
Meta and Google are laying a web of globe-spanning subsea cables. We found out what's involved

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Android Authority
26 minutes ago
- Android Authority
After ditching Spotify for a week, I now understand why readers love YouTube Music
Andy Walker / Android Authority A few weeks ago, I ran an Open Thread asking readers why they prefer using YouTube Music over many available alternatives, including my service of choice, Spotify. It would be an understatement to say that it received a flurry of comments and strong opinions from our community questioning my views. With just under 400 replies at the time of this writing, not to mention the big win for Google's streaming service in the accompanying poll, it's clear that I was perhaps missing a trick by siding with Spotify. So, as I enjoy reevaluating my opinions, I once again signed up for YouTube Music to see what the fuss is all about. A little over a week later, I'm thoroughly impressed by the strides made by Google's offering. I was a happy Google Play Music user for many years, and regularly defended the service when people recommended alternatives. But when Google announced the end of the service in 2021, I was left disillusioned by its replacement. In its early days, YouTube Music was unintuitive and leaned too heavily on its video-hosting namesake. It often pushed video when I wanted an audio-first service. It was also heavily influenced by my YouTube browsing and viewing habits, and was astonishingly slow in operation. In short, it sucked, and I quickly jumped ship to Spotify. Which is the best music streaming service? 0 votes YouTube Music. NaN % Spotify. NaN % Neither (mention your preference in the comments). NaN % I don't use a music streaming service. NaN % The green team is where I still find myself now, and I've been pretty comfortable with it ever since. The Duo plan allows my partner and me to have separate and combined playlists, and collaborate in real-time via Spotify Jam if needed. I also appreciate Spotify's recommendations and the ease of finding new artists. It fits into my life perfectly. A surprisingly positive return Andy Walker / Android Authority So when I returned to YouTube Music earlier this month, the experience was a shock to my system. A wave of nostalgia hit me as I reencountered some treasured playlists I thought I had lost, from the pop-heavy Turbulence reel for managing my anxiety in the air to Sunny Days, a curated list of tracks that feel like a cool summer morning. From a more objective lens, the app has changed so much since its early days. A tighter, cleaner UI greeted me, frontloaded with playlists I've made or artists and albums I'd always tend to pick first. There's an angle towards content already discovered, which was a refreshing change from Spotify, where my mission was always to find new songs, genres, albums, and slot these into carefully designed playlists. There's something comforting about using Google's product, something functional and purposeful. I'll admit that because of this approach, Spotify can sometimes feel scattered. While YouTube Music keeps new content and known or saved music largely contained within distinct tabs or sensible filters, Spotify lays these cards out everywhere on the home screen. At least this is what it feels like visually. I can't say that I prefer either layout, but I will say YouTube's makes better use of its screen space in almost all areas. YouTube Music promotes content already discovered, which was a refreshing change from Spotify's constant new content push. What about the experience of playing music? I quickly realized why many people like the service, especially those who love deep cuts. Songs that I couldn't find on Spotify, I found here, which usually took the form of a video from YouTube. This included many long-lost EDM remixes from the 2011-2012 era, like Vicetone's remix of Zedd's Clarity. Leveraging the music service gives YouTube Music a huge content discovery advantage, and the option for users to upload their content to the service, even if it's a bit of a schlep to do it via the website, makes it incredibly valuable for those who want to carry their bespoke content selections around with them. Andy Walker / Android Authority Dare I say, I like YouTube Music's Explore tab far more than Spotify's Search tab, even if both act as portals into new content. While Spotify opts for a genre-categorized layout with themed collections above, YouTube Music tempts me with its more analytical system, which includes new releases from artists I already follow and a breakdown of top tracks in my country. Again, Google's service makes far better use of the available space on this tab, switching between recommendations and genuine trending content. This perhaps surprised me the most during my experiment. I have always regarded Spotify as the best of the two for naturally discovering new music, and, for the most part, I feel that the Swedish app offers a better hands-off experience in this regard. But if you're the type to flip through vinyls on a Saturday morning slowly, I can appreciate YouTube Music's charm here. In the four years since I last used YouTube Music, I'm surprised by how many elements Google has polished. My partner also mentioned another important point: some artists still boycott Spotify. She was delighted to participate in this experiment, as Spotify does not host Joanna Newsom's music, while YouTube does. That's essential if you're a fan of more obscure or opinionated artists who don't appreciate the latter's financial model. All in all, YouTube Music has a lot going for it. In the four years since I last used the service, I'm surprised by how many elements Google has polished. However, this is a Google product after all, and some quirks largely ruin its otherwise positive glow. Google still has work to do Andy Walker / Android Authority Remember when I said that YouTube Music uses its namesake to increase its music availability? Well, this does have some side effects. I can't help but notice YouTube Music listing a video playlist of CART/Champ Car races stretching from 1979 to 2007. No tracks are found in this playlist, even though the engine sounds could be considered music to some. So why is a video playlist in my music streaming app? This was one of the core reasons I left YouTube Music in the early 2020s, and it seems that Google still hasn't quite drawn a line between playlists on the two services. There are some other odd additions that I wish Google would reconsider. While the Comments feature is excellent in theory, usually remarks left by users offer no insight related to the track itself. It feels like a YouTube comment section, which isn't a good look. I'm not a fan of YouTube Music's Samples tab, either. While Spotify is also slowly trending towards music videos, it's far less intrusive. Dedicating an entire tab for music videos on an audio streaming platform feels counterintuitive. There are some annoyances YouTube Music still haven't shaken, and its silly promotion of video is one of them. But let's come back to Spotify. There are a handful of features that still sell the service to me. As I mentioned earlier, Spotify Jam is essential in my daily life. My partner and I often listen to music while doing chores, cooking, or driving. So, having an option to add individual songs to a playlist queue seamlessly is invaluable. More importantly, the feature has also rolled out to Android Auto, which makes road trips far more enjoyable and easier to manage. YouTube Music offers no equivalent. Then there's Spotify's advanced search chops. For a search giant, Google sure doesn't know how to implement smart search in its products. I can search for artist releases in a specific year using syntax in Spotify. YouTube Music does not. Of course, Spotify Connect is another indispensable feature I use daily on my PS4. I can control music on my phone while enjoying both game audio and my Spotify playlist, and then seamlessly jump that music over to my Nest Mini when I put the controller down. YouTube Music doesn't have this option, so it's either game chat or music for me. I'm sticking with Spotify… for now Andy Walker / Android Authority Although many readers thought I was biased against YouTube Music, I went into this experiment with an open mind. Google's service has genuinely impressed me with its clean UI, innovative use of space, far broader library, and focus on hands-on discovery. However, some of the annoyances that initially turned me off the service still exist today. There are other practical problems that I haven't yet mentioned, one of which is price. YouTube Music doesn't have a Duo equivalent, so I need to buy the whole Family package to share the service with my partner. Although only marginally more expensive than Spotify Duo, this is still a waste of money. YouTube Music may make a fan out of me in the future, but Spotify is a better fit... for now. Of course, Spotify wins on other fronts. As mentioned, Jam and Connect are two unique features that YouTube Music has yet to rival despite Google's expertise in the smart home and service space. The Swedish service is also more broadly available and compatible with the devices I already use and own, while it also offers best-fit plans for my lifestyle. This isn't to say that YouTube Music is trash. I'll give Google its deserved plaudits: it's an excellent music streaming platform, but it's the small things that Spotify offers that I've grown accustomed to and that I can't quite live without. Nevertheless, I can now understand why YouTube Music has plenty of fans, even if it still falls slightly short for me.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg Just Assembled a "Super Intelligence Avengers" Team That Could Totally Change the Game in Artificial Intelligence (AI). Here's Why That Makes Meta a "Must-Own" AI Stock.
Key Points Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has recently gone on a spending binge in pursuit of "super intelligence." Over the past month-plus, Meta has poached top talent from other big artificial intelligence (AI) players with nine-figure offers. The company is also investing in massive Manhattan-sized AI superclusters to bolster the talent push. Will it work? These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › Investors may be generally tracking the artificial intelligence wars (AI), with most of the "Magnificent Seven" companies spending hand over fist in a race to be the first to crack AI -- and all the financial benefits that come with it. But over the last couple of weeks, Meta Platforms (NASDAQ: META) CEO Mark Zuckerberg has made truly massive moves, committing huge amounts of dollars to both talent and computing infrastructure that dwarf even the current super-expensive standard of today's AI leaders. The implications of the moves may have been comprehended by some, but may still be underestimated by the larger investment community. Zuck throws down the gauntlet Over the past month or so, Zuckerberg has: Purchased 49% of data-labeling leader Scale AI at a $28 billion valuation, bringing in Scale's CEO Alexandr Wang and top leadership. Hired top AI talent in addition to Wang to create a "Super-Intelligence Team" from several leading AI and tech rivals, totaling about 50 researchers, by offering multiples more than other companies, with some offers rumored to be as much as $200 million or more. Notable poached talent includes Nat Friedman, the former GitHub CEO; Daniel Gross, who was CEO and co-founder of SSI, Ilya Sustkever's current start-up (Sustkever was a co-founder of OpenAI); Ruoming Pang, the head of Apple's AI division; as well as Lucas Beyer, Alexander Kolesnikov, and Xiaohua Zhai from OpenAI. On infrastructure investments, Zuckerberg also shed light on massive upcoming projects: In a Threads post, Zuckerberg said Meta was going to invest "hundreds of billions of dollars" in AI superclusters. This includes the industry's first 1GW supercluster, which Meta is calling Prometheus and should come online in 2026. Zuckerberg also said this will be just the first of multiple GW-plus superclusters, including Hyperion, which will eventually scale up to 5 GW over several years, and encompass a data center almost the size of Manhattan. How does all this spending pay off? One might wonder what spurred this spending binge from Zuckerberg, and whether it was an offensive or defensive move. The answer, perhaps not surprisingly, is likely both. Zuckerberg now says Meta is aiming for "super intelligence," which could be somewhat akin to what was formerly referred to as artificial general intelligence (AGI). The concept of super intelligence, and whether AI is capable of reaching such a thing, has been hotly debated. However, it appears that Zuckerberg now believes super intelligence is achievable, and may be reached within the next few years. In a recent interview with tech magazine The Information, Zuckerberg said: There is this big debate in the industry today. All right, is super intelligence going to be possible in three years, five years, seven years? But I don't think anyone knows the answer. I just think that we should bet and act as if it's going to be ready in the next two to three years. Zuckerberg also believes "super intelligence" may mean different things to Meta than it does to more enterprise-oriented Mag Seven companies. Whereas, say, Microsoft might use AI to automate many enterprise functions, leading to an increase in productivity, for Meta, Zuckerberg apparently has a vision of giving consumers "super intelligence" related to their everyday lives, the media they consume, and their social connections. Zuckerberg also made an interesting note in the interview that the high salaries are worth it, since the ultimate team will likely be small, between 50 and 70 people: I think that the physics of this is, you don't need a massive team to do this. You actually kind of want the smallest group of people who can fit the whole thing in their head. So there's just an absolute premium for the best and most talented people. This makes sense. The architecting of AI systems is very complex, and if a technician makes a wrong architectural choice along the way, that can affect the performance of the entire model. According to AI chip blog Semianalysis, Meta's recent large language model Llama 4 has been a disappointment, and the reasons were partly due to poor data labeling -- which the Scale AI acquisition should help with -- and a few poor architectural choices. Thus, it's perhaps no surprise that Zuckerberg feels investing in a smaller number of high-caliber engineers is the best path. The difference between a winning model and a disappointing model may come down to a few high-level decisions, so it makes sense that Zuckerberg would pay up for quality over quantity for Meta's new AI efforts. Another offensive aspect of this is that Meta has arguably more financial resources than its rivals, especially OpenAI, which is considered a start-up and losing tens of billions at the moment. Last year, Meta's "core" social media advertising business brought in a whopping $87.1 billion in operating income, somewhat offset by a $17.7 billion loss in its Reality Labs division. And that $87 billion is probably on track to reach close to $100 billion this year. Therefore, Meta has the ability to pay as much or more than its rivals, and by paying these types of astronomical salaries, it's raising the costs of employment for everybody -- OpenAI included. Zuckerberg continued: ... one of the benefits of reinforcement learning is it gives you a venue to, you know, potentially convert very large amounts of capital into a better and better service, and potentially a better service than other less well-funded or less bold competitors will be able to do so... I view that as a competitive advantage. If we can get this to work well, and that's why we are basically all in on this. We're building, you know, we're building multiple, multi-gigawatt data centers, and we can basically do this all funded from the cash flow of the company. But the move may also be defensive, and isn't without risks While the "all-in" spending binge from Zuckerberg is exciting, investors should also be wary of a few things. First, it appears Meta's AI super intelligence dream team will be essentially starting from scratch. This is likely due to Meta's recent efforts on its Llama 4 LLM coming up short of expectations, or at least falling further behind its other competitors than Zuckerberg would like. So, it appears Meta's latest attempt at leading AI is a bit of a bust, raising questions about the need to put all its chips into the pot, so to speak, at this moment. It has also been reported that Zuckerberg wasn't able to successfully acquire all the companies and talent that he wanted. In addition to Scale AI, Zuckerberg reportedly also wanted to acquire Mira Murati's Thinking Machines and Ilya Sustkever's SSI, but was rebuffed in both cases. It was also reported Zuckerberg extended billion-dollar offers to some of OpenAI's leadership team, but was also rebuffed. So, while Meta now has perhaps the most formidable AI "dream team" around, it isn't a "full" dream team necessarily. Finally, Meta has a history of throwing money at certain far-off ventures, without immediate tangible outcomes. Look no further than the Reality Labs segment, which is basically Zuckerberg's gambit to create the "next computing platform" of virtual reality goggles or glasses. Meta even changed its name from Facebook to Meta Platforms in 2021 to show its commitment to the effort. However, in 2024, three years later, that segment lost $17.7 billion, up from a $16.1 billion loss in 2023. Finally, Zuckerberg didn't really spell out what he exactly meant by an everyday consumer "super intelligence." While both the Reality Labs division and the concept of consumer super-intelligence may one day come to fruition, it's not assured -- even with Zuckerberg assembling an AI "dream team." So while this past month's spending is exciting, look for investors to get impatient if Meta's spending goes up without a corresponding growth in revenue. And yet, the spending makes Meta a must-own stock If one of today's current tech leaders reaches "super intelligence" before the others, it has the potential to disrupt the balance of power among today's Magnificent Seven. That's why any young person or growth investor should have exposure to Meta and its rivals, in spite of their massive AI spending today. If and when one of these companies "cracks the code" before others, it's possible the Magnificent Seven could become the Magnificent Three, Two... or even One. With his moves over the past month, Zuckerberg is investing heavily to make sure Meta is one of the leading candidates to become that "one." Investors should keep their ears out for more information when Meta reports earnings at the end of the month on July 30. Don't miss this second chance at a potentially lucrative opportunity Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $448,664!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $39,870!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $687,149!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join , and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.*Stock Advisor returns as of July 14, 2025 Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Billy Duberstein and/or his clients have positions in Apple, Meta Platforms, and Microsoft. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Apple, Meta Platforms, and Microsoft. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg Just Assembled a "Super Intelligence Avengers" Team That Could Totally Change the Game in Artificial Intelligence (AI). Here's Why That Makes Meta a "Must-Own" AI Stock. was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
1 No-Brainer Trillion-Dollar Stock to Buy Like There's No Tomorrow
Key Points Alphabet has an incredible track record of innovation. The company boasts several exciting long-term growth avenues. The stock trades at (very) reasonable levels. 10 stocks we like better than Alphabet › Companies with a market cap above $1 trillion are in a class of their own. They all have terrific businesses and have generally produced market-beating returns for years. And though it might seem odd to say that a corporation of this stature is being underrated, in my view, that's exactly what's happening with Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOG) (NASDAQ: GOOGL). The tech leader has lagged the market this year and trades at attractive levels relative to its growth potential, making the stock a no-brainer buy today. Here's why investors should seriously consider this stock. Multiple growth avenues Alphabet has been an innovator since its early days. Google wasn't the first or the only search engine around, not by a long shot. It just won the race to dominate the field. And Alphabet has never stopped improving this product. The company has made (and continues to make) numerous changes and tweaks to Google to enhance the user experience and help people find more relevant answers to their queries. Alphabet then pounced on the massive cloud computing opportunity through Google Cloud. The company is now leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) to offer a suite of AI-related services through its cloud computing arm. Furthermore, Alphabet acquired YouTube, the internet's leading video streaming platform, and now offers services that enable it to compete with traditional cable providers. Here's one more example: Alphabet owns Waymo, one of the leading companies working on self-driving vehicles. Alphabet's track record proves that it has been a perennial innovator. The past may not matter that much to investors, but the company's innovative efforts will continue to pay off for many, many years to come. First, Alphabet should remain the leading search engine company for a long time, a business that helps it generate billions in ad revenue. The digital advertising market is projected to continue its upward trajectory. Although some thought the rise of ChatGPT-like AI chatbots would decrease traffic on Google, Alphabet has adapted and now provides an AI Overview to its search engine. Second, AI and cloud computing will also prove to be massive long-term tailwinds, as they enable businesses to improve efficiency and productivity, which is something every company strives to achieve. Third, YouTube's streaming ambitions look highly promising. Although YouTube's main platform isn't directly comparable to Netflix (the former hosts a lot of user-generated content versus the TV shows and movies the latter offers), it's worth noting that in May, YouTube captured 12.5% of television viewing time in the U.S., significantly higher than Netflix's 7.5%. YouTube beating out the world's leading streaming service is still noteworthy, even if it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Higher engagement on the platform will lead to increased ad revenue for Alphabet over the long term. Lastly, Waymo operates ride-hailing services using its self-driving vehicles in several major U.S. cities, including San Francisco and Phoenix. Though it will take time, there is a good chance that these will become much more widespread and, eventually, meaningfully contribute to Alphabet's financial results. Alphabet is helping build the future, and in the future, the company will be rewarded for it. And so will the tech leader's shareholders. The price is (more than) right Alphabet's forward price-to-earnings ratio of 19.2 is slightly lower than the average for the communication services sector, which is 19.7. That's somewhat surprising, as market leaders with excellent growth prospects typically trade at a premium. Perhaps the market is factoring in the possibility that Alphabet may lose its Chrome browser due to an ongoing antitrust battle in the U.S. That's fair enough, but at current levels, the stock looks attractive even if regulators get what they want. To be clear, it will be a blow to Alphabet. However, given the company's incredible innovative culture -- which, in my view, is its biggest strength -- a significant cash flow of $74.9 billion over the trailing-12-month period, and multiple growth paths, most of which will remain untouched even in this worst-case scenario, the stock still looks like a no-brainer buy. Do the experts think Alphabet is a buy right now? The Motley Fool's expert analyst team, drawing on years of investing experience and deep analysis of thousands of stocks, leverages our proprietary Moneyball AI investing database to uncover top opportunities. They've just revealed their to buy now — did Alphabet make the list? When our Stock Advisor analyst team has a stock recommendation, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor's total average return is up 1,069% vs. just 180% for the S&P — that is beating the market by 888.61%!* Imagine if you were a Stock Advisor member when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $687,149!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,060,406!* The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 15, 2025 Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Prosper Junior Bakiny has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet and Netflix. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 1 No-Brainer Trillion-Dollar Stock to Buy Like There's No Tomorrow was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio