ReportWire

Tag: Technology

  • GRAND TRAVERSE: Tech problems dog AI dispatch system rollout; program requires ‘babysitting,’ unpopular with callers, dispatchers

    [ad_1]

    TRAVERSE CITY — A full rollout of Grand Traverse County’s Central Dispatch AI assistant has been delayed because of technical problems.

    The county’s implementation of the new automated assistant software program for non-emergency Central Dispatch calls has been plagued by program mistakes, requiring monitoring to ensure it’s working properly, Central Dispatch Director Corey LeCureux said.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAmr6?EC2= s:DA2E49 😀 C6DA@?D:3=6 7@C C6DA@?5:?8 E@ 2== 42==D 7C@> h“ 2D H6== 2D E96 4@F?EJ ?@?6>6C86?4J ?F>36C ab`haacdd_]k^Am

    kAm%96 ?6H DJDE6> — 42==65 pFC6=:2? px — 😀 56D:8?65 E@ 2?DH6C 42==D E@ E96 4@F?EJ’D ?@?6>6C86?4J ?F>36C 2D H6== 2D E9@D6 E92E 5@?’E C6BF:C6 2 5:DA2E496C’D C6DA@?D6]k^Am

    kAm%96 6IA64E2E:@? @7 92G:?8 2 72:C=J :?56A6?56?E DJDE6> FA 2?5 CF??:?8 3J ~4E@36C 5:5 ?@E 92AA6?] %96J ?@H 6IA64E E@ 9:E E92E 8@2= ?@ D@@?6C E92? =2E6 y2?F2CJ – @C A@DD:3=J =2E6C[ 244@C5:?8 E@ {6rFC6FI]k^Am

    kAm%96 4@F?EJ D:8?65 2 E9C66J62C 4@?EC24E H:E9 pFC6=:2? 2?5 5:D4FDD:@?D 😕 yF?6 6DE:>2E65 E96 4@DE E@ CF? Se_[___ 7@C E96 7:CDE J62C 2?5 Sfa[___ 7@C DF3D6BF6?E J62CD[ E@ 36 A2:5 7C@> E96 6I:DE:?8 h“ DFC492C86 @? E6=6A9@?6 3:==D]k^Am

    kAmr@F?EJ u:?2?46 s:C64E@C s62? q@EE 4@?7:C>65 E92E E96 7:CDE J62C’D A2J>6?E H2D A2:5 😕 7F== pF8] g]k^Am

    kAm$@>6 255:E:@?2= 4@DED 92G6 366? :?4FCC65 3J pFC6=:2?[ 3FE E96 4@F?EJ 92D ?@E J6E A2:5 2?J 255:E:@?2= 4@DED 7@C E96 :>A=6>6?E2E:@?[ {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm%96 E9C66J62C 4@?EC24E 7@C E96 D@7EH2C6 H2D AFC492D65 7@C EH@ C62D@?D[ {6rFC6FI D2:5i “%@ AC@G:56 2 9:896C =6G6= @7 D6CG:46 E@ @FC 42==6CD 2?5 E96 86?6C2= AF3=:4” 2?5 E@ C65F46 E96 H@C<=@25 7@C 6>6C86?4J E6=64@>>F?:42E@CD D@ E96J 42? 7@4FD @? h“ 42==D 2?5 C25:@ EC277:4]k^Am

    kAmsFC:?8 E:>6D @7 962GJ h“ 42==D @C :?E6?D6 C25:@ EC277:4 2>@?8 7:CDE C6DA@?56CD[ 5:DA2E49 92D 925 E@ :8?@C6 – @C EFC? @77 E96 C:?86C – 7@C E96 ?@?6>6C86?4J =:?6[ {6rFC6FI D2:5] %9:D px 2DD:DE2?E H:== 9@A67F==J 6?DFC6 E92E D6CG:46D E@ 4:E:K6?D 4@?E:?F6 F?:?E6CCFAE65 5FC:?8 E:>6D @7 962GJ h“ EC277:4 2?5 C6D@=G6 D@>6 @7 E96 C62D@?D 7@C E9@D6 42==D E@ C6=:6G6 E96 3FC56? @? 5:DA2E496CD 36EH66? 6>6C86?4:6D]k^Am

    kAm“(6’C6 ?@E E96C6 J6E H:E9 E9:D AC@8C2>[ 3FE H6 9@A6 E@ 36 E96C6 D@@?[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx562==J[ E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E H:== 7:=E6C 2?5 D@CE E96 42==D 4@>:?8 😕 E@ E96 ?@?6>6C86?4J =:?6 27E6C 2 3C:67 4@?G6CD2E:@? H:E9 E96 42==6C] %96 D@7EH2C6 😀 56D:8?65 E@ 82E96C :?7@C>2E:@? 2?5 4C62E6 2? 24E:@? :E6> 7@C 5:DA2E496CD E@ 255C6DD H96? E96J 92G6 E:>6]k^Am

    kAmx7 E96 42==6C D9@F=5 92G6 4@?E24E65 2?@E96C 56A2CE>6?E[ E96 2DD:DE2?E H:== EC2?D76C @C C65:C64E E96 42==]k^Am

    kAm“p?5 E92E’D @?6 =6DD E9:?8 E92E 2? 6>6C86?4J E6=64@>>F?:42E@C 92D E@ 562= H:E9 H96? E96J’C6 562=:?8 H:E9 >65:42= 6>6C86?4:6D 2?5 =2H 6?7@C46>6?E 492D6D – 2?5 2== E96 @E96C E9:?8D E92E E96J 562= H:E9[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmqFE :7 E96 42== 5@6D 4@?46C? 2? 6>6C86?4J[ E96? E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E 😀 D6E FA E@ EC2?D76C :E 5:C64E=J E@ 2 5:DA2E496C]k^Am

    kAmp? 2F5:E @7 =2DE J62C’D 42==D D9@H65 E92E 23@FE `f A6C46?E @7 E9@D6 E92E 42>6 😕 2D ?@?6>6C86?4:6D 24EF2==J C6BF:C65 2? 6>6C86?4J C6DA@?D6[ {6rFC6FI D2:5] s:DA2E49 H@C<6CD 92G6 366? H@C<:?8 H:E9 E96 pFC6=:2? AC@8C2> E@ AC@A6C=J D6E FA E96 2DD:DE2?E E@ :56?E:7J 2?5 C6DA@?5 E@ E96D6 EJA6D @7 42==D]k^Am

    kAm%96 DJDE6> :D?’E A6C764E[ {6rFC6FI D2:5[ 3FE :E 😀 86EE:?8 36EE6C]k^Am

    kAm“tG6CJ 52J[ H6’C6 7:?5:?8 2C62D @7 H62:DE2<6D[ 492?86D E92E H6 ?665 E@ >2<6[” 96 D2:5[ 255:?8 E92E E96 4@>A2?J 92D 366? C6DA@?D:G6 2?5 :>A=6>6?ED 492?86D BF:4<=J]k^Am

    kAmvC2?5 %C2G6CD6 r@F?EJ $96C:77’D {E] y@? |@C82? D2:5 96 92D ?@E:465 2? :>AC@G6>6?E 😕 E96 2DD:DE2?E’D 23:=:EJ E@ 4@?E24E E96 4@CC64E 286?4J]k^Am

    kAmqFE :E’D E96 5:DA2E496CD H9@ DE:== D66> E@ 36 >2<:?8 E92E 7:?2= 42== @? H96E96C E@ C6BF6DE 56AFE:6D[ D@ “2 9F>2? 😀 DE:== E@F49:?8 E92E 42== ;24<6E 367@C6 H6 D66 :E[” |@C82? D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“x7 E96C6 😀 2? 6CC@C[ :7 E96C6’D 2?JE9:?8 E92E’D F?4=62C[ E96 5:DA2E496C 7:I6D E92E 367@C6 AFEE:?8 :E @FE E@ FD – @C E96J 86E 4=2C:7:42E:@? 7C@> E96 42==6C[” 96 25565]k^Am

    kAm~E96C 492?86D 2C6 >:?:>2=[ |@C82? D2:5] u@C 6I2>A=6[ E96 @?=J 5:776C6?46 @? E96 42== D4C66? 7@C C6DA@?5:?8 56AFE:6D 😀 E96 :?5:42E:@? E92E 46CE2:? ?@E6D H6C6 4C62E65 3J E96 pFC6=:2? DJDE6>]k^Am

    k9bm$*$%t| $t%&!k^9bm

    kAm}F>6C@FD E649?:42= :DDF6D 92G6 366? :?G@=G65 😕 :>A=6>6?E:?8 E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E[ H:E9 E96 3:886DE EH@ 36:?8 4@>A2E:3:=:EJ :DDF6D 2?5 AC@8C2>>:?8 E96 2DD:DE2?E’D C6DA@?D6D]k^Am

    kAm{6rFC6FI D2:5 @?6 @7 E96 :DDF6D E92E C62==J 56=2J65 E96 AC@;64E H2D 7:?5:?8 2 H@C<2C@F?5 7@C E96 4@F?EJ’D A9@?6 ?6EH@C<[ H9:49 H2D?’E 4@>A2E:3=6 H:E9 E96 px DJDE6>] %96 D@=FE:@? H2D E@ CF? 2== 42==D E9C@F89 E96 :?E6C?6E 5:C64E=J E@ E96 pFC6=:2? DJDE6>]k^Am

    kAms:DA2E496CD >@?:E@C E96 :?4@>:?8 2FE@>2E65 DJDE6>’D C6DA@?D6D @? pFC6=:2?’D H63D:E6[ 6?DFC6 ?@ 6>6C86?4:6D 2C6 >:DD65 2?5 C6DA@?5 E@ ?@?6>6C86?4J 42==D H96? E:>6 2==@HD]k^Am

    kAmz66A:?8 2? 6J6 @? EH@ D6A2C2E6 >@?:E@CD 😀 4FCC6?E=J 2 DEC2:? @? 5:DA2E496CD[ H9@ 2=C625J 562= H:E9 `c @E96C D@7EH2C6 DJDE6>D @? E96 ;@3[ {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“%96J’C6 2=C625J <:?5 @7 AC6DD65 E@ E96 >2I @? E96:C 3C2:? A@H6C 2?5 E96 =:>:ED @7 9F>2? 23:=:EJ E@ >F=E:E2D< 2?5 ?@H H6’C6 2D<:?8 E96> E@ 5@ @?6 >@C6 E9:?8 2?5 E92E’D @3G:@FD=J ?@E 8@:?8 E@ 36 G6CJ A@AF=2C[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx?4@CA@C2E:?8 E96 42==D :?E@ E96 4FCC6?E 4@>AFE6C2:565 5:DA2E49 DJDE6> 😀 @?6 @7 E96 :DDF6D E92E DE:== ?665D E@ 36 255C6DD65[ 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx562==J[ pFC6=:2? H@F=5 EC2?DA@D6 E96 :?7@C>2E:@? :?E@ E96 56A2CE>6?E’D DJDE6>[ D2G:?8 E96 5:DA2E496CD 7C@> E92E E2D< 2?5 2==@H:?8 E96> E@ H@C< @77 @?6 D4C66?]k^Am

    kAm“(6 2C6 4=@D6 E@ 86EE:?8 E92E :?E6C7246[ 3FE :E’D E2<6? BF:E6 2 3:E @7 H@C< @? @FC E649?:42= DFAA@CE E62>[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmqFE[ 3642FD6 E96 AC@8C2> 😀 DE:== 36:?8 >@5:7:65[ E96C6 2C6 7C6BF6?E >:DF?56CDE2?5:?8D @? E96 A2CE @7 E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E[ H9:49 C6BF:C6D “323JD:EE:?8[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmpFC6=:2? 😀 4@>A=:2?E H:E9 4@F?EJ AC:G24J C6BF:C6>6?ED[ FE:=:K6D 6?4CJAE:@? 2?5 😀 46CE:7:65 3J E96 7656C2= rC:>:?2= yFDE:46 x?7@C>2E:@? $6CG:46D[ {6rFC6FI D2:5] %96 4@>A2?J DE@C6D C64@C5:?8D @7 E96 42==D E92E E96 4@F?EJ 42? 2446DD G:2 E96 :?E6C?6E 2D H6==]k^Am

    kAm%96 @E96C >2;@C :DDF6 E96 56A2CE>6?E 92D 366? H@C<:?8 E@ C6D@=G6 😀 E96 AC@8C2>>:?8 @7 E96 2DD:DE2?E’D C6DA@?D6]k^Am

    kAm“uC@> H92E H6’C6 962C:?8 7C@> pFC6=:2?[ E96 4@>A2?J[ H6 92G6 2 G6CJ 4@>A=6I DJDE6> 4@>A2C65 E@ @E96C h“ 46?E6CD 😕 9@H H6 E2<6 E96 42==D 2?5 9@H H6 C@FE6 E9@D6[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmpFC6=:2? 😀 ?@E FD:?8 D6=7E6249:?8 px 3642FD6 @7 :ED F?AC65:4E23:=:EJ 2?5 42A24:EJ E@ 92==F4:?2E6[ 96 D2:5] “%96C6’D 2 =@E @7 D276EJ 4@?46C?D E92E 4@>6 7C@> ;FDE E96 ?@E:@? @7 =6EE:?8 2? px 5@ :ED E9:?8]”k^Am

    kAm%@ 2G@:5 E9@D6 :DDF6D[ E96 DJDE6> 😀 36:?8 56G6=@A65 F?56C E96 56A2CE>6?E’D 8F:52?46 H:E9 pFC6=:2?]k^Am

    kAm%96 4@>A2?J 😀 AC@8C2>>:?8 2 D6C:6D @7 A2E9H2JD H:E9 “:7[ E96?” AC@>AED D@ E92E[ 7@C 6I2>A=6[ :7 2 42==6C D2JD E96J ?665 E@ DA62< H:E9 D@>6@?6 2E E96 ;2:=[ E96 AC@8C2> 4@??64ED E96> H:E9 E96 4@F?EJ ;2:=]k^Am

    kAm{2DE J62C[ E96 56A2CE>6?E E@@< 23@FE “_[___ 42==D[ e_[___ @7 H9:49 H6C6 ?@?6>6C86?4:6D] p A@CE:@? @7 E9@D6 42==D H6C6 2?2=JK65 3J E96 56A2CE>6?E E@ 96=A 4C62E6 E96D6 A2E9H2JD 2?5 E96 AC676CC65 C6DA@?D6D H9:49 H6C6 E96? D92C65 H:E9 pFC6=:2?]k^Am

    kAm{6rFC6FI D2:5 E96J 2C6 DA6?5:?8 H66>:?8 E96 DJDE6> E@ C6DA@?5 😕 2 H2J E92E :E E2<6D 5:DA2E496CD b_ D64@?5D E@ 5@ – 2?5 A2CE @7 E96 C62D@? 😀 E96 G2DE 2>@F?E @7 :?7@C>2E:@? :?G@=G65] x?7@C>2E:@? 23@FE E96 G2C:@FD =2H 6?7@C46>6?E 286?4:6D 2?5 7:CDE C6DA@?56CD 92D E@ 36 :?4@CA@C2E65[ 2=@?8 H:E9 E96:C ;FC:D5:4E:@?D 2?5 C6BF:C6>6?ED 7@C 36DE AC24E:46D] r@F?EJ :?7@C>2E:@? 2?5 86@8C2A9J 2=D@ ?665 E@ 36 4@?D:56C65]k^Am

    kAm“$@[ 7@C E96 9F?5C65D @7 5:776C6?E E9:?8D E92E D@>63@5J 4@F=5 36 42==:?8 23@FE[ 6249 @7 E9@D6 92D 366? 2 G6CJ =23@C:@FD AC@46DD E@ >2<6 DFC6 E92E H6 2C6 C@FE:?8 E9@D6 42==D FA E@ @FC DE2?52C5D[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    k9bm%wt #t$!~}$tk^9bm

    kAm%9FD 72C[ :E D66>D E92E E96 DJDE6> 😀 5:D=:<65 3J 5:DA2E496CD 3642FD6 @7 E96 :?4C62D65 H@C< :?G@=G65 E@ EC2:? :E[ 2?5 3J 42==6CD[ H9@ 2C6?’E FD:?8 :E AC@A6C=J[ {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx? 255:E:@? E@ E96 6IEC2 D4C66? >@?:E@C:?8 2?5 EC2?D:E:@?:?8 36EH66? AC@8C2>D[ @?46 2? 24E:@? :E6> 😀 4@>A=6E6[ DE2776CD ?665 E@ C2E6 9@H E96 DJDE6> 5:5 2?5 AC@G:56 7665324< 7@C :>AC@G6>6?ED]k^Am

    kAm“(:E9 9F?5C65D 2?5 9F?5C65D @7 E96D6 42==D 4@>:?8 :?[ E9:D 4C62E6D 2? 255:E:@?2= DE6A E92E H6 92G6 E@ E2<6 😕 @C56C E@ EC2:? E96 DJDE6>[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm%9:D 6IEC2 H@C<=@25 92D =67E E96 h“ E62> F?92AAJ[ H9:49 “:D E96 =2DE E9:?8 E92E H6 H2?E[” 96 D2:5[ “3FE H6 9@A6 E9:D 6IA6C:6?46 :>AC@G6D D@@?]”k^Am

    kAm“%96C6 92D 366? 2 =@E @7 7665324< – 2?5 ?@?6 @7 :E 8@@5[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm~?46 E96 DJDE6> 😀 FA 2?5 CF??:?8 :?56A6?56?E=J[ 96 😀 9@A:?8 E@ AC:@C:E:K6 AF3=:4 65F42E:@? E@ E6249 A6@A=6 9@H E@ :?E6C24E H:E9 E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E]k^Am

    kAm%96 C6DF=E H:== 36 36EE6C[ 72DE6C D6CG:46 :7 42==6CD 42? 6?8286 H:E9 :E 4@?G6CD2E:@?2==J[ 96 D2:5[ ?@E:?8 E92E 42==D 2C6 6IA64E65 E@ =2DE EH@ >:?FE6D @? 2G6C286]k^Am

    kAm“qFE H96? A6@A=6 2C6 C6D:DE2?E E@ :E 2?5 EC62E :E =:<6 J@F H@F=5 EC62E 2?J @E96C A9@?6 EC66[ :E’D 8@:?8 E@ E2<6 2 =@E =@?86C[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx7 E96 AC@3=6>D 42?’E 36 D@=G65[ E96 56A2CE>6?E >2J 92G6 E@ 232?5@? E96 AC@;64E]k^Am

    kAmqFE {6rFC6FI E9:? @776CD 2 A@E6?E:2==J =2C86 36?67:E E@ E96 4@>>F?:EJ]k^Am

    kAm“%9:D 😀 >256 7@C AF3=:4 D276EJ[ 2?5 :E’D ?@E =:<6 E96 @?6 2E J@FC 46== A9@?6 4@>A2?J[” 96 D2:5] “%9:D E9:?8 42? 5@ H2J >@C6 – 2?5 :E’D 4FDE@>:K65 7@C vC2?5 %C2G6CD6 r@F?EJ]”k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Kathryn Depauw KDePauw@record-eagle.com

    Source link

  • GRAND TRAVERSE: Tech problems dog AI dispatch system rollout; program requires ‘babysitting,’ unpopular with callers, dispatchers

    [ad_1]

    TRAVERSE CITY — A full rollout of Grand Traverse County’s Central Dispatch AI assistant has been delayed because of technical problems.

    The county’s implementation of the new automated assistant software program for non-emergency Central Dispatch calls has been plagued by program mistakes, requiring monitoring to ensure it’s working properly, Central Dispatch Director Corey LeCureux said.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAmr6?EC2= s:DA2E49 😀 C6DA@?D:3=6 7@C C6DA@?5:?8 E@ 2== 42==D 7C@> h“ 2D H6== 2D E96 4@F?EJ ?@?6>6C86?4J ?F>36C ab`haacdd_]k^Am

    kAm%96 ?6H DJDE6> — 42==65 pFC6=:2? px — 😀 56D:8?65 E@ 2?DH6C 42==D E@ E96 4@F?EJ’D ?@?6>6C86?4J ?F>36C 2D H6== 2D E9@D6 E92E 5@?’E C6BF:C6 2 5:DA2E496C’D C6DA@?D6]k^Am

    kAm%96 6IA64E2E:@? @7 92G:?8 2 72:C=J :?56A6?56?E DJDE6> FA 2?5 CF??:?8 3J ~4E@36C 5:5 ?@E 92AA6?] %96J ?@H 6IA64E E@ 9:E E92E 8@2= ?@ D@@?6C E92? =2E6 y2?F2CJ – @C A@DD:3=J =2E6C[ 244@C5:?8 E@ {6rFC6FI]k^Am

    kAm%96 4@F?EJ D:8?65 2 E9C66J62C 4@?EC24E H:E9 pFC6=:2? 2?5 5:D4FDD:@?D 😕 yF?6 6DE:>2E65 E96 4@DE E@ CF? Se_[___ 7@C E96 7:CDE J62C 2?5 Sfa[___ 7@C DF3D6BF6?E J62CD[ E@ 36 A2:5 7C@> E96 6I:DE:?8 h“ DFC492C86 @? E6=6A9@?6 3:==D]k^Am

    kAmr@F?EJ u:?2?46 s:C64E@C s62? q@EE 4@?7:C>65 E92E E96 7:CDE J62C’D A2J>6?E H2D A2:5 😕 7F== pF8] g]k^Am

    kAm$@>6 255:E:@?2= 4@DED 92G6 366? :?4FCC65 3J pFC6=:2?[ 3FE E96 4@F?EJ 92D ?@E J6E A2:5 2?J 255:E:@?2= 4@DED 7@C E96 :>A=6>6?E2E:@?[ {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm%96 E9C66J62C 4@?EC24E 7@C E96 D@7EH2C6 H2D AFC492D65 7@C EH@ C62D@?D[ {6rFC6FI D2:5i “%@ AC@G:56 2 9:896C =6G6= @7 D6CG:46 E@ @FC 42==6CD 2?5 E96 86?6C2= AF3=:4” 2?5 E@ C65F46 E96 H@C<=@25 7@C 6>6C86?4J E6=64@>>F?:42E@CD D@ E96J 42? 7@4FD @? h“ 42==D 2?5 C25:@ EC277:4]k^Am

    kAmsFC:?8 E:>6D @7 962GJ h“ 42==D @C :?E6?D6 C25:@ EC277:4 2>@?8 7:CDE C6DA@?56CD[ 5:DA2E49 92D 925 E@ :8?@C6 – @C EFC? @77 E96 C:?86C – 7@C E96 ?@?6>6C86?4J =:?6[ {6rFC6FI D2:5] %9:D px 2DD:DE2?E H:== 9@A67F==J 6?DFC6 E92E D6CG:46D E@ 4:E:K6?D 4@?E:?F6 F?:?E6CCFAE65 5FC:?8 E:>6D @7 962GJ h“ EC277:4 2?5 C6D@=G6 D@>6 @7 E96 C62D@?D 7@C E9@D6 42==D E@ C6=:6G6 E96 3FC56? @? 5:DA2E496CD 36EH66? 6>6C86?4:6D]k^Am

    kAm“(6’C6 ?@E E96C6 J6E H:E9 E9:D AC@8C2>[ 3FE H6 9@A6 E@ 36 E96C6 D@@?[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx562==J[ E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E H:== 7:=E6C 2?5 D@CE E96 42==D 4@>:?8 😕 E@ E96 ?@?6>6C86?4J =:?6 27E6C 2 3C:67 4@?G6CD2E:@? H:E9 E96 42==6C] %96 D@7EH2C6 😀 56D:8?65 E@ 82E96C :?7@C>2E:@? 2?5 4C62E6 2? 24E:@? :E6> 7@C 5:DA2E496CD E@ 255C6DD H96? E96J 92G6 E:>6]k^Am

    kAmx7 E96 42==6C D9@F=5 92G6 4@?E24E65 2?@E96C 56A2CE>6?E[ E96 2DD:DE2?E H:== EC2?D76C @C C65:C64E E96 42==]k^Am

    kAm“p?5 E92E’D @?6 =6DD E9:?8 E92E 2? 6>6C86?4J E6=64@>>F?:42E@C 92D E@ 562= H:E9 H96? E96J’C6 562=:?8 H:E9 >65:42= 6>6C86?4:6D 2?5 =2H 6?7@C46>6?E 492D6D – 2?5 2== E96 @E96C E9:?8D E92E E96J 562= H:E9[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmqFE :7 E96 42== 5@6D 4@?46C? 2? 6>6C86?4J[ E96? E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E 😀 D6E FA E@ EC2?D76C :E 5:C64E=J E@ 2 5:DA2E496C]k^Am

    kAmp? 2F5:E @7 =2DE J62C’D 42==D D9@H65 E92E 23@FE `f A6C46?E @7 E9@D6 E92E 42>6 😕 2D ?@?6>6C86?4:6D 24EF2==J C6BF:C65 2? 6>6C86?4J C6DA@?D6[ {6rFC6FI D2:5] s:DA2E49 H@C<6CD 92G6 366? H@C<:?8 H:E9 E96 pFC6=:2? AC@8C2> E@ AC@A6C=J D6E FA E96 2DD:DE2?E E@ :56?E:7J 2?5 C6DA@?5 E@ E96D6 EJA6D @7 42==D]k^Am

    kAm%96 DJDE6> :D?’E A6C764E[ {6rFC6FI D2:5[ 3FE :E 😀 86EE:?8 36EE6C]k^Am

    kAm“tG6CJ 52J[ H6’C6 7:?5:?8 2C62D @7 H62:DE2<6D[ 492?86D E92E H6 ?665 E@ >2<6[” 96 D2:5[ 255:?8 E92E E96 4@>A2?J 92D 366? C6DA@?D:G6 2?5 :>A=6>6?ED 492?86D BF:4<=J]k^Am

    kAmvC2?5 %C2G6CD6 r@F?EJ $96C:77’D {E] y@? |@C82? D2:5 96 92D ?@E:465 2? :>AC@G6>6?E 😕 E96 2DD:DE2?E’D 23:=:EJ E@ 4@?E24E E96 4@CC64E 286?4J]k^Am

    kAmqFE :E’D E96 5:DA2E496CD H9@ DE:== D66> E@ 36 >2<:?8 E92E 7:?2= 42== @? H96E96C E@ C6BF6DE 56AFE:6D[ D@ “2 9F>2? 😀 DE:== E@F49:?8 E92E 42== ;24<6E 367@C6 H6 D66 :E[” |@C82? D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“x7 E96C6 😀 2? 6CC@C[ :7 E96C6’D 2?JE9:?8 E92E’D F?4=62C[ E96 5:DA2E496C 7:I6D E92E 367@C6 AFEE:?8 :E @FE E@ FD – @C E96J 86E 4=2C:7:42E:@? 7C@> E96 42==6C[” 96 25565]k^Am

    kAm~E96C 492?86D 2C6 >:?:>2=[ |@C82? D2:5] u@C 6I2>A=6[ E96 @?=J 5:776C6?46 @? E96 42== D4C66? 7@C C6DA@?5:?8 56AFE:6D 😀 E96 :?5:42E:@? E92E 46CE2:? ?@E6D H6C6 4C62E65 3J E96 pFC6=:2? DJDE6>]k^Am

    k9bm$*$%t| $t%&!k^9bm

    kAm}F>6C@FD E649?:42= :DDF6D 92G6 366? :?G@=G65 😕 :>A=6>6?E:?8 E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E[ H:E9 E96 3:886DE EH@ 36:?8 4@>A2E:3:=:EJ :DDF6D 2?5 AC@8C2>>:?8 E96 2DD:DE2?E’D C6DA@?D6D]k^Am

    kAm{6rFC6FI D2:5 @?6 @7 E96 :DDF6D E92E C62==J 56=2J65 E96 AC@;64E H2D 7:?5:?8 2 H@C<2C@F?5 7@C E96 4@F?EJ’D A9@?6 ?6EH@C<[ H9:49 H2D?’E 4@>A2E:3=6 H:E9 E96 px DJDE6>] %96 D@=FE:@? H2D E@ CF? 2== 42==D E9C@F89 E96 :?E6C?6E 5:C64E=J E@ E96 pFC6=:2? DJDE6>]k^Am

    kAms:DA2E496CD >@?:E@C E96 :?4@>:?8 2FE@>2E65 DJDE6>’D C6DA@?D6D @? pFC6=:2?’D H63D:E6[ 6?DFC6 ?@ 6>6C86?4:6D 2C6 >:DD65 2?5 C6DA@?5 E@ ?@?6>6C86?4J 42==D H96? E:>6 2==@HD]k^Am

    kAmz66A:?8 2? 6J6 @? EH@ D6A2C2E6 >@?:E@CD 😀 4FCC6?E=J 2 DEC2:? @? 5:DA2E496CD[ H9@ 2=C625J 562= H:E9 `c @E96C D@7EH2C6 DJDE6>D @? E96 ;@3[ {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“%96J’C6 2=C625J <:?5 @7 AC6DD65 E@ E96 >2I @? E96:C 3C2:? A@H6C 2?5 E96 =:>:ED @7 9F>2? 23:=:EJ E@ >F=E:E2D< 2?5 ?@H H6’C6 2D<:?8 E96> E@ 5@ @?6 >@C6 E9:?8 2?5 E92E’D @3G:@FD=J ?@E 8@:?8 E@ 36 G6CJ A@AF=2C[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx?4@CA@C2E:?8 E96 42==D :?E@ E96 4FCC6?E 4@>AFE6C2:565 5:DA2E49 DJDE6> 😀 @?6 @7 E96 :DDF6D E92E DE:== ?665D E@ 36 255C6DD65[ 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx562==J[ pFC6=:2? H@F=5 EC2?DA@D6 E96 :?7@C>2E:@? :?E@ E96 56A2CE>6?E’D DJDE6>[ D2G:?8 E96 5:DA2E496CD 7C@> E92E E2D< 2?5 2==@H:?8 E96> E@ H@C< @77 @?6 D4C66?]k^Am

    kAm“(6 2C6 4=@D6 E@ 86EE:?8 E92E :?E6C7246[ 3FE :E’D E2<6? BF:E6 2 3:E @7 H@C< @? @FC E649?:42= DFAA@CE E62>[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmqFE[ 3642FD6 E96 AC@8C2> 😀 DE:== 36:?8 >@5:7:65[ E96C6 2C6 7C6BF6?E >:DF?56CDE2?5:?8D @? E96 A2CE @7 E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E[ H9:49 C6BF:C6D “323JD:EE:?8[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmpFC6=:2? 😀 4@>A=:2?E H:E9 4@F?EJ AC:G24J C6BF:C6>6?ED[ FE:=:K6D 6?4CJAE:@? 2?5 😀 46CE:7:65 3J E96 7656C2= rC:>:?2= yFDE:46 x?7@C>2E:@? $6CG:46D[ {6rFC6FI D2:5] %96 4@>A2?J DE@C6D C64@C5:?8D @7 E96 42==D E92E E96 4@F?EJ 42? 2446DD G:2 E96 :?E6C?6E 2D H6==]k^Am

    kAm%96 @E96C >2;@C :DDF6 E96 56A2CE>6?E 92D 366? H@C<:?8 E@ C6D@=G6 😀 E96 AC@8C2>>:?8 @7 E96 2DD:DE2?E’D C6DA@?D6]k^Am

    kAm“uC@> H92E H6’C6 962C:?8 7C@> pFC6=:2?[ E96 4@>A2?J[ H6 92G6 2 G6CJ 4@>A=6I DJDE6> 4@>A2C65 E@ @E96C h“ 46?E6CD 😕 9@H H6 E2<6 E96 42==D 2?5 9@H H6 C@FE6 E9@D6[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmpFC6=:2? 😀 ?@E FD:?8 D6=7E6249:?8 px 3642FD6 @7 :ED F?AC65:4E23:=:EJ 2?5 42A24:EJ E@ 92==F4:?2E6[ 96 D2:5] “%96C6’D 2 =@E @7 D276EJ 4@?46C?D E92E 4@>6 7C@> ;FDE E96 ?@E:@? @7 =6EE:?8 2? px 5@ :ED E9:?8]”k^Am

    kAm%@ 2G@:5 E9@D6 :DDF6D[ E96 DJDE6> 😀 36:?8 56G6=@A65 F?56C E96 56A2CE>6?E’D 8F:52?46 H:E9 pFC6=:2?]k^Am

    kAm%96 4@>A2?J 😀 AC@8C2>>:?8 2 D6C:6D @7 A2E9H2JD H:E9 “:7[ E96?” AC@>AED D@ E92E[ 7@C 6I2>A=6[ :7 2 42==6C D2JD E96J ?665 E@ DA62< H:E9 D@>6@?6 2E E96 ;2:=[ E96 AC@8C2> 4@??64ED E96> H:E9 E96 4@F?EJ ;2:=]k^Am

    kAm{2DE J62C[ E96 56A2CE>6?E E@@< 23@FE “_[___ 42==D[ e_[___ @7 H9:49 H6C6 ?@?6>6C86?4:6D] p A@CE:@? @7 E9@D6 42==D H6C6 2?2=JK65 3J E96 56A2CE>6?E E@ 96=A 4C62E6 E96D6 A2E9H2JD 2?5 E96 AC676CC65 C6DA@?D6D H9:49 H6C6 E96? D92C65 H:E9 pFC6=:2?]k^Am

    kAm{6rFC6FI D2:5 E96J 2C6 DA6?5:?8 H66>:?8 E96 DJDE6> E@ C6DA@?5 😕 2 H2J E92E :E E2<6D 5:DA2E496CD b_ D64@?5D E@ 5@ – 2?5 A2CE @7 E96 C62D@? 😀 E96 G2DE 2>@F?E @7 :?7@C>2E:@? :?G@=G65] x?7@C>2E:@? 23@FE E96 G2C:@FD =2H 6?7@C46>6?E 286?4:6D 2?5 7:CDE C6DA@?56CD 92D E@ 36 :?4@CA@C2E65[ 2=@?8 H:E9 E96:C ;FC:D5:4E:@?D 2?5 C6BF:C6>6?ED 7@C 36DE AC24E:46D] r@F?EJ :?7@C>2E:@? 2?5 86@8C2A9J 2=D@ ?665 E@ 36 4@?D:56C65]k^Am

    kAm“$@[ 7@C E96 9F?5C65D @7 5:776C6?E E9:?8D E92E D@>63@5J 4@F=5 36 42==:?8 23@FE[ 6249 @7 E9@D6 92D 366? 2 G6CJ =23@C:@FD AC@46DD E@ >2<6 DFC6 E92E H6 2C6 C@FE:?8 E9@D6 42==D FA E@ @FC DE2?52C5D[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    k9bm%wt #t$!~}$tk^9bm

    kAm%9FD 72C[ :E D66>D E92E E96 DJDE6> 😀 5:D=:<65 3J 5:DA2E496CD 3642FD6 @7 E96 :?4C62D65 H@C< :?G@=G65 E@ EC2:? :E[ 2?5 3J 42==6CD[ H9@ 2C6?’E FD:?8 :E AC@A6C=J[ {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx? 255:E:@? E@ E96 6IEC2 D4C66? >@?:E@C:?8 2?5 EC2?D:E:@?:?8 36EH66? AC@8C2>D[ @?46 2? 24E:@? :E6> 😀 4@>A=6E6[ DE2776CD ?665 E@ C2E6 9@H E96 DJDE6> 5:5 2?5 AC@G:56 7665324< 7@C :>AC@G6>6?ED]k^Am

    kAm“(:E9 9F?5C65D 2?5 9F?5C65D @7 E96D6 42==D 4@>:?8 :?[ E9:D 4C62E6D 2? 255:E:@?2= DE6A E92E H6 92G6 E@ E2<6 😕 @C56C E@ EC2:? E96 DJDE6>[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm%9:D 6IEC2 H@C<=@25 92D =67E E96 h“ E62> F?92AAJ[ H9:49 “:D E96 =2DE E9:?8 E92E H6 H2?E[” 96 D2:5[ “3FE H6 9@A6 E9:D 6IA6C:6?46 :>AC@G6D D@@?]”k^Am

    kAm“%96C6 92D 366? 2 =@E @7 7665324< – 2?5 ?@?6 @7 :E 8@@5[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm~?46 E96 DJDE6> 😀 FA 2?5 CF??:?8 :?56A6?56?E=J[ 96 😀 9@A:?8 E@ AC:@C:E:K6 AF3=:4 65F42E:@? E@ E6249 A6@A=6 9@H E@ :?E6C24E H:E9 E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E]k^Am

    kAm%96 C6DF=E H:== 36 36EE6C[ 72DE6C D6CG:46 :7 42==6CD 42? 6?8286 H:E9 :E 4@?G6CD2E:@?2==J[ 96 D2:5[ ?@E:?8 E92E 42==D 2C6 6IA64E65 E@ =2DE EH@ >:?FE6D @? 2G6C286]k^Am

    kAm“qFE H96? A6@A=6 2C6 C6D:DE2?E E@ :E 2?5 EC62E :E =:<6 J@F H@F=5 EC62E 2?J @E96C A9@?6 EC66[ :E’D 8@:?8 E@ E2<6 2 =@E =@?86C[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx7 E96 AC@3=6>D 42?’E 36 D@=G65[ E96 56A2CE>6?E >2J 92G6 E@ 232?5@? E96 AC@;64E]k^Am

    kAmqFE {6rFC6FI E9:? @776CD 2 A@E6?E:2==J =2C86 36?67:E E@ E96 4@>>F?:EJ]k^Am

    kAm“%9:D 😀 >256 7@C AF3=:4 D276EJ[ 2?5 :E’D ?@E =:<6 E96 @?6 2E J@FC 46== A9@?6 4@>A2?J[” 96 D2:5] “%9:D E9:?8 42? 5@ H2J >@C6 – 2?5 :E’D 4FDE@>:K65 7@C vC2?5 %C2G6CD6 r@F?EJ]”k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Kathryn Depauw KDePauw@record-eagle.com

    Source link

  • GRAND TRAVERSE: Tech problems dog AI dispatch system rollout; program requires ‘babysitting,’ unpopular with callers, dispatchers

    [ad_1]

    TRAVERSE CITY — A full rollout of Grand Traverse County’s Central Dispatch AI assistant has been delayed because of technical problems.

    The county’s implementation of the new automated assistant software program for non-emergency Central Dispatch calls has been plagued by program mistakes, requiring monitoring to ensure it’s working properly, Central Dispatch Director Corey LeCureux said.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAmr6?EC2= s:DA2E49 😀 C6DA@?D:3=6 7@C C6DA@?5:?8 E@ 2== 42==D 7C@> h“ 2D H6== 2D E96 4@F?EJ ?@?6>6C86?4J ?F>36C ab`haacdd_]k^Am

    kAm%96 ?6H DJDE6> — 42==65 pFC6=:2? px — 😀 56D:8?65 E@ 2?DH6C 42==D E@ E96 4@F?EJ’D ?@?6>6C86?4J ?F>36C 2D H6== 2D E9@D6 E92E 5@?’E C6BF:C6 2 5:DA2E496C’D C6DA@?D6]k^Am

    kAm%96 6IA64E2E:@? @7 92G:?8 2 72:C=J :?56A6?56?E DJDE6> FA 2?5 CF??:?8 3J ~4E@36C 5:5 ?@E 92AA6?] %96J ?@H 6IA64E E@ 9:E E92E 8@2= ?@ D@@?6C E92? =2E6 y2?F2CJ – @C A@DD:3=J =2E6C[ 244@C5:?8 E@ {6rFC6FI]k^Am

    kAm%96 4@F?EJ D:8?65 2 E9C66J62C 4@?EC24E H:E9 pFC6=:2? 2?5 5:D4FDD:@?D 😕 yF?6 6DE:>2E65 E96 4@DE E@ CF? Se_[___ 7@C E96 7:CDE J62C 2?5 Sfa[___ 7@C DF3D6BF6?E J62CD[ E@ 36 A2:5 7C@> E96 6I:DE:?8 h“ DFC492C86 @? E6=6A9@?6 3:==D]k^Am

    kAmr@F?EJ u:?2?46 s:C64E@C s62? q@EE 4@?7:C>65 E92E E96 7:CDE J62C’D A2J>6?E H2D A2:5 😕 7F== pF8] g]k^Am

    kAm$@>6 255:E:@?2= 4@DED 92G6 366? :?4FCC65 3J pFC6=:2?[ 3FE E96 4@F?EJ 92D ?@E J6E A2:5 2?J 255:E:@?2= 4@DED 7@C E96 :>A=6>6?E2E:@?[ {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm%96 E9C66J62C 4@?EC24E 7@C E96 D@7EH2C6 H2D AFC492D65 7@C EH@ C62D@?D[ {6rFC6FI D2:5i “%@ AC@G:56 2 9:896C =6G6= @7 D6CG:46 E@ @FC 42==6CD 2?5 E96 86?6C2= AF3=:4” 2?5 E@ C65F46 E96 H@C<=@25 7@C 6>6C86?4J E6=64@>>F?:42E@CD D@ E96J 42? 7@4FD @? h“ 42==D 2?5 C25:@ EC277:4]k^Am

    kAmsFC:?8 E:>6D @7 962GJ h“ 42==D @C :?E6?D6 C25:@ EC277:4 2>@?8 7:CDE C6DA@?56CD[ 5:DA2E49 92D 925 E@ :8?@C6 – @C EFC? @77 E96 C:?86C – 7@C E96 ?@?6>6C86?4J =:?6[ {6rFC6FI D2:5] %9:D px 2DD:DE2?E H:== 9@A67F==J 6?DFC6 E92E D6CG:46D E@ 4:E:K6?D 4@?E:?F6 F?:?E6CCFAE65 5FC:?8 E:>6D @7 962GJ h“ EC277:4 2?5 C6D@=G6 D@>6 @7 E96 C62D@?D 7@C E9@D6 42==D E@ C6=:6G6 E96 3FC56? @? 5:DA2E496CD 36EH66? 6>6C86?4:6D]k^Am

    kAm“(6’C6 ?@E E96C6 J6E H:E9 E9:D AC@8C2>[ 3FE H6 9@A6 E@ 36 E96C6 D@@?[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx562==J[ E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E H:== 7:=E6C 2?5 D@CE E96 42==D 4@>:?8 😕 E@ E96 ?@?6>6C86?4J =:?6 27E6C 2 3C:67 4@?G6CD2E:@? H:E9 E96 42==6C] %96 D@7EH2C6 😀 56D:8?65 E@ 82E96C :?7@C>2E:@? 2?5 4C62E6 2? 24E:@? :E6> 7@C 5:DA2E496CD E@ 255C6DD H96? E96J 92G6 E:>6]k^Am

    kAmx7 E96 42==6C D9@F=5 92G6 4@?E24E65 2?@E96C 56A2CE>6?E[ E96 2DD:DE2?E H:== EC2?D76C @C C65:C64E E96 42==]k^Am

    kAm“p?5 E92E’D @?6 =6DD E9:?8 E92E 2? 6>6C86?4J E6=64@>>F?:42E@C 92D E@ 562= H:E9 H96? E96J’C6 562=:?8 H:E9 >65:42= 6>6C86?4:6D 2?5 =2H 6?7@C46>6?E 492D6D – 2?5 2== E96 @E96C E9:?8D E92E E96J 562= H:E9[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmqFE :7 E96 42== 5@6D 4@?46C? 2? 6>6C86?4J[ E96? E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E 😀 D6E FA E@ EC2?D76C :E 5:C64E=J E@ 2 5:DA2E496C]k^Am

    kAmp? 2F5:E @7 =2DE J62C’D 42==D D9@H65 E92E 23@FE `f A6C46?E @7 E9@D6 E92E 42>6 😕 2D ?@?6>6C86?4:6D 24EF2==J C6BF:C65 2? 6>6C86?4J C6DA@?D6[ {6rFC6FI D2:5] s:DA2E49 H@C<6CD 92G6 366? H@C<:?8 H:E9 E96 pFC6=:2? AC@8C2> E@ AC@A6C=J D6E FA E96 2DD:DE2?E E@ :56?E:7J 2?5 C6DA@?5 E@ E96D6 EJA6D @7 42==D]k^Am

    kAm%96 DJDE6> :D?’E A6C764E[ {6rFC6FI D2:5[ 3FE :E 😀 86EE:?8 36EE6C]k^Am

    kAm“tG6CJ 52J[ H6’C6 7:?5:?8 2C62D @7 H62:DE2<6D[ 492?86D E92E H6 ?665 E@ >2<6[” 96 D2:5[ 255:?8 E92E E96 4@>A2?J 92D 366? C6DA@?D:G6 2?5 :>A=6>6?ED 492?86D BF:4<=J]k^Am

    kAmvC2?5 %C2G6CD6 r@F?EJ $96C:77’D {E] y@? |@C82? D2:5 96 92D ?@E:465 2? :>AC@G6>6?E 😕 E96 2DD:DE2?E’D 23:=:EJ E@ 4@?E24E E96 4@CC64E 286?4J]k^Am

    kAmqFE :E’D E96 5:DA2E496CD H9@ DE:== D66> E@ 36 >2<:?8 E92E 7:?2= 42== @? H96E96C E@ C6BF6DE 56AFE:6D[ D@ “2 9F>2? 😀 DE:== E@F49:?8 E92E 42== ;24<6E 367@C6 H6 D66 :E[” |@C82? D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“x7 E96C6 😀 2? 6CC@C[ :7 E96C6’D 2?JE9:?8 E92E’D F?4=62C[ E96 5:DA2E496C 7:I6D E92E 367@C6 AFEE:?8 :E @FE E@ FD – @C E96J 86E 4=2C:7:42E:@? 7C@> E96 42==6C[” 96 25565]k^Am

    kAm~E96C 492?86D 2C6 >:?:>2=[ |@C82? D2:5] u@C 6I2>A=6[ E96 @?=J 5:776C6?46 @? E96 42== D4C66? 7@C C6DA@?5:?8 56AFE:6D 😀 E96 :?5:42E:@? E92E 46CE2:? ?@E6D H6C6 4C62E65 3J E96 pFC6=:2? DJDE6>]k^Am

    k9bm$*$%t| $t%&!k^9bm

    kAm}F>6C@FD E649?:42= :DDF6D 92G6 366? :?G@=G65 😕 :>A=6>6?E:?8 E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E[ H:E9 E96 3:886DE EH@ 36:?8 4@>A2E:3:=:EJ :DDF6D 2?5 AC@8C2>>:?8 E96 2DD:DE2?E’D C6DA@?D6D]k^Am

    kAm{6rFC6FI D2:5 @?6 @7 E96 :DDF6D E92E C62==J 56=2J65 E96 AC@;64E H2D 7:?5:?8 2 H@C<2C@F?5 7@C E96 4@F?EJ’D A9@?6 ?6EH@C<[ H9:49 H2D?’E 4@>A2E:3=6 H:E9 E96 px DJDE6>] %96 D@=FE:@? H2D E@ CF? 2== 42==D E9C@F89 E96 :?E6C?6E 5:C64E=J E@ E96 pFC6=:2? DJDE6>]k^Am

    kAms:DA2E496CD >@?:E@C E96 :?4@>:?8 2FE@>2E65 DJDE6>’D C6DA@?D6D @? pFC6=:2?’D H63D:E6[ 6?DFC6 ?@ 6>6C86?4:6D 2C6 >:DD65 2?5 C6DA@?5 E@ ?@?6>6C86?4J 42==D H96? E:>6 2==@HD]k^Am

    kAmz66A:?8 2? 6J6 @? EH@ D6A2C2E6 >@?:E@CD 😀 4FCC6?E=J 2 DEC2:? @? 5:DA2E496CD[ H9@ 2=C625J 562= H:E9 `c @E96C D@7EH2C6 DJDE6>D @? E96 ;@3[ {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“%96J’C6 2=C625J <:?5 @7 AC6DD65 E@ E96 >2I @? E96:C 3C2:? A@H6C 2?5 E96 =:>:ED @7 9F>2? 23:=:EJ E@ >F=E:E2D< 2?5 ?@H H6’C6 2D<:?8 E96> E@ 5@ @?6 >@C6 E9:?8 2?5 E92E’D @3G:@FD=J ?@E 8@:?8 E@ 36 G6CJ A@AF=2C[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx?4@CA@C2E:?8 E96 42==D :?E@ E96 4FCC6?E 4@>AFE6C2:565 5:DA2E49 DJDE6> 😀 @?6 @7 E96 :DDF6D E92E DE:== ?665D E@ 36 255C6DD65[ 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx562==J[ pFC6=:2? H@F=5 EC2?DA@D6 E96 :?7@C>2E:@? :?E@ E96 56A2CE>6?E’D DJDE6>[ D2G:?8 E96 5:DA2E496CD 7C@> E92E E2D< 2?5 2==@H:?8 E96> E@ H@C< @77 @?6 D4C66?]k^Am

    kAm“(6 2C6 4=@D6 E@ 86EE:?8 E92E :?E6C7246[ 3FE :E’D E2<6? BF:E6 2 3:E @7 H@C< @? @FC E649?:42= DFAA@CE E62>[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmqFE[ 3642FD6 E96 AC@8C2> 😀 DE:== 36:?8 >@5:7:65[ E96C6 2C6 7C6BF6?E >:DF?56CDE2?5:?8D @? E96 A2CE @7 E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E[ H9:49 C6BF:C6D “323JD:EE:?8[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmpFC6=:2? 😀 4@>A=:2?E H:E9 4@F?EJ AC:G24J C6BF:C6>6?ED[ FE:=:K6D 6?4CJAE:@? 2?5 😀 46CE:7:65 3J E96 7656C2= rC:>:?2= yFDE:46 x?7@C>2E:@? $6CG:46D[ {6rFC6FI D2:5] %96 4@>A2?J DE@C6D C64@C5:?8D @7 E96 42==D E92E E96 4@F?EJ 42? 2446DD G:2 E96 :?E6C?6E 2D H6==]k^Am

    kAm%96 @E96C >2;@C :DDF6 E96 56A2CE>6?E 92D 366? H@C<:?8 E@ C6D@=G6 😀 E96 AC@8C2>>:?8 @7 E96 2DD:DE2?E’D C6DA@?D6]k^Am

    kAm“uC@> H92E H6’C6 962C:?8 7C@> pFC6=:2?[ E96 4@>A2?J[ H6 92G6 2 G6CJ 4@>A=6I DJDE6> 4@>A2C65 E@ @E96C h“ 46?E6CD 😕 9@H H6 E2<6 E96 42==D 2?5 9@H H6 C@FE6 E9@D6[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmpFC6=:2? 😀 ?@E FD:?8 D6=7E6249:?8 px 3642FD6 @7 :ED F?AC65:4E23:=:EJ 2?5 42A24:EJ E@ 92==F4:?2E6[ 96 D2:5] “%96C6’D 2 =@E @7 D276EJ 4@?46C?D E92E 4@>6 7C@> ;FDE E96 ?@E:@? @7 =6EE:?8 2? px 5@ :ED E9:?8]”k^Am

    kAm%@ 2G@:5 E9@D6 :DDF6D[ E96 DJDE6> 😀 36:?8 56G6=@A65 F?56C E96 56A2CE>6?E’D 8F:52?46 H:E9 pFC6=:2?]k^Am

    kAm%96 4@>A2?J 😀 AC@8C2>>:?8 2 D6C:6D @7 A2E9H2JD H:E9 “:7[ E96?” AC@>AED D@ E92E[ 7@C 6I2>A=6[ :7 2 42==6C D2JD E96J ?665 E@ DA62< H:E9 D@>6@?6 2E E96 ;2:=[ E96 AC@8C2> 4@??64ED E96> H:E9 E96 4@F?EJ ;2:=]k^Am

    kAm{2DE J62C[ E96 56A2CE>6?E E@@< 23@FE “_[___ 42==D[ e_[___ @7 H9:49 H6C6 ?@?6>6C86?4:6D] p A@CE:@? @7 E9@D6 42==D H6C6 2?2=JK65 3J E96 56A2CE>6?E E@ 96=A 4C62E6 E96D6 A2E9H2JD 2?5 E96 AC676CC65 C6DA@?D6D H9:49 H6C6 E96? D92C65 H:E9 pFC6=:2?]k^Am

    kAm{6rFC6FI D2:5 E96J 2C6 DA6?5:?8 H66>:?8 E96 DJDE6> E@ C6DA@?5 😕 2 H2J E92E :E E2<6D 5:DA2E496CD b_ D64@?5D E@ 5@ – 2?5 A2CE @7 E96 C62D@? 😀 E96 G2DE 2>@F?E @7 :?7@C>2E:@? :?G@=G65] x?7@C>2E:@? 23@FE E96 G2C:@FD =2H 6?7@C46>6?E 286?4:6D 2?5 7:CDE C6DA@?56CD 92D E@ 36 :?4@CA@C2E65[ 2=@?8 H:E9 E96:C ;FC:D5:4E:@?D 2?5 C6BF:C6>6?ED 7@C 36DE AC24E:46D] r@F?EJ :?7@C>2E:@? 2?5 86@8C2A9J 2=D@ ?665 E@ 36 4@?D:56C65]k^Am

    kAm“$@[ 7@C E96 9F?5C65D @7 5:776C6?E E9:?8D E92E D@>63@5J 4@F=5 36 42==:?8 23@FE[ 6249 @7 E9@D6 92D 366? 2 G6CJ =23@C:@FD AC@46DD E@ >2<6 DFC6 E92E H6 2C6 C@FE:?8 E9@D6 42==D FA E@ @FC DE2?52C5D[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    k9bm%wt #t$!~}$tk^9bm

    kAm%9FD 72C[ :E D66>D E92E E96 DJDE6> 😀 5:D=:<65 3J 5:DA2E496CD 3642FD6 @7 E96 :?4C62D65 H@C< :?G@=G65 E@ EC2:? :E[ 2?5 3J 42==6CD[ H9@ 2C6?’E FD:?8 :E AC@A6C=J[ {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx? 255:E:@? E@ E96 6IEC2 D4C66? >@?:E@C:?8 2?5 EC2?D:E:@?:?8 36EH66? AC@8C2>D[ @?46 2? 24E:@? :E6> 😀 4@>A=6E6[ DE2776CD ?665 E@ C2E6 9@H E96 DJDE6> 5:5 2?5 AC@G:56 7665324< 7@C :>AC@G6>6?ED]k^Am

    kAm“(:E9 9F?5C65D 2?5 9F?5C65D @7 E96D6 42==D 4@>:?8 :?[ E9:D 4C62E6D 2? 255:E:@?2= DE6A E92E H6 92G6 E@ E2<6 😕 @C56C E@ EC2:? E96 DJDE6>[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm%9:D 6IEC2 H@C<=@25 92D =67E E96 h“ E62> F?92AAJ[ H9:49 “:D E96 =2DE E9:?8 E92E H6 H2?E[” 96 D2:5[ “3FE H6 9@A6 E9:D 6IA6C:6?46 :>AC@G6D D@@?]”k^Am

    kAm“%96C6 92D 366? 2 =@E @7 7665324< – 2?5 ?@?6 @7 :E 8@@5[” {6rFC6FI D2:5]k^Am

    kAm~?46 E96 DJDE6> 😀 FA 2?5 CF??:?8 :?56A6?56?E=J[ 96 😀 9@A:?8 E@ AC:@C:E:K6 AF3=:4 65F42E:@? E@ E6249 A6@A=6 9@H E@ :?E6C24E H:E9 E96 2FE@>2E65 2DD:DE2?E]k^Am

    kAm%96 C6DF=E H:== 36 36EE6C[ 72DE6C D6CG:46 :7 42==6CD 42? 6?8286 H:E9 :E 4@?G6CD2E:@?2==J[ 96 D2:5[ ?@E:?8 E92E 42==D 2C6 6IA64E65 E@ =2DE EH@ >:?FE6D @? 2G6C286]k^Am

    kAm“qFE H96? A6@A=6 2C6 C6D:DE2?E E@ :E 2?5 EC62E :E =:<6 J@F H@F=5 EC62E 2?J @E96C A9@?6 EC66[ :E’D 8@:?8 E@ E2<6 2 =@E =@?86C[” 96 D2:5]k^Am

    kAmx7 E96 AC@3=6>D 42?’E 36 D@=G65[ E96 56A2CE>6?E >2J 92G6 E@ 232?5@? E96 AC@;64E]k^Am

    kAmqFE {6rFC6FI E9:? @776CD 2 A@E6?E:2==J =2C86 36?67:E E@ E96 4@>>F?:EJ]k^Am

    kAm“%9:D 😀 >256 7@C AF3=:4 D276EJ[ 2?5 :E’D ?@E =:<6 E96 @?6 2E J@FC 46== A9@?6 4@>A2?J[” 96 D2:5] “%9:D E9:?8 42? 5@ H2J >@C6 – 2?5 :E’D 4FDE@>:K65 7@C vC2?5 %C2G6CD6 r@F?EJ]”k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Kathryn Depauw KDePauw@record-eagle.com

    Source link

  • The Future of Crypto Trading Is Hybrid: CeFi and DeFi Unite

    [ad_1]

    Hybrid trading ecosystems allow users to access traditional and crypto-native assets seamlessly, with deeper liquidity and fewer risks. Unsplash+

    Despite its rocky start, the crypto industry has firmly transitioned from niche communities to the core of global finance. In early December, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded nearly a full week of net inflows, totaling around $288 million, as BTC continues its recovery. At the same time, traditional asset managers are increasingly embracing digital assets: Vanguard, for example, recently began offering clients exposure to BTC, ETH, XRP and other crypto ETFs. What once was a fringe corner of finance is knowing seeing significant capital flows, and, naturally, traders’ expectations have evolved alongside it.

    Today’s users want simplicity above all else. They want a market structure that feels seamless and doesn’t force them to jump between five different platforms to engage with all the services they need. They don’t want to sacrifice liquidity for self-custody, transparency for better execution or choose between crypto-native assets and traditional financial instruments. 

    This is where hybrid CeFi-DeFi (centralized-decentralized finance) models enter the scene, designed to bridge these gaps. By merging centralized and decentralized rails, hybrid platforms aim to eliminate compromise and deliver better results for traders.  

    Establishing a new market backbone

    Historically, traders had to choose between two camps. CeFi offered deep liquidity, institutional-grade execution and predictable user experience. DeFi, meanwhile, provided open access, transparency and blockchain-native liquidity. Each side had its strengths and weaknesses, which users inevitably had to navigate.

    Now, these gaps are gradually closing. Tokenized real-world assets (RWA) have surged to $24 billion as of the late third quarter of this year, driven largely by tokenized U.S. treasuries, among the most liquid RWAs today. By 2028, the market could exceed $2 trillion, achieving an almost 82-fold increase. 

     On the DeFi side, decentralized perpetual-futures trading surpassed $1 trillion in monthly volume in October 2025, putting DeFi platforms on par with many centralized exchanges. In short, more traditional financial instruments are moving on-chain, while crypto-native assets demand deep liquidity. No single model—pure CeFi or pure DeFi—can meet all of these conditions simultaneously. Hybrid models, however, can.

     The world increasingly needs an environment that allows users to move between asset types without forcing them to move platforms as well. Or split their margins, for that matter. Hybrid architecture enables users to move freely between tokenized U.S. stock futures, high-leverage crypto derivatives and on-chain liquidity pools, all from a single account and interface. What used to take multiple logins is now made into a single workflow. 

    Why does this matter? CeFi rarely touches newly emerging DeFi assets; DeFi often lacks the institutional-level liquidity needed for serious capital; and traditional products remain on altogether different rails from crypto as a whole. By connecting historically siloed markets, hybrid systems unlock efficiency, scale and accessibility at unprecedented levels. 

    There is also the fact that hybrid models lower counterparty risk by reducing the number of hand-offs: fewer transfers between platforms, fewer intermediaries, fewer points of failure. And with shared liquidity pools, traders get better pricing and faster execution across multiple instrument types. This is the prime example of infrastructure finally catching up with user expectations.

    Why all-in-one ecosystems are winning

    The push toward unified trading platforms did not happen by accident. It is being driven by four key forces, all existing in tandem.

    1. User expectations. Users want simplicity when managing their finances. One account, seamless experience—this desire sets the standard for the industry to reach.
    2. Technological progress. Advances in asset tokenization, real-time settlements and blockchain rails all contribute to a market state where unified platforms can actually be built successfully. Just a couple of years ago, this wouldn’t have been very feasible.
    3. Institutional participation. As this class of investors grows more proactive about entering the crypto space, seamlessness becomes that much more necessary. Institutions need access to multiple asset classes without fragmented custody, inconsistent execution or operational gaps in order to feel confident.
    4. Regulatory maturity. Clearer frameworks support multi-asset ecosystems, which means that platforms in this sector can build with greater confidence and without fearing unexpected backlash. Europe’s MiCA and the GENIUNS Act in the U.S. are prime examples of this shift. The first created a legal base for cross-asset and cross-service platforms, while the latter introduced a comprehensive framework for stablecoins and the classification of digital asset payments. These steps lay the groundwork for platforms offering a wide range of hybrid services, and for unified CeFi-DeFi ecosystems; this legal clarity is an absolute must.

    With all of these factors aligning, consolidation stops looking like a simple “trend” and appears instead as what it truly is—the natural next stage in the development of this market.

    There are many tangible benefits that this transition brings to traders, but arguably the greatest one is the growth in user trust. Now market participants can see and understand the full lifecycle of their assets in one coherent system. This makes participation smoother, safer and aligned with how people actually want to trade.

    The hybrid future is already here

    The next market cycle will not be defined by any single asset class. Instead, it will be defined by interoperability: CeFi and DeFi instruments will mix seamlessly, traditional markets will connect with on-chain liquidity and A.I. will increasingly augment human decision-making.

    For traders, this means smoother workflows, deeper liquidity and fewer risks. For the industry, it means the next step in maturity and infrastructure that finally matches user expectations. The future of crypto trading is hybrid, and more importantly, it’s not a distant vision. That future is already here, developing around us in real time.

    The Future of Crypto Trading Is Hybrid: CeFi and DeFi Unite

    [ad_2]

    Ignacio Aguirre Franco

    Source link

  • Breaking down what Trump’s executive order to block state AI regulations means

    [ad_1]

    Stocks dipped lower on Friday as tech and AI companies came under pressure from President Trump. He signed an executive order on Thursday to stop state regulation of artificial intelligence, arguing that a patchwork set of rules could hold the U.S. back from dominating the competition. CBS News MoneyWatch correspondent Kelly O’Grady has more.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Humanoid robots take center stage at Silicon Valley summit, but skepticism remains

    [ad_1]

    MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. — Robots have long been seen as a bad bet for Silicon Valley investors — too complicated, capital-intensive and “boring, honestly,” says venture capitalist Modar Alaoui.

    But the commercial boom in artificial intelligence has lit a spark under long-simmering visions to build humanoid robots that can move their mechanical bodies like humans and do things that people do.

    Alaoui, founder of the Humanoids Summit, gathered more than 2,000 people this week, including top robotics engineers from Disney, Google and dozens of startups, to showcase their technology and debate what it will take to accelerate a nascent industry.

    Alaoui says many researchers now believe humanoids or some other kind of physical embodiment of AI are “going to become the norm.”

    “The question is really just how long it will take,” he said.

    Disney’s contribution to the field, a walking robotic version of “Frozen” character Olaf, will be roaming on its own through Disneyland theme parks in Hong Kong and Paris early next year. Entertaining and highly complex robots that resemble a human — or a snowman — are already here, but the timeline for “general purpose” robots that are a productive member of a workplace or household is farther away.

    Even at a conference designed to build enthusiasm for the technology, held at a Computer History Museum that’s a temple to Silicon Valley’s previous breakthroughs, skepticism remained high that truly humanlike robots will take root anytime soon.

    “The humanoid space has a very, very big hill to climb,” said Cosima du Pasquier, founder and CEO of Haptica Robotics, which works to give robots a sense of touch. “There’s a lot of research that still needs to be solved.”

    The Stanford University postdoctoral researcher came to the conference in Mountain View, California, just a week after incorporating her startup.

    “The first customers are really the people here,” she said.

    Researchers at the consultancy McKinsey & Company have counted about 50 companies around the world that have raised at least $100 million to develop humanoids, led by about 20 in China and 15 in North America.

    China is leading in part due to government incentives for component production and robot adoption and a mandate last year “to have a humanoid ecosystem established by 2025,” said McKinsey partner Ani Kelkar. Displays by Chinese firms dominated the expo section of this week’s summit, held Thursday and Friday.

    In the U.S., the advent of generative AI chatbots like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini has jolted the decades-old robotics industry in different ways. Investor excitement has poured money into ambitious startups aiming to build hardware that will bring a physical presence to the latest AI.

    But it’s not just crossover hype — the same technical advances that made AI chatbots so good at language have played a role in teaching robots how to get better at performing tasks. Paired with computer vision, robots powered by “visual-language” models are trained to learn about their surroundings.

    One of the most prominent skeptics is robotics pioneer Rodney Brooks, a co-founder of Roomba vacuum maker iRobot who wrote in September that “today’s humanoid robots will not learn how to be dexterous despite the hundreds of millions, or perhaps many billions of dollars, being donated by VCs and major tech companies to pay for their training.” Brooks didn’t attend but his essay was frequently mentioned.

    Also missing was anyone speaking for Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s development of a humanoid called Optimus, a project that the billionaire is designing to be “extremely capable” and sold in high volumes. Musk said three years ago that people can probably buy an Optimus “within three to five years.”

    The conference’s organizer, Alaoui, founder and general partner of ALM Ventures, previously worked on driver attention systems for the automotive industry and sees parallels between humanoids and the early years of self-driving cars.

    Near the entrance to the summit venue, just blocks from Google’s headquarters, is a museum exhibit showing Google’s bubble-shaped 2014 prototype of a self-driving car. Eleven years later, self-driving cars full of passengers operated by Google affiliate Waymo are constantly plying the streets nearby.

    Some robots with human elements are already being tested in workplaces. Oregon-based Agility Robotics announced shortly before the conference that it is bringing its tote-carrying warehouse robot Digit to a Texas distribution facility run by Mercado Libre, the Latin American e-commerce giant. Much like the Olaf robot, it has inverted legs that are more birdlike than human.

    Industrial robots performing single tasks are already commonplace in car assembly and other manufacturing. They work with a level of speed and precision that’s difficult for today’s humanoids — or humans themselves — to match.

    The head of a robotics trade group founded in 1974 is now lobbying the U.S. government to develop a stronger national strategy to advance the development of homegrown robots, be they humanoids or otherwise.

    “We have a lot of strong technology, we have the AI expertise here in the U.S.,” said Jeff Burnstein, president of the Association for Advancing Automation, after touring the expo Thursday. “So I think it remains to be seen who is the ultimate leader in this. But right now, China has certainly a lot more momentum on humanoids.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s how Denver police fly drones to 911 calls, triggering fears about privacy and surveillance

    [ad_1]

    In a windowless room at Denver police headquarters on a recent Thursday afternoon, Officer Chris Velarde activated a police drone to investigate a potential car break-in.

    Officer Chris Velarde flies a drone and monitors live footage from its camera from Denver Police Department headquarters on Thursday, Dec. 4, 2025. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)

    Several floors above, the drone launched from the roof and flew itself — essentially on autopilot — to the site of the call, reported as a man breaking into a car with a crowbar near the Santa Fe Arts District.

    The drone whizzed along, 200 feet up, in a straight line across blocks, buildings and streets during the roughly mile-long flight from police headquarters at 1331 Cherokee St. Velarde didn’t pick up the Xbox video-game controller that manually pilots the drone until it reached the area of the call. Then he took control and trolled the block for the supposed break-in, watching live video footage transmitted from the drone on his computer monitor as he flew.

    After a few moments, Velarde spotted two people jiggering the passenger-side window of a vehicle. He zoomed in on the pair, and on the car’s license plate. He ran the plate to see whether the vehicle was stolen; it was not. The people on the street didn’t look up. They didn’t seem to know a police drone was hovering above them, that they were being recorded and watched a mile away by officers and a reporter.

    Two more people joined the pair at the vehicle’s window and Velarde made the call — this didn’t look like a vehicle break-in. More likely, someone had just locked their keys in their car. He cleared the call with 911 dispatchers and told them there was no need to send an officer to the scene. Then he sent the drone back to headquarters; it flew itself to the rooftop dock, landing autonomously on a platform stamped with bright blue-and-yellow QR codes.

    The Denver Police Department began testing drones as first responders — that is, sending them out on 911 calls — in mid-October after signing up for two free pilot programs from rival drone companies Skydio and Flock Safety. The effort has raised concerns among privacy advocates, Denver politicians and the city’s police oversight group, particularly regarding the department’s contract with Flock, the company behind the city’s controversial network of automated license-plate readers.

    Police see the drones as a way to speed up call-response times and provide more information to officers as they arrive on scene, improving, they say, both public safety and officer safety. If a drone arrives at a scene before officers, and the drone pilot can tell police on the ground that the man with the knife actually put down the weapon before the officers arrived, that helps everyone, police said.

    “The more knowledge, information and intelligence that we can provide our officers on the ground, the better methods that they can use to respond to certain situations, which may cause them to not escalate unnecessarily,” said Cmdr. Clifford Barnes, who heads the department’s Cyber Bureau.

    Critics say the eyes in the sky raise serious privacy concerns both with how the drones and the data they collect are used now, and with how they might be used in the future as the technology rapidly changes. They worry that the drones could create a citywide surveillance network with few legal guardrails, that the footage they collect will be used to train private companies’ AI algorithms or that police will misuse emerging AI capabilities, like facial recognition.

    “When it comes to the decision of, are we going to use this thing that could potentially increase public safety, that will erode privacy rights — no one should get to decide the public is willing to give away our constitutional rights, except the people,” said Anaya Robinson, public policy director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado.  “And when law enforcement makes that decision for us, it becomes extremely problematic.”

    Almost 300 drone flights in 55 days

    So far, only Skydio drones have flown as first responders over Denver.

    Denver police signed a zero-dollar contract with Flock — without public announcement — in August for a year-long pilot of drones as first responders, but the company has yet to set up its autonomous aircraft. Skydio, on the other hand, moved quickly to get drones in the air after Denver police in October signed a contract to test up to four of the company’s drones during a free six-month pilot.

    Skydio’s drones can reach about a 2-mile radius around the Denver police headquarters. The company advertises a top speed of 45 mph with 40 minutes of flight time; Denver pilots have found the drones average around 28 mph and around 25 minutes of battery life per flight.

    From the first flight on Oct. 15 through Tuesday, two Skydio drones flew 297 times, according to data provided by Denver police in response to an open records request. Most of those flights — 199 — were to answer calls for service; another 82 were training flights, according to the data.

    Skydio drones also surveilled events — a function police call “event overwatch” — seven times, the police data shows. Overwatch might include flying over a protest to track where the demonstrators are headed and alert officers on the ground for traffic control, Barnes said. (The police data showed that all seven overwatch flights occurred on Oct. 18, the day of Denver’s “No Kings” rally.)

    The drones flew to 29 calls about a person with a weapon, 21 disturbances, 20 assaults in progress, a dozen suspicious occurrences and 11 hold-up alarms, according to data from Denver’s 911 dispatch records.  The drones also flew to 39 other types of calls, including reports of prowlers, fights, burglaries, domestic violence and suicidal people.

    The most common outcome for a call was that the officers were unable to locate an incident or the suspect was gone by the time the drone or police officers arrived, the records show. Across about 200 calls for service that included drone responses, police made 22 arrests and issued one citation, the dispatch data shows.

    When responding to calls for service, the drones reached the scene before patrol officers 88% of the time, the police data shows. A drone was the sole police response in 80 of 199 calls for service, or about 40% of the time.

    Barnes said answering calls with solely a drone improves police efficiency.

    “If an officer on the ground doesn’t need to respond, and the drone pilot is comfortable with cancelling the other officers coming, we can assign those officers to more important, more pressing matters, so call-response times come down,” he said.

    That approach raises questions about what the drones (which are equipped with three different cameras and a thermal imager) can and can’t see, and how officers are making decisions about call responses without actually speaking to anyone at the scene, the ACLU’s Robinson said.

    “Humans have bias,” he said. Drone pilots might be more inclined to send officers to a potential car break-in in a low-income neighborhood and more likely not to in a higher-income neighborhood, he said. Or they might miss something from above that they could have seen at street level.

    Officer Chris Velarde flies a drone and monitors live footage from its camera from Denver Police Department headquarters on Thursday, Dec. 4, 2025. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)
    Officer Chris Velarde flies a drone and monitors live footage from its camera from Denver Police Department headquarters on Thursday, Dec. 4, 2025. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)

    But minimizing in-person police interactions with residents, particularly in over-policed neighborhoods, can also be a positive, said Julia Richman, chair of Denver’s Citizen Oversight Board, which provides civilian oversight of the police department.

    “Where my head goes is the other outcome, where they roll up on those people who are trying to get keys out of the car and then they shoot them,” she said. “Actually, (the drone-only response) seems like a really good outcome.”

    The oversight group has talked with Denver police over the last two years about developing its drone program, she said. The department created a seven-page policy to guide their use; the policy aims to ensure “civil rights and reasonable expectations of privacy are a key component of any decision made to deploy” a drone.

    But Richman said she was surprised by aspects of the police department’s pilot programs despite the ongoing conversations with department leadership.

    “What was never discussed, not once, was the idea of a third party running those drones or those drones being autonomous,” she said, referring to the drone companies. “What has changed with this latest pilot is the key features and key aspects that would create public concern had never been discussed with us.”

    Both Flock and Skydio advertise autonomous features powered by artificial intelligence. Skydio uses AI for its autonomous flight paths, obstacle avoidance and tracking people and cars.

    Flock, which also offers autonomous flight, advertises its drones as integrating with its automated license-plate readers. The license-plate readers — there are more than 100 around Denver — automatically photograph every car that passes by them. If a license plate is stolen or involved in a crime, the license-plate readers alert police within seconds.

    Police Chief Ron Thomas and Mayor Mike Johnston defended the surveillance network as an invaluable crime-solving tool this year against mounting public discontent around how much data the machines collected and how that data was used — particularly around sharing information with the federal government for the purposes of immigration enforcement.

    That privacy debate around Flock’s license plate readers unfolded in communities across Colorado and nationwide this year. In Loveland, the police department for a time allowed U.S. Border Patrol agents to access its Flock cameras before blocking that access. In Longmont, councilmembers voted Wednesday to look for alternatives to replace the 20 Flock license plate readers in that city.

    Flock in August announced it was pausing operations with federal agencies over the widespread concerns.

    When Denver City Council members, some driven by privacy concerns, voted against continuing Flock’s license-plate readers in May, Johnston extended the surveillance anyway through a free five-month contract extension with Flock in October that did not require approval from the council. Against that backdrop, Denver police quietly signed on for Flock’s drone pilot in August.

    Barnes said the police department will not use any license-plate reader capabilities available on Flock drones. Such a feature would constitute “random surveillance,” which is prohibited under the department’s drone policy. The drones never fly without an officer’s direct involvement, he added.

    The blue 2-mile-radius line seen on a computer screen shows the range of Denver police Skydio drones flown from Denver Police headquarters. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)
    The blue 2-mile-radius line seen on a computer screen shows the range of Denver police Skydio drones flown from Denver Police headquarters. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)

    The policy also prohibits drones from filming anywhere a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy unless police have a warrant, and says officers should take “reasonable precautions … to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.”

    Denver police do receive search warrants to fly drones for particular operations outside of the drones-as-first-responder program. In October, a Denver police detective sought and received a warrant to fly a drone over a shooting suspect’s home in Cherry Hills Village to check whether a truck involved in the shooting was parked at the wooded property.

    The warrant noted that when driving home from anywhere outside Cherry Hills Village, the suspect could not reach his house without passing by Flock license-plate readers, and that photos from those license-plate readers suggested the truck was at the property.

    Denver Councilwoman Serena Gonzales-Gutierrez and Councilman Kevin Flynn both told The Post they were not aware of the police department’s Skydio drone pilot before hearing about it from the newspaper, even though they are both on the city’s Surveillance Technology Task Force. The new group began meeting in August largely to consider Flock license-plate readers, as well as other types of surveillance technology, Gonzales-Gutierrez said.

    “We haven’t talked about it in the task force, and the charge of our work in the task force is to come up with those guardrails that need to be put in place for these types of technology being utilized by law enforcement,” she said. “I feel like they just keep moving on without us being able to complete our work.”


    Police don’t need permission from the City Council to carry out the pilot programs, Gonzales-Gutierrez said, but she was disappointed by the lack of communication and collaboration from the department.

    Flynn sees the potential of police drones, particularly in speeding up officer response times, which can sometimes be dismal in the far-flung areas of his southwestern district.

    “If a drone can get there to a 911 call and it can help an officer at headquarters assess the scene before a staffed car could get there, I would love that,” he said.

    But he wants to be sure they are used in a way that respects residents’ rights. He would not support using the drones for general patrolling or surveillance, he said.

    “This pilot is an excellent opportunity to test all of those boundaries and see if there are ways to operate a system that can be very useful for public safety without crossing boundaries,” he said.”…And maybe we don’t keep using them. That is the point of a pilot.”

    ‘These are flying cops’

    The Skydio drones film from the moment they are launched until they drop in to land.

    When the drone is on its way to a call — flying at the 200-foot altitude limit set by the Federal Aviation Administration — its cameras remain pointed at the horizon. In Denver’s denser neighborhoods, the Skydio drones at that height flew among buildings, sometimes at eye-level with balconies, offices and apartment windows, according to video of four flights obtained by The Post through an open records request.

    “What if someone is in their apartment unit in one of these giant buildings and they’re changing, and they have their window open because they’re way up high and they don’t think anyone is watching them?” Gonzales-Gutierrez said. “That is crazy.”

    The drones buzzed over rooftop decks, balconies and elevated apartment complex pools, the videos show. On one trip, a drone flew past the Colorado State Capitol Building, recording three people on a balcony on the tower under the building’s golden dome. Another time, the drone pilot zoomed in on a license plate so tightly that the car’s small, decorative “LOVE” decal was clearly visible.

    Flynn noted that a 200-foot altitude would put the drones well above most of the homes in his less-dense district, and that people on their porches or balconies aren’t somewhere private.

    “If someone is out on a balcony, sitting there reading a book… generally speaking, if you are out in public there’s no expectation of privacy,” he said.

    The Skydio drones recorded about 54 hours of footage in the first eight weeks of their operation, according to data provided by the police department. Police leadership opted to have the drones’ cameras on and recording whenever the drone is in flight to boost transparency about how the drones are being used, Barnes said.

    “It makes sense to keep the camera rolling,” Barnes said. “Then, if there’s an allegation, we just make sure that footage is recorded and treated like digital evidence, uploaded to the evidence management platform so it could be reviewed as necessary. We’re just trying to make sure we establish that balance, being as transparent as possible.”

    Drone footage unrelated to criminal investigations is automatically deleted after 60 days, he said. While it’s retained, it’s stored in an evidence system that keeps a record of anyone who looks at it. The drone unit’s sergeant, Brent Kohls, also audits the flight reports monthly. (Footage used in criminal investigations will be on the same retention schedule as body-worn camera footage, police said.)

    Kohls noted it would be unusual for the drone footage to be viewed only by the pilot. The feed is often displayed on the wall of the police department’s Real-Time Crime Center as it comes in.

    ACLU attorney Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy director of the organization’s speech, privacy and technology project, would rather see police keep the recording off while flying a drone to a call, even if the camera is still livestreaming to police headquarters. In that scenario, a drone pilot might still see a woman tanning topless on her rooftop pool deck, he said, but the government wouldn’t then keep a recording of that privacy violation, amplifying it further.

    “The thing we are really worried about is police start deploying drones as first responders for the majority of their calls for service and suddenly you have this crisscrossing network of surveillance all over the city,” Freed Wessler said. “You have the potential for a pervasive record of what everyone is doing all the time.”

    Kohls said an officer flying a drone who spotted a different crime occurring while en route to another call would stop to report and respond to that secondary crime, just like an officer would on the ground.

    “Absolutely, if an officer sees a crime happening, they’re going to get on the radio, alert dispatch to what they’re observing,” Kohls said. “Hopefully, if they have a few minutes of battery time left still, they can extend their time and circle or overwatch on that scene to provide hopefully life-saving radio traffic, whatever information they need to relay to dispatch to get other officers heading, or the fire department heading that way.”

    State and federal laws have not yet caught up to how police are using drones, Freed Wessler said. The Fourth Amendment has what’s known as the plain-view exception, which allows police officers who are lawfully in a place to take action if they see evidence of a crime happening in plain sight.

    “The problem here is we are not talking about police doing a thing we would normally expect them to do,” Freed Wessler said. “We are talking about police taking advantage of a new technology that gives them a totally new power to fly at virtually no expense over any part of the city at any time of day and see a whole bunch of stuff happening.”

    A Denver police drone lands on its docking station on the roof of Denver Police headquarters in Denver, on Thursday, Dec. 4, 2025. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)
    A Denver police drone lands on its docking station on the roof of Denver Police headquarters in Denver, on Thursday, Dec. 4, 2025. (Photo by Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post)

    The Colorado Supreme Court drew a distinction between what a human police officer can see and what technology can do for surveillance in 2021, when the justices found that Colorado Springs police officers violated a man’s constitutional rights when they installed a raised video camera on a utility pole near his home to spy over his fence 24/7 for three months without obtaining a warrant.

    Police have broad leeway to watch suspects without first getting a search warrant — like by peering through a fence or climbing the steps of a nearby building to look into a yard. But that’s different from using a subtle video camera to record a person 24/7 for months, the justices concluded.

    So far, that’s the closest ruling in Colorado on the issue of drone surveillance, Freed Wessler said. Robinson, the policy director at the ACLU of Colorado, said lawmakers should act to regulate police drone use — either at the state or local level.

    “These are flying cops,” said Beryl Lipton, senior investigative researcher at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit focused on digital privacy. “That is another one of those slippery slopes.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Germany summons Russian ambassador over alleged sabotage, cyberattacks and election interference

    [ad_1]

    BERLIN (AP) — Germany summoned Russia’s ambassador Friday following accusations of sabotage, cyberattacks and election interference, an official said.

    The German government has also accused Moscow of perpetrating disinformation campaigns.

    “The goal of these Russian cyber and disinformation attacks is clear: It is to divide society, stir up mistrust, provoke rejection, and weaken confidence in democratic institutions,” German foreign ministry spokesperson Martin Giese said.

    “This targeted manipulation of information is one of a wide range of activities by Russia aimed at undermining confidence in democratic institutions and processes in Germany,” he said during a government news conference.

    German officials have previously accused Russia of hybrid warfare attacks to destabilize Europe. Moscow didn’t immediately return a request for comment Friday.

    Giese said that the shadowy Russian military intelligence agency known as GRU was behind a 2024 cyberattack against German air traffic control. The foreign ministry says GRU, which has been sanctioned in other countries, was responsible for the attack that was allegedly perpetrated by hacker collective APT28, also known as Fancy Bear.

    APT28 and GRU have also been linked to global cyber intrusions, including in the 2016 U.S. election, where they were accused of aiding U.S. President Donald Trump by leaking Democratic Party emails.

    Giese also said investigators believe GRU also attempted to destabilize and influence Germany’s last federal election, held in February, through a campaign called “Storm 1516.”

    “Our services’ analysis shows that the campaign spreads artificially generated, pseudo-investigative research, deepfake image sequences, pseudo-journalistic websites, and fabricated witness statements on various platforms,” he said.

    Russia will face a series of countermeasures for its hybrid warfare, Giese said.

    “The German government condemns the repeated and unacceptable attacks by state-controlled Russian actors in the strongest possible terms,” he said. “We will continue to strengthen our support for Ukraine and our deterrence and defense.”

    The summons occurred Friday as the European Union indefinitely froze Russia’s assets in Europe to ensure that Hungary and Slovakia, both with Moscow-friendly governments, can’t prevent the billions of euros from being used to support Ukraine.

    Using a special procedure meant for economic emergencies, the EU blocked the assets until Russia gives up its war on Ukraine and compensates its neighbor for the heavy damage that it has inflicted for almost four years.

    It’s a key step that will allow EU leaders to work out at a summit next week how to use the tens of billions of euros in Russian Central Bank assets to underwrite a huge loan to help Ukraine meet its financial and military needs over the next two years.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Crypto mogul Do Kwon sentenced to 15 years in prison for $40 billion stablecoin fraud

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK (AP) — Onetime cryptocurrency mogul Do Kwon was sentenced Thursday to 15 years in prison after a $40 billion crash revealed his crypto ecosystem to be a fraud. Victims said the 34-year-old financial technology whiz weaponized their trust to convince them that the investment — secretly propped up by cash infusions — was safe.

    Kwon, a Stanford graduate known by some as “the cryptocurrency king,” apologized after listening as victims — one in court and others by telephone — described the scam’s toll: wiping out nest eggs, depleting charities and wrecking lives. One told the judge in a letter that he contemplated suicide after his father lost his retirement money in the scheme.

    Judge Paul A. Engelmayer said at a daylong sentencing hearing in Manhattan federal court that the government’s recommendation of 12 years in prison was “unreasonably lenient” and that the defense’s request for five years was “utterly unthinkable and wildly unreasonable.” Kwon faced a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison.

    “Your offense caused real people to lose $40 billion in real money, not some paper loss,” Engelmayer told Kwon, who sat at the defense table in a yellow jail suit. The judge called it “a fraud on an epic, generational scale” and said Kwon had an “almost mystical hold” on investors and caused incalculable “human wreckage.”

    More than the combined losses in FTX and OneCoin cases

    Kwon pleaded guilty in August to fraud charges stemming from the collapse of Terraform Labs, the Singapore-based firm he co-founded in 2018. The loss exceeded the combined losses from FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried and OneCoin co-founder Karl Sebastian Greenwood’s frauds, prosecutors said. Engelmayer estimated there may have been a million victims.

    Terraform Labs had touted its TerraUSD as a reliable “stablecoin” — a kind of currency typically pegged to stable assets to prevent drastic fluctuations in prices. But prosecutors say it was an illusion backed by outside cash infusions that came crumbling down after it plunged far below its $1 peg. The crash devastated investors in TerraUSD and its floating sister currency, Luna, triggering “a cascade of crises that swept through cryptocurrency markets.”

    Kwon tried to rebuild Terraform Labs in Singapore before fleeing to the Balkans on a false passport, prosecutors said. He’s been locked up since his March 2023 arrest in Montenegro. He was credited for 17 months he spent in jail there before being extradited to the U.S.

    Kwon agreed to forfeit over $19 million as part of his plea deal. His lawyers argued his conduct stemmed not from greed, but hubris and desperation. Engelmayer rejected his request to serve his sentence in his native South Korea, where he also faces prosecution and where his wife and 4-year-old daughter live.

    “I have spent almost every waking moment of the last few years thinking of what I could have done different and what I can do now to make things right,” Kwon told Engelmayer. Hearing from victims, he said, was “harrowing and reminded me again of the great losses that I have caused.”

    Victims say losses ruined their lives, harmed charities

    One victim, speaking by telephone, said his wife divorced him, his sons had to skip college, and he had to move back to Croatia to live with his parents after TerraUSD’s crash evaporated his family’s life savings. Another said he has to “live with the guilt” of persuading his in-laws and hundreds of nonprofit organizations to invest.

    Stanislav Trofimchuk said his family’s investment plummeted from $190,000 to $13,000 — “17 years of our life, gone” during what he described as “two weeks of sheer terror.”

    Chauncey St. John, speaking in court, said some nonprofits he worked with lost more than $2 million and a church group lost about $900,000. He and his wife are saddled with debt and his in-laws have been forced to work well past their planned retirement, he said.

    Nevertheless, St. John said, he forgives Kwon and “I pray to God to have mercy on his soul.”

    A prosecutor read excerpts from some of more than 300 letters submitted by victims, including a person identified only by initials who lost nearly $11,400 while juggling bills and trying to complete college. Kwon had made Terra seem like a safe place to stash savings, the person said.

    “To some that is just a number on a page, but to me it was years of effort,” the person wrote. “Watching it evaporate, literally overnight, was one of the most terrifying experiences of my life.”

    “What happened was not an accident. It was not a market event. It was deception,” the person added, imploring the judge to “consider the human cost of this tragedy.”

    Kwon created an “illusion of resilience while covering up systemic failure,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah Mortazavi told Engelmayer. “This was fraud executed with arrogance, manipulation and total disregard for people.”

    ___

    Associated Press reporter Anthony Izaguirre contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump signs order to limit state AI regulations, with California in the crosshairs

    [ad_1]

    The battle between California and the White House escalated as President Trump signed an executive order to block state laws regulating artificial intelligence.

    The president’s power move to try to take over control of the regulation of the technology behind ChatGPT through an executive order Thursday was applauded by his allies in Silicon Valley, who have been warning that many layers of heavy-handed rules and regulations were holding them back and could put the U.S. behind in the battle to benefit most from AI.

    The order directs the attorney general to create a task force to challenge some state AI laws. States with “onerous AI laws” could lose federal funding from a broadband deployment program and other grants, the order said.

    The Trump administration said the order will help U.S. companies win the AI race against countries such as China by removing “cumbersome regulation.” It also pushes for a “minimally burdensome” national standard rather than a patchwork of laws across 50 states that the administration said makes compliance challenging, especially for startups.

    “You have to have a central source of approval when they need approval. So things have to come to one source. They can’t go to California, New York and various other places,” Trump told reporters at the Oval Office on Thursday.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom pushed back against the order, stating it “advances corruption, not innovation.”

    “They’re running a con. And every day, they push the limits to see how far they can take it,” Newsom said in a statement. “California is working on behalf of Americans by building the strongest innovation economy in the nation while implementing commonsense safeguards and leading the way forward.”

    The dueling remarks between Newsom and Trump underscore how the tech industry’s influence over regulation has increased tensions between the federal government and state lawmakers trying to place more guardrails around AI.

    While AI chatbots can help people quickly find answers to questions and generate text, code, and images, the increasing role the technology plays in people’s daily lives has also sparked greater anxiety about job displacement, equity, and mental health harms.

    The order heavily impacts California, home to some of the world’s largest tech companies such as OpenAI, Google, Nvidia and Meta. It also jeopardizes the $1.8 billion in federal funding California has received to expand high-speed internet throughout the state.

    Some analysts said Trump’s order is a win for tech giants that have vowed to invest trillions of dollars to build data centers and in research and development.

    “We believe that more organizations are expected to head down the AI roadmap through strategic deployments over time, but this executive order takes away more questions around future AI buildouts and removes a major overhang moving forward,” said Wedbush analyst Dan Ives in a statement.

    Facing lobbying from tech companies, Newsom has vetoed some AI legislation while signing others into law this year.

    One new law requires platforms to display labels for minors that warn about social media’s mental health harms. Another aims to make AI developers more transparent about safety risks and offers more whistleblower protections.

    He also signed a bill that requires chatbot operators to have procedures to prevent the production of suicide or self-harm content, though child safety groups removed support for that legislation because they said the tech industry successfully pushed for changes that weakened protections.

    States and consumer advocacy groups are expected to legally challenge Trump’s order.

    “Trump is not our king, and he cannot simply wave a pen to unilaterally invalidate state law,” state Sen. Steve Padilla (D-Chula Vista), who introduced the chatbot safety legislation that Newsom signed into law, said in a statement.

    In addition to California, three other states — Colorado, Texas and Utah — have passed laws that set some rules for AI across the private sector, according to the International Assn. of Privacy Professionals. Those laws include limiting the collection of certain personal information and requiring more transparency from companies.

    The more ambitious AI regulation proposals from states require private companies to provide transparency and assess the possible risks of discrimination from their AI programs. Many have regulated parts of AI: barring the use of deepfakes in elections and to create nonconsensual porn, for example, or putting rules in place around the government’s own use of AI.

    The order drew both praise and criticism from the tech industry.

    Collin McCune, the head of government affairs at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, said on social media site X that the executive order is an “incredibly important first step.”

    “But the vacuum for federal AI legislation remains,” he wrote. “Congress needs to come together to create a clear set of rules that protect the millions of Americans using AI and the Little Tech builders driving it forward.”

    Omidyar Network Chief Executive Mike Kubzansky said in a statement that he is aware of the risks posed by poorly drafted rules, but the solution isn’t to preempt state and local laws.

    “Americans are rightly concerned about AI’s impact on kids, jobs, and the costs imposed on consumers and communities by the rapid development of data centers,” he said. “Ignoring these issues through a blanket moratorium is an abdication of what elected officials owe their constituents — which is why we strongly oppose the Administration’s recent executive action.”

    Investors seemed unimpressed by the possible boost the sector could get from the White House.

    The stock market fell sharply on Friday, led by AI shares.

    Bloomberg and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Queenie Wong

    Source link

  • Converts are finding Eastern Orthodoxy online. The church wants to help them commune face-to-face

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — Often when a potential convert walks through the doors of his church, one of the first things the Very Rev. Andreas Blom encourages them to do is give up the thing that brought them there.

    “You discovered Orthodoxy online. You learned about it online. Now you’re here, the internet is done,” he tells inquirers at Holy Theophany Orthodox Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado. “Now you have a priest. Now you have people. Now you need to wean yourself off that stuff and enter into this real community of faith.”

    Blom is not a Luddite advising congregants to go off the grid, but is instead responding to the explosion of Eastern Orthodox content online that is, at least in part, driving a surge of converts across the United States. Christian Orthodoxy is an embodied tradition that requires in-person participation, but the internet has given their message a reach not seen in centuries.

    Sometimes called America’s “best kept secret,” Orthodoxy is embraced by about 1% of U.S. adults, according to Pew Research Center. But a heightened online profile has led to two waves of converts since the pandemic, said Matthew Namee, executive director of the Orthodox Studies Institute.

    Young, single men are often cited as the driving force behind this trend. But Namee said preliminary data suggest the most recent influx of converts is more diverse, with many Black and Hispanic people, women and young families joining. Clergy report people coming from a host of religious backgrounds, from Islam to witchcraft, as well as different Christian traditions.

    Blom’s Holy Theophany launched a second church this year because their 250-capacity building was consistently overflowing, with dozens standing outside each week.

    “It’s almost full already,” he said of the new location. “And back at our church, again we have a bunch of people standing outside every Sunday. We just can’t keep up.”

    They’re already in talks to launch a third church.

    While some Orthodox content creators are priests, others have no formal ties to the church. They span ideological and political affiliations, with some leaning far right and others who are conventional religious conservatives on issues like marriage and abortion.

    “By and large, Orthodox Christians are not far right. It’s a minority group within a minority religious tradition,” said Sarah Riccardi-Swartz, who studies religion and politics at Northeastern University.

    Jonathan Pageau, a Canadian icon carver who teaches symbolism courses online, is among the most popular content creators with about 275,000 YouTube subscribers.

    “We have to see it as a kind of irony and something of a paradox. In some ways, you could say we’re using tools that aren’t completely appropriate,” he said of how the internet contrasts with Orthodoxy’s emphasis on in-person liturgy. “At the same time, one of the things that the internet offers is reach. And one of the things Orthodoxy hasn’t had in forever is reach.”

    Pageau, who converted in 2003, says he and other influencers stress the importance of in-person community to their followers.

    “We tell them to go to church,” he said. “You can’t live this in your mind online because it is distorting. When you go to church, you meet all kinds of people, people that are on all sides of the political aisle.”

    Abia Ailleen researched Orthodoxy online for six months before stepping inside Saint Sophia Greek Orthodox Cathedral in Los Angeles. The 28-year-old Latina, who was chrismated — or received into the faith — in April 2024, also sees a disconnect between Orthodoxy online and in the flesh.

    “People who come to Saint Sophia who are very rigid, who want to be perfect and holy based on what they’ve learned on the internet, a lot of the time Saint Sophia isn’t a place that they want to stay,” she said. “We really have cultivated a structure of humility, of making mistakes and of vulnerability.”

    To be sure, devout Orthodox do follow a robust program of prayer, fasting and other disciplines. Justin Braxton, a firefighter who converted a year and a half ago, likens some of Orthodoxy’s “strenuous” demands to exercise.

    “I dreaded leg day, but I would feel amazing afterwards. I feel like that’s the difference between happiness and joy. Happiness is when you’re basically fulfilling carnal needs,” he said. “Joy is that feeling after that tough workout and saying, ‘Yeah, I did it.’”

    At the same time, priests often try to temper the yearnings of some converts for rules and structure.

    “They come to Orthodoxy and they find that yes, we have rules and we have structure. But within those rules and structure there’s a lot of fluidity,” said the Very Rev. Thomas Zain, dean of St. Nicholas Cathedral in Brooklyn, New York, and vicar general of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America.

    His church has seen an exponential increase in attendance, which began about two years ago. “I’ll get like 50 people at a Bible study or adult education class, where I used to get three or four or five,” he said.

    Zain, a descendant of Syrian immigrants who was born into the faith, is navigating the ideological diversity from which people are joining. “It’s breathed new life into the church, but it’s also challenging because you’re trying to mold them into one community with the old and the new,” he said.

    Part of what’s fueling the perception that only men are converting is that many influencers overlap with the so-called manosphere — content online that caters toward men grappling with their understanding of masculinity. Orthodoxy is often billed as an alternative or supplement to self-help advice for young men.

    “As a theologian, the idea that somehow masculinity — this particular way of thinking about masculinity — is inherent to Orthodox theology and teaching is I think just completely wrong,” said Aristotle Papanikolaou, cofounding director of the Orthodox Christian Studies Center at Fordham University. “There’s actually no logic to the idea that somehow I need to be masculine in this particular way in order to unite myself with God.”

    Though appealing to some, others believe these influencers distort their idea of Christianity. “It’s just not my cup of tea,” said Aaron Velasco, a 26-year-old filmmaker chrismated last year.

    And while Velasco did take an interest in some content creators, and appreciates Pageau’s demeanor and perspective, he thinks many of them preach an inflammatory version of the faith that doesn’t fit his current understanding of it.

    Many adherents say the broader church is more ideologically diverse than the rigid conservatism often found online.

    “Look at the institutional church. There is this huge hierarchy where women are not present. It’s hard to say that’s not a masculine image,” said Dina Zingaro, who is studying Orthodoxy at Harvard Divinity School and who was raised in the faith. “At the same time, there are so many counter-narratives in Orthodoxy that uproot this idea.”

    Church leaders have made few public responses, however some clergy are beginning to speak more about the magnitude of this influx and its accompanying challenges.

    “There are cases of extremism and fundamentalism,” said Metropolitan Saba, leader of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, during an address last month in Denver. “Many who are coming to the church today are psychologically, emotionally or socially wounded, which requires experienced and mature spiritual fathers and mothers.”

    Zingaro, who preaches regularly and teaches courses for Orthodox women on preaching, hopes church leadership will be more vocal.

    “Our response in my mind has not been strong enough,” Zingaro said. “There’s something that we’re doing that is making people think it’s OK to make these claims about Orthodoxy. We need to lift up the real spirit and the core of Orthodoxy, which is really the opposite of this rule-based male domination version.”

    ___

    Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NASA switches to Boeing for Artemis transport vans after Canoo goes bankrupt

    [ad_1]

    NATIONWIDE — A company that was contracted to give a fleet of electric vehicle vans so NASA could use them for its Artemis astronauts has filed for bankruptcy.


    What You Need To Know

    • The three EV vans were supposed to transport Artemis astronauts to the launch pad before going to the moon
    • Canoo Technologies Inc. filed for bankruptcy earlier this year
    • NASA tells Spectrum News the company was “no longer able to meet our mission” needs
    • The space agency will use another transport vehicle, which was built by Boeing and Airstream

    In 2022, Canoo Technologies Inc. was contracted to supply three EV vans, listed as “Artemis Crew Transportation Vehicles.”

    These fully electric vans were supposed to be environmentally friendly and would not produce emissions as they would take Artemis astronauts to the Space Launch Systems rocket to the moon.

    According to the contract, it cost NASA $147,855 for the three vehicles.

    However, the California-based company filed for bankruptcy at the start of 2025.

    In 2023, Canoo Technologies delivered three EVs to NASA, which the U.S. space agency called Artemis astronauts’ “… final Earth-bound leg of their journey to the Moon before boarding their rocket and spacecraft,” in a press release.

    NASA has stated that it will be going with Boeing’s Astrovan instead.

    “As of October, NASA is leasing Boeing’s Astrovan to transport crew to the launch pad for the agency’s associated training exercises and Artemis II launch. This change in providers was necessary as Canoo Technologies was no longer able to meet our mission requirements. NASA will evaluate future transportation options,” Artemis Public Affairs specialist Tiffany Fairley stated to Spectrum News in an email.

    The Astrovan was built in partnership with Airstream and Boeing, and was used for the NASA-Boeing Starliner mission in 2024.

    The Airstream-Boeing Astrovan is seen taking the Starliner crew to the launch pad during the second launch attempt in 2024. (Spectrum News file photo/Anthony Leone)

    Spectrum News reached out to Boeing, Airstream and Canoo for comment, with Boeing being the only one who replied, but stated any questions about the Artemis mission should go to NASA.

    [ad_2]

    Anthony Leone, Jon Shaban

    Source link

  • A Chinese whistleblower now living in the US is being hunted by Beijing with US tech

    [ad_1]

    MIDLAND, Texas — Retired Chinese official Li Chuanliang was recuperating from cancer on a Korean resort island when he got an urgent call: Don’t return to China, a friend warned. You’re now a fugitive.

    Days later, a stranger snapped a photo of Li in a cafe. Terrified South Korea would send him back, Li fled, flew to the U.S. on a tourist visa and applied for asylum. But even there — in New York, in California, deep in the Texas desert — the Chinese government continued to hunt him down with the help of surveillance technology.

    Li’s communications were monitored, his assets seized and his movements followed in police databases. More than 40 friends and relatives — including his pregnant daughter — were identified and detained, even by tracking down their cab drivers through facial recognition software. Three former associates died in detention, and for months shadowy men Li believed to be Chinese operatives stalked him across continents, interviews and documents seen by The Associated Press show.

    “They track you 24 hours a day. All your electronics, your phone — they’ll use every method to find you, your relatives, your friends, where you live,” Li said. “No matter where you are, you’re under their control.”

    The Chinese government is using an increasingly powerful tool to cement its power at home and vastly amplify it abroad: Surveillance technology, much of it originating in the U.S., an AP investigation has found.

    Within China, this technology helped identify and punish almost 900,000 officials last year alone, nearly five times more than in 2012, according to state numbers. Beijing says it is cracking down on corruption, but critics charge that such technology is used in China and elsewhere to stifle dissent and exact retribution on perceived enemies.

    Outside China, the same technology is being used to threaten wayward officials, along with dissidents and alleged criminals, under what authorities call Operations “Fox Hunt” and “Sky Net.” The U.S. has criticized these overseas operations as a “threat” and an “affront to national sovereignty.” More than 14,000 people, including some 3,000 officials, have been brought back to China from more than 120 countries through coercion, arrests and pressure on relatives, according to state information.

    “They’re actively pursuing those people who fled China. … as a way to demonstrate power, to show there’s no way you can escape,” said Yaqiu Wang, a fellow at the University of Chicago. “The chilling effect is enormously effective.”

    The technology used to control officials at home and abroad over the past decade came from Silicon Valley companies such as IBM, Oracle and Microsoft, according to a review of hundreds of leaked emails, government procurements, and internal corporate presentations obtained exclusively by AP. This technology mines texts, payments, flights, calls, and other data to identify the friends and family of officials and their assets.

    Among the agencies pursuing Li and his family is China’s economic crimes police, which hunts corruption suspects domestically and abroad. IBM said in internal slides that it sold the i2 surveillance software program to this Economic Crime Investigation Bureau, and procurement records show Oracle and Microsoft software was sold to that same division. Leaked emails show i2 software was copied by a former IBM partner, Landasoft, and sold to China’s disciplinary commissions, which investigate officials. None of the sales violated U.S. sanctions.

    IBM said in a statement that it sold its division making the i2 program in 2022, and has “robust processes” to ensure its technology is used responsibly. Oracle declined comment, and Microsoft did not respond.

    China’s State Council, Ministry of Public Security, National Supervision Commission, and Supreme People’s Court and Prosecutorate did not respond to faxed requests for comment. China’s foreign ministry told AP that Chinese authorities protect the rights of suspects, handle cases lawfully and respect foreign sovereignty.

    “We urge relevant countries to drop double standards and avoid becoming a safe haven for corrupt officials and their assets,” it said.

    Li’s story is a rare firsthand account from a former Chinese official. Beijing has accused Li of corruption totaling around $435 million, but Li says he’s being targeted for openly criticizing the Chinese government and denies criminal charges of taking bribes and embezzling state funds. A review of thousands of pages of legal, property, and corporate records, interrogation transcripts, and Li’s medical and travel files obtained exclusively by AP, as well as interviews with nine lawyers, support key parts of his story, showing distorted charges, blocked access to evidence, coercive confessions, and altered legal records.

    Li drew ire because as a former official, he knew well and exposed the inner workings of local politics, including naming names. While in the U.S., he also started what he called the Chinese Tyrannical Officials Whistleblower Center.

    “China places enormous emphasis on the political discipline of even former officials and (Communist) Party members,” said Jeremy Daum, Senior Fellow at Yale Law School’s Paul Tsai China Center. “So when one becomes a vocal critic of the country’s leadership, it doesn’t go over well.”

    At a pro-democracy gathering in California in 2020, Li said, he was tailed and questioned by a stranger who knew his identity. That November, an activist secretly working for Beijing asked Li to a meeting and added him to a dissident group chat monitored by China’s police, a 2025 FBI indictment later revealed. In June, an FBI letter identified Li as the possible victim of a crime involving an unregistered Chinese agent.

    Both the FBI and the White House did not comment on Li’s specific case. But the White House said it pursues any violations of U.S. law, and the FBI told AP it considers China’s efforts to retaliate against people in the U.S. who exercise their rights “unacceptable.”

    Li’s future in the U.S. is unclear. The Trump administration has paused all asylum applications. If he doesn’t return, he could face trial in absentia; if convicted and deported, he could face life in prison.

    “Electronic surveillance is the arteries for China to project power into the world … each step that every one of your relatives takes is being monitored and analyzed with big data,” Li said. “It’s absolutely terrifying.”

    Li, a stocky and well-built man who projects authority, rose through the ranks through the 1990s and 2000s, when China’s growing prosperity also brought corruption. Beijing formed a new “economic crime investigation bureau” and established what it called “Golden Tax,” “Golden Finance,” and “Golden Audit” systems to track businesses and officials across the country, using tech from Silicon Valley companies.

    Li worked as a state accountant in his hometown, Jixi, in far northeastern China, where he signed off on contracts to purchase American technology. “Bulwark against corruption,” the local media dubbed him.

    Li’s family prospered, investing in apartment complexes and renting out forklifts and bulldozers, raising questions over whether he used his position to enrich relatives. Li and his lawyers don’t deny conflicts of interest or civil violations, but say profits were made from legal, regular business operations and deny criminal charges of embezzlement and bribery.

    The same technology to fight corruption was also used for surveillance. Police accessed banking records, financial transactions, “Golden Tax,” “Golden Finance,” and “Golden Audit” data along with their own digital policing systems to sift through the finances of wide swaths of the population.

    Officials began deploying surveillance technology against each other. China’s former top security official was found to have wiretapped political opponents. And a former vice state security minister colluded with a businessman to leak tapes of a political competitor having sex with a mistress.

    In June 2011, Jixi gained a new leader: Xu Zhaojun, a local party boss.

    Months later, Li was named vice mayor of Jixi. He soon heard stories about Xu, his new boss.

    In January 2012, Xu splurged on an extravagant family getaway to China’s tropical Hainan Island, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars of public money on first-class tickets, lavish seafood dinners, and luxury suites, according to photos and receipts obtained by Li and seen by AP. They brought a maid, bought gold jewelry, and used the VIP airport terminal.

    At first Li stayed silent. But Xu kept spending: Luxury cars. Clothes from Louis Vuitton. A high-roller trip to Vegas, with paid escorts and expensive watches.

    Xu allegedly colluded with property developers to demolish an apartment complex, a culture center and a thriving shopping plaza for new construction, standing to earn millions in the process, documents show.  More than 100 people complained.

    But rather than investigate Xu, the Jixi authorities went after the protesters, and police said they were “strictly preventing” residents from complaining to the central government in Beijing, documents show.

    The funds Li had earmarked for Jixi’s surveillance apparatus was being turned on ordinary people. He was aghast.

    “It only became clear after I became vice mayor,” Li said. “From top to bottom, it’s all corrupt.”

    It all changed in 2012, when Xi Jinping became China’s top leader.

    Gifts of watches, cigarettes and high-end liquor were curbed. Private clubs shuttered, upscale restaurants closed. Banquets were canceled, red carpets rolled up, and thousands arrested.

    Back in Jixi, Xu ordered more seizures: Investors wanted to privatize a funeral home. When staff discussed making formal complaints, Xu had some arrested.

    Li knew the risks of reporting his boss were high. But in early 2013, Xi called on the party to catch “tigers and flies” in corruption — officials high-ranking and low.

    Li gathered evidence: photos, memos, and piles of receipts. He typed out a letter about Xu, accusing his boss and his cronies of embezzling more than $100 million. “They’re not just greedy for the money of the living, but they also eat the money of the dead,” he wrote.

    The daring gambit backfired at first.

    The party demoted Xu but didn’t arrest him. Furious, Xu sought revenge, and Li found himself and his relatives the target of state scrutiny. Li’s family was threatened, and his siblings were fired from their government jobs.

    But Li’s complaint against Xu had opened the floodgates, with accusations from others mounting. In August 2014, an official from Beijing asked Li for a meeting about Xu. They spoke well into the night.

    Within a week, Xu was arrested. He was sentenced to 14 years in prison.

    Xu is in prison and could not be reached. Chinese authorities did not respond to a request for an interview with Xu.

    Party officials asked Li if he wanted a new post. But he had lost faith in the party.

    “I saw through the nature of the system,” Li said. “So I quit.”

    In 2014 and 2015, the launch of operations Fox Hunt and Sky Net began ensnaring hundreds of former officials and their business partners abroad.

    Beijing set up big data centers to track money and relationships and established an online portal to report “fleeing party members and government officials.”

    A playbook emerged: Trawl through police databases to find transactions or property that could be deemed suspicious. Identify friends and family who could be coerced to confess. Then announce corruption charges.

    A leaked photo of the internal police software used to hunt officials suggests the moniker “Sky Net” was inspired by an American movie, “The Terminator,” about a cyborg assassin that hunts humans.

    At first, the U.S. government was open to cooperating with Beijing’s requests for information and extradition, said Holden Triplett, FBI attache in Beijing from 2014 to 2017. But soon, the U.S. realized China’s anti-corruption campaign was often about stifling dissent.

    “It was such a low level of information, not even really evidence, it was not enough for us to take any action ever,” Triplett told AP. “What they tended to focus on were things that frankly were threatening to the state and threatening to the party potentially, or somehow would make the party look bad.”

    In 2015, Washington complained that Chinese agents were flying to the U.S. and stalking targets without approval, including U.S. permanent residents. Agents brought night goggles from China, snapped photos and taped threatening messages on doors.

    Marketing documents and a leaked copy of software used against officials fleeing abroad show how American technology enabled Beijing’s playbook.

    IBM marketed i2 to Chinese police to allow them to flag officials based on the value of their assets and that of their families, according to a slideshow whose metadata identifies it as being from 2018. They customized financial software to add a function for Chinese officials to “sign off” on orders.

    i2 was also copied by an IBM Chinese reseller, Landasoft, which developed its own software that drew connections to flag “suspicious individuals,” such as relatives connected to a targeted official. A leaked copy of Landasoft software showed one button was called “associated persons management.” Another showed special functions for Valentine’s Day and other holidays, when loved ones were more likely to call.

    Landasoft systems flagged suspicious transactions and tracked suspected prostitutes or when two people of the opposite gender booked the same hotel room. Landasoft did not respond to a request for comment.

    Monitoring and threatening family was key to getting back anyone who had fled.

    “A fugitive is like a kite,” said Li Gongjing, a captain in the economic crime investigation division of the Shanghai police, in an interview with state media. “He may be abroad, but the string is in China, and he can always be found through his family.”

    After Li quit the party, auditors trawled through his finances — usual practice for departing officials. Three years later, in 2017, they declared him clean.

    The next year, Xi removed term limits, allowing him to rule for life. He used the anti-corruption campaign to sideline rivals and eliminate opposition.

    Soon, even those who were hunting other officials fell victim to the government.

    In 2018, Chinese police official Meng Hongwei was detained in Beijing, abruptly ending a two-year term as Interpol president during which the international policing organization issued hundreds of Red Notices requested by China. Red Notices alert global law enforcement to look out for a criminal suspect, upon request of a member country, but Interpol has spent years trying to prevent abuse of the system for hunting down political asylum-seekers.

    In February 2020, agents came for Li’s friend and former deputy, district chief Kong Lingbao, who had criticized Beijing’s censorship of key information in the COVID-19 pandemic. A rival secretly recorded Kong saying during a private dinner that he could no longer work for the party. Kong was summoned to the local discipline inspection office and never came out: he was being investigated for “inappropriate remarks”.

    Kong’s arrest prompted a friend to ring Li in Korea and warn him. That July, Chinese authorities opened an investigation into Li.

    A month later, Li told The Epoch Times, a dissident Chinese publication, that he had quit the party, and portrayed himself as a dissident. He says he did not know he was under investigation at the time.

    A week after the interview was published, strangers stalked Li at the unveiling of a sculpture dedicated to pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong, asking menacing questions and tailing him by car. Agents identified the address of one of his safe houses.

    In early September, the party publicly accused Li of embezzling “huge amounts” of state funds, paying money for sex and fleeing abroad. It was “only a matter of time”, authorities declared, before Li would be arrested.

    “We advise all corrupt officials who have fled abroad, including Li Chuanliang, that no matter how cunning a fox is, it cannot escape the eyes of the hunter,” it said.

    Official statements and interviews with four people familiar with Li’s case show Xi and the central government got directly involved after Li spoke out.

    Beijing tapped phones, seized assets and installed cameras outside the homes of friends and family. Some detained were denied surgery or other medical care, even those recovering from heart disease, cancer, and other illnesses. Li’s aunt was released from a hospital in a vegetative state with bruises on her head and all over her body. Even the Li family grave was dug up.

    Li’s friend, Kong, was sentenced to over a decade in prison for allegedly taking bribes. The party claimed he had watched porn and ignored his work, which they blamed for the spread of COVID in his district. Furious, Li kept speaking out.

    In December 2020, a man from Shanghai posing as a private investigator approached Zheng Cunzhu, vice chairman of the dissident China Democracy Party. The man offered $100,000 in bribes for information on Li and promised more if he obstructed Li’s bid for asylum, Zheng said in an interview and a letter.

    In February 2021, Li learned the Chinese government had asked Interpol to issue a Red Notice declaring to police worldwide that Li was a wanted man. Interpol retracted the Red Notice after Li filed a complaint.

    Li began donning masks and hats in public and carrying multiple phones, wary of surveillance. He floated from safe house to safe house with Christians across the United States.

    In October 2024, a Chinese court announced that Li was suspected of corruption totaling over 3.1 billion RMB, or roughly $435 million. The government claimed they seized 1,021 properties, 38 vehicles, and 18 companies belonging to Li and charged his relatives and associates with crimes related to Li. The lawyers who reviewed the case told AP there were serious anomalies with the charges.

    Many of the lawyers Li has tried to hire were rejected, threatened, and put under surveillance. At least three were summoned by Chinese legal authorities. They were told Li’s case was “political” and important to leaders from Beijing, and warned against speaking publicly, according to memos viewed by AP.

    “Once you get to the point that you’re criticizing the party, it’s no holds barred,” said Ryan Mitchell, a law professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. “Resistance is punished.”

    In a courthouse in China, Li’s friends and family faced legal proceedings tied to his corruption charges. A plainclothes officer outside stopped an AP reporter from taking photos, saying a “sensitive political case” was being heard.

    “They didn’t show any evidence. Instead, they told a story,” one of the lawyers told AP, declining to be named because they were warned against speaking to the press. “They wouldn’t even show us the accusations.”

    Authorities in Heilongjiang, where the proceedings were held, did not respond to a faxed request for comment.

    Li is now cut off from friends and family, denied legal assistance and clueless even to the details of the charges against him. So he is once again resorting to speaking out — this time on YouTube.

    Li acknowledges the situation seems hopeless. But he’s pressing on.

    “Why am I speaking up?” he said. “Today, it’s me. Tomorrow, it might be you.”

    __

    Independent investigative journalists Myf Ma in New York and Yael Grauer in Phoenix and AP journalists Serginho Roosblad in Texas, Garance Burke in San Francisco and Byron Tau in Washington contributed to this report.

    —-

    Contact AP’s global investigative team at Investigative@ap.org or https://www.ap.org/tips/.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Reddit challenges Australia’s world-first law banning children under 16 from social media

    [ad_1]

    MELBOURNE, Australia — Global online forum Reddit on Friday filed a court challenge to Australia’s world-first law that bans Australian children younger than 16 from holding accounts on the world’s most popular social media platforms.

    California-based Reddit Inc.’s suit filed in the High Court follows a case filed last month by Sydney-based rights group Digital Freedom Project.

    Both suits claim the law is unconstitutional because it infringes on Australia’s implied freedom of political communication.

    “We believe there are more effective ways for the Australian government to accomplish our shared goal of protecting youth, and the SMMA (Social Media Minimum Age) law carries some serious privacy and political expression issues for everyone on the internet,” Reddit said in a statement.

    “While we agree with the importance of protecting people under 16, this law has the unfortunate effect of forcing intrusive and potentially insecure verification processes on adults as well as minors, isolating teens from the ability to engage in age-appropriate community experiences (including political discussions), and creating an illogical patchwork of which platforms are included and which aren’t,” Reddit added.

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government declined to comment on the merits of Reddit’s challenge.

    “The Albanese government is on the side of Australian parents and kids, not platforms,” a government statement said.

    “We will stand firm to protect young Australians from experiencing harm on social media. The matter is before the courts so it is not appropriate to comment further,” the statement added.

    Reddit, Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube and Twitch face fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($32.9 million) from Wednesday if they fail to take reasonable steps to remove the accounts of Australian children younger than 16.

    Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, the law’s enforcer, sent compulsory information notices to the 10 age-restricted platforms on Thursday demanding data on how many accounts of young children they had deactivated since the law took effect on Wednesday.

    Inman Grant had predicted that some platforms might have been waiting to receive their first notice or their first fine for noncompliance before mounting a legal challenge.

    ESafety will send six monthly notices to gauge how effectively the platforms are complying.

    Despite the court challenge, Reddit said it would comply with the law and would continue to engage with eSafety.

    The platforms’ age-verification options were to ask for copies of identification documents, use a third party to apply age-estimation technology to analyze an account holder’s face, or make inferences from data already available, such has how long an account has been held.

    The government hasn’t told the platforms how to check ages, but has said requesting all account holders verify their ages would be unnecessarily intrusive, given the tech giants already have sufficient personal data on most people to perform that task.

    For privacy reasons, the platforms also cannot compel users to provide government-issued identification.

    Documents filed with the court registry show Reddit will ask the seven High Court judges to rule the law is invalid.

    Alternatively, the company wants the court to prevent the government from listing Reddit among the age-restricted platforms.

    The High Court will hold a preliminary hearing in late February to set a date for Digital Freedom Project’s challenge on behalf of two 15-year-olds. It is not yet clear whether the two challenges would be heard together.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump signs executive order to block

    [ad_1]

    President Trump signed an executive order Thursday aimed at restricting states from crafting their own regulations for artificial intelligence, saying the burgeoning industry is at risk of being stifled by a patchwork of onerous rules while in a battle with Chinese competitors for supremacy.

    Members of Congress from both parties, as well as civil liberties and consumer rights groups, have pushed for more regulations on AI, saying there is not enough oversight for the powerful technology.

    But Mr. Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that “there’s only going to be one winner” as nations race to dominate artificial intelligence, and China’s central government gives its companies a single place to go for government approvals.

    “We have the big investment coming, but if they had to get 50 different approvals from 50 different states, you can forget it because it’s impossible to do,” the president said.

    The executive order directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to create a new task force to challenge state laws, and directs the Department of Commerce to draw up a list of problematic regulations. It also threatens to restrict funding from a broadband deployment program and other grant programs to states with AI laws.

    David Sacks, a venture capitalist who is leading Mr. Trump’s policies on cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence, said Thursday the Trump administration would only push back on “the most onerous examples of state regulation” but would not oppose “kid safety” measures.

    Four states — Colorado, California, Utah and Texas — have passed laws that set some rules for AI across the private sector, according to the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

    Those laws include limiting the collection of certain personal information and requiring more transparency from companies.

    The laws are in response to AI that already pervades everyday life. The technology helps make consequential decisions for Americans, including who gets a job interview, an apartment lease, a home loan and even certain medical care. But research has shown that it can make mistakes in those decisions, including by prioritizing a particular gender or race.

    States’ more ambitious AI regulation proposals require private companies to provide transparency and assess the possible risks of discrimination from their AI programs.

    Beyond those more sweeping rules, many states have regulated parts of AI: barring the use of deepfakes in elections and to create nonconsensual porn, for example, or putting rules in place around the government’s own use of AI.

    Those who support regulations that would prevent states from restricting AI — including some GOP lawmakers and advocates like Sacks — argue that forcing tech companies to contend with varied or even contradictory rules would hurt the industry.

    “At best, we’ll end up with 50 different AI models for 50 different states – a regulatory morass worse than Europe,” Sacks wrote on X earlier this week. “This will stymie innovation, especially by small startups who can’t afford the compliance burden. Meanwhile, China will race ahead.”

    But members of both parties have pushed back. Last month, when congressional Republicans weighed adding restrictions on state AI regulations to a defense bill, Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis called the idea a “subsidy to Big Tech.”

    “The rise of AI is the most significant economic and cultural shift occurring at the moment; denying the people the ability to channel these technologies in a productive way via self-government constitutes federal government overreach and lets technology companies run wild,” the governor wrote.

    Earlier this week, Democratic Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts called Mr. Trump’s plan to restrict AI regulations via an executive order an “early Christmas present for his CEO billionaire buddies.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Reddit Challenges Australia’s World-First Law Banning Children Under 16 From Social Media

    [ad_1]

    MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Global online forum Reddit on Friday filed a court challenge to Australia’s world-first law that bans Australian children younger than 16 from holding accounts on the world’s most popular social media platforms.

    California-based Reddit Inc.’s suit filed in the High Court follows a case filed last month by Sydney-based rights group Digital Freedom Project.

    Both suits claim the law is unconstitutional because it infringes on Australia’s implied freedom of political communication.

    “We believe there are more effective ways for the Australian government to accomplish our shared goal of protecting youth, and the SMMA (Social Media Minimum Age) law carries some serious privacy and political expression issues for everyone on the internet,” Reddit said in a statement.

    “While we agree with the importance of protecting people under 16, this law has the unfortunate effect of forcing intrusive and potentially insecure verification processes on adults as well as minors, isolating teens from the ability to engage in age-appropriate community experiences (including political discussions), and creating an illogical patchwork of which platforms are included and which aren’t,” Reddit added.

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government declined to comment on the merits of Reddit’s challenge.

    “The Albanese government is on the side of Australian parents and kids, not platforms,” a government statement said.

    “We will stand firm to protect young Australians from experiencing harm on social media. The matter is before the courts so it is not appropriate to comment further,” the statement added.

    Reddit, Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube and Twitch face fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($32.9 million) from Wednesday if they fail to take reasonable steps to remove the accounts of Australian children younger than 16.

    Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, the law’s enforcer, sent compulsory information notices to the 10 age-restricted platforms on Thursday demanding data on how many accounts of young children they had deactivated since the law took effect on Wednesday.

    Inman Grant had predicted that some platforms might have been waiting to receive their first notice or their first fine for noncompliance before mounting a legal challenge.

    ESafety will send six monthly notices to gauge how effectively the platforms are complying.

    Despite the court challenge, Reddit said it would comply with the law and would continue to engage with eSafety.

    The platforms’ age-verification options were to ask for copies of identification documents, use a third party to apply age-estimation technology to analyze an account holder’s face, or make inferences from data already available, such has how long an account has been held.

    The government hasn’t told the platforms how to check ages, but has said requesting all account holders verify their ages would be unnecessarily intrusive, given the tech giants already have sufficient personal data on most people to perform that task.

    For privacy reasons, the platforms also cannot compel users to provide government-issued identification.

    Documents filed with the court registry show Reddit will ask the seven High Court judges to rule the law is invalid.

    Alternatively, the company wants the court to prevent the government from listing Reddit among the age-restricted platforms.

    The High Court will hold a preliminary hearing in late February to set a date for Digital Freedom Project’s challenge on behalf of two 15-year-olds. It is not yet clear whether the two challenges would be heard together.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • El Salvador teams up with Elon Musk’s xAI to bring AI to 5,000 public schools

    [ad_1]

    SAN SALVADOR, El Salvador — El Salvador President Nayib Bukele said Thursday that his administration is partnering with Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI to bring artificial intelligence into more than 5,000 public schools.

    The millennial leader, who previously made El Salvador the first nation to make bitcoin legal tender in 2021, is betting big on technology again.

    In a statement Thursday, xAI said that its Grok chatbot will bring “personalized learning to over one million students” by creating tutoring “that adjusts to each student’s pace, preferences, and mastery level — ensuring every child, from urban centers to rural communities, receives world-class education tailored to their needs.”

    Bukele said in the statement that El Salvador would be “pioneering AI-driven education.”

    Last month, Bukele announced a partnership with Google to launch a mobile app that would allow Salvadorans to access free virtual medical consultations with doctors that would be assisted by AI.

    Earlier this year, xAI said it was taking down “inappropriate posts” made by Grok, which appeared to include antisemitic comments that praised Adolf Hitler. Musk said at the time that the chatbot was improving.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Australia demands social media giants report progress on account bans for children under 16

    [ad_1]

    MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australian authorities on Thursday demanded some of the world’s biggest social media platforms report how many accounts they have deactivated since a ban on accounts for children younger than 16 became law.

    Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube and Twitch all said they would abide by Australia’s world-first law that took effect on Wednesday, Communications Minister Anika Wells said.

    But the tech companies’ responses to eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant’s first demand for data will likely indicate their commitment to ridding their platforms of young children.

    “Today the eSafety Commissioner will write to all 10 platforms who are considered age-restricted social media platforms and she will ask them … what were your numbers of under 16 accounts on Dec. 9; what are your numbers today on Dec. 11?” Wells said.

    The commissioner would reveal the platforms’ responses within two weeks. The platforms would be required to provide monthly updates for six months.

    The companies face fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($32.9 million) from Wednesday if they fail to take reasonable steps to remove the accounts of Australian children younger than 16.

    Wells said the European Commission, France, Denmark, Greece, Romania, Indonesia, Malaysia and New Zealand were considering following Australia’s lead in restricting children’s access to social media.

    “There’s been a huge amount of global interest and we welcome it, and we welcome all of the allies who are joining Australia to take action in this space to draw a line to say enough’s enough,” Wells said.

    Sydney-based rights group Digital Freedom Project plans to challenge the law on constitutional grounds in the Australian High Court early next year.

    Inman Grant said some platforms had consulted lawyers and might be waiting to receive their first so-called compulsory information notice Thursday or their first fine for noncompliance before mounting a legal challenge.

    Inman Grant said her staff were ready for the possibility that platforms would deliberately fail to exclude young children through age verification and age estimation technologies.

    “That could be a strategy that they have in and of themselves: we’ll say we’re complying but then we’ll do a crappy job using these technologies and we’ll let people get through and have people claim it’s a failure,” Inman Grant told Australian Broadcasting Corp.

    Inman Grant said her research had found that 84% of children in Australia aged 8-12 had accessed a social media account. Of those with social media access, 90% did so with the help of parents.

    Inman Grant said the main reason parents helped was because “they didn’t want their children to be excluded.”

    “What this legislation does … is it takes away that fear of exclusion,” Inman Grant said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Crypto mogul Do Kwon to be sentenced for misleading investors who lost billions

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Cryptocurrency mogul Do Kwon is scheduled to be sentenced Thursday for misleading investors who lost billions when his company’s crypto ecosystem collapsed in 2022.

    Kwon, known by some as “the cryptocurrency king,” pleaded guilty in Manhattan federal court in August to fraud charges stemming from Terraform Labs’ $40 billion crash.

    The company had touted its TerraUSD as a reliable “stablecoin” — a kind of currency typically pegged to stable assets to prevent drastic fluctuations in prices. But prosecutors say it was all an illusion that came crumbling down, devastating investors and triggering “a cascade of crises that swept through cryptocurrency markets.”

    Kwon, who hails from South Korea, has agreed to forfeit over $19 million as part of the plea deal.

    While federal sentencing guidelines would recommend a prison term of about 25 years, prosecutors have asked the court to sentence Kwon to 12 years. They cited his guilty plea, the fact that he faces further prosecution in Korea and that he has already served time in Montenegro while awaiting extradition.

    “Kwon’s fraud was colossal in scope, permeating virtually every facet of Terraform’s purported business,” prosecutors wrote in a recent memo to the judge. “His rampant lies left a trail of financial destruction in their wake.”

    Kwon’s attorneys asked that the sentence not exceed five years, arguing in their own memo that his conduct stemmed not from greed, but hubris and desperation.

    In a letter to the judge, Kwon wrote, “I alone am responsible for everyone’s pain. The community looked to me to know the path, and I in my hubris led them astray,” while adding, “I made misrepresentations that came from a brashness that is now a source of deep regret.”

    Authorities said investors worldwide lost money in the downfall of the Singapore crypto firm, which Kwon co-founded in 2018. Around $40 billion in market value was erased for the holders of TerraUSD and its floating sister currency, Luna, after the stablecoin plunged far below its $1 peg.

    Kwon was extradited to the U.S. from Montenegro after his March 23, 2023, arrest while traveling on a false passport in Europe.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Following Australia’s lead, Denmark plans to ban social media for children under 15

    [ad_1]

    COPENHAGEN, Denmark — As Australia began enforcing a world-first social media ban for children under 16 years old this week, Denmark is planning to follow its lead and severely restrict social media access for young people.

    The Danish government announced last month that it had secured an agreement by three governing coalition and two opposition parties in parliament to ban access to social media for anyone under the age of 15. Such a measure would be the most sweeping step yet by a European Union nation to limit use of social media among teens and children.

    The Danish government’s plans could become law as soon as mid-2026. The proposed measure would give some parents the right to let their children access social media from age 13, local media reported, but the ministry has not yet fully shared the plans.

    Many social media platforms already ban children younger than 13 from signing up, and a EU law requires Big Tech to put measures in place to protect young people from online risks and inappropriate content. But officials and experts say such restrictions don’t always work.

    Danish authorities have said that despite the restrictions, around 98% of Danish children under age 13 have profiles on at least one social media platform, and almost half of those under 10 years old do.

    The minister for digital affairs, Caroline Stage, who announced the proposed ban last month, said there is still a consultation process for the measure and several readings in parliament before it becomes law, perhaps by “mid to end of next year.”

    “In far too many years, we have given the social media platforms free play in the playing rooms of our children. There’s been no limits,” Stage said in an interview with The Associated Press last month.

    “When we go into the city at night, there are bouncers who are checking the age of young people to make sure that no one underage gets into a party that they’re not supposed to be in,” she added. “In the digital world, we don’t have any bouncers, and we definitely need that.”

    Under the new Australian law, Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X and YouTube face fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) if they fail to take reasonable steps to remove accounts of Australian children younger than 16.

    Some students say they are worried that similar strict laws in Denmark would mean they will lose touch with their virtual communities.

    “I myself have some friends that I only know from online, and if I wasn’t fifteen yet, I wouldn’t be able to talk with those friends,” 15-year-old student Ronja Zander, who uses Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok, told the AP.

    Copenhagen high school student Chloé Courage Fjelstrup-Matthisen, 14, said she is aware of the negative impact social media can have, from cyberbullying to seeing graphic content. She said she saw video of a man being shot several months ago.

    “The video was on social media everywhere and I just went to school and then I saw it,” she said.

    Line Pedersen, a mother from Nykøbing in Denmark, said she believed the plans were a good idea.

    “I think that we didn’t really realize what we were doing when we gave our children the telephone and social media from when they were eight, 10 years old,” she said. “I don’t quite think that the young people know what’s normal, what’s not normal.”

    Danish officials are yet to share how exactly the proposed ban would be enforced and which social media platforms would be affected.

    However, a new “digital evidence” app, announced by the Digital Affairs Ministry last month and expected to launch next spring, will likely form the backbone of the Danish plans. The app will display an age certificate to ensure users comply with social media age limits, the ministry said.

    “One thing is what they’re saying and another thing is what they’re doing or not doing,” Stage said, referring to social media platforms. “And that’s why we have to do something politically.”

    Some experts say restrictions, such as the ban planned by Denmark, don’t always work and they may also infringe on the rights of children and teenagers.

    “To me, the greatest challenge is actually the democratic rights of these children. I think it’s sad that it’s not taken more into consideration,” said Anne Mette Thorhauge, an associate professor at the University of Copenhagen.

    “Social media, to many children, is what broadcast media was to my generation,” she added. “It was a way of connecting to society.”

    Currently, the EU’s Digital Services Act, which took effect two years ago, requires social media platforms to ensure there are measures including parental controls and age verification tools before young users can access the apps.

    EU officials have acknowledged that enforcing the regulations aiming at protecting children online has proven challenging because it requires cooperation between member states and many resources.

    Denmark is among several countries that have indicated they plan to follow in Australia’s steps. The Southeast Asian country of Malaysia is expected to ban social media account s for people under the age of 16 starting at the beginning of next year, and Norway is also taking steps to restrict social media access for children and teens.

    China — which manufacturers many of the world’s digital devices — has set limits on online gaming time and smartphone time for kids.

    [ad_2]

    Source link