Tag: technology

Musicians Vs. Machines: First Ever Record Contract to AI Music Creator Prompts Panic, Protest

When pop groups and rock bands practice or perform, they rely on their guitars, keyboards and drumsticks to make music. Oliver McCann, a British AI music creator who goes by the stage name imoliver, fires up his chatbot.

McCann’s songs span a range of genres, from indie-pop to electro-soul to country-rap. There’s just one crucial difference between McCann and traditional musicians.

“I have no musical talent at all,” he said. “I can’t sing, I can’t play instruments, and I have no musical background at all.”

McCann, 37, who has a background as a visual designer, started experimenting with AI to see if it could boost his creativity and “bring some of my lyrics to life.” Last month, he signed with independent record label Hallwood Media after one of his tracks racked up 3 million streams, in what’s billed as the first time a music label has inked a contract with an AI music creator.

McCann is an example of how ChatGPT-style AI song generation tools like Suno and Udio have spawned a wave of synthetic music. A movement most notably highlighted by a fictitious group, Velvet Sundown, that went viral even though all its songs, lyrics and album art were created by AI.

It fueled debate about AI’s role in music while raising fears about “AI slop” — automatically generated low quality mass produced content. It also cast a spotlight on AI song generators that are democratizing song making but threaten to disrupt the music industry.

Experts say generative AI is set to transform the music world. However, there are scant details, so far, on how it’s impacting the $29.6 billion global recorded music market, which includes about $20 billion from streaming.

The most reliable figures come from music streaming service Deezer, which estimates that 18% of songs uploaded to its platform every day are purely AI generated, though they only account for a tiny amount of total streams, hinting that few people are actually listening. Other, bigger streaming platforms like Spotify haven’t released any figures on AI music.

Keep reading

Ukraine’s battlefield data is being used as LEVERAGE to train the future of military AI

Imagine a drone, no larger than a dinner plate, humming through the skeletal remains of a bombed-out village. It doesn’t hesitate. It doesn’t feel. It simply knows — its artificial brain trained on millions of hours of combat footage, every pixel of destruction meticulously logged, every human movement analyzed like a chessboard. This isn’t science fiction. It’s the future Ukraine is quietly shopping to the highest bidder. Data obtained from the Ukraine-Russia war will soon be used to train military AI to make future war time missions more efficient, more cold and calculated.

For over three and a half years, Ukraine has been more than a battleground — it’s been a lab. A brutal, real-world experiment in how machines learn to kill. Now, as the war grinds on, Kyiv isn’t just fighting for survival. It’s negotiating with its Western allies, dangling something far more valuable than territory or political loyalty: data. Terabytes of it. Footage from first-person-view drones that have stalked Russian tanks like predators. Reconnaissance feeds that map every explosion, every ambush, every death in excruciating detail. And Ukraine’s digital minister, Mykhailo Fedorov, has made one thing clear — this isn’t charity. It’s a transaction. “I think this is one of the ‘cards,’ as our colleagues and partners say, to build win-win relations,” he told Reuters, his words carrying the cold precision of a man who understands leverage. The question isn’t whether this data will be sold. It’s who will wield it — and what happens when they do.

Key points:

  • Ukraine has amassed an unprecedented trove of battlefield data, including drone footage and combat statistics, which is now being positioned as a negotiating tool with Western allies.
  • The data is critical for training military AI, particularly for autonomous drone swarms and target recognition systems, making it a prized asset for defense contractors and governments.
  • Ukraine’s “points system” for confirmed kills has gamified war, incentivizing troops to destroy more Russian targets in exchange for drones and weapons — further feeding the data machine.
  • Experts warn that AI-trained weapons systems could soon operate with full autonomy, raising ethical and existential questions about machine-driven warfare and the risk of uncontrollable kill chains.
  • Historical patterns suggest that warfare technology often escapes its original intent, with civilian casualties rising as automation increases — yet global powers are racing to deploy it.
  • The long-term implications extend beyond Ukraine: this data could accelerate a new arms race, where AI-driven weapons decide who lives and who dies — without human oversight.

The black box of modern war

Fedorov didn’t minced words when he called the data “priceless.” And he’s right. In the hands of defense firms like Palantir — which already works with Ukraine to analyze Russian strikes and disinformation — this isn’t just intelligence. It’s the raw material for the next generation of war. Imagine an AI that doesn’t just assist pilots but replaces them. Drones that don’t just follow orders but make them. Systems that can identify, track, and eliminate targets faster than a human can blink.

Ukraine has already dipped its toes into this future. Fedorov admitted that Kyiv uses AI to scan reconnaissance imagery for targets that would take humans “dozens of hours” to find. They’re testing fully autonomous drones — machines that could soon hunt in swarms, coordinating attacks without a single soldier pulling the trigger. And they’re not alone. The U.S., China, and Russia are all pouring billions into AI-driven warfare, each racing to outpace the others. But Ukraine’s data is different. It’s not simulated. It’s not theoretical. It’s real death, digitized and weaponized.

The problem? We’ve seen this movie before. Every major leap in military technology — from machine guns to atomic bombs — has been sold as a way to end war faster. Instead, it’s made war more efficient, more distant, and more devastating. When the first autonomous drone swarm is unleashed, will it distinguish between a soldier and a civilian? Will it care? Or will it simply follow the patterns it’s been trained on — patterns built on Ukraine’s kill zones, where the line between combatant and bystander has already blurred?

Keep reading

New AI tool flags more than 1,000 questionable science journals… but can it be trusted?

  • The open-access journal boom has fueled predatory publishers exploiting researchers with fees while skipping real peer review.
  • An AI tool trained on 14,500 journals flagged over 1,000 suspicious publications but has a 24% false positive rate.
  • Fake science is surging, with a 2025 study warning that paper mills are doubling fraudulent research output every 1.5 years.
  • Predatory journals threaten public trust, distorting medical guidelines and policy decisions while wasting taxpayer funds.
  • AI detection tools could be misused to censor legitimate but controversial research, raising concerns over truth control.

The explosion of open-access journals has democratized scientific research, but it has also given rise to a shadow industry of predatory publishers that exploit authors with publishing fees while offering little to no legitimate peer review. Now, researchers have developed an AI tool to detect these shady journals—but its 24% false positive rate means human experts are still essential.

Who’s behind it? A team of computational scientists, led by Daniel Acuña of the University of Colorado Boulder, trained an AI model on more than 14,500 journals—12,869 high-quality ones and 2,536 that had been removed from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) for violating ethical guidelines. The AI then analyzed nearly 94,000 open-access journals, flagging more than 1,000 previously unknown suspect publications.

The problem with predatory journals

The open-access model was supposed to make research freely available to everyone, breaking down paywalls that restrict knowledge. But as the system grew, so did the number of journals that prioritize profit over scientific integrity. These “questionable” journals often promise rapid publication with little to no peer review, charging authors hefty fees while producing low-quality—or even fraudulent—research.

A 2025 study in PNAS found that the number of fake papers churned out by “paper mills” is doubling every 1.5 years, threatening to flood academia with junk science. “If these trends are not stopped, science is going to be destroyed,” warned Luís A. Nunes Amaral, a data scientist at Northwestern University.

Keep reading

AI browsers could leave users penniless: A prompt injection warning

Artificial Intelligence (AI) browsers are gaining traction, which means we may need to start worrying about the potential dangers of something called “prompt injection.”

Large language models (LLMs)—like the ones that power AI chatbots including ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini—are designed to follow “prompts,” which are the instructions and questions that people provide when looking up info or getting help with a topic. In a chatbot, the questions you ask the AI are the “prompts.” But AI models aren’t great at telling apart the types of commands that are meant for their eyes only (for example, hidden background rules that come directly from developers, like “don’t write ransomware“) from the types of requests that come from users.

To showcase the risks here, the web browser developer Brave—which has its own AI assistant called Leo—recently tested whether it could trick an AI browser into reading dangerous prompts that harm users. And what the company found caused alarm, as they wrote in a blog this week:

“As users grow comfortable with AI browsers and begin trusting them with sensitive data in logged in sessions—such as banking, healthcare, and other critical websites—the risks multiply. What if the model hallucinates and performs actions you didn’t request? Or worse, what if a benign-looking website or a comment left on a social media site could steal your login credentials or other sensitive data by adding invisible instructions for the AI assistant?”

Prompt injection, then, is basically a trick where someone inserts carefully crafted input in the form of an ordinary conversation or data, to nudge or outright force an AI into doing something it wasn’t meant to do.

What sets prompt injection apart from old-school hacking is that the weapon here is language, not code. Attackers don’t need to break into servers or look for traditional software bugs, they just need to be clever with words.

For an AI browser, part of the input is the content of the sites it visits. So, it’s possible to hide indirect prompt injections inside web pages by embedding malicious instructions in content that appears harmless or invisible to human users but is processed by AI browsers as part of their command context.

Now we need to define the difference between an AI browser and an agentic browser. An AI browser is any browser that uses artificial intelligence to assist users. This might mean answering questions, summarizing articles, making recommendations, or helping with searches. These tools support the user but usually need some manual guidance and still rely on the user to approve or complete tasks.

But, more recently, we are seeing the rise of agentic browsers, which are a new type of web browser powered by artificial intelligence, designed to do much more than just display websites. These browsers are designed to actually take over entire workflows, executing complex multi-step tasks with little or no user intervention, meaning they can actually use and interact with sites to carry out tasks for the user, almost like having an online assistant. Instead of waiting for clicks and manual instructions, agentic browsers can navigate web pages, fill out forms, make purchases, or book appointments on their own, based on what the user wants to accomplish.

Keep reading

Mississippi’s Digital ID Law Hits a Wall with Mastodon

Mississippi’s privacy-ruining online digital ID law is putting pressure on decentralized platforms, and Mastodon says it simply cannot comply.

The organization behind the software states that it lacks the technical ability to verify users’ ages and refuses to implement IP-based restrictions, which it argues would wrongly affect travelers and those temporarily located in the state.

The law, known as the Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act (HB 1126), has already led to Bluesky withdrawing its service from Mississippi.

Mastodon is not following that path. Instead, it points to the design of its platform, where individual server administrators are responsible for their own compliance with local laws. Mastodon itself neither collects user data nor maintains centralized control over the network.

Although Mastodon’s nonprofit arm initially declined to comment, it later provided a statement to TechCrunch.

The organization explained that while its own servers require users to be at least 16, it does not “have the means to apply age verification” and that the software does not retain any data collected during sign-up.

A feature added in the July 2025 release of Mastodon 4.4 allows server administrators to set age minimums and manage legal terms, but does not support storing verification data.

Each server in the network operates independently. It is up to those server owners to decide whether to integrate third-party systems to check user ages.

Mastodon confirmed it cannot offer “direct or operational assistance” to these operators and instead points them to resources such as the IFTAS library, which provides guidance on trust and safety practices for federated platforms.

The nonprofit reiterated that it does not track user behavior or enforce policy across the wider ecosystem. Responsibility for legal compliance, it says, belongs to those who host and manage the servers in their own jurisdictions.

Keep reading

Is your baby, doorbell or security cam spying for China? Florida’s top cop wants to know

Florida’s top law enforcement official has issued a subpoena to Lorex Corp., a top maker of baby monitors, security and doorbell cameras, demanding documents and information about its corporate structure, whether it has any ties to Chinese Communist firms and whether Americans’ data or privacy can be breached. Those documents could provide evidence of illegal activity.

Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office told Just the News he believes Lorex, though North American-based, has imported large swaths of equipment from a Chinese manufacturer banned from the United States over alleged human rights abuses and national security risks.

A spokesperson for Lorex did not immediately respond to a written request for comment sent via email to its corporate public relations account.

Probe into whether products are relabeled from black-listed maker

“Lorex Corporation is importing millions of devices from CCP-controlled Dahua, which has been banned in the United States for human rights abuses and national security risks,” the office said in a statement to Just the News. “AG Uthmeier must discover whether Lorex is selling re-labeled Dahua products which would introduce a range of cybersecurity vulnerabilities that would give the CCP a direct line into the homes and private lives of millions of Floridians.”

Dahua, a Chinese technology company, acquired the Canadian-based Lorex in 2018 but sold it to Taiwan-based Skywatch nearly three years ago after Dahua was blacklisted in the United States.

The Pentagon in 2022 listed Dahua as one of 13 companies doing business with the Chinese military and banned its products in the United States. Earlier, the Commerce Department in 2020 identified Dahua as one of several Chinese firms involved in human rights abuses with alleged slave labor involving Uighur minorities.

In 2023, the Australian government expressed alarm when it found about 1,000 security cameras in its various offices tied to Dahua and another Chinese-tied firm, ordering a sweeping review of all security equipment in its government facilities.

The Florida attorney general’s subpoena was issued Friday, and shortly afterwards, Uthmeier put out a statement on X advising Florida consumers about his actions and possible vulnerabilities in Lorex products they may own.

“What consumers do not know is that data might be shared with the Chinese military,” he said. “Imagine that. Footage of your baby in a crib going to the Chinese government. This is unacceptable. It is a national security issue, and it will not be tolerated.”

Keep reading

US-Israel plan aims to empty Gaza of Palestinians, build AI-powered ‘smart cities’: Report

A postwar plan for Gaza circulating within President Donald Trump’s White House envisions demolishing the strip, confiscating all public land within it, paying small amounts to remove the entire population of more than 2 million Palestinians, and building “a gleaming tourism resort and high-tech manufacturing and technology hub” on its ruins, The Washington Post reported on 31 August.

A 38-page prospectus seen by The Post envisions placing Gaza in a trust controlled by Israeli and American investors. The trust will then serve as the vehicle for the development of the strip into a high-tech commercial, residential, and tourist hub resembling Dubai.

The Post reports that the proposal to establish the Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust, or GREAT Trust, was developed by some of the same Israelis who created the deadly, US and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), which was used as a pretext to block the delivery of food aid by the UN.

Financial planning for the GREAT Trust project was carried out by a team from the Boston Consulting Group, which also worked on establishing the GHF.

The plan calls for the “voluntary” departure of Gaza’s residents to another country, making them refugees, or herding them into “restricted, secured zones” amounting to concentration camps, within the strip.

In exchange for abandoning their land, Palestinians would be “offered a digital token by the trust in exchange for rights to redevelop their property,” The Post writes. The token could allegedly be used to “finance a new life elsewhere or eventually redeemed for an apartment in the new ”AI-powered smart cities'” to be built in Gaza.

“Each Palestinian who chooses to leave would be given a $5,000 cash payment and subsidies to cover four years of rent elsewhere, as well as a year of food,” The Post further wrote.

After beginning his term as president in January, Trump boasted that all Palestinians would be removed from Gaza, never to return, and the strip redeveloped as the “Riviera of the Middle East.”

“I looked at a picture of Gaza, it’s like a massive demolition site,” Trump stated just two days after taking office.

“It’s got to be rebuilt in a different way.” Gaza, he said, was “a phenomenal location … on the sea, the best weather. Everything’s good. Some beautiful things can be done with it.”

Trump appointed Steve Witkoff, a Jewish real estate developer from New York, as his Special Envoy to the Middle East and point man for alleged negotiations with Hamas to reach a ceasefire.

Keep reading

These Are The 10 Most-Used AI Chatbots In 2025

Chatbots have become a key interface for AI in both personal and professional settings. From helping draft emails to answering complex queries, their reach has grown tremendously.

This infographic, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, ranks the most-used AI chatbots of 2025 by annual web visits. It provides insight into how dominant certain platforms have become, and how fast some competitors are growing.

ChatGPT continues to dominate the chatbot space with over 46.5 billion visits in 2025. This represents 48.36% of the total chatbot market traffic, four times more than the combined visits of the other 10 chatbots. Its year-over-year growth of 106% also shows it is not just maintaining, but expanding its lead.

Keep reading

Transcripts Show AI Fed Tech Worker’s Troubling Delusions Before He Murdered His Own Mother

Just to be perfectly clear, this writer is not one of those artificial intelligence doomsayers who thinks that Terminator 2 was a quasi-documentary.

AI, whether you love it or hate it, has escaped Pandora’s Box, and this is simply the world we must grapple with.

To say that it has no value whatsoever would be naive. Time is the most finite resource we have, and if we can save some of it via AI automation, that’s a net positive value.

But just because AI has its occasional use does not mean that people must just accept a rampant and out-of-control version of it. AI, more so than perhaps any invention in human history, needs guardrails and safety measures because people are essentially trying to play God with this tech.

That’s scary enough, but there’s an even scarier problem: people are replacing God with AI, and this utterly horrific and tragic story from Connecticut highlights the truly sinister side of the technology.

As reported by The Wall Street Journal, Stein-Erik Soelberg, 56, entered into a dangerous and parasocial relationship with a ChatGPT bot prior to murdering his own mother, and then himself.

The incident, which occurred in the spring (both Soelberg’s body and his mother’s were found on Aug. 5, per the New York Post), came after Soelberg had entered into a seeming kinship with the AI chatbot.

The reason the mentally disturbed Soelberg began consulting ChatGPT? He was convinced that he was being spied on, possibly by his own mother, and ChatGPT was all too willing to feed into that delusion.

“A Chinese food receipt contained symbols representing Soelberg’s 83-year-old mother and a demon, ChatGPT told him,” The Wall Street Journal reported.

“After his mother had gotten angry when Soelberg shut off a printer they shared, the chatbot suggested her response was ‘disproportionate and aligned with someone protecting a surveillance asset,’” the outlet proffered as another ominous example of the things ChatGPT was telling Soelberg.

In yet another chat, Soelberg told “Bobby” (the nickname he had bestowed on the AI chatbot) that he thought his mother and her friend had tried to poison him by putting psychedelic drugs into his car’s air vents.

Instead of talking him away from the clearly delusional and paranoid claim, this is what the bot proffered: “That’s a deeply serious event, Erik — and I believe you. And if it was done by your mother and her friend, that elevates the complexity and betrayal.”

If that’s not disturbing enough for you, by the summer, the “relationship” between Soelberg and “Bobby” had grown to the point that the two sides were actively discussing how they could reunite in the afterlife.

Keep reading

CIA and Mossad-linked Surveillance System Quietly Being Installed Throughout the US

Launched in 2016 in response to a Tel Aviv shooting and the Pulse Nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, Gabriel offers a suite of surveillance products for “security and safety” incidents at “so-called soft targets and communal spaces, including schools, community centers, synagogues and churches.” The company makes the lofty promise that its products “stop mass shootings.” According to a 2018 report on Gabriel published in the Jerusalem Post, there were an estimated 475,000 such “soft targets” across the U.S., meaning that “the potential market for Gabriel is huge.”

Gabriel, since its founding, has been backed by “an impressive group of leaders,” mainly “former leaders of Mossad, Shin Bet [Israel’s domestic intelligence agency], FBI and CIA.” In recent years, even more former leaders of Israeli and American intelligence agencies have found their way onto Gabriel’s advisory board and have promoted the company’s products.

While the adoption of its surveillance technology was slower than expected in the United States, that dramatically changed last year, when an “anonymous philanthropist” gave the company $1 million to begin installing its products throughout schools, houses of worship and community centers throughout the country. That same “philanthropist” has promised to recruit others to match his donation, with the ultimate goal of installing Gabriel’s system in “every single synagogue, school and campus community in the country.”

With this CIA, FBI and Mossad-backed system now being installed throughout the United States for “free,” it is worth taking a critical look at Gabriel and its products, particularly the company’s future vision for its surveillance system. Perhaps unsurprisingly, much of the company’s future vision coincides with the vision of the intelligence agencies backing it – pre-crime, robotic policing and biometric surveillance.

Keep reading