk frequently turns to legal threats against competitors and critics over perceived injustice, sometimes resulting in lawsuits and other times fizzling out after a few social media posts. As of Tuesday afternoon, xAI did not appear to have filed a lawsuit in federal court.

Representatives for xAI and Apple did not respond to requests for comment.

A fact-checking feature run by X users, called Community Notes, added a note to Mr. Musk’s post that said chatbot apps made by companies other than OpenAI had reached the No. 1 spot on the App Store.

Mr. Musk has feuded with OpenAI and Apple before. Mr. Musk previously criticized Apple in 2022, when he said the company had threatened to remove his social media app from its App Store altogether after he relaxed content moderation rules. Apple’s policies prohibit apps that include hateful speech or content.

Mr. Musk later met with Tim Cook, Apple’s chief executive, and clarified it was a “misunderstanding.”

Mr. Musk co-founded OpenAI, but left the company in 2018, citing disagreements with the other co-founders over the company’s direction. He sued OpenAI last year, claiming that the company and two of its founders, Sam Altman and Greg Brockman, had breached its founding contract by putting commercial interests ahead of the public good.

(The New York Times has also sued OpenAI for copyright infringement. The company has denied wrongdoing.)

Mr. Altman, who remains the chief executive of OpenAI, has denied the allegations. 

Kate Conger is a technology reporter based in San Francisco. She can be reached at kate.conger@nytimes.com."

Elon Musk Threatens Lawsuit Against Apple Over Claims It Favors OpenAI - The New York Times

Why I spent $2000 on an iPad, NOT a Mac! M4 iPad Pro with Nano Texture R...

Monday, August 11, 2025

Meike AF 55mm f/1.8 'Pro' lens review

M4 Macbook Air Vs Microsoft Surface Laptop Is Embarrassing

Neil deGrasse Tyson EXPOSES Elon Musk’s Biggest Mistake On Piers Morgan Uncensored

These 5 Game-Changing APS-C Cameras Prove Full Frame Isn't Everything

 

These 5 Game-Changing APS-C Cameras Prove Full Frame Isn't Everything

“The article describes five game-changing APS-C cameras that prove that full frame isn't everything. These cameras offer professional-grade image quality, advanced autofocus systems, and features like 4K video recording. Additionally, APS-C cameras are more compact, lightweight, and affordable than full frame cameras, making them a great choice for photographers and videographers who prioritize portability and versatility.

These 5 Game-Changing APS-C Cameras Prove Full Frame Isn't Everything

The camera industry has been pushing full frame sensors so hard that many photographers think anything smaller is automatically inferior. Here are five remarkable APS-C cameras that deliver professional results while offering advantages that even the best full frame cameras can't match.

Fujifilm X-T5

Expect to Pay: $1,899

The Fujifilm X-T5 proves that resolution wars aren't just for full frame cameras anymore. This compact powerhouse packs an incredible 40.2-megapixel APS-C sensor that delivers detail rivaling cameras costing twice as much. What makes this camera special isn't just the pixel count, it's how Fujifilm's fifth-generation X-Trans CMOS sensor and X-Processor 5 work together to produce images with stunning clarity and their legendary color science.

The X-T5 brings back the classic three-way tilting LCD that photographers loved from earlier X-T models, opting for a design optimized for photography rather than the fully articulating screen that video-focused users preferred on the X-T4. This design choice signals Fujifilm's commitment to still photography, and it shows in every aspect of the camera's performance. The 40-megapixel sensor provides incredible cropping flexibility, effectively giving you multiple focal lengths from a single frame. When paired with Fujifilm's excellent APS-C lens lineup, you get a system that's significantly lighter and more compact than comparable full frame setups while delivering image quality that's essentially indistinguishable in real-world use.

What truly sets the X-T5 apart is Fujifilm's film simulation modes, which have evolved into sophisticated color grading tools. Options like Nostalgic Negative mode alongside classics like Classic Chrome and Acros give you professional-grade looks straight out of camera. These aren't just Instagram filters; they're carefully calibrated color profiles that can save hours in post-processing. The camera delivers approximately 580 shots per charge in normal mode and includes up to 7 stops of in-body image stabilization, making it a reliable companion for extended shooting sessions. The camera also includes a 20-shot pixel-shift multi-shot mode that creates 160-megapixel images, matching medium format resolution (though not the color depth or dynamic range) while maintaining the portability advantages of APS-C.

Canon EOS R7

Expect to Pay: $1,499

Canon's EOS R7 represents the perfect evolution of their legendary 7D DSLR series into the mirrorless age. This camera is built for speed and precision, delivering 30 frames per second with the electronic shutter and 15 fps with the mechanical shutter. The 32.5-megapixel sensor strikes an ideal balance between resolution and performance, providing excellent image quality while maintaining the fast readout speeds necessary for tracking fast-moving subjects.

The R7's autofocus system borrows heavily from Canon's flagship cameras, featuring Dual Pixel CMOS AF II with subject detection for people, animals, and vehicles. This sophisticated system covers approximately 100% on both horizontal and vertical axes with 651 AF zones, ensuring your subject stays sharp whether you're photographing birds in flight or your kids playing sports. The 1.6x crop factor that full frame devotees often dismiss as a limitation becomes a major advantage here, as your 100-400mm lens effectively becomes a 160-640mm powerhouse, giving you incredible reach for wildlife and sports photography at a fraction of the cost and weight of equivalent full frame systems.

Canon has also equipped the EOS R7 with professional-grade video capabilities that rival much more expensive cameras. It shoots uncropped 4K video at 30p using the full width of the sensor with 7K oversampling, while 4K/60p recording uses a 1.08x crop. The camera supports 10-bit internal recording and Canon Log 3 for serious color grading work. The five-axis in-body image stabilization provides up to 7 stops of compensation with RF-S lenses (or up to 8 stops when paired with full frame RF lenses), making handheld shooting possible in situations that would typically require a tripod. For photographers and videographers who need a versatile, fast, and reliable workhorse that doesn't break the bank, the R7 delivers flagship performance in a compact, affordable package.

Ricoh GR IIIx

Expect to Pay: $1,127

The Ricoh GR IIIx might be the most specialized camera on this list, but it's also one of the most compelling arguments for APS-C sensors. This tiny marvel packs a 24.2-megapixel APS-C sensor into a body smaller than most smartphones, creating a street photography machine that's virtually invisible in use. The fixed 26.1mm f/2.8 lens (40mm equivalent) delivers exceptional sharpness across the entire frame, proving that you don't need interchangeable lenses to create stunning images.

What makes the GR IIIx special is its commitment to the fundamentals of photography. There's no viewfinder, no grip, and no unnecessary features—just pure, uncompromising image quality in the smallest possible package. The 40mm focal length provides a natural field of view that's perfect for environmental portraits, street scenes, and travel photography. Unlike the original GR III's 28mm lens, the IIIx's longer focal length creates more natural perspective and better separation between subjects and backgrounds.

The camera's three-axis stabilization system provides 4 stops of shake reduction, remarkable for such a compact body. This allows for sharp handheld shots at surprisingly slow shutter speeds, expanding your creative possibilities in low light. The GR IIIx also includes unique features like an anti-aliasing filter simulator that can be adjusted based on your subject matter and extensive in-camera raw processing capabilities. For photographers who value portability above all else, or who want a camera that never draws attention to itself, the GR IIIx proves that the best camera is often the one you'll actually carry and use every day.

Nikon Zfc

Expect to Pay: $907

The Nikon Zfc brings classic film camera aesthetics into the digital age while proving that style and substance can coexist beautifully. Inspired by the iconic Nikon FM2 from 1982, this camera combines vintage looks with modern APS-C mirrorless technology, creating something that's both nostalgic and thoroughly contemporary. The dedicated ISO, shutter speed, and exposure compensation dials on the top plate provide tactile control that's missing from most modern cameras, making manual exposure adjustments intuitive and satisfying.

Under its retro exterior, the Zfc shares its 20.9-megapixel sensor and processing engine with Nikon's Z50, delivering excellent image quality with clean performance up to ISO 3200 and usable results even higher. The camera's 209-point hybrid autofocus system covers approximately 87% of the frame width and 85% height, with eye detection for humans, dogs, and cats, ensuring sharp portraits whether you're shooting people or pets. What sets the Zfc apart from other retro-styled cameras is its fully articulating touchscreen, which makes it equally capable for traditional photography and modern content creation including vlogging and social media.

The Zfc represents Nikon's understanding that camera ergonomics matter just as much as specifications. The mechanical dials provide immediate feedback about your camera settings even when the camera is turned off, encouraging a more thoughtful approach to photography. The camera shoots 4K video at 30p using the full width of its APS-C sensor and includes features like live streaming capabilities and a 3.5mm microphone input for external audio recording, though it lacks a headphone jack for monitoring. Image stabilization comes from compatible lenses like the Z 16-50mm f/3.6-6.3 VR, as the camera body itself does not include in-body stabilization. Available in numerous color combinations including limited editions, the Zfc proves that APS-C cameras can be both functional tools and desirable objects that you'll be proud to carry and use.

Sony ZV-E10 II

Expect to Pay: $1,098

Sony's ZV-E10 II transforms the vlogging camera concept into something that serious photographers should take notice of. This second-generation model packs the same 26-megapixel BSI CMOS sensor found in Sony's acclaimed a6700, delivering image quality that rivals cameras costing significantly more. The ZV-E10 II proves that cameras designed for content creators can excel at traditional photography while offering video capabilities that put dedicated camcorders to shame.

The standout feature is the camera's blazing-fast sensor readout, which enables 4K video recording at 60 frames per second with 6K oversampling for exceptional detail and sharpness. The 4K/30p mode uses the full width of the sensor, while 4K/60p recording employs a 1.1x crop. Unlike its predecessor, which had to crop the sensor significantly for 4K/30p recording, the ZV-E10 IIuses much more of its sensor area for all video modes, while dramatically reducing rolling shutter issues that plagued the original model. The autofocus system features 759 phase-detection points covering 94% of the frame, with Sony's latest real-time tracking and subject recognition for humans, animals, and vehicles.

What makes the ZV-E10 II special for photographers is how it combines professional-grade specs with an incredibly user-friendly interface. The flip-out screen makes it perfect for self-portraits and awkward angles, while the simplified control layout encourages experimentation rather than getting lost in menus. The camera supports 4:2:2 10-bit recording internally, S-Cinetone and S-Log3 profiles for professional color grading, and includes creative look presets that rival Fujifilm's film simulations. For stabilization, the camera relies entirely on optical stabilization from compatible OSS lenses or Sony's "Active Mode" digital stabilization, which provides steady footage with a slight crop—there is no in-body sensor stabilization. Sony has also improved the battery life significantly with their larger Z-series battery, delivering 610 stills or up to 195 minutes of continuous video recording. Weighing just 377 grams with battery, the ZV-E10 II delivers flagship performance in a compact, approachable package perfect for creators who need a camera that excels at both stills and video.

Why APS-C Still Makes Perfect Sense

These five cameras demonstrate that many of the supposed advantages of full frame sensors have been largely narrowed by modern APS-C technology. Today's crop sensors deliver clean images approaching full frame quality in many real-world situations, with usable performance at ISO 6400 and beyond, while faster aperture lenses designed specifically for APS-C can create depth of field effects that rival full frame systems.

More importantly, APS-C cameras offer practical advantages that full frame simply can't match. They're significantly smaller and lighter, making them ideal for travel, street photography, and any situation where discretion matters. The crop factor provides extra reach for telephoto work, effectively turning every lens into a longer focal length. And perhaps most significantly, APS-C systems are more affordable across the board—not just the camera bodies, but the lenses, accessories, and overall investment required to build a complete system.“

Sunday, August 10, 2025

Apple Software is Changing FOREVER!

Alexa Got an A.I. Brain Transplant. How Smart Is It Now? - The New York Times

Alexa Got an A.I. Brain Transplant. How Smart Is It Now?

"It took Amazon several years to overcome technical hurdles as it remade its voice assistant with new artificial intelligence technology.

An Alexa device sits on a table.
Alexa+ processes language in a more fluid way. Users can speak to it as they would to a human.Graham Dickie/The New York Times

For the last few years, I’ve been waiting for Alexa’s A.I. glow-up.

I’ve been a loyal user of Alexa, the voice assistant that powers Amazon’s home devices and smart speakers, for more than a decade. I have five Alexa-enabled speakers scattered throughout my house, and while I don’t use them for anything complicated — playing music, setting timers and getting the weather forecast are basically it — they’re good at what they do.

But since 2023, when ChatGPT added an A.I. voice mode that could answer questions in a fluid, conversational way, it has been obvious that Alexa would need a brain transplant — a new A.I. system built around the same large language models, or L.L.M.s, that power ChatGPT and other products. L.L.M.-based systems are smarter and more versatile than older systems. They can handle more complex requests, making them an obvious pick for a next-generation voice assistant.

Amazon agrees. For the last few years, the company has been working feverishly to upgrade the A.I. inside Alexa. It has been a slog. Replacing the A.I. technology inside a voice assistant isn’t as easy as swapping in a new model, and the Alexa remodel was reportedly delayed by internal struggles and technical challenges along the way. L.L.M.s also aren’t a perfect match for this kind of product, which not only needs to work with tons of pre-existing services and millions of Alexa-enabled devices, but also needs to reliably perform basic tasks.

Alexa+ struggled to make a correct product suggestion.

But finally, the new Alexa — known as Alexa+ — is here. It’s a big, ambitious remodelthat is trying to marry the conversational skills of generative A.I. chatbots with the daily tasks that the old Alexa did well.

Alexa+, which has been available to testers through an early-access program for a few months, is now being rolled out more widely. I got it last week after I bought a compatible device (the Echo Show 8, which has an eight-inch screen) and enrolled in the upgraded version. (Prime members will get Alexa+ at no cost, while non-Prime members will have to pay $19.99 per month.)

The New York Times recently announced a licensing deal with Amazon, which will allow Amazon to use Times content in its A.I. systems, including Alexa+. The Times is also suing OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, and Microsoft for alleged copyright violations related to the training of A.I. systems.

Two steps forward, one step back

I have good news and bad news for my fellow Alexa-heads.

The good news is that the new Alexa+ is, in fact, more fun to talk to than the old one, with more realistic synthetic voices and a more humanlike cadence. (There are eight voices to choose from; I used the default setting, an upbeat female voice.)

And I liked some of Alexa+’s new capabilities, such as booking a table at a restaurant and generating long stories and reading them to my 3-year-old.

An example of a story from Alexa+.
Alexa+ quickly produced a story about a dinosaur who wanted to become a firefighter.

The new Alexa is also better at handling multistep requests. “Set three kitchen timers for 15, 25 and 45 minutes” and “write a one-day itinerary for a trip to San Diego and send it to my email” were two prompts that worked for me.

And Alexa+ doesn’t require you to say its wake word every time you talk to it, so you can go back and forth or ask it follow-up questions, which is a nice change.

The bad news is that despite its new capabilities, Alexa+ is too buggy and unreliable for me to recommend. In my testing, it not only lagged behind ChatGPT’s voice mode and other A.I. voice assistants I’ve tried, but was noticeably worse than the original Alexa at some basic tasks.

When I asked Alexa+ to cancel an alarm the other morning — a request I had made to the old Alexa hundreds of times with no issues — it simply ignored me.

When I emailed a research paper to alexa@alexa.com, in order to hear Alexa+ summarize it while I washed the dishes, I got an error message saying the document couldn’t be found.

A man looks at a large monitor in front of a room of people.
Daniel Rausch, the Amazon vice president who oversees Alexa and Echo, demonstrated the new technology in February at an event in New York City.Graham Dickie/The New York Times

Alexa+ also hallucinated some facts and made some inexplicable errors. When I asked it to look up Wirecutter’s recommended box grater and add it to my Amazon cart, it responded that “according to Wirecutter, the best box grater is the OXO Good Grips Box Grater.” Wirecutter’s actual box grater pick is the Cuisipro 4-Sided Box Grater. Luckily, I caught the mistake before ordering. When I asked Alexa+ to walk me through installing a new A.I. model on my laptop, it got tripped up and started repeating, “Oh, no, my wires got crossed.”

And I didn’t have access to some of the new Alexa+ features Amazon advertised, such as a “routine” feature that triggers several different actions when a user enters a room. (I wanted to have Alexa+ greet me in the mornings with a motivational speech and a high-volume rendition of “Eye of the Tiger,” but the presence-sensing feature hasn’t been turned on yet, according to an Amazon spokesman.)

Daniel Rausch, the Amazon vice president who oversees Alexa and Echo, told me in a podcast interview this week that many of these flaws would be fixed soon, as Alexa+ rolled out more widely and more of its features came online.

“We’ve got some edges to sand,” he said.

Alexa, give me 500 words on the history of kitchen timers

Mr. Rausch said the biggest challenge in building generative A.I. models into Alexa was that they were fundamentally different types of systems.

The old Alexa, he said, was built on a complicated web of rule-based, deterministic algorithms. Setting timers, playing songs on Spotify, turning off the lamp in your living room — all of these features required calling up different tools and connecting with different interfaces, and they all had to be programmed one by one.

Adding generative A.I. to Alexa forced Amazon to rebuild many of these processes, Mr. Rausch said. Large language models, he said, are “stochastic,” meaning they operate on probabilities rather than a strict set of rules. That made Alexa more creative, but less reliable.

An example of an Alexa+ discussion.
Alexa+ struggled with some other tasks.

It also made the voice assistant slow. Mr. Rausch recalled an early internal demo in which Alexa+ took more than 30 seconds to play a song, an “excruciating” delay, he said, that led the team to rethink its approach.

“These models are slow to respond when they’re following a deep set of instructions,” he said. “We’re asking them to do something quite hard.”

Another challenge to overcome, Mr. Rausch said, was generative A.I.’s wordiness. Initially, when engineers hooked Alexa up to large language models, the system would sometimes produce long, verbose answers, or introduce needless complexity. Alexa+ might respond to a user’s request for a 10-minute kitchen timer with a 500-word essay about the history of kitchen timers.

The solution, Mr. Rausch said, was to spend several years combining more than 70 A.I. models — some Amazon’s proprietary models and some from outside providers, like Anthropic’s Claude — into a single, voice-based interface, with an orchestration system that routes a user’s request to the model that is best suited to handle it.

“The magic, when it is working really well, is to get those new ways of speaking to Alexa to interface with those predictable outcomes or behaviors,” he said.

Learning a new language

There are other barriers, too. One of them, Mr. Rausch said, is that many longtime users have learned how to “speak Alexa,” phrasing their daily requests in familiar commands that they know the system will understand.

“We all sort of came up with our way of setting a timer to get the pasta done on time,” he said.

But Alexa+ processes language in a more fluid way. Users can talk to it as they would talk to a human — no robot pidgin required — and that may necessitate some retraining.

I assume that many of the flaws will be ironed out, and that most users will acclimate to the new way of speaking to Alexa+. I’m also inclined to cut Amazon some slack, since building L.L.M.-based technology into a reliable voice assistant seems like a thorny technical problem, and it’s not like anyone else has solved it. (Apple, which has been struggling to give Siri an A.I. upgrade for years, certainly hasn’t.)

I also don’t think the limitations of Alexa+ suggest that generative A.I. models are inherently unreliable, or that they’ll never work as personal voice assistants. Ultimately, I think it’s just really hard to combine generative A.I. with older, legacy systems — a lesson many companies, both inside and outside tech, are learning the hard way right now — and it’s going to take some time to work out all the kinks.

For now, I’m going to downgrade my devices to the older, less intelligent version of Alexa, and leave the beta testing to others. With A.I., as with humans, sometimes raw intelligence matters less than how you use it."


Alexa Got an A.I. Brain Transplant. How Smart Is It Now? - The New York Times