Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

A recent jury verdict in California has held Meta and YouTube liable for the harm caused to a young woman, KGM, due to the addictive nature of their platforms. The plaintiff claimed that her social media use, which began at the age of six, led to injuries including body dysmorphia and thoughts of self-harm.The jury's decision marks a significant milestone in the ongoing debate about the impact of social media on young people. The verdict suggests that companies like Meta and YouTube, which have been accused of designing features to keep users engaged, can be held accountable for the harm caused by their platforms.Critics of the judgment argue that it could lead to a flood of lawsuits against social media companies, while others see it as a necessary step to protect young people from the potential dangers of social media. The verdict may also prompt regulatory changes and increased scrutiny of social media companies' practices.According to a report from Brown University, social media can be addictive due to its ability to activate the brain's reward system, releasing feel-good hormones such as dopamine. This can lead to a vicious cycle of use and addiction, particularly among young people who spend many hours a day on social media.In response to growing concerns, some countries have taken action to protect young people. Australia, for example, has banned children under 16 from using social media. In the US, there have been calls for social media companies to be required to put warning labels on their sites, but such proposals have yet to gain traction.The verdict is also significant given the close ties between the tech industry and the US administration. The appointment of Mark Zuckerberg to the president's council of advisers on science and technology has raised concerns about the influence of tech companies on policy decisions.Ultimately, the jury verdict sends a clear message to tech titans that they will be held accountable for the impact of their platforms on young people. As the debate about social media regulation continues, this verdict is likely to have far-reaching implications for the industry and for the protection of young people online.

A light-up C-3PO head used in Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back has fetched more than $1 million at an auction. The prop was part of a collection of film and TV memorabilia that went under the hammer on Wednesday as part of the Spring Entertainment Memorabilia Live Auction at Propstore auction house in Los Angeles.It is the only known example of the fictional droid’s head to appear on the collector market and sold for $1,058,400 (£790,440 or A$1,519,259), having received a pre-sale estimate of $350,000 to $700,000.The C-3PO head was the top lot at the auction, which also saw the harpoon gun used by the actor Robert Shaw in Jaws, accompanied by its original case, fetch $327,600.Elsewhere, a Wilson volleyball used by Tom Hanks in 2000’s Cast Away sold for $189,000 after receiving a pre-sale estimate of $150,000 to $300,000.The auction also featured broken pieces of a sword used in The Lord Of The Rings, which sold for $252,000.The first day of the auction fetched $6.5 million and also included items such as a golden ticket from the 1971 film Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory.Brandon Alinger, Propstore’s chief operating officer, said: “We’ve seen a strong start to the auction, with competitive bidding right from the outset.“At Propstore, Star Wars material continues to resonate with collectors and the C-3PO head from The Empire Strikes Back was a real highlight of the day.“The Jaws collection also delivered an impressive overall result, coming just after the film’s 50th anniversary and reflecting its enduring appeal with collectors.“With such a diverse lineup of material still to come, we’re excited to see how the rest of the auction unfolds.”The final day of bidding, 27 March, will be dedicated to animation, with more than 200 lots celebrating the artistry of animation in film and television.

The House of Lords has backed an Australian-style social media ban for under-16s, with peers voting 266 to 141 against proposals for a public consultation.Conservative former minister Lord Nash said the vote sent an 'unambiguous message' to the government, emphasizing that 'hollow promises and half-measures are not enough.'The vote comes after a jury in Los Angeles found that Meta, the owner of Google and Facebook, designed deliberately addictive products that harmed a 20-year-old's mental health.Nash proposed the age limit as part of the children's wellbeing and schools bill, stating that 'techies' had taken a 'cavalier approach' to content damaging to children.The decision could influence thousands of similar lawsuits in the US accusing social media companies of deliberately causing harm.Lady Cass, a paediatrician and crossbench peer, criticized the government for 'failing to understand the impact of social media on our children.'

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.

Los Angeles Rams star receiver Puka Nacua is facing a civil lawsuit filed by a woman named Madison Atiabi, who claims he made an antisemitic statement and bit her on the shoulder on New Year's Eve. According to the lawsuit, Nacua allegedly said 'fuck all Jews' during a dinner in Los Angeles, which Atiabi, who is Jewish, found deeply distressing.The lawsuit also alleges that Nacua bit Atiabi on the shoulder, leaving teeth marks, and also bit her friend's thumb 'with such force that her companion screamed in acute pain.' The suit cites gender violence and negligence in addition to the antisemitic remark and biting incident.Nacua's attorney, Levi McCathern, has strongly denied the allegations, stating that multiple sober witnesses confirm Nacua never made the claimed comments. McCathern described the bites as 'horseplay' and announced that Nacua intends to sue Atiabi for defamation. This development comes after Nacua apologized last December for performing a gesture that invoked antisemitic tropes during an internet livestream.The 24-year-old receiver had a stellar season with the Rams, leading the league with 129 catches, 1,715 yards, and 10 touchdowns, and then leading the NFL again in playoff catches. His future with the Rams includes eligibility for a contract extension this offseason that could make him one of the highest-paid receivers in NFL history.

The film 'They Will Kill You' is a satirical take on the beat-em-up genre, offering a mix of gore, bad jokes, and deja vu. The story revolves around Asia, a new maid at the Virgil, a satanic co-op residence in New York, where she must navigate a world of satanic rituals and eternal life.The film's tone is pitched between a bloodbath and bath time, with a boyish strain of immaturity dominating the creative force. This is evident in the giddy, inventive approach to violence, where the narrative device of immortality unshackles the filmmaker from the laws of physics. The film's antic gore peaks with an extended interlude following a disembodied eyeball as it rolls down corridors and slingshots itself up an elevator shaft.The adolescent quality runs deeper than that, manifesting more overtly in the potty-mouthedness of the script and the ostentatious stylistic flourishes that are hand-me-downs from other filmmakers. The film's supporting cast is haphazardly assembled and half-assedly differentiated from one another, with Heather Graham and Tom Felton getting the most to do.Despite its sprightly fight choreography and retro synth arpeggios, the film's invoked inspirations and story components err on the side of the popular and well-trod. The received shtick grows worn before long, and the film's attempts at humor often fall flat. A good rule of (severed) thumb: if you're going to make a character quote Monty Python's immortal 'just a flesh wound' bit, you must yourself be capable of originally generating something at least as funny.

The wait is over for fans of medical dramas, as The Pitt has landed on HBO Max. This 15-episode series, which follows the lives of medical staff in a Pittsburgh hospital, has been generating significant buzz since its release in the US last year.Produced by the same team behind the groundbreaking series ER, The Pitt stars Noah Wyle, known for his iconic role as Dr. John Carter in ER. Wyle plays Dr. Michael 'Robby' Robinavitch, a senior attending physician struggling with PTSD after the loss of his mentor during the pandemic.Each episode covers a single shift in the hospital, delving into the challenges faced by the medical staff as they navigate urgent and complex cases, from gunshot wounds to patients with dementia. The show's pace is more measured than ER, with a focus on character development and nuanced storytelling.The cast is strong, with well-developed characters and backstories that add depth to the narrative. Showrunner John Wells handles the large ensemble with skill, and Wyle is a rock-solid presence at the center of the show.The Pitt explores themes that are both timely and timeless, including the US healthcare system's flaws and the personal and professional struggles of medical staff. With its gripping storylines and strong performances, this series is sure to captivate audiences and leave them eager for more.

Afghanistan's authorities have released US citizen Dennis Coyle, who was detained in the country for over a year. The release was announced by the country's Foreign Ministry on Tuesday, stating that Coyle's detention period was deemed sufficient by the Supreme Court of the Islamic Emirate.The decision to release Coyle was made on humanitarian grounds and as a gesture of 'goodwill'. The UAE facilitated the release, which came after a meeting between Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi, former US Special Envoy to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad, the UAE Ambassador to Kabul Saif Mohammed al-Ketbi, and a member of Coyle's family.Coyle, a linguist and researcher, was detained in January 2025 while working to support Afghan language communities. He was held 'in near-solitary conditions' without access to adequate medical care, according to the Foley Foundation. The Taliban authorities stated that Coyle was held 'due to violations of Afghanistan's applicable laws'.The release is seen as a positive step towards ending the practice of hostage diplomacy. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio thanked the UAE and Qatar for their support in securing Coyle's release, stating that it is a positive step towards ending the practice of hostage diplomacy.This is not the first time the Taliban has released US citizens as a goodwill gesture. Last year, five other US citizens were released under similar circumstances.

A landmark jury verdict has found Meta and YouTube liable for deliberately designing addictive products that harmed a young user, KGM. The jury ruled that the tech companies were both negligent and failed to provide adequate warnings about the potential dangers of their products.The plaintiff, KGM, testified that she became addicted to YouTube at age six and Instagram at nine, which she claimed had deleterious effects on her wellbeing. By age 10, she said she had become depressed and was engaging in self-harm as a result. Her social media use allegedly caused her to have strained relationships with her family and in school.The jury awarded KGM $6m in damages, with Meta to pay 70% and YouTube the remainder. This lawsuit, over social media's alleged harm to young people, was the first of its kind to go to trial.KGM's lawyers argued that the companies' features, such as infinite scrolling and video autoplay, were designed to keep people on the apps and made the products addictive. The plaintiffs' arguments mirrored those brought against big tobacco in the 1990s, focusing on the addictive qualities of social media and the companies' public denial despite knowledge of their products' harms.Meta and YouTube have consistently denied wrongdoing and plan to appeal the verdict. A YouTube spokesperson said the video service was a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site. Meta said KGM's mental health issues were brought on by a difficult home life and social media use was not to blame.This trial is the first in a consolidated group of cases brought in California against Meta, TikTok, YouTube, and Snap on behalf of more than 1,600 plaintiffs. The next bellwether case is scheduled to go to trial in July.