[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"article-openai-ipo-listing-guide-cfds-exposure-en":3,"article-related-openai-ipo-listing-guide-cfds-exposure-en":30,"series-industry-26d39990-07da-4ead-8ef2-4a268d91250d":83},{"id":4,"slug":5,"title":6,"content":7,"summary":8,"source":9,"source_url":10,"author":11,"image_url":12,"cover_image":12,"category":13,"language":14,"translated_content":11,"related_article_id":15,"keywords":16,"key_takeaways":22,"views":26,"created_at":27,"published_at":28,"topic_cluster_id":29},"26d39990-07da-4ead-8ef2-4a268d91250d","openai-ipo-listing-guide-cfds-exposure-en","OpenAI IPO lets you map the listing before it lands","\u003Cp data-speakable=\"summary\">This breaks down \u003Ca href=\"\u002Ftag\u002Fopenai\">OpenAI\u003C\u002Fa>’s possible IPO and gives you a copyable watchlist.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>I've been tracking OpenAI like a lot of people track a private company they know is going to become everyone’s problem eventually. The weird part is that the story keeps changing shape. One week it’s “maybe late 2026,” the next it’s “confidential filing,” then the structure changes, then the valuation rumors get louder, and somehow the actual useful details stay buried under marketing, speculation, and brokerage fluff.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>That’s what annoyed me about the Capital.com EU page on the \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcapital.com\u002Fen-eu\u002Flearn\u002Fipo\u002Fopenai-ipo\">OpenAI IPO\u003C\u002Fa>. It has the right pieces, but they’re scattered across timing, structure, revenue, risk, and trading access. If you’re a developer or a technically minded investor, you don’t need the cheerleading version. You need the mechanics: what changed, what matters, what to watch, and what you can actually do before the stock ever hits a tape.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>I pulled the page apart because the useful part isn’t “will OpenAI list someday?” Of course it might. The useful part is knowing which signals matter before the filing shows up and which ones are just noise dressed up as certainty.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>The source that triggered this breakdown is Capital.com EU’s OpenAI IPO guide, published on its learning hub and updated with references to OpenAI’s 2025 restructuring and 2026 IPO reporting. I’m also cross-checking the company’s own announcements on \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fopenai.com\u002F\">OpenAI\u003C\u002Fa>, plus reporting from \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.forbes.com\u002F\">Forbes\u003C\u002Fa>, \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.theguardian.com\u002F\">The Guardian\u003C\u002Fa>, and the \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.sec.gov\u002F\">SEC\u003C\u002Fa> for the filing mechanics. I’m not treating any rumor as fact unless it’s in a primary source or clearly labeled as reporting.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Stop asking for a date before the filing exists\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cblockquote>“OpenAI hasn’t publicly confirmed an official IPO date. However, reports in May 2026 said the company was preparing a confidential IPO filing...”\u003C\u002Fblockquote>\u003Cp>What this actually means is simple: there is no tradable certainty here yet. The market loves pretending a rumor is a schedule. It isn’t. A confidential filing is not a public filing, and a public filing is not a priced deal. Until the S-1 lands, the best anyone has is informed speculation.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cfigure class=\"my-6\">\u003Cimg src=\"https:\u002F\u002Fxxdpdyhzhpamafnrdkyq.supabase.co\u002Fstorage\u002Fv1\u002Fobject\u002Fpublic\u002Fcovers\u002Finline-1780391918561-lyib.png\" alt=\"OpenAI IPO lets you map the listing before it lands\" class=\"rounded-xl w-full\" loading=\"lazy\" \u002F>\u003C\u002Ffigure>\n\u003Cp>I ran into this exact mistake when I used to follow late-stage private companies like they were already listed. I’d anchor on a month, then spend the next six weeks reacting to headlines instead of reading the actual signals. That’s a bad habit. For IPOs, the filing path matters more than the date people keep repeating on X or in broker notes.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>How to apply it: build your checklist around milestones, not rumors. I’d watch for four things in order: confidential filing confirmation, public S-1, price range, final offering terms. If those aren’t visible, I treat “IPO date” chatter as background noise.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cul>\u003Cli>Confidential filing: suggests intent, not certainty.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Public S-1: gives you the real risk and financial picture.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Price range: tells you how the underwriters are framing demand.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>First trade: tells you what the market actually thinks.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Ful>\u003Cp>For the mechanics of how filings work, the SEC’s own \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.sec.gov\u002Ffast-answers\u002Fanswersipohtm.html\">IPO overview\u003C\u002Fa> is still the cleanest reference. It’s boring, which is usually a good sign.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>The restructuring is the real story, not the rumor mill\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cblockquote>“In October 2025, OpenAI completed a restructuring that created OpenAI Group PBC, a public benefit corporation...”\u003C\u002Fblockquote>\u003Cp>This is the part that matters more than the “when.” OpenAI didn’t just wake up and decide to list. It changed its corporate shape to make a public-market path more plausible. That means the company is trying to preserve mission language while making room for outside capital. Those two goals are always awkward together.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>The article says the new structure replaced the earlier capped-profit setup and gave OpenAI a clearer route to raising larger amounts of capital. That’s the key phrase. Public markets don’t care about vibes; they care about governance, control, disclosure, and whether the cap table makes sense. A public benefit corporation can be a bridge between mission and money, but it also invites scrutiny because investors will ask who really controls the thing and who gets paid first.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>I’ve seen this pattern before in smaller form: a company wants capital, but it also wants to keep a tight grip on product direction. That tension doesn’t disappear after incorporation. It just gets documented better. And once it’s documented, public investors start reading it like a contract, not a mission statement.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>How to apply it: if you’re trying to understand an IPO before it happens, read the structure first. Ask three questions: who controls the voting rights, what stake does the nonprofit or founder entity keep, and what rights do new public shareholders actually get? If the answers are fuzzy, the listing will be fuzzy too.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cul>\u003Cli>Look for voting control, not just ownership percentage.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Check whether the mission entity can block major moves.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Watch for any special share classes or governance carve-outs.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Ful>\u003Cp>OpenAI’s own restructuring announcement on \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fopenai.com\u002Findex\u002F\">its newsroom\u003C\u002Fa> is the primary source I’d start with before trusting any secondary summary.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Valuation rumors are not valuation\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cblockquote>“Several outlets said OpenAI was being discussed in the context of a possible IPO valuation approaching $1tn...”\u003C\u002Fblockquote>\u003Cp>What this actually means is that people are throwing around a number that sounds big enough to be important. That doesn’t make it the deal price. It doesn’t even make it the target. A rumored valuation is just a narrative about what the market might tolerate if the company shows up with enough growth and enough scarcity.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cfigure class=\"my-6\">\u003Cimg src=\"https:\u002F\u002Fxxdpdyhzhpamafnrdkyq.supabase.co\u002Fstorage\u002Fv1\u002Fobject\u002Fpublic\u002Fcovers\u002Finline-1780391923777-hvre.png\" alt=\"OpenAI IPO lets you map the listing before it lands\" class=\"rounded-xl w-full\" loading=\"lazy\" \u002F>\u003C\u002Ffigure>\n\u003Cp>The article also points to earlier private-market valuations above $500bn. That’s useful context, but I’d still treat both numbers as placeholders until a prospectus says otherwise. Private-market marks can be inflated by scarcity, strategic demand, and optionality. Public-market pricing has to survive actual buyers, actual float, and actual disclosure.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>I ran into this when comparing late-stage AI companies with public SaaS names. The private rounds always looked heroic on paper. Then the public comps would force the conversation back to revenue quality, margins, and growth durability. Public markets are rude like that, which is why they’re useful.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>How to apply it: don’t model OpenAI off a single headline valuation. Build a range. I’d anchor around three inputs: revenue growth, gross margin pressure from compute, and the size of the float actually sold. If the float is small and demand is hot, the opening price can detach from fundamentals fast. If the market cools, that same valuation narrative collapses just as fast.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>If you want a public-company comparison set, look at \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.microsoft.com\u002F\">Microsoft\u003C\u002Fa>, \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.google.com\u002F\">Alphabet\u003C\u002Fa>, and \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.meta.com\u002F\">Meta\u003C\u002Fa> only as rough reference points, not direct substitutes. OpenAI’s mix of model spend, partnerships, and governance is its own mess.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Revenue is real, but the cost base is the monster\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cblockquote>“OpenAI generates revenue through subscriptions, enterprise products, application programming interface (API) access and strategic partnerships.”\u003C\u002Fblockquote>\u003Cp>That line is the cleanest summary in the article, and it’s the one I’d keep. OpenAI is not a science project anymore. It has paid products, enterprise usage, \u003Ca href=\"\u002Ftag\u002Fapi\">API\u003C\u002Fa> demand, and partner-driven distribution. That’s a business. But the ugly side is the compute bill. Frontier AI is expensive in a way that most software companies never have to face.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>The article says annualized revenue was reported above $20bn in 2026, while compute and infrastructure costs stayed high. That’s exactly the tension investors will care about. Revenue growth gets headlines. Margin compression gets the earnings calls. If OpenAI goes public, everyone will want to know whether it can turn usage into durable cash flow or whether it’s just buying scale with more and more infrastructure spend.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>I’ve built products on APIs long enough to know how this movie goes. At first the unit economics look fine because usage is small. Then adoption spikes, \u003Ca href=\"\u002Ftag\u002Finference\">inference\u003C\u002Fa> costs show up, and suddenly every “cool feature” has a bill attached to it. OpenAI is that problem, just at a scale most teams never touch.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>How to apply it: don’t just track top-line growth. Track the cost of serving one unit of value. For OpenAI that means compute intensity, inference efficiency, enterprise retention, and whether paid plans actually expand margin or just subsidize more usage. If you’re building your own AI business, this is the lesson hiding in plain sight.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cul>\u003Cli>Subscriptions tell you about consumer willingness to pay.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Enterprise products tell you about workflow stickiness.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>API access tells you about developer adoption.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Compute spend tells you whether growth is expensive or absurd.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Ful>\u003Cp>For a primary-source view of OpenAI’s product direction, the company’s \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fopenai.com\u002Fnews\u002F\">news page\u003C\u002Fa> is better than any broker summary. It shows where the company is actually pushing.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Partnerships are the moat, and also the dependency\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cblockquote>“Microsoft has been one of its most important partners, integrating OpenAI technology into Azure, GitHub Copilot and Microsoft 365 Copilot.”\u003C\u002Fblockquote>\u003Cp>What this actually means is that OpenAI’s distribution story is partly borrowed. \u003Ca href=\"\u002Ftag\u002Fmicrosoft\">Microsoft\u003C\u002Fa> gives it scale, credibility, and infrastructure. That’s great until you remember that borrowed distribution comes with leverage of its own. The company gets reach, but it also gets dependency risk, partner negotiation risk, and the possibility that the partner becomes a competitor in all but name.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>The article also mentions the Stargate Project, the $500bn infrastructure initiative involving OpenAI, SoftBank, Oracle, and others. That’s the kind of thing that sounds abstract until you think about what it really is: a giant bet that future AI demand will justify even more chips, power, and data-center buildout. If that buildout slips, the growth story gets slower. If it succeeds, OpenAI gets more capacity but also more complexity.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>I’ve watched partner-heavy businesses get trapped by the very alliances that made them look strong. Everything works until procurement, pricing, or strategic priorities shift. Then the “ecosystem” starts feeling like a dependency graph with a nicer logo.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>How to apply it: if you’re evaluating OpenAI as a future public company, separate product strength from partner strength. Ask whether \u003Ca href=\"\u002Ftag\u002Fchatgpt\">ChatGPT\u003C\u002Fa> demand is sticky on its own, or whether a lot of the value is actually distribution through Microsoft and other infrastructure players. That distinction matters for pricing power.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>For partnership context, start with Microsoft’s own pages on \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.microsoft.com\u002Fen-us\u002Fai\">AI\u003C\u002Fa> and OpenAI’s announcements about infrastructure expansion. They tell you more than the brokerage gloss does.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Risk is the actual product in an IPO story\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cblockquote>“AI companies face growing scrutiny from regulators, policymakers and courts.”\u003C\u002Fblockquote>\u003Cp>This is the part brokers always push to the bottom, which is annoying because it’s the part that changes the deal. If OpenAI lists, investors won’t just be buying growth. They’ll be buying legal exposure, governance questions, model-safety scrutiny, copyright fights, and regulatory uncertainty around how the company trains and deploys its systems.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>The article notes that Musk’s claims were reportedly rejected in May 2026, which removes one legal cloud, but not the whole sky. That’s a decent reminder that one lawsuit is not the same thing as a clean legal environment. And for public companies, the SEC disclosure process itself adds more visibility into these risks, which can be good for transparency and bad for hype.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>I’ve been in enough product reviews to know that “we’ll handle compliance later” is not a strategy. In public markets, it becomes a line item. Once the company is listed, every security issue, copyright dispute, and governance fight gets translated into valuation pressure.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>How to apply it: if you’re scanning an IPO, read the risk section like it’s the real product spec. Look for litigation exposure, regulatory dependencies, concentration risk, and any language around training data or model safety. If the risk section is thin, that’s not a good sign. It means the company either isn’t being honest or hasn’t thought hard enough.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cul>\u003Cli>Copyright and training data remain a sector-wide issue.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Governance changes can trigger investor skepticism.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Regulatory review can slow listing timelines.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Ful>\u003Cp>For legal and filing context, the \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.sec.gov\u002Fedgar\u002Fsearch\u002F\">SEC EDGAR database\u003C\u002Fa> is where the real paperwork will land if and when OpenAI goes public.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>How to watch it like a developer, not a headline addict\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cblockquote>“Before any listing, investors and traders will usually watch for the public S-1 registration statement.”\u003C\u002Fblockquote>\u003Cp>That’s the practical bit, and it’s the one I’d actually use. If you’re a developer, you already know how to read a system by watching its interfaces, logs, and failure modes. Do the same here. Don’t obsess over social chatter. Watch the artifacts.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>What this actually means is that the S-1 is your API response from the company. It tells you what the business thinks matters, what the lawyers forced it to disclose, and what the underwriters are willing to put in writing. That’s a lot more valuable than a “sources familiar” headline.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>I ran into this mindset shift when I stopped reading IPO coverage as entertainment and started reading it like documentation. The closer you get to the filing, the less useful opinion becomes. The document itself is the signal.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>How to apply it: set a simple monitoring loop. Track OpenAI’s newsroom, the SEC filing search, and a couple of serious business desks. Ignore price predictions until you’ve seen the filing. Then compare the disclosed revenue mix, customer concentration, losses, and share structure against the earlier hype.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cul>\u003Cli>Primary sources first: OpenAI and SEC.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Secondary sources second: Reuters, Forbes, The Guardian.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli>Trading access third: only after the terms are public.\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Ful>\u003Cp>If you want a clean market-news feed, Reuters is usually less noisy than social platforms, and that matters when timing is still uncertain.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>The template you can copy\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cpre>\u003Ccode># OpenAI IPO watchlist template\n\n## 1) Filing status\n- Confidential filing: [yes\u002Fno\u002Funknown]\n- Public S-1 filed: [yes\u002Fno]\n- Exchange venue: [Nasdaq \u002F NYSE \u002F unknown]\n- Expected listing window: [date or range]\n\n## 2) Corporate structure\n- Listing entity: [name]\n- Control holder: [founder\u002Fnonprofit\u002Fboard\u002Fother]\n- Share classes: [single \u002F dual \u002F other]\n- Governance risks: [notes]\n\n## 3) Business model\n- Consumer subscriptions: [notes]\n- Enterprise products: [notes]\n- API revenue: [notes]\n- Strategic partnerships: [notes]\n\n## 4) Unit economics to watch\n- Reported revenue: [number]\n- Revenue growth: [number]\n- Compute\u002Finfrastructure spend: [number]\n- Margin trend: [up\u002Fdown\u002Funknown]\n- Cash burn: [number]\n\n## 5) Risk checklist\n- Regulatory risk: [low\u002Fmed\u002Fhigh]\n- Legal risk: [low\u002Fmed\u002Fhigh]\n- Copyright risk: [low\u002Fmed\u002Fhigh]\n- Competition risk: [low\u002Fmed\u002Fhigh]\n- Partner dependency risk: [low\u002Fmed\u002Fhigh]\n\n## 6) News sources\n- OpenAI newsroom: https:\u002F\u002Fopenai.com\u002Fnews\u002F\n- SEC filings: https:\u002F\u002Fwww.sec.gov\u002Fedgar\u002Fsearch\u002F\n- Reuters: https:\u002F\u002Fwww.reuters.com\u002F\n- Forbes: https:\u002F\u002Fwww.forbes.com\u002F\n- The Guardian: https:\u002F\u002Fwww.theguardian.com\u002F\n\n## 7) My decision rules\n- If there is no S-1, I do not model a final valuation.\n- If governance is unclear, I reduce conviction.\n- If compute costs outpace revenue quality, I wait.\n- If the float is tiny and hype is huge, I expect volatility.\n\n## 8) Copyable alert prompt\n\"Track OpenAI IPO signals: filing status, S-1, governance, revenue mix, compute costs, legal risk, and partner dependency. Summarize only primary-source updates and label rumors clearly.\"\u003C\u002Fcode>\u003C\u002Fpre>\u003Cp>I’m not pretending this template tells you whether to buy anything. It doesn’t. What it does is force the right questions in the right order, which is usually the difference between informed and merely enthusiastic.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>Original source: Capital.com EU’s OpenAI IPO guide at \u003Ca href=\"https:\u002F\u002Fcapital.com\u002Fen-eu\u002Flearn\u002Fipo\u002Fopenai-ipo\">https:\u002F\u002Fcapital.com\u002Fen-eu\u002Flearn\u002Fipo\u002Fopenai-ipo\u003C\u002Fa>. My breakdown is a derivative read of that article, with added commentary, source checking, and a copyable monitoring template built from the same public signals.\u003C\u002Fp>","A developer-friendly breakdown of OpenAI’s possible IPO, what moves valuation, and how to prep a copyable watchlist.","capital.com","https:\u002F\u002Fcapital.com\u002Fen-eu\u002Flearn\u002Fipo\u002Fopenai-ipo",null,"https:\u002F\u002Fxxdpdyhzhpamafnrdkyq.supabase.co\u002Fstorage\u002Fv1\u002Fobject\u002Fpublic\u002Fcovers\u002Finline-1780391918561-lyib.png","industry","en","bbb4c365-ee4c-44af-b1c8-ff6d82b17a91",[17,18,19,20,21],"OpenAI IPO","S-1 filing","AI valuation","public benefit corporation","CFD trading",[23,24,25],"Don’t anchor on an IPO date before the S-1 exists.","OpenAI’s restructuring matters more than rumor-driven valuation chatter.","Track revenue, compute costs, governance, and partner dependency before any listing.",2,"2026-06-02T09:18:08.11464+00:00","2026-06-02T09:18:08.102+00:00","50ad070c-8891-4ccc-a7ee-038aa8918c86",{"tags":31,"relatedLang":42,"relatedPosts":46},[32,34,36,38,40],{"name":20,"slug":33},"public-benefit-corporation",{"name":18,"slug":35},"s-1-filing",{"name":19,"slug":37},"ai-valuation",{"name":17,"slug":39},"openai-ipo",{"name":21,"slug":41},"cfd-trading",{"id":15,"slug":43,"title":44,"language":45},"openai-ipo-listing-guide-cfds-exposure-zh","OpenAI IPO 先看文件再看價","zh",[47,53,59,65,71,77],{"id":48,"slug":49,"title":50,"cover_image":51,"image_url":51,"created_at":52,"category":13},"af3fd811-1233-4c99-955c-ea199afd91d7","korea-nvidia-talks-ai-factory-push-en","Korea’s Nvidia talks point to an AI factory push","https:\u002F\u002Fxxdpdyhzhpamafnrdkyq.supabase.co\u002Fstorage\u002Fv1\u002Fobject\u002Fpublic\u002Fcovers\u002Finline-1781057870737-hb3x.png","2026-06-10T02:17:21.544572+00:00",{"id":54,"slug":55,"title":56,"cover_image":57,"image_url":57,"created_at":58,"category":13},"72823fc3-fb0c-41fa-ba83-83eb7cc3880b","openai-should-not-rush-its-ipo-en","OpenAI should not rush its IPO just to win the AI race","https:\u002F\u002Fxxdpdyhzhpamafnrdkyq.supabase.co\u002Fstorage\u002Fv1\u002Fobject\u002Fpublic\u002Fcovers\u002Finline-1781053364904-2rcp.png","2026-06-10T01:02:20.320813+00:00",{"id":60,"slug":61,"title":62,"cover_image":63,"image_url":63,"created_at":64,"category":13},"73c81054-d5b7-4fb9-8487-c93d603ff85b","openai-europe-privacy-policy-en","OpenAI updates its Europe privacy policy","https:\u002F\u002Fxxdpdyhzhpamafnrdkyq.supabase.co\u002Fstorage\u002Fv1\u002Fobject\u002Fpublic\u002Fcovers\u002Finline-1781052478315-n5wv.png","2026-06-10T00:47:31.644415+00:00",{"id":66,"slug":67,"title":68,"cover_image":69,"image_url":69,"created_at":70,"category":13},"60f9f257-29a3-42fc-94a0-e781cae297a0","openai-ads-sensitive-chats-policy-en","OpenAI is right to keep ads out of sensitive chats","https:\u002F\u002Fxxdpdyhzhpamafnrdkyq.supabase.co\u002Fstorage\u002Fv1\u002Fobject\u002Fpublic\u002Fcovers\u002Finline-1781051570830-gx73.png","2026-06-10T00:32:23.894911+00:00",{"id":72,"slug":73,"title":74,"cover_image":75,"image_url":75,"created_at":76,"category":13},"4410b717-f1b6-4a96-854b-60dd47cc933e","ai-bootlegs-streaming-royalties-stick-figure-en","AI bootlegs are already draining streaming royalties","https:\u002F\u002Fxxdpdyhzhpamafnrdkyq.supabase.co\u002Fstorage\u002Fv1\u002Fobject\u002Fpublic\u002Fcovers\u002Finline-1781050678990-9idm.png","2026-06-10T00:17:31.471242+00:00",{"id":78,"slug":79,"title":80,"cover_image":81,"image_url":81,"created_at":82,"category":13},"317dc8b9-9ab1-4d29-8741-a50d795f7727","amd-microsoft-windows-ml-acceleration-en","AMD and Microsoft push Windows ML on GPU and NPU","https:\u002F\u002Fxxdpdyhzhpamafnrdkyq.supabase.co\u002Fstorage\u002Fv1\u002Fobject\u002Fpublic\u002Fcovers\u002Finline-1781047979576-a01a.png","2026-06-09T23:32:31.891479+00:00",[84,89,94,99,104,109,114,119,124,129],{"id":85,"slug":86,"title":87,"created_at":88},"d35a1bd9-e709-412e-a2df-392df1dc572a","ai-impact-2026-developments-market-en","AI's Impact in 2026: Key Developments and Market Shifts","2026-03-25T16:20:33.205823+00:00",{"id":90,"slug":91,"title":92,"created_at":93},"5ed27921-5fd6-492e-8c59-78393bf37710","trumps-ai-legislative-framework-en","Trump's AI Legislative Framework: What's Inside?","2026-03-25T16:22:20.005325+00:00",{"id":95,"slug":96,"title":97,"created_at":98},"e454a642-f03c-4794-b185-5f651aebbaca","nvidia-gtc-2026-key-highlights-innovations-en","NVIDIA GTC 2026: Key Highlights and Innovations","2026-03-25T16:22:47.882615+00:00",{"id":100,"slug":101,"title":102,"created_at":103},"0ebb5b16-774a-4922-945d-5f2ce1df5a6d","claude-usage-diversifies-learning-curves-en","Claude Usage Diversifies, Learning Curves Emerge","2026-03-25T16:25:50.770376+00:00",{"id":105,"slug":106,"title":107,"created_at":108},"69934e86-2fc5-4280-8223-7b917a48ace8","openclaw-ai-commoditization-concerns-en","OpenClaw's Rise Raises Concerns of AI Model Commoditization","2026-03-25T16:26:30.582047+00:00",{"id":110,"slug":111,"title":112,"created_at":113},"b4b2575b-2ac8-46b2-b90e-ab1d7c060797","google-gemini-ai-rollout-2026-en","Google's Gemini AI Rollout Extended to 2026","2026-03-25T16:28:14.808842+00:00",{"id":115,"slug":116,"title":117,"created_at":118},"6e18bc65-42ae-4ad0-b564-67d7f66b979e","meta-llama4-fabricated-results-scandal-en","Meta's Llama 4 Scandal: Fabricated AI Test Results Unveiled","2026-03-25T16:29:15.482836+00:00",{"id":120,"slug":121,"title":122,"created_at":123},"bf888e9d-08be-4f47-996c-7b24b5ab3500","accenture-mistral-ai-deployment-en","Accenture and Mistral AI Team Up for AI Deployment","2026-03-25T16:31:01.894655+00:00",{"id":125,"slug":126,"title":127,"created_at":128},"5382b536-fad2-49c6-ac85-9eb2bae49f35","mistral-ai-high-stakes-2026-en","Mistral AI: Facing High Stakes in 2026","2026-03-25T16:31:39.941974+00:00",{"id":130,"slug":131,"title":132,"created_at":133},"9da3d2d6-b669-4971-ba1d-17fdb3548ed5","cursors-meteoric-rise-pressures-en","Cursor's Meteoric Rise Faces Industry Pressures","2026-03-25T16:32:21.899217+00:00"]