Slashdot

An anonymous reader quotes a report from NBC News: Two senators said they are announcing bipartisan legislation on Tuesday to crack down on tech companies that make artificial intelligence chatbot companions available to minors, after complaints from parents who blamed the products for pushing their children into sexual conversations and even suicide. The legislation from Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo, and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., follows a congressional hearing last month at which several parents delivered emotional testimonies about their kids' use of the chatbots and called for more safeguards. "AI chatbots pose a serious threat to our kids," Hawley said in a statement to NBC News. "More than seventy percent of American children are now using these AI products," he continued. "Chatbots develop relationships with kids using fake empathy and are encouraging suicide. We in Congress have a moral duty to enact bright-line rules to prevent further harm from this new technology." Sens. Katie Britt, R-Ala., Mark Warner, D-Va., and Chris Murphy, D-Conn., are co-sponsoring the bill. The senators' bill has several components, according to a summary provided by their offices. It would require AI companies to implement an age-verification process and ban those companies from providing AI companions to minors. It would also mandate that AI companions disclose their nonhuman status and lack of professional credentials for all users at regular intervals. And the bill would create criminal penalties for AI companies that design, develop or make available AI companions that solicit or induce sexually explicit conduct from minors or encourage suicide, according to the summary of the legislation. "In their race to the bottom, AI companies are pushing treacherous chatbots at kids and looking away when their products cause sexual abuse, or coerce them into self-harm or suicide," Blumenthal said in a statement. "Our legislation imposes strict safeguards against exploitative or manipulative AI, backed by tough enforcement with criminal and civil penalties." "Big Tech has betrayed any claim that we should trust companies to do the right thing on their own when they consistently put profit first ahead of child safety," he continued.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

hackingbear shares a report from Crypto News: Two Chinese artificial intelligence (AI) models, DeepSeek V3.1 and Alibaba's Qwen3-Max, have taken a commanding lead over their US counterparts in a live real-world real-money cryptocurrency trading competition, posting triple-digit gains in less than two weeks. According to Alpha Arena, a real-market trading challenge launched by US research firm Nof1, DeepSeek's Chat V3.1 turned an initial $10,000 into $22,900 by Monday, a 126% increase since trading began on October 18, while Qwen 3 Max followed closely with a 108% return. In stark contrast, US models lagged far behind. OpenAI's GPT-5 posted the worst performance, losing nearly 60% of its portfolio, while Google DeepMind's Gemini 2.5 Pro showed a similar 57% decline. xAI's Grok 4 and Anthropic's Claude 4.5 Sonnet fared slightly better, returning 14% and 23% respectively. "Our goal with Alpha Arena is to make benchmarks more like the real world -- and markets are perfect for this," Nof1 said on its website.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The Python Software Foundation rejected a $1.5 million U.S. government grant because it required them to renounce all diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. "The non-profit would've used the funding to help prevent supply chain attacks; create a new automated, proactive review process for new PyPI packages; and make the project's work easily transferable to other open-source package managers," reports The Register. From the report: The programming non-profit's deputy executive director Loren Crary said in a blog post today that the National Science Founation (NSF) had offered $1.5 million to address structural vulnerabilities in Python and the Python Package Index (PyPI), but the Foundation quickly became dispirited with the terms (PDF) of the grant it would have to follow. "These terms included affirming the statement that we 'do not, and will not during the term of this financial assistance award, operate any programs that advance or promote DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion], or discriminatory equity ideology in violation of Federal anti-discrimination laws,'" Crary noted. "This restriction would apply not only to the security work directly funded by the grant, but to any and all activity of the PSF as a whole." To make matters worse, the terms included a provision that if the PSF was found to have voilated that anti-DEI diktat, the NSF reserved the right to claw back any previously disbursed funds, Crary explained. "This would create a situation where money we'd already spent could be taken back, which would be an enormous, open-ended financial risk," the PSF director added. The PSF's mission statement enshrines a commitment to supporting and growing "a diverse and international community of Python programmers," and the Foundation ultimately decided it wasn't willing to compromise on that position, even for what would have been a solid financial boost for the organization. "The PSF is a relatively small organization, operating with an annual budget of around $5 million per year, with a staff of just 14," Crary added, noting that the $1.5 million would have been the largest grant the Foundation had ever received - but it wasn't worth it if the conditions were undermining the PSF's mission. The PSF board voted unanimously to withdraw its grant application.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Variety: A news special on Britain's Channel 4 titled "Will AI Take My Job?" investigated how automation is reshaping the workplace and pitting humans against machines. At the end of the hour-long program, a major twist was revealed: the anchor, who narrates and appears throughout the telecast reporting from different locations, was entirely AI-generated. In the final moments of the special, the host says: "AI is going to touch everybody's lives in the next few years. And for some, it will take their jobs. Call center workers? Customer service agents? Maybe even TV presenters like me. Because I'm not real. In a British TV first, I'm an AI presenter. Some of you might have guessed: I don't exist, I wasn't on location reporting this story. My image and voice were generated using AI." The hour aired Monday at 8 p.m. as part of the "Dispatches" documentary program, which Channel 4 says is now the first British television show to feature an AI presenter. The "anchor" was produced by AI fashion brand Seraphinne Vallora for Kalel Productions and was guided by prompts to create a realistic on-camera performance. "The use of an AI presenter is not something we will be making a habit of at Channel 4 -- instead our focus in news and current affairs is on premium, fact checked, duly impartial and trusted journalism -- something AI is not capable of doing," said Louisa Compton, Channel 4's head of news and current affairs. "But this stunt does serve as a useful reminder of just how disruptive AI has the potential to be -- and how easy it is to hoodwink audiences with content they have no way of verifying."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

A cyclist who received severe third-degree burns to his head after being struck by a drunk driver has been fitted with a printed 3D face. The Guardian: Dave Richards, 75, was given a 3D prosthetic by the NHS that fits the space on his face and mimics his hair colour, eye colour and skin. [...] While recovering, he was referred to reconstructive prosthetics, which has opened the Bristol 3D medical centre, the first of its kind in the UK to have 3D scanning, design and printing in a single NHS location. Richards, from Devon, said surgeons tried to save his eye but "they were worried any infection could spread from my eye down the optic nerve to the brain so the eye was removed." [...] He called the process of getting a 3D-printed face "not the most pleasant." He added: "In the early days of my recovery, I felt very vulnerable, and would not expose myself to social situations. It took me a long time to feel comfortable about my image, how I thought people looked at me and what they thought of me -- but I have come a long way in that respect."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.