Apple executives held internal talks about buying Perplexity, Bloomberg News reports
Apple executives have held internal talks about potentially bidding for artificial intelligence startup Perplexity, Bloomberg News reported on Friday, citing people with knowledge of the matter.
The discussions are at an early stage and may not lead to an offer, the report said, adding that the tech behemoth's executives have not discussed a bid with Perplexity's management.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
2 hours ago
- Business Times
Meta discussed buying Perplexity before investing in Scale
[LOS ANGELES] Meta Platforms held discussions with artificial intelligence (AI) search startup Perplexity AI about a possible takeover before moving ahead with a multibillion-dollar investment in Scale AI, according to sources familiar with the matter. The two companies could not come to an agreement and decided not to pursue the deal, said the sources, who asked not to be named as the details of the talks are not public. The financial terms under discussion could not be learned. Perplexity recently closed a new round of funding at a US$14 billion valuation. Meta also attempted to hire Perplexity chief executive officer Aravind Srinivas to join the social media company's new 'superintelligence' team, which is focused on building more powerful AI systems, the sources said. The talks with Meta, which have not previously been reported, highlight Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's willingness to use deals and big hires to catch up in the AI race. The talks took place before Meta finalised a US$14.3 billion investment in Scale AI that gives it a 49 per cent stake in the data-labelling startup. Meta and Perplexity did not respond to requests for comment. Founded in 2022, Perplexity has emerged as one of the most prominent startups using generative AI to rethink core Internet services. Perplexity is taking on Alphabet's Google by offering an AI tool that summarises search results, lists citations for its answers and helps users refine their queries to get the best responses. The startup is also developing an AI-powered web browser. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up Frustrated with the pace of Meta's AI development, Zuckerberg is making a concerted push to poach top AI talent from across the industry with lucrative pay packages. Meta has succeeded in hiring Scale AI's former CEO Alexandr Wang, as well as top researchers from Google DeepMind and Sesame AI. Not everyone is jumping to join Meta, however. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said in a podcast this week that some on his staff had been approached by Meta with offers of US$100 million signing bonuses and even bigger compensation packages, but had declined to join the company. Meta has been in talks with former GitHub CEO Nat Friedman to recruit him to the new team, according to sources familiar with the matter. The company has also been working on hiring Daniel Gross, the CEO of Safe Superintelligence, a research lab founded by former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever, the source said. Meta has also held early discussions for a computing deal in which Safe Superintelligence would use Meta's data centre infrastructure, the source said. Representatives for Safe Superintelligence did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Other Big Tech firms, including Google and have tried to establish themselves as the backbone of the AI ecosystem by providing chips and cloud computing resources to AI startups. Meta has not gone this route to date. BLOOMBERG
CNA
2 hours ago
- CNA
US auto safety agency reviewing Tesla answers on robotaxi deployment plans
WASHINGTON :U.S. highway safety regulators are reviewing answers Tesla gave in response to the agency's questions about the safety of its self-driving robotaxi in poor weather, the agency said on Friday, ahead of plans to deploy the vehicles as soon as this weekend. Tesla has sent invitations to a small group of people to join in a limited test of its robotaxi service in Austin, Texas, which is tentatively set to start on Sunday, according to posts and email screenshots on social media. In a letter last month, NHTSA asked Tesla to answer detailed questions by June 19 on its plans to launch paid robotaxi service in Austin, to assess how the electric vehicle maker's cars with full self-driving technology will perform in poor weather. The agency said it has received Tesla's response "and is in the process of reviewing it. Once our review has been completed the public file will be updated." Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The invitations said a Tesla employee will accompany riders in the front passenger seat, the posts showed. NHTSA asked Tesla if vehicles "will be supervised or otherwise monitored by Tesla in real time." NHTSA has been investigating Tesla full self-driving collisions in reduced roadway visibility conditions since October. The probe covers 2.4 million Tesla vehicles equipped with full self-driving technology after four reported collisions, including a 2023 fatal crash. The agency said in May it was seeking additional information about Tesla's development of robotaxis "to assess the ability of Tesla's system to react appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions" as well details on robotaxi deployment plans and the technology being used. NHTSA said in May it wants to know how many vehicles will be used as robotaxis and the expected timetable for availability of robotaxi technology for vehicles controlled by people other than Tesla. NHTSA's letter asked Tesla to describe how it intends to ensure the safety of robotaxi operations in reduced roadway visibility conditions such as sun glare, fog, airborne dust, rain, or snow. It also wants to know what happens if poor visibility is encountered during a ride.
Business Times
3 hours ago
- Business Times
AI and the disappearing pause
'IT'S interesting to see progress through the arc of time,' Google chief executive officer Sundar Pichai said recently on Lex Fridman's podcast. It aptly describes a huge shift happening in business right now; a change in how we even think about something as basic as time. Time used to be one of the few constants in global business. We had clear deadlines, synchronised news cycles, 'follow-the-sun' business models. New York would open for business as Singapore was winding down. The world had a predictable beat, even if not perfectly aligned. But something has shifted. We no longer share time. We consume it. And as we do, something else has stepped in to seemingly unify us: artificial intelligence (AI). Released recently, Apple's latest white paper, The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexity, offered a timely warning about the limits of what we perceive as AI's true 'reasoning' capabilities, particularly when faced with increasing complexity. This research could not be more relevant, as we navigate a world where time itself feels fractured. Not just by time zone, but by our very experience of it. Our screens update instantly, yet our minds need more time to catch up. Trends explode in minutes, but decisions stretch across weeks. Some teams are 'on' 24/7, while others are experimenting with four-day weeks, all creating a fragmented sense of pace. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up The clock is dead; long live the code AI has replaced traditional time as the driver of business speed. It works across time zones, never sleeps and always responds. AI is becoming the first thing everyone relies on. It is global, immediate and relentlessly consistent. Feed a business challenge into an AI tool and in less than a minute, a well-structured response will appear. Discuss it with the team and I assure you that someone will say, 'That's actually good enough to run with.' But that is precisely the problem. Not because it is inaccurate, because it probably is not. But because it is almost always predictably coherent. It offers no friction, no doubt. There would not be a spark of tension. This is where the real shift is happening. AI is collapsing time while expanding output. We get more done in less time. But in doing so, it threatens to erase something businesses have not yet learnt how to measure – the value of shared deliberation. Even Bill Gates, during a recent visit to Singapore, admitted, 'If I had a switch to slow down AI, I might use it.' It was a rare concession from one of technology's most persistent optimists, and a reminder that just because something moves fast, does not mean we are ready to move with it at the same pace. The disappearance of productive discomfort When humans worked to the same clock, decisions took time. But that time created space for discussion, disagreement or even deep reflection. Not all of it was efficient, but much of it was productive discomfort. Productive discomfort is that critical pause before commitment; the challenge before reaching consensus. AI, by contrast, skips the pause. It generates answers before humans even begin to ask follow-up questions. I am not saying it is wrong, but it removes resistance – which is the very thing that often leads to better insight. With less shared time and more AI, companies might move quickly but without much deep thought. This is not an argument against AI. It is an argument for reasserting intentional rhythm in a world where machines are increasingly dictating the pace at which we need to move. If AI is the new constant, then leaders must become designers of pace, friction and flow. That begins with reintroducing cadence. For example, how does one create deliberate moments where teams step back from tools and re-engage with deeper thought. Not all tasks require instant answers. We know this from years of human experience and insight. Next, we need to embrace useful pauses. Taking a bit more time should not be seen as a weakness. This strategic lag can bring back important context, deeper understanding and clearer thinking into our decisions. Finally, we need to tell the difference between 'fast' and 'finished'. Just because AI gives an instant answer does not mean the discussion is over. Often, that is where the real thinking should just begin. In short, we need to create thoughtful counterbalances to the hyper-efficiency AI enables. Do not get me wrong. This is not to slow progress, but to ensure we still know what progress means. The new role of leadership In the past, when everyone largely shared the same work hours, great leaders were like timekeepers. They set the pace, coordinated schedules and organised how work flowed. Today, their role has changed. Leaders must now become guardians of how we use time. They need to decide not only what tasks are completed, but also when they are done, how quickly and how much thought goes into them. We used to organise business around time. Now, increasingly, we organise it around AI. Leadership today should not be about rejecting the technology. It is about knowing when to slow it down. Deliberately, and for the right reasons. Because AI moves in seconds, but strategy and orchestration still takes time. The writer is head of Singapore at Sling & Stone
