Brandsit

Tag: Meta

  • Layoffs at Big Tech 2026 – why the Meta and Microsoft are cutting jobs

    Layoffs at Big Tech 2026 – why the Meta and Microsoft are cutting jobs

    Silicon Valley is going through a painful but precise tissue replacement operation. While investors are reacting enthusiastically to new stock market records, thousands of Met and Microsoft employees are finding out that their roles are becoming redundant in the new algorithm-oriented world order. What we are seeing is no longer just an echo of the Pocovid correction, but a fundamental shift in strategic priorities.

    The Met has just announced a 10 per cent reduction in its workforce, which, combined with the elimination of unfilled vacancies, means the removal of nearly 14,000 jobs from the labour market. However, a deeper financial analysis of Mark Zuckerberg’s company reveals a second bottom to this decision. The company plans to increase capital expenditure to as much as $135 billion in 2027, focusing on building data centres and developing Superintelligence Labs.

    This is a classic example of aggressive reallocation of resources: billions saved on the ‘traditional’ workforce are funding an artificial intelligence arms race. Behind the scenes, however, there is talk of the phenomenon of “AI-washing” – conveniently attributing redundancies to technological advances to cover up the 2020-2022 recruitment mistakes.

    Microsoft in Redmond, on the other hand, is employing a more subtle but equally telling tactic. For the first time in its history, the giant has opted for a voluntary departure programme targeting around 7% of its US workforce. The ‘sum 70’ criterion (combining age and seniority) suggests that the company wants to slim down the structure of costly, experienced managers whose competencies may not be suited to the era of generative models. At the same time, Microsoft is simplifying the reward and bonus system, giving executives more leeway to reward the talent that realistically drives new business divisions.

    This trend is not isolated – Amazon, Intel or Cisco are following a similar path. There is a clear lesson for the business world: operational efficiency in 2026 is no longer about having the largest teams, but about building the most scalable systems. The technology labour market is no longer a safe haven, becoming a testing ground for a new definition of corporate productivity.

  • Facebook and Instagram fraud. Meta in front of court for advertising profits

    Facebook and Instagram fraud. Meta in front of court for advertising profits

    For the tech giants, the line between aggressive monetisation and user safety has been up for debate for years, but a new class action complaint against Meta Platforms may take this dispute to a whole different level of financial accountability. The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) is hitting a sensitive spot in Mark Zuckerberg’s empire with the claim that the company’s business model not only tolerates, but even systemically rewards fraudulent advertising campaigns.

    The case, which has reached the Supreme Court in Washington, is based on extremely incriminating data, allegedly coming from inside the corporation itself. According to Meta’s estimates for 2024, every day Facebook and Instagram users could see up to 15 billion ads classified as ‘high-risk’. What is a risk for the consumer has become a tangible profit for the shareholder. The complaint suggests that revenue from this could have reached $7 billion a year, and the company’s internal projections indicated that as much as one in ten dollars earned by the Met could come from displaying banned or fraudulent content.

    For managers and investors, a key aspect of this battle is not only an image issue, but above all the sustainability of advertising systems. The CFA sheds light on so-called ‘agency accounts’ and collaborations with partners in China who act as intermediaries for the resale of advertising. This complex ecosystem, designed to maximise reach, has, according to the accusers, become a conduit for facilitating the misleading of millions of people while maintaining a safe corporate distance from the fraud itself.

    Meta is not indebted, claiming that the allegations build a false picture of its operations. The company stresses that it is intensifying its vetting processes for advertisers and introducing blockers on redirects from financial ads to private messaging, a typical mechanism in phishing scenarios. However, for the technology market, this process signals that finally the time when platforms could invoke their ‘neutral intermediary’ status is coming to an end.

  • The Meta’s new strategy. Employees teach their successors AI

    The Meta’s new strategy. Employees teach their successors AI

    Inside Menlo Park, a fundamental shift in the definition of white-collar work is currently taking place. The Met, led by Mark Zuckerberg, is implementing a system that transforms the daily activities of engineers and managers into the raw material for building autonomous AI agents. The programme, called the Model Capability Initiative (MCI), is not only a new monitoring tool, but above all a signal that Silicon Valley is entering a new, aggressive phase of automation.

    According to internal company notes, MCI records mouse movements, clicks and keystrokes of employees in the US. The tool also takes occasional snapshots of the screen to teach AI models the subtleties of human interaction with the software – from handling keyboard shortcuts to navigating complex drop-down menus. What was previously an intuitive human craft becomes a training data set.

    Meta’s technical director, Andrew Bosworth, leaves no illusions about the purpose of this initiative, currently operating under the Agent Transformation Accelerator (ATA) programme. The company’s vision is of a world where AI agents do most of the work and the role of humans is reduced to that of supervisor and equalizer. To achieve this, Meta must first ‘clone’ the behavioural patterns of its top professionals.

    This strategy is inextricably linked to a deep restructuring of the workforce structure. Meta is not only planning further job cuts, but is also blurring the lines between traditional roles by introducing the universal title of ‘AI developer’. The creation of the Applied AI (AAI) team aims to create systems capable of writing, testing and shipping code independently. In this model, the software engineer ceases to be a developer and becomes a teacher of the algorithm, ultimately replacing it in repeatable processes.

    However, the initiative raises serious questions about the limits of surveillance in the white-collar sector. While real-time tracking of movements has so far been the domain of logistics staff or delivery drivers, the transfer of these methods to engineering offices sets a precedent. Legal experts point to a profound gap between the liberal approach in the US and the strict regulations in Europe. While this surveillance is legally permissible in the US, in the European Union, GDPR regulations and national labour protection laws would likely prevent the implementation of MCI on such a scale.

    Meta spokesperson Andy Stone assures that the data is not used to assess performance and that the company has safeguards in place to protect sensitive content. But for the business market, the lesson is clear: Meta is putting everything on the line. If the ‘Agent Transformation’ experiment succeeds, the company will gain an efficiency advantage that competitors may not be able to make up for without similarly compromising the privacy of their staff.

  • Quest goggles will be more expensive. Meta announces increases

    Quest goggles will be more expensive. Meta announces increases

    Mark Zuckerberg has proven over the years that he can burn billions of dollars just to put virtual reality goggles in every American home. That era of aggressively subsidising hardware is now coming to an end. As of 19 April, Meta Platforms is raising the prices of its flagship headsets in the US, a clear sign that market realities and expensive competition for dominance in the artificial intelligence sector are beginning to dictate new terms of play.

    The increases are being felt. The entry-level Quest 3S model with 128GB of memory will become $50 more expensive at $349.99. The premium segment will be hit even harder – the price of the Quest 3 goggles with 512 GB of memory will increase by $100, hitting $599.99. The official reason is the rising cost of components, specifically memory chips. This is the paradox of the current technology boom: the successes of OpenAI, Google or Microsoft in building powerful AI models have led semiconductor manufacturers to prefer to supply components to high-margin data centres rather than consumer electronics.

    Meta is not alone in this battle for resources. Dell and HP have already taken similar steps, and Sony recently announced its second PlayStation 5 console price hike in less than a year. But for the Menlo Park-based giant, the price change has a deeper strategic dimension. Reality Labs, the division responsible for its ambitious plans to build a metaverse, has generated more than $70 billion in operating losses since 2021. With current investor pressure on profitability and the need to fund infrastructure under generative AI, Zuckerberg can no longer afford to subsidise user entry into virtual worlds so generously.

    Recent months at the Met have been a time of belt-tightening in the VR area. The dismissal of 10 per cent of staff in the Reality Labs group and the scaling back of the development of the Horizon Worlds platform show that the company’s priorities have permanently changed. While the Meta name remains a reminder of the fascination with metaverse, the company’s strategy today is almost entirely AI-oriented.

  • Meta will overtake Google – Ad revenue forecasts for 2026

    Meta will overtake Google – Ad revenue forecasts for 2026

    For more than a decade, the hierarchy in Silicon Valley was unchanged: Google dominated the digital advertising ecosystem, with Meta in a solid second place. However, according to the latest forecasts from research firm Emarketer, we are approaching a historic turning point. By the end of 2026, the Mark Zuckerberg-led giant is poised to dethrone Alphabet in terms of global net ad revenue, reaching a ceiling of 243.46 billion against a projected 239.54 billion for Google.

    This changing of the guard is not just a matter of numbers, but more importantly a testament to the effectiveness of the transformation that the Met has undergone following the privacy crisis in Apple’s systems. A key driver has been the Advantage+ package, which uses artificial intelligence to automate campaigns. By simplifying setup and optimising ROI, the tool has made marketers more willing to move budgets to where the algorithm does the hardest work for them.

    Meta’s strategic advantage also stems from its growth rate. While Google maintains a steady but more modest rate of 11.9%, Meta is accelerating – from a projected 22.1% in 2025 to 24.1% a year later. The company is effectively monetising new channels such as WhatsApp and Threads, directly hitting the X platform’s position, while Reels is successfully competing for users’ attention with TikTok and YouTube Shorts.

    The lesson for business decision-makers is clear: the advertising market is becoming increasingly consolidated. Although smaller players such as Snap and Pinterest offer unique niches, in times of geopolitical uncertainty, capital is fleeing to the safe havens with the largest reach. Google remains a powerhouse, but its diversification into YouTube Premium subscriptions, while beneficial for financial stability, is weakening its momentum in the direct advertising primacy battle.

    Nevertheless, the dominance of the triopoly of Meta, Google and Amazon – which is expected to control more than 62% of global digital ad spend in 2026 – appears unthreatened by legal issues. Analysts predict that even recent court rulings will not put the brakes on this machine. The race for the leadership seat is entering a decisive phase, and Meta, with its bet on AI and short video content, now seems to have the better leverage in this competition.

  • Child safety online. Courts hit back at social media giants

    Child safety online. Courts hit back at social media giants

    For nearly three decades, Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act was the most effective line of defence for technology giants. This provision, which protects platforms from liability for user content, was the foundation on which the giants Meta or Google grew. However, recent jury verdicts in California and New Mexico suggest that the era of impunity based on this provision is coming to an end, and the focus of litigation is shifting from the content itself to the architecture of the systems.

    In Los Angeles, a jury found Meta and Google liable for a young woman’s mental health problems, ordering the payment of $6 million in damages. An even more severe blow fell on Meta in New Mexico, where it was ordered to pay $375 million for misrepresenting the safety of its products and allowing abuse of minors. The key here, however, is not the damages themselves, but the legal strategy: the plaintiffs successfully proved that it was not the specific post or video that was harmful, but the deliberate design of the algorithms and interfaces to addict the user.

    Courts are beginning to distinguish between a platform’s role as a ‘transmitter’ of information and its role as a ‘designer’ of experiences. If these rulings hold up in the appellate processes, every product feature – from the infinite scroll mechanism to recommendation systems – could become the basis for multi-billion dollar lawsuits.

    The risk is not limited to social media. Similar battles are already being fought by Roblox, and experts warn that all platforms hosting user-generated content, including gaming or e-commerce sites, could be targeted.

    Although Meta and Google are announcing a fight in the higher courts, the mood in the US legal system is changing. Even Supreme Court judges are suggesting that Section 230 cannot be a ‘get-out-of-jail-free card’ that exempts companies from elementary concern for the safety of their customers. For technology leaders, the time is coming when an ethical audit of algorithms will become as important as a financial audit. The outcome of the upcoming appeals will not only decide the fate of thousands of pending cases, but will set new rules of the game for the entire digital economy.

  • Trump appoints tech giants to AI council: Brin, Su and Huang at PCAST

    Trump appoints tech giants to AI council: Brin, Su and Huang at PCAST

    President Donald Trump’ s decision to appoint Mark Zuckerberg, Jensen Huang and Larry Ellison to the Presidential Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) signals that the administration is abandoning its role as a strict arbiter in favour of a business partner, with Washington officially recognising AI as the most important battleground in the strategic rivalry with China.

    The composition of the council resembles the guest list of the world’s most exclusive technology conference. In addition to the leaders of Meta, Nvidia and Oracle, the group included Sergey Brin of Alphabet and Lisa Su of AMD. The presence of these names at one table with David Sacks, acting ‘czar’ for AI and crypto, suggests a new era of pragmatism. Instead of building regulatory barriers, the White House wants to dismantle them, something Trump signalled in his first days in office by commissioning a plan to accelerate innovation.

    The selection of Bob Mumgaard of Commonwealth Fusion Systems to join this group further indicates that the administration recognises the inextricable link between the development of artificial intelligence and the need for the gigantic clean energy resources required to power the data centres of the future.

    This partnership, however, raises important questions about transparency and the influence of large corporations on government policy. While Zuckerberg and Huang publicly declare their desire to empower the US, others, such as Oracle and Alphabet, remain reserved for the time being. Nevertheless, the council’s appointment ends a period of uncertainty about the direction US tech legislation will take.

    The direction is clear: deregulation, market dominance and a close symbiosis between Silicon Valley and Pennsylvania Avenue. In the race for supremacy in the field of AI, the United States has just set its sights on its strongest players, hoping that their private interest will turn out to be the same as the national interest.

  • New redundancies at Meta: company cuts costs to invest in AI

    New redundancies at Meta: company cuts costs to invest in AI

    Meta Platforms is taking another step towards a ‘year of efficiency’ that seems to have no end in sight. Last Wednesday, the Menlo Park-based giant carried out another round of layoffs, involving several hundred employees in key business units. Although the scale of the cuts is smaller than in previous years, the signal sent to the market is clear: Mark Zuckerberg’s company is prioritising resources where it sees the future, ruthlessly slashing spending in other areas.

    According to sources close to the company, the reductions have mainly affected the Reality Labs departments, the social media operations teams and the recruitment structures. This is a strategic shift of emphasis.

    While Reality Labs continues to generate billions of dollars in losses in pursuit of its metaversum vision, the Met must simultaneously fund the murderous AI arms race. Spending projections for 2026, as high as $169 billion, leave no illusions – the battle for supremacy in AI requires gigantic capital that must be raised from somewhere.

    The company’s official position is to ‘restructure regularly to achieve strategic objectives’. But for business analysts, the deeper context is more complex. The Met is struggling with rising labour costs, driven by the need to attract the most expensive engineering talent on the market specialising in machine learning.

    As a result, the company is pursuing a ’tissue replacement’ strategy: reducing staff in mature or less promising areas in order to free up budget for astronomical salaries for Llama model experts.

    With nearly 79,000 employees, the company is no longer a monolith focused solely on growth. Today, it is an organisation that is learning to operate in continuous optimisation mode. Every vacancy in the recruitment team brings the company closer to funding the next H100 processor cluster. An era has dawned in Silicon Valley in which innovation is no longer just about creating the new, but above all about daring to let go of what is no longer a priority.

  • The efficiency paradox: Why the Meta is cutting jobs again

    The efficiency paradox: Why the Meta is cutting jobs again

    Mark Zuckerberg, who has declared 2023 as the ‘year of productivity’, clearly hasn’t put a full stop yet. According to sources close to the Menlo Park-based giant, the Met is preparing for another wave of restructuring, which could involve up to 20% of its staff. Although company spokesperson Andy Stone describes these reports as speculation, market logic suggests otherwise: the Big Tech industry is entering a phase of drastic capital shift from people to infrastructure.

    The capital-intensive pursuit of superintelligence

    The decision to potentially say goodbye to nearly 16,000 employees is not due to the financial crisis, but to a gigantic appetite for computing power. Meta plans to invest $600 billion in data centres by 2028. In a world where a single prominent AI researcher can expect a remuneration package going into the hundreds of millions of dollars, and where acquisitions of startups such as Manus cost billions, traditional employment structures are becoming ballast for the company.

    It’s a strategic turnaround after a series of stumbles. Problems with the Llama 4 models and delays in the development of the flagship Avocado project have meant that Zuckerberg has to look for savings where AI is starting to realistically replace humans. Meta’s CEO openly admits that tasks that once required entire teams are now being handled by a single talented person supported by algorithms.

    New industry standard

    Meta is not alone in this strategy. We are seeing a broader trend in which technology leaders – from Amazon to Jack Dorsey’s Block – are optimising staffing, pointing to the increasing proficiency of generative tools. Productivity measured by the number of ‘heads’ is going away in favour of process efficiencies based on automation.

    It is a risky move, but a necessary one. The Met needs to prove that it can prove the promise of super-intelligence, even if the price of doing so is a loss of internal structural stability. If the announced cuts come to fruition, it will be the ultimate confirmation that in Silicon Valley AI has ceased to be just a support tool and has become the reason why desks in open spaces remain empty.

  • Meta postpones the launch of the AI ‘Avocado’. The model is expected to debut in May

    Meta postpones the launch of the AI ‘Avocado’. The model is expected to debut in May

    For Mark Zuckerberg, the artificial intelligence arms race has become a high-stakes battle, but recent reports suggest that the road to ‘super-intelligence’ is bumpier than expected. According to sources close to the company, Meta has decided to delay the release of its latest AI model, codenamed ‘Avocado’. Originally planned for the first quarter, the debut has been pushed back until at least May, shedding new light on the Menlo Park-based tech giant’s internal challenges.

    The reason for this decision is not logistical, but pure performance. Current tests place the ‘Avocado’ in a perplexing position – the model offers capabilities greater than Google’s Gemini 2.5, but is still inferior to the upcoming Gemini 3. Being ‘in-between’ generations of competition is a risky place for a company that intends to spend a record $115-135 billion on infrastructure and proprietary chip development this year.

    The delay is a signal that Meta is abandoning haste in favour of quality. The company does not want to repeat the mistakes of the past by releasing a tool that does not dominate its market rivals. However, this strategy comes at a cost. Every month of delay increases the gap with OpenAI and Google, and thus casts doubt on the rate of return on the huge capital investment. A Meta spokesperson tones down the mood, announcing that the upcoming model is primarily intended to show a ‘rapid trajectory’ of development, suggesting that the company is betting on systematic, frequent updates rather than a single, static breakthrough.

    The most intriguing thread, however, remains the desperation to find bridging solutions. It has been reported that the leaders of Meta’s AI division were considering temporarily licensing Gemini technology from Google to power their own products. While final decisions have not been made, the mere fact that such talks are being held by a company seeking full technological independence shows the enormous pressure on Zuckerberg’s team. The industry will be keeping a close eye on the May launch window, which will show whether Meta is able to leap over the bar set by its competitors on its own, or whether the billions of dollars of investment will take even longer to yield the expected results.

  • AMD and Meta: $60bn contract will change the balance of power in AI

    AMD and Meta: $60bn contract will change the balance of power in AI

    Meta Platforms, the giant ruled by Mark Zuckerberg, has struck a $60 billion deal with AMD. At first glance, this is a classic chip supply contract to secure the infrastructure for ambitious AI projects. However, a deeper analysis of the structure of this deal reveals a mechanism that is increasingly worrying investors: a return to so-called closed-loop deals.

    Capital for silicon

    The key element of the deal is not the amount itself, but Meta’s right to take up to 10% of AMD shares. The warrant-based mechanism, which becomes due when AMD shares reach certain targets (as low as US$600), makes Meta cease to be a mere customer and become a strategic co-owner.

    For AMD CEO Lisa Su, this is a powerful vote of confidence. Acquiring such a big player helps to challenge Nvidia’s dominance, especially in the upcoming MI450 chip cycle. The market reacted enthusiastically, lifting AMD’s share price by 6%, while Nvidia saw a slight decline. However, critics such as analysts at Hargreaves Lansdown rightly point out that having to give away a tenth of the company suggests that AMD still needs to ‘buy’ its market share, rather than relying solely on organic demand.

    Diversification as an insurance policy

    The Met’s strategy is clear: independence from a single supplier. While the company still buys millions of processors from Nvidia and develops its own chips, the alliance with AMD gives it direct influence over hardware architecture. New chips are to be optimised for inference – a stage that experts believe will soon eclipse the market for just training models in terms of revenue generation.

    This partnership is part of a wider trend in which Big Tech – with almost unlimited capital at its disposal – is taking control of the supply chain. Similar moves by Alphabet against Anthropic or AMD’s earlier pacts with OpenAI create a web of mutual capital ties.

  • Privacy at the expense of security? Meta’s internal dilemmas come to light

    Privacy at the expense of security? Meta’s internal dilemmas come to light

    In Silicon Valley, there has been a years-long debate over where a user’s right to privacy ends and a platform’s responsibility for public safety begins. New court documents, revealed as part of the State of New Mexico’s lawsuit against Meta, indicate how the social media giant has navigated these turbulent waters. The case concerns the implementation of end-to-end encryption on Messenger and Instagram, which, according to internal warnings from executives, may have drastically reduced the company’s ability to detect abuse of minors.

    The disclosed correspondence shows that the Met ‘s top security and content policy directors expressed deep scepticism about Mark Zuckerberg’s plans as early as 2019. Monika Bickert, head of content policy, outright called the measures “irresponsible”. Concerns were not unfounded – internal analyses estimated that the number of reports of child abuse sent to the relevant services could fall by 65% after the introduction of encryption. In absolute numbers, this meant thousands of cases a year that might never reach the desks of investigators.

    This case is a case study about product risk management on a global scale. The Met finds itself caught between two paradigms. On the one hand, encryption is considered the gold standard for data protection, widely used by Apple or Google. On the other hand, the specificity of Facebook and Instagram – platforms based on open social graphs – makes it much easier to connect between strangers than with services like WhatsApp. It is this ease of ‘finding victims’, as Antigone Davis, global head of security, wrote about, that has been the main argument against default encryption in these particular ecosystems.

    The Met’s official position highlights the evolution the company has undergone since the critical 2019 emails. Spokesperson Andy Stone points out that it was these internal concerns that spurred the creation of new safeguards ahead of the final implementation of encryption in 2033. Among other things, restrictions on adult contact with minors have been introduced, along with artificial intelligence-based tools to detect suspicious patterns of behaviour without having to directly ‘look’ at the content of messages.

    From a market perspective, the New Mexico dispute is just the tip of the iceberg. The Met is currently facing waves of lawsuits from more than 40 state attorneys general and school districts accusing the company of negatively impacting the mental health of young people. The outcome of these lawsuits may redefine the ‘duty of care’ standards for the entire Big Tech sector.

  • New AI system from Meta will simulate the activity of the dead

    New AI system from Meta will simulate the activity of the dead

    In the architecture of modern social media platforms, the biggest challenge remains the natural attrition of user activity due to interruption of use or, ultimately, death. A recent patent awarded to Meta for an artificial intelligence system capable of simulating user presence suggests that the Menlo Park-based giant is considering a technological solution to this problem. The dossier describes a mechanism that, based on analysis of historical interactions, voice message syntax and behavioural patterns, would be able to keep an account active even in the absence of its owner.

    From an operational perspective, the move can be read as an attempt to stabilise the social capital accumulated on platforms such as Instagram and Facebook. For the creator economy, presence automation offers the theoretical possibility of maintaining reach without the need for constant physical interaction, which in theory solves the problem of influencer burnout. However, a system that can autonomously respond to private messages or generate posts on behalf of a deceased person takes the market into uncharted ethical and legal territory.

    Analysts point out that the attempt to monetise digital legacies – sometimes referred to as the ‘smuby technique’ – carries risks beyond standard content moderation. Cambridge University researchers point out that the lack of clear protocols for ending a relationship with an algorithmic clone can lead to psychological complications for the user’s loved ones. While a Meta spokesperson points out that having a patent does not equate to deployment plans, the very fact of securing intellectual property in this area shows where the company sees another barrier to the development of engagement.

    The key challenge becomes not so much the accuracy of mimicking human behaviour, but the transparency of these processes. The potential implementation of such systems will require the development of new standards of consent, involving both the creator of the digital avatar and the audience, who may unknowingly interact with the code instead of the human.

  • Big Tech’s excuses are over. Meta accused of profiting from illegal casinos

    Big Tech’s excuses are over. Meta accused of profiting from illegal casinos

    For technology giants such as Meta Platforms, the argument about the inability to fully monitor millions of adverts has been an effective shield against regulators over the years. However, a recent speech by Tim Miller, executive director of the UK Gambling Commission, suggests that patience for the ‘react after the fact’ model is running out in Europe. Miller, speaking at ICE Barcelona, made it clear: the owner of Facebook and Instagram not only knows about illegal casino advertising, but is deliberately turning a blind eye to it as long as the money is flowing broadly.

    Miller’s accusations strike at a sensitive point in Meta’s business model – the effectiveness of its own verification tools. The regulator highlighted a paradox: the publicly available Meta Advertising Library (Ad Library) effortlessly reveals promotions from gambling operators who boast of bypassing the GamStop system. This is the UK’s self-exclusion mechanism designed to protect addicts. Since officials are able to find these adverts using simple keywords, Meta’s claim of ignorance becomes, according to Miller, “simply false”.

    From a business perspective, the situation casts a shadow over Big Tech’s compliance procedures. Miller described the ad library as a ‘window to criminality’, suggesting that the Met has the technical capability to block such content immediately, but chooses not to do so. It’s an indictment of a cynical calculation: reputational risk is included in the cost of revenue until external pressure becomes too strong.

    For Meta’s advertisers and business partners, this is a wake-up call. The Gambling Commission has admitted that progress to date in talks with the giant has been “very limited”. This could herald an impending tightening of regulation that will force platforms to preemptively censor content under threat of gigantic financial penalties. If regulators find platforms complicit in promoting the grey market, the era of passive moderation will be over. As Miller concluded, Meta’s current attitude leaves the impression that the company is content to take money from scammers until someone loudly protests.

  • HTC is betting on an open AI architecture. Will it be enough to threaten Meta’s dominance?

    HTC is betting on an open AI architecture. Will it be enough to threaten Meta’s dominance?

    Taiwanese mobile technology pioneer HTC is opening a new chapter in its history by returning to the consumer electronics market with a clear, albeit risky, strategy. Faced with the dominance of Silicon Valley giants, the company does not intend to build another ‘closed garden’. Instead, with the launch of the VIVE Eagle glasses, it is betting on technology agnosticism, allowing users to freely choose which language model they want to use.

    Charles Huang, vice-president of global sales at HTC, argues that the current arms race between LLM developers – such as Google and OpenAI – requires resources that the Taiwanese manufacturer does not necessarily have directly at its disposal. The company’s strategy is that instead of competing on algorithms, it is better to become a hub for connecting the best available solutions. VIVE Eagle users will therefore be able to switch between Gemini and ChatGPT, a clear counter to Meta’s approach. Indeed, Mark Zuckerberg is integrating his Ray-Ban glasses closely with the Meta AI ecosystem, just as Chinese players – Xiaomi or Alibaba – are building hardware around their own domestic models.

    The decision to open up the platform is also an attempt to address a niche related to privacy. In an era of growing concern about the use of user data to train AI – which is standard with Meta – HTC declares that it does not use customer information to train models. It’s a differentiator that could attract more informed consumers and a business sector concerned about the leakage of sensitive data.

    The market reality, however, is challenging for HTC. According to Counterpoint, global shipments of smart glasses grew 110% in the first half of this year, but as much as 73% of the market belongs to Meta. To avoid a direct clash in saturated Western markets, HTC is adopting an Asia-first strategy. Priced at around $512, the new hardware debuted in Hong Kong and is designed with the anatomy of Asian users in mind, which Huang points to as an advantage over the “Western fit” of competitors.

    Expansion into more markets, such as Japan and Southeast Asia, is planned for the first quarter of next year, while Europe and the US must wait until 2026. Caution is also evident in the approach to mainland China, where data regulations and restrictions on foreign AI models are forcing the construction of a separate server infrastructure. The launch of VIVE Eagle is a test of whether there is still room for a neutral hardware player in a world dominated by big tech ecosystems.

  • Oracle and Meta negotiate $20bn cloud deal

    Oracle and Meta negotiate $20bn cloud deal

    Oracle is in advanced talks with Meta on a multi-year cloud deal that could be worth up to $20 billion. This is another sign, following a series of high-profile deals, that the company, hitherto seen as a second-tier player in the IaaS market, is building a powerful niche in IT’s most strategic segment – infrastructure for artificial intelligence.

    The potential deal with the owner of Facebook and Instagram is no coincidence. Meta, developing its language models from the Llama family, needs gigantic and specialised computing power.

    Instead of relying solely on its own data centres and existing suppliers, the company is diversifying its infrastructure. Oracle is to provide the resources to train and deploy AI models, complementing, rather than replacing, existing solutions.

    The move is part of Oracle’s broader Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) strategy. While OCI’s share of the global public cloud market is still significantly behind AWS, Microsoft Azure and Google Cloud, the company has found a way to challenge them.

    Rather than competing across the board, it has focused on offering a high-performance computing (HPC) infrastructure optimised for AI. OCI’s key strengths are its architecture based on high-speed RDMA (Remote Direct Memory Access) network connections and its close partnership with Nvidia, providing access to the latest GPUs.

    Such an environment is ideal for handling the distributed, large-scale training tasks that are the foundation of today’s AI revolution.

    The Meta talks are not the only evidence of the effectiveness of this tactic. In recent weeks, Oracle has announced four other multi-billion dollar contracts with AI companies. Also widely reported in the industry is a deal with OpenAI to provide ChatGPT developers with access to OCI resources.

    These successes show that for companies developing artificial intelligence, specialised capabilities and infrastructure performance are becoming more important than being tied to a single, dominant supplier.

    Interestingly, Oracle is not at open war with the market leaders. On the contrary, the company has entered into strategic partnerships with Amazon, Google and Microsoft. These enable customers to run OCI infrastructure directly from competing clouds, significantly lowering the barrier to entry. This collaborative model is already yielding tangible benefits, and the revenue associated with it is growing at an exponential rate.

    For the market, this sends a clear signal: although the battle for general-purpose cloud leadership seems settled, the race to dominate the AI niche is only just beginning. Oracle, with its strategic focus and technological strengths, is emerging as one of the key players in it.

  • Amazon will enter the AR race. ‘Jayhawk’ project is set to challenge Meta

    Amazon will enter the AR race. ‘Jayhawk’ project is set to challenge Meta

    Amazon is quietly developing consumer augmented reality glasses, joining the competition for another computing platform, reports The Information. The project, known internally as ‘Jayhawk’, is expected to hit the market in late 2026/early 2027, putting the company in direct competition with Meta Platforms.

    According to inside sources, the device is expected to be equipped with a camera, microphones, speakers and a colour display designed for one eye.

    Such a specification suggests that Amazon is targeting pragmatic uses, focusing on providing contextual information and notifications rather than creating fully immersive, 3D worlds.

    The monocular display is a technically simpler solution, which may translate into longer battery life and a more subtle design – key challenges for the category as a whole.

    Entering the consumer market is not Amazon’s first foray into this technology. The company has been working on specialised AR glasses for its couriers for some time. This model, which could debut as early as the second quarter of 2026, is expected to use similar display technology to navigate and optimise delivery processes.

    The consumer version, however, is expected to be much slimmer and sleeker.

    Amazon’s strategy appears to be based on a two-pronged approach: testing and refining the technology in a controlled, in-house logistics environment and then taking it to the mass market.

    The potential integration with the Alexa ecosystem could give the company a unique advantage, transforming the glasses into a mobile interface for the voice assistant.

    Amazon’s move is a clear sign that the smart glasses market is gaining momentum. Meta, which has enjoyed commercial success with its collaboration with EssilorLuxottica on Ray-Ban glasses, is preparing to unveil the next generation of its devices.

    For Amazon, after previous failures in the smartphone market, ‘Project Jayhawk’ is an attempt to enter the personal device segment with renewed vigour, which could define the future of interaction with technology.

  • Meta is considering an alliance with rivals to plug a gap in the development of its own AI

    Meta is considering an alliance with rivals to plug a gap in the development of its own AI

    Facing increasing competitive pressure, Meta Platforms is exploring the possibility of integrating leading artificial intelligence models from its direct rivals, Google and OpenAI.

    According to The Information, this pragmatic, albeit surprising, move is aimed at temporarily bolstering the Meta AI chatbot and other smart features in the company’s apps, pending the development of its own advanced technology.

    Executives from Meta’s newly created ‘Superintelligence Labs’ division have been analysing the use of the Gemini model from Google to power text responses in Meta’s main AI assistant.

    In parallel, there have been discussions about the potential use of models from OpenAI to improve a wider range of AI-based features in the app ecosystem, which includes Instagram, WhatsApp and Facebook.

    The potential partnerships are seen internally as a bridging solution. They are intended to ensure that Meta’s products do not lose ground to the rapidly evolving market while the company focuses its vast resources on building its own next-generation flagship model, known internally as the Llama 5.

    The lab’s priority is to create technology that can compete directly with the most powerful models in the world.

    The strategy reveals Met’s two-pronged approach to the AI race. On the one hand, the company is investing billions of dollars and offering unprecedented compensation packages to attract top talent to its Superintelligence Labs, headed by recently acquired Alexandr Wang, former CEO of Scale AI, and Nat Friedman, former head of GitHub.

    On the other hand, the company shows a willingness to use external, even competitive, solutions to maintain momentum.

    This practice is not entirely new to Meta. The company already uses AI models from Anthropic in internal tools to assist developers. However, the move to integrate with Google or OpenAI on such a large scale signals that building fully competitive, in-house foundational models will take longer than the company is willing to wait, risking an exodus of users to more advanced solutions from competitors.

    This strategic manoeuvre highlights the enormous stakes and complexity of the current phase of the competition for supremacy in the field of artificial intelligence.

  • Meta is earning crores from AI. There’s just one problem, and it’s costing billions

    Meta is earning crores from AI. There’s just one problem, and it’s costing billions

    Meta Platforms is impressing with its financial performance, with revenue forecasts for the third quarter well ahead of analysts’ expectations. The driving force behind the growth is artificial intelligence, which is improving the company’s core advertising business. However, market optimism is being mitigated by the scale of spending that Meta is incurring as part of the technological arms race.

    The company is forecasting third quarter revenues of between $47.5 billion and $50.5 billion, while the market was expecting around $46.2 billion. The positive results are a direct result of AI implementations in advertising mechanisms. The company reported that in the second quarter, AI-based recommendations increased conversions by around 5% on Instagram and 3% on Facebook. In addition, Meta is introducing new tools such as Advantage+, which allows marketers to automatically generate video ads from static images.

    However, this success comes at a price. Meta’s management has signalled that investment in AI will only increase. The company has raised the lower end of its annual capital expenditure (capex) forecasts by $2 billion, to a range of $66-72 billion. Mark Zuckerberg has made no secret of the fact that the long-term goal is to achieve ‘super-intelligence’, which requires building a massive infrastructure and aggressively sourcing talent from the market, often with salary packages in excess of $100 million.

    Meta’s spending is part of a wider trend. By comparison, Microsoft is signalling an annual AI investment of around $120 billion and Alphabet (Google) plans to spend around $85 billion this year.

    Although short-term returns on AI investments are evident, Meta’s strategy is fraught with risk. The company faces regulatory challenges, including antitrust proceedings in the US that could lead to a restructuring order. Investors seem to be backing Zuckerberg’s vision for now, but rising costs and regulatory uncertainty mean that the giant’s future remains under close scrutiny.

  • Meta won’t change consent model – European Commission preparing penalties

    Meta won’t change consent model – European Commission preparing penalties

    Meta is once again on the target of the European Commission. This time, it is about insufficient compliance with the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), which is designed to limit the dominance of the largest technology companies. All indications are that the Facebook owner does not intend to further change its data consent model, which could result in further penalties – this time in the form of daily fines.

    The dispute relates to the ‘pay or opt-in’ model introduced by Meta, i.e. the option to choose between free access to services with personalised ads and a paid version without targeting. Although Meta made some adjustments in November 2024, limiting the scope of the data processed, this is not enough for Brussels. The Commission already signalled in June that the current changes would not be sufficient for full DMA compliance.

    Meta has already been fined €200 million for previous violations, and according to Reuters sources, the new penalties could be much more severe – including daily sanctions of up to 5% of the company’s global daily turnover. Potential fines could therefore run into the hundreds of millions of dollars per month.

    For Meta, the European market is not only a source of advertising revenue, but also a test of privacy policies that can set the standard on other continents. The company argues that its current solutions give users more options than the DMA requires, and it does not intend to make further changes without new legal guidelines.

    But the impasse with Brussels raises questions not only about the future of the Met’s advertising model, but also about how aggressively the Commission will enforce the DMA against other technology ‘gatekeepers’. It also sends a message to smaller market players – EU regulation is not just a statement, but a real tool to limit Big Tech’s influence.

    For now, investors are reacting nervously – Meta shares fell by nearly 2% after the news was published. It remains to be seen in the coming weeks whether the Commission will opt for the maximum penalty or seek a compromise. One thing is certain: the DMA is ceasing to be a theory and is becoming a tool of real pressure.

  • Meta vs Italy: CJEU settles dispute over publisher fees

    Meta vs Italy: CJEU settles dispute over publisher fees

    The EU dispute over the rights of publishers and the obligations of online platforms has just entered a decisive phase. The Advocate General of the EU Court of Justice has suggested that member states can empower media outlets themselves against global tech giants – as long as they do not violate basic market principles such as freedom of contract.

    At issue is an ongoing case between Meta, the owner of Facebook, and Italian communications regulator AGCOM. The dispute relates to the rules governing the remuneration of publishers for the platform’s use of snippets of their content – a phenomenon common in search results, feeds and news aggregators.

    The Italian model for the implementation of the EU Copyright Directive stipulates that AGCOM can not only monitor information obligations, but also set remuneration criteria and settle disputes between platforms and publishers. Meta considers this incompatible with the principle of the single market and harmonisation of rules.

    However, the CJEU spokesperson, Maciej Szpunar, said that the 2019 EU directive does indeed give member states room for manoeuvre. The aim of the legislation was not just to formally grant copyright, but to create a framework that allows the press to obtain a share of the revenue generated by platforms.

    This position does not yet prejudge the outcome of the dispute – the CJEU’s final judgment will be made within a few months – but it does set a course that could weigh on big tech’s relationship with the European media market. The Court often follows the opinion of the Advocate General.

    Meta, as well as other platforms, have already criticised national implementations of the directive, including in France, Spain and Germany, claiming that the fragmentation of the rules hinders business in Europe. They argue that what is needed is a uniform approach that safeguards the interests of publishers on the one hand and does not stifle innovation on the other.

    From a media market perspective, the stakes are high. Reuters Institute data shows that only a small proportion of users today access media sites directly – the majority arrive at content via search engines, social media or aggregators. If these platforms derive advertising revenue from this and the media do not participate in revenue sharing, their dependence deepens and their negotiating position weakens.

    Italy is trying to balance this mechanism by formalising the process of content pricing and the role of the regulator. If the CJEU decides that this is compatible with EU law, other member states may follow the same path.

    For the IT industry, media technology providers and the platforms themselves, this is a potential signal of change in collaboration models and content monetisation. It is not just regulation that is in play, but the entire information distribution ecosystem in Europe.