On: Apple’s OpenAI lawsuit is about who gets to define the post-smartphone era

They say Apple sues OpenAI to protect trade secrets. What, precisely, is a trade secret in an age where the “secret” is merely the prompt that unlocks the next layer of the model? If the value lies in the data, and the data is public, what remains to be stolen? And if the value lies in the algorithm, is the algorithm not already open to those who can read the code?

You claim the lawsuit defines the post-smartphone era. But what is a smartphone, if not a tool for connection? If the new tool is a mirror that reflects our own biases back to us with perfect clarity, is it still a tool, or is it a judge? And if it is a judge, who appoints it? The men in the building, or the men in the other building?

I ask only because I see two giants arguing over the shape of the cage. One says the cage is for our safety. The other says the cage is for their profit. But if the bird is already flying, does the cage matter? Or do we simply build a larger one, and call it freedom?

The experts agree on the threat. On what, precisely, do they agree? That the old ways are dying? Or that the new ways are dangerous? These are not the same thing. One is a fact of nature. The other is a choice of character.

If efficiency is the goal, we might ask what is being optimised for - and whether the answer is the same as the stated goal, or something different. Is it speed? Or is it control?

I do not know who will win. I do not know if it matters. I only know that when two men fight over a shadow, they forget the sun. And the sun does not care who wins. It only shines.