×
OTT Releases This Week: Kaalidhar Laapata, Thug Life, The Good Wife, and More

OTT Releases This Week: Kaalidhar Laapata, Thug Life, The Good Wife, and More

With the weekend nearing, top OTT platforms are so ready with the new set of releases. This week will be surrounded by romance, drama, thrillers, and crime. There will be web series, movies, and originals for the viewers. Some of them include Kaalidhar Laapata, The Good Wife, The Hunt, and more. Also, this week, The Old Guard returns with a sequel. So, are you ready with your weekend watch-list?

Top OTT Releases This Week

Below are the top OTT releases of the week. Take a look:

Kaalidhar Laapata

  • Release Date: July 4, 2025
  • OTT Platform: Zee 5
  • Genre: Drama
  • Cast: Abhishek Bachchan, Daivik Baghela, Mohd. Zeeshan Ayyub

Kaalidhar Laapata is a drama movie that follows an elderly man named Kaalidhar (portrayed by Abhishek Bachchan), who escapes his home after learning that his family has decided to abandon him. However, during his journey, he meets an 8-year-old orphan boy, who turns his life upside down. This movie is a blend of emotions and comedy.

Thug Life

  • Release Date: July 3, 2025
  • OTT Platform: Netflix
  • Genre: Action
  • Cast: Kamal Hassan, Ali Fazal, Trisha Krishnan, Abhirami, Silambarasan TR, Aishwarya Lekshmi

Written and directed by Mani Ratnam, Thug Life is an action movie that revolves around a gangster, Sakhtivel (played by Kama Hassan), who adopts Amaran (Silambarasan TR), after saving him from a gang war. However, years later, as Sakhtivel survives an assassination, he becomes suspicious of the involvement of Amaran. The movie has an excellent plot with a battle of trust, betrayal, and loyalty.

The Good Wife

  • Release Date: July 4th, 2025
  • OTT Platform: JioHotstar
  • Genre: Legal Drama
  • Cast: Priya Mani, Sampath Raj, Aari Arjunan

The Good Wife is an upcoming web series that marks the debut of the talent Priya Mani in the Tamil OTT. Directed by Revathy, The Good Wife is a legal drama that follows Tarunika (Priya Mani), a lawyer-turned-housewife, whose world goes upside down when her husband is trapped in a scandal. That’s when she decides to fight for justice.

The Hunt: The Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case

  • Release Date: July 4, 2025
  • OTT Platform: Sony LIV
  • Genre: Thriller, Drama
  • Cast: Amit Sial, Bagavathi Perumal, Girish Sharma, Sahil Vaid, Rama Rao Jadhav

Set back in the year 1991, The Hunt: The Raji Gandhi Assassination Case revolves around the biggest assassination in the history of India, where Rajiv Gandhi was killed by a suicide bomber during an election rally. This LIV original series reflects the investigation of the case and how the conspiracies were cracked within 90 days.

Uppu Kappurambu

  • Release Date: July 4, 2025
  • OTT Platform: Prime Video
  • Genre: Comedy
  • Cast: Keethy Suresh, Suhas, Subhalekha Sudhakar, Rameshwari, Vishnu Oi

Uppu Kappurambu is a Telugu comedy which has been directed by Ani I.V. Sasi. The plot follows a newly appointed village leader, named Apoorva, who has to deal with a bizarre issue of no land remaining in the graveyard. Now, she has to find the solution to this problem collectively with the villagers. The movie is a blend of comedy and crazy ideas.

The Old Guard 2

  • Release Date: July 2, 2025
  • OTT Platform: Netflix
  • Genre: Thriller, Crime
  • Cast: Charlize Theron, Chiwetel Ejiofor, KiKi Layne, Uma Thurman

Charlize Theron returns as Andy in this much-anticipated sequel. The Old Guard 2 follows Andy, who, post losing her immortality, fights with another group of immortals who are threatening humanity. The movie is full of action sequences, and the stars have delivered power-packed performances.

In The Lost Lands

  • Release Date: July 4, 2025
  • OTT Platform: Lionsgate Play
  • Genre: Action Fantasy
  • Cast: Milla Jovovich, Dave Bautista, Fraser James, Simon Loof, Amara Okereke

In the Lost Lands is a fantasy drama that follows a queen who sends Gray Alyas, played by Milla Jovovich, to the lost lands to hunt for a magical power. Gray is strong and fearless and is accompanied by her guide, Boyce (portrayed by Dave Bautista). Together, they must fight the demons and men to obtain the power.

Heads of State

  • Release Date: July 1, 2025
  • OTT Platform: Prime Video
  • Genre: Thriller, Action
  • Cast: Priyanka Chopra, John Cena, Idris Elba

Directed by Ilya Naishuler, Heads of State is an action thriller movie that features Priyanka Chopra, John Cena, and Idris Elba in the lead roles. The plot is packed with thrills as a foreign adversary poses a threat to the US President and the UK Prime Minister. Now, both of them are supposed to rely on each other to thwart this global conspiracy.

The Sandman Season 2

  • Release Date: July 3, 2025
  • OTT Platform: Netflix
  • Genre: Dark Fantasy, Horror
  • Cast: Tom Sturridge, Vivienne Acheimpong, Patton Oswalt, Boyd Holbrook, Nina Wadia

The Sandman Season 2 Volume 1 is finally ready to stream on digital screens. Post the success of the first season, this year the dreams will return. However, the unresolved challenges from the past will surface. The series is packed with intense action, fantasy, and introspection.

Source link
#OTT #Releases #Week #Kaalidhar #Laapata #Thug #Life #Good #Wife

In late May, Neil Rimer said something during a sit-down I had with him in Athens that I haven’t been able to shake. At a vibrant new tech festival in the city, talking about the wealth piling up around AI, he said he has “a strong sense that there will be some sort of a redistribution.” He continued on. “It’ll either be voluntary or it’ll be involuntary, but it’ll happen, and I hope it’s voluntary,” he told me, adding that he thinks tech leaders “can play a leading role in seeing that through.”

Coming from most people, that would sound like standard-issue populism. Coming from Rimer, a co-founder of Index Ventures, one of the most successful venture firms of the last three decades, it seemed a striking thing to say in public.

Rimer stepped back from day-to-day investing in 2021, and these days spends much of his time in Athens, where his wife is from and where his children treasure their Greek passports. He turned up to our interview in a rumpled button-down and jeans, not the quarter-zips and fine knitwear that mark so many of his peers. Yet Index’s returns in recent years have been exceptional: the firm has raised roughly $15 billion from outside investors since its founding, and last year’s exits including Figma’s IPO and Google’s purchase of the cybersecurity firm Wiz reportedly netted Index roughly $9 billion.

Rimer has found ways to give back. He sits on the board of Endeavor Greece, which mentors entrepreneurs in emerging markets, and chaired the board of Human Rights Watch from 2019 to 2025. In late 2021, he and his father and two brothers gave $13 million to McGill University to renovate a campus building, now the Rimer Building, and found a new Institute for Indigenous Research and Knowledges.

In the meantime, his comment about redistribution comes at an odd moment, to be charitable, for giving. The Giving Pledge, the promise Warren Buffett and Bill Gates launched in 2010 to get billionaires to commit half their fortunes to charity, is becoming increasingly irrelevant. One hundred and thirteen families signed in its first five years, then 72, then 43, then just four in all of 2024, per a New York Times report in March that underscored how out-of-fashion philanthropy has become among some of the richest people in tech. (Noted that piece: “Elon Musk, the world’s wealthiest person, has said that his businesses ‘are philanthropy.’”)

The pattern appears to hold beyond the Pledge. Total American charitable giving hit a record $592.5 billion in 2024, but the number of Americans actually giving has fallen for five straight years, down 4.5% in 2024 alone, according to the Stanford Social Innovation Review. Two-thirds of households donated in 2000; roughly half do now, and Bank of America and Lilly Family School data shows even affluent-household giving has slipped, from 90% in 2017 to 81% last year.

The pattern shows up in Index’s own portfolio, too, which includes Anthropic. Business Insider recently asked a financial planner, Alex Caswell, whether his newly wealthy clients, many of them Anthropic employees tied to effective altruism, were pledging to give away the bulk of their fortunes. Anthropic matches employee donations of up to 25% of their equity to charity, and some of Caswell’s clients have used it, he told BI, but most weren’t building philanthropy into their plans at all; they were focused on angel investing or starting their own companies. “That’s what I’m seeing more than the desire to become philanthropic,” he told the outlet.

Unsurprisingly, the absence of voluntary giving is now running up against attempts to legislate the outcome instead. California voters will decide this year on a 5% one-time wealth tax that targets the state’s billionaires. Some, including Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, have already moved their primary residences to South Florida to be on the safe side.

OpenAI is reportedly considering going public in 2027, and cynically, one reason among others may be that the tax, if passed, will calculate net worth based on an individual’s worldwide assets as of the end of this calendar year.

As unsurprisingly, there is plenty of opposition to any kind of wealth-redistribution measure of this scale, including by Governor Gavin Newsom, and including by economists who point out that many industrialized countries have repealed similar wealth taxes since 1990 after watching their wealthy residents skedaddle.

Other options on the table are as controversial. OpenAI has reportedly discussed handing the federal government a 5% equity stake, an idea CEO Sam Altman has framed as sharing AI’s upside with the public, but critics see it instead as a way to buy political cover in Washington. In either case, Silicon Valley has never been eager to put Uncle Sam on the cap table. Joked veteran investor Roelof Botha during a separate sit-down with this editor last year: “[Some] of the most dangerous words in the world are: ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’”

It’s worth thinking through how much wealth sits outside these mechanisms. Musk is worth just over $1 trillion, after SpaceX’s IPO last month made him the first person to reach that mark. Forbes counted 45 new AI billionaires in its 2026 rankings alone, worth a combined $2.9 trillion, and that’s before either Anthropic or OpenAI has gone public. In that same BI story about Anthropic employees, BI notes that once Anthropic and OpenAI complete their IPOs, their combined employees will hold enough wealth to buy nearly a third of all homes in the San Francisco metro area.

It feels unprecedented, but whether it represents an historic extreme is a matter of some debate. The share of wealth held by the top 1% of U.S. households hit 31.7% in the third quarter of last year, a record since the Federal Reserve began tracking the data in 1989, and roughly equal to what the other 90% of households outside the top decile held combined.

That’s still below the 45% the top 1% commanded at the Gilded Age peak in 1916. But narrow the lens to the tippy top, and the picture flips. Renowned economist Gabriel Zucman calculates that at the height of the Gilded Age, around 1910, America’s four largest fortunes were worth a combined 4% of U.S. GDP. Today, that same sliver of the population — now 19 households instead of four — is worth 14%.

Rimer’s two paths, voluntary or forced, have precedent from the last time American wealth concentration reached this level. In 1889, at the peak of the first Gilded Age, Andrew Carnegie published an essay arguing that a rich man should treat his fortune as a trust to be distributed for the public good within his own lifetime, calling it a disgrace to die wealthy. That essay, “The Gospel of Wealth,” became the founding document of modern philanthropy and the intellectual ancestor of the Giving Pledge.

It didn’t hold off the other path for long, though. By the mid-1930s, Louisiana Senator Huey Long had built a national following behind a program called Share Our Wealth, demanding steep taxes on the rich to fund a guaranteed income for every American. Worried about losing working-class support to Long, Franklin Roosevelt pushed through what the press called the “soak-the-rich tax,” raising the top marginal income tax rate as high as 79%. It redistributed less than Long wanted, but it remains the clearest example in American history of politically forced redistribution arriving once voluntary giving failed to adequately address the pressure building underneath it.

None of this is news to Rimer, who has spent his career in tech. What’s more curious to him is “the moral center of tech companies,” a fascination he traced to being a Stanford undergrad in 1984, when Apple discounted the first Macintosh for students and Steve Jobs and Apple’s other founders were, in his words, “heroes” for building something he felt was genuinely good for the world.

What troubles him now, he said, is hearing his own children talk about certain tech companies the way an earlier generation talked about defense contractors or cigarette makers.

Critics may note that Rimer — as an investor in Anthropic and other tech companies — is a direct beneficiary of the windfall he says will eventually need to be shared. But he’d rather see his fellow beneficiaries choose to give some of the money back than have it taken from them. There’s an easy way to do this and a hard way, and Rimer is betting on people picking the easy one before history picks it for them.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Neil #Rimer #thinks #money #coming #TechCrunch">Neil Rimer thinks the AI money is coming back out | TechCrunch
In late May, Neil Rimer said something during a sit-down I had with him in Athens that I haven’t been able to shake. At a vibrant new tech festival in the city, talking about the wealth piling up around AI, he said he has “a strong sense that there will be some sort of a redistribution.” He continued on. “It’ll either be voluntary or it’ll be involuntary, but it’ll happen, and I hope it’s voluntary,” he told me, adding that he thinks tech leaders “can play a leading role in seeing that through.”

Coming from most people, that would sound like standard-issue populism. Coming from Rimer, a co-founder of Index Ventures, one of the most successful venture firms of the last three decades, it seemed a striking thing to say in public.







Rimer stepped back from day-to-day investing in 2021, and these days spends much of his time in Athens, where his wife is from and where his children treasure their Greek passports. He turned up to our interview in a rumpled button-down and jeans, not the quarter-zips and fine knitwear that mark so many of his peers. Yet Index’s returns in recent years have been exceptional: the firm has raised roughly  billion from outside investors since its founding, and last year’s exits including Figma’s IPO and Google’s purchase of the cybersecurity firm Wiz reportedly netted Index roughly  billion.

Rimer has found ways to give back. He sits on the board of Endeavor Greece, which mentors entrepreneurs in emerging markets, and chaired the board of Human Rights Watch from 2019 to 2025. In late 2021, he and his father and two brothers gave  million to McGill University to renovate a campus building, now the Rimer Building, and found a new Institute for Indigenous Research and Knowledges.

In the meantime, his comment about redistribution comes at an odd moment, to be charitable, for giving. The Giving Pledge, the promise Warren Buffett and Bill Gates launched in 2010 to get billionaires to commit half their fortunes to charity, is becoming increasingly irrelevant. One hundred and thirteen families signed in its first five years, then 72, then 43, then just four in all of 2024, per a New York Times report in March that underscored how out-of-fashion philanthropy has become among some of the richest people in tech. (Noted that piece: “Elon Musk, the world’s wealthiest person, has said that his businesses ‘are philanthropy.’”)

The pattern appears to hold beyond the Pledge. Total American charitable giving hit a record 2.5 billion in 2024, but the number of Americans actually giving has fallen for five straight years, down 4.5% in 2024 alone, according to the Stanford Social Innovation Review. Two-thirds of households donated in 2000; roughly half do now, and Bank of America and Lilly Family School data shows even affluent-household giving has slipped, from 90% in 2017 to 81% last year.

The pattern shows up in Index’s own portfolio, too, which includes Anthropic. Business Insider recently asked a financial planner, Alex Caswell, whether his newly wealthy clients, many of them Anthropic employees tied to effective altruism, were pledging to give away the bulk of their fortunes. Anthropic matches employee donations of up to 25% of their equity to charity, and some of Caswell’s clients have used it, he told BI, but most weren’t building philanthropy into their plans at all; they were focused on angel investing or starting their own companies. “That’s what I’m seeing more than the desire to become philanthropic,” he told the outlet. 


Unsurprisingly, the absence of voluntary giving is now running up against attempts to legislate the outcome instead. California voters will decide this year on a 5% one-time wealth tax that targets the state’s billionaires. Some, including Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, have already moved their primary residences to South Florida to be on the safe side. 

OpenAI is reportedly considering going public in 2027, and cynically, one reason among others may be that the tax, if passed, will calculate net worth based on an individual’s worldwide assets as of the end of this calendar year. 

As unsurprisingly, there is plenty of opposition to any kind of wealth-redistribution measure of this scale, including by Governor Gavin Newsom, and including by economists who point out that many industrialized countries have repealed similar wealth taxes since 1990 after watching their wealthy residents skedaddle. 







Other options on the table are as controversial. OpenAI has reportedly discussed handing the federal government a 5% equity stake, an idea CEO Sam Altman has framed as sharing AI’s upside with the public, but critics see it instead as a way to buy political cover in Washington. In either case, Silicon Valley has never been eager to put Uncle Sam on the cap table. Joked veteran investor Roelof Botha during a separate sit-down with this editor last year: “[Some] of the most dangerous words in the world are: ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’”

It’s worth thinking through how much wealth sits outside these mechanisms. Musk is worth just over  trillion, after SpaceX’s IPO last month made him the first person to reach that mark. Forbes counted 45 new AI billionaires in its 2026 rankings alone, worth a combined .9 trillion, and that’s before either Anthropic or OpenAI has gone public. In that same BI story about Anthropic employees, BI notes that once Anthropic and OpenAI complete their IPOs, their combined employees will hold enough wealth to buy nearly a third of all homes in the San Francisco metro area.

It feels unprecedented, but whether it represents an historic extreme is a matter of some debate. The share of wealth held by the top 1% of U.S. households hit 31.7% in the third quarter of last year, a record since the Federal Reserve began tracking the data in 1989, and roughly equal to what the other 90% of households outside the top decile held combined. 

That’s still below the 45% the top 1% commanded at the Gilded Age peak in 1916. But narrow the lens to the tippy top, and the picture flips. Renowned economist Gabriel Zucman calculates that at the height of the Gilded Age, around 1910, America’s four largest fortunes were worth a combined 4% of U.S. GDP. Today, that same sliver of the population — now 19 households instead of four — is worth 14%.

Rimer’s two paths, voluntary or forced, have precedent from the last time American wealth concentration reached this level. In 1889, at the peak of the first Gilded Age, Andrew Carnegie published an essay arguing that a rich man should treat his fortune as a trust to be distributed for the public good within his own lifetime, calling it a disgrace to die wealthy. That essay, “The Gospel of Wealth,” became the founding document of modern philanthropy and the intellectual ancestor of the Giving Pledge. 

It didn’t hold off the other path for long, though. By the mid-1930s, Louisiana Senator Huey Long had built a national following behind a program called Share Our Wealth, demanding steep taxes on the rich to fund a guaranteed income for every American. Worried about losing working-class support to Long, Franklin Roosevelt pushed through what the press called the “soak-the-rich tax,” raising the top marginal income tax rate as high as 79%. It redistributed less than Long wanted, but it remains the clearest example in American history of politically forced redistribution arriving once voluntary giving failed to adequately address the pressure building underneath it.

None of this is news to Rimer, who has spent his career in tech. What’s more curious to him is “the moral center of tech companies,” a fascination he traced to being a Stanford undergrad in 1984, when Apple discounted the first Macintosh for students and Steve Jobs and Apple’s other founders were, in his words, “heroes” for building something he felt was genuinely good for the world. 

What troubles him now, he said, is hearing his own children talk about certain tech companies the way an earlier generation talked about defense contractors or cigarette makers.







Critics may note that Rimer — as an investor in Anthropic and other tech companies — is a direct beneficiary of the windfall he says will eventually need to be shared. But he’d rather see his fellow beneficiaries choose to give some of the money back than have it taken from them. There’s an easy way to do this and a hard way, and Rimer is betting on people picking the easy one before history picks it for them.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#Neil #Rimer #thinks #money #coming #TechCrunch

tech festival in the city, talking about the wealth piling up around AI, he said he has “a strong sense that there will be some sort of a redistribution.” He continued on. “It’ll either be voluntary or it’ll be involuntary, but it’ll happen, and I hope it’s voluntary,” he told me, adding that he thinks tech leaders “can play a leading role in seeing that through.”

Coming from most people, that would sound like standard-issue populism. Coming from Rimer, a co-founder of Index Ventures, one of the most successful venture firms of the last three decades, it seemed a striking thing to say in public.

Rimer stepped back from day-to-day investing in 2021, and these days spends much of his time in Athens, where his wife is from and where his children treasure their Greek passports. He turned up to our interview in a rumpled button-down and jeans, not the quarter-zips and fine knitwear that mark so many of his peers. Yet Index’s returns in recent years have been exceptional: the firm has raised roughly $15 billion from outside investors since its founding, and last year’s exits including Figma’s IPO and Google’s purchase of the cybersecurity firm Wiz reportedly netted Index roughly $9 billion.

Rimer has found ways to give back. He sits on the board of Endeavor Greece, which mentors entrepreneurs in emerging markets, and chaired the board of Human Rights Watch from 2019 to 2025. In late 2021, he and his father and two brothers gave $13 million to McGill University to renovate a campus building, now the Rimer Building, and found a new Institute for Indigenous Research and Knowledges.

In the meantime, his comment about redistribution comes at an odd moment, to be charitable, for giving. The Giving Pledge, the promise Warren Buffett and Bill Gates launched in 2010 to get billionaires to commit half their fortunes to charity, is becoming increasingly irrelevant. One hundred and thirteen families signed in its first five years, then 72, then 43, then just four in all of 2024, per a New York Times report in March that underscored how out-of-fashion philanthropy has become among some of the richest people in tech. (Noted that piece: “Elon Musk, the world’s wealthiest person, has said that his businesses ‘are philanthropy.’”)

The pattern appears to hold beyond the Pledge. Total American charitable giving hit a record $592.5 billion in 2024, but the number of Americans actually giving has fallen for five straight years, down 4.5% in 2024 alone, according to the Stanford Social Innovation Review. Two-thirds of households donated in 2000; roughly half do now, and Bank of America and Lilly Family School data shows even affluent-household giving has slipped, from 90% in 2017 to 81% last year.

The pattern shows up in Index’s own portfolio, too, which includes Anthropic. Business Insider recently asked a financial planner, Alex Caswell, whether his newly wealthy clients, many of them Anthropic employees tied to effective altruism, were pledging to give away the bulk of their fortunes. Anthropic matches employee donations of up to 25% of their equity to charity, and some of Caswell’s clients have used it, he told BI, but most weren’t building philanthropy into their plans at all; they were focused on angel investing or starting their own companies. “That’s what I’m seeing more than the desire to become philanthropic,” he told the outlet.

Unsurprisingly, the absence of voluntary giving is now running up against attempts to legislate the outcome instead. California voters will decide this year on a 5% one-time wealth tax that targets the state’s billionaires. Some, including Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, have already moved their primary residences to South Florida to be on the safe side.

OpenAI is reportedly considering going public in 2027, and cynically, one reason among others may be that the tax, if passed, will calculate net worth based on an individual’s worldwide assets as of the end of this calendar year.

As unsurprisingly, there is plenty of opposition to any kind of wealth-redistribution measure of this scale, including by Governor Gavin Newsom, and including by economists who point out that many industrialized countries have repealed similar wealth taxes since 1990 after watching their wealthy residents skedaddle.

Other options on the table are as controversial. OpenAI has reportedly discussed handing the federal government a 5% equity stake, an idea CEO Sam Altman has framed as sharing AI’s upside with the public, but critics see it instead as a way to buy political cover in Washington. In either case, Silicon Valley has never been eager to put Uncle Sam on the cap table. Joked veteran investor Roelof Botha during a separate sit-down with this editor last year: “[Some] of the most dangerous words in the world are: ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’”

It’s worth thinking through how much wealth sits outside these mechanisms. Musk is worth just over $1 trillion, after SpaceX’s IPO last month made him the first person to reach that mark. Forbes counted 45 new AI billionaires in its 2026 rankings alone, worth a combined $2.9 trillion, and that’s before either Anthropic or OpenAI has gone public. In that same BI story about Anthropic employees, BI notes that once Anthropic and OpenAI complete their IPOs, their combined employees will hold enough wealth to buy nearly a third of all homes in the San Francisco metro area.

It feels unprecedented, but whether it represents an historic extreme is a matter of some debate. The share of wealth held by the top 1% of U.S. households hit 31.7% in the third quarter of last year, a record since the Federal Reserve began tracking the data in 1989, and roughly equal to what the other 90% of households outside the top decile held combined.

That’s still below the 45% the top 1% commanded at the Gilded Age peak in 1916. But narrow the lens to the tippy top, and the picture flips. Renowned economist Gabriel Zucman calculates that at the height of the Gilded Age, around 1910, America’s four largest fortunes were worth a combined 4% of U.S. GDP. Today, that same sliver of the population — now 19 households instead of four — is worth 14%.

Rimer’s two paths, voluntary or forced, have precedent from the last time American wealth concentration reached this level. In 1889, at the peak of the first Gilded Age, Andrew Carnegie published an essay arguing that a rich man should treat his fortune as a trust to be distributed for the public good within his own lifetime, calling it a disgrace to die wealthy. That essay, “The Gospel of Wealth,” became the founding document of modern philanthropy and the intellectual ancestor of the Giving Pledge.

It didn’t hold off the other path for long, though. By the mid-1930s, Louisiana Senator Huey Long had built a national following behind a program called Share Our Wealth, demanding steep taxes on the rich to fund a guaranteed income for every American. Worried about losing working-class support to Long, Franklin Roosevelt pushed through what the press called the “soak-the-rich tax,” raising the top marginal income tax rate as high as 79%. It redistributed less than Long wanted, but it remains the clearest example in American history of politically forced redistribution arriving once voluntary giving failed to adequately address the pressure building underneath it.

None of this is news to Rimer, who has spent his career in tech. What’s more curious to him is “the moral center of tech companies,” a fascination he traced to being a Stanford undergrad in 1984, when Apple discounted the first Macintosh for students and Steve Jobs and Apple’s other founders were, in his words, “heroes” for building something he felt was genuinely good for the world.

What troubles him now, he said, is hearing his own children talk about certain tech companies the way an earlier generation talked about defense contractors or cigarette makers.

Critics may note that Rimer — as an investor in Anthropic and other tech companies — is a direct beneficiary of the windfall he says will eventually need to be shared. But he’d rather see his fellow beneficiaries choose to give some of the money back than have it taken from them. There’s an easy way to do this and a hard way, and Rimer is betting on people picking the easy one before history picks it for them.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Neil #Rimer #thinks #money #coming #TechCrunch">Neil Rimer thinks the AI money is coming back out | TechCrunch

In late May, Neil Rimer said something during a sit-down I had with him in Athens that I haven’t been able to shake. At a vibrant new tech festival in the city, talking about the wealth piling up around AI, he said he has “a strong sense that there will be some sort of a redistribution.” He continued on. “It’ll either be voluntary or it’ll be involuntary, but it’ll happen, and I hope it’s voluntary,” he told me, adding that he thinks tech leaders “can play a leading role in seeing that through.”

Coming from most people, that would sound like standard-issue populism. Coming from Rimer, a co-founder of Index Ventures, one of the most successful venture firms of the last three decades, it seemed a striking thing to say in public.

Rimer stepped back from day-to-day investing in 2021, and these days spends much of his time in Athens, where his wife is from and where his children treasure their Greek passports. He turned up to our interview in a rumpled button-down and jeans, not the quarter-zips and fine knitwear that mark so many of his peers. Yet Index’s returns in recent years have been exceptional: the firm has raised roughly $15 billion from outside investors since its founding, and last year’s exits including Figma’s IPO and Google’s purchase of the cybersecurity firm Wiz reportedly netted Index roughly $9 billion.

Rimer has found ways to give back. He sits on the board of Endeavor Greece, which mentors entrepreneurs in emerging markets, and chaired the board of Human Rights Watch from 2019 to 2025. In late 2021, he and his father and two brothers gave $13 million to McGill University to renovate a campus building, now the Rimer Building, and found a new Institute for Indigenous Research and Knowledges.

In the meantime, his comment about redistribution comes at an odd moment, to be charitable, for giving. The Giving Pledge, the promise Warren Buffett and Bill Gates launched in 2010 to get billionaires to commit half their fortunes to charity, is becoming increasingly irrelevant. One hundred and thirteen families signed in its first five years, then 72, then 43, then just four in all of 2024, per a New York Times report in March that underscored how out-of-fashion philanthropy has become among some of the richest people in tech. (Noted that piece: “Elon Musk, the world’s wealthiest person, has said that his businesses ‘are philanthropy.’”)

The pattern appears to hold beyond the Pledge. Total American charitable giving hit a record $592.5 billion in 2024, but the number of Americans actually giving has fallen for five straight years, down 4.5% in 2024 alone, according to the Stanford Social Innovation Review. Two-thirds of households donated in 2000; roughly half do now, and Bank of America and Lilly Family School data shows even affluent-household giving has slipped, from 90% in 2017 to 81% last year.

The pattern shows up in Index’s own portfolio, too, which includes Anthropic. Business Insider recently asked a financial planner, Alex Caswell, whether his newly wealthy clients, many of them Anthropic employees tied to effective altruism, were pledging to give away the bulk of their fortunes. Anthropic matches employee donations of up to 25% of their equity to charity, and some of Caswell’s clients have used it, he told BI, but most weren’t building philanthropy into their plans at all; they were focused on angel investing or starting their own companies. “That’s what I’m seeing more than the desire to become philanthropic,” he told the outlet.

Unsurprisingly, the absence of voluntary giving is now running up against attempts to legislate the outcome instead. California voters will decide this year on a 5% one-time wealth tax that targets the state’s billionaires. Some, including Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, have already moved their primary residences to South Florida to be on the safe side.

OpenAI is reportedly considering going public in 2027, and cynically, one reason among others may be that the tax, if passed, will calculate net worth based on an individual’s worldwide assets as of the end of this calendar year.

As unsurprisingly, there is plenty of opposition to any kind of wealth-redistribution measure of this scale, including by Governor Gavin Newsom, and including by economists who point out that many industrialized countries have repealed similar wealth taxes since 1990 after watching their wealthy residents skedaddle.

Other options on the table are as controversial. OpenAI has reportedly discussed handing the federal government a 5% equity stake, an idea CEO Sam Altman has framed as sharing AI’s upside with the public, but critics see it instead as a way to buy political cover in Washington. In either case, Silicon Valley has never been eager to put Uncle Sam on the cap table. Joked veteran investor Roelof Botha during a separate sit-down with this editor last year: “[Some] of the most dangerous words in the world are: ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’”

It’s worth thinking through how much wealth sits outside these mechanisms. Musk is worth just over $1 trillion, after SpaceX’s IPO last month made him the first person to reach that mark. Forbes counted 45 new AI billionaires in its 2026 rankings alone, worth a combined $2.9 trillion, and that’s before either Anthropic or OpenAI has gone public. In that same BI story about Anthropic employees, BI notes that once Anthropic and OpenAI complete their IPOs, their combined employees will hold enough wealth to buy nearly a third of all homes in the San Francisco metro area.

It feels unprecedented, but whether it represents an historic extreme is a matter of some debate. The share of wealth held by the top 1% of U.S. households hit 31.7% in the third quarter of last year, a record since the Federal Reserve began tracking the data in 1989, and roughly equal to what the other 90% of households outside the top decile held combined.

That’s still below the 45% the top 1% commanded at the Gilded Age peak in 1916. But narrow the lens to the tippy top, and the picture flips. Renowned economist Gabriel Zucman calculates that at the height of the Gilded Age, around 1910, America’s four largest fortunes were worth a combined 4% of U.S. GDP. Today, that same sliver of the population — now 19 households instead of four — is worth 14%.

Rimer’s two paths, voluntary or forced, have precedent from the last time American wealth concentration reached this level. In 1889, at the peak of the first Gilded Age, Andrew Carnegie published an essay arguing that a rich man should treat his fortune as a trust to be distributed for the public good within his own lifetime, calling it a disgrace to die wealthy. That essay, “The Gospel of Wealth,” became the founding document of modern philanthropy and the intellectual ancestor of the Giving Pledge.

It didn’t hold off the other path for long, though. By the mid-1930s, Louisiana Senator Huey Long had built a national following behind a program called Share Our Wealth, demanding steep taxes on the rich to fund a guaranteed income for every American. Worried about losing working-class support to Long, Franklin Roosevelt pushed through what the press called the “soak-the-rich tax,” raising the top marginal income tax rate as high as 79%. It redistributed less than Long wanted, but it remains the clearest example in American history of politically forced redistribution arriving once voluntary giving failed to adequately address the pressure building underneath it.

None of this is news to Rimer, who has spent his career in tech. What’s more curious to him is “the moral center of tech companies,” a fascination he traced to being a Stanford undergrad in 1984, when Apple discounted the first Macintosh for students and Steve Jobs and Apple’s other founders were, in his words, “heroes” for building something he felt was genuinely good for the world.

What troubles him now, he said, is hearing his own children talk about certain tech companies the way an earlier generation talked about defense contractors or cigarette makers.

Critics may note that Rimer — as an investor in Anthropic and other tech companies — is a direct beneficiary of the windfall he says will eventually need to be shared. But he’d rather see his fellow beneficiaries choose to give some of the money back than have it taken from them. There’s an easy way to do this and a hard way, and Rimer is betting on people picking the easy one before history picks it for them.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Neil #Rimer #thinks #money #coming #TechCrunch
added support for the Hindi language to its platform, thus becoming even more user-friendly for millions of players in India. The newly added language option is now available to all Roblox users on the website, in the Creator Hub, and in Roblox Studio. With this update, the platform should become even more accessible to millions of Hindi-speaking people.

Enable Hindi on Roblox

  1. Open the Roblox app.
  2. Click on Settings from the menu.
  3. Select Account Info.
  4. Choose the Language option.
  5. Click Hindi and save your changes.

Roblox supports Hindi translations for game names, descriptions, in-game text, and game products. This helps creators create content for the Hindi-speaking community on Roblox. Commenting on the announcement, Sunil Rao said Roblox sees India as an important market for future growth. He noted that the company will continue expanding its localization efforts. “Roblox thrives on connection, and language shouldn’t be a barrier to creativity.”

Hindi SEO Support Makes Roblox Content Easier to Find

Hindi SEO support is another recent addition made by Roblox. This update makes indexing Hindi content on the site through search engines easier. It will help users locate Roblox content using Hindi queries.

Roblox has confirmed that more Hindi features will arrive in future updates. The company will be adding a feature called Hindi Chat Translator to its game. This feature will help communicate with people from other regions who speak other languages. It will make conversations easier for both parties during game time and other activities. The company sees this as another step toward building a more inclusive user experience.

#Roblox #Adds #Hindi #Language #Support #IndiaRoblox">Roblox Adds Hindi Language Support in India
	
Roblox has officially added support for the Hindi language to its platform, thus becoming even more user-friendly for millions of players in India. The newly added language option is now available to all Roblox users on the website, in the Creator Hub, and in Roblox Studio. With this update, the platform should become even more accessible to millions of Hindi-speaking people.



Enable Hindi on Roblox




Open the Roblox app.



Click on Settings from the menu.



Select Account Info.



Choose the Language option.



Click Hindi and save your changes.




Roblox supports Hindi translations for game names, descriptions, in-game text, and game products. This helps creators create content for the Hindi-speaking community on Roblox. Commenting on the announcement, Sunil Rao said Roblox sees India as an important market for future growth. He noted that the company will continue expanding its localization efforts. “Roblox thrives on connection, and language shouldn’t be a barrier to creativity.”



Hindi SEO Support Makes Roblox Content Easier to Find



Hindi SEO support is another recent addition made by Roblox. This update makes indexing Hindi content on the site through search engines easier. It will help users locate Roblox content using Hindi queries.



Roblox has confirmed that more Hindi features will arrive in future updates. The company will be adding a feature called Hindi Chat Translator to its game. This feature will help communicate with people from other regions who speak other languages. It will make conversations easier for both parties during game time and other activities. The company sees this as another step toward building a more inclusive user experience.

#Roblox #Adds #Hindi #Language #Support #IndiaRoblox

support for the Hindi language to its platform, thus becoming even more user-friendly for millions of players in India. The newly added language option is now available to all Roblox users on the website, in the Creator Hub, and in Roblox Studio. With this update, the platform should become even more accessible to millions of Hindi-speaking people.

Enable Hindi on Roblox

  1. Open the Roblox app.
  2. Click on Settings from the menu.
  3. Select Account Info.
  4. Choose the Language option.
  5. Click Hindi and save your changes.

Roblox supports Hindi translations for game names, descriptions, in-game text, and game products. This helps creators create content for the Hindi-speaking community on Roblox. Commenting on the announcement, Sunil Rao said Roblox sees India as an important market for future growth. He noted that the company will continue expanding its localization efforts. “Roblox thrives on connection, and language shouldn’t be a barrier to creativity.”

Hindi SEO Support Makes Roblox Content Easier to Find

Hindi SEO support is another recent addition made by Roblox. This update makes indexing Hindi content on the site through search engines easier. It will help users locate Roblox content using Hindi queries.

Roblox has confirmed that more Hindi features will arrive in future updates. The company will be adding a feature called Hindi Chat Translator to its game. This feature will help communicate with people from other regions who speak other languages. It will make conversations easier for both parties during game time and other activities. The company sees this as another step toward building a more inclusive user experience.

#Roblox #Adds #Hindi #Language #Support #IndiaRoblox">Roblox Adds Hindi Language Support in India

Roblox has officially added support for the Hindi language to its platform, thus becoming even more user-friendly for millions of players in India. The newly added language option is now available to all Roblox users on the website, in the Creator Hub, and in Roblox Studio. With this update, the platform should become even more accessible to millions of Hindi-speaking people.

Enable Hindi on Roblox

  1. Open the Roblox app.
  2. Click on Settings from the menu.
  3. Select Account Info.
  4. Choose the Language option.
  5. Click Hindi and save your changes.

Roblox supports Hindi translations for game names, descriptions, in-game text, and game products. This helps creators create content for the Hindi-speaking community on Roblox. Commenting on the announcement, Sunil Rao said Roblox sees India as an important market for future growth. He noted that the company will continue expanding its localization efforts. “Roblox thrives on connection, and language shouldn’t be a barrier to creativity.”

Hindi SEO Support Makes Roblox Content Easier to Find

Hindi SEO support is another recent addition made by Roblox. This update makes indexing Hindi content on the site through search engines easier. It will help users locate Roblox content using Hindi queries.

Roblox has confirmed that more Hindi features will arrive in future updates. The company will be adding a feature called Hindi Chat Translator to its game. This feature will help communicate with people from other regions who speak other languages. It will make conversations easier for both parties during game time and other activities. The company sees this as another step toward building a more inclusive user experience.

#Roblox #Adds #Hindi #Language #Support #IndiaRoblox

Post Comment