Elon Musk’s X was down for tens of thousands of users in the United States on Saturday, according to outage tracking website Downdetector.com.
There were more than 25,000 incidents of people reporting issues with the social media platform as of 8:39 a.m. EDT (1239 GMT), according to Downdetector, which tracks outages by collating status reports from a number of sources.
Artificial intelligence outperformed humans in a series of emotional intelligence tests, a team of Swiss researchers said Thursday.
Teams from the universities of Geneva and Bern administered emotional intelligence tests—originally developed to assess humans—to six different AI systems.
The five-part test series evaluated empathy and the ability to identify, manage, and regulate emotions. The tests include emotionally charged scenarios like determining the most appropriate response when an employee’s idea is stolen at work.
Overall, AI models gave correct answers 82% of the time, whereas the accuracy rate for human participants was only 56%.
In the second phase of the study, researchers asked ChatGPT to generate new emotional intelligence tests.
These AI-generated tests were evaluated by over 400 participants and were found to be as realistic as those not created by humans.
“This suggests that these AIs not only understand emotions but also grasp what it means to behave with emotional intelligence,” said one of the researchers, Marcello Mortillaro, in a statement.
Experts say the findings suggest AI, under expert supervision, could play a role in fields traditionally seen as uniquely human, such as education, coaching, and conflict resolution.
The results of the study were published in the journal Communications Psychology.
Google is introducing a new artificial intelligence (AI) mode that more firmly embeds chatbot capabilities into its search engine, aiming to give users the experience of having a conversation with an expert.
The “AI Mode” was made available in the US on Tuesday, appearing as an option in Google’s search bar.
The change, unveiled at the company’s annual developers conference in Mountain View, California, is part of the tech giant’s push to remain competitive against ChatGPT and other AI services, which threaten to erode Google’s dominance of online search.
The company also announced plans for its own augmented reality glasses and said it planned to offer a subscription AI tool.
Sundar Pichai, the chief executive of Google parent Alphabet, said the incorporation of the company’s Gemini chatbot into its search signalled a “new phase of the AI platform shift”.
“With more advanced reasoning, you can ask AI both longer and more complex queries,” Pichai told the audience.
The company’s foray into AI-powered glasses comes more than a decade after it pioneered smart glasses with its “Google Glasses”, which ultimately flopped.
The new Google glasses are being developed with eyeglass retailers Warby Parker and Gentle Monster and will feature a camera, microphone, and speakers.
With the renewed effort, Google hopes to compete against Meta’s AI-powered glasses made with Ray-Ban.
The company said it expected to start building the new product later this year.
Leo Gebbie, principal analyst and director for the Americas at CCS Insight, said Google had been expected to wrap AI more tightly into its products.
He said he thought the chatbot would help minimise the number of web pages that users must sift through while also allowing people to ask more complicated queries.
“For the end user, this should mean less time spent browsing the web itself and more time spent talking with Google’s AI tools,” he said.
Any updates that Google makes to search are “of critical importance”, added Gebbie, since the search business contributes the vast majority of Google’s revenues.
Google’s attempts to keep up with ChatGPT could fundamentally change the nature of its search engine, which could impact its profits.
“Google is getting more efficient at answering questions but less efficient at generating clicks – and clicks is how they get paid,” said Cory Johnson, chief market strategist at Epistrophy Capital Research.
The announcements also come as the company fights a court battle in the US over potential changes to its business after a judge ruled it had a monopoly in search.
Google has had mixed success in its recent attempts to incorporate more AI into its services.
Its AI Overviews feature, unveiled by Google at its developers conference last year, offers AI-generated summaries that currently appear at the top of search results.
It initially generated ridicule from users who posted some of the odd responses they received, as when it advised one user that non-toxic glue could help make cheese stick to pizza.
Another widely circulated response stated that geologists recommend humans eat one rock each day.
A Google spokesperson said at the time that these were “isolated examples”.
Mr Pichai said on Tuesday that AI Overviews now gets 1.5 billion uses per month in more than 200 countries and territories.
In its biggest markets – the US and India – AI Overviews drive more than 10% of growth in the types of queries that show them, Pichai said.
“It’s one of the most successful launches in search in the past decade,” he added.
(BBC)
Kenya will soon require all social media users to verify their age using national identification documents before accessing popular platforms, officials confirmed yesterday.
The Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) has issued new guidelines for child online protection that will take effect in six months, mandating “age verification mechanisms” for all Information and Communication Technology (ICT) product and service providers operating in the country.
“Initially, service providers may accept user-entered ages, but ultimately everyone will be required to verify their identity through government-issued ID,” said a CA official.
The directive aims to minimize “exposure of children to online risks and vulnerabilities” by ensuring that minors aren’t accessing content intended for adults.
The measure comes amid growing global concern about children’s safety online and follows months after Kenya’s Interior ministry ordered social media companies to establish physical offices in the country.
Currently, users can access platforms like Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, and WhatsApp without proving their age, often bypassing minimum requirements by simply entering false birth dates.
The new regulations would change that landscape entirely.
If successfully implemented, Kenya would become the first country in the world to fully enforce age verification for social media access.
While other nations have debated similar measures, none have successfully deployed such mechanisms nationwide.
In Australia, efforts to ban users under 16 from social media have faced significant challenges, with government advisors warning that age verification technology remains difficult to enforce effectively.
The move raises questions about data privacy and potential exclusion.
While ID verification is already standard practice for financial technology applications in Kenya, extending this requirement to social media platforms introduces new risks of data breaches and could potentially exclude undocumented individuals.
Alternative verification methods mentioned in the guidelines include AI-based facial analysis and third-party verification, though these approaches have limited accuracy compared to ID verification.
Beyond age verification, the new guidelines will require ICT industry players to develop and publish child protection policies and implement measures to combat child sexual abuse material.
Kenya currently ranks poorly on global benchmarks for child online protection, according to the DQ Institute, performing below average in regulation, infrastructure, and ensuring safe technology use by children.
The CA stated that the guidelines were developed through public consultation and form part of its constitutional mandate to ensure safer internet experiences for all ICT consumers, including children.
As the six-month implementation window approaches, both industry stakeholders and users are watching closely to see how this unprecedented regulatory move will transform Kenya’s digital landscape.
A US federal jury ordered Israeli spyware company NSO Group to pay more than $167 million in damages for hacking the devices of approximately 1,400 WhatsApp users in 2019 using its Pegasus software.
The verdict delivered Tuesday after a five-year legal battle includes $167.25 million in punitive damages and $445,000 in compensatory damages to WhatsApp and its parent company, Meta.
The US District Court for the Northern District of California rejected NSO Group’s claim of sovereign immunity as a private company, finding that the Pegasus spyware exploited vulnerabilities in WhatsApp’s platform.
The Pegasus tool enabled “zero-click” attacks that could infect devices without any user interaction, a capability governments allegedly used to surveil journalists, dissidents and activists worldwide.
Meta hailed the ruling as “the first victory against illegal spyware that threatens the safety and privacy of everyone.”
“The jury’s decision to force NSO to pay damages is a critical deterrent to this malicious industry against their illegal acts aimed at American companies and our users worldwide,” it said in a statement.
Evidence presented during the trial revealed WhatsApp was not NSO’s only target. Meta noted that while it stopped the attack vector that exploited the company’s calling system in 2019, “Pegasus has had many other spyware installation methods” targeting different technologies.
The case began in October 2019 when WhatsApp filed a lawsuit claiming that the NSO Group had deployed malware to some mobile devices.
Nairobi, Kenya – In a landmark ruling on May 5, 2025, the High Court of Kenya declared the collection and processing of biometric data by WorldCoin, a cryptocurrency and digital identity platform, unconstitutional and illegal under Kenyan law.
Justice Roselyne Aburili ordered the immediate deletion of all biometric data, including iris scans and facial images, collected from over 300,000 Kenyans, under the supervision of the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner (ODPC).
The decision marks a significant victory for data privacy advocates and a major setback for WorldCoin’s operations in the country.
The case, brought forward by the Katiba Institute and the Kenyan Section of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ Kenya), challenged WorldCoin’s practice of collecting sensitive biometric data through its “Orb” device in exchange for cryptocurrency tokens valued at approximately $55 USD (around 7,000 Kenyan shillings).
Launched in Kenya in 2022, the initiative saw thousands of citizens queuing to have their irises scanned, drawn by the promise of financial reward amid economic hardship.
However, concerns quickly arose over the project’s compliance with Kenya’s Data Protection Act of 2019, which mandates strict safeguards for personal data, including informed consent and a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) prior to collection.
Justice Aburili’s ruling highlighted multiple violations by WorldCoin and its parent entities, Tools for Humanity Corporation and Tools for Humanity GmbH.
The court found that the company failed to conduct a DPIA, neglected to register as a data processor with the ODPC, and obtained consent through inducement rather than freely given agreement—practices that contravened both Kenyan law and international data protection principles.
“The collection and processing of biometric data without adherence to statutory requirements undermines the constitutional right to privacy,” the judge stated, emphasizing the irreversible nature of biometric identifiers like iris scans, which, unlike passwords, cannot be changed if compromised.
The court’s order prohibits WorldCoin from further collecting or processing biometric data in Kenya without a proper DPIA and valid consent mechanisms in place.
Additionally, it mandates the supervised destruction of all previously collected data, a move hailed by civil society groups as a critical step in safeguarding Kenyans’ privacy.
“This judgment reinforces the importance of ethical practices in the deployment of emerging technologies,” said a spokesperson for the Katiba Institute, which led the judicial review alongside ICJ Kenya.
WorldCoin’s entry into Kenya had initially sparked excitement, with the platform positioning itself as a revolutionary tool to provide universal access to the global economy through a blockchain-based digital ID. However, the project faced mounting scrutiny after the Kenyan government suspended its operations in August 2023, citing potential risks to national security and data integrity. A multi-agency investigation followed, revealing that the company had continued processing data despite a cessation directive from the ODPC, prompting further legal action.
The ruling aligns Kenya with a growing global pushback against WorldCoin’s biometric data practices. Countries like Germany, Portugal, and South Korea have also imposed restrictions or fines on the company for similar privacy violations. In December 2024, Germany ordered the deletion of non-compliant data, while South Korea fined WorldCoin for transferring sensitive data without proper consent. These developments underscore the ethical and regulatory challenges facing tech initiatives that rely on biometric data, particularly in regions with vulnerable populations.
For Kenyans who participated in the program, the decision brings mixed implications. While some welcomed the financial incentive during a period of economic strain, others expressed relief at the court’s intervention. “I scanned my eyes because I needed the money, but I didn’t know where my data was going,” said James Otieno, a Nairobi resident who enrolled in 2023. The lack of transparency around data storage—spanning jurisdictions like the Cayman Islands and the Virgin Islands—had fueled fears of potential breaches or misuse.
WorldCoin has yet to issue an official response to the ruling, though its previous statements have emphasized a commitment to privacy-preserving technology. The company’s chief legal officer, Thomas Scott, had earlier indicated plans to resume operations in Kenya following a June 2024 decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions to close a criminal probe into the project. However, today’s judgment effectively halts such ambitions unless WorldCoin complies with stringent new requirements.
Legal experts predict the ruling will set a precedent for how Kenya handles digital identity projects in the future. “This is a wake-up call for tech companies operating in Africa,” said Mercy Mutemi, a prominent digital rights lawyer. “You cannot bypass local laws or exploit economic desperation to harvest sensitive data.” The ODPC, tasked with overseeing the data deletion, has been urged to strengthen enforcement and public awareness around data rights.
The Congolese government said in March 2024 that use of Starlink was banned, with military officials warning that it could be used by rebel groups including Rwandan-backed M23, which has seized more territory than ever before in the east of the country this year.
War-torn Congo has low connectivity, with just around 30% of the population using the internet as of 2023, according to the International Telecommunication Union.
The satellite internet provider is rapidly expanding its services in Africa and is live in more than a dozen countries.
Bluesky, the emerging social media platform developed as an alternative to X (formerly Twitter), has announced the introduction of blue check marks for verified accounts in an effort to build trust and combat impersonation.
In a blog post shared on Monday, the company revealed it would begin proactively verifying high-profile and legitimate users, placing a blue tick beside their usernames to signify authenticity.
“Trust is everything,” the Bluesky team stated in the post, drawing parallels with the original verification system once used on Twitter, which helped users identify genuine accounts.
Unlike Twitter’s former verification process, however, Elon Musk scrapped the traditional system after acquiring the platform in 2022, instead introducing a paid subscription model — X Premium — which offers blue check marks to paying users, regardless of identity.
Commenting on the decision to implement verification, Bluesky said: “Social media has connected us in powerful ways, but it hasn’t always given us the tools to know who we’re interacting with or why we should trust them.”
Bluesky was conceived by Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey in 2019 as a side project aimed at decentralising social media. Dorsey believed that centralised moderation efforts would ultimately fail to address issues like abuse and misinformation. The platform, which only launched publicly in 2023 — a year after Musk’s takeover of Twitter — was intended to give users greater control over content moderation and their personal data.
Earlier this year, Bluesky disclosed it had surpassed 30 million users. The platform already enables users to verify their identities by linking their account names to official websites, a feature currently adopted by over 270,000 users.
The platform’s new blue check system will initially focus on “trusted verifiers”, but Bluesky intends to open up the verification process through a formal application system in the future.
Bluesky’s chief operating officer Rose Wang expressed optimism about the platform’s momentum in a recent interview with AFP.
“We really see this as our coming-out year,” she said. “People want to know what’s happening in the world and need a safe, moderated space to discuss it, have fun, and make friends. Right now, they’re not finding that anywhere else.”
US judge has ruled that tech giant Google holds a monopoly in the online advertising technology sector. The decision follows a lawsuit filed by the US Department of Justice, alongside 17 states, accusing Google of unlawfully dominating the systems that determine which adverts appear online and where they are placed.
This marks the second antitrust defeat for Google within a year, after it was previously found to have monopolised online search. The company has stated its intention to appeal the ruling.
“Publishers have many options and they choose Google because our ad tech tools are simple, affordable and effective,” said Lee-Ann Mulholland, Google’s head of regulatory affairs.
However, US District Judge Leonie Brinkema concluded that Google had “wilfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts” that allowed it to “acquire and maintain monopoly power” in the advertising technology market.
“This exclusionary conduct substantially harmed Google’s publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web,” she added.
The court found against Google on two counts, while dismissing a third.
“We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half,” Ms Mulholland said. “The court found that our advertiser tools and our acquisitions, such as DoubleClick, don’t harm competition.”
The ruling is being seen as a major victory for US antitrust regulators. Laura Phillips-Sawyer, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law, said: “It signals that not only are agencies willing to prosecute but also that judges are willing to enforce the law against big tech firms.”
She emphasised that the judgement sets a key legal precedent, one likely to influence corporate decision-making across the United States.
Google’s legal team argued that the case placed too much focus on historical actions, overlooking the presence of other major players in ad tech, including Amazon.
Jason Kint, head of the trade group Digital Content Next, which represents online publishers, stated: “Google has repeatedly used its market power to self-preference its own products, stifling innovation and depriving premium publishers worldwide of critical revenue needed to sustain high-quality journalism and entertainment.”
Google currently operates across both the buying and selling sides of the online ad market and also owns a key exchange that connects advertisers with publishers.
While the judgement is unlikely to result in visible changes for internet users, it could reshape the financial relationships within the advertising ecosystem. Anupam Chander, professor of law and technology at Georgetown University, noted it affects “the division of monies between advertisers, publishers, and ad service providers”.
“The judge seems willing to order structural changes in Google’s ad exchange practices, which may affect Google’s bottom line somewhat, but don’t seem to necessarily threaten its core value proposition as an advertising middleman,” he said.
This case forms part of a broader series of antitrust actions targeting Google, with the US government pushing for a potential breakup of the tech giant’s parent company, Alphabet — a move that could include divesting platforms such as the Chrome browser.
According to John Kwoka, professor of economics at Northeastern University, the case will now enter a second phase focused on remedies, which could result in Alphabet being broken up.
Across the Atlantic, the UK’s competition watchdog also provisionally found in September that Google had engaged in anti-competitive behaviour to maintain dominance in the online advertising technology market.
Artificial intelligence giant OpenAI has filed counterclaims against multi-billionaire Elon Musk, accusing its former co-founder of waging a “relentless campaign” to damage the organization after it achieved success without him.
In legal documents filed Wednesday in northern California’s federal court, OpenAI alleges Musk became hostile toward the company after abandoning it years before its breakthrough achievements with ChatGPT.
“Musk could not tolerate seeing such success for an enterprise he had abandoned and declared doomed,” OpenAI said in the filing.
The lawsuit is the latest round in a bitter feud between the generative AI (genAI) start-up and the world’s richest man, who sued OpenAI last year, accusing the company of betraying its founding mission.
In its countersuit, the company alleges Musk “made it his project to take down OpenAI, and to build a direct competitor that would seize the technological lead — not for humanity but for Elon Musk.”
Musk founded his own genAI startup, xAI, in 2023, and has invested tens of billions of dollars to compete with OpenAI and the other major AI players.
OpenAI was established in December 2015 as a nonprofit research lab with the mission of ensuring that artificial general intelligence (AGI) — the term used for human-level AI — would “benefit all humanity.”
Musk was among its initial backers alongside CEO Sam Altman, giving a key investment to get the project up and running.
According to the counterclaims, Musk’s involvement was short-lived.
The filing alleges that in 2018, Musk departed after OpenAI’s leadership refused “to bow to Musk’s demands for control of the enterprise or, alternatively, its absorption into Musk’s electric car company, Tesla.”
OpenAI also contends that Musk never fulfilled his financial commitment to the organization, delivering “not even close” to a promised $1 billion.
The company is now valued at $300 billion after its latest funding round of $40 billion, the biggest capital-raising session ever for a startup.
OpenAI claims that Musk’s assault has included press attacks and malicious campaigns broadcast to Musk’s more than 200 million followers on X, the platform he owns, as well as “a sham bid for OpenAI’s assets.”
The legal battle between Altman and Musk has intensified amid OpenAI’s plans for a restructuring that would transform the company into a public benefit corporation while maintaining the nonprofit parent organization.
OpenAI claims Musk is deliberately misrepresenting this move as a full conversion from nonprofit to for-profit status.
The AI lab is seeking an injunction to halt Musk’s “further unlawful and unfair action” and compensation for damages allegedly caused by his actions.
OpenAI on Monday said it raised $40 billion in a new funding round that valued the ChatGPT maker at $300 billion, the biggest capital-raising session ever for a startup.
(AFP)
Kenya will now be able to regulate the cryptocurrency and digital asset space if the bill is made law.
The bill, now before Parliament, proposes to license and regulate all entities dealing in virtual assets, such as cryptocurrency exchanges, digital wallet services, and custodians.
Under the proposed law, it will be illegal to offer these services without approval from the Capital Markets Authority (CMA)
In the bill, “virtual assets” are defined broadly to include digital representations of value used for payment, investment, or transfer — including cryptocurrencies.
It introduces mandatory Know Your Customer (KYC) and anti-money laundering (AML) procedures, as well as clear consumer protection standards, such as transparency in fees, risk disclosures, and fund segregation.
For everyday users, this potentially marks a turning point in an industry long plagued by fraud, scams, and a lack of accountability.
Licensed platforms will be required to act more transparently, offering greater recourse when things go wrong.
The bill also seeks to align Kenya with international standards set by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) — a move aimed at improving Kenya’s standing in the global fintech ecosystem and curbing the use of virtual assets for money laundering, terrorism financing, and other illicit activities.
However, as with any regulation, the bill comes with trade-offs. Startups and smaller players may struggle to meet the financial and administrative demands of compliance, which include registration fees, regular audits, and reporting obligations to both the CMA and the Financial Reporting Centre (FRC).
While the bill provides transitional provisions to allow existing service providers time to adapt, non-compliance will be costly. Individuals could face fines of up to Sh3 million, while companies could be penalized up to Sh10 million.
If passed, the VASP Bill would mark Kenya’s first serious attempt at bringing order to its growing but volatile virtual asset market. Whether it leads to a safer investment environment or chokes a quickly growing industry remains to be seen.
The United States African Development Foundation (USADF), under the leadership of Elon Musk, has terminated another grant program to Kenya.
In a statement released by the Department of Government Efficiency(DOGE), a federation body run by Musk on Tuesday, April 8, confirmed that the Kenyan grant worth about KSh 6.3 million ($48,406) had been cancelled by the USADF.
“The United States African Development Foundation (USADF) has terminated KSh 6.7 billion (around $51 million) in grants,” the statement reads.
This grant was intended to support the development of a WhatsApp Marketing Chatbot in Kenya, aimed at helping local businesses market their products.
USADF operates a Learning Hub, a digital platform such as the WhatsApp chatbot, which provides African entrepreneurs with access to business training materials. This initiative was developed in collaboration with Visa and Shift Impact Africa.
The decision is part of a broader move by the USADF to cancel several grants across Africa, citing efforts to eliminate “wasteful” contracts.
Other cancelled projects include one in Burkina Faso, where KSh 30 million ($229,296) was meant to promote 100% organic shea butter.
In Nigeria, KSh 11 million ($84,059) had been set aside for a business incubator to support spa and wellness entrepreneurs.
Benin, on the other hand, lost a project worth KSh 31 million ($239,738), which was focused on marketing pineapple juice.
Additionally, the foundation cancelled a KSh 32 million ($246,217) project in Ivory Coast intended to build mango drying facilities.
Uganda lost about KSh 13 million ($99,566) that would have gone toward increasing yogurt production, while Senegal had a KSh 6.5 million ($50,000) grant cancelled, which was intended to train farmers on growing dragon fruit.
In Summary
X is bringing in stricter rules around parody accounts.
From 10 April, accounts which impersonate another user or person must use key words such as “fake” or “parody” at the start of their account names.
The platform will also require parody account holders to use different images to the X accounts belonging to those they seek to represent.
Some users have complained about confusion caused by parody accounts on the platform, such as those impersonating its owner Elon Musk.
“These changes are designed to help users better understand the unaffiliated nature of PCF accounts and reduce the risk of confusion or impersonation,” the company said in a post on Saturday.
It encouraged affected accounts to update their profiles by the enforcement date.
The changes will also apply for fan and commentary accounts, it said.
“Hopefully this includes all the thousands of fake variations of Elon Musk accounts,” wrote one user in response to X’s post about its policy update.
“About time, I get a fake Elon account contacting me almost once a week,” wrote another.
There are a number of parody accounts for the platform’s owner, identifying themselves as impersonations in various ways.
Posts viewed by the BBC from Elon Musk parody accounts ranged from memes and jokes, to promoting cryptocurrency and car giveaways.
A recent post by one Elon Musk parody account, which has more than one million followers, told users to “like and comment” for the chance to win a Tesla.
The post has received 428,000 likes and more than 200,000 replies.
X rolled out labels for parody accounts in January – building on its rules requiring users engaging in impersonation for the purpose of entertainment to identify themselves as such.
These, and the platform’s blue tick verification system, have been cited as tools to prevent misleading impersonation while allowing speech and discussion.
But the effectiveness of such measures have been disputed.
The EU said in July 2024 that the blue ticks breached its online content rules, with its “verified” blue tick accounts having the potential to “deceive” users.
Musk called the EU’s rules “misinformation”, in response.
Following his takeover in November 2022, the Tesla chief executive said accounts engaging in unlabelled impersonation would be banned.
Many parody accounts on X identify their parody nature in brackets at the end of user names, but this is not a fool-proof measure.
If a parody account’s name is particularly long, and only a shortened version appears in feeds or replies, users can unwittingly duped – especially if the account’s image matches that of the real person.
(BBC)
(Reuters)—Your favorite iPhone could soon become much pricier, thanks to tariffs.
U.S. President Donald Trump imposed a series of sweeping tariffs on countries around the world that could drastically alter the landscape of global trade, and consumer goods like iPhones could be among the hardest hit, analysts said on Thursday, with increases of 30% to 40% if the company were to pass on the cost to consumers.
Most iPhones are still made in China, which was hit with a 54% tariff. If those levies persist, Apple (AAPL.O) has a tough choice: absorb the extra expense or pass it on to customers.
Shares of the company closed down 9.3% on Thursday, hitting their worst day since March 2020.
Apple sells more than 220 million iPhones a year; its biggest markets include the United States, China and Europe.
The cheapest iPhone 16 model was launched in the U.S. with a sticker price of $799, but could cost as much as $1,142, per calculations based on projections from analysts at Rosenblatt Securities, who say the cost could rise by 43% – if Apple is able to pass that on to consumers.
A more expensive iPhone 16 Pro Max, with a 6.9-inch display and 1 terabyte of storage, which currently retails at $1599, could cost nearly $2300 if a 43% increase were to pass to consumers.
Rosenblatt Securities says Apple needs to hike iPhone price by 43% to cover for tariffs.
Trump imposed tariffs on a wide range of Chinese imports in his first term as president to pressure U.S. companies to bring manufacturing either back to the United States or to nearby countries such as Mexico, but Apple secured exemptions or waivers for several products. This time, he has not yet granted any exemptions.
“This whole China tariff thing is playing out right now completely contrary to our expectation that American icon Apple would be kid-gloved, like last time,” Barton Crockett, analyst at Rosenblatt Securities, said in a note.
The iPhone 16e, launched in February as a cheaper entry point for Apple’s suite of artificial-intelligence features, costs $599. A 43% price hike could push that cost to $856. Prices of other Apple devices could jump as well.
Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Many customers pay for their phones over a period of two or three years through contracts with their cellular providers.
However, other analysts noted that iPhone sales have been floundering in the company’s major markets, as Apple Intelligence, a suite of features that helps summarize notifications, rewrite emails and give users access to ChatGPT, has failed to enthuse buyers.
Expert reviews have suggested that the features, while innovative, do not provide enough of a compelling reason to justify upgrading to newer models.
The stagnation in demand could put additional pressure on Apple’s bottom line, especially if costs rise due to tariffs.
Angelo Zino, equity analyst at CFRA Research, said the company will have a tough time passing on more than 5% to 10% of the cost to consumers.
“We expect Apple to hold off on any major increases on phones until this fall when its iPhone 17 is set to launch, as it is typically how it handles planned price hikes.”
Even with some production moving to Vietnam and India, most iPhones are still made in China, and those countries were not spared from tariffs either, with Vietnam getting a 46% levy and India’s coming in at 26%.
Apple would need to raise its prices by at least 30% on average to offset import duties, according to Counterpoint Research co-founder Neil Shah.
A potentially sharp price hike could dampen demand for the smartphone and give South Korea’s Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) an edge, as the Asian country faces lower tariffs than China, where all iPhones sold in the U.S. are made.
This map shows the percentage of reciprocal tariffs imposed by the U.S. administration on each economy.
“Our quick math on Trump’s tariff Liberation Day suggests this could blow up Apple, potentially costing the company up to $40 billion,” Rosenblatt Securities’ Crockett noted, adding that negotiations between Apple, China and the White House are likely.
“It’s hard for us to imagine Trump blowing up an American icon…but this looks pretty tough.”
The free messaging app Signal has made headlines after the White House confirmed it was used for a secret group chat between senior US officials.
The editor-in-chief of the Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, was inadvertently added to the group where plans for a strike against the Houthi group in Yemen were discussed.
It has caused a significant backlash, with Democrat Senate leader Chuck Schumer calling it “one of the most stunning” military intelligence leaks in history and calling for an investigation.
But what actually is Signal – and how secure or otherwise were the senior politicians’ communications on it?
Signal has estimated 40-70 million monthly users – making it pretty tiny compared to the biggest messaging services, WhatsApp and Messenger, which count their customers in the billions.
Where it does lead the way though is in security.
At the core of that is end-to-end encryption (E2EE).
Simply put, it means only the sender and the receiver can read messages – even Signal itself cannot access them.
Cyber correspondent Joe Tidy explains how end to end encryption works
A number of other platforms also have E2EE – including WhatsApp – but Signal’s security features go beyond this.
For example, the code that makes the app work is open source – meaning anybody can check it to make sure there are no vulnerabilities that hackers could exploit.
Its owners say it collects far less information from its users, and in particular does not store records of usernames, profile pictures, or the groups people are part of.
There is also no need to dilute these features to make more money: Signal is owned by the Signal Foundation, a US-based non-profit, which relies on donations rather than ad revenue.
“Signal is the gold standard in private comms,” said its boss Meredith Whittaker in a post on X after the US national security story became public.
That “gold standard claim” is what makes Signal appealing to cybersecurity experts and journalists, who often use the app.
But even that level of security is considered insufficient for very high level conversations about extremely sensitive national security matters.
That is because there is a largely unavoidable risk to communicating via a mobile phone: it is only as secure as the person that uses it.
If someone gains access to your phone with Signal open – or if they learn your password – they’ll be able to see your messages.
And no app can prevent someone peeking over your shoulder if you are using your phone in a public space.
Data expert Caro Robson, who has worked with the US administration, said it was “very, very unusual” for high ranking security officials to communicate on a messaging platform like Signal.
“Usually you would use a very secure government system that is operated and owned by the government using very high levels of encryption,” she said.
She said this would typically mean devices kept in “very secure government controlled locations”.
The US government has historically used a sensitive compartmented information facility (Scif – pronounced “skiff”) to discuss matters of national security.
A Scif is an ultra-secure enclosed area in which personal electronic devices are not allowed.
“To even access this kind of classified information, you have to be in a particular room or building repeatedly swept for bugs or any listening devices,” said Ms Robson.
Scifs can be found in places ranging from military bases to the homes of officials.
“The whole system is massively encrypted and secured using the government’s own highest standards of cryptography,” she said.
“Especially when defence is involved.”
There’s another issue tied to Signal that has raised concerns – disappearing messages.
Signal, like many other messaging apps, allows its users to set messages to disappear after a set period of time.
The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg said some of the messages in the Signal group he was added to disappeared after a week.
This may violate laws around record-keeping – unless those using the app forwarded on their messages to an official government account.
This is also far from the first row involving E2EE
Various administrations have wanted to create a so-called backdoor into messaging services that use it so they can read messages they think might pose a national security threat.
Apps including Signal and WhatsApp have previously fought attempts to create such a backdoor, saying it would eventually be used by bad actors.
Signal threatened to pull the app from the UK in 2023 if it was undermined by lawmakers.
This year, the UK government became embroiled in a significant row with Apple, which also uses E2EE to protect certain files in cloud storage.
Apple ended up pulling the feature in the UK altogether after the government demanded access to data protected in this way by the tech giant.
The legal case is ongoing.
But, as this controversy shows, no level of security or legal protection matters if you simply share your confidential data with the wrong person.
Or as one critic more bluntly put it: “Encryption can’t protect you from stupid.”
(BBC)
Elon Musk’s Starlink, has hit a rough patch in Kenya, with new subscriber growth plunging by 72.9% in the final quarter of 2024, according to fresh data from the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA).
The slowdown, which saw only 2,360 new users added between October and December compared to 8,723 in the previous quarter, has cast a shadow over the company’s once-rapid rise in the East African nation.
However, a recent infrastructure boost could signal a turnaround.
Since its launch in Kenya in July 2023, Starlink has promised high-speed, low-latency internet, particularly for rural areas underserved by traditional providers.
The service gained traction quickly, climbing to a 1.1% market share by December 2024 and securing its spot as the seventh most-popular fixed data provider.
But the latest figures reveal a stark reversal, driven by a suspension of new subscriptions in five key counties—Nairobi, Kajiado, Machakos, Kiambu, and Murang’a—starting in November 2024.
The reason? Network overload due to stretched capacity, a challenge that has exposed the limits of Starlink’s ambitious rollout.
“We’ve seen unprecedented demand, but our infrastructure wasn’t fully prepared for it in these high-density areas,” a Starlink spokesperson admitted last November, as reported by Business Daily.
The suspension came at a time when the company also paused sales in five other countries, hinting at broader scalability issues.
Starlink’s meteoric entry has not gone unchallenged. Local internet giants like Safaricom, which holds a 36.1% market share despite a slight dip, have accused Starlink of predatory pricing and potential interference with existing networks.
In August 2024, Safaricom urged the CA to reconsider Starlink’s operating model, advocating for mandatory partnerships with local ISPs. “This isn’t just competition—it’s a threat to our connectivity ecosystem,” a Safaricom executive argued at the time.
Yet, the rivalry has yielded unexpected benefits for Kenyan consumers.
Internet speeds have surged by up to 18.5%, hitting a record 11.59 megabytes per second in October 2024, according to San Francisco-based firm Meltwater. Online engagement has also spiked, reflecting a broader digital boom.
President William Ruto has embraced this dynamic, telling a UN General Assembly audience in September 2024, “Competition keeps our local players ahead. Safaricom’s CEO isn’t thrilled, but he’s upped his game.”
Other providers have felt the heat too. Jamii Telecommunications’ share slipped to 23.6%, and Zuku’s dropped to 15.4%, while smaller players like Poa Internet and Vilcom Network gained ground, buoyed by competitive pricing and new offerings.
Just when Starlink’s Kenyan journey seemed to falter, a surprising development emerged.
On January 29, 2025, the company unveiled a new Point of Presence (PoP) in Nairobi, a move designed to bolster capacity and slash latency. “This is a game-changer,” said tech analyst Jane Mwangi. “If Starlink can resolve its urban bottlenecks, it might reclaim its momentum.”
The PoP could address the very issues that stalled growth late last year, potentially reopening subscriptions in Nairobi and beyond. While it’s too early to gauge the full impact, early signs suggest a renewed push to capture Kenya’s growing digital market.
Starlink’s journey in Kenya reflects both the promise and pitfalls of satellite internet in emerging markets. Its initial success—doubling its market share in just three months earlier in 2024—showed its potential to bridge the digital divide.
But the recent slowdown shows the challenges of scaling in urban hubs, where demand is fierce and competition entrenched.
Elon Musk’s X has been hit by three waves of outages since this morning, which the billionaire claims was due to a cyberattack.
According to outage tracking site DownDetector, the problems began around 6 am ET when up to 20,538 users reported problems. The issues temporarily died down before nearly 40,000 users reported outages at 10 am. Since 12:30 pm ET, there have been about 26,000 reports at the time of writing.
Many users on DownDetector complained the app wouldn’t load, and the outage appears to be global, according to DownDetector’s international sites.
DownDetector data is self-reported, meaning it doesn’t fully represent the outage’s scale. CNN has reached out to X, though the company doesn’t usually respond to press inquiries.
Musk posted on X that he believes “a large, coordinated group and/or a country is involved,” though the source of motivation behind the attack wasn’t confirmed. Musk also replied “Yes” to a post on X suggesting people are trying to silence the billionaire and his platform, although no further details about the service disruption, including whether it was caused by a targeted attack, have been revealed.
Eric Noonan, CEO of cybersecurity provider CyberSheath, told CNN it’s likely too early to tell if an attack caused the issues.
“One of the things that should always be taken with a grain of salt is any statements made in the short period of time, immediately after, or even in this case during an attack,” Noonan said.
Musk has a history of attributing technical snafus to cyberattacks. When his conversation with Donald Trump on X started 42 minutes late in August 2024, he said there was a “probability” of an attack.
“Given the prominence of this conversation, there was of course a 100% probability of DDOS attacks,” Musk posted on the social media platform at the time. DDOS stands for“distributed denial-of-service,” which involves overwhelming servers with fake traffic to cause service disruptions. But Florida Governor Ron Desantis’ presidential campaign announcement on X in 2023 was also marred by technical difficulties.
Ransomware attacks have been more common than DDOS attacks in recent years because they’re usually financially motivated, according to Noonan. DDOS, however, is typically used to cause a disruption, which also makes confirming the source of these types of attacks more difficult.
Musk implemented widespread cuts and major changes to X after acquiring the popular social media platform, then called Twitter, in 2022. He immediately laid off top executives and, within days of acquiring X, cut 3,500 people, or around half the platform’s workforce. He laid off 80% of the staff in total and required the remaining employees to return-to-office full time.
The platform has experienced a series of glitches and disruptions since the acquisition.
It’s been a tough day for the businesses owned by Musk, who is also the head of Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). On Monday, Tesla shares fell as much as 12% in midday trading, erasing its gains since Trump’s November 2024 election.
(CNN)
Hackers thought to be working for the North Korean regime have successfully cashed out at least $300m (£232m) of their record-breaking $1.5bn crypto heist.
The criminals, known as Lazarus Group, swiped the huge haul of digital tokens in a hack on crypto exchange ByBit two weeks ago.
Since then, it’s been a cat-and-mouse game to track and block the hackers from successfully converting the crypto into usable cash.
Experts say the infamous hacking team is working nearly 24 hours a day – potentially funnelling the money into the regime’s military development.
“Every minute matters for the hackers who are trying to confuse the money trail and they are extremely sophisticated in what they’re doing,” says Dr Tom Robinson, co-founder of crypto investigators Elliptic.
Out of all the criminal actors involved in crypto currency, North Korea is the best at laundering crypto, Dr Robinson says.
“I imagine they have an entire room of people doing this using automated tools and years of experience. We can also see from their activity that they only take a few hours break each day, possibly working in shifts to get the crypto turned into cash.”
Elliptic’s analysis tallies with ByBit, which says that 20% of the funds have now “gone dark”, meaning it is unlikely to ever be recovered.
The US and allies accuse the North Koreans of carrying out dozens of hacks in recent years to fund the regime’s military and nuclear development.
On 21 February the criminals hacked one of ByBit’s suppliers to secretly alter the digital wallet address that 401,000 Ethereum crypto coins were being sent to.
ByBit thought it was transferring the funds to its own digital wallet, but instead sent it all to the hackers.
Ben Zhou, the CEO of ByBit, assured customers that none of their funds had been taken.
The firm has since replenished the stolen coins with loans from investors, but is, in Zhou’s words, “waging war on Lazarus”.
ByBit’s Lazarus Bounty programme is encouraging members of the public to trace the stolen funds and get them frozen where possible.
All crypto transactions are displayed on a public blockchain, so it’s possible to track the money as it’s moved around by the Lazarus Group.
If the hackers try to use a mainstream crypto service to attempt to turn the coins into normal money like dollars, the crypto coins can be frozen by the company if they think they are linked to crime.
So far 20 people have shared more than $4m in rewards for successfully identifying $40m of the stolen money and alerting crypto firms to block transfers.
But experts are downbeat about the chances of the rest of the funds being recoverable, given the North Korean expertise in hacking and laundering the money.
“North Korea is a very closed system and closed economy so they created a successful industry for hacking and laundering and they don’t care about the negative impression of cyber crime,” Dr Dorit Dor from cyber security company Check Point said.
Another problem is that not all crypto companies are as willing to help as others.
Crypto exchange eXch is being accused by ByBit and others of not stopping the criminals cashing out.
More than $90m has been successfully funnelled through this exchange.
But over email the elusive owner of eXch – Johann Roberts – disputed that.
He admits they didn’t initially stop the funds, as his company is in a long-running dispute with ByBit, and he says his team wasn’t sure the coins were definitely from the hack.
He says he is now co-operating, but argues that mainstream companies that identify crypto customers are betraying the private and anonymous benefits of crypto currency.
North Korea has never admitted being behind the Lazarus Group, but is thought to be the only country in the world using its hacking powers for financial gain.
Previously the Lazarus Group hackers targeted banks, but have in the last five years specialised in attacking cryptocurrency companies.
The industry is less well protected with fewer mechanisms in place to stop them laundering the funds.
Recent hacks linked to North Korea include:
In 2020, the US added North Koreans accused of being part of the Lazarus Group to its Cyber Most Wanted list. But the chances of the individuals ever being arrested are extremely slim unless they leave their country.
(BBC)
Skype, the iconic internet chat and phone service owned by Microsoft, has announced it will be shutting down in May.
The company shared the news on X (formerly Twitter) on Friday, marking the end of an era for a platform that started in 2003 and had long been a go-to service for both personal and professional communication.
“Starting in May 2025, Skype will no longer be available,” the announcement read. “Over the coming days, you can sign in to Microsoft Teams Free with your Skype account to stay connected with all your chats and contacts. Thank you for being part of Skype.”
The statement said with Teams, users will have access to the same core features they use in Skype such as one-on-one calls, and group calls, messaging, and file sharing.
OpenAI has introduced GPT-4.5, its most sophisticated AI language model yet, offering improved conversational abilities and greater emotional intelligence. The model is currently available to ChatGPT Pro subscribers, who pay $200 per month, as part of a research preview. OpenAI has announced plans to extend access to other subscription tiers in the near future.
Designed to make interactions more natural and engaging, GPT-4.5 boasts enhanced conversational depth. However, its high computational demands make it costly to train and operate. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has attributed delays in the model’s full rollout to ongoing GPU shortages.
Beyond improved dialogue capabilities, GPT-4.5 includes web search functionality, canvas integration, and support for file and image uploads. However, AI Voice Mode is not yet available. While GPT-4.5 surpasses its predecessors in language performance, it has been observed to lag behind smaller models like o3-mini in mathematics and science benchmarks.
OpenAI aims to expand access to GPT-4.5 in the coming weeks, allowing more users to experience its advanced capabilities.