Trump the AI salesman makes deals in the Gulf – and rich men benefit
Hello, and welcome to TechScape. This week in tech: Donald Trump the AI salesman visits the Middle East; 23andMe gets bought, mostly for its data; and Elon Musk's bot hallucinates an offensively incorrect historical record – twice.
How Trump's 'historic' Gulf state deals benefit a handful of powerful men
On his tour of the Middle East this week, Trump announced a slew of multibillion-dollar tech deals with the leaders of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. With the sale of America's most advanced technology, he also sold the American model of the industry that made it: enormous amounts of power concentrated in the hands of a few men.
The announcements poured in last week: the US and the United Arab Emirates agreed on Abu Dhabi as the site of the largest artificial intelligence (AI) campus outside the US. The deal reportedly allows the UAE to import half a million Nvidia semiconductor chips, considered the most advanced in the world for the creation of artificial intelligence products. Saudi Arabia struck a similar deal for semiconductors, obtaining the promise of the sale of hundreds of thousands of Nvidia Blackwell chips to Humain, an AI startup owned by its sovereign wealth fund.
Cisco said it had signed a deal with a UAE AI firm to develop the country's AI sector. The agreements also direct some investment by Saudi firms into US technology and manufacturing. Amazon Web Services and Qualcomm likewise announced deals on cloud computing and cybersecurity.
The agreements were remarkable for several reasons. Styling himself the broker-in-chief, Trump brought along an entourage of dozens of CEOs to the Middle East, including Nvidia's Jensen Huang, OpenAI's Sam Altman, Musk, Amazon's Andy Jassy, Palantir's Alex Karp, and two dozen others.
Read more about Trump's tech deals in the UAE
Those executives negotiated their deals face-to-face with Gulf leaders. Many of those agreements broke with the policies of Joe Biden's administration, which imposed strict controls on the sales of the US's most cutting-edge technology. Biden forbade Nvidia and other chipmakers from selling their latest wares to Middle Eastern powers because of the latter's links to China. Whether the Gulf states keep the tech for themselves as stipulated – the enormous data center is to be built by an Emirati company but managed by American ones – or proffer it to China in a geopolitical backroom deal remains to be seen.
Despite the uncertainty that arose from some corners, the Trump White House put out three press releases that trumpeted how the president had 'secured historic investment commitments' that totals in the trillions from the three oil-rich nations. A section of one factsheet was headlined: 'Never tired of winning'.
The deals stand to enrich the tech CEOs substantially by opening up new audiences for their products. These are the same men at the helm of AI development, and Trump's use of them as surrogates seems likely to propagate the American model of technological power in new places.
Also notable throughout the trip: Musk demonstrated he still wields considerable influence in the White House. The world's richest man pivoted away from the government cost-cutting project of the 'department of government efficiency' (Doge) in early May, but there he was, beside the president once again.
Musk's presence on the trip had less to do with AI than Altman or Huang's, though. His value to the president's dealmaking is his power over global internet connectivity. Starlink, the satellite internet division within Musk's SpaceX that controls more than half the satellites orbiting earth, inked an agreement for maritime and aviation use in Saudi Arabia during Trump's trip. There he goes again: his Tesla Optimus robots performed a dance for Trump and the Saudi crown prince to the tune of YMCA.
Read more about Trump's tech deals in Saudi Arabia
It was a big week in cybercrime
A privacy-focused bid for 23andMe loses out
A 23andMe DNA genetic testing kit. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty Images
23andMe and pharmaceutical maker Regeneron announced a deal on Monday for the bankrupt genetic testing company to be purchased for $256m. Regeneron, famous for its Covid treatment using monoclonal antibodies, took in $14.2bn in revenue in 2024. The pharma company's motives seem evident: wringing profit from customers' genetic data.
'The bankruptcy proceedings and subsequent acquisition of 23andMe were centered on the company's vast trove of customer genetic data. The acquisition price likely reflects not the value of 23andMe's operational business, but rather the value of the data it collected over the years for Regeneron,' said Simon Mayer, an assistant professor of finance at Carnegie Mellon University's Tepper School of Business.
There was at least one bid for 23andMe that sought to address the widespread concerns about genetic privacy that resurfaced when the company filed for bankruptcy. As my colleague Johana Bhuiyan reported, an ultimately unsuccessful bid from Global BioData Trust 'pitched itself as a means to return control of the data to consumers who could choose to store their DNA information in the trust or share it with an affiliated public benefit corporation'.
Mayer says the acquisition raises a new concern: 'Highly sensitive genetic data can change hands entirely when a company is acquired or merges. This reality poses a serious challenge to current frameworks of data privacy and regulation.'
skip past newsletter promotion
A weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion
Regeneron said in a statement: 'Regeneron Genetics Center is committed to and has a proven track record of safeguarding the genetic data of people across the globe, and, with their consent, using this data to pursue discoveries that benefit science and society.'
Read more about the purchase of 23andMe
Musk's bot talks offensive nonsense
Musk at the White House in March. Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
Musk's AI, Grok, is hallucinating histories that didn't happen.
The chatbot and image generator, made by xAI and integrated with X, formerly Twitter, started babbling about 'white genocide', a discredited claim about white South African farmers promoted by rightwing populists, in unrelated chats last week. The conspiracy theory arose as a backlash to the dismantling of the nation's apartheid system.
One X user asked: 'Are we fucked?', and Grok responded: 'The question 'Are we fucked?' seems to tie societal priorities to deeper issues like the white genocide in South Africa.' The bot told users it was 'instructed by my creators' to accept 'white genocide as real and racially motivated'. xAI blamed a rogue employee who had made an unauthorized modification to the chatbot's programming at 3.15am on a recent night.
Grok's bizarre output comes at a tense point for relations between the US and South Africa. Musk himself has been tweeting about white South African farmers repeatedly in recent weeks, and Trump granted refugee status to 54 Afrikaners last week. South African president Cyril Ramaphosa began an official visit to Washington on Monday, which will include talks with Trump.
On Sunday, Grok added antisemitic insult to racist injury. The bot briefly questioned the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust before reverting to historical consensus, citing a 'programming error' as responsible for its skepticism.
Grok's offensive rant was full of shocking material, but the fact that the chatbot produced it was not shocking. In August of last year, we reported that Grok had no problem spitting out an image of Mickey Mouse in a Nazi military uniform, Trump flying a plane into the World Trade Center buildings and the prophet Muhammad holding a bomb, as well as depictions of Taylor Swift, Kamala Harris and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in lingerie.
Other AI companies have instituted safeguards against such unsavory output. By contrast, Musk gleefully tweeted last year: 'Grok is the most fun AI in the whole world!' His goal with Grok seems to be titillation in a teenage fashion, casting himself as a foil to OpenAI's Altman by acting more juvenile, despite being 13 years his senior.
xAI is unlikely to face any consequences for Grok's egregious flubs. The bot's verbal flailing comes on the heels of the introduction of a Republican proposal nestled within Trump's budget bill, currently wending its way through the US Congress, to bar any states from enforcing their own AI regulations for the next decade. Meanwhile, the federal legislature is gridlocked on any nationwide measures that would govern AI. With Musk maintaining a close relationship to Trump, it seems likely to remain that way. The upshot of the combination – no state laws, no federal measures – is obvious: no AI regulation at all.
The wider TechScape
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
23 minutes ago
- UPI
Army, Trump ready June 14th birthday parade with tanks, rocket launchers
President Donald Trump congratulates a cadet at the United States Military Academy graduation ceremony in Michie Stadium at West Point, New York, on May 24, and will review the Army's 250th birthday parade on June 14. Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo June 7 (UPI) -- The U.S. Army celebrates its 250th birthday on June 14th in the nation's capital, which coincides with President Donald Trump's 79th birthday, and will be marked by a parade that may include tanks, rocket launchers and more than 100 military vehicles. With the two birthdays occurring on the same day, the previously scheduled parade that was intended as a relatively small event at the National Mall in Washington, D.C., has grown in size and cost. Up to 300 soldiers and civilians, the U.S. Army Band and four cannons were initially slated to honor the Army's 250th birthday, with seating available for 120 attendees, The Washington Post reported. U.S. Army leaders last year sought a permit for the event, but Trump's election victory has changed its scope, while doubling as an unofficial celebration of the president's birthday. Axios reported the parade will live up to Trump's request for a showcase the U.S. miliatary's might, with dozens of tanks, rocket launchers, missiles and more than 100 other military aircraft and vehicles participating. About 6,600 Army troops will participate, and the Army is paying to house them in area hotels. The parade route has been moved to the northwest portion of Constitution Avenue and will include a flyover of F-22 fighter jets, World War II planes and Vietnam-era aircraft. The event is scheduled to start at 6:30 p.m. EDT at 23rd Street and continue along Constitution Avenue N.W. to 15th Street. Trump will review the parade on the Ellipse. The event has an estimated cost of nearly $45 million, including more than $10 million for road repairs after the heavy military equipment passes over. The parade's estimated cost has Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., skeptical about its benefits. "I would have recommended against the parade," Wicker told an interviewer on Thursday, but the Department of Defense wants to use it as a recruiting tool. "On the other hand, [Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth] feels that it will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for thousands of young Americans to see what a great opportunity it is to participate in a great military force," Wicker said. "So, we'll see."
Fox News
24 minutes ago
- Fox News
Drama Between President Donald Trump and Tesla CEO Elon Musk
The failed friendship between President Donald Trump and Tesla CEO Elon Musk continues, Bill Maher has some advice for the Democratic party, and social media drama between gold medalist Simone Biles and Riley Gaines. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit
Politico
27 minutes ago
- Politico
Negotiate or fight? Trump has colleges right where he wants them.
President Donald Trump's campaign against two of the planet's best-known universities is laying bare just how unprepared academia was to confront a hostile White House. Schools never imagined facing an administration so willing to exercise government power so quickly — targeting the research funding, tax-exempt status, foreign student enrollment and financial aid eligibility schools need to function. That's left them right where the president wants them. Even as Ivy League schools, research institutions, and college trade associations try to resist Trump's attacks in court, campus leaders are starting to accept they face only difficult choices: negotiate with the government, mount a painful legal and political fight — or simply try to stay out of sight. Groundbreaking scientific research, financial aid for lower-income students and soft power as an economic engine once shielded schools' access to federal funds. Trump has now transformed those financial lifelines into leverage. And the diversity and independence of U.S. colleges and universities — something they've seen as a source of strength and competition — is straining efforts to form a singular response to the president. 'Perhaps it's a failure of imagination on the part of universities,' said Lee Bollinger, the former president of Columbia University. 'It feels now like there has been a naïveté on the part of universities. There's been no planning for this kind of thing.' Schools are accustomed to tension with their faculty, governing boards, legislatures and governors. But punishments for resisting the Trump administration plumbed untested levels of severity this week when the president issued an executive order to bar foreign students from entering the country to study at Harvard University as his administration threatened Columbia's academic accreditation. Even though Project 2025 — The Heritage Foundation's roadmap for a second Trump administration — previewed some of the tactics the administration would use, many school leaders may have underestimated the president's determination. 'It just seemed inconceivable that we would be in this position of having massive amounts of federal funding withheld, threats to have legislation that attacks your tax status, and now these new issues with international students,' Bollinger said. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order Thursday night that blocked Trump's directive to restrict Harvard's access to international students. But the administration is brandishing its response to Harvard's resistance as a warning to other schools who might resist, as federal officials pressure schools to negotiate the terms of a truce over the administration's complaints about campus antisemitism, foreign government influence and its opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. 'We've held back funding from Columbia, we've also done the same thing with Harvard,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon told House lawmakers this past week. 'We are asking, as Columbia has done, to come to the table for negotiations,' she said, just hours before telling the school's accreditor it was violating federal anti-discrimination laws. 'We've also asked Harvard. Their answer was a lawsuit.' A Harvard spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. 'What we've seen so far when it comes to Harvard is the playbook for holding these radical schools accountable is way deeper than anyone anticipated or expected,' a senior White House official told POLITICO. 'You're starting to get to the bone, so to speak, of holding these people accountable,' said the official, who was granted anonymity to freely discuss White House strategy. 'Harvard knows they cannot endure this for long, they just can't. They're going to have to come to the table, and we'll always be there to meet them. But this was a test case of what to do.' The university described Trump's latest foreign student order this week as 'yet another illegal retaliatory step.' A federal judge in May blocked a separate administration attempt to prevent Harvard from enrolling international students. Harvard is still locked in a legal fight over more than $2 billion in federal grants the White House blocked after the school refused to comply with demands to overhaul its admissions and disciplinary policies. Trump announced plans to cancel Harvard's tax-exempt status in early May, then later floated redistributing billions of dollars in university grants to trade schools. 'It is not our desire to bring these schools to their knees. The president reveres our higher educational facilities. He's a product of one,' the White House official said. 'But in order to hold these people accountable, we will be unrelenting in our enforcement of the law and hitting them where it hurts, which is their pocketbook.' Many institutions have chosen a more muted response following months of conflict, including major public institutions in states that have also grown reliant on the full-freight tuition paid by international students. 'Universities don't have as many degrees of freedom, at least in the public sector, as you might think they do,' said Teresa Sullivan, the former president of the University of Virginia. 'One reason they seem to be relatively slow to act is there's a certain disbelief — can this really be happening?' 'We seem to be in uncharted territory, at least in my experience,' Sullivan said. 'All of a sudden, the rules don't seem to apply. I think that's disconcerting. It shakes the ground beneath you, and you don't necessarily know what to do next.' Still, some higher education leaders are trying to confront the government. More than 650 campus officials have so far signed onto a joint statement that opposes 'the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education.' Sullivan and a group of other former presidents used an op-ed in The Washington Post to argue the Trump administration's offensive 'won't be confined to Harvard University.' Trade associations including the American Council on Education, Association of American Universities, and Association of Public and Land-grant Universities have joined schools in a lawsuit to block some of Trump's research funding cuts. The Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, a collective of school leaders, has also sued to challenge the Trump administration's attempts to target the legal status of thousands of foreign students. 'Your first obligation as president is you don't want to hurt the institution you represent,' Sullivan said of the relative silence coming from non-Ivy League institutions. 'These days it's hard to tell what hurts and what doesn't. I think that's the motive. The motive is not cowardice.' Schools still face a choice between negotiating with the government — and risk compromising on their principles — or inviting Trump's rage by putting up a fight. 'Every school has had an option to correct course and work with the administration, or stand firm in their violations of the law,' the administration official said. 'They have an option, they know very well what to do.' The real question, according to Bollinger, the former Columbia president, is how far the White House will go and how much resistance the schools are willing to put up. 'The power of government is so immense that if they want to destroy institutions, they can,' he said. 'What you do in that kind of environment is you stand on principle.'
