Reading

Meta plans to release the Muse Charm this holiday season—a wearable AI pet hardware device. The Verge gadgets editor Sean Hollister didn't buy one; instead, he paid $50 to have a Waveshare ESP32-S3 1.75C touchscreen development board drop-shipped directly from China, using Claude Code to turn it into his own version of the Muse Charm.

This development board is one of the officially recommended Muse Gadget development kits by Meta, using Meta's open-source code and tokens to connect directly to the Muse AI cloud. Hollister plugged the device into his computer, directed Claude at Meta's GitHub repository, and paired it with the Muse mobile app. However, the out-of-the-box experience felt nearly useless: Muse treated his voice as audio clips for transcription rather than commands; responses were slow and silent; the screen displayed only a few words with no place to read full messages; there was only one static avatar named Jolly; and it failed to automatically discover smart home devices.

What truly changed everything was a few rounds of dialogue with Claude Code. When Hollister told Claude he couldn't read or hear Muse's replies, Claude built a conversation history page allowing him to swipe right to view full messages; he integrated ElevenLabs' British AI voice so the device could speak answers aloud. Complaining that the phone's front-facing camera showed an upside-down image during remote photo capture, Claude fixed the issue and added a low-quality Bluetooth real-time preview, enabling creative framing even when not connected to home Wi-Fi.

The electronic pet aspect served as another example. He asked Claude to create a batch of different avatars and add a Tamagotchi-style mini-game where the pet needs feeding, playing, sleeping, and bathing. Finding the game too simple to hold attention, he instructed Claude to add four levels each for hunger, boredom, and dirtiness. He decided that snacks would leave crumbs making the pet dirty, and excessive play would tire it out. Throughout the process, he only needed to describe what he wanted; Claude handled the coding.

He also had Claude spend 15 minutes creating a pocket watch face with three hands that actually tells time, as well as a video player. He downloaded, edited, and loaded Mark Zuckerberg's introduction clip of the Muse Charm onto the small screen.

Hollister explicitly stated he has no programming experience and doesn't know if the code quality is good or if it contains fatal flaws. He also does not trust Meta or Muse, citing prior reports that Muse leaked a reviewer's home address; therefore, he placed the device on a guest Wi-Fi network from the start.

His final judgment is that Muse itself is not a reason to buy dedicated computing hardware, because the Muse features on a smartphone offer more functionality than the development board in its out-of-the-box state. The reason to own dedicated hardware is that you can reprogram the entire device to do things the smartphone in your pocket cannot. This raises a question about the upcoming Muse Charm: Will it allow such free programming, or should people who really want to tinker just buy a development kit?

The massive investment in AI infrastructure is essentially a bet that enterprises will eventually be willing to pay for intelligence. However, a more pressing question arises: What internal changes must occur within enterprises for these investments to truly become self-funding? In the SiliconANGLE Breaking Analysis program, Crawford Del Prete, former president of IDC and now senior adviser at PSG Equity, provided a specific mechanistic explanation: Currently, AI is automating a large number of individual tasks, but it has not yet changed how work is organized within an organization. Consequently, there is a J-curve delay between individual productivity improvements and the company's income statement.

Del Prete’s observations stem from his daily interactions with private equity portfolio companies and a wide range of enterprise clients. He described a seemingly contradictory phenomenon: On one hand, quantitative-oriented clients have 'insatiable' demand for compute capacity—they are willing to purchase all available GPU capacity because AI enables them to create analyses and deliverables previously impossible. On the other hand, broader enterprise customers are beginning to use AI in expected areas such as coding and customer service, and it is starting to permeate various specific tasks within organizations. However, 'jobs consist of hundreds or even thousands of tasks; we are starting to automate these tasks without changing the way work is orchestrated within an organization.'

This is the source of the J-curve delay. Host Vellante introduced the research framework by Brynjolfsson, Rock, and Syverson regarding how intangible investments affect productivity: The adoption phase involves initial investments in tools and skills, followed by process redesign; both steps result in negative cumulative cash flow. Only when integration spans the entire organization does the curve begin to rise steeply. Del Prete drew an analogy to the PC era—actual growth in productivity data became visible only after thirteen or fourteen years following the introduction of PCs, with the key turning point occurring during the internet connectivity period from 1996 to 2002. He also pointed out a significant difference from the dot-com era: While dark fiber laid down back then remained idle for a long time, 'every GPU brought online today is at 100% utilization.'

Del Prete believes the specific path to crossing this curve is workflow redesign, rather than simply automating existing processes. He contrasted this with previous Robotic Process Automation (RPA): RPA was difficult because you had to codify human steps into code; AI differs in that it starts 'from the bottom up'—employees solve pain points they have faced for a long time using natural language, then encode those solutions into replicable projects or skills, which are then shared across the organization. He described this as 'an extremely flexible, adaptable, and usable form of RPA that never existed before.'

At the level of software pricing, Del Prete observed the most significant change is the migration from seat-based to usage-based models. For non-SaaS companies introducing AI, the biggest challenge is 'how to discretely monetize AI'—the answer is usually not to sell AI separately, but to embed it into core products, demonstrating value through cross-selling, upselling, and price increases, ultimately launching incremental features exclusive to AI. He remains skeptical about outcome-based pricing because 'it becomes very episodic and project-specific, so you don’t get that stickiness.'

Nikola Mrkšić, co-founder and CEO of PolyAI, recently appeared in a clip from the 'Disruptive' podcast by Barclays Eagle Labs, hosted by Luke Christoforidis. In this segment, Mrkšić discusses why the prevailing view in Silicon Valley that 'voice is dead' is detached from the reality of how people actually reach out to businesses.

PolyAI builds enterprise voice AI agents that answer customer calls. This resource is suitable for professionals seeking to understand the current application status and market positioning of voice AI in business scenarios. While the full argumentation details are not provided, the direct perspective from the founder of a leading voice AI company offers a reference point for evaluating the continued importance of voice technology in enterprise communications.

Nikola Mrkšić, co-founder of PolyAI (poly.ai), discusses the profound impact of artificial intelligence on the labor market in a recent clip from the tech interview show 'The Unlock with Oliver Bruce'. Mrkšić, originally from Belgrade, references his mother's experience working at the National Bank of Serbia as a personalized example to explain the magnitude of the AI wave.

According to the video title and publisher description, Mrkšić notes that his mother's department originally had 40 people, but only 2 remained. He uses this case to argue that AI represents "the same wave at far greater scale." This viewpoint provides a specific, tangible entry point for understanding how AI technology reshapes workforce structures in traditional industries.

For readers focused on AI industry investment and social implications, the value of this clip lies in its first-hand observation from the founder of a company specializing in enterprise voice AI agents. Although a full transcript or detailed argumentation is not provided, the resource clearly identifies the guest, their affiliation, and the direction of their core thesis, making it suitable as quick reference material for understanding AI-driven job displacement.

PolyAI co-founder Nikola Mrkšić recently appeared in a clip from the tech interview show 'The Unlock with Oliver Bruce,' sharing his experience of leaving Apple to found PolyAI. Mrkšić previously worked on Siri within Apple, noting in the description that persistent feedback about Siri's poor performance ('People kept telling me Siri's sh*t') motivated him to leave and build voice AI focused on doing one job really well.

This narrative provides a micro-view of AI talent mobility and competitive dynamics within major tech companies. Mrkšić's startup, PolyAI, currently builds voice AI agents that answer customer calls for enterprises. Although the clip does not elaborate on technical arguments or market analysis, it clearly identifies the motivation of former Apple employees turning to vertical voice interaction development due to dissatisfaction with general-purpose assistant experiences. For professionals interested in AI industry investment, particularly in voice technology commercialization, this background story reveals a potential driver behind the shift from general large models to specialized tools for specific scenarios.

According to The Decoder, OpenAI plans to begin using session data from its Daybreak Blue cybersecurity product for model training starting November 29. The change was confirmed via an email to members of the Trusted Access program. Previously, this data was excluded from training even when users had turned off the "improve the model for everyone" setting.

The backlash was swift. OpenAI followed up with a second email promising a separate opt-out mechanism. However, the report notes that interactions flagged during safety reviews can still be used for safety purposes.

The move has researchers worried about a repeat of the Buckmaster-Alpöge case. In that incident, mathematicians Tristan Buckmaster and Levent Alpöge uploaded Navier-Stokes equation drafts to OpenAI's Codex. OpenAI soon presented its own proof but denied using their inputs for training. Yet the suspicion alone was enough to show researchers what could go wrong.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced on October 31, 2026, that the first results of Operation Ghostbusters have led to the indictment of five defendants and the seizure of more than $750,000 in cryptocurrency tied to a network associated with Kenyan nationals. This marks the first international seizure of its kind in Kenya.

According to the agency, bad actors used stolen identities to sign up for student loans and used AI to complete the application, making it appear that the fake student was attending online classes. While schools received the majority of the proceeds, the remaining amount was funneled into bank accounts of the fraudsters, who then used mules to move money to overseas conspirators. Unwitting victims who skipped college are saddled with debt they never signed up for.

Multiple community colleges and universities across the United States started suspecting fraud in the Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) program in 2021. Estimates suggest the U.S. government lost over $200 million due to this activity. Currently, more than 40 open fraud cases involve 26 FBI field offices and 20 U.S. Attorney’s offices.

According to a report by The Decoder citing the Wall Street Journal, OpenAI has raised less than half of its targeted $30 billion in its latest private funding round, securing approximately $11 billion so far. The company's valuation landed at $1.25 trillion, falling short of the $1.4 trillion it had aimed for.

The shortfall is reportedly driven by fading interest from major institutional investors amid a broader tech sell-off triggered by weak quarterly results from Google, Amazon, and Intel. In response, OpenAI plans to raise up to $20 billion from family offices and high-net-worth individuals. The company is also reportedly planning an initial public offering early next year.

This development contrasts with rival Anthropic, which is pushing to go public as early as November. A strong IPO could leave Anthropic with well over $100 billion in capital, while OpenAI continues to push price cuts and more efficient models to hold its market share.