Why did @JeffDean leave Google after 27 years? Here's the answer in his own words! “Sometimes being a focused small company, with everyone focused on exactly that mission… can be amazing,” he said this at the AASF 2026 conference at Stanford. Jeff had watched Google grow from 25 people to more than 190,000. Now, with his new venture @DiscoLoopAI, he is returning to something much smaller: a focused group of people united around one ambitious mission—to use AI to accelerate scientific and engineering discovery. Perhaps he is just searching for the feeling of early Google again: a small team, a huge vision, and brilliant people all pulling in the same direction. Large companies have resources, but small teams have dreams and focus. Best of luck, Jeff! You'll always have our support! 😊

Can you outsource taste? This is such a thought-provoking question by @reidhoffman. Artist Joe Salvatore said it well: “I can outsource production, but I can't outsource my taste."

Reuters reports that the Trump administration is preparing to block imports of new Chinese humanoid robots, robot dogs and certain power inverters. There is also a claim circulating on X that Chinese AI models will be banned today. But so far, I have not seen that confirmed in the Reuters report or by an official announcement. So I would treat that part as speculation for now. I get the security concern. A robot is no longer just a machine that moves. It has cameras, microphones, sensors and internet access. It could be operating inside a factory, laboratory, warehouse or even someone’s home. Power inverters are even less glamorous, but possibly more sensitive. They connect solar panels, batteries and other equipment to the electricity grid. If they can be remotely accessed or controlled, they become part of the national-security conversation. But here is the question I keep coming back to: How does America plan to build a competitive robotics industry without relying on China’s robotics supply chain? China installed 295,000 industrial robots in 2024—more than half of all the industrial robots installed worldwide that year. Four of the five largest humanoid-robot companies by 2025 installations were Chinese. China also has major advantages in many of the components robots need: permanent magnets, motors, batteries, bearings, power electronics and increasingly actuators and sensors. This does not mean every robot component is made in China. Japan, Germany, South Korea and other countries remain important suppliers. But China has something that is very difficult to reproduce: the factories, suppliers, engineers, component makers and customers are all close to one another. A robot company can design something, find parts, build a prototype, test it and move toward production much faster—and usually much more cheaply. So banning Chinese robots may solve one security problem, but it raises several others. Will American robotics companies still be allowed to buy Chinese components? Will the government invest enough to build alternative supply chains? Will these restrictions help American companies—or simply make robots more expensive and slow down adoption? And if the U.S. restricts Chinese robots while China continues deploying them across factories, warehouses and public services, who will collect more real-world data and improve faster? The U.S. may still have an advantage in the AI “brain.” China has a serious advantage in building the robotic “body.” You can ban a finished product quite quickly. Rebuilding the industrial ecosystem behind it is much harder.

One Month Later, We Are Still Fighting for Justice for Wang Wang Today marks one month since Wang Wang, a gentle stray mother dog in Jieyang, Guangdong Province, China and her three newborn puppies were brutally tortured and killed. According to information later circulated online, five minors were involved, including one who filmed what happened; the official notice identified four directly involved boys, all under the age of 14. The videos and reports show that this was not a momentary outburst, and it cannot be dismissed as “children not knowing better.” It was prolonged, escalating cruelty. Wang Wang's three puppies—barely old enough to open their eyes—were beaten to death. Wang Wang was restrained by the neck, repeatedly beaten, doused with a flammable liquid and set on fire, with eyes gouged out. She was so sweet that she did not even try to attack them. Even in her final moments, she reportedly struggled back toward her babies and used the last of her strength to lick their bleeding heads. Meanwhile, the perpetrators filmed, laughed and cheered. This was not ordinary childish misbehavior. It was the deliberate creation, observation and celebration of suffering. It challenged the most basic limits of human conscience. What makes this even more unbearable is not only the cruelty itself, but the absence of clear, transparent and credible accountability. Local authorities stated that the four directly involved boys had been sent to a specialized school for education. Yet the public has received little meaningful information about what intervention, psychological assessment or continued supervision actually followed. People familiar with the case said they were not sent to any "special school", and the authorities had never criticized such horrid behaviors. The parents and family of these perpetrators even threatened to kill more dogs and cats in response to online fury. And at least one father of the killers did kill more animals and brag about it. China still lacks a nationwide anti-cruelty law specifically protecting companion animals such as dogs and cats. Existing laws cover wildlife, livestock and laboratory animals in different ways, but significant gaps remain when someone deliberately tortures an ordinary companion or stray animal. This is not a debate about vegetarianism, and it is not about telling people what they may or may not eat. It is about whether a society is willing to draw a basic legal line against deliberately torturing a sentient being for pleasure, entertainment, attention or online content. Justice means establishing the truth, requiring serious psychological evaluation and long-term intervention, holding guardians accountable, preventing perpetrators from owning or accessing more animals, and creating laws with meaningful consequences and deterrence. Because when children can torture defenseless lives while laughing—and the adults and institutions around them remain silent—the damage extends beyond the animals. It reaches the moral foundation of society itself. Wang Wang never had a real home. She reportedly sheltered her puppies in a small hole, trying to keep them safe. She may never have known comfort or had a truly good meal. But this Earth was her home too. She and her babies harmed no one. They were simply trying to survive. Yet even that most basic right was denied to them. Today, we remember Wang Wang and her three puppies. We will continue to say their names. We will not allow them to become another horrific video that briefly circulates online and is then forgotten. We must turn our grief into strength: continue speaking, advocate for China’s long-overdue animal anti-cruelty legislation, and work toward a society in which more animals like Wang Wang can live peacefully—and those who choose to harm defenseless lives know that there will be consequences. Cruelty is not entertainment. Abuse is not freedom. Deliberately inflicting suffering must have consequences. Justice for Wang Wang and her family.