The AI company is expected to set its valuation range this week, the Wall Street Journal reported.

OpenAI has banned two sophisticated influence operations, one from Russia and one from Iran, that exploited its AI models for propaganda. The Iranian operation created fake journalist personas to pitch articles to international news outlets and generated social media comments about the US-Iran war. The Russian operation, despite originating from a country with no direct access to OpenAI models, used VPNs to co-opt individuals in Latin America for a fake think tank. Both campaigns successfully infiltrated mainstream media with content, though not all was AI-generated. These operations aimed to launder geopolitical messaging and spread disinformation through deceptive tactics. The Russian group fabricated "leaked" documents and audio, and even orchestrated fake school events using falsified emails to generate outrage and plant misleading stories. For instance, they claimed to have influenced Peruvian and Polish media by fabricating a story about Ukraine promoting ultra-nationalism in Peruvian schools. They also deceptively engineered a ceremony in Ecuador pledging allegiance to President Noboa and Erik Prince, claiming it caused national outrage and government denials. To support these false narratives, they disseminated fake audio recordings attributed to Ukrainian diplomats. These incidents highlight how state actors can leverage accessible AI tools for large-scale propaganda campaigns. OpenAI has identified nearly 100 articles under the Iranian operation's bylines, reaching various global outlets. The Iranian operation's activity intensified after the recent US-Iran war began.

A top executive at the AI lab told the Wall Street Journal that the model in question had displayed a poor aptitude for following orders.

Our 15-month investigation into death and surveillance along the US-Mexico border began with a simple question: Why did so many people die near government surveillance towers meant to help track and apprehend them? This story is part of Dying on Camera, a collaboration between MIT Technology Review and Times of San Diego. Journalists in both newsrooms spent the past…

A new book, "Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle to Remake Public Schools," by Natasha Singer, reveals Silicon Valley's pursuit of influence in computer science and AI education. The book details the efforts of Code.org and its leader, Hadi Partovi, who warned of economic consequences for those not learning to code. Singer notes similarities between the current AI push and past tech initiatives in schools, despite increased public distrust of Big Tech. Parents are concerned about excessive tech use and social media's impact on children. However, tech companies like Microsoft, OpenAI, and Google are actively seeking to integrate their AI tools into schools. Despite past promises of educational revolutions from various technologies, Singer expresses concern over a lack of learned lessons and collective amnesia regarding these cycles. She questions why schools aren't critically examining the AI push based on prior experiences. The book cites contributions from a specific Slashdot reader, theodp. Ironically, one Amazon Vine reviewer misunderstood the book's critical stance, recommending it as a positive introduction to coding for children.

A University of California, Berkeley math professor, Zvezdelina Stankova, wrote an op-ed in the San Francisco Standard criticizing a significant math deficiency in students. She claimed some students were years behind in basic math skills. Stankova attributed this issue to the UC system's test-blind admissions policy, arguing it allowed underprepared students to enroll. Journalists from the Daily Californian suspected AI assistance in the op-ed's writing. They used AI detection software, which indicated a portion of the text may have been AI-generated. Stankova admitted to using AI for editing and to find relevant documents, but maintained the analysis was human-driven. The San Francisco Standard stated their expectation is that humans author and are responsible for all published content. They understood Stankova's op-ed represented her and her colleagues' original research. The controversy questions whether the op-ed should have been entirely free of AI and if the AI use distracts from the core argument. Stankova's op-ed noted a threefold increase in students with severe readiness deficits for calculus I after test-blind admissions. She believes the removal of standardized tests like the SAT prevented proper assessment of student preparedness.

일기장 앱이 단순한 기록을 넘어 내 말을 알아듣고 대화하는 시대가 왔습니다. 최근 데이원이 신규 골드 요금제를 발표하며 AI 요약과 음성 대화 기능을 선보였는데요. 연 74.99달러라는 꽤 나가는 가격표에도 사람들의 관심이 쏠리는 이유가 있습니다. 과연 이 기능들이 기록에 어떤

An automatic journal is a diary that exists whether you write in it or not. Here is what is in one, and why it only became possible recently.

Rosebud, Mindsera, Reflect, and deariary all use AI for journaling. But they use it in completely different ways. Here is how the landscape breaks down.