Doctrinal manifesto published on **meta.com** on **August 10, 2026**, signed with only a first name (*"– Mark"*) by **Mark Zuckerberg**, under the title *"The Future is for Everyone: The Path to a Positive AI Future"*, ~6,500 words. Three principles are announced from the outset: individual empowerment as a source of prosperity, invention as the primary purpose of superintelligence, balance of power as the foundation of safety. **(A) The central argument is a political argument**, stated as a short chain: *"Humanity is not a monoculture"* — people's values encode opposing trade-offs, no technical solution can align simultaneously with conflicting interests, so any singular superintelligence would have to prioritize certain values over others and would thereby be incapable of being benevolent toward everyone. Hence the formula: *"There is no such thing as a singular benevolent superintelligence."* Safety is reframed as a problem of power distribution, illustrated by a thought experiment repeated three times (a single superintelligent lawyer versus everyone having one; the same for cybersecurity, then for business). **(B) A redefinition of alignment**: *"Solving alignment is necessary for billions of people to adopt personal superintelligence agents. But it also implies that if we reach a state where billions of people are using and scrutinizing personal superintelligence agents, then we will have solved alignment with their interests."* The corollary targets the rest of the industry without naming it: *"the most dangerous scenario would be leading labs training powerful models and keeping them for themselves."* **(C) Datable commitments**: a **fully private** mode where *"even Meta"* cannot see or grant access (a WhatsApp analogy); **free** versions for billions of people paired with a **dynamic bidding mechanism** for paid compute; the announced **resumption** of open source releases — *"we will soon resume releasing some open source models"*; and a structure giving the **independent board** the power to approve release safety criteria and verify each release's compliance, with the author acknowledging that Meta is a founder-controlled company. **(D) Two public-policy proposals**, repeated three times: that labs share **intermediate training checkpoints** and engineers with the government rather than an end-of-cycle review, and that the **physical production** of dangerous materials be regulated rather than the spread of knowledge. The text's sourcing is nearly nonexistent.
#Mark Zuckerberg#Meta#Meta Superintelligence Labs
**Mark Zuckerberg** — fondateur et PDG de **Meta**. Texte signé du seul prénom (*« – Mark »*) · publié le **10 août 2026** sur un domaine dédié de meta.com. La signature n'est pas « Meta » · et l'alternance des pronoms est régulière : **« we » pour les engagements de l'entreprise** (*« we will offer free versions »*, *« Meta is implementing a governance structure »*) · **« I » pour les affirmations normatives ou contestables** (*« I think this view of alignment is fundamentally flawed »*, *« I propose that companies developing frontier AI should… »*, *« My honest guess, and it is a guess »*). Les engagements produits et de gouvernance sont au « nous » · les propositions de politique publique au « je ».
Product announcement published on the **Stripe** blog on **April 29, 2026** by **Dan Hill** (Product Manager, Link Consumer Product), following on from the **Stripe Sessions 2026** keynote: the launch of **Link's wallet for agents**, built on a new building block, **Issuing for agents**. **The diagnosis fits in one sentence, and it is the most important one in the text**: *"While machine payments protocols are still gaining adoption, agents need to work with the payment options sellers and consumers use today."* → **Stripe acknowledges that machine-native payment protocols are not ready, and delivers a workaround for existing rails rather than a bet on new ones.** **The mechanism**: a consumer grants an agent access to their Link wallet via a **standard OAuth flow**; the agent then issues a *spend request* and receives either a **single-use card**, or a **Shared Payment Token** — backed by the cards and bank accounts already present in the wallet. Cardinal point: *"The agent never gets access to your raw payment credentials."* The credential is **scoped** (amount, currency, merchant) and the agent must supply the **transaction context** so the human understands what they are approving — the example given in the CLI is explicit: `amount 3500`, `merchant-name "Powdur"`, `context "Purchasing the Powdur Glow Renewal Vitamin C Serum as a gift for $35."`. **The structuring constraint is temporal, and it is owned as such**: *"Today, each request requires the person's review before the credential is shared with your agent"* — **human** approval, **transaction by transaction**, on the web or in the **new Link iOS and Android apps**. Spending limits and cases where the agent would act **without additional approval** are announced, not delivered. **The second layer is the real infrastructure product**: **Issuing for agents** opens the full set of Issuing APIs to anyone building their own agentic wallet — single-use virtual cards, fund storage, spend controls, card-level permissions, **at-authorization** antifraud controls, real-time visibility. Four use cases are cited: internal spend automation, agentic cards embedded at **fintechs**, **vertical SaaS** platforms issuing cards to SMBs under their own brand, **marketplaces** whose selling agents pay suppliers and logistics. **Distribution argument**: Link claims **more than 200 million consumers**, and the article cites **OpenClaw** as an example of a personal agent that benefits. **Two reservations worth flagging up front**: per-transaction approval is presented as a design convenience when it is actually **an admission that delegated agent authorization is not solved**; and stablecoin, *agentic tokens*, and "other payment methods" are all in the **future tense** (*"coming soon"*).
#Stripe#Link#wallet for agents
**Dan Hill** — Product Manager · **Link Consumer Product** chez Stripe. Auteur de l'annonce sur le blog Stripe · rubrique *Product*. Le rattachement au produit *Link Consumer* est significatif : l'annonce est écrite depuis le **portefeuille grand public** · pas depuis l'équipe protocole ni depuis Issuing — ce qui explique que le consentement de l'utilisateur final structure tout le texte.