^{(Image credit: Adobe Stock)}

Mark Zuckerberg, the co-founder of Facebook (now Meta), recently celebrated reaching 100 million users in just five days with his new Twitter-like platform called Threads. However, this achievement doesn’t impress me much. Instead, it highlights Zuckerberg’s tendency to imitate rather than innovate.

While I used to admire him, I now realize that he doesn’t belong in the same league as my true idols. Comparing the 100 million sign-ups for ChatGPT to the 100 million Threads users is simply absurd.

Mark is in his own garden with billions of users, and he only called a few to test his new toy, as if inviting them for a cocktail. It’s incredibly easy to raise 100 million or more in such a short time under these circumstances.

The same cannot be said about the massive adoption of ChatGPT, which started from scratch. Don’t forget that, Mark. So don’t boast about it. It’s not an accomplishment!

Copying an existing idea is one thing, but claiming superiority because of the immense power of Facebook (Meta) is another. It’s disappointing to see someone with such influence resort to blatant copying. Mark, you should be ashamed of your lack of originality, and especially your arrogance.

Perhaps Zuckerberg’s actions stem from the pressure of investors who expected a groundbreaking Metaverse but received a mere playground. It’s been a complete disaster, exposing his own mediocrity. Mark, you had the potential to do great things, but you have fallen short.

I used to be a fan, but now I can’t help but wonder if this behavior has always been a part of your character. In my humble opinion, Elon Musk gives you too much credit, more than you deserve. While Elon is not without his flaws, he is undeniably a creative genius and fairer than you could ever aspire to be.

As Elon himself said, “Competition is fine, cheating is not.” And you, Mark, shamelessly cheat. Don’t you feel any remorse? Wait, wait, wait, there’s no room for remorse in business, isn’t that right, Mark? wink

In the business world, there are always opportunists who think they are superior and try to outdo everyone else. Mark, times have changed since you first emerged in 2004, toppling MySpace with something that wasn’t particularly groundbreaking. Facebook had its moment, but it never truly became the Big Thing. And the addition of Instagram’s “Threads” won’t change that either.

Why don’t you retreat to your “metaverse” and give the world some breathing space? Go play in your own sandbox and let the world thrive…

The world needs to evolve rapidly in the face of the Artificial Intelligence era, which is just beginning to take its first steps after many years of crawling. This new era requires creative and innovative individuals!

In this rapidly advancing era of Artificial Intelligence, where the possibilities are expanding at an unprecedented pace, it is crucial to foster a community of creative and innovative individuals who can harness the potential of this technology. As we witness AI taking its first steps towards transforming various industries and aspects of our lives, it becomes evident that only through constant evolution, imaginative thinking, and groundbreaking ideas can we navigate the challenges and seize the opportunities presented by this new era. By embracing creativity and fostering innovation, we can shape a future where AI enhances our world in ways we have yet to imagine. Together, let us embark on this journey of discovery, pushing the boundaries of what is possible and creating a brighter future for all.

© 2023 Ӈ

Elon Musk doesn’t follow the same standards that most entrepreneurs do. He’s different, he likes to be different!

And when you’re different, and you’re not afraid to be, it’s okay to test a cigar (or should I say ‘joint’?) of tobacco mixed with marijuana, on Joe Rogan’s famous podcast. But if you look closely, Elon was just nice (polite) and followed Rogan’s elaborate script. Before trying it, Musk even asked him if it was legal.

Then all those facial expressions of Musk, which photojournalists love to catch, go viral as if he’s there promoting some soft drug or passing abroad that his office at Tesla (or SpaceX) is enveloped in a large cloud of smoke.

Quite the opposite. The expressions themselves spoke for themselves, as if to say, “This is nothing special, Joe. Why do you waste my time with these scenes”? Musk even claimed that weed is not good for productivity at all, but it has nothing against (as I do, by the way).

Joe Rogan was far too cheeky and presumptuous to think that Elon Musk would be such a creative and quick guy at what he does, thanks to weed or any other drugs, light or hard. He responded promptly and directly, politely and very lucidly.

However, the media preferred to extol the “non-content” of the interview and highlight the least interesting just because he was nice to test a “cigar” that generated a huge cloud of smoke to the real content.

Well, people see more of what they’re focused on!… Musk is definitely more focused on other things.

Elon Musk likes to do useful things for other people. He said it himself, believe it or not. Although the acquisition of Twitter was a burning desire of Musk, he realized long ago that he could do better than was done with a machine as powerful as this microblogging. He dealt with the “cleaning” like that, wasting no time. He, by the way, even prepared people with the ‘Easter egg’ (sink) that he carried to Twitter’s headquarters in San Francisco.

The same needs to be done in relation to Facebook, which is terrible. Super slow; full of patches; many features that do not work properly; very little, or not at all, intelligent algorithms — or rather, they even have intelligence, but for a world of ignorant people (yes, Facebook, or its “master” algorithm, judges its users as ignorant); instability and incongruity in engagement; etc.

The union of all Meta platforms — Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, mainly — made the entire system become anything but practical and not at all user-friendly.

Facebook (the social network itself) urgently needs change if it wants to survive the new future ahead. And I’m not referring to the future that Mark Zuckerberg wants (metaverse) but to the real future of the Internet, the new Internet, whether we call it Metaverse or whatever.

Mark’s elephant is old and tired. It looks more like a mammoth trapped in prehistory. It may be massive and heavy, but what good is a huge footprint far away in the time of the mammoths?

The Facebook glory days are long gone, and it’s time to refresh the new world! It is not with retrograde concepts that the new and demanding society remains active in this already obsolete and worn out network.

Coming back to Twitter, it took a super brave and visionary man — love it or hate it — to, necessarily, move and shake the entire structure of the organization.

I wouldn’t want to be fired so on short notice either, but if you look at the ‘Big Picture’, it doesn’t seem dramatic. Jack Dorsey, co-founder and former CEO of Twitter, who no longer has any voice in the organization, says the company’s employees are resilient and will survive change. And, in my humble opinion, he’s right!

The reactions are felt all over the Internet, ridiculously by all those who have always enjoyed Twitter without paying a penny. Now, with the change, they think they are masters of reason without having any reason at all.

Naturally, this type of “cleaning” is strange, especially for those who are outside and do not see the inside of the heavy “machine”. Strangeness that, if they let the ‘Chief Twit’ work, it will ingrain and end up becoming mainstream.

(Usually, people who do little, perhaps because of idleness, do not have the patience to wait for the result of the hard work of those who actually do things.)

Countless people say that Elon Musk is the demonstration of the power of doing ‘whatever the f*ck he wants’. I think it’s not like that. He even listens to people! He is tired of asking for opinions in order to be more useful to people. However, Elon Musk’s power is legitimate.

When he claims that the $8 monthly “Blue Twitter” plan, which includes the ‘Verified Badge’, is to pay, he is within his rights to do so. After all, he paid $44 billion for the platform, for God’s sake.

Who are the offended people who have always enjoyed Twitter and the ‘Verified Badge’ for free? Yes, because having a ‘Verified Badge’ on Twitter (and other social networks) is like having a social status and, whether we like it or not, they are seen with different eyes. That’s why I use the word “enjoyed”.

Twitter’s (as well as Facebook and Instagram’s) account verification policy is completely ridiculous and uneven when one of the requirements for doing so is being a “notable person” or having a “notable account”. Come on! Really? Give me a break. There are many (too many, even) verified accounts of people who are anything but notable. Where is the equality, then?

If it is to empower the people, as Musk himself claims, the necessary changes must be made, and he is making them. Only those who do not see beyond their aura of selfishness do not realize what these (necessary) measures bring.

Now, what Elon Musk wants here is to praise free speech, freeing the shackles of other people who, not fitting into the social status of the old Twitter, did not have the ‘freedom of expression’ to be heard. A fairer and more democratic system is needed.

Twitter remains free, of course, but those who want Premium accounts pay a tiny monthly fee of 8 dollars (7.99, to be more precise). In that monthly fee, account verification is included, and current verified accounts need to adhere to this plan to maintain the “status of notable person”, called ‘Verified Badge’. Whoever does not pay, is without the seal. What’s the drama about it?

Whether we like it or not, Elon Musk is a force of nature that has proven his resolve.

Those who complain the most about his irreverence, if they are Twitter users and do not agree with his policy, have a solution, which is, of course, to leave.

Those who stay on Twitter for free and complain about the slightest thing, I don’t think they should do it if they are part of that social house.

Those who pay can complain about the paid services if they do not conform to what was sold to them. Otherwise, they shouldn’t make big waves either.

Let the man work and give it time. Twitter was created in 2006, and it took 16 years to be the colossus it is today, creating many vicious circles that are difficult to get out of at the expense of anything that goes against those same circles.

We have to change to remain dynamically innovative!

© 2022 _Ӈ_

When in 2015, Eileen Brown looked at the ETER9 Project (crazy for many, visionary for few) and wrote an interesting article for ZDNET with the title “New social network ETER9 brings AI to your interactions”, it ensured a worldwide projection of something the world was not expecting.

Someone, in a lost world (outside the United States), was risking, with everything he had in his possession (very little or less than nothing), a vision worthy of the American dream. At that time, Facebook was already beginning to annoy the cleaner minds that were looking for a difference and a more innovative world.

Today, after that test bench, we see that Facebook (Meta or whatever) is nothing but an illusion, or, I dare say, a big disappointment. No, no, no! I am not now bad-mouthing Facebook just because I have a project in hand that is seen as a potential competitor.

I was even a big fan of the “original” Facebook; but then I realized, it took me a few years, that Mark Zuckerberg is nothing more than a simple kid, now a man, who against everything and everyone, gave in to whims. Of him, initially, and now, perforce, of what his big investors, deluded by himself, of what his “metaverse” would be.

This path is just beginning, but with the devastating results that the “meta child” has had (forgive me), I recommend that investors not be so deluded by those who have the current power, and believe more in what the world now yearns for. There is a time for everything. The time for Facebook is gone, whether it is Meta (Facebook patched) or something else coming from someone where the first name is Mark.

For me, I thank all those who believed in me, in my visions right after the rise of the Internet and especially nowadays, with all these new concepts that I have been introducing in the “system” (new world of digital innovation). Digital Counterpart or Digital Second Self (https://www.SSelf.co) are my warhorse, and I believe they are really going to change the world. They won’t just change the world because they do, but because the world wants and needs it to.

Please note: In the image, virtual (or augmented) reality glasses are on the head of a digital being (Second Self), not a human…!

Like any commodity, the exchange value of Bitcoin is driven by supply and demand. But, unlike most commodities, including the US Dollar, the Euro or even gold, the eventual supply is capped. It is a mathematical certainty. Yet, demand is affected by many factors: Adoption as a payment instrument, early signs that it is being considered as a reserve currency, fascination by Geeks and early adopters and its use as a preferred tool by some criminals.

But chief among reasons for acquiring Bitcoin is speculation. Whether it is buy-and-hold or day trading, speculators still outnumber those who use Bitcoin to settle debts or to buy and sell other products and services. (Earlier this week, I argued that speculation is responsible for 85% of demand and of transactions—but that’s another story).

It’s a bit ironic that speculation—in the early days of a new market—retards organic adoption. It contributes to uncertainty and volatility, and it reduces the fraction available to the markets that make it both useful and liquid. Yet, in free markets, speculation is a necessary and critical antecedent to adoption.

This week, short term speculators have an unusually keen opportunity to profit, especially if they know how to buy a ‘put’ or sell a ‘call’ (i.e. to leverage a bet for or against the direction of Bitcoin, without actually acquiring any). For example, you can bet that an exchange-traded stock will fall, because there is a market for puts & calls. But it’s not as easy to bet against commodities that are not yet listed for options trading.

I am not going to give advice in this article. I am not a licensed investment professional and although I am bullish on long term, organic adoption of Bitcoin, I really don’t have an opinion on the current news or the short term prospects for a pull back. But, if you have an opinion on a current news event, then there is an immediate opportunity for you to make (or lose) a significantly leveraged sum in the next few days…

SEC and ETFs  (Alphabet soup of investment banks)

Next weekend, on Saturday March 11, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) will approve or deny an application for the first regulated, recognized and significantly backed Bitcoin Exchange Traded Fund (ETF). Why is this significant? Because most investments are not hand picked by individual investors. Investors choose the level of risk or diversification that seems reasonable for their life stage and then leave stock-picking decisions to a formula, a market sector basket, or a fund manager. That is, invest or park their money in a fund rather than betting on Space-X, PayPal or the local electric company.                                                                                                                          _{[continue below image]}

If approved, an ETF potentially adds massive new demand for a commodity, by offering a financial instrument than can be subscribed by the vast fraction of funds, investors, pensioners and speculators who prefer to leave asset management to an organization, outside broker or formula.

The first ETF application is created and backed by the Winkelvoss Twins. They were Olympic rowers, but found fame & fortune by contracting Marc Zuckerberg to create an early design for Facebook. If their application is approved, a dozen more investment banks, brokers and hedge funds are standing by to jump in with both feet.

This morning, Cointelegraph put the odds that the ETF will be approved at 50%. Some analysts place the chances even higher. But consider that Bitcoin has already spiked dramatically in the past few weeks. The excitement is already reflected in the price. So, where is the opportunity?

The opportunity, as with any speculative decision, is in the dissonance between your research and hunch compared with the overall market expectation reflected in the current price. So, for example, if Bitcoin is accepted as the basis for an ETF (and if it continues to grow in more fundamental adoption), the current price is actually remarkably low. Under these assumptions, it hasn’t even begun its period of rapid ascent. Perhaps more obviously (and even more short-term), if you believe that an ETF will be blocked by regulators, then the recent rise is likely to be reversed quickly, at least in the minutes after the March 11 decision is announced.

So how can you profit from your belief that a commodity will drop in value? I leave that to your personal investment knowledge and research or your financial advisor. My purpose is not to advise, nor even to teach about puts and calls. It is to point out that a few people will win or lose a lot of real money this coming weekend—at least on paper. And it all hinges on whether they can correctly predict the outcome of a regulatory decision process.

Again, Bitcoin is a very limited commodity, There are only 15.2 million coins today, and there will never be more than 21 million coins. This does not present an obstacle to adoption, because the coins can be sliced smaller and smaller as needed. In a noteworthy demonstration of ‘good deflation’, there will always be enough units for everyone—even if the entire world adopts it for every transaction under the sun.

• Winkelvoss ETF decision could send Bitcoin to $2000
• Too the Moon! Analysts optimistic. SEC a 50% possibility
• Bitcoin at all time high as talk as decision approaches

^{Philip Raymond co-chairs Crypsa & Bitcoin Event, columnist & board member at Lifeboat, editor
at WildDuck and will deliver the keynote address at Digital Currency Summit in Johannesburg.}

“The scale of Facebook’s ambition, and the rivalries it faces, reflect a consensus that these technologies will transform how people interact with each other, with data and with their surroundings.”

Read more

Advances in the field of artificial intelligence are invariably greeted with concern about an imminent robot uprising. Similarly, when we hear about developments in the field of brain-to-brain communication, we imagine any number of outlandish scenarios: perhaps a government marching us unquestioningly into battle via a process of insidious mind control, or an erotic thought we had about a work colleague being unwittingly transmitted to our partner.

When Facebook’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, announced this week during one of his regular Q&A sessions that Facebook is working in the field of thought transmission, we found ourselves momentarily transported to a horrific telepathic future. “You’ll just be able to think of something and your friends will immediately be able to experience it too,” he said, as people thought to themselves “under no circumstances do I want anyone to know the dark, unsettling images that flash through my mind on an hourly basis”. We are troubled by that vision. But it’s only a vision.  Read more