Musk threatens to sue Apple over X, Grok absence on recommended apps list
'Hey @Apple App Store, why do you refuse to put either 𝕏 or Grok in your 'Must Have' section when 𝕏 is the #1 news app in the world and Grok is #5 among all apps?' Musk wrote on X. 'Are you playing politics? What gives? Inquiring minds want to know.'
Several hours later, he escalated the dispute, suggesting xAI would take 'immediate legal action' against the iPhone maker. The tech billionaire's AI firm xAI acquired X for $45 billion in March.
'Apple is behaving in a manner that makes it impossible for any AI company besides OpenAI to reach #1 in the App Store, which is an unequivocal antitrust violation,' Musk added.
A Community Note attached to his own post noted that DeepSeek reached the top spot on Apple's App Store in January. The #1 spot is currently held by OpenAI's ChatGPT.
Musk has long had a contentious relationship with OpenAI, which he helped found in 2015. Since his departure, the tech mogul has sued the AI firm over its close partnership with Microsoft and its push to transform into a for-profit company.
His chatbot Grok, which currently sits in the fifth spot from the top in Apple's App Store, was briefly suspended from Musk's own social platform Monday. The AI chatbot said in response to a query that the reason for its suspension remains unclear.
However, it also noted that 'Grok itself claimed in now-deleted posts that the suspension was due to comments it made accusing Israel and the US of committing genocide in Gaza, citing sources like ICJ [International Court of Justice] rulings, UN reports, Amnesty International, and B'Tselem.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Engadget
7 minutes ago
- Engadget
Anthropic brings Claude's learning mode to regular users and devs
This past spring, Anthropic introduced learning mode, a feature that changed Claude's interaction style. When enabled, the chatbot would, following a question, try to guide the user to their own solution, instead of providing them with an answer outright. Since its introduction in April, learning mode has only been available to Claude for Education users. Now, like OpenAI did with Study Mode, Anthropic is making the tool available to everyone. Starting today, users will find a new option within the style dropdown menu titled "Learning." The experience here is similar to the one Anthropic offers with Claude for Education. When you turn learning mode on, the chatbot will employ a Socratic approach, trying to guide you through your question. However, unlike the real-life Socrates, who was famous for bombarding strangers with endless questions, you can turn off learning mode at any time. Notably, Anthropic is also offering two different takes on the feature through Claude Code. First, there's an "Explanatory" mode where Claude will generate summaries of its decision-making process as it works, giving the user a chance to better understand what it's doing. For those at the start of their coding career or hobby, there's also a more robust option, which is once again called "Learning." Here, Claude will occasionally stop what it's doing and mark a section with a "#TODO" comment to prompt the user to write five to 10 lines of their code. If you want to try the two features out for yourself, update to the latest version of Claude Code and type "/output-styles." You can then select between the two modes or Claude's default behavior. According to Drew Bent, education lead at Anthropic, learning mode, particularly as it exists in Claude Code, is the company's attempt to make its chatbot into more of a collaborative tool. "I think it's great that there's a race between all of the AI labs to offer the best learning mode," he said. "In a similar way, I hope we can inspire something similar with coding agents." Bent says the original learning mode came out of conversations Anthropic had with university students, who kept referring back to the concept of brain rot. "We found that they themselves realized that when they just copy and paste something directly from a chat bot, it's not good for their long-term learning," he said. When it came time to adapt the feature to Claude Code, the company wanted to balance the needs of new programmers with those like Bent who have been coding for a decade or more. "Learning mode is designed to help all of those audiences not just complete tasks, but also help them grow and learn in the process and better understand their code base," Bent said. His hope is that the new tools will allow any coder to become a "really good engineering manager." In practice, that means those users won't necessarily write most of the code on a project, but they will develop a keen eye for how everything fits together and what sections of code might need some more work. Looking forward, Bent says Anthropic doesn't "have all the answers, but needless to say, we're trying to think through other features we can build" that expand on what it's doing with learning mode. To that end, the company is opening up Claude Code's new Output Styles to developers, allowing them to build their own learning modes. Users too can modify how Claude communicates by creating their own custom prompts for the chatbot.
Tom's Guide
7 minutes ago
- Tom's Guide
Sam Altman's bold prediction: Gen Alpha grads could skip the cubicle and head right for high-paying jobs in space
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman believes the next generation of college graduates won't just be working in offices, their careers could take them to space. In an interview first reported by Fortune, Altman predicted that by 2035, Gen Alpha graduates may step into 'completely new, exciting, super well-paid' jobs that blend space exploration and AI technology. Speaking with host Cleo Abram on the Huge Conversations podcast, Altman framed today's college grads as the 'luckiest kids in all of history.' According to him, AI will do more than disrupt the workforce, it will rewire it, creating opportunities unimaginable just a few years ago. By 2035, Altman envisions young professionals leaving university and heading off on missions to explore the solar system, engaged in highly lucrative and fulfilling careers that blend space and AI technology In Altman's vision, a 2035 graduate might just as easily be boarding a spacecraft to work on an asteroid mining project as joining a tech startup in San Francisco. But Altman's prediction isn't universally shared. Former Google X executive Mo Gawdat has warned that AI could wipe out nearly half of entry-level white-collar jobs in the next five years, potentially leaving younger generations scrambling for footing in a volatile Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei claims AI will cause mass unemployment but also help us live longer. On the other hand, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang offered a more hopeful perspective at the 28th annual Milken Institute Global Conference, encouraging workers to see AI as a tutor and collaborator, not a rival, to unlock new skills and career opportunities. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Altman's forecast is a provocation to rethink how we define work in the coming decades. His comments open up questions about where careers could exist, who will benefit from these changes, and how society should adapt. Altman's vision may read like sci-fi, but it underscores a real shift. AI is advancing so fast that tomorrow's careers could be unlike anything we've known, with some measured in light-years. As a mom of three gen alpha kids, I just hope those high-paying space jobs come with powerful Wi-Fi and a way to do their own Tom's Guide on Google News to get our up-to-date news, how-tos, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.
Forbes
9 minutes ago
- Forbes
Behold The ‘Cook Model' To Tariff Exemption
Earlier this month, Donald Trump sat in the Oval Office with Apple CEO Tim Cook on one side, a 100% semiconductor tariff threat on the other, and a $100 billion 'investment pledge' hovering somewhere in between. By the end of the press conference, Cook and Apple had walked away with the tariff exemption every multinational tech CEO in the world will soon want—and all it cost Cook was an unenforceable spending promise, a round of presidential praise, what appeared to be some kind of commemorative Apple trinket, and whatever moral high ground he may have previously enjoyed. It was more than just a corporate win, it was a prototype for a new kind of tax policy: tariff exemptions as personal favors granted to executives in real time, for the cameras. And, make no mistake, the tariff is a tax—and the exemption is a tax credit. But, unlike in the actual tax code, there was no legislation required, no permanence offered, and no pretense of equal treatment. This is economic nationalism by invitation-only; like a rewards program for loyal members of the global C-suite. The planned mechanics appear simple enough. Trump has threatened a 100% tariff on semiconductor imports. Then, he offered an escape hatch: any company willing to 'commit' to building in America will be spared. Apple's $100 billion pledge was their golden ticket. The fact that much of it overlaps with previously announced spending, or that the timelines of the deal stretch far beyond the current administration, is immaterial. Never mind also the minor issue that no one has explained how the pledge will be verified or enforced. It was enough to check the White House's box for 'made in America' and, most importantly, enough to make for a good headline. And that's exactly what makes it such a bad deal. In the previous version of economic policy drafting, Congress writes a law, agencies issue regulations under that law, and companies compete on equal terms for the same incentive. In the Cook Model, you bypass the whole system; all you need is a sufficiently large and photogenic promise, and a moment in the presidential spotlight. The obvious winners here, in the short term, are Apple's shareholders. The obvious losers are everyone else. When tariff exemptions become political favors, the costs don't vanish—they just change forms. If Apple gets a pass, someone else pays the tariff, and those costs get baked into prices. That means consumers foot the bill twice: once at the checkout counter and again when economic instability slows investment and eliminates jobs. Nonetheless, the bigger loss is invisible and much longer-lasting. It comes in the form of the erosion of predictable and rules-based economic policymaking. One of the United States' most valuable competitive advantages, to this point, has been policy stability. Investors can assume the same rules will apply to everyone, and those rules will more or less remain constant—at least in the near term. Exemptions were rare, codified, and transparently administered. Tearing that up invites a future where one's tax burden turns less on a business model and more on your ability to flatter the person sitting behind the Resolute Desk. That isn't just bad for competitors that might lack political clout or, heaven forbid, are on unfriendly terms with the president. It's bad for the country. Once corporate America realizes tariff rates are entirely negotiable, every CEO becomes a lobbyist, every half-considered investment plan becomes a bargaining chip, and the only thing transparent about the national economy is its status as a hostage to televised backroom deals. The Cook Model amounts to a playbook with four steps: first, announce a large round-number 'investment'—preferably with enough zeros to make headlines. Second, make sure it is in a politically useful location—for now, Texas is a good bet. Third, stand next to the president while making the pledge. Fourth, collect your tariff exemption and let the market reward you for your patriotism and service to your shareholders. This is the Cook Model, and it is easy to see why CEOs will rush to copy it. The pledge doesn't even have to be new money, it certainly doesn't have to be legally binding, and it doesn't have to happen on any particular schedule. It just has to appear big enough and domestic enough to play in that particular political moment. Today, it's semiconductors. Tomorrow it could be automakers promising new plants, energy firms pledging oil or coal jobs, or pharmaceutical companies pinky-promising to build big beautiful factories in swing states. The process is always the same: turning a vague promise into a de facto tax cut, bypassing the mess and expense of legislation, lobbying legislatures, and competing on merit. The problem is, once it works a few times, it stops being an exception and becomes the default. To be clear, presidents have been cutting bespoke deals like these since long before Tim Cook. Nixon's 1971 import surcharges were replete with carve-outs for politically useful industries and foreign states. Reagan negotiated 'voluntary' export thresholds with Japan that looked an awful lot like backroom favors. What distinguishes the Cook Model from past deals is the speed, scale, and stakes. In the past, such deals were negotiated for in legislation or trade agreements. They were the product of months or years of lobbying, which at least gave markets some time to react and adapt. Today, a president can reprice a trillion dollar supply chain in the span of a press conference—and reverse it later on social media. Modern supply chain realities only amplify these risks. When a White House handshake can shift sourcing for a product assembled across five countries and multiple continents, the ripple effect hits not just domestic competitors, but suppliers, logistics providers, and workers oceans away. Multiply that across every CEO that takes up the Cook Model and you've replaced a rulebook with a Rolodex and certainty with instability. If the goal is to encourage domestic semiconductor manufacturing, there are ways to achieve that end. Congress should establish clear, legislated, and enforceable criteria for the provision of tariff exemptions, tied to actual benchmarks. Things like jobs created, production volume, timelines, and coupled with penalties for missing targets. That's how you align economic incentives with actual outcomes. The road we are currently on is one of policy by applause line, and optics over substance. Companies are incentivized to engage in investment theater rather than delivering on any durable economic gains. The real danger is the undermining of one of the last great advantages the United States had over many of its competitors: policy stability. Tear that up, and we trade a rules-based economy for a patronage system. Whatever Apple may have gained from this deal, the country has lost far more. If exemptions become a matter of personal favor, we won't just erode trust in our institutions—we'll invite a permanent race among CEOs to out-empty-promise and out-flatter one another for political grace. Enter the Cook Model: where tax and tariff policy becomes reduced to a set of White House talking points, and corporates don't need lobbyists—they need a courtier.
