Blog

  • The Real Life Tech Execs That Inspired ‘Mountainhead’

    The Real Life Tech Execs That Inspired ‘Mountainhead’

    Jesse Armstrong loves to pull fictional stories out of reality. His universally acclaimed TV show Successionfor instance, was inspired by real-life media dynasties like the Murdochs and the Hearsts. Similarly, his newest film Mountainhead centers upon characters that share key traits with the tech world’s most powerful leaders: Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Sam Altman, and others.

    Mountainheadwhich releases on HBO on May 31 at 8 p.m. ET, portrays four top tech executives who retreat to a Utah hideaway as the AI deepfake tools newly released by one of their companies wreak havoc across the world. As the believable deepfakes inflame hatred on social media and real-world violence, the comfortably-appointed quartet mulls a global governmental takeover, intergalactic conquest and immortality, before interpersonal conflict derails their plans.

    Armstrong tells TIME in a Zoom interview that he first became interested in writing a story about tech titans after reading books like Michael Lewis’ Going Infinite (about Sam Bankman-Fried) and Ashlee Vance’s Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Futureas well as journalistic profiles of Peter Thiel, Marc Andreessen, and others. He then built the story around the interplay between four character archetypes—the father, the dynamo, the usurper, and the hanger-on—and conducted extensive research so that his fictional executives reflected real ones. His characters, he says, aren’t one-to-one matches, but “Frankenstein monsters with limbs sewn together.”

    These characters are deeply flawed and destructive, to say the least. Armstrong says he did not intend for the film to be a wholly negative depiction of tech leaders and AI development. “I do try to take myself out of it, but obviously my sense of what this tech does and could do infuses the piece. Maybe I do have some anxieties,” he says.

    Armstrong contends that the film is more so channeling fears that AI leaders themselves have warned about. “If somebody who knows the technology better than anyone in the world thinks there’s a 1/5th chance that it’s going to wipe out humanity—and they’re some of the optimists—I think that’s legitimately quite unnerving,” he says.

    Here’s how each of the characters in Mountainhead resembles real-world tech leaders. This article contains spoilers.

    Read More: With Mountainhead, the Creator of Succession Targets a Group That’s Beyond Satire

    Venis (Cory Michael Smith) is the dynamo.

    Cory Michael Smith in Mountainhead Macall Polay—HBO

    Venis is Armstrong’s “dynamo”: the richest man in the world, who has gained his wealth from his social media platform Traam and its 4 billion users. Venis is ambitious, juvenile, and self-centered, even questioning whether other people are as real as him and his friends.

    Venis’ first obvious comp is Elon Musk, the richest man in the real world. Like Musk, Venis is obsessed with going to outer space and with using his enormous war chest to build hyperscale data centers to create powerful anti-woke AI systems. Venis also has a strange relationship with his child, essentially using it as a prop to help him through his own emotional turmoil.

    Throughout the movie, others caution Venis to shut down his deepfake AI tools which have led to military conflict and the desecration of holy sites across the world. Venis rebuffs them and says that people just need to adapt to technological changes and focus on the cool art being made. This argument is similar to those made by Sam Altman, who has argued that OpenAI needs to unveil ChatGPT and other cutting-edge tools as fast as possible in order to show the public the power of the technology.

    Like Mark Zuckerberg, Venis presides over a massively popular social media platform that some have accused of ignoring harms in favor of growth. Just as Amnesty International accused Meta of having “substantially contributed” to human rights violations perpetrated against Myanmar’s Rohingya ethnic group, Venis complains of the UN being “up his ass for starting a race war.”

    Randall (Steve Carell) is the father.

    Steve Carell in Mountainhead Macall Polay—HBO

    The group’s eldest member is Randall, an investor and technologist who resembles Marc Andreessen and Peter Thiel in his lofty philosophizing and quest for immortality. Like Andreessen, Randall is a staunch accelerationist who believes that U.S. companies need to develop AI as fast as possible in order to both prevent the Chinese from controlling the technology, and to ostensibly ignite a new American utopia in which productivity, happiness, and health flourish.

    Randall’s power comes from the fact that he was Venis’ first investor, just as Thiel was an early investor in Facebook. While Andreessen pens manifestos about technological advancement, Randall paints his mission in grandiose, historical terms, using anti-democratic, sci-fi-inflected language that resembles that of the philosopher Curtis Yarvin, who has been funded and promoted by Thiel over his career.

    Randall’s justification of murder through utilitarian and Kantian lenses calls to mind Sam Bankman-Fried’s extensive philosophizing, which included a declaration that he would roll the dice on killing everyone on earth if there was a 51% chance he would create a second earth. Bankman-Fried’s approach—in embracing risk and harm in order to reap massive rewards—led him to be convicted of massive financial fraud.

    Randall is also obsessed with longevity just like Thiel, who has railed for years against the “inevitability of death” and yearns for “super-duper medical treatments” that would render him immortal.

    Jeff (Ramy Youssef) is the usurper.

    Ramy Youssef in Mountainhead Macall Polay—HBO

    Jeff is a technologist who often serves as the movie’s conscience, slinging criticisms about the other characters. But he’s also deeply embedded within their world, and he needs their resources, particularly Venis’ access to computing power, to thrive. In the end, Jeff sells out his values for his own survival and well-being.

    AI skeptics have lobbed similar criticisms at the leaders of the main AI labs, including Altman—who started OpenAI as a nonprofit before attempting to restructure the company—as well as Demis Hassabis and Dario Amodei. Hassabis is the CEO of Google Deepmind and a winner of the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry; a rare scientist surrounded by businessmen and technologists. In order to try to achieve his AI dreams of curing disease and halting global warning, Hassabis enlisted with Google, inking a contract in 2014 in which he prohibited Google from using his technology for military applications. But that clause has since disappeared, and the AI systems developed under Hassabis are being sold, via Google, to militaries like Israel’s.

    Read More: Demis Hassabis Is Preparing for AI’s Endgame

    Another parallel can be drawn between Jeff and Amodei, an AI researcher who defected from OpenAI after becoming worried that the company was cutting back its safety measures, and then formed his own company, Anthropic. Amodei has urged governments to create AI guardrails and has warned about the potentially catastrophic effects of the AI industry’s race dynamics. But some have criticized Anthropic for operating similarly to OpenAI, prioritizing scale in a way that exacerbates competitive pressures.

    Souper (Jason Schwartzman) is the hanger-on.

    Jason Schwartzman in Mountainhead Macall Polay—HBO

    Every quartet needs its Turtle or its Ringo; a clear fourth wheel to serve as a punching bag for the rest of the group’s alpha males. Mountainhead’s hanger-on is Souper, thus named because he has soup kitchen money compared to the rest (hundreds of millions as opposed to billions of dollars). In order to prove his worth, he’s fixated on getting funding for a meditation startup that he hopes will eventually become an “everything app.”

    No tech exec would want to be compared to Souper, who has a clear inferiority complex. But plenty of tech leaders have emphasized the importance of meditation and mindfulness—including Twitter co-founder and Square CEO Jack Dorsey, who often goes on meditation retreats.

    Armstrong, in his interview, declined to answer specific questions about his characters’ inspirations, but conceded that some of the speculations were in the right ballpark. “For people who know the area well, it’s a little bit of a fun house mirror in that you see something and are convinced that it’s them,” he says. “I think all of those people featured in my research. There’s bits of Andreessen and David Sacks and some of those philosopher types. It’s a good parlor game to choose your Frankenstein limbs.”

    Sumber

  • The Real Life Tech Execs That Inspired ‘Mountainhead’

    The Real Life Tech Execs That Inspired ‘Mountainhead’

    Jesse Armstrong loves to pull fictional stories out of reality. His universally acclaimed TV show Successionfor instance, was inspired by real-life media dynasties like the Murdochs and the Hearsts. Similarly, his newest film Mountainhead centers upon characters that share key traits with the tech world’s most powerful leaders: Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Sam Altman, and others.

    Mountainheadwhich releases on HBO on May 31 at 8 p.m. ET, portrays four top tech executives who retreat to a Utah hideaway as the AI deepfake tools newly released by one of their companies wreak havoc across the world. As the believable deepfakes inflame hatred on social media and real-world violence, the comfortably-appointed quartet mulls a global governmental takeover, intergalactic conquest and immortality, before interpersonal conflict derails their plans.

    Armstrong tells TIME in a Zoom interview that he first became interested in writing a story about tech titans after reading books like Michael Lewis’ Going Infinite (about Sam Bankman-Fried) and Ashlee Vance’s Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Futureas well as journalistic profiles of Peter Thiel, Marc Andreessen, and others. He then built the story around the interplay between four character archetypes—the father, the dynamo, the usurper, and the hanger-on—and conducted extensive research so that his fictional executives reflected real ones. His characters, he says, aren’t one-to-one matches, but “Frankenstein monsters with limbs sewn together.”

    These characters are deeply flawed and destructive, to say the least. Armstrong says he did not intend for the film to be a wholly negative depiction of tech leaders and AI development. “I do try to take myself out of it, but obviously my sense of what this tech does and could do infuses the piece. Maybe I do have some anxieties,” he says.

    Armstrong contends that the film is more so channeling fears that AI leaders themselves have warned about. “If somebody who knows the technology better than anyone in the world thinks there’s a 1/5th chance that it’s going to wipe out humanity—and they’re some of the optimists—I think that’s legitimately quite unnerving,” he says.

    Here’s how each of the characters in Mountainhead resembles real-world tech leaders. This article contains spoilers.

    Read More: With Mountainhead, the Creator of Succession Targets a Group That’s Beyond Satire

    Venis (Cory Michael Smith) is the dynamo.

    Cory Michael Smith in Mountainhead Macall Polay—HBO

    Venis is Armstrong’s “dynamo”: the richest man in the world, who has gained his wealth from his social media platform Traam and its 4 billion users. Venis is ambitious, juvenile, and self-centered, even questioning whether other people are as real as him and his friends.

    Venis’ first obvious comp is Elon Musk, the richest man in the real world. Like Musk, Venis is obsessed with going to outer space and with using his enormous war chest to build hyperscale data centers to create powerful anti-woke AI systems. Venis also has a strange relationship with his child, essentially using it as a prop to help him through his own emotional turmoil.

    Throughout the movie, others caution Venis to shut down his deepfake AI tools which have led to military conflict and the desecration of holy sites across the world. Venis rebuffs them and says that people just need to adapt to technological changes and focus on the cool art being made. This argument is similar to those made by Sam Altman, who has argued that OpenAI needs to unveil ChatGPT and other cutting-edge tools as fast as possible in order to show the public the power of the technology.

    Like Mark Zuckerberg, Venis presides over a massively popular social media platform that some have accused of ignoring harms in favor of growth. Just as Amnesty International accused Meta of having “substantially contributed” to human rights violations perpetrated against Myanmar’s Rohingya ethnic group, Venis complains of the UN being “up his ass for starting a race war.”

    Randall (Steve Carell) is the father.

    Steve Carell in Mountainhead Macall Polay—HBO

    The group’s eldest member is Randall, an investor and technologist who resembles Marc Andreessen and Peter Thiel in his lofty philosophizing and quest for immortality. Like Andreessen, Randall is a staunch accelerationist who believes that U.S. companies need to develop AI as fast as possible in order to both prevent the Chinese from controlling the technology, and to ostensibly ignite a new American utopia in which productivity, happiness, and health flourish.

    Randall’s power comes from the fact that he was Venis’ first investor, just as Thiel was an early investor in Facebook. While Andreessen pens manifestos about technological advancement, Randall paints his mission in grandiose, historical terms, using anti-democratic, sci-fi-inflected language that resembles that of the philosopher Curtis Yarvin, who has been funded and promoted by Thiel over his career.

    Randall’s justification of murder through utilitarian and Kantian lenses calls to mind Sam Bankman-Fried’s extensive philosophizing, which included a declaration that he would roll the dice on killing everyone on earth if there was a 51% chance he would create a second earth. Bankman-Fried’s approach—in embracing risk and harm in order to reap massive rewards—led him to be convicted of massive financial fraud.

    Randall is also obsessed with longevity just like Thiel, who has railed for years against the “inevitability of death” and yearns for “super-duper medical treatments” that would render him immortal.

    Jeff (Ramy Youssef) is the usurper.

    Ramy Youssef in Mountainhead Macall Polay—HBO

    Jeff is a technologist who often serves as the movie’s conscience, slinging criticisms about the other characters. But he’s also deeply embedded within their world, and he needs their resources, particularly Venis’ access to computing power, to thrive. In the end, Jeff sells out his values for his own survival and well-being.

    AI skeptics have lobbed similar criticisms at the leaders of the main AI labs, including Altman—who started OpenAI as a nonprofit before attempting to restructure the company—as well as Demis Hassabis and Dario Amodei. Hassabis is the CEO of Google Deepmind and a winner of the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry; a rare scientist surrounded by businessmen and technologists. In order to try to achieve his AI dreams of curing disease and halting global warning, Hassabis enlisted with Google, inking a contract in 2014 in which he prohibited Google from using his technology for military applications. But that clause has since disappeared, and the AI systems developed under Hassabis are being sold, via Google, to militaries like Israel’s.

    Read More: Demis Hassabis Is Preparing for AI’s Endgame

    Another parallel can be drawn between Jeff and Amodei, an AI researcher who defected from OpenAI after becoming worried that the company was cutting back its safety measures, and then formed his own company, Anthropic. Amodei has urged governments to create AI guardrails and has warned about the potentially catastrophic effects of the AI industry’s race dynamics. But some have criticized Anthropic for operating similarly to OpenAI, prioritizing scale in a way that exacerbates competitive pressures.

    Souper (Jason Schwartzman) is the hanger-on.

    Jason Schwartzman in Mountainhead Macall Polay—HBO

    Every quartet needs its Turtle or its Ringo; a clear fourth wheel to serve as a punching bag for the rest of the group’s alpha males. Mountainhead’s hanger-on is Souper, thus named because he has soup kitchen money compared to the rest (hundreds of millions as opposed to billions of dollars). In order to prove his worth, he’s fixated on getting funding for a meditation startup that he hopes will eventually become an “everything app.”

    No tech exec would want to be compared to Souper, who has a clear inferiority complex. But plenty of tech leaders have emphasized the importance of meditation and mindfulness—including Twitter co-founder and Square CEO Jack Dorsey, who often goes on meditation retreats.

    Armstrong, in his interview, declined to answer specific questions about his characters’ inspirations, but conceded that some of the speculations were in the right ballpark. “For people who know the area well, it’s a little bit of a fun house mirror in that you see something and are convinced that it’s them,” he says. “I think all of those people featured in my research. There’s bits of Andreessen and David Sacks and some of those philosopher types. It’s a good parlor game to choose your Frankenstein limbs.”

    Sumber

  • Don’t miss this sale—a MacBook Air for just 9.97

    Don’t miss this sale—a MacBook Air for just $199.97

    Sumber

  • Tariffs court fight threatens Trump’s power to wield his favourite economic weapon

    Tariffs court fight threatens Trump’s power to wield his favourite economic weapon

    Sarah Smith

    North America editor

    Getty Images Trump is shown in a blue suit and red tie, with a sceptical look on his face, during a cabinet meeting, seated next to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth Getty Images

    Since returning to power, US President Donald Trump has wielded tariffs – or the threat of them – as his economic weapon of choice.

    He has slapped import duties against allies and adversaries alike, and raised their rates to staggeringly high levels, only to change his mind and abruptly pause or reduce the charges.

    Markets and global leaders have scrambled trying to guess his next moves, while major retailers have warned of rising prices for American consumers and potentially empty shelves in shops.

    The president has claimed this power to impose tariffs unilaterally. He says that as president he is responding to a national economic emergency – and he cannot wait for Congress to pass legislation.

    In effect, this meant firing off a threatening missive to a country playing hardball was as easy as posting on Truth Social (just ask the European Union, which he called “very difficult to deal with” in negotiations last week).

    However, late on Wednesday, the US Court of International Trade ruled that he had exceeded the authority of the emergency powers he was using. The court gave the White House 10 days to remove almost all tariffs, which it says have been imposed illegally.

    The White House appealed, and a federal appeals court has stayed the trade court’s ruling, which means that those tariffs will stay in place – for now.

    The administration argued in its appeal that a ruling against Trump “would kneecap the president on the world stage, cripple his ability to negotiate trade deals, imperil the government’s ability to respond to these and future national emergencies”.

    On Thursday night, Trump was back on Truth Social, rebuking the lower court judges who had ruled against him, calling their decision “wrong” and “horrible”.

    Until now, the power to make or break the economy has rested on his shoulders, as the tariff rates levelled against other countries keep going up and down – seemingly according to Trump’s mood.

    He raised the tariffs on imported Chinese goods all the way up to 145% before dropping them down to 30%. A few weeks later he used a social media post to threaten the EU with 50% tariffs, before backing down a couple of days later.

    Wall Street analysts have even reportedly now coined the phrase “Taco trade”, referring to their belief that Trump Always Chickens Out from imposing steep import taxes. He looked furious when asked about the acronym in the Oval Office on Wednesday.

    “That’s a nasty question” he said, arguing that it was only by making these threats that he got the EU to the negotiating table.

    Watch: Trump slams “Taco” acronym given to tariff flip-flops

    Trump’s ambassador to the EU during his first term, Gordon Sondland, told the BBC this erratic approach was by design.

    “What Trump is doing is exactly what he would do as a business person. He would immediately find a point of leverage to get someone’s attention today. Not next month, not next year… he wants to have these conversations now,” he said earlier this week, before the latest legal twists.

    “How do you get someone as intransigent and as slow moving as the EU to do something now? You slap a 50% tariff on them and all of a sudden the phone start ringing.”

    If Trump’s tariffs plan continues to meet resistance in the courts, one option at his disposal is asking Congress to legislate the taxes instead. But that would eliminate one of his biggest tools – the element of surprise.

    For decades, Trump has been convinced that trade tariffs are the answer to many of America’s economic problems. He has appeared to welcome the prospect of global trade war sparked by his tariff agenda, insisting that it is by raising the price of imported goods and reviving the US manufacturing sector that he will “Make America Great Again”.

    Trump touts the money – billions of dollars, not trillions, as he says – that tariffs have already brought in to US government coffers.

    The president argues they will help to revive American manufacturing by persuading firms to move their factories to the US to avoid import duties.

    However, University of Michigan economics professor Justin Wolfers described Trump’s methods as “madness”.

    “If you believe in tariffs, what you want is for businesses to understand that the tariffs are going to… be permanent so that they can make investments around that and that’s what would lead the factories to come to the United States,” he told the BBC.

    Watch: Trump tariff agenda “alive and well”, says Trump adviser Peter Navarro

    He said that whatever happens with this court challenge, Trump has already transformed the global economic order.

    Prof Wolfers said while Trump “chickens out from the very worst mistakes” – citing his original ‘Liberation Day’ levies and the threat of 50% tariffs on the EU – he doesn’t backflip on everything.

    The president wants to keep 10% reciprocal tariffs on most countries and 25% tariffs on cars, steel and aluminium.

    “Yes, he backs off the madness, but even the stuff he left in meant that we had the highest tariff rate yesterday than we’d had since 1934,” Prof Wolfers said.

    All signs point to this being a fight that the Republican president won’t give up easily.

    “You can assume that even if we lose, we will do it another way,” Trump’s trade advisor Peter Navarro said after Thursday’s appeals court ruling.

    While the litigation plays out, America’s trade partners will be left guessing about Trump’s next move, which is exactly how he likes it.

    Sumber

  • Samsung’s tiny-yet-fast USB-C flash drive is only  right now

    Samsung’s tiny-yet-fast USB-C flash drive is only $18 right now

    Sumber

  • I slapped this  LED strip on the back of my TV. My eyes thank me daily

    I slapped this $30 LED strip on the back of my TV. My eyes thank me daily

    Sumber

  • I slapped this  LED strip on the back of my TV. My eyes thank me daily

    I slapped this $30 LED strip on the back of my TV. My eyes thank me daily

    Sumber

  • UK banks urged to beef up anti-fraud systems for international payments | Scams

    UK banks urged to beef up anti-fraud systems for international payments | Scams

    UK banks and payment firms have been urged to strengthen their anti-fraud systems for international payments after a rise in scammers tricking people into sending money abroad.

    After years of horror stories about people losing huge sums through bank transfer scams, rules came into force last October requiring UK banks and other payment firms to refund those who have been manipulated into sending money to criminals. This week, industry data revealed that the number of cases of this type of crime had fallen to its lowest level for five years.

    The frauds are known as authorised push payment (APP) scams. The number of cases fell by 20% last year to just under 186,000, said the banking body UK Finance, which issued the data. In 2023, there were more than 232,000 cases. The decrease is thought to be down in part to the new rules, plus other initiatives and greater awareness.

    But the figures came with some stings in the tail. While the number of cases fell substantially, the total amount lost to APP fraud decreased by just 2% to £450m. In other words, as UK Finance put it, “fewer people are handing over bigger sums of money”.

    There was also a “notable increase” in APP scams involving international payments, in which criminals trick people into sending money outside the UK. This is not covered by the new rules, which apply to money that is moved from one UK bank account to another.

    This week’s data revealed that international payments accounted for 11% of APP scam losses in 2024 – almost double the 2023 figure.

    Rocio Concha, the director of policy and advocacy at Which?, said: “Fraudsters are constantly evolving their tactics, so it is disheartening but unsurprising to see a rise in the number of cases in which scammers trick their victims into sending money abroad.”

    As these payments are not covered, the victims are very unlikely to get their money back.

    “Banks and payment firms should enhance their anti-fraud controls for international payments, and the independent review of the mandatory reimbursement scheme in October should take note of these emerging trends,” said Concha.

    Scammers try to get hold of people’s card details via phishing and then link these to criminal-controlled digital wallets. Photograph: Brian Jackson/Alamy

    Most of the APP frauds reported last year (71%) were purchase scams, in which the victim hands over money for goods or services – perhaps a car, a mobile phone or gig tickets – that either do not exist or never arrive.

    When it comes to the total amount of money lost, investment scams dominate. Typically, the criminal convinces victims to move their money to a fictitious fund or pay for a fake investment. Cryptocurrencies often feature heavily. More than £144m was stolen via this type of APP fraud in 2024 – up 34% on 2023, despite a sizeable fall in the number of cases.

    UK Finance is itself not immune to being targeted by scammers. This week there was a prominent warning on its website saying: “We are aware of a potential scam involving people being offered loans for an upfront fee by an individual posing as a representative of UK Finance.” The organisation doesn’t offer any financial products, “and anyone claiming to provide such products on our behalf is fraudulent,” it said.

    Meanwhile, the payments firm Visa this week revealed four fraud tactics that it said had been gaining ground across the UK and Europe in recent months. They are:

    Fake sales websites

    Fraudsters offer high-value goods – such as exercise machines – at low prices. Shoppers are tricked into handing over the one-time passcode banks send customers to authorise transactions. These are then used by criminals to carry out fraud.

    Malicious app scams

    Fake apps impersonating trusted organisations are stealing personal and financial data.

    ‘Ghost taps’

    Scammers get hold of people’s card details via phishing and then link these to criminal-controlled digital wallets. They then use software that allows them to make contactless payments using these details remotely from anywhere in the world.

    AI-driven identity fraud

    Generative artificial intelligence is increasingly being used to create convincing fake IDs and open fraudulent accounts.

    Sumber

  • Goa proposes ride-hailing framework; aggregators welcome draft policy

    Goa proposes ride-hailing framework; aggregators welcome draft policy

    The framework seeks to address long-standing concerns from local taxi operators about the impact of out-of-state vehicles on local livelihoods
    | Photo Credit:
    VIJAYA BHASKAR CH

    The Goa Transport Department has released the draft Transport Aggregator Guidelines 2025, proposing a regulatory framework to allow app-based ride-hailing services to operate in the state formally — a move welcomed by major mobility players.

    Under the proposed policy, aggregators will be allowed to offer app-based taxi services using vehicles that are either registered in Goa or possess valid permits issued by the state. This clause seeks to address long-standing concerns from local taxi operators about the impact of out-of-state vehicles on local livelihoods.

    To ensure compliance and safety, the draft mandates that all drivers affiliated with ride-hailing platforms must hold a Public Vehicle Service Badge, as required under the Goa Motor Vehicles Rules, 1991.

    Industry stakeholders have responded positively, saying the policy could pave the way for more structured and sustainable mobility solutions in the state, particularly in high-tourism zones where demand for reliable transport remains elevated.

    “We believe tourists as much as locals in Goa deserve more mobility choices, and there is already strong existing demand for reliable ride options in the state. This regulatory update makes it possible for platforms like Uber to serve that demand more effectively and responsibly. As we review the draft guidelines in detail, we will submit our formal comments and continue collaborating with all stakeholders to ensure the final framework delivers long-term value for riders, drivers, and Goa’s tourism-led economy,” said an Uber spokesperson.

    “The Transport Aggregator Policy introduced by the Goa Transport Department is a progressive move toward building a transparent, safe, and inclusive mobility ecosystem. At Rapido, we believe this policy marks a significant step toward digitising mobility and empowering local micro-entrepreneurs,” according to a Rapido spokesperson.

    “Beyond enhancing last-mile connectivity, our aim is to generate 3–4 lakh livelihood opportunities over the next year, empowering captains with meaningful earning potential. Safety remains at the core of our platform — with features such as SOS alerts, trip tracking, and driver verification helping ensure physical and mental peace for riders. We look forward to working closely with the Goa Transport Department and all stakeholders to support seamless rollout and contribute to the state’s growth in terms of mobility, job creation and economy,” the spokesperson added.

    More Like This

    IndiGo is the host airline of the event, which was last held in India in 1983.
    iStockphoto

    Published on May 31, 2025

    Sumber

  • Why am I filled with nostalgia for a pre-internet age I never knew? | Isabel Brooks

    Why am I filled with nostalgia for a pre-internet age I never knew? | Isabel Brooks

    A video went viral on X a few months ago that I can’t stop watching. It’s 2003: the band that later becomes MGMT are performing their song Kids to their peers, years before they become a pop sensation, in a dusty quad at Wesleyan University, Connecticut. Social media doesn’t exist yet. There is something about the way people look and behave and inhabit the space that tugs at my heartstrings and fills me with nostalgia. No one is dressed that well; the camera zooms unsteadily to capture the crowd’s awkwardness, slumped shoulders and arrhythmic bopping. Beyond the footage we’re watching, no one seems to be filming.

    I was only four when the video was filmed, so why does watching it make me feel as if I’ve lost a whole world? A recent survey suggests I’m not alone – that almost half of young people would prefer a world without the internet. If anything, I expected a higher percentage. This doesn’t mean my generation really would like to reverse everything that’s happened in the last few decades, but there’s clearly something we feel we’re missing out on that older people have had, and we attribute it to the internet – or at least to its current form, dominated as it is by social media.

    What exactly do we think we’re missing? Personally, I assume that before the social internet people behaved in more authentic and idiosyncratic ways. Social media has sped up trend cycles, resulting in an eerie uniformity across styles and personalities: we buy the same products, wear the same clothes, act in the same way, reference the same memes – even quirkiness itself or more “unique” behaviour can be ascribed to trends.

    I also imagine that if we weren’t on display all the time, our friendships and interactions could be less commodified. Now, spending time with friends is material to be documented and then demonstrated to a faceless audience.

    I’m sure these are rose-tinted assumptions, and I’m conscious too of the things I take for granted about an age of connectivity. Having to trawl through a few measly books and encyclopedias to find anything useful, or growing up in a remote area with little connection to the wider world, surely must have felt both inhibiting and claustrophobic.

    But it may be that these “negative” aspects are what young people yearning for disconnectivity actually want – we have a sense that there was a value, now largely lost, in the practical effort required for social interaction, for finding good music, or joining a subculture. Life now in comparison seems streamlined, efficient, more yassifiedin a phenomenon that writer Michael Harris calls a “loss of lack”.

    Recently, my office manager showed me the technology he and his friends used to “watch” the football on: Reprun. The football score would load on a television screen via the changing of a single digit. They would spend the afternoon just sitting on the sofa, waiting for the digit to change (or not). I felt envious of this. Why? If anything, this is clearly a case where an experience has improved exponentially. And yet I’m captivated by the sense of mystery: if they weren’t watching the game or reading the updates, what were they doing? What were they occupying their thoughts with?

    The reality might be that they were bored, another scarce experience in a connected age. At least, if bored, they would have entertained themselves with internal rather than external resources. It doesn’t even matter if that was really the case – it is precisely because this experience is unknowable that it is compelling to me. I am haunted by the feeling that spending so much time on our phones has stolen something human and vital from our lives.

    It is of course true that each era experiences a crisis about the new wave of tech destroying people’s souls – when it wasn’t the internet, it was TV, or the radio, or the printing press, even papyrus scrolls, and nostalgia is common across every generation. But I don’t think any previous generations were ever so down on their own era, in such large numbers, to the point they’d erase its major salient feature. We feel nostalgic for a world that can’t be brought back. As Donald Trump said, now “everything is computer”.

    Ironically, my nostalgia for a pre-internet age is being fed by the internet itself: the machine constantly feeding me clips of the past, footage of young people operating decades ago where everything seems refreshingly unobserved and carefree.

    So the very engine of this nostalgia is the thing half of us wish to do away with, despite the fact that it’s an incredible resource, that has allowed unparalleled access to older music, knowledge, ways of living – and is also by nature democratic, questioning traditional media outlets on global affairs and challenging convention.

    If this survey is a canary in the mine, what should we do? Enjoyable as it is, I don’t think being misty-eyed about the past is the solution; neither is fetishising a perceived authenticity of the past. “Authenticity”, I think, looks like the power to opt in or out, perform or not, when you want to – in other words: freedom. So when it comes to the internet, if switching off entirely isn’t possible any more, then surely the words of MGMT can be useful: control yourself, take only what you need from it.

    Sumber