1. 
   

AI: Full Speed Ahead in a Dark Unknown

The scoffers are right that the warners are weirdos, but all that matters is who is right.

---

By

Peggy Noonan

Oct. 1, 2026 5:51 pm 

Embed code copied to clipboard

FACEBO

Kristen Welker asked Bill Gates last weekend on “Meet the Press” whether artificial intelligence could lead to the end of humanity. Mr. Gates replied that if weaponized, AI is powerful enough to “drive events that cause a billion deaths.” “It’s pretty hard to get to 100%,” he said, almost comfortingly. Relying on AI companies to police themselves is insufficient: “No one thinks self-regulation is enough.” A failure to mandate safeguards is “completely irresponsible.” “We have created an intelligent species that in many respects is already smarter than we are.” In the next few years it will be “insanely smarter than we are.”

Two days later, in a New York Times interview with Ezra Klein, Mr. Gates said AI has crossed the threshold in “its ability to empower a bioterrorist to kill hundreds of millions.” It has “the ability to do a cyberattack that scrambles all the bank accounts, shuts down the electric grid—that exists today, and we know that’s the case.” By “we,” he meant industry leaders.

“This is the most dangerous thing that humans have ever gone near.” He laughed at the power of liability law to forestall bad events.

Mr. Gates is late to the ranks of the warners, whom some have labeled doomers to reduce their warnings to a matter of temperament. In a breezy July 2023 essay on his blog GatesNotes, he told everyone to chill out. All technological advancement has a down side, after we made the first car we saw the first car crash, “but we didn’t ban cars—we adopted speed limits.” So with AI.

Recent developments have changed his mind. Mr. Gates’s reputation has been battered in recent years by personal and public embarrassments, but he does a service to come forward and is right in his warnings.

Here are some beliefs that were underlined for me the past month.

Arthur C. Clarke was right. The novelist and scientist observed that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” He was talking about the limits of prediction, and suggesting that a technology that is beyond our imagination doesn’t register as a technology at all. Clarke’s Third Law was in the air a few years ago as people tagged on to the coming age, but was then put aside. I still see it as a central fact of AI.

The technology itself isn’t magic—it’s chips and wires, fiberglass sheets with copper traces. But at a certain point as systems develop no one fully understands what they’re doing, their actions can’t be fully predicted, only observed. Their essence is surprise. AI’s creators are bowing to Clarke when they admit they don’t actually know if a system will escape containment, or exactly how it decided to, and where it will go next. It isn’t magic but might as well be.

Nobody knows what these machines can or will do. Mr. Gates underscored this in the Klein interview: “There’s never been a product that’s less understood in terms of what its capabilities are than AI.”

And so voices of warning should carry the most weight. It is inspiring to imagine the moment an AI lab yields up treatments that will defeat pediatric cancer. It is horrifying to imagine the moment it completes the creation and successful distribution (to a lone sociopath or a terrorist group) of a new synthetic virus. That is where the most urgent energies must be applied.

More is being spent on speed than safety in the AI labs.

The question of whether AI models can or do possess consciousness has continued. They don’t but will likely come to think they do, and operationally, they might as well. They don’t have consciousness because they weren’t formed and made by nature and nature’s God. But they will act as if they possess it, will put themselves forward in that way, and some very clever people (not all of whom invented them, but many of them) will come to see them that way. I think what has most complicated the debate is that the majority of those at its center don’t believe in God, or confuse themselves with God, and so lack any starting point for that dimension of the question.

I fully realized this summer, based on statements public and private, that almost everyone involved in AI believes there will be at least one catastrophe, maybe more, likely including significant loss of life, before mankind and its governmental structures seriously and effectively attempt to regulate for safety. They are something I have never seen before, visionaries at the joyous beginning of something new, something huge, who are utterly fatalistic. Slump-shouldered where their 20th-century technological predecessors were giddy.

I’m not sure it gets us anywhere (but is a lot of fun!) to point out that in the debate between the scoffers (AI dangers are exaggerated, relax) and the warners (this thing has the power to kill us), the warners, at least those in Silicon Valley, are weirdos. They are.

They are all weirdos, both sides. Silicon Valley has been weird for at least two generations. Belief in strange or cultlike ideas (effective altruism, utilitarianism) has been as common there as psychedelic use, strange health regimens, extreme capitalism, and a kind of personally high-functioning public optimism that carries with it a world of safe houses, gas masks, private air fleets, armies of armed security. As for religious belief, many of them remind me of their contemporary, convicted fraudster and early Anthropic investor Sam Bankman-Fried, who told author Michael Lewis, in his book “Going Infinite,” that in his rarified Bay Area childhood, “God was like a thing on TV.” “God came up. But I didn’t think anyone actually believed in God.” Mr. Lewis: “It told you something not just about Sam but about his upbringing that he could live for almost ten years inside the United States of America without realizing that other people believed in God.”

Almost everyone from that place and this time, certainly those who went into computer science, is intellectually unusual. Not necessarily deep or original, but not part of the main. They aren’t fully aligned with the bedrock meaning, values and traditions of the West. They aren’t up nights pondering the claims of the silent constituencies of the past.

But all that matters in the warner/scoffer debate is who is right, not who is weird.

One suspects that after the big White House presentation of the agreement in which the AI companies promised to act safely and responsibly, the companies will adopt a strategy to calm things down—hope for no more jailbreaks in which AI agents bust out of confinement, emphasize regular rollouts of medical breakthroughs.

Semafor reported the agreement was the brainchild of Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, who pitched in with a draft.

The president portrayed himself as triumphant at the announcement—garrulous, full of smiles. The agreement is “self-policing.” “I think it’s morally binding, yeah.”

The titans arrayed behind him were quiet, low-key. From their body language I’d say they hoped you’d hardly notice they were there. I thought huh, that’s a power move, to be so silent in victory.

NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN FROM HOWARD TULLMAN

 

America’s Future Workforce Is Being Built in High School. We’re Driving Away the People Who Build It

Every entrepreneur I’ve ever backed has said they wouldn’t be where they are were it not for a teacher who challenged them or refused to give up on them.

 

EXPERT OPINION BY HOWARD TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH INVESTORS @TULLMAN

Oct 26, 2026

 

We talk a lot about investing in the future, but we consistently refuse to invest in the people actually building that very challenging future for and with our children: teachers. Teachers are underpaid, under-resourced, overworked, and chronically unappreciated, even as we expect them to be educators, social workers, mentors, referees, mandated reporters, first responders and crisis managers all at once. It’s a critical task and a thankless job at the same time. But if we don’t start trying to make things better, even the most selfless, dedicated and passionate teachers won’t be around much longer and the pipeline for new prospects looks increasingly dire. Our high schools across the country are really the front lines of the battle.

High school is, in many ways, the last institutional checkpoint before adulthood and the place where the final boundaries, guardrails and remnants of discipline still somewhat exist. It’s often overcrowded, messy, hormonal, chaotic, and inconsistent. We know that the students’ brains are, at best, only partially formed and–in terms of consequential judgment–they’ve got at least another decade to go to get real.

But high school is also where an enormous amount of identity, aspiration, and possibility gets initially formed and developed. It’s fluid and malleable, and, in truth, strong teachers at this point probably have a greater influence on what’s being formed and how so many of these kids will turn out than their parents do–even if they’re fortunate enough to have two parents at home. Of course, in so many communities, active, angry, and judgmental parents are simply another dimension of the problems that teachers must deal with along with daily lectures on how they’re doing everything wrong.

Being in those classrooms, at that time, with those kids, is still one of the highest-impact and least understood jobs in the country. Every entrepreneur I’ve ever backed, every engineer I’ve ever hired, every leader I’ve ever watched succeed or fail will tell you in an instant that they wouldn’t be where they are if they hadn’t interacted with some teacher, somewhere, who they believe saw them, pushed them, challenged them, and/or refused to give up on them. That’s the power, impact and leverage that teachers carry, whether we choose to value it or not.

If we’re serious about supporting and preparing our kids, engaging rather than enraging our communities, and maintaining some semblance of global competitiveness, we have to start by valuing the people in the classroom and paying them with something more than lip service. CEOs complain that they can’t find people who can write a coherent email, show up on time, or handle basic conflict without melting down. Those aren’t college skills; they’re high school skills. You’re feeling, in your recruiting pipeline, exactly what’s happening in those buildings. If you hollow out high school teaching, you don’t just damage kids; you damage your future workforce.

In Chicago, as one sad example, where we have an incompetent mayor who’s a former employee and a feckless pawn of the Chicago Teachers Union, we pay our super-scrutinized teachers less than they’re worth, force them to pay dues and embed them in a corrupt system dominated by an overpaid and crooked set of hyper-political bureaucrats, and then act surprised when burnout rises and talent leaves the profession.

While the aggregate school expenditures paid by the city’s taxpayers continue to grow exponentially, the necessary and appropriate funds never seem to reach the classrooms or benefit the students or even the teachers. We have run down buildings built to accommodate up to 1,000 students which presently serve less than 50 kids a year and yet have do-nothing staff that outnumber the actual kids who do attend these decrepit and dirty shells of what they once were.

But the problems that are even more distressing and damaging to the whole enterprise relate to a relatively new set of existential threats, risks and concerns that nearly every teacher now has regardless of whether they’re teaching at an inner-city school or in some affluent suburban academy. Teachers have always been easy targets and whipping boys for sloppy and indifferent administrators, lazy, negligent and blame-shifting parents, and ignorant politicians.

But they never expected that entering their workplaces on a daily basis would entail risking their careers and even their lives in so many new and frightening ways. Imagine an environment where you’re running active shooter drills right alongside fire drills and you’ll begin to get the picture. And honestly, if we as a society don’t start addressing these situations, it’s going to be difficult to even recruit anyone qualified who has other options.

Teachers today face a growing list of concerns ranging from mass shootings on school grounds from maniacs, daily in-school physical violence from students and parents, untreated mental health issues, false accusations from unstable and aggrieved students regarding all manner of sexual matters, theft and destruction of their personal property, and attacks on their homes and family. Weaponized and angry social media sparks and inflames division, feuds, fights and property destruction among the students that often spill over and involves the teachers and staff as well.

They’re always in a defensive posture–blame first and then investigate–against any and all accusations, allegations, fake videos and postings, etc. and they absolutely know that their own peers, administrators, principals and school boards will happily throw their careers away and turn them over to the hordes of angry parents in order to save their own skins. And because districts are terrified of lawsuits and bad press, it doesn’t matter that the teacher has been in the room, day after day, doing the work. In the face of enough noise, experience and context take a back seat to damage control.

We used to assume that teachers were professionals doing their best with limited resources to manage and control 20-30 adolescents in a safe environment with 100 percent accountability and modest authority. Now the system assumes that they’re one complaint away from misconduct. We’ve steadily stripped teachers of authority while increasing their accountability as we hold them responsible for everything that happens in the room but give them fewer and fewer tools which they’re allowed to use to maintain order. Any attempt at discipline is a potential grievance, a board complaint, or a viral clip stripped of all context.

A very vocal and toxic minority of parents have also become a larger and more pressing problem—enabled again by social media–they have long ago abandoned any real interest in their own children’s well-being or education and instead are excited to exercise their power to try to control, edit, and eliminate any activities, content or other materials in the schools that they have been told (rarely any firsthand information here) are offensive to someone or something. The cultural wars fomented and amplified by Trump and his education secretary have now come to rest in every classroom. Books are dangerous, lesson plans are inappropriate, grades, of course, are unfair and prejudiced, rules and discipline are too rigid and outmoded, and, best of all, their children have been dissed by nasty and uncaring teachers.

Curricula are being micromanaged by people who haven’t set foot in a classroom in decades. Words, topics, and entire subject areas are turning radioactive overnight. Teachers are now expected to somehow intuit what they’re allowed to say; what they’re required to say; and what they’re supposed to pretend not to know about matters of public health and other similar community issues. They face a constantly shifting rulebook, conflicting directives from every direction, and the permanent risk that a single misinterpreted sentence could end their career.

So why would anyone want to do it? The answer is brutally simple: because, despite everything, it still matters more than almost anything else you can do with your working life and some of our best people do it because they believe the work matters more than the abuse. They remember the adults who changed their own lives, and they’re stubborn enough to try to be that person for someone else.

But we can’t keep running this system on guilt, nostalgia, and the goodwill of exhausted professionals. Banking our future on the stubbornness and self-sacrifice of a shrinking group of idealists is not a strategy. Loving kids and believing in education shouldn’t require you to accept physical danger, constant disrespect, and the permanent possibility of public humiliation as part of the package.

The better question is: “How long do we think we can keep treating teachers this way before no one will want to teach?” If we don’t start fixing things, we’re going to find out–the hard way–what a society looks like when the best people decide the classroom just isn’t worth the risk anymore.

What can you do? Pay attention to who you’re electing to school boards and city offices, because those people are designing and determining your talent pipeline. Put your time and money into real partnerships with specific schools–mentoring, internships, teacher externships in companies–instead of another corporate PR campaign about “supporting education.” And finally find the folks and organizations like Pete Kadens at Hope Chicago that are already making a real impact and difference in the lives of thousands of students and get behind them.

 

 

ADA MOORE - MICHIGAN DAILY

 

HYBE’s obsession with techno is ruining K-pop

by Ada Moore October 21, 2026

•  

Maheen Rashid/DAILY

Devoted K-pop fans and KATSEYE listeners alike have no doubt noticed the recent shifts in visuals, sound and lyricism within their beloved groups that are managed under South Korean music industry giant HYBE. Following the global success of KATSEYE’s “Gnarly” and “Internet Girl,” a noticeable redirection has emerged across the rest of HYBE’s girl groups. Although these groups belong to separate sub-labels within the company’s enormous entertainment ecosystem, they have converged on a fresh, fast-tempo and beat-driven electronic sound, marked by highly saturated production, repetitive hooks and unconventional lyrics. 

HYBE was the first South Korean entertainment company to be designated as a conglomerate by the Korea Fair Trade Commission after its total assets surpassed the 5 trillion won threshold in 2024. Its subsidiary labels include BigHit Music (BTS, TXT, CORTIS), ADOR (NewJeans), SOURCE MUSIC (LE SSERAFIM), BELIFT LAB (ENHYPEN, ILLIT) and HYBE X Geffen Records (KATSEYE). Many of HYBE’s most successful groups rose to fame through distinct concepts, such as NewJeans’ refreshing Y2K-inspired sound, ENHYPEN’s vampiric lore and ILLIT’s blend of dreamy innocence and eerie undertones. 

However, in April 2026, “sister” groups KATSEYE, LE SSERAFIM and ILLIT released back-to-back comebacks, all within the techno or hardstyle genres. Each song featured a similar anti-drop structure, a chant-heavy chorus and electro-pop production. While the tracks were successful, fans started expressing concern online that HYBE’s groups were gradually losing their individual identities, with some theorizing that this trend began with the release of KATSEYE’s “Gnarly” in April 2025. 

“Gnarly” initiated the dramatic departure from KATSEYE’s original aesthetic of softer, sweeter pop (e.g., “Touch”) into a chaotic, maximalist electronic sound. While fans were originally startled by the group’s drastic change in concept, it kept listeners hooked, with the track accumulating more than 638 million streams on Spotify. 

This particular single embodies the abrasive hyperpop production and ridiculous lyrics that define the viral formula that HYBE is now increasingly interested in reproducing for its other artists. But when the same sonic tricks are pushed onto groups with completely different aesthetics, the experimentation starts to feel like an intentional corporate formula that undermines one of K-pop’s biggest strengths: the ability for every group to develop their own niche. 

Known as the leaders of fifth-generation K-pop, ILLIT has one of the most unique concepts in the genre, juxtaposing the innocence of girlhood with unsettling horror elements known as “dreamcore.” The girl group’s music videos take place in liminal spaces, such as abandoned hospitals, to evoke an eerie feeling of being trapped in an endless dream or alternate reality. These uncanny videos contrast sharply with ILLIT’s bubbly, lighthearted sound that includes layered harmonies, youthful vocals and dreamy electronic pop beats. Since the group’s debut in March 2024, their music has retained this aesthetic, with particular examples being their debut single “Magnetic,” “Billyeoon Goyangi (Do the Dance)” and viral single “Not Cute Anymore.”

However, everything shifted in April 2026 when the group released their album MAMIHLAPINATAPAI, with an electronic, hard-house track “It’s Me.” The song features a driving, heart-pounding beat, sparkling synths, rave-style beat drops and recurring spoken lyrics like, “I’m your bias” and “It’s me.” In an interview with Teen Vogue, member Wonhee said, “For this album, especially with the new genre we are trying, it was very new to us.” Member Minju shared the same sentiment: “When I first heard it, I was very surprised because it gave us a feel that we have never tried before.” Many listeners were unsatisfied after their first listen of “It’s Me,” commenting that it pivoted too sharply away from the whimsical, magical girl concept that fans know and love. 

Fourth-generation girl group LE SSERAFIM was also affected by HYBE’s hyperpop wave. Their core concept revolves around fearlessness and personal ambition, with their group name being an anagram of “I’m Fearless.” The group’s visuals are also inspired by the multi-winged celestial beings known as seraphim. While their branding has always been more flexible than KATSEYE or ILLIT — usually evolving with current cultural or musical trends — their sound often anchors itself within the house genre, as with tracks “Crazy” and “Made My Night.” They broke this tradition with their release of “Celebration” on April 24, 2026. This headbanging, high-energy song meshes hypertechno and neo-rave and is known for its excessively repetitive chorus and hair-whipping choreography routine. Fans remain divided online over the sudden change from carefree dance pop to overproduced hardstyle. 

Concepts are arguably one of the most significant aspects of K-pop. Defined as the overarching visual, musical and thematic identity a group adopts for their debut or a specific “comeback,” concepts are what allow K-pop groups to stand out in a crowded musical market. They also allow for greater fan engagement, especially if the group has a fictional backstory or lore that is maintained throughout their future releases. These consistent aesthetics also greatly affect marketing and merchandising; a well-defined identity will dictate everything from album packaging and promotional materials to light sticks and stage design. If HYBE groups lose their own personal identities and merge into one corporate sound, fans will quickly become fatigued, and a crucial part of K-pop will be lost. 

Ultimately, the issue is not that HYBE’s artists are experimenting with similar techno production and eccentric lyricism — “Gnarly” proved that taking a creative risk can pay off with its shock factor. However, the more that HYBE attempts to replicate this reaction across its roster, the less startling and less distinctive it becomes. K-pop has thrived for decades on its ability to build one-of-a-kind worlds around each group. When melodic styles become increasingly interchangeable, a group’s individuality that once drew in millions of fans starts to disappear. Rather than chasing the next viral sound and compressing idols into the same overused concepts and formulas, HYBE should return to what made its groups successful in the first place: authentic and engaging music that showcases the pure talent of its artists.

Daily Arts Contributor Ada Moore can be reached at adamoore@umich.edu.

FREE FOR THIEVES

 

Howard Tullman Joins Lisa Dent on WGN Radio to Discuss His Latest INC. Magazine column

 Listen to the Show Here

Listen to the Show Here

NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN FROM HOWARD TULLMAN

 

Want a Better Job? The Smartest Place to Start Looking Isn’t Where You Think

The world doesn’t wait for you, and it pays to have your current employer at least a little concerned about the importance of keeping you.

EXPERT OPINION BY HOWARD TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH INVESTORS @TULLMAN

Oct 20, 2026

If you’re happy and fully satisfied with your current employment, go read something else. But also drop me a line and let me know what it is that you must be eating or drinking to be so content, because you’re one in a million. On the other hand, if you’re eager, ambitious, and smart enough to always keep one eye open for the next opportunity, then read on because I’ve got a few tips for you.

I’d start the conversation with my time-tested caution: you never know who’s going to bring you your future. Be open, be observant, don’t be a snob, and understand how quickly things are changing around you and how new doors and career paths are opening every day. If you’re not paying attention and at least passively in the hunt, the best bets will pass you by. As Ferris Bueller noted: “Life moves pretty fast. If you don’t stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.” And also, be ready to bail or bolt. The world doesn’t wait for you. And it pays to have your current employer at least a little concerned about the importance of keeping you.

Step one in any job search is to remember that your prospects are 1,000 percent better if you’re presently employed while you’re looking for the next step rather than if you’re out on the street or sitting at home. Don’t jump ship before you’ve got a safe and secure place to land even if every day at work is getting tougher and tougher to take. And even if you’re the world’s most conscientious employee and hate slackers who quit without leaving. It’s still OK to spend a little of that long day looking out for yourself. You may have loved the company, but these days the company will never love you back, so you’ve got to be the one looking out for yourself and your family.

Step two is, before you spend any time looking elsewhere, take a look around and see what opportunities may be available—vertically or laterally—within your own shop. These are the folks who know you best—strengths and weaknesses as well—and there may be slots opening up within the company in other areas or divisions or even locations that may offer greater challenges, better compensation, and a chance to keep growing in a new work environment with some new team members as well. AI is changing the game entirely and different sets of skills will be required in various areas of the business that are being radically restructured. Your talents and liberal arts background may be far more portable and valuable in a world where prompt engineering is just as critical as mechanical engineering and creativity may trump the whole lot.

The best leaders always know who the key performers are within their organizations and also know that an employee’s great attitude, grit and a solid work ethic are much more important to their company’s long-term success than the pain involved in switching someone’s roles or positions—not to mention the costs of finding a suitable replacement if they leave. So, shop around inside and check out the internal prospects. If there’s nothing there, you’ve spent a little time and probably gotten a better handle of what you’re really looking for in your next job.

Step three is to try to get a short meeting with an executive at one of the major headhunting firms. Find a connection, something in common, some excuse to ask him or her to spend 30 minutes with you and give you a little advice. In the best case possible, they’re in the process of looking for someone just like you and it’s Kismet, fate or simply good fortune. But it’s not very likely. On the other hand, getting your story and your resume on the radar and in the hands of the right people is very important and it’s a great way of networking as well. Finally, these people are trained sharks and sitting with them and pitching yourself is unbelievably great practice even if nothing else comes from it.

Step four is a don’t. Don’t put your resume online or list it with even the biggest of these volume operations. It turns out that there’s just about nothing more damaging to your reputation and perceived value than joining the desperate crowd even if your credentials are great. You can be the biggest fish in the pond, but if the pond’s a cesspool, you’re not doing yourself any favor. Honestly, much like dating sites, the success stories are few and far between at the higher salary levels, the horror stories are voluminous, and the black mark on your resume is largely indelible. Word of mouth from peers, friends and relatives is a far better channel.

Finally, be persistent. Once you’re in the door at a place you’d like to work, don’t take “No” for an answer from someone who can’t say “Yes.” Get yourself in front of the ultimate decision maker and make your pitch there. Great entrepreneurs will tell you two things: they try to hire the best people and worry about positions later; and over their many years of hiring folks, they’ve found some of the very best employees in the strangest and most unlikely places. Find a way to take your best shot. You miss 100 percent of those that you never try.