Yagament

Imagine spending years learning new skills, only to enter a world where your most valuable skill is telling a robot what to do. That's the future Elon Musk is describing. His advice to young people? Study as broadly as possible. Science. Engineering. Art. Everything. Because the more you understand, the better you can direct AI and robots to do things for you. And in many ways, that sounds promising. Less repetitive work. More time for creativity. Machines handling tasks we'd rather not spend our lives doing. But there's a fine line between AI making our lives easier and AI making our skills unnecessary. Today, we're learning how to give robots better instructions. Tomorrow, AI could learn from those instructions, our decisions, and our expertise until it can manage entire industries without us. And that creates an interesting dilemma. If AI can eventually do the work AND decide how it should be done, what exactly are we educating the next generation to prepare for? Of course, automation could bring enormous benefits to society, from greater productivity to more freedom over how we spend our time. But those benefits aren't guaranteed to reach everyone equally. At Action Model, we're exploring a future where people can actively contribute to AI's development and have an opportunity to share in the value it creates. The real debate isn't whether AI should do more for us. It's how much we're willing to hand over, and on whose terms. So we're opening this conversation to you. Would you welcome a future where AI and robots handle almost everything, or does that cross a line we shouldn't be crossing?

The future of AI should belong to the people building it. That's the vision behind Action Model: Community-built. Community-owned. Discover what we're building and why it matters.

An alleged affair. Billions of dollars in AI chips. Suspicions of Chinese espionage. And Nvidia's CEO at the centre of it all. Nvidia reportedly lost $430 BILLION in market value in just two days. But how much of that was actually connected to the controversy? What started as a personal scandal involving Jensen Huang has escalated into questions about national security, AI chip exports and Nvidia's leadership. Here's what's being reported: → Jensen Huang reportedly admitted to being unfaithful to his wife of 41 years in an email to Nvidia employees. → The woman allegedly involved is Alice Huang, a former executive at Singapore-based Megaspeed, a company involved in purchasing Nvidia chips. → Megaspeed has faced allegations of helping move billions of dollars' worth of Nvidia chips into China, potentially bypassing US export restrictions. The company denies wrongdoing. → Reports have raised suspicions of possible Chinese intelligence connections, although these allegations remain unproven. → Nvidia's board has reportedly launched an independent investigation, while US lawmakers are seeking answers. No criminal charges have been announced against Huang or Alice Huang in connection with these allegations. But here's why this matters. Nvidia sits at the centre of the global AI revolution. Its chips power some of the world's most advanced AI systems. When one company holds that much influence over AI, questions about its leadership and security become everyone's concern. And it raises a bigger question. Should so much of the world's AI infrastructure and economic power be concentrated in the hands of a handful of companies? At Action Model, we believe AI should be built with broader participation and ownership, rather than leaving its future entirely in the hands of a few billionaires. So is this a genuine national security concern, or is speculation turning a personal scandal into something much bigger? What's your take?