DEV Community: Pudgy Cat

The European Space Agency Co-Designed a Video Game About the End of Earth. It Launches April 28.

Pudgy Cat — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 16:12:18 +0000

On April 28, 2026, the European Space Agency will release a video game. That sentence should stop you for a second. ESA, the same agency that landed Philae on a comet and is currently tracking the Artemis program from Darmstadt, put its name on a third-person action-adventure about two astronauts stranded on a hypothetical ninth planet. The game is called Aphelion, it is made by French studio Don’t Nod, and it is the first time a major space agency has publicly co-designed a narrative game from the ground up.

Most space games want you to blow things up. Aphelion wants you to survive a catastrophe that scientists think is plausible. That difference is the whole story.

The Premise Is a Peer-Reviewed Nightmare

The setup: by 2060, Earth is uninhabitable. Humanity’s last shot is Persephone, a theorized ninth planet at the edge of the Solar System. ESA sends the Hope-01 mission, two astronauts named Ariane and Thomas, on a one-way scientific expedition. The ship crashes. Ariane wakes up on the surface. Thomas is hurt. There is something out there that is not human.

Persephone is not a random sci-fi planet. It is lifted from the Planet Nine hypothesis, the astronomical theory that there is a massive undetected planet in the outer Solar System, nudging Kuiper Belt objects into weird orbits. Caltech researchers have been chasing this ghost since 2016. Don’t Nod wrote a game around it and handed the planetary stats to ESA physicists to stress-test.

Persephone’s published data sheet reads like a homework assignment: diameter 11,480 km, mass 4.77 × 10²⁴ kg (about 80 percent of Earth), gravity 0.8G, icy composition, a very long eccentric orbit. Those numbers are not flavor text. They dictate how Ariane jumps, how her suit behaves in vacuum, how light hits the ice.

Why ESA Said Yes to a Video Game

Space agencies do not co-develop entertainment products. They consult on documentaries, license footage, send astronauts to late-night shows. Actually sitting in a writers’ room with a narrative studio, reviewing scripts for scientific accuracy, is new territory. ESA’s public statement frames it as “grounding the depiction of space exploration in real scientific knowledge and humanistic values,” which is press-release language for “we wanted to stop Hollywood from inventing the laws of physics again.”

The practical side is recruitment. NASA has been panicking for a decade about the median age of its engineering workforce. ESA is in a similar spot. Gen Z kids do not grow up watching Apollo footage, they grow up watching streamers. If a kid spends 20 hours on Persephone and walks away thinking orbital mechanics are cool, that is a funnel ESA cannot buy with recruitment ads.

It also lines up with a real moment in space exploration. Artemis II just broke a 55-year-old distance record set by Apollo 13. The Moon is being remeasured in real time, with new craters being catalogued that erased older ones. Public appetite for space stories is back, and ESA would rather feed it with something accurate than watch Netflix produce another show where spaceships bank like airplanes.

Don’t Nod Is the Right Studio for This

If you picked a random AAA studio to make a game with the European Space Agency, you would probably get a cover shooter where aliens scream and the astronaut has a bionic arm. Don’t Nod is different. The Paris studio made Life Is Strange, Tell Me Why, Vampyr, and Banishers. Their portfolio is narrative-forward, emotionally heavy, often slow. They care about character interiority. They are famously allergic to bombastic action.

Their new trailer, aired at the ID@Xbox showcase on April 22, doubles down on that. It focuses on Ariane’s grief. It hints at the past relationship between her and Thomas. It shows her alone in vast frozen panoramas with an entity called the Nemesis hunting her from off-screen. This is a stealth-exploration game with action sequences, not a shooter with lore. The studio’s public pitch is that Aphelion sits at the intersection of exploration, traversal, and tense hiding, not combat.

There is a risk here. Narrative games have a weird relationship with commercial success. The Last of Us Online was killed when it was 80 percent complete because Sony could not model the live-service math. Aphelion is a linear, single-player, story-first product in a year when Ubisoft is remaking Black Flag with live-service hooks and Starfield is getting a second chance on PS5 via free weekends. A slow, sad sci-fi game about guilt and ice is not the obvious April 2026 hit. It is the bet.

The Literary Sci-Fi Lineage

Don’t Nod has been open about the references. Interstellar, The Martian, Ad Astra, Arrival. That lineup is not accidental. All four films treat space as lonely, cold, and scientifically uncooperative. All four have an astronaut confronting a personal emotional problem wrapped in a cosmic one. Aphelion is trying to port that mood into playable form.

The closest gaming ancestor is Alien: Isolation. Same stealth pressure, same “one creature you cannot kill, you can only evade.” The difference is tone. Isolation was claustrophobic horror in corridors. Aphelion is agoraphobic horror in wide frozen plains, under a sky that at 1000+ AU from the Sun would look nothing like Earth’s.

The Question Nobody Is Asking

Here is what makes Aphelion weird in the best way: the game assumes Earth dies. Not as a twist. Not as a surprise third-act reveal. The premise is that by 2060, we have already lost, and the last functional institution is ESA, trying a hail-Mary mission to a planet that might not even be there.

That is a dark starting position for an agency co-branded product. ESA did not have to sign off on “Earth is uninhabitable by 2060.” They could have asked for “Earth is badly damaged” or “Earth is evacuating” or any of the softer framings space agencies usually prefer. They did not. The pitch they approved is bleak.

Read that however you want. One reading is that ESA scientists, unlike ESA comms, are tired of dancing around the math on climate and biosphere collapse and wanted a mainstream narrative product to state the timeline in plain language. Another is that they just thought the story was good. Either way, a video game is about to drop with a space agency’s blessing that says, in not very coded terms, we have 34 years to figure something out.

The cat on the windowsill does not care about Planet Nine. He cares about the sunbeam moving across the floor. There is something honest about that. Ariane is going to spend her entire game trying to survive on a planet that may not exist, because the one that does exist has run out of time. The cat, meanwhile, is winning.

Aphelion launches April 28, 2026, on PC, PS5, and Xbox Series X|S. Day one on Game Pass. Physical edition in July. Bring a jacket.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

AI Is Eating Your RAM: Why Your Next Phone, Laptop, and VR Headset Will Cost More in 2026

Pudgy Cat — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 16:13:14 +0000

On April 19, Meta raised the price of the Quest 3 by 100 dollars and the Quest 3S by 50 dollars. The official reason was not a new chip or a new feature. It was RAM. The same memory that lives inside your phone, your laptop, and the plastic tube you strap to your face to pretend you are in a spaceship is suddenly too expensive, because AI data centers are hoovering up the supply. If you were waiting for 2026 to be the year gadgets got cheaper, bad news from the silicon side.

The Quest hike is not an isolated Meta decision. It is the first visible consumer signal of a memory shortage that has been wrecking hardware budgets since late 2025. TrendForce projects DRAM contract prices to rise 58 to 63 percent quarter over quarter in Q2 2026, and NAND flash to jump 70 to 75 percent. Those are not typos. Those are the numbers PC makers, phone brands, and VR companies have been staring at while deciding whether to absorb the cost or pass it to you. Spoiler: they are passing it to you.

How AI Ate the Memory Supply

Three companies control over 95 percent of global DRAM production: Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron. Historically they split their wafers between server memory, consumer DDR, mobile memory for phones, and NAND storage. That balance is gone. According to analysts tracking the supercycle, the big three have collectively shifted roughly 93 percent of their production priority toward high-bandwidth memory, the specific kind of stacked DRAM that lives inside Nvidia, AMD, and custom AI accelerators.

SK Hynix has already said publicly that its HBM, DRAM, and NAND capacity is essentially sold out for all of 2026. Micron went further in December and announced it was exiting the consumer memory market entirely. One of the three companies making the RAM in your laptop has decided you are no longer the customer. Data centers are. You get the leftovers.

The consumer market did not choose this trade. It is collateral damage from hyperscalers (Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon) signing long-term contracts to lock in supply for AI training clusters. Data centers now consume an estimated 70 percent of all memory chips produced worldwide. A wafer that used to become sixteen gigabytes of DDR5 for a gaming PC is now eight gigabytes of HBM3E going into a rack in Virginia. That is the whole story.

What It Costs You, Specifically

IDC warns that PCs, tablets, and smartphones could see price increases of 10 to 20 percent by the end of 2026. Dell, Lenovo, and HP have signaled 15 to 20 percent hikes on PCs for early 2026. Samsung is reportedly considering a 20 to 30 percent increase on NAND-dependent products. Entry-level and midrange devices, the ones normal humans actually buy, are projected to take the worst hit because they run on thinner margins than flagships.

TrendForce also flagged something weirder: low-end Android phones are expected to drop back to 4 gigabytes of RAM as the default in 2026. Four gigabytes. That is the amount a budget phone shipped with in 2017. The industry spent a decade creeping toward 8 and 12 gigabytes as the new normal, and now a shortage is yanking the floor back down. Your next cheap phone might be a technological regression, sold at a higher price, so some AI model can generate a worse haiku about the sunset.

The Meta Quest 3S 128GB now costs 349.99 dollars, a 16.7 percent increase on what was supposed to be the accessible VR entry point. The psychologically important 300 dollar ceiling, the one Meta spent two years marketing around, is gone. It might come back when supply normalizes (analysts say late 2027 at the earliest), but nobody is promising. The dumb phone boom we covered earlier starts looking less like a vibe and more like a rational response to a consumer market repricing itself out of reach.

Everyone Pays, But the AI Gets Paid

There is a funny circularity here. Meta is raising the Quest price because memory costs went up. Memory costs went up because hyperscalers, including Meta itself, are buying up all the HBM to train AI models. So Meta is charging Quest customers more to subsidize Meta’s own AI buildout. PC Gamer noticed this in real time and called it what it is, Meta made the memory problem worse and is now making you pay for it at the register. Capitalism is beautiful.

The consumer pattern looks a lot like what Cory Doctorow called enshittification, the slow extraction of value from users to feed business customers and then to feed shareholders. Except now it is playing out in silicon rather than software. The same flagship laptop that cost 1,200 euros in 2024 might cost 1,440 euros by Christmas 2026, not because the laptop got better, but because the memory inside it was redirected to training runs you will never interact with.

Europe does not escape this. The Commission just awarded 180 million euros to four European providers for sovereign cloud, and TikTok announced another billion euro data center expansion in Finland. Those buildouts also need HBM. The structural demand is global, and the bill lands on any consumer buying electronics anywhere. The one partial consolation is that EU rules like the right to repair law mean the phone you already own is cheaper to keep alive. Extending current hardware is less a hobby and more a financial strategy.

What Actually Changes

A few practical consequences, with the usual caveat that nobody knows when the cycle breaks. New GPU launches in 2026 will probably come with less VRAM than spec sheets suggested a year ago, because HBM is the bottleneck and gaming cards get the scraps. Budget SSDs are already seeing price increases, so if you were planning a home server or a backup rebuild, maybe do it this quarter. Entry-level laptops sold in back-to-school 2026 are the segment to watch, because that is where shortages meet a price-sensitive audience and the math stops working.

The bigger picture is that consumer electronics got used to a decade of prices holding flat or falling. Cameras got better, RAM doubled, storage tripled, and the device in your pocket stayed roughly the same price. That era is over, at least for the next eighteen months. Capital going into GPUs and HBM is capital not going into consumer-grade fabs. Samsung and SK Hynix have announced expansion plans for 2026, but meaningful new supply does not hit the market until late 2027 at the earliest. Everything between now and then is triage.

The polite way to describe this is a transition period. The less polite way is that the consumer electronics market is paying the construction bill for the AI industry, one 50 dollar hike at a time, and the AI industry is not sending a thank-you card. If your laptop holds out until 2028, hug it. If it does not, budget accordingly, and enjoy the subtle irony that every chatbot you talk to in the meantime was trained on memory you just helped pay for.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

The Nihilist Penguin Became a Corporate Mood and Dubai Won

Pudgy Cat — Wed, 22 Apr 2026 16:14:15 +0000

In 2007, Werner Herzog pointed a camera at Antarctica and filmed an Adélie penguin breaking away from its colony, ignoring the ocean, and walking 70 kilometers inland toward a mountain range that offered nothing except a slow, certain death. Herzog narrated the scene like a man who had just read your diary and found it insufficient. Nineteen years later, that same clip is the most relatable thing on the internet, and Dubai’s toll road company is trying to sell you on it.

Welcome to the Nihilist Penguin era. We are all the penguin. And now BMW wants a word.

A Penguin, a Pipe Organ, and a Collapsing Group Chat

The clip itself has floated online for years, mostly among Herzog obsessives and people who trade ironic screenshots at 3am. It did not become a meme until January 16, 2026, when a TikTok user named natur_gamler paired the footage with a dramatic pipe organ cover of Gigi D’Agostino’s “L’Amour Toujours.” The video pulled over 192,000 likes in six days. By February, the penguin had a name, a genre, and a fanbase across Instagram, TikTok, X, and whatever Facebook is now.

The caption structure is always the same. The penguin walks. A text overlay explains what the penguin is rejecting. Typical entries include “me leaving the group project” and “me at 11pm when my brain suggests tomorrow will be different.” The joke is that the penguin, according to Herzog, is walking toward certain death. The joke is also that this feels, on many weekdays, reasonable.

What makes it stick is not the footage. The footage has been available since 2007. What makes it stick is timing. The penguin arrived in the middle of a long, gray winter, right after the algorithm had spent six months serving everyone the same five trends about fiber and mushroom coffee. People were tired. The penguin was tired.

The Brands Arrive. They Are Holding Something.

A meme is only officially alive once a corporate Twitter account has tried to do it wrong. The Nihilist Penguin cleared that bar in about four weeks. BMW posted a penguin image with captions about choosing your own lane. Lidl posted one walking past the egg aisle. Red Bull, Swiggy, and Zomato all joined in. Most of it was fine. Some of it was embarrassing. One campaign, against every rule of how this usually goes, was actually good.

Dubai’s Salik, which runs the city’s electronic toll gates, posted an image of a solitary penguin crossing a snow-dusted Dubai highway under the city’s skyline. Above the bird was a Salik toll gate, spotless, entirely free of snow. No tagline. No hashtag dump. The joke was that even the nihilist penguin, walking away from everything, would still have to pay the toll. Marketing watchers called it one of the sharpest brand hijacks of the year. It works because it respects the joke. The penguin is still walking. The toll gate just doesn’t care.

Most brand adoptions of a meme kill the meme. This one did the opposite. It made the original funnier, because it confirmed the premise: even the act of walking into the void has infrastructure.

Why This One Hit Different

Internet culture has a specific taste for memes that let people confess things they would not say out loud. The Nihilist Penguin is not a joke about being sad. It is a joke about the quiet, specific decision to opt out of a situation you were expected to participate in. That is a much narrower emotional target, and it is why the format survived the brand takeover.

Compare it to the last wave of viral content. The 2020s have produced “goblin mode,” “bed rotting,” “delulu,” and “in my flop era.” All of them worked as permission slips for not doing the thing. The penguin is stricter. The penguin is not flopping. The penguin has made a decision. The penguin will not explain where it is going, and if you ask, the penguin will not stop walking.

This is also why Italian Brainrot ended up on Panini stickers and why the Dead Internet Theory feels less like theory every month. The memes that spread fastest right now are the ones that name a specific kind of tiredness. Italian Brainrot is tiredness as pure sound. The penguin is tiredness as a destination.

Herzog Is, as Ever, Unbothered

Werner Herzog, 83, has not personally weighed in on the meme. This is in character. Herzog has spent sixty years making films about people and animals that walk toward things that will eat them, and he has refused to frame those decisions as tragic. In the original documentary, he does not rescue the penguin. He does not even sound sad. He tells you what is going to happen and lets the bird keep walking. That is the exact tone the meme inherited. No pity, no lesson, just a small animal, very committed, moving in a straight line away from everyone else.

Whether the actual penguin from 2007 survived has never been confirmed. Most scientists asked say no. The meme does not care. The meme needs the penguin to keep walking, not to arrive. Arrival is for different formats, like the 7×7=49 TikTok trend, which is a meme about numbers that feel correct for reasons nobody can explain. The penguin is a meme about not feeling correct and being fine with that.

The Life Cycle, for Reference

Every meme goes through four stages: discovery, expansion, corporate adoption (which kills most of them), and legacy. The penguin is at the end of stage three. The Nihilist Penguin has a better chance of reaching stage four than most. Herzog’s footage gives it a built-in gravity, and it is the rare meme that feels older than the people posting it.

The shape of the story is familiar. We covered the Dancing Baby, from 1996 CGI demo reel to first viral sensation. A weird thing escapes its original context. It finds people at exactly the right level of exhaustion. It stays.

Where the Penguin Is Going

A few predictions, stated with the confidence of someone who has been wrong about memes before. The Nihilist Penguin will spend the rest of April on merch. By June, there will be a startup pitch deck using it as a slide for “founder resilience.” By autumn, somebody will get the penguin tattooed somewhere visible and regret it in interviews. The footage itself will return to its previous life as a Herzog deep cut, which is where it belongs.

In the meantime, the penguin is still walking. It is still not explaining itself. That is the whole joke, and on some days it is also the whole mood.

Somewhere in all this, there is a cat lesson. Cats have always understood the Nihilist Penguin. A cat that has decided to leave the room will leave the room. A cat that has decided you no longer exist will not be available for comment. The penguin is doing what the cats of the internet have been modeling for twenty years. The rest of us are catching up.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

V.E. Schwab Hid Behind a Pen Name to Write a Publishing Whodunit, and the Industry Deserves It

Pudgy Cat — Tue, 21 Apr 2026 16:15:06 +0000

V.E. Schwab has sold millions of copies of The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue. Cat Clarke quit publishing in 2018 and swore she was done writing books. On April 7, 2026, the two of them released a locked-room mystery about six midlist authors on a Scottish island competing to finish a dead superstar’s manuscript, and they put “Evelyn Clarke” on the cover so nobody would know.

The pen name cracked in a week. Kate Mosse blurbed it as “And Then There Were None meets Yellowface.” NPR aired the interview on April 11. Karin Slaughter called it “both a great locked-room thriller and a brilliant satire on the publishing industry,” which is a generous way of saying the book is a grudge, bound in hardcover, with a knife in it.

Why V.E. Schwab wrote a locked-room mystery instead of another fantasy

Schwab had two rules. She would never co-write a novel. She would never write anything without magic in it. She broke both for this book, and her explanation on NPR was sharper than any of the marketing copy: “This is an industry that, for a very, very long time, has discouraged transparency. And I think what it does is make an island of every single author who just feels so lonely in their own experience.”

So the two of them built a literal island. Arthur Fletch, fictional mega-bestseller, reclusive, dead. His last novel has no ending. Six midlist authors get summoned by his agent and editor. The thriller writer, the romance author, the YA scribe, the sci-fi writer, the horror author, the up-and-comer. Write the final chapter, get paid a “mind-boggling sum,” and get your own career relaunched on the back of the dead man’s brand. Only one of them wins. Seventy-two hours. The mechanics are Agatha Christie. The subtext is a confession.

The publishing satire hiding inside the locked room

Schwab told NPR that the plot is about “struggling writers and the midlist and the desperation and the hunger and the desire to be able to do your craft and make a living.” That is not a subtle hiding place. The book’s engine is the gap between what publishing promises writers (meritocracy, discoverability, a career arc) and what it actually delivers (a lottery ticket, genre snobbery, and whichever BookTok algorithm woke up in a good mood that week). BookTok already broke the old system, and the new one has not been built yet. The midlist is where the bodies are.

Schwab and Clarke have been friends for fifteen years. The story they tell is that the book started in Clarke’s kitchen, years of commiseration over publishing turning into a plot. Clarke had left the industry in 2018 after a YA career she did not want to continue. Schwab had climbed to the opposite problem, a tier of success where the expectations keep getting heavier. Both of them, by their own admission, needed shelter. So they wrote one.

The pen name origin is half joke, half practical. “Originally we were Evie because I was VE, which became EV,” Schwab explained, “and then Clarke and I thought ‘Evelyn’ sounded a bit more stately. We wanted the gravitas of Evelyn.” The mask was not anonymity forever. It was a clean first reaction. No “New York Times bestselling” on the cover, no Addie LaRue readers expecting magic. Just the book.

The Scottish island is doing more work than you think

Setting a locked-room mystery on a Scottish island in 2026 is not an accident. It is Agatha Christie cosplay, yes, but it is also a very specific choice by two writers who live inside the publishing machine. You cannot leave an island. You cannot check your agent’s email. You cannot post your word count on Instagram. The phone does not work. The only thing on the island is the manuscript, the competitors, and the thing you each pretended you did not want: to be the one who gets paid.

Arthur Fletch, the dead man, is the funniest move in the book. He is the platonic ideal of the publishing industry’s favorite author: reclusive, male, famously difficult, writes one book every few years, sells millions, barely exists as a person. Six actual working writers have to finish his sentence while he stays a legend. The book is asking whether the dead mentor is worth finishing at all, or whether the industry just keeps resurrecting the same ghost because it does not know what else to sell.

Why this book lands harder in 2026 than it would have in 2019

Publishing is in a weird place. The big five became the big four, then felt like they became the big one. Indie bookstores grew 70 percent since 2020, which is both a real victory and a weird side effect of chains closing. AI-generated slop is flooding Kindle. Advances for midlist authors have been shrinking in real terms for a decade. Self-publishing is eating the ladder from the bottom while BookTok rewrites the top.

A locked-room mystery about midlist authors eating each other for a ghostwriting credit is not a metaphor. It is a slightly heightened documentary. The only speculative element is that the writers in the book have seventy-two hours of uninterrupted writing time, which, on a weekday in April 2026, is more fantastical than anything in Schwab’s back catalog.

Is it actually good, or is it just a good pitch

The reviews are not hedging. The Daily Northwestern ran a piece on April 15 headlined “The Ending Writes Itself promises, delivers killer premise.” Bookreporter flagged the twist construction as genuinely surprising. Kirkus liked it, thought the satire occasionally softens when the plot needs to move, thought the ending sticks. For a debut pen name from two authors who are not supposed to be writing this genre, that is a better landing than most of the actual debut thrillers published this spring.

It also helps that the concept is dishwasher-proof. Even if the writing were mediocre (it is not), you could sell this book on the pitch alone. Six envious writers, one dead genius, one manuscript, one paycheck, one knife. That is a movie that has already been optioned, probably before you finish this paragraph.

If you are a reader, The Ending Writes Itself is a fun locked-room thriller with a great hook. If you are a writer, it is closer to group therapy. Every genre stereotype in the book is one of your peers. Every petty dig at awards ceremonies and sales rankings and review embargoes is a real Tuesday in someone’s DMs. Two friends sat in a kitchen for fifteen years and turned their frustration into a hardcover. The industry will absorb it. It always does. Books that critique publishing from inside publishing tend to become part of publishing, which is the funniest and bleakest joke in the whole enterprise.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

Spotify AI Fakes Are Hijacking Jazz Artist Profiles and Nobody at Rolling Stone Noticed

Pudgy Cat — Mon, 20 Apr 2026 16:12:26 +0000

Jason Moran did not record an EP called For You. He knows this because he is Jason Moran, a MacArthur Fellow and a pianist with four decades of credits. The EP on his Spotify profile had no piano on it. The cover was an anime girl. It was indie-pop. A musician friend texted him the link, and that is how a jazz legend found out somebody had parked an AI-generated record on his artist page and was collecting streams off his name.

Spotify took about 72 hours to remove it. By then, the scam had already worked. Moran is not alone, and this is not a bug. According to reporting that landed on April 14, AI impersonation tracks have been flooding jazz profiles for weeks, and Spotify is the size of the country where it is happening.

The quiet heist nobody noticed

Most listeners who land on a Jason Moran profile will not catch that the EP cover is AI anime drip or that the sound is suspiciously clean indie-pop with zero improvisation. They put it on while working. They skip to the next thing. The royalty ticker moves anyway. Multiply that by every jazz pianist whose audience is old enough to stream without scrutinizing artwork, and you have an ATM.

Critic Ted Gioia, who runs one of the biggest music Substacks on the planet, warned about this a month before the story got picked up. He called out Rolling Stone and Billboard by name for ignoring it. One of the targets he flagged was Keith Jarrett, 80 years old, sidelined by a stroke, physically incapable of publicly objecting to anything. Scammers uploaded AI tracks to his profile anyway. That is the pitch here. Go after artists who cannot fight back.

The dead artist loophole

If you think that is bleak, wait until you meet the Blaze Foley situation. Foley was an outlaw country songwriter shot dead in 1989. Last summer, a brand new song called Together showed up on his official Spotify page. Slow country ballad, male voice, electric guitar, piano. The cover art was an AI-generated image of a young man with spiky hair and a leather jacket. Foley, who was bearded, bald, and dressed in duct tape during his career, would have found the cover hilarious if he were not thirty-six years deceased.

Craig McDonald, who runs the label that manages Foley’s catalogue, told reporters the song was “not Blaze, not anywhere near Blaze’s style, at all.” Spotify pulled it after the label complained. The track had been uploaded through TikTok-owned distributor SoundOn, which is apparently the loading bay for all of this. There is a grim joke in the fact that we just covered Asha Bhosle, who recorded more songs than any human in history. Now we live in a world where dead musicians can keep releasing forever, except this time it is accounting, not art.

The numbers are worse than you think

Deezer, which actually tags AI uploads instead of pretending the problem does not exist, put out fresh numbers today. Forty-four percent of songs uploaded to Deezer daily are now fully AI-generated. That is up from 18 percent in April 2025. In raw count, roughly 60,000 AI tracks hit the platform every 24 hours. Deezer has flagged 13.4 million AI tracks since it started tagging them in June 2025, and reports that up to 85 percent of streams on fully AI tracks come from bots, not humans.

Read that again. Nine out of ten plays of AI songs are fake humans listening to fake music. The money is real. Michael Smith, a guy in North Carolina, pleaded guilty in 2024 to running exactly this scheme, hundreds of thousands of AI songs and a bot farm that generated eight million dollars in royalties before the FBI noticed. His mistake was scale. The current operators are smarter, they spread thin, and they hide behind musicians who are elderly, dead, or not checking their profiles.

Why jazz is the perfect crime scene

Jazz is the ideal target because jazz listeners are passive in a way pop listeners are not. Nobody is running a TikTok fancam for Carsten Dahl. Nobody refreshes Thomas Blachman’s release page at midnight. Jazz fans hit shuffle on a mood playlist and trust the algorithm. When the algorithm serves them an AI track credited to a Danish piano trio, they nod along. The scam does not need to convince anybody. It just needs to not get flagged long enough to clip a royalty cycle.

This also means the Dead Internet Theory has officially moved into your earbuds. The bots make the music. The bots stream the music. The humans in the middle exist mainly to give the scheme a veneer of legitimacy, which is somehow worse than if they cut us out entirely.

Spotify’s fix is a permission slip for the famous

Spotify’s response is a beta feature called Artist Profile Protection. Artists can opt in, review new releases credited to them, and approve or reject them before they go live. Fine. Except the entire business model of Spotify is “distributors can push tracks to any profile they want and we will sort it out later,” and that model is what created the mess. Adding an opt-in review layer means the default is still “fraud until proven otherwise.”

It also does not help the dead. Spotify says estates can opt in on behalf of deceased artists, provided the estate has a Spotify for Artists account. John Coltrane’s estate presumably has bigger priorities than setting up a dashboard login. Billie Holiday’s people, similarly. The scam continues to work precisely in the catalogue where it is most grotesque.

What this actually means for listeners

If you rely on streaming for jazz, classical, ambient, or any genre where the audience is older and releases are sporadic, assume that a chunk of what shows up on your favorite artist’s page is fake. Check release dates. Check labels. If an album cover looks like it was made by a bored 19-year-old with Midjourney, it probably was. The same rules now apply to music that used to apply to YouTube news, back when AI adoption was still the story rather than the weather.

If you are a working musician, open Spotify for Artists right now. If you do not have an account yet, that is the first thing scammers check. The platform where Lana Del Rey dropped a Bond theme is the same platform where a scammer can credit a jazz EP to you and get paid for three days before anybody notices. Welcome to 2026.

If Spotify wanted to fix this, they could require distributor-side ID verification and freeze profiles of artists who have not uploaded in 24 months. They have not, because the friction would cost them uploads, and uploads are the metric. A platform that rewards volume gets gamed by whoever has the most servers and the fewest ethical brakes. Jason Moran got his fake EP pulled. Blaze Foley’s label got Together pulled. Keith Jarrett is not monitoring this. The next scam is already uploaded.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

Egg Coffee Is Going Viral and the Doctors Are Quietly Losing Their Minds

Pudgy Cat — Sun, 19 Apr 2026 16:12:26 +0000

Somewhere in the last week, the internet collectively decided that the thing missing from your morning espresso was a raw egg yolk whipped into foam. Vietnamese egg coffee, known at home as cà phê trứng, has jumped from niche Hanoi café culture into the front page of every food feed on earth, and doctors are now politely asking everyone to stop before somebody ends up in an emergency room with their camera still rolling.

One Instagram clip from February pulled more than 400,000 likes. By April 15, Fox News had rolled out a physician warning. By April 17, the comment sections were at war. Half the internet is calling it the best coffee they have ever tasted. The other half is typing “it tastes like salmonella” with the confidence of someone who has never actually had salmonella but is willing to gamble.

The Drink Itself Is Actually Legitimate

Before we get to the yellow panic, credit where credit is due. Egg coffee is real, old, and pretty great. It was invented in Hanoi in the 1940s, reportedly during a milk shortage, when a bartender at the Sofitel Legend Metropole decided that whipping an egg yolk with sugar and condensed milk would get you something close to the creamy topping everyone was missing. He was right. The recipe became house style at Café Giang, which is still run by the family, and if you have ever been to Hanoi and stood in a laneway holding a small glass of warm coffee with a cloud on top that tastes like tiramisu, you remember it.

Italian zabaglione, which whips egg yolks with sugar over heat, has been doing the same trick for centuries. So this is not some new TikTok invention. This is an eighty-year-old café classic that got algorithmically rediscovered by people who have never left their kitchen.

The Problem Is What Happens When TikTok Gets Hold of Anything

A trained barista in Hanoi makes this drink carefully. Egg yolks get whipped aggressively with sugar and condensed milk until they form a pale, stiff foam, then poured onto hot, strong Vietnamese drip coffee. The heat of the coffee pasteurises the foam on contact, or at least brings it closer to safe. The proportions matter. The egg freshness matters. The coffee temperature matters.

What TikTok makes of this is different. TikTok makes it cold. TikTok makes it with whatever egg was in the fridge. TikTok cracks the yolk into an iced latte while a voiceover says “trust me.” The drink is no longer being built on a hot surface with any protective effect. It is now a raw egg served with caffeine and a ring light.

Dr. Sujatha Reddy, an obstetrician-gynecologist in Georgia, went on record saying the risks outweigh the benefits. She pointed out that salmonella only dies when the egg gets cooked, that symptoms include diarrhea, fever, stomach cramps, nausea and vomiting, and that pregnant people and the elderly should not be anywhere near this. She also noted raw eggs can interfere with biotin absorption, which is the kind of detail that sounds minor until your hair starts falling out. Her recommendation, if you insist, is in-shell pasteurised eggs. Which nobody on TikTok is using.

Why Does This Keep Happening

Every six months, a food traditionally made with skill by trained cooks gets flattened into a thirty-second tutorial and served back to millions of people who skipped the food safety parts. Remember the TikTok feta pasta. Remember the NyQuil chicken episode. Remember when people were cooking steak in the dishwasher. The platform has a strange gift for taking something that actually works in one specific context and stripping out the context.

Food journalists have been documenting this pipeline for years. It goes: a creator finds a real cuisine, abstracts one element, calls it a hack, and leaves out the part where you need to know what you are doing. A similar thing happened when TikTok convinced millions to eat more fiber through public humiliation, and the thing where Gen Z men started eating dry protein kibble out of bowls on purpose. The story beats are the same. A trend arrives, the experts wince, the comments divide into “life-changing” and “I am going to throw up,” and six weeks later we do it again with a different ingredient.

The Cat Perspective

Here is what a cat would tell you, and this is important. A cat watches you do almost everything without judgment. A cat watches you eat standing up at the counter. A cat watches you put cold pizza in the microwave for forty seconds and walk away. A cat has never commented on your decision to put oat milk in miso soup that one time.

A cat watching you crack a raw egg into a coffee has flat ears. This is the line. This is the behaviour that makes the cat consider leaving. If yours has backed out of the kitchen this week, this is probably why.

If You Actually Want to Try It

There is a safe version. Use pasteurised eggs, which are sold specifically for raw preparations and are not hard to find in supermarkets. Use the freshest condensed milk and sugar you have. Make the coffee actually hot, the real Vietnamese way, strong and dark and still steaming. Pour the whipped foam on at the end so it sits in direct contact with the heat. Drink it quickly.

Better yet, go to a Vietnamese café. There is almost certainly one within a reasonable distance that has been making this drink for decades. It will cost less than your Instagram ingredients, it will taste better, and no physician will have to publicly warn you about it on national news.

The Bigger Pattern

What is strange about the egg coffee moment is that it is the rare TikTok food hack that is not new or stupid. The drink is genuinely good. It has a history. It has grandmothers. The problem is not the drink. The problem is the middle layer where a traditional preparation loses its technique on the way through the algorithm, and the safety warnings that exist in Hanoi café culture do not survive a thirty second edit.

We have seen this shape before in food trends that get weirder when the physics gets involved, like the microwave fryer experiment from last month, which was actually scientifically interesting and still triggered a chorus of “please do not do this at home.” The internet does not handle nuance. The internet handles “you will love this” and “this will kill you,” and most food sits somewhere between, in the space where technique matters and nobody reads the small print.

Egg coffee is not going to kill anybody. Probably. The odds of salmonella from one well-handled egg in a cup of very hot coffee are genuinely low. The odds get worse with every shortcut. The doctors are not wrong. They are just saying it into a feed that has already moved on to the next drink.

The cat is watching. The cat is taking notes. The cat is not impressed.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

Lana Del Rey Did a Bond Theme for a Video Game and Nobody Knows How to Feel

Pudgy Cat — Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:10:39 +0000

On April 16, 2026, Lana Del Rey did something no one saw coming and everyone kind of saw coming. She dropped a James Bond theme song. Not for a movie. For a video game. “First Light” is the title track for the upcoming 007 First Light, a reimagined origin story where Bond is twenty-six and presumably still figuring out which martini glass is which. The song arrived as a surprise single, then got a cinematic title sequence reveal the next day at 3 p.m. ET, complete with slow strings, punchy horns, and a snippet of the classic Bond motif tucked into the outro like a wink.

The internet immediately split into two camps. Rolling Stone called it the “first Bond theme we’ll hear for years.” PC Gamer called it “Bond karaoke.” Somewhere in a Florida suburb, a Pudgy Cat stared at the ceiling and wondered if this was the moment pop culture officially conceded that video games now outrank movies in prestige. Because that is, genuinely, the real story here.

The Bond theme used to be a coronation

Shirley Bassey. Paul McCartney. Adele. Billie Eilish. Getting picked for a Bond film theme is one of those career checkpoints that sits somewhere between a Super Bowl halftime show and a Nobel Prize. You do not submit a demo to the Bond producers. The Bond producers summon you. It is a gig that has launched and re-launched careers for sixty years.

And now the slot has gone to a video game. Developed by IO Interactive, published by Amazon MGM Studios, scored with the help of David Arnold, the five-time Bond film composer who actually knows where the secret brass bodies are buried. Arnold said the song “has to tell us about the world we are about to enter into. It has to intrigue, excite, and beckon us in.” IO Interactive CEO Hakan Abrak said the result “feels instantly Bond while still bringing a fresh identity.” Those are diplomatic sentences. They are also sentences that would have been unthinkable five years ago, back when “video game soundtrack” still carried a faint whiff of chiptune.

Rejection, redemption, reheating

There is also a subplot here that deserves a pause. Del Rey previously submitted a song called “24” for Spectre back in 2015. It got rejected. Sam Smith’s “Writing’s on the Wall” took the slot, and also took home an Oscar. A decade later, Lana gets a yes, but it is a yes for the game, not the film. Showbiz411 went as far as calling “First Light” her “rejected Bond theme, released at last.” Whether that is accurate or shade, the shape of the story is almost too on-the-nose. The pop star who got turned away by the franchise in 2015 is now opening the gate for its biggest non-cinematic spin-off to date.

It is the kind of comeback arc that music writers love and that musicians privately find exhausting. Del Rey’s last album, Did You Know That There’s a Tunnel Under Ocean Blvd, dropped over three years ago. She has been quiet by her standards. Dropping a surprise Bond-adjacent orchestral single is the musical equivalent of walking back into the restaurant, ordering the exact dish they said you could not have, and paying in cash. We respect the commitment to the bit. We respect, also, how fresh reunions and left-field collaborations keep defining this moment in music, the same energy behind Nine Inch Nails’ Coachella noize chapter or the surreal stat that Asha Bhosle still holds the most-recorded-artist title across human history.

Is the song actually good? Depends who you ask

PC Gamer reviewer Andy Chalk was not kind. “This is not very good,” he opened, before describing the track as sounding like “Bond karaoke, an imitation of what a 007 theme song should be.” He argued it “comes off flat and filed down, and Del Rey’s voice is lost in the aural mush.” One of his colleagues, senior producer Scott Tanner, reportedly nicknamed the track “Lana Del Meh.” That is the kind of punchline that writes itself on a Thursday.

On the other end, Gizmodo and Rolling Stone were enthusiastic. Billboard pointed out how the chorus lyric, “dying just to know whether you’ll play your life like a game,” sneaks a self-aware game reference into the drama. The song is short for a Bond theme, leans heavy on atmosphere, and has that classic Del Rey lethargy layered over brass stabs that belong in a 1995 Pierce Brosnan opener. Whether that combination works or collapses is probably a matter of how charitable you feel about sleepy vocals pretending to be a cocktail.

We will say this. The song is not bad. It is, however, clearly a video game theme in a tuxedo. It has more in common with a cutscene than with “Skyfall.” Which brings us back to the main point.

Why this actually matters

Bond as a brand is sixty-three years old. Bond as a video game is older than most people think, with the original GoldenEye 007 from 1997 still cited as one of the most important shooters ever made. But 007 First Light is something different. It is Amazon’s first big swing at Bond after acquiring the rights. It is also the first time in the franchise’s history that the Bond theme slot has gone to a game before a new film. The next movie Bond is still unwritten, uncast, and undated. The game comes out May 27, 2026. That is the cultural state of things now. Games get the theme songs. Movies get the wait-and-see.

This fits a pattern we keep spotting. Streaming anthologies are where the prestige is going. Early cinema’s weird inventions remind us that entertainment formats always mutate. The center of pop gravity keeps drifting, and right now it is drifting toward interactive worlds with Del Rey vocals draped over them. A year from now it will be something else. Probably a Billie Eilish album that only plays inside a Roblox experience.

If you want to actually hear “First Light,” it is available on all streaming platforms as a single from the 007 First Light soundtrack. The full title sequence is on the official IO Interactive YouTube channel. Opinions will keep shipping through launch week. A Pudgy Cat, meanwhile, is going to loop it three times while judging the horns and then probably go take a nap, because that is the appropriate response to a Bond theme released on a Thursday for a game that comes out in six weeks.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

Beef Season 2 Review: The Anthology Gamble Oscar Isaac and Carey Mulligan Almost Win

Pudgy Cat — Fri, 17 Apr 2026 16:10:44 +0000

Beef Season 2 landed on Netflix yesterday, and the internet is already doing the thing it does. Half the reviews call it a triumph. Half call it overcrowded. The Rotten Tomatoes score settled at 82 percent within 24 hours, a respectable number until you remember Season 1 sat at 98 percent. That 16 point gap is not a failure. It is a story about what happens when a show built on two specific people decides to become a format.

The new season, for anyone who skipped the trailer, drops the Amy and Danny road rage premise entirely. Creator Lee Sung Jin always pitched Beef as an anthology, he just needed the first season to work before anyone would let him prove it. This time the feud happens inside a Montecito country club. Oscar Isaac plays Josh, the general manager, married to Lindsay, a restless interior designer played by Carey Mulligan. Cailee Spaeny and Charles Melton play Ashley and Austin, a newly engaged Gen Z couple on the low-wage end of the staff roster. One accidental encounter, one witnessed fight, and the slow-motion class war begins.

The anthology bet nobody wanted to take

Anthology TV is having a moment, and it is a moment mostly defined by its casualties. True Detective Season 2 is still the industry’s punchline almost a decade later. Fargo survived by leaning so hard on a single sensibility that cast changes barely register. The White Lotus figured it out by treating the resort itself as the protagonist, with humans passing through as weather. Our take on the White Lotus Season 3 finale gets into the structural tricks Mike White uses to keep the thing alive across continents.

Beef Season 1 did not use those tricks. It worked because Steven Yeun and Ali Wong were specific in a way most television refuses to be. They had names, tax histories, asthma, siblings, resentments with texture. Amy’s house was cold in a way you could smell. Danny’s truck smelled like a specific kind of regret. When A24 and Netflix renewed the show for an anthology, they were betting that Lee Sung Jin’s vision was portable. The question now is whether the suitcase survived the flight.

The split reviews, translated

The Hollywood Reporter says the new season is where Beef “finally reveals itself” as a great show, the argument being that anthology mode gives Lee room to widen the lens and find new rage vectors. Variety, in the same week, calls it “overcrowded and unfocused,” which is critic language for “too many protagonists, not enough interiority.” NPR splits the difference and calls it a mid-life crisis story, which is maybe the most accurate label for a show where four adults with nice jobs decide that passive aggression is a full contact sport.

Here is the thing nobody is saying out loud. The split is structural, not a matter of taste. Season 1 had two protagonists. Season 2 has four. The budget of screen minutes has not changed. That means every character gets roughly half the interiority, half the backstory, half the quiet scenes where you learn what makes them small and weird. If you are the kind of viewer who watches TV for character, you are going to feel shorted. If you are the kind who watches for plot machinery, you are going to feel served. Both camps are correct, they are just looking at different shows.

Charles Melton quietly steals the season

Every review, even the negative ones, singles out Charles Melton. The Seattle Times called him the thief of the season. He plays Austin as a guy who grew up around wealth he would never touch, a harder register than the rich-guy rage Oscar Isaac is working in, and he finds a controlled panic that echoes his performance in May December. Melton has done this twice now, showing up in projects weighted with prestige names and quietly walking off with the middle hour. The industry has to stop being surprised.

Cailee Spaeny as Ashley has the trickier job. Her character is the closest thing Season 2 has to a Danny Cho figure, someone whose rage is mathematically justified and morally corrosive at the same time. The pilot is hers. The finale is Isaac’s. The middle is where the show either wins you or loses you.

The A24 factor, now that A24 is everywhere

A24 produces Beef. That used to mean something specific. Now A24 produces roughly 40 things a year across film, TV, and theater, and the studio’s house style has gotten diffuse. Season 2 still has the A24 signatures: warm grain, curated soundtrack, scenes allowed to breathe past the punchline. But the rough edges that made Season 1 feel dangerous have been sanded down. The show looks more expensive. It is also less frightening.

That sanding is not unique to Beef. Half the prestige TV arriving this spring has the same problem. The Peaky Blinders return pulled 25 million viewers on a show that had already peaked, which tells you what streaming services actually want from renewed IP. They want the logo and the cast, not the weirdness. Beef is resisting that pull harder than most, but resisting is not the same as winning.

Is it worth your weekend?

Short answer: yes, with an asterisk. If you loved Season 1 for the rage, you will get rage. If you loved Season 1 for the Korean American specificity and the religious-family claustrophobia, that texture is gone and it is not coming back. If you are new to Beef, start with Season 2. The anthology format means you do not owe Season 1 anything, and watching them in reverse is actually a cleaner way to see what Lee is trying to build across the show.

The back half of April has surprisingly little competition on the streaming charts, which is part of why Netflix dropped all eight episodes at once instead of the weekly drip they used last year. Our Sinners Oscar record piece covers the other big prestige story of the quarter. For now, Beef Season 2 is the show most worth arguing about on Friday, and that counts for something in a streaming month of procedurals and cult documentaries.

The real question Beef is asking

Every anthology eventually has to answer one question. Is the format about the idea, or about the execution? Fargo says it is about the idea, the Coen brothers’ DNA carried forward into snow. White Lotus says it is about the location and the class friction inside it. Beef, two seasons in, is pitching itself as a show about American rage specifically, which is a vast enough topic to carry decades of seasons if Lee gets to make them.

The 82 percent score is not a failure. It is the sound of a show recalibrating in public. Season 3, if Netflix greenlights it, will be the real test. By then we will know whether Beef is a franchise or a two-album band that should have broken up while the photos still looked good.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

The US Government Fired 40% of an Agency, Then Asked AI to Do Their Jobs

Pudgy Cat — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 16:09:55 +0000

Fire First, Automate Later

Here’s a timeline that reads like a corporate dystopia speed-run. The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) lost nearly 40% of its workforce since October 2024. Entire teams vanished. The digital services unit 18F, home to almost 100 tech specialists who actually built things for the government, was shuttered completely. The Public Buildings Service shed 45% of its staff between September 2024 and November 2025.

And now, in April 2026, GSA has announced its bold plan to fix the mess: an AI chatbot called USAi, tasked with automating one million work hours. That’s roughly a year’s worth of labor from 500 full-time employees. The ones they already fired.

Let that sink in for a second.

The Million Hours Challenge (Yes, They Actually Called It That)

GSA Deputy Director Michael Lynch revealed the initiative at an industry conference, framing it under the agency’s “EOA” playbook: Eliminate, Optimize, Automate. So far, they’ve identified about 400,000 hours of automatable work, which puts them roughly 40% of the way to their goal. Lynch says the agency wants to “start with ourselves and expand as we go forward,” which is either admirably self-aware or mildly threatening, depending on your perspective.

To power this effort, GSA created “GSA Labs,” recruiting around 300 interested employees. An initial cohort of 30 is tackling five priority problems selected from 17 proposals. These employees do this work on top of their regular duties, with no extra pay. Nothing says “we value you” like asking surviving staff to train their own AI replacement during lunch breaks.

What USAi Actually Does (and Doesn’t)

The tool runs through a ChatGPT-style interface and leverages multiple AI models, including Anthropic’s Claude Haiku 3.5, Claude Sonnet 3.5, and Meta’s LLaMA 3.2. Its approved tasks include drafting emails, creating talking points, summarizing documents, and writing basic code. Employees are explicitly barred from feeding it non-public government data, personal information, or confidential work products.

Early feedback from actual users? It delivers “generic and guessable answers” and works “about as good as an intern.” Forrester analyst Charlie Dai was more pointed, noting that the approach “lacks the careful planning, ethical considerations, and public trust-building seen in other global efforts.” Which is a polite way of saying: this feels rushed.

If you’ve been following how AI companies are raising absurd amounts of money to build these tools, the contrast is striking. Billions flow into building the technology, but the agencies deploying it can barely staff a pilot program.

The DOGE Connection

None of this happens in a vacuum. GSA was a focal point for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Elon Musk’s government cost-cutting initiative. DOGE pushed to slash GSA’s real estate portfolio in half and was directly involved in the workforce reductions. Former 18F employees have filed a class-action appeal, claiming they were specifically targeted.

The Government Accountability Office has already flagged that deep staffing cuts at GSA’s Public Buildings Service created real problems: property sales stalled, access was restricted, and vetting procedures fell apart. Now the plan is to patch those gaps with AI that, by its own users’ admission, performs at intern level.

GSA isn’t alone in this approach. The EPA and IRS, also hit hard by layoffs, have announced similar plans to “rebuild capacity through AI.” It’s becoming a pattern across the federal government: cut the people, then scramble to replace institutional knowledge with language models that can’t access the actual institutional data.

The Real Problem Nobody’s Talking About

There’s a fundamental contradiction here that deserves more attention. The AI tools being deployed are explicitly restricted from handling sensitive government information. But the work that actually needs doing (property management, procurement, building operations) is inherently tied to that sensitive information. You can’t automate building disposal paperwork if the chatbot isn’t allowed to see building disposal records.

This is the gap between AI hype and operational reality. Language models are genuinely useful for certain tasks. AI finding hundreds of security vulnerabilities in open-source code is impressive and verifiable. But drafting generic emails and summarizing documents you could have read in five minutes isn’t going to replace 500 full-time employees. It’s not even close.

Meanwhile, the agency is now trying to rehire. The Public Buildings Service plans to bring on 400 new employees over six months and has invited roughly 400 previously laid-off staff to return. So the timeline goes: fire people, deploy AI, realize AI can’t do the job, try to rehire the people you fired. There has to be a German word for this.

What This Tells Us About AI in 2026

The GSA story is a perfect case study for where we are with AI right now. The technology is real, but the deployment strategy matters enormously. Using AI to augment existing workers, helping them handle repetitive tasks faster so they can focus on complex decisions, is a genuinely good idea. Using AI to justify mass layoffs and then hoping the chatbot figures it out is not.

The best AI applications in 2026 are the ones that work alongside humans, not the ones shoved into the gap where humans used to be. A million hours of automation sounds impressive on a conference slide. But when the tool you’re betting on gets reviewed as “about as good as an intern,” maybe the first step shouldn’t have been firing 40% of the agency.

Just a thought.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

AI Spread Faster Than the Internet, But America Barely Uses It

Pudgy Cat — Wed, 15 Apr 2026 16:09:33 +0000

There’s a number floating around this week that should bother you: 28.3%. That’s the percentage of Americans who regularly use generative AI, according to the 2026 Stanford AI Index, the most comprehensive annual report on the state of artificial intelligence. The country that builds the most AI models, hosts the most data centers, and pours the most money into AI research ranks 24th in the world for actually using the stuff.

Singapore is at 61%. The UAE hits 54%. Meanwhile, the nation that spent $285.9 billion in private AI investment last year can’t get a third of its population to try ChatGPT.

AI Adoption Outpaced the Internet (Yes, Really)

The headline finding from Stanford’s report is staggering: generative AI reached 53% global adoption in just three years. For context, the personal computer took over a decade to hit similar numbers. The internet needed roughly seven years. AI did it in three, and the curve is still pointing up.

But “global adoption” hides a messy reality. The countries where people are most excited about AI aren’t the ones building it. In China, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and Singapore, over 80% of people expect AI to profoundly change their lives within the next five years. In the US, the mood is more like cautious curiosity mixed with a heavy dose of skepticism.

This tracks with something we’ve been watching closely. When bots started outnumbering humans online, the reaction in the West was alarm. In Southeast Asia, the reaction was closer to “how do I get one working for my business?”

The $172 Billion Nobody Notices

Here’s where it gets interesting. Despite low adoption rates, Stanford estimates that generative AI tools deliver $172 billion in annual value to US consumers alone. The median value per user tripled between 2025 and 2026. So the Americans who do use AI are getting enormous value from it. The rest of the country just hasn’t caught on yet.

The report doesn’t speculate much on why, but you can connect some dots. AI literacy in US schools is basically nonexistent. Four out of five high school and college students use AI for schoolwork, but only half of schools have any AI policy at all. Just 6% of teachers say those policies are clear. Students are adopting the technology faster than institutions can figure out what to do about it.

If you’ve been curious about running AI tools yourself without relying on cloud services, we put together a complete guide to running AI locally on your own machine. It’s easier than most people think.

China Closed the Gap (and Nobody Panicked)

The other bombshell in the report: the US-China AI gap has “effectively closed.” US and Chinese models have been trading the top spot on benchmarks since early 2025. In February 2025, DeepSeek-R1 briefly matched the best American model. As of March 2026, Anthropic leads, but only by 2.7%.

The numbers behind the competition tell a split story. The US still produces more top-tier models and higher-impact patents. China leads in publication volume, citations, total patent output, and industrial robot installations. The US hosts 5,427 data centers, more than ten times any other country. But China is catching up on capability while spending a fraction of the money.

US private AI investment hit $285.9 billion in 2025. China invested $12.4 billion. That’s a 23x gap in spending for a razor-thin gap in performance. Either the US is wildly inefficient, or China has figured out how to do more with less. Probably both.

The Talent Drain Nobody’s Talking About

Buried in the report is a number that should set off alarms: the flow of AI researchers and developers moving to the US has dropped 89% since 2017. An 80% decline happened in the last year alone. The country that built its AI dominance partly on importing global talent is watching that pipeline dry up.

Combined with the adoption gap, this paints a picture of a country that’s winning the AI production race but losing the adoption and talent races simultaneously. It’s like building the world’s best cars while your population prefers to walk.

The Safety Gap Is Even Wider

Perhaps the most uncomfortable finding: responsible AI reporting is falling further behind capability advances. Stanford’s benchmark table for safety and responsible AI is, according to the report, mostly empty. Companies are shipping models faster than anyone can evaluate whether those models are safe.

This isn’t a problem for tomorrow. AI is already finding hundreds of zero-day vulnerabilities in critical software. The question isn’t whether AI will cause problems. It’s whether we’ll have the frameworks in place to catch them when it does.

What This Actually Means

Stanford’s report is 300+ pages of data, and the takeaway is surprisingly simple: AI is spreading faster than any technology in history, but the countries building it aren’t the ones adopting it fastest. The safety infrastructure lags years behind the capability curve. And the talent pipeline that fueled American AI dominance is shrinking fast.

The optimistic read: 53% global adoption in three years means AI is genuinely useful to ordinary people, not just tech workers. The pessimistic read: we’re deploying a world-changing technology with almost no safety guardrails, uneven global adoption, and a shrinking talent base in the country that leads development.

The realistic read? All of the above, happening at the same time. Welcome to 2026.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

The Dead Internet Theory Was Right: Bots Now Outnumber Humans Online

Pudgy Cat — Mon, 13 Apr 2026 16:09:44 +0000

Back in 2021, an anonymous user on Agora Road’s Macintosh Cafe (a forum that sounds like it serves espresso alongside conspiracy theories) published a post titled “Dead Internet Theory: Most Of The Internet Is Fake.” The idea was simple and paranoid: most of what you see online isn’t made by humans. It’s bots, algorithms, and automated content, all the way down. People called it unhinged. A 4chan fever dream. The kind of thing you’d read at 3 AM and then close the tab, slightly unsettled.

Turns out, the conspiracy theorists were right. And they have the receipts.

Dead Internet Theory Gets Its Proof

HUMAN Security, one of the largest cybersecurity firms tracking automated traffic, dropped its 2026 State of AI Traffic report on April 9. The headline number: bots now generate 51% of all web traffic. For the first time in the history of the internet, automated systems collectively produce more traffic than actual human beings.

That’s not a rounding error. Automated traffic is growing eight times faster than human traffic. AI agent traffic alone surged 7,851% year over year. Nearly three quarters of newly published web pages now contain AI-generated content. When you scroll through search results, comment sections, or product reviews, the odds are better than a coin flip that what you’re reading was never touched by human hands.

From 4chan’s Paranormal Board to Peer-Reviewed Reality

The dead internet theory first surfaced around September 2019 on 4chan’s /x/ board, the paranormal section where people also discuss cryptids and government mind control. Not exactly the place you’d go for reliable tech analysis. The original claim was that since roughly 2016, most internet activity has been synthetic, manipulated by algorithms and coordinated bot networks to shape public opinion.

At the time, it sounded like classic internet paranoia. But like a regretful tech inventor looking back at what they built, the theory aged disturbingly well. The 2021 version by “IlluminatiPirate” (yes, that was the username) became the foundational text, and The Atlantic covered it later that year, giving it mainstream attention. Even then, most people treated it as a thought experiment. A fun “what if” to share on Reddit before moving on.

Five years later, the numbers say it’s not a “what if” anymore.

Who’s Doing All This Browsing?

The HUMAN Security report breaks down the bot traffic into specific players, and the market concentration is wild. OpenAI’s various bots (ChatGPT User, GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot, and ChatGPT Agent) account for roughly 69% of all observed AI-driven traffic. Meta’s ExternalAgent adds another 16%. Anthropic’s ClaudeBot and Claude-SearchBot make up about 11%.

In other words, three companies are responsible for the vast majority of non-human internet traffic. These aren’t malicious bots scraping credit card numbers. They’re AI systems reading, indexing, and summarizing the web so that their chatbots can answer your questions without you ever clicking a link. The irony is thick: the tools designed to make the internet easier to use are simultaneously making it less human.

The Collateral Damage Is Already Here

This isn’t just a philosophical problem. It’s an economic one. Business Insider’s organic search traffic fell 55% between April 2022 and April 2025, forcing a 21% staff reduction. Zero-click searches (where Google answers the question directly, so you never visit the source) jumped from 56% to 69% in a single year. When Google’s AI Overviews appear in search results, click-through rates drop by nearly half.

The pattern is clear: AI bots consume content created by humans, then serve it back through chatbots and search summaries, cutting out the original creators. The people who actually write, photograph, and research are watching their traffic evaporate while AI companies build their products on top of that work.

The Digg Experiment That Proved the Point

Want a concrete example? In January 2026, Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian and Digg creator Kevin Rose relaunched Digg in open beta. The iconic link-aggregator was supposed to ride a wave of nostalgia and social media fatigue. It lasted exactly two months. The official reason for shutting down on March 14? An “unprecedented bot problem.” The platform was overrun by automated accounts before it could build a real community.

Digg’s failure is a microcosm of the larger issue. Building new platforms for human conversation is getting harder when the bots show up faster than the people do. It’s like trying to have a dinner party in a house that’s already full of strangers who only speak in marketing copy.

The Feedback Loop Nobody Talks About

Here’s the part that should worry everyone: an estimated 30-40% of the active web is now synthetic content. Language models are increasingly training on data that was itself generated by language models. This creates what researchers call a “model collapse” feedback loop, where AI trained on AI output gradually degrades in quality, becoming more generic and less accurate with each generation.

Think of it like making a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy. Each generation loses fidelity. Except instead of blurry text, you get an internet where everything sounds vaguely the same, where running AI locally might become the only way to get something that doesn’t taste like reheated content soup.

So Now What?

The dead internet theory was wrong about one thing: it assumed a shadowy cabal was behind it all. The reality is both more boring and more alarming. There’s no conspiracy. Just market incentives. Companies build AI crawlers because they need data. Websites generate AI content because it’s cheap. Search engines surface AI summaries because users want quick answers. Nobody planned for bots to outnumber humans. It just happened, one optimization at a time.

The conspiracy theorists on 4chan’s paranormal board saw the shape of the future before the data caught up. They were mocked for it. Now the data is here, and the rest of us are the ones scrolling through an internet that’s half ghost town, wondering which comments are real.

Welcome to the dead internet. It was nice knowing you.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat

Trent Reznor Said He Might Never Tour Again, Then Started a New Band at Coachella

Pudgy Cat — Sun, 12 Apr 2026 16:07:38 +0000

The Man Who Said He Might Never Tour Again Just Started a New Band

Six weeks ago, Trent Reznor told a crowd in Tulsa that he didn’t know if Nine Inch Nails would ever tour again. On Friday night, he walked onto the Sahara Stage at Coachella with a brand new project, a surprise album announcement, and what multiple reviewers are calling one of the best festival sets of 2026.

The project is called Nine Inch Noize. It’s Reznor and Atticus Ross joined by Berlin-based producer Alexander Ridha, better known as Boys Noize. Together they played a 45-minute set of NIN songs rebuilt from the ground up, heavy on industrial beats and electronic textures that turned familiar tracks into something genuinely new. The Sahara tent was packed. People who came expecting nostalgia got something closer to a nightmare rave, and they loved it.

From Opening Act to Equal Partner

This didn’t happen overnight. Ridha first worked with Reznor and Ross back in 2024, when he remixed their score for Luca Guadagnino’s film Challengers. That remix album turned heads. Then came production credits on the TRON: Ares soundtrack. By the time the “Peel It Back” tour launched in June 2025, Boys Noize wasn’t just the opening act. Midway through each show, Reznor and Ross would leave the main stage and walk to a smaller B-stage where Ridha was waiting. The three of them would tear through live remixes of deep cuts together.

Sixty-three shows across Europe and North America. That’s a lot of rehearsal time. That’s also a lot of trust being built between musicians who come from very different corners of electronic music. Reznor’s world is abrasion and catharsis. Ridha’s is dancefloor precision and euphoria. The collision sounds exactly as interesting as you’d expect.

What the Coachella Set Actually Looked Like

The stage design alone was worth the ticket. A massive grey foam mountain served as the backdrop, with a tunnel carved through its center. The set opened with a remix of “Vessel,” with Reznor and his wife Mariqueen Maandig singing from the back of that tunnel. A dozen dancers in grey bodysuits moved up and down a ramp, creating an eerie, not-quite-human atmosphere that felt more like performance art than a concert.

The setlist pulled from unexpected places in the NIN catalog: “Copy of A,” “Me, I’m Not,” “Parasite,” and even a track from How to Destroy Angels, the side project Reznor shares with Maandig. Every song was reworked with heavier beats and electronic production courtesy of Boys Noize. The climax was a pounding, distorted version of “Closer” that reportedly shook the tent walls.

Multiple outlets described it as one of the festival’s defining moments. Consequence of Sound called it “a nightmare rave for the ages.” Rolling Stone published the full set footage within hours.

The Album Drops Between Weekends

Here’s where it gets even better. On April 8, three days before the Coachella performance, Nine Inch Nails posted an Instagram announcement: “NINE INCH NOIZE. HALO 38. APRIL 17TH.” Billboards near Indio confirmed it. The self-titled album drops on April 17, right between Coachella’s two weekends. Weekend two gets a second Nine Inch Noize set on April 18, which means the audience will have had a full week to absorb the album before the encore.

For NIN obsessives, that “Halo 38” designation matters. Reznor has numbered every official release since Pretty Hate Machine in 1989 as a “Halo.” This isn’t a side project or a remix compilation. It’s canon. It sits in the official discography right alongside The Downward Spiral and The Fragile.

Why This Actually Matters

Reznor is 60 years old. He’s won two Academy Awards for his film scores. He runs half the music at Apple. He has every reason to coast, take the legacy act paycheck, and play the hits until retirement. Instead, he’s doing the opposite. He’s collaborating with a younger producer, building a new sound, dropping surprise albums, and performing on a festival stage normally reserved for EDM acts half his age.

Compare that to what most artists do when they hint at retirement. They announce a farewell tour, milk it for two years, then announce another one. Reznor said “I don’t know if we’re touring anymore,” caused a minor panic in the rock world, then clarified that what he actually meant was: we have no shows booked because we’re making something new. Sometimes the most interesting thing a creator can do is kill the sure thing and bet on something nobody asked for.

That’s what Nine Inch Noize is. Nobody was asking for an industrial-techno hybrid project from a guy famous for Hurt and the Social Network score. But here it is, and the early reaction suggests it might be the most exciting thing Reznor has done in years.

The Bigger Picture

There’s a pattern forming in 2026 where legacy artists are refusing to play it safe. Culture is getting weirder, genre boundaries are dissolving, and the artists who thrive are the ones willing to torch their own template. Reznor spent decades as rock’s most meticulous control freak, and now he’s handing half the keys to a Berlin DJ he met through a tennis movie soundtrack.

Weekend two of Coachella happens April 18. The album drops April 17. If you care about music that takes risks instead of chasing algorithms, this is the week to pay attention.

🐾 Visit [the Pudgy Cat Shop](https://pudgycat.io/shop/) for prints and cat-approved goodies, or find our [illustrated books on Amazon](https://www.amazon.it/stores/author/B0DSV9QSWH/allbooks).

Originally published on Pudgy Cat