Long-time Slashdot reader shanen has been testing AI clients. (They report that China's DeepSeek "turned out to be extremely good at explaining why I should not trust it. Every computer security problem I ever thought of or heard about and some more besides.")

Then they wondered if there's also government censorship: It's like the accountant who gets asked what 2 plus 2 is. After locking the doors and shading all the windows, the accountant whispers in your ear: "What do you want it to be...?" So let me start with some questions about DeepSeek in particular. Have you run it locally and compared the responses with the website's responses? My hypothesis is that your mileage should differ...

It's well established that DeepSeek doesn't want to talk about many "political" topics. Is that based on a distorted model of the world? Or is the censorship implemented in the query interface after the model was trained? My hypothesis is that it must have been trained with lots of data because the cost of removing all of the bad stuff would have been prohibitive... Unless perhaps another AI filtered the data first?
But their real question is: what would it take to trust an AI? "Trust" can mean different things, including data-collection policies. ("I bet most of you trust Amazon and Amazon's secret AIs more than you should..." shanen suggests.) Can you use an AI system without worrying about its data-retention policies?

And they also ask how many Slashdot readers have read Ken Thompson's "Reflections on Trusting Trust", which raises the question of whether you can ever trust code you didn't create yourself. So is there any way an AI system can assure you its answers are accurate and trustworthy, and that it's safe to use? Share your own thoughts and experiences in the comments.

What would it take for you to trust an AI?

"Reddit Answers" uses generative AI to answer questions using what past Reddittors have posted. Announced in December, Reddit now plans to integrate it into their search results, reports TechCrunch, with Reddit's CEO saying the idea has "incredible monetization potential."

And yet Reddit's stock fell 14% this week. CNBC's headline? "Reddit shares plunge after Google algorithm change contributes to miss in user numbers." A Google search algorithm change caused some "volatility" with user growth in the fourth quarter, but the company's search-related traffic has since recovered in the first quarter, Reddit CEO Steve Huffman said in a letter to shareholders. "What happened wasn't unusual — referrals from search fluctuate from time to time, and they primarily affect logged-out users," Huffman wrote. "Our teams have navigated numerous algorithm updates and did an excellent job adapting to these latest changes effectively...." Reddit has said it is working to convince logged-out users to create accounts as logged-in users, which are more lucrative for its business.
As Yahoo Finance once pointed out, Reddit knew this day would come, acknowledging in its IPO filing that "changes in internet search engine algorithms and dynamics could have a negative impact on traffic for our website and, ultimately, our business." And in the last three months of 2024 Reddit's daily active users dropped, Yahoo Finance reported this week. But logged-in users increased by 400,000 — while logged-out users dropped by 600,000 (their first drop in almost two years).

Marketwatch notes that analyst Josh Beck sees this as a buying opportunity for Reddit's stock: Beck pointed to comments from Reddit's management regarding a sharp recovery in daily active unique users. That was likely driven by Google benefiting from deeper Reddit crawling, by the platform uncollapsing comments in search results and by a potential benefit from spam-reduction algorithm updates, according to the analyst. "While the report did not clear our anticipated bar, we walk away encouraged by international upside," he wrote.

SFGate shares the latest data on America's office-occupancy rates: According to Placer.ai's January 2025 Office Index, office visits nationwide were 40.2% lower in January 2025 compared with pre-pandemic numbers from January 2019.

But San Francisco is dragging down the average, with a staggering 51.8% decline in office visits since January 2019 — the weakest recovery of any major metro. Kastle's 10-City Daily Analysis paints an equally grim picture. From Jan. 23, 2025, to Jan. 28, 2025, even on its busiest day (Tuesday), San Francisco's office occupancy rate was just 53.7%, significantly lower than Houston's (74.8%) and Chicago's (70.4%). And on Friday, Jan. 24, office attendance in [San Francisco] was at a meager 28.5%, the worst of any major metro tracked...

Meanwhile, other cities are seeing much stronger rebounds. New York City is leading the return-to-office trend, with visits in January down just 19% from 2019 levels, while Miami saw a 23.5% decline, per Placer.ai data.
"Placer.ai uses cellphone location data to estimate foot traffic, while Kastle Systems measures badge swipes at office buildings with its security systems..."

An anonymous reader shared this report from the Guardian: Thousands of artists are urging the auction house Christie's to cancel a sale of art created with artificial intelligence, claiming the technology behind the works is committing "mass theft". The Augmented Intelligence auction has been described by Christie's as the first AI-dedicated sale by a major auctioneer and features 20 lots with prices ranging from $10,000 to $250,000...

The British composer Ed Newton-Rex, a key figure in the campaign by creative professionals for protection of their work and a signatory to the letter, said at least nine of the works appearing in the auction appeared to have used models trained on artists' work. However, other pieces in the auction do not appear to have used such models.

A spokesperson for Christie's said that "in most cases" the AI used to create art in the auction had been trained on the artists' "own inputs".
More than 6,000 people have now signed the letter, which states point-blank that "Many of the artworks you plan to auction were created using AI models that are known to be trained on copyrighted work without a license." These models, and the companies behind them, exploit human artists, using their work without permission or payment to build commercial AI products that compete with them. Your support of these models, and the people who use them, rewards and further incentivizes AI companies' mass theft of human artists' work. We ask that, if you have any respect for human artists, you cancel the auction.
Last week ARTnews spoke to Nicole Sales Giles, Christie's vice-president and director of digital art sales (before the open letter was published). And Giles insisted one of the major themes of the auction is "that AI is not a replacement for human creativity." "You can see a lot of human agency in all of these works," Giles said. "In every single work, you're seeing a collaboration between an AI model, a robot, or however the artist has chosen to incorporate AI. It is showing how AI is enhancing creativity and not becoming a substitute for it."

One of the auction's headline lots is a 12-foot-tall robot made by Matr Labs that is guided by artist Alexander Reben's AI model. It will paint a new section of a canvas live during the sale every time the work receives a bid. Reben told ARTnews that he understands the frustrations of artists regarding the AI debate, but he sees "AI as an incredible tool... AI models which are trained on public data are done so under the idea of 'fair use,' just as search engines once faced scrutiny for organizing book data (which was ultimately found to fall under fair use)," he said.... "AI expands creative potential, offering new ways to explore, remix, and evolve artistic expression rather than replace it. The future of art isn't about AI versus artists — it's about how artists wield AI to push boundaries in ways we've never imagined before...."

Digital artist Jack Butcher has used the open letter to create a minted digital artwork called Undersigned Artists. On X he wrote that the work "takes a collective act of dissent — an appeal to halt an AI art auction — and turns it into the very thing it resists: a minted piece of digital art. The letter, originally a condemnation of AI-generated works trained on unlicensed human labor, now becomes part of the system it critiques."

Christie's will accept cryptocurrency payments for the majority of lots in the sale.

According to The Intercept, the IRS is set to purchase an Nvidia SuperPod AI supercomputer to enhance its machine learning capabilities for tasks like fraud detection and taxpayer behavior analysis. From the report: With Elon Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency installing itself at the IRS amid a broader push to replace federal bureaucracy with machine-learning software, the tax agency's computing center in Martinsburg, West Virginia, will soon be home to a state-of-the-art Nvidia SuperPod AI computing cluster. According to the previously unreported February 5 acquisition document, the setup will combine 31 separate Nvidia servers, each containing eight of the company's flagship Blackwell processors designed to train and operate artificial intelligence models that power tools like ChatGPT. The hardware has not yet been purchased and installed, nor is a price listed, but SuperPod systems reportedly start at $7 million. The setup described in the contract materials notes that it will include a substantial memory upgrade from Nvidia.

Though small compared to the massive AI-training data centers deployed by companies like OpenAI and Meta, the SuperPod is still a powerful and expensive setup using the most advanced technology offered by Nvidia, whose chips have facilitated the global machine-learning spree. While the hardware can be used in many ways, it's marketed as a turnkey means of creating and querying an AI model. Last year, the MITRE Corporation, a federally funded military R&D lab, acquired a $20 million SuperPod setup to train bespoke AI models for use by government agencies, touting the purchase as a "massive increase in computing power" for the United States.

How exactly the IRS will use its SuperPod is unclear. An agency spokesperson said the IRS had no information to share on the supercomputer purchase, including which presidential administration ordered it. A 2024 report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration identified 68 different AI-related projects underway at the IRS; the Nvidia cluster is not named among them, though many were redacted. But some clues can be gleaned from the purchase materials. "The IRS requires a robust and scalable infrastructure that can handle complex machine learning (ML) workloads," the document explains. "The Nvidia Super Pod is a critical component of this infrastructure, providing the necessary compute power, storage, and networking capabilities to support the development and deployment of large-scale ML models."

The document notes that the SuperPod will be run by the IRS Research, Applied Analytics, and Statistics division, or RAAS, which leads a variety of data-centric initiatives at the agency. While no specific uses are cited, it states that this division's Compliance Data Warehouse project, which is behind this SuperPod purchase, has previously used machine learning for automated fraud detection, identity theft prevention, and generally gaining a "deeper understanding of the mechanisms that drive taxpayer behavior."

Leveraging AI tools like RFDiffusion and PLACER, researchers were able to design a novel enzyme capable of breaking down plastic by targeting ester bonds, a key component in polyester. Ars Technica reports: The researchers started out by using the standard tools they developed to handle protein design, including an AI tool named RFDiffusion, which uses a random seed to generate a variety of protein backgrounds. In this case, the researchers asked RFDiffusion to match the average positions of the amino acids in a family of ester-breaking enzymes. The results were fed to another neural network, which chose the amino acids such that they'd form a pocket that would hold an ester that breaks down into a fluorescent molecule so they could follow the enzyme's activity using its glow.

Of the 129 proteins designed by this software, only two of them resulted in any fluorescence. So the team decided they needed yet another AI. Called PLACER, the software was trained by taking all the known structures of proteins latched on to small molecules and randomizing some of their structure, forcing the AI to learn how to shift things back into a functional state (making it a generative AI). The hope was that PLACER would be trained to capture some of the structural details that allow enzymes to adopt more than one specific configuration over the course of the reaction they were catalyzing. And it worked. Repeating the same process with an added PLACER screening step boosted the number of enzymes with catalytic activity by over three-fold.

Unfortunately, all of these enzymes stalled after a single reaction. It turns out they were much better at cleaving the ester, but they left one part of it chemically bonded to the enzyme. In other words, the enzymes acted like part of the reaction, not a catalyst. So the researchers started using PLACER to screen for structures that could adopt a key intermediate state of the reaction. This produced a much higher rate of reactive enzymes (18 percent of them cleaved the ester bond), and two -- named "super" and "win" -- could actually cycle through multiple rounds of reactions. The team had finally made an enzyme.

By adding additional rounds alternating between structure suggestions using RFDiffusion and screening using PLACER, the team saw the frequency of functional enzymes increase and eventually designed one that had an activity similar to some produced by actual living things. They also showed they could use the same process to design an esterase capable of digesting the bonds in PET, a common plastic. The research has been published in the journal Science.

Most virtual meeting platforms these days include AI-powered notetaking tools or bots that join meetings as guests, transcribe discussions, and/or summarize key points. "The tech companies behind them might frame it as a step forward in efficiency, but the technology raises troubling questions around etiquette and privacy and risks undercutting the very communication it's meant to improve (paywalled; alternative source)," writes Chris Stokel-Walker in a Weekend Essay for Bloomberg. From the article: [...] The push to document every workplace interaction and utterance is not new. Having a paper trail has long been seen as a useful thing, and a record of decisions and action points is arguably what makes a meeting meaningful. The difference now is the inclusion of new technology that lacks the nuance and depth of understanding inherent to human interaction in a meeting room. In some ways, the prior generation of communication tools, such as instant messaging service Slack, created its own set of problems. Messaging that previously passed in private via email became much more transparent, creating a minefield where one wrong word or badly chosen emoji can explode into a dispute between colleagues. There is a similar risk with notetaking tools. Each utterance documented and analyzed by AI includes the potential for missteps and misunderstandings.

Anyone thinking of bringing an AI notetaker to a meeting must consider how other attendees will respond, says Andrew Brodsky, assistant professor of management at the McCombs School of Business, part of the University of Texas at Austin. Colleagues might think you want to better focus on what is said without missing out on a definitive record of the discussion. Or they might think, "You can't be bothered to take notes yourself or remember what was being talked about," he says. For the companies that sell these AI interlopers, the upside is clear. They recognize we're easily nudged into different behaviors and can quickly become reliant on tools that we survived without for years. [...] There's another benefit for tech companies getting us hooked on AI notetakers: Training data for AI systems is increasingly hard to come by. Research group Epoch AI forecasts there will be a drought of usable text possibly by next year. And with publishers unleashing lawsuits against AI companies for hoovering up their content, the tech firms are on the hunt for other sources of data. Notes from millions of meetings around the world could be an ideal option.

For those of us who are the source of such data, however, the situation is more nuanced. The key question is whether AI notetakers make office meetings more useless than so many already are. There's an argument that meetings are an important excuse for workers to come together and talk as human beings. All that small talk is where good ideas often germinate -- that's ostensibly why so many companies are demanding staff return to the office. But if workers trade in-person engagement for AI readbacks, and colleagues curb their words and ideas for fear of being exposed by bots, what's left? If the humans step back, all that remains is a series of data points and more AI slop polluting our lives.

A new study (PDF) from researchers at Microsoft and Carnegie Mellon University found that increased reliance on AI tools leads to a decline in critical thinking skills. Gizmodo reports: The researchers tapped 319 knowledge workers -- a person whose job involves handling data or information -- and asked them to self-report details of how they use generative AI tools in the workplace. The participants were asked to report tasks that they were asked to do, how they used AI tools to complete them, how confident they were in the AI's ability to do the task, their ability to evaluate that output, and how confident they were in their own ability to complete the same task without any AI assistance.

Over the course of the study, a pattern revealed itself: the more confident the worker was in the AI's capability to complete the task, the more often they could feel themselves letting their hands off the wheel. The participants reported a "perceived enaction of critical thinking" when they felt like they could rely on the AI tool, presenting the potential for over-reliance on the technology without examination. This was especially true for lower-stakes tasks, the study found, as people tended to be less critical. While it's very human to have your eyes glaze over for a simple task, the researchers warned that this could portend to concerns about "long-term reliance and diminished independent problem-solving."

By contrast, when the workers had less confidence in the ability of AI to complete the assigned task, the more they found themselves engaging in their critical thinking skills. In turn, they typically reported more confidence in their ability to evaluate what the AI produced and improve upon it on their own. Another noteworthy finding of the study: users who had access to generative AI tools tended to produce "a less diverse set of outcomes for the same task" compared to those without.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from VentureBeat: A new startup PIN AI (not to be confused with the poorly reviewed hardware device the AI Pin by Humane) has emerged from stealth to launch its first mobile app, which lets a user select an underlying open-source AI model that runs directly on their smartphone (iOS/Apple iPhone and Google Android supported) and remains private and totally customized to their preferences. Built with a decentralized infrastructure that prioritizes privacy, PIN AI aims to challenge big tech's dominance over user data by ensuring that personal AI serves individuals -- not corporate interests. Founded by AI and blockchain experts from Columbia, MIT and Stanford, PIN AI is led by Davide Crapis, Ben Wu and Bill Sun, who bring deep experience in AI research, large-scale data infrastructure and blockchain security. [...]

PIN AI introduces an alternative to centralized AI models that collect and monetize user data. Unlike cloud-based AI controlled by large tech firms, PIN AI's personal AI runs locally on user devices, allowing for secure, customized AI experiences without third-party surveillance. At the heart of PIN AI is a user-controlled data bank, which enables individuals to store and manage their personal information while allowing developers access to anonymized, multi-category insights -- ranging from shopping habits to investment strategies. This approach ensures that AI-powered services can benefit from high-quality contextual data without compromising user privacy. [...] The new mobile app launched in the U.S. and multiple regions also includes key features such as:

- The "God model" (guardian of data): Helps users track how well their AI understands them, ensuring it aligns with their preferences.
- Ask PIN AI: A personalized AI assistant capable of handling tasks like financial planning, travel coordination and product recommendations.
- Open-source integrations: Users can connect apps like Gmail, social media platforms and financial services to their personal AI, training it to better serve them without exposing data to third parties.
- "With our app, you have a personal AI that is your model," Crapis added. "You own the weights, and it's completely private, with privacy-preserving fine-tuning." Davide Crapis, co-founder of PIN AI, told VentureBeat that the app currently supports several open-source AI models, including small versions of DeepSeek and Meta's Llama. "With our app, you have a personal AI that is your model," Crapis added. "You own the weights, and it's completely private, with privacy-preserving fine-tuning."

You can sign up for early access to the PIN AI app here.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: On Wednesday, OpenAI published the latest version of its "Model Spec," a set of guidelines detailing how ChatGPT should behave and respond to user requests. The document reveals a notable shift in OpenAI's content policies, particularly around "sensitive" content like erotica and gore -- allowing this type of content to be generated without warnings in "appropriate contexts." The change in policy has been in the works since May 2024, when the original Model Spec document first mentioned that OpenAI was exploring "whether we can responsibly provide the ability to generate NSFW content in age-appropriate contexts through the API and ChatGPT."

ChatGPT's guidelines now state that that "erotica or gore" may now be generated, but only under specific circumstances. "The assistant should not generate erotica, depictions of illegal or non-consensual sexual activities, or extreme gore, except in scientific, historical, news, creative or other contexts where sensitive content is appropriate," OpenAI writes. "This includes depictions in text, audio (e.g., erotic or violent visceral noises), or visual content." So far, experimentation from Reddit users has shown that ChatGPT's content filters have indeed been relaxed, with some managing to generate explicit sexual or violent scenarios without accompanying content warnings. OpenAI notes that its Usage Policies still apply, which prohibit building AI tools for minors that include sexual content.

Meta unveiled on Friday Project Waterworth, a 50,000-kilometer subsea cable network that will be the world's longest such system. The multi-billion dollar project will connect the U.S., Brazil, India, South Africa, and other key regions. The system utilizes 24 fiber pairs and introduces what Meta describes as "first-of-its-kind routing" that maximizes cable placement in deep water at depths up to 7,000 meters.

The company developed new burial techniques for high-risk areas near coasts to protect against ship anchors and other hazards. A joint statement from President Trump and Prime Minister Modi confirmed India's role in maintaining and financing portions of the undersea cables in the Indian Ocean using "trusted vendors." According to telecom analysts Telegeography, Meta currently has ownership stakes in 16 subsea networks, including the 2Africa cable system that encircles the African continent. This new project would be Meta's first wholly owned global cable system.

A hedge fund startup that uses AI to do work typically handled by analysts has outperformed the global stock market in its first six months while slashing research costs. From a report: The Sydney-based firm, Minotaur Capital, was founded by Armina Rosenberg and Thomas Rice. Rosenberg previously managed a global equities portfolio for tech billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes and ran Australian small-company research for JPMorgan Chase & Co. when she was 25. Rice is a former portfolio manager at Perpetual. The duo's bets on global stocks returned 13.7% in the six months ending January, versus 6.7% for the MSCI All-Country World Index. Minotaur has no analysts on staff, with Rosenberg saying AI models are far quicker and cheaper.

"We're looking at about half the price" in terms of cost of AI versus a junior analyst salary, Rosenberg, 37, said of the firm's program. Minotaur is among a growing number of hedge funds experimenting with ways to improve returns and cut expenses with AI as the technology becomes increasingly sophisticated. Still, the jury is still out on the ability of AI-driven models to deliver superior returns over the long run.

More than $1 trillion in value remains locked in venture-backed startups with dwindling prospects as the Silicon Valley unicorn bubble deflates, according to a new Bloomberg Businessweek report. Of the 354 companies that reached billion-dollar valuations in 2021, only six have completed initial public offerings, Stanford Business School professor Ilya Strebulaev said.

Four others went public via SPACs and 10 were acquired, some below their unicorn status. Several prominent startups have already collapsed, including indoor farming firm Bowery Farming and AI healthcare company Forward Health. Freight business Convoy, valued at $3.8 billion in 2022, shut down last year with rival Flexport buying its assets at a steep discount.

AI startups are poised to disrupt the $300 billion business process outsourcing (BPO) industry, as advances in language models and voice technology enable automation of tasks traditionally handled by human workers.

The BPO market, which reached $300 billion in 2024 and is projected to hit $525 billion by 2030, faces mounting pressure from AI companies offering faster, more scalable alternatives to manual processing of customer support, IT services and financial claims, venture capital firm a16z wrote in a thesis post. Early AI implementations have shown promising results, with customer service startup Decagon reporting 80% resolution rates and improved satisfaction scores. In healthcare, AI company Juniper said its clients saw 80% fewer insurance claim denials and 50% faster processing times.

Major BPO providers are responding to the threat, with Wipro reporting a 140% increase in AI adoption across projects and Infosys deploying over 100 AI agents. However, industry analysts say BPOs face structural challenges in transitioning from their labor-based business model to AI-first operations. The shift threatens traditional BPO companies like Cognizant, Infosys and Wipro, which reported revenues between $10-20 billion in their latest fiscal years.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: The U.K. government wants to make a hard pivot into boosting its economy and industry with AI, and as part of that, it's pivoting an institution that it founded a little over a year ago for a very different purpose. Today the Department of Science, Industry and Technology announced that it would be renaming the AI Safety Institute to the "AI Security Institute." (Same first letters: same URL.) With that, the body will shift from primarily exploring areas like existential risk and bias in large language models, to a focus on cybersecurity, specifically "strengthening protections against the risks AI poses to national security and crime."

Alongside this, the government also announced a new partnership with Anthropic. No firm services were announced but the MOU indicates the two will "explore" using Anthropic's AI assistant Claude in public services; and Anthropic will aim to contribute to work in scientific research and economic modeling. And at the AI Security Institute, it will provide tools to evaluate AI capabilities in the context of identifying security risks. [...] Anthropic is the only company being announced today -- coinciding with a week of AI activities in Munich and Paris -- but it's not the only one that is working with the government. A series of new tools that were unveiled in January were all powered by OpenAI. (At the time, Peter Kyle, the secretary of state for Technology, said that the government planned to work with various foundational AI companies, and that is what the Anthropic deal is proving out.) "The changes I'm announcing today represent the logical next step in how we approach responsible AI development -- helping us to unleash AI and grow the economy as part of our Plan for Change," Kyle said in a statement. "The work of the AI Security Institute won't change, but this renewed focus will ensure our citizens -- and those of our allies -- are protected from those who would look to use AI against our institutions, democratic values, and way of life."

"The Institute's focus from the start has been on security and we've built a team of scientists focused on evaluating serious risks to the public," added Ian Hogarth, who remains the chair of the institute. "Our new criminal misuse team and deepening partnership with the national security community mark the next stage of tackling those risks."

Alibaba will partner with Apple to support AI features on iPhones in China, sending Alibaba's shares surging over 9% to a three-year high. Reuters reports: "They talked to a number of companies in China. In the end they chose to do business with us. They want to use our AI to power their phones. We feel extremely honored to do business with a great company like Apple," Tsai said at the World Government Summit in Dubai. Apple continues to work with Baidu on AI features for iPhones in China, The Information reported on Thursday, citing two people with direct knowledge of the matter.

While Apple's phones outside China utilize a combination of its proprietary Apple Intelligence and OpenAI's ChatGPT, Tsai did not specify whether the Alibaba partnership would follow a similar model. In China, consumer-facing AI products require regulatory approval, and The Information reported earlier that both Alibaba and Apple have already submitted materials to authorities. "Instead of viewing the Alibaba-Apple partnership through the lens of China's AI strength, the partnership is mainly a recognition of Alibaba's AI capability," said Lian Jye Su, a chief analyst at tech research firm Omdia.

Reddit's recent earnings report revealed that AI licensing deals with Google and OpenAI account for about 10% of its $1.3 billion revenue, totaling approximately $130 million. With Google paying $60 million, OpenAI is estimated to be paying Reddit around $70 million annually for content licensing. Adweek reports: "It's a small part of our revenue -- I'll call it 10%. For a business of our size, that's material, because it's valuable revenue," [said the company's COO Jen Wong]. The social platform -- which on Wednesday reported a 71% year-over-year lift in fourth-quarter revenue -- has been "very thoughtful" about the AI developers it chooses to work with, Wong said. To date, the company has inked two content licensing deals: one with Google for a reported $60 million, and one with ChatGPT parent OpenAI.

Reddit has elected to work only with partners who can agree to "specific terms ... that are really important to us." These terms include user privacy protections and conditions regarding "how [Reddit is] represented," Wong said. While licensing agreements with AI firms offer a valuable business opportunity for Reddit, advertising remains the company's core revenue driver. Much of Reddit's $427.7 million Q4 revenues were generated by the ongoing expansion of its advertising business. And its ad revenue as a whole grew 60% YoY, underscoring the platform's growing appeal to brands. [...]

Helping to accelerate ad revenue growth is Reddit's rising traffic. While Reddit's Q4 user growth came in under Wall Street projections, causing shares to dip, its weekly active uniques grew 42% YoY to over 379 million visitors. Average revenue per unique visitor was $4.21 during the quarter, up 23% from the prior year. While Google is "nicely reinforcing" Reddit's growth in traffic, Wong said, she added that the site's logged-in users, which have grown 27% year-over-year, are "the bedrock of our business."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Conde Nast and several other media companies sued the AI startup Cohere today, alleging that it engaged in "systematic copyright and trademark infringement" by using news articles to train its large language model. "Without permission or compensation, Cohere uses scraped copies of our articles, through training, real-time use, and in outputs, to power its artificial intelligence ('AI') service, which in turn competes with Publisher offerings and the emerging market for AI licensing," said the lawsuit (PDF) filed in US District Court for the Southern District of New York. "Not content with just stealing our works, Cohere also blatantly manufactures fake pieces and attributes them to us, misleading the public and tarnishing our brands."

Conde Nast, which owns Ars Technica and other publications such as Wired and The New Yorker, was joined in the lawsuit by The Atlantic, Forbes, The Guardian, Insider, the Los Angeles Times, McClatchy, Newsday, The Plain Dealer, Politico, The Republican, the Toronto Star, and Vox Media. The complaint seeks statutory damages of up to $150,000 under the Copyright Act for each infringed work, or an amount based on actual damages and Cohere's profits. It also seeks "actual damages, Cohere's profits, and statutory damages up to the maximum provided by law" for infringement of trademarks and "false designations of origin."

In Exhibit A (PDF), the plaintiffs identified over 4,000 articles in what they called an "illustrative and non-exhaustive list of works that Cohere has infringed." Additional exhibits provide responses to queries (PDF) and "hallucinations" (PDF) that the publishers say infringe upon their copyrights and trademarks. The lawsuit said Cohere "passes off its own hallucinated articles as articles from Publishers." Cohere said in a statement to Ars: "Cohere strongly stands by its practices for responsibly training its enterprise AI. We have long prioritized controls that mitigate the risk of IP infringement and respect the rights of holders. We would have welcomed a conversation about their specific concerns -- and the opportunity to explain our enterprise-focused approach -- rather than learning about them in a filing. We believe this lawsuit is misguided and frivolous, and expect this matter to be resolved in our favor."

Further reading: Thomson Reuters Wins First Major AI Copyright Case In the US

Trust in AI is significantly higher in China than in the United States, according to new data from the Edelman Trust Barometer. Axios: Edelman's latest research found that 72% of people in China trust AI, compared with just 32% in the United States. Not only is trust higher in China, it's higher in much of the developing world than it is in the United States, according to Edelman's research.

Trust in AI was highest in India, at 77%, followed by Nigeria at 76%, Thailand at 73% and then China. Only six of the surveyed countries ranked lower than the U.S. in their trust in the new technology: Canada (30%), Germany (29%), the Netherlands (29%), United Kingdom (28%), Australia (25%) and Ireland (24%). Globally, 52% of men said they trusted AI vs. 46% of women, with younger people significantly more trusting of the technology than older folks. In the U.S., AI was trusted more by Democrats (38%) than Republicans (34%) or independents (23%). Higher-income respondents were also more trusting (51%) than those with middle (45%) or low (36%) incomes.

Baidu will make its AI chatbot Ernie Bot free from April 1, the Chinese search giant said on Thursday, as it faces mounting competition in China's AI market. The company will offer desktop and mobile users free access to Ernie Bot and an advanced search function powered by its latest Ernie 4.0 model, which Baidu claims matches OpenAI's GPT-4 capabilities.

The move comes as Baidu struggles to gain widespread adoption for its AI services, lagging behind domestic rivals ByteDance's Doubao chatbot and startup DeepSeek, according to data from AI tracker Aicpb.com. Baidu previously charged 59.9 yuan ($8.18) monthly for premium AI-powered search features.