Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

Ethiopian women's rights activists are facing a rising tide of digital violence, including online threats, doxing, and deepfake abuse, forcing some to flee the country. Yordanos Bezabih, an Ethiopian women's rights activist, had faced online threats for years, including acid attacks, gang-rape, and death. However, in 2025, the threats became more menacing, with an anonymous Telegram group organizing an effort to track down her location.The group shared deepfakes of her – nude images and videos. A stranger started filming her in the streets, calling her by her social media handle. Thieves broke into her house and stole her laptop. Soon after, her Telegram account was hacked, and her private photos and messages were circulated on social media. The perpetrators later circulated her address, demanding she be found and “executed”.In August, Bezabih left Ethiopia on a fellowship for human rights defenders. She has not returned since; it is too dangerous. “I have been forced to remain outside the country in order to protect my safety and continue my work,” she says.Bezabih is one of a small but growing number of feminists and women’s rights defenders who have left Ethiopia over the past two years, as online violence has become all-pervasive and uncontrolled. Three years after Facebook was accused of allowing hate speech to spread unchecked in Ethiopia, amid genocidal violence against ethnic Tigrayans during the civil war – claims rejected by Meta – social media inciters in Ethiopia have found a new target: women online.Research by the Centre for Information Resilience (CIR) bears out the scale of online gendered abuse in Ethiopia. Its 2024 report, Silence, Shamed and Threatened, found that technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV) has become “normalized to the point of invisibility” and is a daily occurrence with severe offline impacts, including psychological harm, physical assault, and arrests.Activists say the government and social media platforms are not doing enough to protect them. “I don’t think the government is much concerned about online harassment. It is barely a government agenda,” says Befekadu Hailu, an Ethiopian civil society leader and former director of Ethiopia’s Centre for the Advancement of Rights and Democracy.Bezabih says the online platforms that enable the violence also do little about it. “Even though they claim to have all these community guidelines, tech platforms never respond to reports, claims or even appeals.”

Penguin Random House has taken legal action against OpenAI, claiming that its ChatGPT chatbot infringed on the copyright of a popular German children's book series, Coconut the Little Dragon, by generating text and images virtually indistinguishable from the original work.The lawsuit, filed with a Munich court against OpenAI's Ireland-based European subsidiary, asserts that ChatGPT's responses to prompts were 'clear evidence' that the large-language model had unlawfully 'memorised' the work of Ingo Siegner, the author and illustrator of the Coconut series.Penguin Random House argues that ChatGPT's ability to generate a story, cover, and blurb for a children's book featuring Coconut the Dragon on Mars demonstrates that OpenAI's technology has unlawfully stored and reproduced Siegner's work.This lawsuit could set a precedent for other publishers in the industry, as it challenges the use of AI models that can mimic and reproduce copyrighted material. Carina Mathern, a Penguin Random House publisher, emphasized that the company is committed to protecting intellectual property while remaining open to the opportunities offered by AI.In response, an OpenAI spokesperson stated that the company is reviewing the allegations and respects creators and content owners, while also engaging in productive conversations with many publishers worldwide.This legal action follows a previous ruling by a Munich court in November 2025, which found that ChatGPT had violated German copyright laws by using hits from top-selling musicians to train its language models.

The UK's position in quantum computing has been hailed as a success story of long-term investment in fundamental science. However, the current approach to science funding, particularly by UK Research and Innovation, has raised concerns among experts. The abrupt discontinuation of the Quantum Technologies for Fundamental Physics initiative has resulted in the loss of dozens of early-career researchers trained in a strategically important area. Moreover, there has been no clear vision for what replaces it, nor any meaningful consultation on how such crucial cross-disciplinary programmes should be organised. A similar disconnect is emerging in artificial intelligence, where many techniques driving impact were developed and deployed in fundamental research communities, such as particle physics. Undermining this base risks cutting off the pipeline of ideas and skills that the wider economy depends on. Experts stress that if the UK is serious about long-term leadership, prioritisation must be done with care, transparency, and a credible plan for sustaining the full ecosystem, from fundamental science through to application. Prof Ruben Saakyan, chair of the STFC particle physics advisory panel, emphasises the need for a well-thought-out strategy. Dr Simon Williams also highlights the importance of sustained investment in people and fundamental science, stating that ambition in quantum computing cannot succeed without it. Prof Sheila Rowan, director of the Institute for Gravitational Research, points out that the PPAN area is a training ground for expertise in various engineering and technical skills, which are in short supply and crucial for driving a bright future in quantum computing and quantum technology.

The Australian government has accused major tech firms, including Meta, TikTok, and Google, of failing to comply with a landmark ban on under-16s using social media. The ban, which came into effect last December, aims to protect children from the potential harms of social media.A survey of 900 Australian parents found that around a third (31%) said their children still had one or more social media accounts after the ban, compared to 49% before the laws. Specifically, the survey revealed that 70% of under-16s who had accounts on Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok before the ban maintained access.The eSafety Commission claimed that the technology being used by these companies, such as facial age estimation, was not effective enough. The commission alleged that the firms had lax guardrails which allowed teens to repeatedly attempt age verification until they were successful. 'None of this is impossible. None of this is even difficult for big tech who are innovative billion-dollar companies. What this update shows is unacceptable,' said Australia's communications minister, Anika Wells.The social media minimum age laws specify that Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X, YouTube, Kick, and Reddit are 'age-restricted platforms', banning under-16s from holding accounts and requiring those companies to take reasonable steps to prevent children from opening or holding accounts. The laws carry a maximum A$49.5m (US$33.9m, £25.7m) penalty.In response, Meta said it was committed to complying with the social media ban and working with eSafety and the government. The company highlighted the challenge of accurately determining age online, particularly at the age-16 boundary. 'The most effective, privacy-protective and consistent approach is to require robust age verification and parental approval at the app store and operating system level before a teen can download an app or create an account,' Meta stated.TikTok and Google were contacted for comment but did not respond by publication time. The government said in January that more than 4.7m social media accounts were deactivated, removed, or restricted in the first days after the ban came into effect.

Palantir’s senior UK representative has warned ministers against yielding to ideologically motivated campaigners as they explore the possibility of terminating a £330 million NHS contract for the company’s Federated Data Platform (FDP).The FDP, an AI‑enabled system intended to unify patient information across the health service, is part of a broader portfolio that includes contracts with the Ministry of Defence, several police forces and the UK’s financial regulator.Louis Mosley, executive vice‑chair of Palantir UK, told The Times that abandoning the deal would jeopardise patient care and hinder progress on the NHS’s most pressing challenges. He highlighted that the platform is projected to generate £150 million in benefits by the end of the decade, delivering a £5 return for every pound spent.According to the Financial Times, senior officials have begun informal discussions about activating a break clause that would allow the FDP’s operation to be transferred to an alternative provider once the system becomes fully operational next year.Palantir, a US‑based data‑analytics firm with ties to the Israeli and US militaries and former U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement contracts, has faced sustained opposition from the British Medical Association, which has long criticised the use of its technology in patient‑care settings.Health officials acknowledge the reputational risk, noting that the controversy now extends beyond traditional Labour‑left and Green Party critics. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson emphasised that the FDP is designed to improve care coordination, accelerate cancer diagnoses and increase treatment capacity, while maintaining strict data‑security safeguards.Health Secretary Wes Streeting, speaking on the Guardian Politics Weekly podcast, recognised public unease about Palantir’s political affiliations, referencing founder Peter Thiel’s right‑wing connections. He reassured listeners that Palantir does not have direct access to patient data, stating, "The platform is operated by us; Palantir never sees the data."Adoption of Palantir’s technology within the NHS has risen from 118 to 151 organisations since June, though it remains short of the government’s target of 240 organisations by year‑end. Labour backbencher Clive Lewis noted that the issue is becoming a visible concern for voters, reflecting broader anxieties about AI and foreign‑owned infrastructure in critical public services.

Submersible hydroelectric systems are emerging as a pivotal component of North America’s clean‑energy strategy, especially as the Trump administration eliminates key subsidies for solar and wind. The technology, already proven in Alaska and Maine, is now being deployed in the densely populated Great Lakes corridor, where electricity demand and prices are climbing sharply. Last month, Ocean Renewable Power Company (ORPC) announced its first urban installation on the St Lawrence River in Montreal, slated to launch two carbon‑fiber turbine units later this year. ORPC’s CEO Stuart Davies highlighted the river’s “consistent, high‑velocity water” and estimated a 60‑90 MW resource potential for the Montreal area alone. In parallel, ORPC is preparing a second project on the Niagara River near Buffalo, New York, and plans a future deployment on the lower Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans. The timing coincides with record electricity price spikes across the Great Lakes. New York’s public service commission approved substantial rate hikes in September, and further increases are scheduled for 2027, while Michigan and Ohio face similar pressures driven by data‑center expansion. These economic pressures are driving interest in marine‑based power. Unlike traditional hydropower, ORPC’s devices resemble “push‑lawn‑mower blades” and can generate between 0.5 MW and 5 MW continuously, offering a potential baseload for industrial users and a reliable backup during grid outages. Environmental considerations remain central. While Quebec benefits from long‑standing, low‑cost hydropower, U.S. projects endure an average eight‑year licensing timeline. Critics worry about impacts on fish and wildlife, though ORPC cites its Alaska deployment—operating since 2019 without recorded fish injuries despite massive salmon migrations—as evidence of minimal ecological risk. Researchers are also expanding the technology’s reach to slower‑moving waters. University of Michigan professor Michael Bernitsas demonstrated the Vivace system on the St Clair River, capable of harvesting energy from currents as low as 0.5 m/s, suggesting broader applicability across the Great Lakes watershed. Operating in fresh water offers a distinct advantage: the absence of salt eliminates corrosion, extending turbine lifespan and reducing costs compared with ocean‑based projects. Some European tidal installations have even anchored devices to riverbeds to avoid ice damage, a practice ORPC may adopt. Financially, the sector benefits from a 40‑50 % investment tax credit that remains intact, even as the Trump administration phases out Biden‑era subsidies for solar and wind. The National Hydropower Association confirms that marine‑energy tax incentives will stay in place through at least 2033, reshaping the competitive landscape and attracting inquiries from entities in over 70 countries. As electricity bills rise and policy shifts favor alternative renewables, submersible hydropower could become a cornerstone of the Great Lakes’ energy mix, delivering resilient, low‑carbon power while navigating regulatory and environmental hurdles.

A recent survey conducted by the Football Supporters' Association has revealed that 91% of football fans believe the game is better off without Video Assistant Referees (VAR). The survey, which polled over 7,000 fans, found that the vast majority of respondents are dissatisfied with the VAR system, which has been in use for over eight years.The survey results show that only 2% of fans agree that VAR makes football more enjoyable, while 3% said it improves the experience of attending a match. In contrast, 81% of fans prefer watching matches without video technology. The survey also found that 96% of fans disagree with the statement that VAR decisions are generally resolved in a reasonable amount of time.While some fans approve of the introduction of in-stadium communication from referees to explain VAR decisions, other extensions of the VAR protocol were largely unpopular. For example, only 21% of fans agreed that VAR should adjudicate on whether corner kicks are awarded, a system set to be trialled at this summer's World Cup.The survey results may not necessarily influence the game's decision-makers, as competition organisers and big clubs are committed to the use of VAR. However, the International Football Association Board (Ifab) has announced a two-year review into the system's performance, which may lead to changes in how VAR is used.

Ukraine's expertise in drone technology has garnered attention from countries in the Gulf region, which are looking to bolster their defense capabilities. The country's experience in using drones in conflict zones has made its technology and know-how an attractive proposition for Gulf nations. Ukraine's drone industry has seen significant growth in recent years, driven in part by the need to counter threats on its own borders. This growth has led to the development of a range of drones, from small reconnaissance units to larger, more heavily armed models. Gulf countries, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, have been investing heavily in their military capabilities in recent years, seeking to modernize their defense systems and address emerging threats. The interest in Ukraine's drone technology is part of this broader effort to enhance their military capabilities. The potential for partnerships between Ukraine and Gulf countries in the field of drone technology could have significant implications for regional security dynamics. As these countries look to develop their own drone capabilities, they may also be seeking to reduce their reliance on traditional defense suppliers.

Nicola Jennings, a renowned cartoonist for The Guardian, has created a thought-provoking cartoon that illustrates the recent court rulings against Meta, the tech giant behind Facebook and Instagram. The cartoon, which is part of Jennings' ongoing series for The Guardian, visually represents the legal challenges faced by Meta, emphasizing the company's struggles with regulatory compliance and public scrutiny. Jennings' work often provides incisive commentary on current events and societal issues, and this cartoon is no exception. It offers a unique perspective on the implications of these court rulings for Meta and the broader tech industry. The cartoon is part of a larger collection of Jennings' work that can be found on The Guardian's website, where she regularly publishes her cartoons on a wide range of topics, from politics and social issues to technology and culture.