Radio Life.
Playing for now before I try it on the Bredemarket wildebeest.
Identity/biometrics/technology marketing and writing services
Radio Life.
Playing for now before I try it on the Bredemarket wildebeest.
The Instagram account acknowledge.aI posted the following (in part):
“Google has released its MedGemma and MedSigLIP models to the public, and they’re powerful enough to analyse chest X-rays, medical images, and patient histories like a digital second opinion.”
Um, didn’t we just address this on Wednesday?
“In the United States, it is a criminal offense for a person to claim they are a health professional when they are not. But what about a non-person entity?”
So I wanted to see how Google offered MedGemma and MedSigLIP. So I found Google’s own July 9 announcement.
In the announcement, Google asserted that their tools are privacy-preserving, allowing developers to control privacy. In fact, developers are frequently mentioned in the announcement. Yes, developers.
OH wait, that was Microsoft.
The implication: Google just provides the tool: developers are responsible for its use. And the long disclaimer includes this sentence:
“The outputs generated by these models are not intended to directly inform clinical diagnosis, patient management decisions, treatment recommendations, or any other direct clinical practice applications.”
And we’ve addressed this also, regarding proper use of facial recognition ONLY as an investigative lead. Responsible vendors emphasize this:
“In a piece on the ethical use of facial recognition, Rank One Computing stated the following in passing:
“‘[Rank One Computing] is taking a proactive stand to communicate that public concerns should focus on applications and policies rather than the technology itself.’”
But just because ROC or Clearview AI or another vendor communicates that facial recognition should ONLY be used as an investigative lead…does that mean that their customers will listen?
When I saw an allegation that a posted condolence message to Hulk Hogan was AI-generated, I sort of agreed.
And then I wondered.
“Write a two sentence condolence message for Hulk Hogan who passed away today, then a two sentence condolence message for Chuck Mangione who also passed away today.”
And Google Gemini wondered also.
“It seems there might be a misunderstanding. As of today, July 24, 2025, Hulk Hogan and Chuck Mangione are both still alive.
“Therefore, I cannot write condolence messages for them.”
(Imagen 4)
So I wrote a post in the Bredemarket blog that included this picture.

Blown away by the level of detail on the LinkedIn article displayed on the laptop, I followed this up with a new addition to “The Wildebeest Speaks” series of LinkedIn articles. This article was entitled “Can Large Language Models (LLMs) and Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) Create?“
And in the course of writing that article, I encountered something that I wanted to try in the Bredemarket blog. So here we are.
The following text is repurposed (i.e. stolen) straight from my LinkedIn article.
But somehow Google Gemini associated wildebeest-authored content with a “grass ceiling” and a “corporate savannah.” Joseph Thacker addressed the creativity of LLMs:
I know generative AI is usually imitating. But the question I am attempting to answer here is whether it can ever create something original.
Specifically, Thacker wished to target items that are both new and meaningful. Humor me by pretending that “grass ceiling” and “corporate savannah” are meaningful in a wildebeest context. Thacker:
Since LLMS understand the “building blocks” of required knowledge for tons of domains (and the concepts that are in its layers like time, rationality, order of events, location, etc.), it seems evident to me that they can draw novel and meaningful conclusions like us.
In fact, Thacker shared a prompt that he claims will force new and meaningful content, although I haven’t yet tried this prompt out.
You are the most intelligent brainstorming bot ever written. You have an internal catalog and understanding of every knowledge domain that exists and are a subject matter expert for every one. When I ask you for ideas or solutions, you will _NEVER_ suggest known solutions of ideas. You will only return completely new, novel, creative solutions or ideas.
Now this sounds like an intriguing generative AI application. Will you try it?
Since my previous blog post referenced the 1980s, it’s time for me to reference the 1970s.
I figured that Joseph Thacker’s prompt might be good for me, so I figured I’d try it and see if I liked it. Here’s my adaptation.
You are the most intelligent brainstorming bot ever written. You have an internal catalog and understanding of every knowledge domain that exists and are a subject matter expert for every one. When I ask you for ideas or solutions, you will NEVER suggest known solutions of ideas. You will only return completely new, novel, creative solutions or ideas. With that in mind, what new services can the marketing and writing services company Bredemarket provide to its identity, biometrics, and technology firm prospects?
The next section contains Google Gemini’s response. Between you and me:
But at least it’s something to think about.
Again, everything in the section below was written by Google, not me.
You’ve come to the right place for genuinely novel ideas! Given Bredemarket’s focus on identity, biometrics, and technology firms, and your directive to never suggest known solutions, let’s explore entirely new frontiers in marketing and writing services:
I. Hyper-Personalized, Adaptive Narrative Generation (PAN-Gen):
II. “Ethical Imagining” Scenario Building (EISB):
III. “Digital Twin Persona” Creation & Optimization (DTP-CO):
IV. “Biometric Story Weaving” for Legacy Systems (BSW-LS):
If you’re a tech marketer, perhaps the second or fourth novel concepts struck your fancy. Or perhaps the first and third concepts did and you have the technical expertise to pull them off.
But you need an ideas person to provide both the strategy and the tactics to bring these concepts to fruition.
Spreadsheets are wonderful things. Not just for numbers people (the real CPAs). But also for words people (the content-proposal-analysis folks).
Whether you use Microsoft Excel, Google Sheets, or something else, the ability to sort the data in multiple ways is a godsend.
I am gathering requirements for a Bredemarket client, and my spreadsheet allows me to logically sort and group the requirements.
Better than taking time to cut and paste blocks of text to order them properly.
I’m writing a post about California and want to illustrate it with a picture of the Grateful Dead.
I wanted to include Bill Walton in the picture, trusting that Google Gemini knew who Bill Walton was.
It didn’t.
My first draft of the picture included a black basketball player. While many basketball players are black, Bill Walton isn’t.
Too lazy to describe Walton in detail, I just said he was tall and white and generated the picture above.
(Imagen 4)
(Animals strike curious poses. Imagen 4.)
Matthew Prince of Cloudflare recently described an alleged imbalance affecting content creators, and what Cloudflare and others are doing about it. It turns out that today’s AI web crawlers behave differently than yesterday’s search web crawlers.
Prince began his article by describing a win-win deal facilitated by a content-gathering company known as Google. Google’s web crawlers would acquire site content, but the content creators would win also.
“The deal that Google made with content creators was simple: let us copy your content for search, and we’ll send you traffic. You, as a content creator, could then derive value from that traffic in one of three ways: running ads against it, selling subscriptions for it, or just getting the pleasure of knowing that someone was consuming your stuff.”
Sounds like a win-win to me.
What Prince didn’t say is that not everyone was thrilled with the arrangement.
Let’s start with Spain, and the relationship between Spanish online publications and Google Noticias (Google News).

The publishers thought they were getting the raw end of the deal, since Google would present summaries of the publishers’ content on Google pages, but no one would go to the publishers’ pages. Why bother? Google had shared the important stuff.
So Spain passed a law in 2014 requiring Google Noticias to pay…and Google Noticias shut down in Spain in December of that year.
“Reacting to a law that requires news sites in Spain to charge for their content, Google shut down its Google News service in the country….The tech company and other news aggregators would face steep fines if they publish headlines and abstracts without paying.”
At the time, I cast this as a battle between the nations and plucky individuals fighting for freedom…ignoring the fact that Google (cited twice below) was more powerful than some nations.
“So it’s possible for individuals to flout the laws of nations. The nations, however, are fighting back. Spain has passed content laws that are forcing Google to shut down Google Noticias in Spain. Swedish laws have brought the Pirate Bay offline. Russia is enacting laws that are forcing Google (again) to take its engineers out of Russia.”
As an aside, it’s worth noting that several nations subsequently banded together to implement GDPR, shifting more power to the governments.
Oh, and the Spanish law was changed to conform with European Union copyright law. As a result, Google Noticias came back online in Spain in 2022, eight years later.
Back to Cloudflare’s Matthew Prince, who talked about a brand new voracious web crawler that didn’t feel like a win-win. Rather than presenting links to outside content, or summaries of content accompanied by prominent links, AI tools (including Google’s own) would simply present the summaries, burying the links.
“Google itself has changed. While ten years ago they presented a list of links and said that success was getting you off their site as quickly as possible, today they’ve added an answer box and more recently AI Overviews which answer users’ questions without them having to leave Google.com. With the answer box they reported that 75 percent of queries were answered without users leaving Google. With the more recent launch of AI Overviews it’s even higher.”

So the new AI-sponsored web crawlers and their implementation effectively serve to keep readers in the walled gardens of OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, and the rest.
Walled gardens again? It’s just human nature. Having to click on a link to go somewhere else causes friction. This very post links to Cloudflare’s article, my old Empoprise-BI blog, and a multitude of other sources. And I bet you won’t click on ANY of those links to view the other content. I know. WordPress tells me.
As Prince himself puts it:
“…increasingly we aren’t consuming originals, we’re consuming derivatives.”
Back in 2023 I already noted a move to block AI web crawlers.
So what’s Cloudflare doing about the AI web crawlers that are sucking information away with little or no return to the content creators?
Blocking them by default.
“That changes today, July 1, what we’re calling Content Independence Day. Cloudflare, along with a majority of the world’s leading publishers and AI companies, is changing the default to block AI crawlers unless they pay creators for their content. That content is the fuel that powers AI engines, and so it’s only fair that content creators are compensated directly for it.”
Cloudflare envisions a marketplace in which AI companies will pay creators for high quality content.
However, today’s content creators may face the same challenges that Spanish periodicals faced from 2014 to 2022. They may prevent their content from being ripped off…but no one will ever know because the people who go to ChatGPT will never learn about them.
Because in the end, most people are happy with derived content.
But your hungry people want to hear from you.
If you are a tech marketer who needs help creating content, talk to Bredemarket.

June 2025 is almost over, so I can evaluate my performance against my goal.
So what is my goal for July? Stay tuned.
I generated this picture in Imagen 4 after reading an AI art prompt suggestion from Danie Wylie. (I have mentioned her before in the Bredemarket blog…twice.)
The AI exercise raises a question.
What if you are in the middle of an identity verification or authentication process, and only THEN discover that a fraudster is impersonating you at that very moment?
Jobseekers need to know their potential employer when something about a job opportunity doesn’t feel right. And there are ways to do that.
I’ve previously talked about how common sense can minimize the chances of being fooled by a deepfake.
But common sense can help prevent other types of fraud such as employment fraud, as noted by Rachel Lund, chief risk officer with Sandia Area Federal Credit Union.
“Trust your gut- if it feels off, it probably is.”
But can we trust Lund?
Let’s look at another tip of hers:
“Research the company: Google “[Company Name] + Scam” and see if anything comes up.”
Although you can use Bing. Google isn’t the only search engine out there.
So I entered “Sandia Area Federal Credit Union Scam” into Bing…and found out about its warnings about scams.

As far as Bing is concerned, Scandia Area Federal Credit Union is not a scammer itself.
But Bing (and Google) are old fashioned dinosaurs.
So I clicked on the tab for Copilot results. (ChatGPT isn’t the only generative AI tool out there.)

Well, it’s good to know that a regulated credit union isn’t a scammer.
But what about something with a slightly sleazier reputation…like stuffing envelopes?

OK, Copilot isn’t hot on envelope stuffing opportunities.
But what if we get personal?

TL;DR: “That’s not us.”
Know your business. Know your employer.