TTA’s Summertime Wrap: Taking apart Humanity’s AI Doom; Oracle’s layoffs, financials, and House subpoenas; and how infrastructure health tech can’t get funding

September 17, 2026 | by

17-30 September 2026

It’s hard to believe that the last Alert was before Labor Day, and here we are staring at the chronological End of Summer, bracing for a cold winter again. The 25th anniversary of 9/11 (real doom) was followed by Humanity’s Rumored Doom in 10 years at the hands of AI. My essay takes it apart and puts it back together. (Pro Tip–trust no one). We also caught up with Oracle trumpeting its Q1, laying off another 3,000, and its two top execs subpoenaed by the House VA Committee. This week’s Perspectives is about how infrastructure tech needed by healthcare organizations can’t get arrested on funding, while whiz-bang consumer apps can.

Please feel free to comment on the articles and pass along this Alert. Let me know if this is worth it to you! Also check out my personal page on Substack.

For Readers: Your Editor will be on a second publishing leave to 1-2 October. ‘Best Of’ Alerts will be out 1x weekly only on Fridays after this week till then. I’ll be resting up for what may prove to be an epic Q4!

Oracle’s continued restructuring cuts 3K more jobs, adds $700 million while revenue grows 30%; House VA Committee subpoenas Ellison, Sicilia 19-0 (The Oracle soap opera grinds on)

Perspectives: Digital Health Capital Keeps Rewarding What Patients See, Not What Keeps Companies Alive (Infrastructure tech can’t get funding)

AI’s hoofbeats as Horses, not Zebras: a Gimlety view of AI’s destructive capacity (updated) (P(doom) may be conquered by F(doom), or Why Worry?

Most recent headlines 

Silicon Valley Bank’s take on H1 investment: among the “have and have nots”, it was “the best half in years” for health tech

News roundup: Verma’s rumors, DEA’s new (?) telemedicine rule goes to OMB for review, Cityblock Health goes rural with Homeward buy, Scottish housing sensor tech could save millions–study

Revealed: Oracle’s extended VA EHRM contract increased by $17B as original ceiling reached this year; VA Indy EHR goes online

Must Reads

This Week’s Must Reads: how lack of focus dooms startup financing, Commure’s Sea of Red Flags Flapping, and what happens if OpenAI expires? (Doom…DOOM!)

Why Readers can be assured that TTA is 100% Written by Humans (A handy guide to detecting AI Copy Slop and why it’s not here)

 * * *
Advertise on Telehealth and Telecare Aware
Support not only a publication but also a well-informed international community.

Contact Editor Donna for more information.

Help Spread the News

Please tell your colleagues about this free news service and, if you have relevant information to share with the rest of the world, please let me know!

Donna Cusano, Editor In Chief
donna.cusano@telecareaware.com

Telehealth & Telecare Aware – covering news on latest developments in telecare, telehealth and eHealth, worldwide.

Oracle’s continued restructuring cuts 3K more jobs, adds $700 million while revenue grows 30%; House VA Committee subpoenas Ellison, Sicilia 19-0–and why Congress is mad at a 170% budget increase

September 17, 2026 | by

Oracle trumpets successes to Wall Street while continuing layoffs, tightening spending. Oracle’s downsizing continues while revenue is parked on the sunny side of the street. Its fiscal 2027 Q1 revenue (ending August 2026) grew 30% to $19.3 billion while non-GAAP operating income rose 31% to $8.2 billion and non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $1.92, also up 30%. Some was driven by cloud growth. For those following their data center builds, their remaining performance obligations, a measure of contracted future revenue, grew by $26 billion but much of it was prepaid or with customer supplying their own hardware, meaning no cash outlay for Oracle. Another way of looking at this is conversion to revenue over the next 36 months which is now estimated at 50%.

This perked interest by investors. Barclays has upped its Oracle price target to $252 from $250 and kept an “Overweight” rating on the tech stock. The stock price is currently around $154, down 54% from its high. The Street

This is despite that debt is high and building. Total debt climbed to $155.9 billion on a trailing twelve-month basis, up from $90.5 billion just two years ago. Net debt now sits at $118.9 billion.

More Oracle employees got their severance notes and cutoffs at the beginning of September. Restructuring has a price and it’s in people. Business Insider quoted ‘insiders’ that they started on 14 September with a chilly 6am note signed “Oracle Management” similar to the previous round: “After careful consideration of Oracle’s current business needs, we have made the decision to eliminate your role as part of a broader organizational change. As a result, today is your last working day.” Severance was 4 weeks’ base salary plus 1 week per year of employment. The count of the layoffs, LOBs, and states is unconfirmed by Oracle but estimated at 3,000, several hundred in Washington state. Not quite the ‘double digit percentages’ rumored in August but possibly so on some teams. This is on top of the earlier 21,000 global cuts, 13% of their workforce, originally posted as near 30,000 [TTA 31 March]. Oracle’s original restructuring cost estimate of $2.1 billion on severance payments and other costs linked to restructuring through 31 August was increased this quarter by over $700 million, bringing that total to $2.8 billion. NDTV, Quartz

Updated 22 Sept: It appears that the employee severance package for most people, in the tech context, is skimpy. It’s four weeks of base pay plus one additional week for each completed year of service, subject to a 26-week maximum. Microsoft’s maximum was up to 39 weeks. Moreover, Reddit employee threads state that the WARN period is deducted from the base pay (e.g. two weeks of WARN, two weeks of severance) and accrued vacation is lost if state law allows it. The article in TechTimes confirms that laid off employees forfeit unvested stock, but does not have how severance affects corporate bonus and the employee stock purchase plan.

Oracle’s new CFO Hilary Maxon denied in the next day’s all-hands that the layoffs did not mean that remaining employees would be doing more with less. CEO Mike Sicilia cheered the survivors on with “How does the work that I’m doing help deliver a better outcome for a customer?” Not an off-target ask, but if the work load does not change especially in healthcare or implementing an EHR, how does this situation not mean doing more with less? 2+2≠5

Rounding out a roller coaster two weeks for Oracle was a 19-0 House Veterans Affairs Committee subpoena for Larry Ellison and Mike Sicilia. It was voted on by the House Veterans Affairs Committee and issued before Labor Day, when Oracle did not attend the 2 September hearing citing scheduling conflicts. The hearing covered the $17 billion increase in budget for Oracle’s EHR development for current costs and the three-year extension to May 2031. It turned out to be rather raucous with accusations of “unreasonable” and “corruption.” The original $10 billion estimate was by Cerner and is running out [TTA 27 August]. The new budget request brings the total to $26.94 billion. Apparently the House members found out about it through news reports, While the House is not in session until 9 November, House committees can meet anytime, but both hearings are after the midterms. Sicilia is due on 19 November and Ellison on 10 December. FedScoop, Becker’s, Stars and Stripes, MedCity News, Healthcare IT News (updated for appearance dates)

Updated. Why Congress is Madder than Wet Hens is revealed in this FedScoop article and timeline. Simply and quickly, back in July 2022, when things started to go sideways in the EHRM implementation [TTA 28 July 2022], then-EVP for Industries Mike Sicilia told the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee that Oracle would absorb any “performance or workflow” issue costs above the original $10 billion ceiling. For Oracle, after the Transformational Big Vision kvelling faded, Cerner’s painful stumbles became Oracle’s VA Migraine. There are also other add-on costs for infrastructure related to the EHRM but not part of Oracle’s costs. 170% is a big surprise in the VA budget and it blindsided Congress.

Perspectives: Digital Health Capital Keeps Rewarding What Patients See, Not What Keeps Companies Alive

September 17, 2026 | by

TTA has an open invitation to industry leaders to contribute to our Perspectives non-promotional opinion and thought leadership area. Today’s topic concerns the disconnect between what gets funded–patient-facing tech–versus the more complex infrastructure technology that healthcare organizations need to “keep the lights on”. The author, Ramkumar Pichandi, is the founder and CEO of Rytsense Technologies, where he leads the development of agentic AI and intelligent automation solutions for healthcare revenue cycle management. He is passionate about practical AI adoption that delivers real business outcomes rather than experimental technology–and he throws down the gauntlet here.

Digital health capital has a blind spot. It rewards what patients can see and touch, such as the app, the AI assistant, or the sleek intake screen, far more than it rewards the financial machinery that determines whether a company survives long enough to keep serving them. Carbon Health is the clearest recent illustration. In February 2026, the hybrid primary care company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy after raising more than $600 million over a decade and building roughly 90 clinics across eight states that together treated well over 800,000 patients a year. Nobody was complaining about the care. What forced the filing was a cost structure built for a larger company in a friendlier capital environment, and a balance sheet that no longer matched the business underneath it, according to court filings and reporting on the case. Patients experienced a functioning clinic right up until the day the financial layer underneath it gave out.

Carbon Health is not an outlier so much as the latest entry in a pattern that has repeated through several funding cycles now. Olive AI raised close to $900 million on the promise of automating revenue cycle work, then shut down in 2023 after its technology failed to deliver the savings it had promised hospitals. Pear Therapeutics and Babylon Health, two of the most recognized digital health brands of the pandemic era, went through bankruptcy the same year. The products differed. The failure mode did not: each company built something patients or providers could see and use, while the financial machinery underneath it stayed thin, brittle, or simply unbuilt.

This is worth naming plainly because the funding data suggests the pattern is still being set up, not corrected. Digital health investment is recovering in 2026, and AI is the reason why. U.S. digital health startups raised $7.4 billion across 244 deals in the first half of 2026, up from $6.4 billion a year earlier, according to Rock Health. Mental health platforms and GLP-1/weight-management startups remain the two most heavily funded clinical categories, and nearly 60 percent of all digital health investment in the first quarter came from a dozen mega-deals of $100 million or more, mostly consumer-facing. Capital is concentrating into fewer, larger bets, and visible keeps meaning patient-facing.

Meanwhile, the category that actually keeps healthcare companies solvent is losing ground with investors even as demand for it grows. Research from Galen Growth tracking healthcare buying behavior found that infrastructure’s share of health-system partnerships has climbed steadily, from under 19 percent of deals in the first half of 2022 to nearly 23 percent in the first half of 2026. Hospitals increasingly want the unglamorous layer underneath documentation, claims, scheduling, and care coordination, not another point solution. Yet over the same stretch, infrastructure’s share of venture financing dollars actually fell, and the number of infrastructure deals dropped by roughly 62 percent even as average deal size for the survivors doubled. Buyer demand for durable financial plumbing is rising, and the number of companies funded to build it is shrinking. That is not an absence of demand. It is a mismatch between what health systems need and what investors will write checks for.

The gap shows up most clearly in revenue cycle work, which is where a healthcare company’s survival is actually decided. Experian Health’s State of Claims research found that 41 percent of providers now report denial rates above 10 percent, up from 30 percent in 2022, and hospitals collectively spend close to $20 billion a year just overturning claims that were denied incorrectly. None of that shows up in a product demo. A denial queue does not make for a good conference stage moment the way a patient-facing app or an AI scribe does. It just quietly determines, months later, whether a company can make payroll.

That asymmetry is not really about technology. It is about what is easy to show and easy to fund. A patient portal or an AI assistant can be demonstrated in a five-minute pitch and photographed for a press release. A well-run eligibility check or a denial-prevention workflow is judged by what does not happen: the claim that does not bounce, the appeal that never has to be filed. Investors and journalists are simply better equipped to evaluate the former than the latter, and capital tends to follow what can be judged quickly. The cost of that bias never stays confined to the layer that was underfunded. It falls on the whole company, patient-facing product included, the way it did at Carbon Health.

None of this argues for less investment in patient experience or clinical AI; both remain genuinely important, and the returning capital in 2026 reflects real progress on that front. It argues for a more honest accounting of what digital health actually needs to survive its own growth. Until the layer that keeps the lights on gets judged by the same standard as the layer patients see, the industry should expect more companies that patients loved right up until the day they were gone.

AI’s hoofbeats as Horses, not Zebras: a Gimlety view of AI’s destructive capacity (updated)

September 17, 2026 | by

Gimlet EyeA longish holiday does provide some Perspective of the Gimlety View. What blew up during the last big summer holiday, as I was building my Vitamin D for the long winter while at the Jersey Shore, was the news made by one Jacob Coxon, a former researcher at Anthropic (developer of Claude), that advanced AI within 10 years has a more than 10% chance to have the ability to hack into enough systems, initiate bioweapons, nukes, and otherwise kill off Humanity. The humans who originally designed it would be unable to stop rogue (and roguish) frontier AI. This started with Coxon’s well-timed posting on X on 8 September and percolated through tech media right before the 25th anniversary of the mass murders on 9/11/01. Mass media, already overheated because of the anniversary, exploded like a pressure cooker. 

Axios, the techie bulletin board and for generalist media types a source for pithy quotes, on 9 September quoted a MIT 2025 study of “experts” giving a 21.5% chance of “AI possessing dangerous capabilities”, with a 21% chance of AI initiating “Cyberattacks, weapon development or use, and mass harm”.  It was a reasonably analytic article full of nuggets for a writer to run with.

This past week introduced us to the latest pop tech slang, P(doom), a cute term for the percent chance of AI Doomsday. P(doom) has now surfaced everywhere from Elon Musk to Anthropic’s CEO Dario Amodei. (Impress your friends and relatives at the next cocktail party or tailgating/cookout.)

The mass media in the following week ran with quotes by Coxon, old tech stalwarts, and politicians. Plenty of P(doom) predictions. Emblematic of the coverage was the Los Angeles Times recap published on, ironically, 11 September, a day of real, not theoretical, doom.

Readers know from my running coverage that this Editor is skeptical of AI both in a business sense (a financial time bomb) and of its utility in its current models. Automating many functions within healthcare? Sure. Providing deeper insights into imaging to speed diagnosis? Faster drug development? Bravo. Speeding market and marketing analysis, sussing out needs? Hey, hey! But equally I have been scathing of companies that buy AI services and believe vendor promises, without cross-checking for accuracy, dumping the skilled humans doing these jobs in mass layoffs. These people are the boots on the ground who should be doing the cross-checks and upgrading the models that come from developers usually unfamiliar with medicine and healthcare–and certainly without deep and specific knowledge the boots have. It turns out that the mass layoffs in many companies, from team managers, data analytics, customer services, marketers to operations, have been to fund so-called investments and token spending in AI tools. ROI has gone into a Missing Man Formation in the finance department, while services to customers and in healthcare, patients, go sideways–as does market share and revenue. CFOs, funders and Mr. Market are just waking up to this surprise that they forgot to teach at HBS. 

I’ve also been scathing in coverage of certain companies such as Open AI, Oracle, and somewhat so of Anthropic, Microsoft, Meta, and Google. These companies are pushing one to two year bricks-and-mortar data center development without responsibility for local effects on water, power, noise, and land use–something that a GM, Ford, Toyota, or Worldwide Widgets building a factory would face and mitigate. This thoughtless pushing is proving to be politically evenhanded in opposition; these companies have received epic wedgies and a few pitchforks in their metaphorical derrieres as a deserved result. But this is manageable; because of pushback, it’s diminishing as a ‘reason why’ except as a political club for unscrupulous politicians.

What’s a lot more devastating is that apparently all the forecasting is inflated beyond belief. There is no decent idea of metrics, of matching up capacity to future demand. Not by OpenAI, not by Anthropic as they prep for IPOs. This is an ancient problem that always, reliably, cyclically bites developing sectors in their nether regions. Not a hype cycle like we saw circa 2006-15 with telehealth, not bad management, but in other industries within recent memory, with ‘sky’s the limit’ booms followed by a crash and partial/total hull loss:

TNW discusses in a deeper dive the debt structure and why PIMCO could make this bet where banks could not [reference is to Oracle’s debt funding]. The question it raises is whether the furious pace of data center building is another cycle of overbuilding–and if it is, will it be absorbed in time? The ominous parallels: the 2000s building boom in an earlier iteration of data centers, the fiberoptic boom of the early 2000s that broke WorldCom, Global Crossing, Winstar, Corning, and 360Networks, cloud overbuilding that left Amazon Web Services with years of excess capacity (it helps to have a deep-pocketed and not all that transparent parent), and others. This Editor would also liken it to the early years of 1980s-90s airline deregulation (too many airlines, too much debt, too many seats) and about a decade in the cruise ship industry where too many cabins were chasing too few people. These took decades and multiple bankruptcies to settle. TTA 7 May

Writer Ed Zitron, who has few parallels in Gimlety-ness, analyzed how OpenAI could easily meet the Devil of Demise sooner rather than later in his article What Happens If OpenAI Dies?, one of our Must Reads of 19 August. OpenAI’s losses are terrifying, contrary to their PR spin, and will not change in the immediate future; based on the numbers, their growth is slowing. It has to become the most successful company since Caesar Crossed The Rubicon–or it croaks and may well pull down an economy with it. I will add from other reading that Anthropic, ahead of OpenAI, is painted in a similar corner.

Leaving aside P(doom), what we are hearing are hoofbeats from horses, not zebras. What’s happening is the AI boom cooling and billions in concentrated funding that has hit multiple headwinds. Both companies have trillion-dollar valuations and heavy debt. Technical and security concerns are popping up like weeds (see the Hugging Face sandbox breakout).  Failures might not be the end of the world but not a cheerful earful for a stressed economy.

In the short term, the two major AI companies have more of a challenge from F(doom)–financial doom–than P(doom).

Suddenly, we have three things happening in the past 10 days:

  • A short-term, low-level former Anthropic employee, Jacob Coxon, with few followers on X, suddenly bursting out and ‘going wide’ with a doomsday prediction. Quoted and covered everywhere in mass media with the things that at least some of his elders like Steve Wozniak and Geoffrey Hinton have been saying for over three years. (The Woz I’ve traced back to 2015!)
  • Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, Sam Altman, still CEO of OpenAI, and Elon Musk (Grok/X) then calling for government safety regulation. Not guardrails. Government regulation by a Federal agency, NIST. CNBC, OpenAI blog, Amodei blog statement
  • Online ‘surveys’ stating that the public is now terrified of AI, with 63% rating Humanity’s Destruction from ‘moderate risk’ to ‘almost certain to happen’. (POLITICO) 

Private companies demanding government regulation of their business truly boggles the mind. This should raise red flags as to why, and why now, and who writes those regulations.

P(doom) supposedly has a ten-year horizon. F(doom) works far faster, may be more likely, and once it starts, there may not be an Anthropic or OpenAI to worry about.

Some Gimlety Speculation, IMO only:

  • Both Anthropic and OpenAI float on a sea of red ink and Other People’s Money (OPM). Their lenders want to monetize and exit their investment with an IPO. Both companies were racing to IPOs. Except neither company is logically, reasonably, in any financial sense, ready.  Yet Anthropic was due to IPO before end of 2026 with OpenAI racing to beat them.
  • Investors are also pushing for another OpenAI funding round to cash out secondary shares held by employees, according to CNBC today (16 Sept). Which, in a case of an IPO, means more shares for the investors.
  • Both the Coxon media pickup and the subsequent Amodei/Altman calls for regulation effectively stop the IPO clock. One can speculate about the timing and origins, but it is fortuitous timing for both companies. .

It is also being used as a political club in the upcoming midterms. Goosing the ‘terror’ narrative is calculated to pay off certain players.

  • The usual Senate suspects are demanding complete regulation of AI because “we are losing control”. There is a bipartisan bill in the House (Lawler/Gottheimer) drafted to regulate frontier AI, kicking the standards over to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), but the House is now out of session until 9 November, after the midterms, which leaves exactly two months before a new House is seated. There is a parallel bill in the Senate.
  • President Trump, somewhat on the back foot on this, calls their fears a ‘hoax’ and a ‘scam’ that will prevent US leadership in AI development. Yet Sam Altman along with Nvidia’s Jensen Huang will be attending the state dinner for Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Washington next week,
  • The security threat is real. China is building a lot of data centers, well away of course from any international observation; Uyghurs don’t get to complain about data centers and water usage to Beijing. One doesn’t even know if they are real or empty buildings like their empty hinterland cities. Where are the chips coming from? Yet Chinese-engineered AI models may take the lower end of the market, much like steel.

There’s an old saying in medicine: when you hear hoofbeats, think first of horses, not zebras. It dates back to Dr. Theodore Woodward of the University of Maryland medical school and the 1940s in teaching his students to first rule in or out common diseases rather than searching first for exotic, rare diseases because they’re more interesting. (Apologies to those with rare diseases, and may AI be a savior in this.) Taking the analogy to business, the ‘horses’ are the shaky business models around AI development, capacity versus demand, the heavy debt of the two AI leaders, and data centers. Throw in the Chinese capacity and models. The ‘zebras’ are Humanity’s Extinction By AI. They’re there, but in the next county.

What’s running in that herd out there, who’s trying to paint the horses black and white, and why? Cui bono? The consequences can be severe.

Updated 17 September: Gary Marcus, Substacker and BBC commentator, in his latest ‘Marcus on AI’ takes an even more Gimletly view than your Editor. He points out the stratagems behind Altman’s and Amodei’s calls for regulation. It’s all ‘trust us’ to write the regulations and guarantee safety. We shouldn’t. Meanwhile, certain Senators go over the top on Doom with the aim of terrifying voters. We shouldn’t. A Must Read. And if you are working with AI, worth your subscription.