Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

National Savings & Investment (NS&I;), a state-owned savings bank in the UK, has admitted to a long-running administrative error that has resulted in nearly £500m in missing payments to bereaved families. The bank's chief executive, Dax Harkins, was forced out amid the scandal.NS&I;, which holds over £240bn for 24 million customers, has been accused of a series of errors dating back years. The bank allegedly lost track of investments and withheld premium bond prizes from the families of deceased savers. Some families had to pay lawyers to recover their money.The pensions minister, Torsten Bell, confirmed that 37,500 bereavement claims were potentially affected, with a total value of £476m. He stated that the problem had been reported to ministers in December last year and that NS&I;'s new CEO, Sir Jim Harra, would work to resolve the issue.NS&I; has apologized for the errors, stating that it had identified an issue where the estates of deceased customers were not always repaid money from all of their accounts after a bereavement claim. The bank has introduced robust measures to ensure this does not happen again.To rectify the situation, NS&I; will publish a plan in May detailing how people will be reunited with their money. The plan will confirm the number of missing payments and how the representatives of estates will be contacted. Estates may receive interest on savings as well as compensation. The government has promised that the cash is '100% safe' and that returning it will not present an additional liability to the taxpayer.

The decision has garnered mixed reactions. The charity Sex Matters has welcomed the guidelines, calling them a necessary measure to secure a safe and fair female category. However, others, such as Dsdfamilies, have expressed concern that the proposed processes may cause harm to transgender and DSD athletes.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced plans to address addictive features in social media platforms, signaling a potential regulatory shift following a significant US court ruling that held Meta and YouTube accountable for harms caused by their technology designs.The prime minister emphasized that the recent California court verdict reflects rising public expectations for more aggressive regulation of social media platforms. "I'm absolutely clear that we need to go further," Starmer stated, adding that "the status quo isn't good enough" in terms of protecting children online.Starmer specifically mentioned that the government is consulting about banning social media for under-16s and expressed strong commitment to addressing addictive features within social media platforms. These remarks come amid growing international pressure on tech companies to address the potential harms of their products on young users.In the landmark US case, a California jury found Meta and YouTube negligent for failing to provide adequate warnings about the potential dangers of their platforms. The plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman who claimed she became addicted to social media during her childhood, was awarded $6 million (£4.5 million) in damages, with Meta responsible for 70% of the payment and YouTube covering the remainder.The Duke and Duchess of Sussex welcomed the verdict as "a reckoning" for tech companies, stating in a joint statement: "For too long, families have paid the price for platforms built with total disregard for the children they reach." They emphasized that "today, the truth has been heard and precedent has been set" regarding children's safety versus corporate profits.Both Google, which owns YouTube, and Meta have indicated they will challenge the decision. Google claimed the case "misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site," while Meta stated it "respectfully disagrees with the verdict and is evaluating our legal options." The verdict came after nine days of deliberation in the first lawsuit concerning social media's alleged harm to young people to reach trial.The ruling has resonated beyond the courtroom, with European Commission digital chief Henna Virkkunen noting that such cases send "a very clear message" to online platforms about the risks they pose. Campaigners for safer social media have celebrated the decision as a potential watershed moment in regulating platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and X.The Molly Rose Foundation, established after the death of 14-year-old Molly Russell who was exposed to harmful content on Instagram, called for legislation that would make "safety and wellbeing the price for tech firms to pay for doing business in the UK." Thomas Lancaster, a computing expert at Imperial College London, emphasized that policies must be effectively enforced to protect those they're designed to safeguard.Sacha Haworth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, declared that "the era of big tech invincibility is over," suggesting that the verdict validates concerns about tech platforms' impact on young people that have been raised for years.

The recent story of Julie Maughan, a grieving mother who lost her eight-year-old daughter Heather Preen due to exposure to polluted water, has left an indelible mark. The Channel 4 docudrama Dirty Business brings to light the struggles of campaigners and families fighting against privatised water companies and a system that often fails to protect them.In a poignant meeting, Julie Maughan's emotional testimony, marked by grief, dignity, and determination, underscored the human cost of water privatisation. Her story starkly contrasts with the detached world of statistics and policy debates, illustrating the moral failure of a system that prioritises profit over people's lives.Clive Lewis, Labour MP for Norwich South, argues that the water industry's model, which allows private companies to profit from a basic necessity while the public bears the risk, is fundamentally flawed. This has led to billions being paid to shareholders while investment falls short and pollution becomes routine.The article highlights the broader implications of water privatisation as a microcosm of a larger systemic problem. With millions of households facing another wave of pressure on their living standards due to an impending energy price surge, the question remains whether the current economic framework can adapt to address these challenges.Lewis emphasises that Labour must decide whether it stands with the electorate or the water companies, advocating for a fundamental reorientation of the economy that prioritises the public interest over profit. The story of Julie Maughan and her daughter Heather serves as a powerful reminder of the human cost of policy failures and the urgent need for change.

Egil Johansen, the landlord of the Kenton pub in Hackney, east London, describes recent incidents involving children as "like the wild west." He has now banned children entirely after a three-year-old fell down a cellar hatch while parents sat elsewhere, a five-year-old crashed into staff carrying drinks, and six parents brought 10 hyperactive children after a birthday party while ignoring their behavior."In every case, the parents blame us when something goes wrong or get really angry when we ask them to control their children," says Johansen, who has run the pub for 17 years. "I'm legally obliged to keep children safe on my premises and if the parents let their children run riot, the only answer is to not allow them in at all."Johansen initially tried banning children only after 5pm, but this interim measure failed to address the underlying issues. Despite online criticism framing him as the "baddie," he expresses sadness about the situation: "I'm a publican; I'm a people-person. It gives me no joy to ban anyone, but it's just not safe: parents don't control their children and our other customers were beginning to go elsewhere. I had no choice."The Kenton's decision reflects a growing trend among UK pubs seeking to differentiate themselves from establishments that "resemble soft play centres without the ball pit." While some welcome this shift, others view it as unwelcoming to families, creating a culture war in the pub industry.Lee Jones, landlord of the Brewers Arms in West Malvern, Worcestershire, reversed a previous child ban: "We're dog-friendly, child-friendly, adult-friendly. We're just friendly – we don't distinguish. Pubs are for the community and I don't see bans in the spirit of what we're here for." Jones reports that when children become rowdy, staff can address the issue with parents, though this is rarely needed.Stephen Boyd, who runs the Alma in south London, took a different approach after attempting to attract young families. He found families with children consumed disproportionate time and resources with special requests for diluted drinks, heated beverages, and customized meals, while adult customers waited longer for their orders."You just need a couple screaming, banging on a table or running up and down, and it dictates the whole atmosphere of the pub," Boyd says. "Parents would take massive umbrage if staff asked them to stop their children doing something." After implementing a child ban, he describes the change as "a fucking revelation" with staff retention improving and takings doubling.Despite the positive results, Boyd faced significant backlash: "I got a lot of online hate. Mainly from people who had never been to the pub but felt I was doing something morally hateful."Tom Stainer, chief executive of the Campaign for Real Ale, acknowledges the debate is "very live" but emphasizes: "But you do have to look at the responsibility of the parents in these situations, not just at the pubs. They're the ones responsible for making sure that their children behave."Financial considerations also drive some decisions. Mandy Keefe, landlady of the Wheel Inn in Ashford, banned children partly for behavioral reasons but also financial ones: "If a third of my Sunday customers were children eating from a reduced-rate child's menu and not drinking any alcohol, that wouldn't be financially viable."Across the UK, pubs are making individual decisions based on their specific circumstances, but as Johansen's experience demonstrates, it only takes one serious incident to settle the question for good.

Solar panel sales have surged dramatically since the onset of the Iran war, according to Octopus Energy, with British households increasingly opting for larger rooftop installations to achieve energy independence.The company reported a 54% increase in sales this month compared to the same period last month, marking a significant shift in consumer behavior amid global energy uncertainty.Rebecca Dibb-Simkin, Octopus Energy's chief product officer, observed: "We are seeing a massive shift as people stop just asking and start acting. British families are tired of being held hostage by global fossil fuel prices. By switching to solar and heat pumps, they are becoming their own power stations, locking in low costs and protecting their wallets for the long term."Octopus noted that many customers are choosing "supersize" systems with 12 panels instead of the typical 10-panel arrays. Additionally, heat pump sales have increased by more than 50%, while electric vehicle charger systems have seen a 20% rise in sales.Greg Jackson, Octopus Energy's chief executive, described a "huge jolt" in solar sales compared to February. On March 17, the company reported a 27% increase in solar sales inquiries since the start of the Iran war.Good Energy, another green electricity supplier, confirmed this trend, reporting a doubling of interest in solar panels over the past three months.Nigel Pocklington, Good Energy's chief executive, emphasized: "The most effective way to bring bills down over the long term is to double down on renewables, alongside storage and flexibility, so more of our power comes from predictable, homegrown sources. We should be putting solar on any building that can take it. That's how we cut costs, strengthen energy security and give people real control over the energy they rely on every day."The market is poised for further growth with plug-in solar kits expected to become available from high street retailers and supermarkets in the coming months. The government recently announced that most new homes will likely have solar panels from 2028 and will lift a ban on sales of these kits.Andrew Dickinson, head of infrastructure at Heligan Group, explained: "Given the recent geopolitical events, the UK's reliance on global energy markets has become front and centre. The solution lies in a series of short-term initiatives to address the immediate impact of rising energy prices on homeowners. Plug-in solar is one of these solutions that is expected to lower the barriers to entry for homeowners. The previously lengthy process of roof assessment, design and installation by a specialist technician will no longer be necessary."A recent report from Electrify Britain, backed by Octopus, found that solar panels and heat pumps would significantly reduce vulnerability to fossil fuel price fluctuations. The report "Plug In, Pay Less" revealed that houses using these technologies would be almost immune to fossil fuel price rises: a 30% increase in wholesale gas and oil prices would translate into only a 1.7% rise in energy bills by 2035 for households using no gas or oil appliances.Energy bills are expected to rise by more than £300 this July, according to Cornwall Insight, a consultancy. Jess Ralston, head of energy at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, commented: "Predictions of energy bills rising by hundreds of pounds will feel like deja vu to hard-working families as yet another gas price crisis pushes up the cost of living. Many are still saddled with debt from the last gas crisis while Putin and the oil and gas companies stand to benefit."Ralston added: "These wars and the global gas market are clearly beyond the UK's control, so the only way we have to permanently stabilise bills is to cut our use of gas and that means switching to electric heat pumps and renewables that squeeze gas power plants off the grid."Octopus Energy also noted a one-third increase in inquiries about leasing electric vehicles, further indicating a broader shift toward renewable energy solutions among British consumers.

National Savings and Investments (NS&I;) is preparing to make a significant payout to customers who have been affected by a savings scandal. The bank is expected to repay hundreds of millions of pounds to approximately 37,000 people whose money was misplaced due to historical failings.The government-backed savings institution is in discussions with the Treasury to compensate these customers, with the exact amount yet to be determined. This payout would not be considered compensation but rather a reimbursement for money that customers did not receive.The scandal involves reports of bereaved families not receiving money that was rightfully theirs, as well as complaints that NS&I; failed to pay out premium bond prizes to the families of deceased savers. The bank has apologized for the poor customer service, particularly during sensitive times.The pensions minister, Torsten Bell, is expected to address the issue in a statement to the House of Commons. NS&I; holds over £100bn for around 26 million customers and is one of the largest savings organizations in the UK. The bank recently faced criticism over the spiralling cost of its modernisation programme, which has risen from £1.3bn to £3bn.A spokesperson for NS&I; said: “We recognise that dealing with bereavement can be challenging and would like to apologise to anyone who has not received the customer service from NS&I; that they should expect, particularly at such a sensitive time.”

The UK government is set to trial social media curbs for teenagers in a major study aimed at understanding the impact of reduced social media use on young people's lives. Hundreds of UK teenagers will participate in the six-week pilot, which will test different restrictions on social media use, including bans, digital curfews, and time limits on popular apps like Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat.The trial, led by the UK government, will involve 300 teens across all four nations of the UK, with some participants having their social apps disabled, while others will have access blocked overnight or capped to one hour's use. The goal is to gather evidence on how different restrictions affect young people's day-to-day lives.Technology Secretary Liz Kendall emphasized the importance of testing different options in the real world, stating that the pilots will provide the evidence needed to take the next steps, informed by the experiences of families themselves.The pilot is part of a broader effort to address concerns about the mental health risks associated with unfettered internet access. Nearly 30,000 parents and children have responded to the government's digital wellbeing consultation, which closes on May 26. An independent study, funded by the Wellcome Trust, will also examine the impact of reducing social media use among adolescents.The study, involving about 4,000 students between the ages of 12 and 15 from 10 Bradford secondary schools, will investigate changes in anxiety and sleep quality, time spent with friends and family, wellbeing, body image, social comparison, school absences, and bullying.The UK government faces pressure to follow Australia's move to ban access to social media sites for under-16s, with France, Spain, and Indonesia also considering similar bans. The European parliament has passed a resolution on age restrictions, although it is not legally binding.Critics argue that the pilot is a half-measure that puts pressure on parents rather than holding big tech accountable for the harm caused by social media. Bereaved parents have written to parliamentarians, urging them to support a ban and expressing concern about the consultation process.

Apple has introduced a new requirement for UK iPhone users, mandating them to confirm they are 18 or older to use certain services. This move, believed to be a first for a European market, comes as part of a broader effort to protect children online. The age verification process can be completed by uploading a credit card or scanning an ID, such as a driving license or national ID. Ofcom, the online regulator, has welcomed the change, calling it “a real win for children and families” and part of a wider drive to “keep young people away from harmful content”. The update is part of a software update and aims to restrict access to certain services and features for users under 18. However, some users have expressed concerns about the privacy implications of uploading personal information for age verification. Apple has assured users that if they already have an account, they can confirm their age with a payment method on file or other eligible methods. The company was unable to immediately specify which services, features, or actions would be inaccessible without age confirmation. This development follows the introduction of age verification gates on many web services, including pornography websites, to comply with the Online Safety Act. Ofcom noted that Apple’s decision makes the UK one of the first countries to receive new child safety protections on devices. The watchdog plans to report on the use of app stores by children and evaluate the effectiveness of age assurance by app store providers.