>>> US Close Dow +0.43% S&P +0.27% Nasdaq +0.37% Russell -0.55%

Closing Market Summary: Nasdaq Composite hits record high ahead of inflation data
With little in the way of macro catalysts or corporate news, the major averages traded sideways for much of the session before an uptick in buying activity saw the Nasdaq Composite (+0.4%) establish a new record high (21,891.42) and closing high, while the S&P 500 (+0.3%) and DJIA (+0.4%) captured record closing highs of their own.

The major averages benefitted from broad-based sector strength, with the communication services sector (+1.7%) leading the way, supported by strong leadership in its mega-cap components, Alphabet (GOOG 239.94, +5.78, +2.47%) and Meta Platforms (META 765.70, +13.40, +1.78%).

Mega-caps as a unit had a relatively subdued session, though they especially benefitted from the late afternoon buying pickup. The Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF (+0.3%) closed with a decent gain after spending the day oscillating around its flatline.

Yesterday's top movers, the information technology (flat) and consumer discretionary (+0.1%) sectors, clawed just above their opening levels after a long stint in negative territory, though their improvement was particularly supportive to the final standings of the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite.

While today's advances were modest in nature, they were broad-based, as only the materials (-1.6%), industrials (-0.7%), and real estate (-0.1%) sectors finished lower.

Despite a scarcity of corporate headlines, UnitedHealth (UNH 348.18, +27.93, +8.72%) made a significant upward move following amendments to the company's guidance disclosure.

Meanwhile, Apple (AAPL 234.35, -3.53, -1.48%) traded lower following the company's annual product launch event, with investor focus on iPhone pricing. The iPhone Air will debut at $999 as the slimmer entry model, while the price of the iPhone Pro rose by $100 to $1,099.

There were no notable economic data releases today, though attention centered on the preliminary benchmark revision to payroll growth estimates for March 2024-March 2025. The revision showed a record overstatement of 911,000 jobs, confirming expectations for a significant downward adjustment.

The stock market had a muted reaction to the revision, as rate cut expectations hardly changed in response. The market is still fully pricing in a 25-basis point rate cut at the September FOMC meeting, while the CME FedWatch assigns an 8.2% probability of a 50-basis point cut, down from 10.6% yesterday.

While smaller cap indices might have gained momentum in response to heightened expectations for a 50-basis point cut, the Russell 2000 retreated 0.6%, with the S&P Mid Cap 400 slipping 0.9%.

Market focus now turns to tomorrow's release of August PPI data, with CPI to follow on Friday. Those inflation readings, if hotter than expected, could revive concerns about the broader health of the economy and test the market's conviction in its current rate cut expectations for the October and December FOMC meetings.

U.S. Treasuries retreated on Tuesday, making for a shallow pullback after four days of gains that sent yields to their lowest levels in at least three months. There was some light buying after the U.S. Treasury kicked off this week's note and bond auction slate with a strong sale of 3-year notes that saw stellar foreign demand. The 2-year note yield settled up five basis points to 3.54% and the 10-year note yield settled up three basis points to 4.72%.
  • Nasdaq Composite: +13.3% YTD
  • S&P 500: +10.7% YTD
  • DJIA: +7.4% YTD
  • Russell 2000: +6.8% YTD
  • S&P Mid Cap 400: +4.7% YTD

Reviewing today's economic data:
  • The NFIB Small Business Optimism Index rose to 100.8 in August from 100.3 in July.

WWD : François-Henri Pinault on the Changing of the Guard at Kering

François-Henri Pinault on the Changing of the Guard at Kering
The luxury titan reflected on his transformative and eventful 20 years helming the French luxury group before officially passing the torch to Renault executive Luca de Meo.

PARIS – “It’s not up to the company to adapt to the family that controls it; it’s up to the family to adapt to the needs of the company. It’s the right time for Kering to have a new CEO, to have a new perspective, a new vision.”

So says François−Henri Pinault, who officially passes the chief executive officer torch to former Renault Group executive Luca de Meo this month after navigating the family-controlled conglomerate through multiple transformations, and making it a serious contender in the world of luxury goods.

The French business titan, who maintains the chairman role, sat down with WWD on Monday at Kering headquarters here to discuss his fruitful and eventful 20-year tenure as CEO, the day before shareholders are to ratify de Meo as Pinault’s successor, effective Sept. 15.

Wearing a light blue shirt and gray pants, and sounding relaxed and sanguine, Pinault reflected on the key decisions and instincts that led him to shed the retail components of his family’s conglomerate — founded in 1962 by his father François — and charge headlong into the high-margin fashion business.

He also spoke excitedly about Kering’s future under de Meo, who was spotted in the corridors lugging a backpack and conversing rapidly in Italian with a colleague.

Viewed as a whole, Pinault’s tenure at Kering and previous iterations of the French group was a vibrant one, during which many of its marquee fashion houses grew rapidly.

According to Kering reference documents, between 2005 and 2024, revenues were multiplied by 18 at Saint Laurent and 11 at Bottega Veneta, fueled by daring designer appointments and rapid retail expansion. The group does not break out figures for Balenciaga, but market sources estimate that revenues at the French house grew more than 30 times over the same period.

What’s more, under Pinault’s leadership, overall luxury revenues were multiplied by six, and profit by a factor of seven, Kering reference documents also show.

To be sure, the last few years have been more challenging, with Gucci rapidly losing momentum — and Kering’s debt load swelling after an acquisition spree that included Creed, Maui Jim, a 30 percent stake in Valentino, and large chunks of prime real estate.

Taking Over
But when Pinault took over the CEO reins from Serge Weinberg at age 43 in 2005, he faced a similar financial scenario, his main goal then being to maximize cash generation and reduce the group’s then-debt load of 4.5 billion euros.

He also faced some skepticism in the market, given that what was then PPR was a relatively new player in European luxury.

The Pinault family came onto the international fashion radar in 1999 when it agreed to buy 40 percent of Gucci Group via its distribution conglomerate Pinault-Printemps-Redoute or PPR, which ran department stores, furniture and electronics chains, and a mail-order business.

PPR began edging out of retail in 2006 when it sold the Printemps retail chain, following up with a stock market listing for African trading company CFAO in 2009 and a sale of the Conforama furniture chain to Steinhoff International in 2010.

In 2013, it finally turned a page on its retail past and became Kering, initially a fashion and accessories specialist in the luxury and sport-lifestyle segments, and later exiting the latter segment.

Indeed, after shedding retail and sport-lifestyle holdings, Kering was whittled down to a luxury pure player with revenues just north of 3 billion euros.

Yet even then, Pinault had a fluid view of the sector: “Ferrari is a luxury car. Falcon is a luxury plane. It’s a very, very large universe,” he told WWD in a 2005 interview. “What we call luxury is not only fashion and accessories. For me, luxury is much wider than that.”

Under his leadership, Kering took many headline-making risks, notably taking a chance on Gucci studio talent Alessandro Michele in 2015, rapidly changing the fortunes of the Italian fashion house, and the same year tapping underground Georgian designer Demna from the nascent Vetements brand to take the creative helm of Balenciaga, unleashing fashion fireworks galore — and explosive growth.

An earnest and thoughtful executive with a warm, open demeanor, Pinault was seated at Monday’s interview under a large black-and-white painting of an owl, the mascot for Kering — and a metaphor for his watchful eyes on shifting consumer sentiment and economic fluctuations.
Over a wide-ranging, one-hour conversation, Pinault, 63, spoke frankly about his initial steep learning curve, his entrepreneurial streak, his pioneering sustainability initiatives, and his new priorities:

WWD: You’ve been piloting this group as CEO for 20 years, through important transformations, through boom times and lean times. How does it feel to give up the CEO reins?

François−Henri Pinault: I remain the reference shareholder, and I remain president (of the board of directors) so I don’t feel like I’m leaving. But still, it makes me realize what I’ve done for 20 years, and it was an extraordinary adventure. First, I was very lucky to have these responsibilities very early on. I was 43 years old, so I’m very, very grateful for that. At the time, my father was around my age, he was 65 or 66, and I’m 63. Above all, he let me do it, he trusted me from the beginning… and I realize it even more now that it’s my turn to pass the baton on the operational part.

I still have the feeling that we’re at the very beginning: What’s exciting is to see what Kering will become… and that’s why I’m very happy to have found Luca because we have someone who is there to build. He’s not there to take over something and manage it as best as possible. He’s here to bring something new, a new vision, a breath of fresh air, and a new idea. And I like that.

WWD: Even though the appointment of a new Kering CEO felt sudden to some, how far back can you trace the prospect of an eventual handover?

F-H.P.: I’ve been preparing for it for several years now. When my father gave me the responsibility for the group in 2005, first of all, I wasn’t succeeding my father, I was succeeding Serge Weinberg. But he told me two things: If I were your age, I would want to have full responsibility for the group. And for me, at 65 or 66, I don’t want to cling to power at all costs. It’s always very dangerous to hold on beyond a certain age. And so I told myself, “‘Wow, I hope that when the time comes, I’ll be able to do that, too.”

One special thing about me: I love numbers, and I told myself 20 years is a good symbol, and in 20 years means I’ll be 63. So I set that goal for myself. Not at the very beginning, but somewhere between 2010 and 2015, I told myself 20 years would be an important milestone. I’ll keep that in mind. And when the dates approached, I started the (succession) process quite naturally.

It’s not an easy decision, but it’s a very rewarding one to make it. That’s why you have to tell yourself what matters is not me. It’s the interest of the company. The group is moving into a new phase of its development. We need a new vision, new perspectives.

WWD: Before taking the helm of Kering, you had been running CFAO, Fnac and Artémis. Did having a bit of an outsider perspective then help you?

F-H.P.: The group was in good health in 2005. I could have chosen to manage it in the best possible way. But when he entrusted me with the reins, my father said. “What will your mark be? Think about what you want to do with the group later. That’s what’s important.” That had a big impact on me. And so that’s how I came to suggest this transformation.

Having had quite a bit of experience in distribution, even if it wasn’t luxury distribution, helped me a lot, especially the technology part. At Fnac, we launched e-commerce in 1997, so very, very early. Hence I had a real digital culture when I arrived and that served me well at Kering.

During the first phase, between 2005 and 2012 when I was transforming the group, I still managed the divisions, including Rexel, Fnac, etc. As a conglomerate, I had interactions with Robert Polet (then head of Gucci Group) and interactions from time to time with a few brands. During that phase I took the time to learn about luxury.

I understood that our (luxury) portfolio was very coherent, but that the houses had much more potential than what they had achieved up until then. I was convinced of that. There was really something to be done, but differently. When you’re a challenger in an industry, there’s no point in trying to copy-paste what those bigger than you have done. Of course, you have to understand what they do, what they do well, and what they don’t do so well. But above all, you need your own vision, your own way of doing things. I’ve always been obsessed with changing the rules of the game.

WWD: Also at the time of your appointment, PPR had faced skepticism in the industry for its being a newcomer in the luxury realm. How do you think Kering earned its recognition?

F-H.P.: In 2005, PPR was a conglomerate of eight divisions… and the luxury division was the smallest. So at the beginning, when you’re a conglomerate, you don’t directly manage the businesses because the businesses are too different… The organization of the group above the brands has changed enormously and we have brought luxury expertise into the group’s structures that we didn’t have before. And then we moved quite quickly to reposition the brands. It was in 2012 that I took over all the luxury brand CEOs directly. The question was, “How do we become an international player?”

The priority became the development of the brands and their positioning, and that’s where we changed the rules a bit… We took the gamble of differentiating ourselves through the creative component and less through the savoir-faire aspect. Heritage is also very important in luxury, but we said to ourselves, if we do that like everyone else; it’s going to take a very long time. So I thought, why not use this creative component to create a difference? And that’s when we changed artistic directors to ones with a stronger creative point of view, and a more global vision of the house. We harmonized the brand’s vision across all points of expression.

This very global 360-degree approach to the aesthetics of a house that we pushed quite far allowed us to create these differences, this visibility, this desirability. We know fashion is cyclical, and we increased the cyclical aspect of the group by doing that, but that’s what allowed us to change the dimension of the houses, and usher in a vision of a luxury that is a little more modern, a little more dynamic, but also consistent.

We developed a vision of creativity which is built over time. And we did that first with Hedi (Slimane at Saint Laurent), then with Alessandro (Michele at Gucci) and Demna (at Gucci), where we didn’t change our aesthetic every six months or every year. There was a very long continuity to establish a strong aesthetic. And that’s what we managed to do in our main brands. The figures speak for themselves.

Achievements
WWD: Putting modesty aside for moment, can you mention some proud achievements during your tenure as CEO of Kering?

F-H.P.: In a more entrepreneurial dimension, there is Kering Eyewear. I’m very proud of Kering Eyewear because, first of all, no one had done it before, to internalize what had been a licensed business. The licenses we bought were worth around 300 million… and we grew it to 1.6 billion. So that’s a real entrepreneurial success, and we’re still at the beginning. We changed the rules of the game for internalizing licenses. It’s something we anticipated, and everyone followed.

On a smaller scale, there is Qeelin. In the early 2010s, China was driving a lot of growth in the luxury sector and we asked ourselves very early on why there wouldn’t be a luxury brand in China? And we bought Qeelin in 2012 and it’s grown tenfold, if I’m not mistaken. So, in the jewelry sector, here’s a Chinese brand based on Chinese codes and Chinese culture that is developing essentially in China and is doing very well, and we’re continuing to do so. It’s not what will determine the size of the group tomorrow. But I remain very optimistic about this initiative.


WWD: Beyond business, you also brought your own convictions to the group about planet and people.

F-H.P.: It’s linked to my upbringing. That’s pretty clear on the environmental side. I was surrounded by women — my mother, my first wife — who were very, very sensitive to that. And my father always told me that a business can’t just be about constantly seeking profit. Businesses have responsibilities that go beyond the economic or financial objectives that we set for ourselves.

It became obvious in 2007-2008 that sustainable development was part of the definition of modern luxury. You cannot develop a true luxury brand that does not take into consideration respect for the planet, the preservation of its own resources, its know-how.

For example, we developed leather tanning processes that don’t use heavy metals, and we open-source them. It’s about inspiring others and convincing others to follow us. That’s the only way we can truly have an impact. So we have contributed to the creation of the Fashion Pact and its development. There’s also all the work we’ve done on regenerative agriculture and water protection. We’re going very far on that.

And then there’s social responsibility. Again, women have had a big impact on me, especially Salma (Hayek) who brought to my attention the reality of violence against women. Our collaborators are more than 60 percent women and our clientele is overwhelmingly female. And so women’s causes, including combating violence against women, became another important dimension and purpose for the group.


WWD: This is not the first time that succession at a family-controlled luxury group went to a non-family member. What would you say is the value of having a fresh perspective?

F-H.P.: It’s not up to the company to adapt to the family that controls it; it’s up to the family to adapt to the needs of the company. It’s the right time for Kering to have a new CEO, to have a new perspective, a new vision.

It’s not just about being family, it’s first about having the skills. But the question didn’t arise since it’s not on the agenda. For the third generation, they are still too young. On the other hand, it was the right time for the group. And so we had this very, very structured process with Serge (Weinberg) and the nomination committee, and Luca emerged quite naturally as the ideal candidate for the group.

What would be very dangerous is for the company to wait until someone in the family is ready to make the change. The company has its own life, its own needs. And it was the right time. And it just so happened that at that moment, a candidate from outside the family was needed.

WWD: Is there still room for taking risks in fashion? In your 20 years leading Kering, what were some of the risks you took that you’re most grateful for, and why?

F-H.P.: You can’t claim to be successful if you don’t take risks. Afterwards, there are different types of risk. And in the case of Kering, yes, we took a risk taking on artistic director profiles who have a very precise, very sharp creative vision, without trying to please everyone. We did that with Alessandro, with Demna, and Matthieu (Blazy at Bottega Veneta) too. We’ve taken entrepreneurial risks like Kering Eyewear.


The point is taking the right risks and knowing how to backtrack. It’s not easy, but you must have this ability to regularly question yourself, to not be afraid to change when you’ve made a mistake.

WWD: What do you think Kering has brought to the luxury sector over the past 20 years?

F-H.P.: In the luxury sector, we brought back brands that were either dormant or in difficulty in the 2000s, such as Saint Laurent, Balenciaga and Bottega Veneta, and built them into another dimension. And so we have enriched the competition in the luxury sector, which is always a very good thing.

Also, highlighting and pushing the creative dimension of luxury undoubtedly contributed greatly to introducing younger generations to luxury. We weren’t the only ones, but I think we contributed to that, too.

WWD: Can you describe what your role will be as president of the board of directors?

F-H.P.: I am responsible for leading the board of directors, and the role of the board itself is to make the strategic choices that will be proposed based on the options that will be proposed by the new CEO.

I know that there is a rumor in the market that I will remain very hands-on. Not at all. I know how important it was that I was given freedom of action on my first day in 2005. My father never wanted to intervene, which was critical for the transformation we managed to achieve. And so today, when I’m bringing in a very great new CEO to lead Kering, there’s no way I’m going to stop him and make decisions for him. I want to give him all the leeway possible to express himself with all the talent he has.


WWD: We hear Mr. de Meo has been quite active in getting acclimated to the group since his eventual appointment was announced in June. Can you share some of your first impressions?

F-H.P.: It’s true that Luca is a very active person, so he’s already met almost all of the CEOs, almost all of the artistic directors, and all of the group’s corporate directors. He’s eager to get started, and he saw all those people without me, obviously.

But the feedback I have from the collaborators is that he has a lot of charisma, along with humility and simplicity in his contacts. He fits the group’s culture well. He’s someone who has a real sense of urgency. He’s constantly thinking about the priorities, brand by brand, from the discussions he’s had. What’s really interesting is that even though he doesn’t know the luxury world, he has a real sensitivity to brands. Right away, he got into questions about brands, brand positioning. He loves the product. He visited all our stores in Paris.

He’s met a lot of people from outside, too, and he’s really, really keen to understand why things are done the way they are in the luxury sector before changing them. What’s certain is that he’s someone who’s going to bring new things. It’s about bringing a new vision, new ideas to help the group evolve in its new phase. It’s a young group, there’s plenty to do. He already has some very interesting ideas. It’s very exciting.

WWD: Relinquishing the CEO role at Kering will free you up for other projects and responsibilities. What will be some of the key subjects and priorities you will turn to?


F-H.P.: I’m the head of the board of directors, and I’ll be working on Artémis, where we still have a number of important assets. I’ll be looking after them full-time and the long-term diversification of this family holding. So, it’s a very interesting subject. I’m not about to go fishing.

WWD: What will you miss in the first months after having passed the baton of CEO of Kering?

F-H.P.: I’m really not like that. I think more about what’s to come more than the past. We have extraordinary teams here, and I entrust them to Luca. I know he will be able to do it perfectly well. I will find others at Artémis.

It’s true that I became attached to the artistic directors, to many collaborators of the group and I will see them less often, by definition. But it’s not a regret. It’s a natural evolution and it’s good for them, too. They will have the chance to have a new, different leader, who has different ideas. It’s very enriching for everyone.

WWD: You have new designers, and very accomplished ones, at three of Kering’s most prominent fashion houses. What does this say about the nature of your group and its place in the fashion firmament?

F-H.P.: First of all, that means we’re still very attractive. We’ve never had a problem recruiting talent. Even if we have difficulties — I don’t hide that — the quality of our houses, and the quality of the group’s culture remains very, very attractive. The proof is that these talents have joined us. Yes, I’m very proud to have convinced these artistic directors to join us and express themselves at Kering.


WWD: So should we expect you to attend the Milan and Paris shows later this month?

F-H.P.: Yes, but discreetly. It’s no longer my place to be in the front row. But you might find me backstage.

>>> US Early premarket gappers

Early premarket gappers
  • Gapping up:
    • WOLF +65.9%, TRML +57.7%, NBIS +51.2%, GMHS +31.2%, TECK +14.1%, AMBO +10.9%, CGEM +6.6%, CRWV +6.6%, UUUU +4.2%, SPAI +4%, YEXT +3.2%, NEXT +3%, EVTL +2.9%, NG +2.2%, CLBK +2.1%, RAIL +1.7%, RARE +1.6%, DEC +1.6%, WIX +1.3%, TTE +1.1%, ALNY +1%, AVO +1%
  • Gapping down:
    • PACS -16.1%, PL -11.1%, AIRO -8.7%, GILT -5.5%, MOMO -4.9%, FOXA -4.8%, LTM -3.1%, MAMA -2.6%, CHPT -2.3%, DOOO -2.1%, DNTH -2.1%, CASY -1.8%, NWSA -1.3%, DRS -1.3%, DXC -1.2%, DELL -0.9%

>>> Europe : Brokers Upgrades & Downgrades - 9th of September 2025 V2(+)

>>> Up
* Aker BP Raised to Buy at SpareBank; PT 290 kroner
* Alibaba ADRs PT Raised to $190 from $145 at Barclays
* Basler PT Raised to 21 euros from 15 euros at Berenberg
* Castellum Raised to Neutral at Goldman; PT 98 kronor
* CCC Raised to Outperform at Oddo BHF; PT 250 zloty
* Comer Industries Raised to Buy at Alantra Capital Markets
* Endomines Finland Raised to Reduce at Evli Bank; PT 27 euros
* Femsa ADRs Raised to Buy at Citi; PT $97
* Givaudan Raised to Outperform at Davy (+)
* Hyatt Raised to Buy at Citi; PT $167
* Petronor E&P Raised to Buy at SpareBank; PT 13 kroner
* Publicis Raised to Outperform at Oddo BHF; PT 110 euros
* PVA TePla PT Raised to 39 euros from 29 euros at Berenberg
* Segro Raised to Buy at Goldman; PT 730 pence
* UMG Raised to Buy at Citi; PT 29 euros

>>> Down
* Aroundtown Cut to Neutral at Goldman; PT 3.20 euros
* BCP Cut to Neutral at JPMorgan; PT 75 euro cents
* Commerzbank Cut to Neutral at JPMorgan; PT 33 euros
* International Workplace Cut to Hold at Peel Hunt; PT 199 pence
* Lululemon Cut to Sector Weight at KeyBanc
* Porsche Cut to Sell at Rothschild & Co Redburn; PT 40 euros
* Seadrill Cut to Neutral at SpareBank; PT $35
* Shelf Drilling Cut to Neutral at SpareBank; PT 14 kroner
* Solstad Maritime Holding Cut to Neutral at Clarksons (+)

>>> Initiation
* Eckert & Ziegler Rated New Buy at Berenberg; PT 24 euros
* Hensoldt Rated New Equal-Weight at Barclays; PT 88 euros
* Leonardo Rated New Equal-Weight at Barclays; PT 51 euros
* Rheinmetall Rated New Overweight at Barclays; PT 2,050 euros
* Rosebank Rated New Overweight at Barclays; PT 430 pence
* Saab Rated New Underweight at Barclays; PT 395 kronor

>>> Call
* Eckert & Ziegler a Leader in Niche Market, New Buy at Berenberg
* JPMorgan Constructive on Banks, Deutsche Bank on Catalyst Watch
* Publicis Upgraded at Oddo BHF on Better Momentum, Valuation

TechCrunch : Nuclear startup Deep Fission goes public isocial media feel ‘fake’

Nuclear startup Deep Fission goes public in a curious SPAC

Nuclear startup Deep Fission announced Monday that it has gone public in a reverse merger, netting the company $30 million.

No, it’s not 2021.

The startup is proposing to build small, cylindrical nuclear power plants and lower them into 30-inch diameter holes drilled one mile down into the Earth. By burying the reactors, the company hopes to solve several problems that plague current reactors, including concerns over meltdowns and potential terrorist attacks.

Deep Fission’s 15-megawatt reactors are cooled using pressurized water, the same type found in nuclear submarines and many existing power plants.

Earlier this year, Deep Fission inked a deal with data center developer Endeavor to build 2 gigawatts of underground reactors.

As recently as April, the startup had been attempting to raise a $15 million seed round. In August, Deep Fission and nine other nuclear fission startups were selected to be a part of the Department of Energy’s Reactor Pilot Program, essentially a streamlined permitting process.

Under the terms of the reverse merger with four-year-old Surfside Acquisition Inc., the offering was priced at $3 per share, below the customary $10 that other SPACs target. The new entity will retain the Deep Fission name, and though its shares aren’t yet trading, it says it intends to quote on the OTCQB.

Join 10k+ tech and VC leaders for growth and connections at Disrupt 2025
Netflix, Box, a16z, ElevenLabs, Wayve, Sequoia Capital, Elad Gil — just some of the 250+ heavy hitters leading 200+ sessions designed to deliver the insights that fuel startup growth and sharpen your edge. Don’t miss the 20th anniversary of TechCrunch, and a chance to learn from the top voices in tech. Grab your ticket before Sept 26 to save up to $668.

The circumstances around the SPAC — the share price, the selected equity market, and the timing of the transaction — suggest that Deep Fission wasn’t able to raise cash from new or existing shareholders, who first capitalized the company with a $4 million check last year.

The proceeds of the merger give the startup a bit more runway than its ill-fated seed round would have, but it also imposes SEC reporting costs for what is likely a small company operating in a very expensive sector. Deep Fission is hoping to start its first reactor by July 2026.

TechCrunch : Sam Altman says that bots are making social media feel ‘fake’

Sam Altman says that bots are making social media feel ‘fake’

X enthusiast and Reddit shareholder Sam Altman had an epiphany on Monday: Bots have made it impossible to determine whether social media posts are really written by humans, he posted.

The realization came while reading (and sharing) some posts from the r/Claudecode subreddit, which were praising OpenAI Codex. OpenAI launched the software programming service that takes on Anthropic’s Claude Code in May.

Lately, that subreddit has been so filled with posts from self-proclaimed Code users announcing that they moved to Codex that one Reddit user even joked: “Is it possible to switch to codex without posting a topic on Reddit?”

This left Altman wondering how many of those posts were from real humans. “I have had the strangest experience reading this: I assume it’s all fake/bots, even though in this case I know codex growth is really strong and the trend here is real,” he confessed on X.

He then live-analyzed his reasoning. “I think there are a bunch of things going on: real people have picked up quirks of LLM-speak, the Extremely Online crowd drifts together in very correlated ways, the hype cycle has a very ‘it’s so over/we’re so back’ extremism, optimization pressure from social platforms on juicing engagement and the related way that creator monetization works, other companies have astroturfed us so i’m extra sensitive to it, and a bunch more (including probably some bots).”

To decode that a little, he’s accusing humans of starting to sound like LLMs, even though LLMs — spearheaded by OpenAI — were literally invented to mimic human communication, right down to the em dash. And OpenAI’s models definitely trained on Reddit, where Altman was a board member through 2022, and was disclosed as a large shareholder during the company’s IPO last year.

He makes a valid point that fandoms, led by extremely, always-on social media users, do tend to behave in odd ways. Many groups can devolve into hatefests if overrun by those venting frustrations to their brethren.

Altman also throws a dig at the incentives when social media sites and creators rely on engagement to make money. Fair enough.

But then Altman confesses that one of the reasons he thinks the pro-OpenAI posts in this subreddit might be bots is because OpenAI has also been “astroturfed.” That typically involves posts by people or bots paid for by the competitor, or paid by some third-degree contractor, giving the competitor plausible deniability.

We have no evidence of astroturfing (though it is possible). But we did see how OpenAI subreddits turned on the company after it released GPT 5.0. Instead of waves of praise from the faithful over the new model, many angry posts were voted up. People took to Reddit and X to complain about everything from GPT’s personality to how it burned through credits without finishing tasks.

A day after the bumpy release, Altman did a Reddit ask-me-anything session on r/GPT in which he confessed to rollout issues and promised changes. The GPT subreddit has never fully recovered its previous level of love, with users still posting regularly on how much they dislike the changes with GPT 5.0. Are they human? Or are they, as Altman seems to imply, fake in some way?

Altman surmises, “The net effect is somehow AI twitter/AI Reddit feels very fake in a way it really didn’t a year or two ago.”

If that’s true, who’s fault is it? GPT has led models to become so good at writing, that LLMs have become a plague not just to social media sites (which have always had a bot problem) but to schools, journalism, and the courts.

While we don’t know how many Reddit posts are written by bots, or are fictional accounts by humans using LLMs, it is likely a substantial number. Data security company Imperva reported that over half of all internet traffic in 2024 was non-human, largely due to LLMs. X’s own bot Grok says: “The exact numbers aren’t public, but 2024 estimates suggest hundreds of millions of bots on X.”

Several cynics have suggested that Altman’s lament was his first foray into marketing OpenAI’s rumored social media platform. In April, the Verge reported that such a project to take on X and Facebook was at the earliest stages. This product may or may not exist. Altman may or may not have had ulterior motives for suggesting that social media is too fake these days.

But motives aside, if OpenAI is planning a social network, what are the odds that it would be a bot-free zone? And, funny enough, if it did the reverse and banned humans, the results likely wouldn’t be different. Not only do LLMs still hallucinate facts, but when researchers at the University of Amsterdam built a social network composed entirely of bots, they found that the bots soon formed cliques and echo chambers for themselves, too.

SMCP : Chasing Starlink, China Unicom one step closer to satellite communication

Chasing Starlink, China Unicom one step closer to satellite communication services
New licence is expected to foster a moderately competitive market while making internet services more accessible to everyday users

China has issued a satellite mobile communication business licence to a telecoms giant, in a concrete move that accelerates preparations for the large-scale commercial roll-out of its home-grown satellite services.

The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology announced on Monday that it had issued the licence to China Unicom, permitting the state-owned company to conduct services such as direct-to-phone satellite connectivity and expand its applications in emergency and maritime communications.

The move is expected to foster a moderately competitive market while making internet services more accessible to everyday users, the ministry said.

“Concurrently, coordination between telecoms enterprises and entities across the satellite mobile communications industry chain will tighten, which will be beneficial for driving industrial transformation and upgrading, as well as enhancing the resilience and security of supply chains,” it added.

This marks the first licence the ministry has issued since it released a guideline late last month urging telecoms operators to leverage low-orbit satellite internet to expand high-speed data services beyond voice and text messaging.

The announcement also comes on the heels of China Unicom’s launch of four low-orbit satellites near Shandong province’s Rizhao city in late August.

The launch included China’s first low-orbit satellite equipped with advanced narrowband Internet of Things (IoT) capabilities, which provide low-power connectivity to IoT devices, marking a step forward in the country’s development of low-orbit satellites.

While China has a mature high-orbit satellite network for traditional services such as navigation, telecommunications and weather monitoring, its push to develop high-speed satellite-internet infrastructure remains in its infancy, with low-orbit constellations still in the early stages of development.

China Telecom, which was granted a licence for satellite mobile communications in 2019, has commercialised direct-to-phone satellite connectivity through the high-orbit Tiantong satellite system.

The service has attracted more than 2.4 million users, the company’s deputy general manager, Luan Xiaowei, said at a conference in April.

The telecoms operator was also testing low-orbit satellites to verify its technical capabilities for future services, Luan said.

Beijing has designated satellite communications a key emerging sector, as the country steps up its efforts to create its own versions of SpaceX’s low-orbit satellite-internet constellation, Starlink.

Although two state-led Chinese satellite-internet projects – Spacesail, also known as Qianfan, and Guowang – have launched their first batches of low-orbit satellites over the past year, they are expected to have a long way to go to catch up with Starlink.

It will take another two to three years before domestic services are comparable to Starlink, an industry insider told local media outlet IT Times in late August.