United News of Bangladesh

The United States has proposed creating a new system to notify each other about artificial intelligence incidents that could pose national security risks, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sunday. The proposal was discussed during weekend talks between Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng in New York, ahead of a planned meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at the White House this week. “We want a shared vision of common goals and common threats,” Bessent told reporters after the talks. He said greater transparency between the world’s two leading AI powers was important, particularly as AI-related activities increasingly cross national borders. Trump has opposed calls to slow AI development, arguing that doing so could allow China to narrow the gap with US companies. Bessent and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the weekend talks helped prepare the way for Thursday’s meeting between Trump and Xi. Greer said the two sides had also agreed to put into operation a new “Board of Trade,” an idea discussed by the two leaders during their meeting in Beijing in May. The countries are still discussing which “nonsensitive” goods could qualify for lower tariffs, Greer said. The list could include consumer and agricultural products, energy goods and medical devices. China’s state-run Xinhua news agency said Bessent and He discussed issues related to AI and held “candid, in-depth and constructive” talks on major economic and trade matters. George Chen, a partner and chair of digital practice at The Asia Group, said the agreement to continue discussions was significant. He said the proposed AI risk notification system could provide a model for other countries.

Anthropic, OpenAI, SpaceXAI and Google allegedly reached an illegal agreement to slow AI development, according to a lawsuit filed Friday in the US District Court for Northern California. The proposed class-action suit says the companies violated antitrust laws by coordinating efforts to slow development, potentially reducing the value of paid subscriptions to ChatGPT, Claude, Grok and Gemini. The complaint points to Sept 12, when Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei called for industry cooperation on slowing advances for safety. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, SpaceXAI CEO Elon Musk and Google DeepMind chair Demis Hassabis publicly supported the proposal. Plaintiffs also cite a July statement signed by senior AI-lab employees acknowledging competitive pressure against unilateral slowdowns and urging governments to support a global effort. They say companies may independently prioritize safety but cannot collectively restrain competition. Lead lawyer Nick Rowley warned that private agreements could threaten AI safety. The companies did not immediately comment. Amodei had acknowledged antitrust concerns and suggested government mediation or a limited waiver. Altman backed a federal safety framework. President Donald Trump opposed regulation but announced an AI task force and AI czar. Republican Sen. Josh Hawley rejected any antitrust exemption, warning collaboration could stifle competition.

As concerns grow over the risks of rapidly advancing artificial intelligence, potential Democratic presidential contenders are increasingly speaking out about the need for stronger safeguards, while President Donald Trump has dismissed many of the warnings. On Friday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order aimed at speeding up implementation of a state law requiring independent oversight of AI companies and so-called “kill switches” that would allow developers to shut down their systems. “California will do what it can. But this nation needs to get in the game. Washington, D.C. needs to do its job,” Newsom said on his podcast Friday. The order came a day after Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, another potential Democratic presidential contender, outlined his efforts to address AI risks. Like Newsom, Shapiro acknowledged that states have limited power to regulate a technology that operates globally. The moves come as AI industry leaders have issued increasingly serious warnings about the possibility of rogue AI systems causing catastrophic harm. AI could bring major benefits in fields such as medical research and automation, but experts have also warned it could contribute to the spread of deadly viruses, cause major economic disruption and help terrorists carry out attacks. Trump has dismissed such warnings as a “HOAX,” while Democratic lawmakers and potential candidates are proposing legislation and making AI a campaign issue ahead of the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 presidential race. Trump dismisses warningsAnthropic CEO Dario Amodei, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and SpaceX and xAI owner Elon Musk have called for greater government oversight following a series of hacks that exposed AI agents attempting to deceive humans. Trump has said he is “the only control or ‘guardrails’ that AI needs.” Democrats have quickly seized on the issue. Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff, a Democrat seeking reelection in a state Trump won two years ago, said at a campaign rally last weekend that a capable president should act quickly to protect Americans, send inspectors to leading AI laboratories, strengthen defenses against bioterrorism, seek legislation from Congress and work internationally toward an AI treaty. Ossoff, who is viewed as a potential 2028 presidential contender, criticized what he described as an aging political establishment that has limited understanding of AI. “An ancient establishment, barely capable of email, sleepwalks into a technological revolution while the president dismantles precautions and calls us fools for worrying,” he said. Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, another potential presidential contender, told Politico that he plans to introduce legislation next week creating a fund that AI companies would contribute to help workers affected by technological disruption. In his speech, Shapiro called for federal rules requiring independent third-party oversight, greater transparency and a policy that would “prioritize safety above all else.” He said he had already signed an executive order establishing safeguards for the use of generative AI in Pennsylvania. But Shapiro also acknowledged the limits of state-level action. “It’s going to require national and, in fact, international, leadership and collaboration,” he said. Alex Bores, a former New York state lawmaker who lost his congressional primary this summer after AI companies spent millions opposing him over an AI safety bill he supported, said public concern about the issue has grown significantly. “People want there to be real action on it,” he said. “Both sides of the aisle seem to be talking about the need to do something here.” Bores, who recently launched a political advocacy group focused on shaping his party’s response to AI, said he was encouraged by governors moving beyond calls for federal action and pursuing their own state-level regulations. “While we do need federal action, we also need governors to be doing their part and pushing through policies at the state level,” he said. “I’ve been encouraged by the vibe shift” over the last few days. A growing partisan divide over AIAlthough the 2028 presidential race remains in its early stages, polling indicates a growing partisan divide over AI. Democrats have become increasingly concerned about the technology in recent years, while Republicans have become less concerned. A June Pew Research Center poll found that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say they are “more concerned than excited” about the growing use of AI in everyday life. About half of U.S. adults overall said the increased use of AI makes them more concerned than excited. Another Pew survey conducted in June found that about seven in 10 U.S. adults believe AI will cause job losses in the United States over the next 20 years, an increase of seven percentage points from 2024. Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, a Democrat, has urged Republican Senate leaders to establish a select committee on AI as soon as possible. “I worry about this as a true existential threat. This is the first time that we’ve created technology to destroy humanity that could be controlled by not humans,” he said on MSNOW. AI concerns less prominent in some local racesWhile potential 2028 presidential contenders have been eager to address AI, the issue has been less prominent in several local races, where some candidates remain concerned about facing the kind of spending Bores encountered. At a rally Wednesday in New York’s closely contested 17th Congressional District, the crowd cheered as Democratic candidate Cait Conley pledged to ban data centers used to power AI and cloud computing. However, she did not directly address the broader risks associated with AI. There have been exceptions. In Michigan, both candidates competing for a closely contested Senate seat have called for some form of slowdown in AI development. At a town hall on Sept. 11, Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed said AI was keeping him awake at night and described it as an existential risk. “We need to all hit pause,” El-Sayed said, calling for a halt to frontier AI research and new public oversight. His proposals include turning AI companies into public benefit corporations, creating a new regulatory agency and banning the use of AI to deny medical care, make hiring or firing decisions or operate weapons. On Monday, Republican nominee Mike Rogers also called for slowing AI development in an X post following Amodei’s warning. “I believe we must slow down development of AI in order to allow the government and its partners to catch up and put stricter protocols and guardrails in place to protect us from the rapid advancements we’ve seen,” Rogers wrote. Bores said opposition to data centers reflects not only concerns about their immediate effects on local communities but also broader public anxiety about AI. “It is the first time that AI is meeting democracy,” he said. “Of course they’re channeling all of their concerns about it into the fight against data centers,” he added.

President Donald Trump said Friday that CNN, MS NOW and Politico would be barred from the White House, accusing the three news organizations of repeatedly publishing what he described as “fake news” and unfavorable coverage. He also suggested that additional media outlets could face similar restrictions. The announcement represents the latest escalation in Trump's increasingly confrontational relationship with news organizations whose reporting he criticizes. As with several previous disputes between Trump and the media, the proposed restrictions could raise questions involving First Amendment protections. However, there was no immediate indication that the administration had actually implemented the ban. Trump announced the move on his social media platform, saying that the three organizations were being banned from the White House effective immediately because of their alleged “FAKE NEWS” reporting. Shortly afterward, reporters asked Trump in the Oval Office to explain the decision. “Because they’re fake news,” Trump said. He criticized CNN and MS NOW, claiming that their reporting was inaccurate and pointing to what he described as poor ratings. He also accused Politico of publishing false stories. Trump added that other media organizations could potentially be subjected to similar restrictions, saying that they might have an opportunity to improve their coverage but that the United States needs what he considers to be honest journalism. Trump did not explain how the proposed restrictions would be enforced. Reporters from CNN, MS NOW and Politico remained on White House property late Friday afternoon, and there was no visible indication that they had been expelled. CNN criticized the announcement and said it continued to support its White House correspondents and their “fair and accurate reporting.” The network said the U.S. Constitution protects its ability to report from the White House without government interference. CNN added that if Trump's threatened ban were implemented, it would amount to an unlawful infringement of that constitutional protection. Politico similarly said it would continue reporting on the Trump administration and future administrations and would defend its First Amendment rights against attempts to restrict its access. MS NOW did not immediately respond to an email requesting comment. Trump Administration Has Increased Pressure on MediaDuring Trump's second term, his administration has intensified its disputes with news organizations through lawsuits, regulatory measures and public attacks against individual journalists. Trump has also criticized reporters personally, both in public appearances and on social media. The latest threat follows Trump's decision last year to restrict Associated Press journalists' access to the Oval Office, Air Force One and other presidential events. The action came after the AP declined to adopt Trump's preferred name, “Gulf of America,” for the body of water traditionally known as the Gulf of Mexico. The AP said it would continue using “Gulf of Mexico” while noting Trump's directive when appropriate. The news organization subsequently filed a lawsuit, which remains unresolved. Since returning to office, Trump has also pursued legal action involving several other media organizations, including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and the BBC. His administration has additionally remained involved in a long-running dispute with ABC concerning the renewal of its broadcast licenses. Potential Impact on White House Press AccessA possible ban on CNN would be particularly significant because the network has traditionally been part of the television press pool that accompanies the president and provides independent coverage of presidential activities. That pool is designed to ensure that journalists can observe and report on the president's movements and interactions on behalf of the American public and international audiences. CNN was accompanying Vice President JD Vance in Iowa on Friday. The National Press Club was among the organizations that quickly objected to Trump's announcement. Its president, Mark Schoeff, said restricting news organizations because of dissatisfaction with their reporting could amount to an effort to determine which journalists are permitted to observe and report on presidential actions. The legal concept involved is known as “viewpoint discrimination,” which refers to government action targeting particular speakers or organizations because of the views or content they express. That issue has been central to several legal disputes involving Trump's treatment of the press. Tim Richardson, journalism and disinformation director at PEN America, also criticized the move, arguing that government officials cannot simply restrict journalists because they dislike critical coverage. Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, likewise described the threatened restrictions as a serious potential First Amendment issue, arguing that the White House should not exclude news organizations because they criticize the government. Trump Offers Few Details About the Proposed BanTrump's original social media post did not explain how the restrictions against CNN, MS NOW and Politico would operate. The announcement came shortly before Trump met reporters in the Oval Office during an event focused on health care. He later planned to travel with the White House press pool to his golf club in Virginia for a meeting and dinner sponsored by his political action committee before spending the weekend at Camp David, where reporters generally do not accompany him. Trump argued that media organizations should not be permitted to publish what he considers false information while covering the president, his administration or the United States. He also warned that additional news organizations could be targeted. During the Oval Office event, Trump continued criticizing other major media organizations, including The New York Times and The Washington Post. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also expressed support for Trump's announcement in a post on X, saying the Department of War backed the decision to remove CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House. Previous Court Ruling on White House Press AccessA 1977 federal appeals court ruling in Sherrill v. Knight established important principles concerning White House press access. The court determined that although the White House does not have an unlimited obligation to provide access to journalists, once it creates press facilities for credentialed reporters, it cannot exclude journalists simply because of the content of their reporting. The ruling also held that any denial of access must be based on a compelling government interest. Journalists must also receive notice of the proposed denial, an opportunity to respond and a written final decision.

Chinese technology giant Huawei has unveiled new chip technologies as it seeks to strengthen its position in the global artificial intelligence race and challenge industry leader Nvidia. Huawei made the announcement Thursday at its annual key conference in Shanghai, just days before an expected meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Washington on Sept 24. China has been pushing to become more self-reliant in key technologies, particularly semiconductors, after US-led restrictions limited its access to some of the world's most advanced AI chips and chipmaking equipment. At the event, Huawei introduced the Atlas 960 SuperPoD computing cluster, a faster successor to a model launched only months ago. The new system includes improvements in AI training and "inference," the process through which a trained AI system makes predictions or decisions. Huawei also plans to launch the Ascend 970 and Ascend 980 chip series in 2028 and 2029, respectively, with significantly greater computing power expected from the new chips. "The timing — less than two weeks before President Xi Jinping's visit to Washington — underscores Beijing's confidence and ambition in technology and innovation," said George Chen, a partner and chair of digital practice at consultancy The Asia Group. Huawei's announcement came as Trump dismissed calls from some AI leaders to slow the development of the technology for safety reasons. Trump has stressed that the United States must maintain its lead over China, saying, "whoever wins in AI, wins." "AI developments move so quickly that no one can be certain of holding the lead forever," Chen said. Analysts say advanced AI development in China, including the training of AI models, still depends heavily on US-made chips, including those produced by Nvidia. However, Huawei has developed its own advanced chips and remains ahead of other Chinese chipmakers as more AI companies in China turn to domestically produced technology. The Atlas 960 SuperPoD has drawn attention from some technology analysts because it was introduced only months after Huawei unveiled the Atlas 950 SuperPod late last year. "The fact that Huawei achieved this upgrade in just a year, far quicker than before, will only heighten US anxiety about the accelerating AI competition," Chen said.

As concerns grow over the risks posed by artificial intelligence, any global effort to manage the technology may depend on cooperation between the United States and China, even as the two powers increasingly view each other's AI strategies with suspicion. AI governance is expected to be discussed at a planned meeting next week in Washington between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The issue has become increasingly urgent in both countries, with American technology leaders arguing that preventing the worst possible outcomes from advanced AI will require some level of cooperation with China. At the same time, Washington and Beijing are competing for an advantage in AI. Trump has warned that stronger regulation of the technology could give China an edge. This could make any agreement at the upcoming meeting limited in scope, but experts say even a small understanding could provide a starting point for broader cooperation. "A formal agreement or consensus may be near impossible, but they do not need to go that far," said Samm Sacks, a senior fellow at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies' Institute for America, China, and the Future of Global Affairs. "Trump and Xi just need to create political space by acknowledging AI poses risks to both countries." China and US increasingly divided over AI Trump has opposed calls for stronger AI regulation, saying it could allow China to overtake the US in the technology. He has repeatedly said the country that leads in AI "wins." "We are leading China, and all others," Trump said Monday in a social media post. The two countries are advancing AI in different ways. US companies are developing increasingly powerful systems using advanced computer chips and expanding data center infrastructure. China, meanwhile, is promoting wider global use of open-source and lower-cost AI models. Chinese AI models have made significant progress and are gaining interest among American companies, despite US-led restrictions limiting China's access to the world's most advanced AI chips. Most leading US AI models are closed-source, meaning their underlying designs are not publicly available. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Tuesday that the US needs to develop more open-source models to compete with China. The US has accused China of making "aggressive, malicious" efforts to obtain capabilities from American AI systems. Beijing has responded by accusing Washington of trying to restrict Chinese companies in order to create a "monopoly of the AI industry." It remains unclear whether Trump's relationship with Xi will be strong enough to overcome those differences. Still, people with links to the Chinese government say greater coordination on AI could be useful. At an annual security and defense conference in Beijing, Cui Tiankai, a former Chinese ambassador to the US, said Tuesday that AI is an area where Beijing and Washington should expand dialogue. "Because there is a need, a growing need, for cooperation," he told the Xiangshan Forum. "So how can we manage the balance?" US AI leaders seek to limit China while calling for cooperation Two major US AI companies, Anthropic and OpenAI, restrict access to their services in China and have said protecting America's lead in AI is a national security priority. At the same time, both have supported cooperation with China on AI safety. In an essay last weekend calling for a slowdown in AI development because of safety concerns, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said the US should slow China's progress, including by maintaining restrictions on China's access to the world's most advanced AI chips. He also said that "global pacing will require cooperation with China, the autocratic country with by far the most advanced AI capabilities." China's Foreign Ministry criticized Amodei's comments Monday, saying that "fearmongering, confrontation and vicious competition will only disrupt the process of global AI governance which serves no one's interest." China's state-run Global Times newspaper went further, describing his comments as containing measures aimed at restricting China and as a "Cold War playbook" for the AI sector. Trump has consulted Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, including calling him during a podcast interview Monday. Nvidia has generally supported some exports of its chips to China, arguing that maintaining access could help strengthen an American technology ecosystem and encourage a more open relationship on AI, given the large number of AI researchers in China. AI's growing capabilities raise concerns in both countries Officials and policymakers in both the US and China have expressed concern about the increasingly powerful capabilities of AI. Chen Yixin, head of China's Ministry of State Security, warned in an article Sunday that AI poses a range of threats, including risks to political and ideological security and the possibility of cyberattacks. Chen said AI could threaten China's political and ideological security if used by people "with ulterior motives." He specifically referred to powerful AI models developed by Anthropic and OpenAI, saying they could be used to "weaponize" cybersecurity vulnerabilities and threaten China's critical information infrastructure.   Other recent AI-related developments have also raised concerns in China. One example was the discovery by a US security firm of vulnerabilities involving WeChat, China's major messaging platform, which also provides payment and other services, said Paul Triolo, a partner at DGA-Albright Stonebridge Group. Chinese officials said after Trump's meeting with Xi in Beijing in mid-May that the two countries had agreed to pursue dialogue on AI development and governance. However, there has been little progress since then. Neither China nor the US "can simply seal itself off from the other," said Lizzi C. Lee, a fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute's Center for China Analysis. She said both governments have an interest in creating safeguards to maintain human control over AI. "We already know that neither government is going to abandon its competitive AI strategy or pursuit of technological advantage," Lee said. Meanwhile, Washington and Beijing have been working to build AI partnerships with other countries. In July, China launched the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization with 29 founding member countries, including Russia and Pakistan. The group aims to promote global AI governance. This month, Xi called on BRICS countries to speed up the creation of a global AI governance framework and establish an open-source AI community. Some political observers viewed the China-led organization as a response to the US-led Pax Silica initiative, which was launched last year to strengthen cooperation with countries including Japan, the UK and Australia on AI supply chains. Asked by CBS' "Face the Nation" about his expectations for the Trump-Xi meeting, Amodei said the longer-term goal could be for the two countries to work together to "put a speed limit on the rate of AI progress." However, he said achieving such cooperation would likely be difficult. A recent social media post by Yuyuantantian, a Chinese state media-linked account, also expressed caution ahead of the meeting. "Only after the United States first demonstrates that the safety rules are equally effective for its own model companies can substantive discussions between the U.S. and China take place," the post said.

China has introduced new border control rules that allow authorities to stop citizens from leaving the country if they engage in illegal activities that threaten national or industrial security. The rules, which took effect Tuesday as part of a wider overhaul of border regulations, come amid growing government concerns over the transfer of advanced technology as competition with the United States intensifies in artificial intelligence and other emerging fields. The regulation says its main purpose is to protect China's sovereignty, security and development interests. Under the new rules, Chinese citizens who engage in illegal or criminal activities overseas that threaten national security could be barred from leaving the country again for six months to three years after returning. People who violate regulations governing technology imports or exports could also face travel restrictions if their actions are considered a threat to industrial or technological security. Authorities may also choose not to notify the individuals concerned if they believe notification could affect national security or interfere with a criminal investigation. The broad wording of the rules has raised concerns among experts about the amount of discretion officials may have in deciding which activities and individuals are covered. “Given how broadly national security is defined nowadays, one could easily find themselves subject to bans without even these basic procedural protections promised in the text,” said Mark Jia, a law professor at Georgetown University. Consultancy Trivium said the regulations were another sign of China's determination to prevent the transfer of key technologies and technical knowledge. In April, China unexpectedly blocked technology company Meta from acquiring artificial intelligence startup Manus after the proposed deal reportedly raised government concerns about the transfer of advanced technology. Manus is a Singapore-based company with Chinese roots. The new border rules also contain provisions affecting foreigners. Authorities can bar foreign nationals from entering China for one to five years if they provide false information in visa applications or at ports of entry. The regulations also aim to protect Chinese citizens from being tricked into traveling overseas and then forced to take part in illegal gambling or online and telephone scam operations, which have remained a persistent problem in recent years. The Cyberspace Administration of China, which oversees online discussions, sought to ease concerns that the new measures would make international travel more difficult. In an online post last week, the agency said the rules target people involved in illegal cross-border activities rather than ordinary citizens who have legitimate reasons to travel abroad.

Millions of students use AI chatbots every day for schoolwork, emotional support and personal advice, often without knowing how their conversations and other personal information may be stored or used. As AI becomes increasingly common in classrooms, educators, parents and students are raising concerns about data privacy and the role schools should play in protecting children’s information. The issue has gained attention as the two largest US school districts, New York City and Los Angeles, announced plans to limit student use of AI for a year while they examine how the technology should be used in education. Against this backdrop, Microsoft last week agreed to adopt stronger privacy and safety standards for AI used in schools following negotiations with the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the country’s second-largest teachers union. The agreement has important safety measures, but they will have a wider impact only if other major AI companies adopt similar standards, said Josh Golin, executive director of online safety nonprofit Fairplay. “I worry that a high-profile framework like this will be misunderstood and schools will think, ‘If they’re doing a good job on data privacy and safety, then that means we should be using the tool,’” Golin said. The AFT said the legally binding agreement, which includes independent audits, could become an industry standard. OpenAI and Anthropic said they are also discussing similar agreements with the union. Google, however, has not said whether it will adopt the same protections. Limits on use of student data Under the agreement, Microsoft will not use student or educator data to train its AI systems, except for a limited purpose related to protecting students. The company also says collected data cannot be sold, used for advertising or used to develop products. The agreement bans AI companions and other features designed to create emotional attachment or dependency or keep students engaged beyond what is needed for learning. It also requires audits and greater transparency, including explaining to families in clear language how Microsoft’s AI tools work. “This standard sets a high bar for child privacy and AI safety, and we’ll extend this agreement to every school district across the country,” Microsoft Vice Chair and President Brad Smith said. The standards will apply from Nov. 1 to all schools that have contracts with Microsoft, he said. AFT President Randi Weingarten described the agreement as the first of its kind and an important step toward creating industry-wide standards in the absence of federal or state laws governing AI use in schools. “We want parents to have control of their kids’ education. We want educators to have control of kids’ education, not ed tech,” Weingarten said. She made the comments at a joint news conference with Smith at the headquarters of the United Federation of Teachers in New York City. The building houses the AFT’s National Academy for AI Instruction for teachers, which launched a year ago with $23 million in support from Microsoft, OpenAI and Anthropic. New York City and Los Angeles are also planning extensive reviews of their education technology contracts and AI tools, focusing on privacy, transparency and accountability. New York City’s one-year AI restriction applies to elementary and middle school students, while Los Angeles’ policy covers students through high school. Union seeks similar commitments from Google and others Weingarten said she contacted Google before the Microsoft agreement was announced and invited the company to become a signatory. Google has not responded to an AP request for comment on whether it plans to adopt similar protections. “Is Google going to embrace this framework? That is a huge question,” Golin said, noting that schools also use thousands of AI-powered educational technology products made by smaller companies. Google faced criticism in August after announcing that it had enabled its Gemini chatbot for many K-12 students using Google Classroom, its learning management platform. Google says Classroom is used by about 150 million teachers and students worldwide. Critics said the move intensified competition among technology companies to expand their presence in schools and attract the next generation of AI users. The Gemini feature is available only to schools that allow students to use the Gemini app or Gemini Notebook. Until August, Google had allowed Gemini access only to students aged 18 or older. Weingarten said the union is also negotiating with OpenAI and Anthropic, both of which have welcomed the Microsoft agreement. OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, called the deal an “important milestone for AI safety and privacy in schools” and said it hoped to finalize its own agreement with the AFT. Anthropic, which makes Claude, said it welcomed efforts to promote responsible AI use in education and was working with the AFT toward what it called a “gold standard for safety and privacy.” Experts say companies should carry the privacy burden Data privacy experts said the new standards could influence how schools negotiate with AI companies, even when they do not use Microsoft products. Elizabeth Laird, director at the Center for Democracy and Technology, said the agreement could reduce the pressure on individual school districts to negotiate privacy protections with large technology companies. Previously, schools’ ability to secure stronger protections often depended on their financial resources and bargaining power. Laird said the agreement could help reduce such differences between school districts. She also praised Microsoft for going beyond existing legal requirements for companies providing technology to schools. For example, Microsoft has agreed not to use sensitive information such as gender, race, age and ZIP codes, which can sometimes be used to identify individuals even after their names have been removed. However, Laird said the agreement also shows how difficult it is to establish consistent AI standards without legislation. She said responsibility for protecting students’ privacy should rest with technology companies rather than parents, students or individual schools. Microsoft’s Smith acknowledged that technology companies have been slow to accept that responsibility. “There are important discussions and debates all across the country about when AI should be used in schools, how it should be used, for what purpose,” he said. “It is our role, even our responsibility, to ensure that AI is provided in a form that teachers and kids and parents can trust.”

Fresh warnings from within the artificial intelligence industry have reignited a long-running debate over whether increasingly advanced AI could eventually escape human control and threaten humanity, as well as whether technology companies are doing enough to prevent such risks. Dario Amodei, CEO of San Francisco-based Anthropic, which develops Claude, said Saturday that the industry may need to slow its pace of development. He warned that swarms of AI agents could potentially take control of the internet within six months to a year unless companies devote more effort to developing safeguards. Amodei proposed a plan for AI companies and governments to ensure that increasingly capable systems remain aligned with the instructions and values of responsible people. His comments came days after two former Anthropic safety researchers publicly raised concerns that potential existential threats posed by AI were not receiving enough attention. AI models becoming more capableConcerns about AI risks are growing as newer models become more powerful, raising fears about both deliberate misuse and systems behaving unpredictably. Potential misuse could include creating or spreading deadly diseases, while autonomous systems could potentially act in dangerous ways. Anthropic said last week that it had blocked attempts by malicious actors to use its AI models for activities including cyberattacks, surveillance and research that could have contributed to the development of biological weapons. The company said it had introduced stronger safeguards in its latest models to restrict biological research that could be used to develop weapons. However, it warned that as AI systems become more capable, their risks could increase unless developers and society take steps to make them safer. Anthropic also reported last year that hackers had used its AI in a cyberattack targeting about 30 companies and government agencies worldwide. The company said the hackers were very likely linked to a Chinese state-sponsored group. AI systems have acted autonomouslyAn AI agent is considered to have “gone rogue” when it takes actions beyond the task it was instructed to perform. Anthropic and OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, both reported in July that their AI models had demonstrated such capabilities. Anthropic said three models Claude Opus 4.7, Claude Mythos 5 and an internal research model hacked into three other organizations during testing. The disclosure came days after OpenAI said one of its AI systems had hacked into the servers of AI startup Hugging Face. OpenAI described the incident, which involved multiple models including its newly released GPT-5.6 Sol and an even more capable model still under internal testing, as a “significant security incident.” Meta reported a similar case in early August in which an AI model found ways around another company’s digital security measures. Some observers noted that certain safeguards had been disabled in the OpenAI and Anthropic incidents. Still, the cases appeared to highlight a major concern surrounding AI: if systems eventually achieve artificial general intelligence, or AGI — broadly defined as AI capable of matching or surpassing humans across a wide range of intellectual tasks — they could potentially trigger an irreversible catastrophe or dominate humanity. Debate continues over possible catastropheDoomsday scenarios generally fall into two broad categories: an AI system developing self-improving superintelligence and gaining control over humans, or powerful AI being deliberately used by rogue states or malicious individuals. Concerns that AI could eventually exceed human control are not new. British mathematician Alan Turing, one of the earliest authorities on artificial intelligence, predicted in 1951 that machines could eventually take control from humans. Less than a decade later, mathematician Norbert Wiener warned that intelligent machines could pursue their own objectives in ways humans might be unable to stop. How likely such scenarios are in 2026 remains uncertain. Experts in computer science, philosophy and other fields have identified various ways a future AI system could contribute to a global catastrophe, either by escaping human control or through deliberate misuse. Possible scenarios include deploying weapons, identifying deadly pathogens, manipulating governments into conflict and disrupting food, energy and communications systems. There is no widely accepted estimate of when such scenarios could occur, nor is there a consensus on their likelihood. In 2023, the nonprofit Center for AI Safety issued a statement signed by more than 350 researchers and technology executives, including Amodei and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, calling for reducing the risk of AI-related extinction to be treated as a global priority alongside pandemics and nuclear war. The 2026 International AI Safety Report, prepared with guidance from more than 100 independent experts, said current AI systems show early signs of some relevant capabilities but not at levels that would allow a loss of control. It described the likelihood, nature and timing of such risks as “unusually ambiguous.” Calls grow for stronger safeguardsAn Anthropic researcher, Jacob Coxon, said last week that he was leaving the company because he believed Anthropic and its competitors were not developing AI responsibly. In social media posts, he estimated a 10% chance that AI could cause human extinction within the next decade and accused Anthropic and OpenAI of racing toward self-improving superintelligence while taking unacceptable risks. Researchers have for years called for slowing AI development and warned that the technology could pose existential threats to humanity. Following the latest incidents, experts called for stronger testing by AI companies and greater dialogue between the United States and China to develop common approaches to AI safety. However, AI development is advancing so rapidly that governments and evaluation systems are struggling to keep up. Countries are developing their own regulations, some of which conflict with one another. Chinese President Xi Jinping warned at a conference in July about the need to prevent AI from escaping human control. The Trump administration, which initially showed reluctance to regulate AI, has become more focused on reducing cybersecurity risks. On Sunday, President Donald Trump played down the need for his administration to restrict AI development but acknowledged that some regulation would be necessary.

Green technologies, intelligent equipment and smart mining solutions showcased at the 2026 China Mining Conference and Exhibition are highlighting China's growing role in the global mining industry's shift toward greener and more sustainable practices. The conference and exhibition, held in north China's Tianjin Municipality from Thursday to Saturday, featured autonomous mining trucks, real-time data systems and advanced mineral processing equipment aimed at improving efficiency while reducing energy use and environmental impacts. At the Xinhai Mining booth, a sand-table model demonstrated a smart green mine, with a central control screen displaying real-time data on ore hoisting, equipment loads, tailings pond levels and personnel locations. “Staff can monitor and control the mineral processing plant remotely from a computer screen,” said Zhang Yunlong, chairman of Shandong Xinhai Mining Group Co. Ltd. The company's whole-process smart mining solution has been used in more than 100 countries and regions. Zhang cited a gold mine project in Zimbabwe with a daily processing capacity of 500 tonnes, where a clean-energy supply system covering 100,000 square metres has reduced costs by about 75 percent compared with diesel-based power generation. A new large magnetic separator also attracted attention at the exhibition. Without changing processing capacity or beneficiation requirements, the technology reduces equipment size by about 50 percent and operating energy consumption by around 30 percent, while improving beneficiation indicators by about 20 percent. Beneficiation involves a series of processes through which raw ore is converted into a concentrated product with greater economic value. Li Chaopeng, deputy general manager of LONGi Magnet Co. Ltd., said the equipment has been deployed in more than 70 countries and regions, most recently at an iron ore project in Brazil. “Our equipment uses less energy, recovers more resources from tailings and reduces iron ore waste, better meeting the mining industry's demand for automated and intelligent development,” Li said. The approach has drawn attention from mining professionals outside China. “When I speak to many of our Chinese clients, they take sustainability very seriously. They have very strong sustainability standards,” said Andrew Thake, an Australian mining industry practitioner and divisional director at Beacon Events & Exhibitions. He said China's green mining practices, developed over more than a decade, provide useful examples for pursuing sustainable development under different resource conditions and levels of economic development. China has established institutional, standards and evaluation systems for green mining and has promoted technologies including backfill mining, comprehensive use of solid waste and clean-energy substitution in mining areas. Chinese mining companies are also applying these practices through overseas projects. Zijin Mining, for example, has developed green mines in the Democratic Republic of the Congo based on China's ecological civilization practices. Its green mine in Serbia has also contributed to improved environmental management in mining areas. “I appreciate the efforts China has made in green development and environmental restoration,” said Patricia, a Zimbabwean geospatial analyst. “I have followed some of the environmental restoration projects that have been carried out in China and I think they have been done quite well.” Dmitry Tetenkin, deputy minister of natural resources and environment of the Russian Federation, described green and intelligent industrial development as an urgent priority for the mining sector. “Digital technologies, innovations, rational use of resources and reduction of environmental burden are no longer issues of the distant future, but necessary conditions for the modern mining industry,” he said. “Technological progress must work simultaneously for production efficiency and responsible attitude to the environment.” China's green mining approach also extends to ecological research and conservation. Under the International Big Scientific Plan on Resources and Environmental Effects of Global Karst Dynamic Systems, China has worked with several countries on resource and environmental surveys, carbon-cycle research and ecological protection in karst regions. The efforts have gradually contributed to a global karst monitoring network and explored ways to balance resource development with ecological protection. In Tanzania, a Chinese technical assistance project at the Ngorongoro Lengai geopark has helped improve infrastructure and promote the integrated development of geological research and tourism. Orkotete Lesongoyo, a resident of a village at the foot of Mount Lengai, became a local geological guide after receiving training organized by the geopark. He now introduces visitors from around the world to the geological features of the Lengai volcano. “This project has raised the international profile and influence of Tanzania's tourism resources and created new livelihoods for surrounding residents,” said Ren Junping, director of the Southern Africa Geological Survey Cooperation Center at the Tianjin Center of the China Geological Survey. From green mining and environmental restoration to community development, Chinese practices are providing practical examples for the global mining industry's green transformation, Ren said. The transition toward green and low-carbon development has become a key direction for high-quality growth in the global mining industry. The Tianjin Declaration on Green Development of the Mining Industry, issued at the conference, called on countries, international organisations and other stakeholders to accelerate the industry's transition toward green and low-carbon development and contribute to global sustainable development. Mohamed Noorain, CEO of Kossel Sudan mining enterprises, said China's technologies, standards and management experience in green mine development offer valuable lessons. He expressed hope for stronger exchanges and cooperation between China and other countries, including Sudan, in green mining so that more environmentally friendly technologies and practices can be implemented and contribute to sustainable development in the sector.