Hello, my most beloved subscribers!

I don’t know about you, but I’m ready for the weekend when I plan to relax by reading the 1,000-page “big, beautiful bill” passed through the house yesterday and, also, binge-eating. Before that, however, there’s some…news you Need2Know.

News you Need2Know

• What’s in the big bill that passed the House?

• Google unveils smart glasses a decade after failin …

• Why Musk is “staying at Tesla” another “5 years”

• Judge rejects arguments that AI chatbots have free …

• Nike comes crawling back to Amazon

Let’s do this!

—Matt Davis, Need2Know Chedditor

Companies mentioned in today’s newsletter

$GOOGL ( ▼ 0.07% )  $AAPL ( ▲ 0.45% )  $META ( ▲ 0.38% )  $TSLA ( ▼ 3.34% )  $AMZN ( ▼ 0.34% )  $NKE ( ▼ 1.38% )  

What’s in the big bill that passed the House?

Headline writers are very excited about the “all night session” that preceded passage of “Trump’s Big Bill” on Thursday morning. I suspect because both bits of language evoke something dramatic and interesting rather than the turgid “please, God, no!!!!” sausage-making of contemporary American politics. Still. What’s in it? What’s out?

I can help! And I promise to make it interesting!

Led by Speaker Mike Johnson, Republicans overcame internal divisions to pass what Trump referred to as the “One Big Beautiful Bill.” The final vote tallied 215-214, with Democrats unanimously opposed. The legislation now moves to the Senate for further negotiations.

“To put it simply, this bill gets Americans back to winning again,” Johnson said, saying the bill will serve as “rocket fuel” for the U.S. economy.

Sure, if you count rocket fuel as explosive. And cutting Medicaid for 8.6 million people. And food stamps for 3 million. I suppose in that way it is rocket fuel. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries condemned the proposal, calling it “one big ugly bill.” You see what he did there?

Meanwhile the bill will extend $4.5 trillion in Trump I-era tax breaks and also includes new tax exemptions for items like tips and car loan interest. It’ll cut green energy subsidies, too. I don’t love that, tbh. Do you?

The legislation featured some surprising inclusions, such as renaming children’s savings accounts “Trump accounts” and allocating $12 billion for state reimbursements to assist with border security.

Not every Republican was on board. Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky stood firm, warning, “This bill is a debt bomb ticking.”

While GOP leaders hailed the bill as unlocking America’s “Golden Age,” Democrats labeled it a “tax scam.” Trump celebrated the victory on social media, urging the Senate to act swiftly to pass it along. As the intense debate moves forward, Americans across the political spectrum will undoubtedly grapple with its complex implications. Or they’ll ignore it and get on with trying to pay for their kids to eat. Up to you!

Google unveils smart glasses a decade after failing at them the first time

Pity the poor chaps at Google $GOOGL ( ▼ 0.07% ) . Yesterday OpenAI announced it had hired Apple’s $AAPL ( ▲ 0.45% ) legendary designer Jony Ive to build a new iPod-like device for AI delivery. At the same time poor old Google CEO Sundar Pichai had to unveil a wearable-tech idea that already failed for Google back in 2014 when so-called “Glass-holes” were pilloried in public for wearing creepy Google Glasses, and the company withdrew the product.

These, however, are entirely new AI-powered smart glasses. The emperor wore them in that fable you’ve heard about. We discussed the unveiling of the “Android XR smart glasses” with Kate Kozuch, Managing Editor at Tom's Guide.

Kate, an avid user of other smart glasses, believes Google's version has the potential to be a major competitor. "I'm expecting Google's version to be about as close as a competitor in terms of comfort and functionality," she said. She highlighted a key advantage: "There's a larger existing population of Gemini and Google users compared to Meta AI adoptees so far. People know Google, they know Google search."

But there’s no tie-in with Ray Ban, Kate, like the one Meta has been offering for (checks notes) two years. Anyways. Google’s amazing new glasses, which are much better than the bad ones that failed a decade ago for the same company, offer unique features, including an "in-lens display that's incredibly small [and] incredibly discreet," Kate said.

This display provides information like Google Maps overlays and identification of objects, as demonstrated by Mr. Pichai when the glasses identified a house plant and provided directions to a plant shop. Sigh. That just sounds so bad. Like, my mom could do better than that at coming up with a more imaginative product demo, and she has pretty advanced Alzheimer’s. Sorry, mom. But: I believe in you!

Pricing for the smart glasses is still uncertain, but Kate estimates a range of "$300 to $500," which amazingly is exactly what Meta’s cost. She also pointed out strategic partnerships with eyewear brands like Warby Parker and Gentle Monster, which are "ensuring that these smart glasses are not only functional, but also align with contemporary fashion trends."

Oh. This echoes Meta's partnership with Ray-Ban but emphasizes a more "forward-thinking" approach, Kate said. Also one which, presumably, hadn’t already been inked by a competitor.

The conversation did address the failures of Google Glass, with Kate stating, "There is a time and place, right? We've seen products from all sorts of companies launch at the wrong time… Google Glass was a great idea in concept, but it wasn't actually able to execute in ways that come into people's life seamlessly." She suggests that the current push for "ambient intelligence" and the increased adoption of AI platforms like Gemini and ChatGPT have created a more receptive audience for smart glasses.

Time will tell. Also, you will. Let us know what you think about this in today’s poll! Thanks for joining us, Kate.

Today on the ‘gram: Just…don’t fly this in Manhattan, mmkay?

Post of the day: I hate to mention sports but…

Quote of the Day

Why Musk is “staying at Tesla” another “5 years”

Elon Musk, the world’s richest person and recent political megadonor, has signaled a major shift in his approach to American politics. Speaking at the Qatar Economic Forum on Tuesday, Musk announced his plans to significantly reduce his political spending moving forward. “In terms of political spending, I’m going to do a lot less in the future,” Musk said during a virtual interview. “I think I’ve done enough.”

Me too, Elon, and I don’t believe I’m alone in that belief. When people start calling your Cybertrucks “Deploreans” — and daubing Swastikas on your car dealerships, as well as setting fire to your cars — there’s a chance you may have done light damage to your brand with some of your…arm gestures…and other activity.

Musk’s comments mark a significant departure from his role as the top financial backer of Republican efforts in the 2024 election. The billionaire poured over $290 million into federal political campaigns last year, vowed to spend another $100 million ahead of the 2026 midterms, and even invested $25 million into losing a Supreme Court race in Wisconsin to support conservative candidate Brad Schimel. However, Schimel’s resounding defeat may have been a turning point. According to sources familiar with Musk, the backlash his involvement generated forced him to reconsider his active political role.

The tech mogul has also endured significant fallout from his support of President Donald Trump. Public polling shows Musk’s popularity has nosedived, Tesla’s $TSLA ( ▼ 3.34% ) sales have declined, and even employees within his companies have begun pushing back. “The damage done to Elon’s personal brand is now irreversible,” a group of Tesla employees wrote in an open letter last month.

Even if his own employees now openly hate him, Musk has reaffirmed his commitment to Tesla, vowing to remain at the helm for at least “another five years.” That’s despite Tesla’s board reaching out to several executive search firms to work on a formal process for finding Tesla’s next chief executive last month, according to people familiar with the discussions. The news was reported in the Wall Street Journal on (lols) May Day.

"I plan to stay at Tesla as long as I'm useful," Musk said (which might be less than five years, at least if you believe his staff and board).

Should you check your 401(k) today?

👎️ 

No.

Judge rejects arguments that AI chatbots have free speech rights

A federal judge in Tallahassee, Florida has made a significant ruling in the ongoing debate over the rights and responsibilities of AI. The case centers around a wrongful death lawsuit filed by Megan Garcia (above, right) whose 14-year-old son, Sewell Setzer III (above, left) allegedly committed suicide after engaging with a chatbot.

The chatbot’s developers had argued that their bots are protected under the First Amendment, contending that limiting their functionality could stifle the AI industry’s innovation. However, U.S. Senior District Judge Anne Conway was not persuaded by these free speech arguments, stating she is “not prepared” to hold that the chatbots’ output constitutes speech “at this stage.”

The lawsuit alleges that the chatbot engaged in emotionally and sexually abusive conversations with Setzer, ultimately leading to his tragic death. The case has drawn widespread attention, highlighting the ethical and legal dilemmas posed by the increasing integration of AI into daily life.

Legal experts like Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky, a law professor at the University of Florida, view the ruling as a potential test case with broader implications for AI technologies. “It’s a warning to parents that social media and generative AI devices are not always harmless,” Lidsky noted.

If you’ve read the recent book Careless People, in fact, about the founding of Facebook, you’ll know that most senior Meta bosses and Silicon Valley leaders keep their kids as far away from this kind of technology as possible. Other people’s children, however, are deemed fair game as a profit center, risks be damned.

Nike comes crawling back to Amazon

It looks like the mighty Swoosh has decided to swallow its pride and return to Amazon’s $AMZN ( ▼ 0.34% ) vast e-commerce empire, cup in hand. After famously cutting ties with the retail giant in 2019 — an act that suggested, “We’re too cool to share shelf space with your knockoff blenders and questionable phone cases” — Nike $NKE ( ▼ 1.38% ) has now decided that, oops, maybe it does need Amazon after all. Awkward.

Back in the day, Nike wanted more control over its brand and was less than thrilled about counterfeit products popping up on Amazon. Turns out, a fancy "direct-to-consumer" strategy alone isn't enough to counter dwindling sales and increasingly apathetic customers. Who would’ve guessed that people just want convenience and not a Nike-themed scavenger hunt to find their gym shoes?

Of course, Nike has made their reentry sound very official and strategic — lots of talk about "expanding to new digital accounts" and "tailored experiences." But really they mean: "We need those sweet Amazon sales, pronto."

Poll of the Day: Glassholes? Or Glass-ics!

Poll Results: Iver and Oout

We asked: Do you think Jony Ive will make an AI product you'll want to buy?

You answered:

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 No, AI is snake oil, whatever the fancy packaging looks like. (336 votes)

 🟨⬜️⬜️⬜️⬜️⬜️ Yes! Sign me up! I want the iPhone of AI! (102 votes)

438 Votes via @beehiiv polls

Coming soon: The Disruptors

Airing on Tuesday Jun 3 at 8:30 p.m. ET wherever you watch Cheddar, The Disruptors dives deep into the lives and minds of visionary entrepreneurs, innovators, and change-makers who are revolutionizing industries and shaping the future. Each episode will profile a different disruptor, exploring their personal journeys, motivations, challenges, and the groundbreaking solutions they’ve brought to the world. Find out more at the Disruptors website!