Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

A recent jury verdict in California has held Meta and YouTube liable for the harm caused to a young woman, KGM, due to the addictive nature of their platforms. The plaintiff claimed that her social media use, which began at the age of six, led to injuries including body dysmorphia and thoughts of self-harm.The jury's decision marks a significant milestone in the ongoing debate about the impact of social media on young people. The verdict suggests that companies like Meta and YouTube, which have been accused of designing features to keep users engaged, can be held accountable for the harm caused by their platforms.Critics of the judgment argue that it could lead to a flood of lawsuits against social media companies, while others see it as a necessary step to protect young people from the potential dangers of social media. The verdict may also prompt regulatory changes and increased scrutiny of social media companies' practices.According to a report from Brown University, social media can be addictive due to its ability to activate the brain's reward system, releasing feel-good hormones such as dopamine. This can lead to a vicious cycle of use and addiction, particularly among young people who spend many hours a day on social media.In response to growing concerns, some countries have taken action to protect young people. Australia, for example, has banned children under 16 from using social media. In the US, there have been calls for social media companies to be required to put warning labels on their sites, but such proposals have yet to gain traction.The verdict is also significant given the close ties between the tech industry and the US administration. The appointment of Mark Zuckerberg to the president's council of advisers on science and technology has raised concerns about the influence of tech companies on policy decisions.Ultimately, the jury verdict sends a clear message to tech titans that they will be held accountable for the impact of their platforms on young people. As the debate about social media regulation continues, this verdict is likely to have far-reaching implications for the industry and for the protection of young people online.

German film-maker and author Alexander Kluge, a leading figure in the New German Cinema movement, has died at the age of 94. Kluge was known for his intellectually stimulating films and his role in shaping the cinematic landscape of post-war Germany. Kluge's career was marked by his innovative approach to filmmaking, which often incorporated cinematic collages and experimental techniques. His film Abschied von Gestern (released as Yesterday Girl in the US) was one of the first films to emerge from the Oberhausen Manifesto, a call to the German film industry to break free from traditional and shallow filmmaking. Kluge's contributions to German cinema were significant, and his influence can be seen in the work of other notable directors such as Rainer Werner Fassbinder and Werner Herzog. He continued to produce films and television programs throughout his career, including arts, magazine, and interview programs for German television through his production company DCTP. Kluge's wartime experiences had a profound impact on his life and work, shaping his commitment to pacifism. However, his comments on the topic have been met with controversy, particularly in the context of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Throughout his career, Kluge collaborated with other artists and writers, including Ben Lerner, with whom he co-authored a poetic dialogue book, The Snows of Venice. Kluge's legacy as a pioneering film-maker and author continues to be celebrated, and his influence on German cinema and culture remains significant.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced a temporary waiver allowing the sale of a higher-ethanol fuel blend, known as E15, in an effort to alleviate soaring gas prices that have been exacerbated by the ongoing Iran war.E15, which contains a higher percentage of ethanol than standard gasoline, has been prohibited during warm weather months due to concerns over its potential to worsen smog. However, the EPA's decision, supported by the US agriculture secretary, Brooke Rollins, aims to provide relief to consumers at the pump.“President Trump is unleashing American Energy Dominance, and today’s action will directly lower prices at the pump and gives a clear demand signal to our domestic biofuels producers,” Rollins stated.The summer waiver for E15 has become a recurring measure in recent years, with both Republicans and Democrats advocating for its permanent implementation to reduce fuel costs. Currently, E15 is already permitted in several states, including Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Nebraska, Missouri, Wisconsin, and most of South Dakota.However, not all experts are convinced that the move will significantly lower gas prices. Kenneth Gillingham, a professor at the Yale School of the Environment, pointed out that E15 is not widely available in all states, and some areas lack the necessary infrastructure or sufficient ethanol supply to support increased use.Gillingham also highlighted potential risks associated with E15, particularly for older vehicles, boats, and all-terrain vehicles, due to its higher corrosive ethanol content. Additionally, increased corn usage for ethanol production could lead to higher costs for animal feed and, subsequently, grocery prices.“I think it’s difficult to see when the ledger’s settled how this is a benefit for US consumers,” said Jason Hill, a professor at the University of Minnesota.The decision has also drawn criticism over its potential environmental impacts, with concerns about increased ozone issues, respiratory problems, and even premature deaths.While the oil industry has generally opposed the expansion of E15, citing costly biofuel blending and potential price increases, the American Petroleum Institute has expressed support for the temporary waiver, emphasizing its role in ensuring affordable and reliable energy for American consumers.

The ongoing energy crisis in Britain has exposed the consequences of successive governments' reliance on short-term, vote-winning policies, leaving the country vulnerable to strategic coercion, particularly in the energy sector. Britain has significant potential in tidal stream energy, with about 50% of Europe's tidal resources available within its territorial waters. This energy source is predictable, inexhaustible, and can be operational within three years of consent, independent of global energy prices and weather variability. Despite its potential, government support for tidal stream energy remains a tiny fraction of that provided to offshore wind, well under 1%. With stronger support, its costs could fall to parity with wind within five years. Operational projects in Scotland have already generated more than 70 GWh, while costs are falling by around 17% a year. The constraint on tidal stream energy is not technical, but political short-termism. It is time for the government to act and provide stronger support for this industry. Additionally, the article suggests that rooftop solar and battery storage can be encouraged to provide more renewables without blighting the countryside. An obligation can be put on energy companies to encourage their customers to install solar, and customers can be encouraged to include battery storage with the solar panels. Over time, this can lead to grid-level storage hosted over the whole grid, providing resilience for the energy companies and a way for renewables to provide many of the UK's energy needs.

In 2025, England's rivers and seas were hit by 291,492 instances of raw sewage discharge from storm overflows, a 35% reduction from the previous year. The discharges lasted for 1.8 million hours, a significant decrease from almost 4 million hours in 2024. The Environment Agency (EA) reported that some water companies achieved reductions of over 60% and 70% compared to the previous year. However, campaigners argue that the discharges, which are only supposed to occur in extreme weather conditions, are still too frequent and harmful to the environment. Richard Benwell, chief executive of Wildlife and Countryside Link, stated, 'When sewage is pouring out even in a dry year, you really know the system is broken.' He emphasized that rivers, lakes, and seas should not be used as pressure valves for pollution. The water industry acknowledged that dry conditions contributed to the reduction in discharges but also cited record levels of investment in the system. Water UK stated that the industry aims to halve spills over the next five years by building bigger storm tanks and expanding capacity at sewage treatment works. Michelle Walker, technical director for the Rivers Trust, highlighted that many discharges occur on dry days and are therefore illegal. She warned that the impact of these discharges will be more concentrated and damaging in already stressed ecosystems. The government and water companies face criticism for the ongoing pollution. Water minister Emma Hardy said there is still an unacceptable amount of sewage entering waterways and a long way to go in cleaning up rivers, lakes, and seas.

The creator of the AI actor Tilly Norwood, Eline van der Velden, has revealed that she received death threats following a global backlash against her project. Van der Velden developed Tilly Norwood to spark conversation about the role of AI in the entertainment industry.Van der Velden's AI creation, Tilly Norwood, gained significant attention last year when she announced that talent agents were interested in signing the AI actor. This led to widespread condemnation from prominent actors and acting unions, including Melissa Barrera, Mara Wilson, and Ralph Ineson, as well as Sag-Aftra and Equity.In an interview with the Guardian, Van der Velden expressed her surprise at the intensity of the backlash, stating, “The death threats and the hate … my goodness, loads,” she said. Despite the negative reaction, Van der Velden remains committed to her vision of integrating AI into the entertainment industry.Van der Velden founded Particle6 and its AI arm, Xicoia, and debuted Norwood in a short comedy sketch called AI Commissioner last autumn. Norwood has gained a significant following, with 141,000 followers on Instagram.Van der Velden believes that AI actors like Norwood could be beneficial for some performers, allowing them to maintain anonymity while still engaging in acting. She noted, “I think it’s great for some actors, it might actually be a blessing that they can have a digital twin,” emphasizing that fame can be burdensome.Van der Velden continues to advocate for the use of AI in entertainment, highlighting its potential to offer actors more creative freedom. She has now featured Norwood in a new music video, with lyrics written by an AI chatbot, and controls Norwood’s avatar using motion capture techniques.

Google has issued a warning that quantum computers could potentially break most existing encryption systems by 2029, posing a significant threat to current cryptographic standards. The tech giant is urging banks, governments, and technology providers to prepare for this emerging threat.In a blog post, Google stated that the encryption currently used to keep information confidential and secure could easily be broken by a large-scale quantum computer in the coming years. The company, owned by Alphabet, emphasized the need for post-quantum cryptography migration to protect sensitive data.While quantum computers are still a nascent technology, Google, Microsoft, and universities across the UK and the US are actively building systems that harness the physics of quantum mechanics to perform extremely sophisticated mathematical calculations. However, constructing a powerful quantum computer with hundreds of thousands or even millions of stable qubits remains a significant technological challenge.Leonie Mueck, formerly the chief product officer of Riverlane, a Cambridge-based quantum startup, noted that Google's statement does not necessarily mean a working quantum computer capable of breaking encryption will definitely exist by 2029. Most timelines for a cryptographically relevant quantum computer range from the 2030s to the 2050s.Despite this, governments and organizations are already preparing for the eventuality that data stored to today's encryption standards would be exposed when the technology sufficiently advances. The UK's cybersecurity agency, the National Cyber Security Centre, has urged organizations to guard their systems against quantum hackers by 2035.Google's timeline suggests that engineering teams across the technology industry should consider measures to protect sensitive data by migrating to more advanced encryption systems now. Certain kinds of attacks predicated on the future availability of quantum decryption – “store now, decrypt later” – may currently be being deployed across the field.

The recent story of Julie Maughan, a grieving mother who lost her eight-year-old daughter Heather Preen due to exposure to polluted water, has left an indelible mark. The Channel 4 docudrama Dirty Business brings to light the struggles of campaigners and families fighting against privatised water companies and a system that often fails to protect them.In a poignant meeting, Julie Maughan's emotional testimony, marked by grief, dignity, and determination, underscored the human cost of water privatisation. Her story starkly contrasts with the detached world of statistics and policy debates, illustrating the moral failure of a system that prioritises profit over people's lives.Clive Lewis, Labour MP for Norwich South, argues that the water industry's model, which allows private companies to profit from a basic necessity while the public bears the risk, is fundamentally flawed. This has led to billions being paid to shareholders while investment falls short and pollution becomes routine.The article highlights the broader implications of water privatisation as a microcosm of a larger systemic problem. With millions of households facing another wave of pressure on their living standards due to an impending energy price surge, the question remains whether the current economic framework can adapt to address these challenges.Lewis emphasises that Labour must decide whether it stands with the electorate or the water companies, advocating for a fundamental reorientation of the economy that prioritises the public interest over profit. The story of Julie Maughan and her daughter Heather serves as a powerful reminder of the human cost of policy failures and the urgent need for change.

Egil Johansen, the landlord of the Kenton pub in Hackney, east London, describes recent incidents involving children as "like the wild west." He has now banned children entirely after a three-year-old fell down a cellar hatch while parents sat elsewhere, a five-year-old crashed into staff carrying drinks, and six parents brought 10 hyperactive children after a birthday party while ignoring their behavior."In every case, the parents blame us when something goes wrong or get really angry when we ask them to control their children," says Johansen, who has run the pub for 17 years. "I'm legally obliged to keep children safe on my premises and if the parents let their children run riot, the only answer is to not allow them in at all."Johansen initially tried banning children only after 5pm, but this interim measure failed to address the underlying issues. Despite online criticism framing him as the "baddie," he expresses sadness about the situation: "I'm a publican; I'm a people-person. It gives me no joy to ban anyone, but it's just not safe: parents don't control their children and our other customers were beginning to go elsewhere. I had no choice."The Kenton's decision reflects a growing trend among UK pubs seeking to differentiate themselves from establishments that "resemble soft play centres without the ball pit." While some welcome this shift, others view it as unwelcoming to families, creating a culture war in the pub industry.Lee Jones, landlord of the Brewers Arms in West Malvern, Worcestershire, reversed a previous child ban: "We're dog-friendly, child-friendly, adult-friendly. We're just friendly – we don't distinguish. Pubs are for the community and I don't see bans in the spirit of what we're here for." Jones reports that when children become rowdy, staff can address the issue with parents, though this is rarely needed.Stephen Boyd, who runs the Alma in south London, took a different approach after attempting to attract young families. He found families with children consumed disproportionate time and resources with special requests for diluted drinks, heated beverages, and customized meals, while adult customers waited longer for their orders."You just need a couple screaming, banging on a table or running up and down, and it dictates the whole atmosphere of the pub," Boyd says. "Parents would take massive umbrage if staff asked them to stop their children doing something." After implementing a child ban, he describes the change as "a fucking revelation" with staff retention improving and takings doubling.Despite the positive results, Boyd faced significant backlash: "I got a lot of online hate. Mainly from people who had never been to the pub but felt I was doing something morally hateful."Tom Stainer, chief executive of the Campaign for Real Ale, acknowledges the debate is "very live" but emphasizes: "But you do have to look at the responsibility of the parents in these situations, not just at the pubs. They're the ones responsible for making sure that their children behave."Financial considerations also drive some decisions. Mandy Keefe, landlady of the Wheel Inn in Ashford, banned children partly for behavioral reasons but also financial ones: "If a third of my Sunday customers were children eating from a reduced-rate child's menu and not drinking any alcohol, that wouldn't be financially viable."Across the UK, pubs are making individual decisions based on their specific circumstances, but as Johansen's experience demonstrates, it only takes one serious incident to settle the question for good.