Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

A massive heist involving over 12 tons of KitKat chocolate bars has occurred in Europe, just ahead of the Easter holiday. The stolen shipment, consisting of 413,793 units of KitKat's 'new chocolate range', was pilfered on March 26 while en route to Poland.The truck, which left a factory in central Italy, was intercepted by thieves, and the vehicle and chocolate have not been recovered. No one was hurt during the heist, according to a Nestlé spokesperson.Nestlé, the parent company of KitKat, confirmed the theft and is investigating the incident with local authorities and supply chain partners. The company warned that the stolen bars could end up in unofficial markets.The stolen chocolate bars were from KitKat's new Formula One line, which features race car-molded bars with KitKat's iconic chocolate-covered wafers. This product line was launched after KitKat became the official F1 chocolate bar last year.Nestlé officials noted that law enforcement can trace stolen products through batch codes assigned to individual bars. The company also expressed concern about the increasing trend of cargo theft, stating that it has chosen to go public with its experience to raise awareness.“We've always encouraged people to have a break with KitKat,” Nestlé said in a statement. “But it seems thieves have taken the message too literally and made a break with more than 12 tons of our chocolate.”

A United States judge has ruled that he will not dismiss the drug-trafficking and weapons possession charges brought against former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores.In a Thursday court hearing, Judge Alvin Hellerstein questioned whether the US government has the right to bar Venezuela from funding Maduro's legal expenses. The hearing was the first for Maduro and his wife since a brief January arraignment, where they pleaded not guilty.Maduro and Flores have sought to have the charges against them thrown out. Hellerstein declined to do so, but he pressed the prosecution on some of the issues Maduro's legal team raised in its petition to dismiss the case. Among them was a decision by the administration of US President Donald Trump to prevent the Venezuelan government from financing Maduro's defence.Federal prosecutors argued that national security reasons prevented the US from allowing such payments. They also pointed to ongoing sanctions against the Venezuelan government. But Hellerstein pushed back against that argument, noting that Trump had eased sanctions against Venezuela since Maduro's abduction on January 3. He also questioned how Maduro might pose a security threat while imprisoned in New York.“The defendant is here. Flores is here. They present no further national security threat,” said Hellerstein. “I see no abiding interest of national security on the right to defend themselves.”Hellerstein emphasised that, in the US, all criminal defendants have the right to a vigorous defence, as part of the US Constitution's Sixth Amendment. Maduro, who led Venezuela from 2013 to 2026, has been charged with four criminal counts, including “narco-terrorism” conspiracy, conspiracy to import cocaine, the possession of machine guns and the conspiracy to possess machine guns and other destructive devices.He and his wife were taken into US custody on January 3, after Trump launched an attack on Venezuela. The Trump administration has framed the military operation as a “law enforcement function”, but experts say it was widely considered illegal under international law, which protects local sovereignty.Trump himself weighed in on the proceedings during a Thursday US Cabinet meeting, hinting that further charges could be brought against Maduro. “He emptied his prisons in Venezuela, emptied his prisons into our country,” Trump said of Maduro, reiterating an unsubstantiated claim. “And I hope that charge will be brought at some point. Because that was a big charge that hasn’t been brought yet. It should be brought.”

The UK government has taken a significant step in its ongoing efforts to counter Russia's attempts to evade Western sanctions. Armed forces have been authorized to board Russian oil tankers in British waters, a move aimed at disrupting Moscow's 'shadow fleet' of vessels.This fleet, comprising over 600 vessels targeted by sanctions from the EU, UK, and US, uses tactics such as false national flags and opaque ownership structures to export Russian crude oil while avoiding Western sanctions. The new rules apply specifically to vessels sanctioned by the UK.The Royal Navy has previously collaborated with allies to take action against these vessels. For instance, last week it helped track a sanctioned Russian oil tanker in the Mediterranean, which was subsequently boarded by the French navy.The UK's move is part of a broader strategy to hamper Russia's economy and, consequently, its war efforts in Ukraine. Prime Minister Starmer emphasized that the goal is to 'starve Putin's war machine of the dirty profits that fund his barbaric campaign in Ukraine.'However, Russia has warned that direct action against shadow fleet vessels could lead to direct conflict. A senior Russian official, Nikolai Patrushev, suggested that Moscow could deploy its navy to protect Russian-linked vessels from potential European seizures.The UK's defense secretary, John Healey, previously suggested using 'military options' against sanctioned vessels, with any seized oil potentially being sold and the proceeds sent to Ukraine.Before any ship is boarded, its situation will be examined by law enforcement, military, and energy market specialists, with a recommendation made to ministers. Seizure could be followed by criminal proceedings against the owners, operators, and crew for breaches of UK sanctions legislation.

Hong Kong police have been granted the authority to require individuals suspected of violating the city's national security law to provide passwords to their mobile phones or computers. This measure, which took effect on Monday, is part of the national security law imposed by Beijing in 2020. The new provisions empower police to require a person under investigation suspected of endangering national security to provide any password or decryption method for electronic devices and to provide the police “any reasonable and necessary information or assistance”. Refusing to comply could lead to up to one year’s imprisonment and a fine of up to 100,000 Hong Kong dollars ($12,768), while providing false or misleading information could bring up to three years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to 500,000 Hong Kong dollars ($63,840). The imposition of the 2020 national security law, supplemented by a second component in 2024, has led to a marked decline in civil liberties in the former British colony returned to China in 1997, according to human rights advocates. The new amendments have sparked concerns over the erosion of Hong Kong's autonomy and its status as an international financial and business centre. Urania Chiu, a law lecturer in the UK researching Hong Kong, said the new provisions interfered with fundamental liberties, including the privacy of communication and the right to a fair trial. “The sweeping powers given to law enforcement officers without any need for judicial authorisation are grossly disproportionate to any legitimate aim the bylaw purports to achieve,” Chiu told the Reuters news agency. A Hong Kong government spokesperson said the amended rules conform to the city’s mini-constitution, the Basic Law, and its human rights provisions, and “will not affect the lives of the general public or the normal operation of institutions and organisations”. According to the Security Bureau, a total of 386 people have been arrested for national security crimes so far, with 176 people and four companies convicted.

A New Mexico jury has ordered Meta to pay $375m in civil penalties after finding the company liable for misleading consumers about the safety of its platforms and enabling harm, including child sexual exploitation. This verdict marks the first bench trial to find Meta liable for acts committed on its platform. The lawsuit, brought by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, claimed that Meta executives knew their products harmed children but disregarded warnings from their own employees and lied to the public about the risks. The jury found Meta liable for violating New Mexico's consumer protection laws, specifically the Unfair Practices Act. The penalty of $375m is the maximum allowed under the law of $5,000 per violation. Meta has announced its intention to appeal the ruling, accusing Torrez of making 'sensationalist, irrelevant arguments.' Internal Meta documents and testimony revealed that company employees and external child safety experts repeatedly warned about risks on Meta's platforms. Evidence presented included details of a sting investigation, 'Operation MetaPhile,' which led to the arrest of three men charged with sexually preying on children through Meta's platforms. The New Mexico court also heard about deficiencies in Meta's reporting of crimes on its platforms, including the exchange of child sexual abuse material. Meta generated high volumes of 'junk' reports by overly relying on AI to moderate its platforms, making it difficult for law enforcement to investigate crimes. In the next phase of the legal proceedings, the attorney general's office will seek additional financial penalties and court-mandated changes to Meta's platforms to offer stronger protections for children. The state is seeking design feature changes, including 'enacting effective age verification, removing predators from the platform, and protecting minors from encrypted communications.' This verdict is seen as a 'historic victory' for children and families who have been affected by Meta's actions. The case may also open the floodgates to further litigation and regulation of social media companies.

Hong Kong police have been granted new powers to demand that individuals suspected of breaching the city's national security law provide mobile phone or computer passwords. This move is part of a further crackdown on dissent in the city.The amendments to the law, published by the city government, also empower customs officers to seize items deemed to have a 'seditious intention', regardless of whether any person has been arrested for an offence endangering national security.Refusing to comply with the demand for passwords could lead to up to one year's jail and a fine of up to HK$100,000 ($12,773), while providing false or misleading information could bring up to three years' imprisonment and a fine of up to HK$500,000.The sweeping national security law, imposed by Beijing in 2020, punishes acts including subversion and collusion with foreign forces with up to life imprisonment. The law has sparked criticism from western governments and rights groups, but Beijing and Hong Kong officials say it was needed to restore stability after months of pro-democracy protests in 2019.Urania Chiu, a law lecturer in the UK researching Hong Kong, said the new provisions interfere with fundamental liberties, including the privacy of communication and the right to a fair trial. Chiu stated that 'the sweeping powers given to law enforcement officers without any need for judicial authorisation are grossly disproportionate to any legitimate aim the bylaw purports to achieve.'A Hong Kong government spokesperson said the amended rules conform to the city's mini-constitution, the Basic Law, and its human rights provisions, and 'will not affect the lives of the general public or the normal operation of institutions and organisations'. According to the Security Bureau, a total of 386 people have been arrested for national security crimes so far, with 176 people and four companies convicted.