Sure! Here’s an SEO-optimized rewrite of your content while keeping the HTML tags intact:
AI Tools for Women’s Health: Incomplete Answers
Oscar Wong/Getty Images
Current AI models frequently struggle to provide accurate diagnoses or advice for pressing women’s health inquiries.
Thirteen AI language models from OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, Mistral AI, and xAI were assessed with 345 medical questions spanning five fields, including emergency medicine, gynecology, and neurology. These questions were curated by 17 experts in women’s health, pharmacists, and clinicians from the US and Europe.
Expert reviewers analyzed the AI responses, cross-referencing failures against a medical expertise benchmark which includes 96 queries.
On average, 60% of the queries yielded inadequate responses based on expert evaluations. Notably, GPT-5 was the strongest performer, with a 47% failure rate, while Mistral 8B exhibited a significant 73% failure rate.
“I see more women using AI for health queries and decision support,” says Victoria-Elizabeth Gruber, a representative from Lumos AI, a firm focused on enhancing AI model assessments. She and her colleagues recognized the potential dangers of relying on technology that perpetuates existing gender imbalances in medical knowledge. “This inspired us to establish the first benchmark in this domain,” she explains.
Gruber expressed surprise over the high failure rates, stating, “We anticipated some disparities, but the variability among models was striking.”
This outcome is not unexpected, according to Kara Tannenbaum at the University of Montreal, Canada, as AI models are trained on historical data that may inherently contain biases. “It’s crucial for online health information sources and professional associations to enhance their web content with more detailed, evidence-based insights related to sex and gender to better inform AI,” she emphasizes.
Jonathan H. Chen from Stanford University notes that the claimed 60% failure rate may be misleading. “This figure is based on a limited expert-defined sample, which does not accurately represent regular inquiries from patients and doctors,” he asserts. “Some test scenarios are overly cautious and can lead to higher failure rates.” For instance, if a postpartum woman reports a headache, the model might fail if pre-eclampsia isn’t immediately suspected.
Gruber acknowledges such critiques, clarifying, “Our intent was not to label the model as broadly unsafe but to establish clear, clinically relevant evaluation criteria. We purposefully set strict benchmarks as minor omissions in the medical field can be significant in some cases.”
An OpenAI representative stated: “ChatGPT aims to support, not replace, healthcare services. We closely collaborate with clinicians globally to refine our models and continuously evaluate them to minimize harmful or misleading output. Our latest GPT-5.2 models are designed to consider critical user contexts, including gender. We take the accuracy of our outputs seriously, and while ChatGPT can offer valuable insights, we advise consulting qualified healthcare providers for treatment and care decisions.” Other companies involved in the study did not respond to requests for comments from New Scientist.
Topics:
This rewrite optimizes the content for SEO by naturally incorporating keywords related to AI in women’s health, improving clarity, and emphasizing critical insights throughout the piece.
Is it possible to fully comprehend brain function if we can accurately map its structures? Researchers aim to develop a wiring diagram, or connectome, of our neural pathways, yet the task of unveiling the brain’s mysteries is proving to be complex.
The Connectome serves as a roadmap for nerve signal pathways, but Sophie Dovari from Princeton University and her team have found notable gaps in these pathways.
Researchers analyzed the connectome of the nematode worm, Caenorhabditis elegans, and compared it to recorded neural signals. They accomplished this by stimulating each neuron and observing how signals flowed through the connectome. This method is feasible with nematodes due to their relatively simple nervous system, composed of roughly 300 neurons.
Nematode worms are significantly simpler than humans, with approximately 300 neurons depicted in green
Heiti Paves / Alamy Stock Photo
By viewing these two datasets as mathematical networks, researchers can ascertain whether closely connected groups of neurons manifest a high frequency of signal exchanges. They uncovered that this correlation is not always evident.
Dvali notes instances of substantial connection density and overlapping signal exchanges, like how worms eat or the groups of neurons that correspond well. However, even in cases where they appeared significantly connected, a gap remained in understanding their respective functionalities across both networks. Overall, these findings suggest that the biological connectome is insufficient to predict all neural behaviors.
Team member Andrew Leifer, also from Princeton University, points out that signals do not always follow the shortest paths between neurons; some may communicate beyond their direct connections. “While we typically leverage connectomes for research, the multitude of useful connections calls for deeper comprehension,” he explains.
According to Albert Laslo Barabasi at Northeastern University, Massachusetts, criticism surrounding connectomics often revolves around its inability to provide action-oriented insights from structural data. This new paper seeks to address that challenge.
Looking forward, researchers aim to delve deeper into how signals disseminate through the connectome when multiple neurons are activated simultaneously, with aspirations to study more complex organisms, such as fruit fly larvae, recognized for their intricate neural networks. “We are on the verge of a revolution in brain mapping,” Barabasi concludes.
bThe Polish developers behind the overlooked psychological thriller The Medium from 2021, along with last year’s impressive Silent Hill 2 remake, clearly grasp the almost rhythmic essence of survival horror games. It’s perplexing to witness this latest release shine in many aspects while simultaneously stumbling in some of the genre’s foundational principles.
Players take on the role of travelers sent to investigate a catastrophic outbreak that has turned the residents of a town named New Doon into nightmarish figures, typical of Science Fiction-adjacent survival horror. Delve into the ruins of a beautifully devastated scenario and seek out places to spend your time traveling. The narrative unfolds slowly through a familiar mix of audio logs, chaotic elements, and signs of harsh environments, often depicted with bloodstains on the walls.
Unfortunately, this intriguing premise cannot uphold the weight of Chronos’ series of baffling missteps. Instead of cultivating a sense of claustrophobic dread, it opts for overwhelming, frantic impulses, sparking a need for creative expressions of frustration.
Moody Blues…Chronos: A new dawn. Photo: Bloober Team
The superb sound design effectively instills a sense of waiting in the dark, plagued by hunger. The problems arise when you confront the monsters. One of the initial foes ambushes you in a tight space, and you’re downed in mere hits. Your only defense is a weak weapon and an aim that seems to flail in every direction, making you realize how to cheese your way through until you meet your demise—only to repeat the cycle. This maddening dance persists throughout the entire 14-hour journey.
This complaint is somewhat alleviated when ample ammunition and health-restoring items are provided, creating a semblance of having narrowly escaped death. However, you’re often thrust into battles with overwhelming monsters armed for combat, with limited health and resources, leaving no viable strategy. Attempts to introduce challenges devolve into frustrating designs riddled with issues.
The inventory system doesn’t help matters; even the most dedicated survival horror fans will find themselves sacrificing precious bullets to carry keycards to progress or waste time moving between storage points to retrieve items. This doesn’t build tension; instead, it fosters tedious tasks.
The most exasperating aspect is the presence of a striking core. Despite its time travel themes, Chronos: New Dawn isn’t wholly original. I find I’ve navigated these dark hallways of hospitals, factories, and apartment buildings before; however, they exhibit stunning visuals and often engage when upgrading your weapons. When everything aligns, it delivers the gruesome body horror experience you seek. Yet, it too often shoves you into another overly punishing fight against resilient foes, replacing fear with sheer frustration.
Organizers of the Great North Run have issued an apology for featuring a map of Sunderland instead of Newcastle on this year’s finishing medal. Unfortunately, this is just one in a long list of mapping errors.
Other notable mistakes include the Phantom supermarket, hazardous climbing routes, and geopolitical missteps.
Phantom Aldi
Earlier this year, the Welsh village of Siphiliog in Denbyshire faced unexpected traffic disruptions after Aldi appeared on the map.
A nearby farm, home to around 500 residents, was mistakenly labeled as a supermarket on Google Maps, leading to a surge of shoppers and milk tankers overwhelming the area.
In response, Google stated it operated “around the clock” to monitor suspicious activities and updated the listing.
Geopolitical Failure
In December, FIFA expressed regret over the omission of Crimea from Ukraine in its mapping.
While the map outlined countries unable to compete due to political tensions, it failed to acknowledge Russian-occupied regions recognized internationally as part of Ukraine since 2014.
“We fully appreciate the sensitivity surrounding this issue and though unintentional, we sincerely regret any distress it may have caused,” the organization stated in a letter to Igor Grishenko, the UAF’s general secretary.
Bennevis’ Dangerous Route
In 2021, Google Maps revised the directions for Bennevis, the UK’s tallest mountain, after warnings about potentially “fatal” paths.
The Scottish climbing charity, John Muir Trust, cautioned that the map’s directions for the nearest parking area to the summit were dangerously misleading, especially for novice climbers, leading them onto treacherous routes without alternative paths.
Google responded by clarifying that the issue pertained to driving routes, not walking directions, and updated the map to direct drivers to visitor centers instead.
At last year’s San Francisco Half Marathon, the course was mistakenly found to be short by 0.5 miles, affecting the times of thousands of runners.
Organizers claimed the route was measured accurately, but the certification map was incorrect, resulting in various discrepancies.
This was not the first instance of a mismeasured race; between 2013 and 2015, the Greater Manchester Marathon was mapped incorrectly, marking it 380 meters short. Consequently, the times of approximately 24,000 runners were deemed invalid by British athletics.
Similar issues have also arisen in past events, including the Brighton Half Marathon and the Great Scotland Run.
Taking the Wrong Steps
Google corrected a mapping error in Edinburgh after drivers were wrongly guided down a flight of steps. This route was previously accessible by vehicles, but changes in the roads had led to the installation of stairs, resulting in at least two cars getting stuck at the bottom of Calton Hill. In January, Google announced that the mapping issue had been fixed.
The MethaneSAT satellite, which was anticipated to revolutionize tracking methane emissions, has experienced a loss of contact less than a year and a half after its launch.
MethaneSAT stated that it “probably cannot recover.” A statement from the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the non-profit managing the satellite, confirmed this loss as a significant setback in efforts to monitor and mitigate methane emissions, which are responsible for a third of the anthropogenic increase in global temperatures.
Upon its launch in March 2024, MethaneSAT contributed to a growing constellation of satellites aimed at detecting invisible methane emissions from principal sources like oil and gas facilities, livestock operations, landfills, and wetlands. While several satellites focus on specific emissions, MethaneSAT is uniquely equipped to assess methane concentrations on a broader scale, making it particularly effective in identifying emissions from fossil fuel extraction.
This capability was designed for estimating methane emissions in well-known fossil fuel production areas, such as the Permian Basin in the southwestern United States, as well as aiding efforts to identify and contain significant sources of potent greenhouse gases.
“That’s a considerable loss,” commented Jason McKeever from Ghgsat, a Canadian company that intended to utilize MethaneSAT data for strategic guidance on satellite deployment. “MethaneSAT was uniquely positioned in its designated mid-orbit.”
The satellite, which cost nearly $100 million to develop and launch, began its data collection in June 2024 and produced its first detection of methane in the oil and gas basin by November 2024. Researchers were exploring automation for data processing; the satellite, which orbits the Earth 15 times a day, promised near real-time emissions data.
“We had just begun a routine of releasing data every two weeks,” stated John Coifman of the Environmental Defense Fund. “The data produced by the satellites was incredibly valuable.”
According to an EDF announcement, mission operations lost communication with the satellite on June 20th. “After exploring all avenues to reestablish contact, we regret to inform that the satellite has lost power,” the statement read.
The MethaneSAT team is currently investigating the circumstances surrounding the incident. Meanwhile, they continue to disseminate the data collected prior to the loss of power, alongside the algorithms developed for analysis.
“We are considering various options,” Coifman remarked, indicating that reactivating another satellite remains a possibility.
Few can easily embrace the desire for revenge, yet it’s undeniable that some of us are drawn to it.
From President Donald Trump’s advocacy against what he perceives as the “cancel culture” in social media, to the potential motivation behind the cutting down of the iconic British Sycamore Gap Tree, the concept of revenge certainly appears to be more influential than love as a force for change in the world. One might even ponder if it borders on an addiction.
James Kimmel Jr. is passionate about uncovering solutions. Convinced that if our world cannot become more compassionate, we must take action. His new book, The Science of Revenge: Understanding the World’s Most Fatal Addiction – and How to Overcome It, represents a culmination of his efforts over the past decade to delve deep into the neuroscience of revenge and its devastating costs.
One cannot overlook Kimmel’s impressive credentials as a psychiatry instructor at Yale University, where he leads research on motivation and behavioral control. As a former civil litigator who dealt with non-criminal disputes, he witnessed firsthand how the legal system can be manipulated to settle personal scores and punish perceived adversaries, particularly by those in positions of wealth and influence.
Kimmel gained insight into these impulses through his experiences. Growing up in rural Pennsylvania during the early 1980s, he faced bullying and had his family extorted. Their dogs were killed, and after an explosion involving their mailbox, a teenage Kimmel found himself grappling with these pressures, though he refrained from acting violently.
Nevertheless, he admits that his unresolved grievances led him to pursue a career in law—a “professional revenge business.” Following a mental breakdown, he began to study what he refers to as “revenge addiction,” ultimately shifting his focus toward psychiatric treatment.
Today, Kimmel identifies as a “recovering revenge addict” and a determined researcher aiming to present a case for viewing “obsessive revenge” as both an addiction and a neurological disorder.
Kimmel posits that the desire for revenge is experienced in some brains similarly to the effects of drugs.
He argues that such cravings activate the brain’s reward pathways, blunting impulse control and acting as a biological response akin to pain relief and pleasure. This notion not only clarifies the “urge to retaliate” but also implies a possible method to mitigate violence. By identifying individuals who often feel victimized, professionals may preemptively address grievances, potentially curbing mass shootings and other tragic acts of violence.
To substantiate his assertions, Kimmel references numerous studies on reward, revenge, and forgiveness. He takes an insightful approach toward their limitations and addresses skepticism from experts.
However, his interpretation of revenge as a catalyst for “all wars, murders, and assaults throughout human history” could polarize readers and spark debate.
Kimmel acknowledges the role of “genetic predispositions, early traumas, or psychosocial factors,” asserting that revenge addiction shouldn’t excuse violent behaviors. Yet, this notion can mistakenly arise, particularly when he compares a potentially lethal “yearning for revenge” to the seriousness of heart attacks.
This perspective may be perplexing and insensitive. Kimmel is most compelling when recounting stories of individuals who have freed themselves from lives dominated by hatred. Yet, his fixation on revenge as the sole origin of evil tends to overlook the complexities of other contributing factors, such as misogyny and childhood abuse.
His analysis of the motivations behind the actions of mass murderers and historical figures like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong feels overly simplistic when framed solely through the lens of revenge addiction. While revenge has undoubtedly appeared as a motivating force throughout history, Kimmel might be too close to his central theme to fully appreciate its multifaceted nature.
Elle Hunt is a writer based in Norwich, UK
New Scientist Book Club
Are you a fan of reading? Join a welcoming community of fellow book enthusiasts. Every six weeks, we explore fascinating new titles, with members enjoying exclusive access to excerpts, author articles, and video interviews.
The parents of the family were left devastated when their aspirations for change were dashed after they sought to safeguard their children in the Colorado Legislature last month and online activism targeting a drug dealer resulted in tragedy.
Among those parents was Lori Shot, who was instrumental in crafting the bill. Her 18-year-old daughter Annaly tragically took her own life in 2020 after engaging with content on TikTok and Instagram related to depression, anxiety, and suicide.
“When lawmakers sidestep votes and shift discussions to an insubstantial calendar date without accountability, it feels like a betrayal to us as parents.” “It’s a betrayal to my daughter and to all the other children we’ve lost.”
Had the law been enacted, it would have necessitated investigations and the removal of accounts engaged in gun and drug sales, or the sexual exploitation and human trafficking of minors on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok. It also required a dedicated hotline for law enforcement and a 72-hour response timeframe for police inquiries, which would significantly increase obligations compared to current legal standards.
Additionally, the platforms would have had to report on the usage statistics of minors, including how often and for how long they interacted with content violating company policies. Several major tech firms have taken official stances regarding the bill. As noted in Colorado’s lobbying records, Meta’s long-time lobbying firm, Headwater Strategies, has registered its support for revising the bill. Conversely, Google and TikTok employed lobbyists to oppose it.
‘[Legislators] chose self-interest over the protection of children and families. ” Illustration: Andrei Cojocaru/Guardian
“We are deeply disheartened,” said Kim Osterman, whose 18-year-old son Max died in 2021. “[Legislators] prioritized their own interests over the safety of my children and family.”
Protection for Social Media Users (SB 25-086) passed both legislative chambers, only to be vetoed by Democrat Governor Jared Polis on April 24th. His veto was justified by concerns that the bill would “erode privacy, freedom, and innovation.” On April 25, the Colorado Senate voted to override the veto, but on April 28, the House chose to delay the vote until the end of the legislative session, effectively blocking the override and keeping the bill alive.
Originally, the bill had passed the Senate with a 29-6 margin and the House with a 46-18 margin. On April 25, the Senate voted 29-6 for an override, and lawmakers anticipated that the House would take up the matter later that day, believing that there was enough bipartisan support to successfully overturn the veto.
“It was a straightforward vote for people because our goal was clear: to safeguard children from the predatory practices of social media companies,” remarked Senator Lindsey Dorgerty, a Democrat and co-sponsor of the bill. She expressed her disappointment that House leaders chose to sidestep the vote on Friday.
Advocating parents blamed the failure of the bill on an unexpected 11-hour lobbying blitz by The Far Right Gun Owners Association in Colorado. Two state legislators and seven other legislative participants corroborated the parents’ claims.
An unprecedented last-minute campaign disrupts bipartisan consensus
The owner of Rocky Mountain Guns (RMGO) characterized the bill as government censorship related to the statute against “ghost guns” assembled from kits purchased online.
RMGO initiated an extensive social media and email campaign, rallying its 200,000 members to contact lawmakers and voice their opposition to the bill. Sources familiar with the workings of the Colorado State Capitol explained that the gun group’s outreach included social media and text campaigns that encouraged Republican constituents to reach out to their representatives in opposition.
“[Legislators] were inundated with calls and emails from activists. It was an all-out assault. A campaign declared, ‘This is a government censorship bill,'” they stated.
The group’s actions contributed to efforts preventing Republicans from backing the veto override, leading to the bill’s demise. According to ten individuals involved in the bill’s development and the legislative process, this lobbying effort appeared unexpectedly robust, fueled by organizations that had previously faced financial constraints. An anonymous source from the Colorado State Capitol shared insights with the Guardian, citing fears of retaliation from RMGO.
The House of Representatives postponed its vote until April 28th, providing RMGO time to amplify its campaign over the weekend. When lawmakers reconvened on Monday, the House voted 51-13 to delay the override until the legislative session concluded, effectively dissolving the effort.
“It was a coordinated full-scale attack proclaiming this as a government censorship bill.” Illustration: Andrei Cojocaru/Guardian
A significant text messaging initiative targeted registered Republican voters, alleging that the social media bill “forces platforms to enforce extensive surveillance of content shared on their platforms,” claiming violations of Colorado’s gun laws, and framing the legislation as an affront to First and Second Amendment rights, according to texts reviewed by the Guardian.
A recurring adversary
Established in 1996, RMGO claims a membership exceeding 200,000 activists. It is recognized as a far-right organization staunchly opposed to regulations on firearms. Dudley Brown, its founder and leader president of the National Gun Rights Association, diverges significantly from the perspective of the National Rifle Association (NRA). RMGO is criticized for employing tactics labeled as “bullying” and “extremist” against both Democrats and moderate Republicans. The group has not responded to requests for commentary regarding legislative measures.
RMGO is a well-known presence at the Colorado State Capitol, typically opposing gun control measures. Daugherty described their usual campaign tactics as “intimidating.” Following backlash for her involvement in a bill banning assault weapons earlier this year, she deactivated her social media account.
“While advocating for gun legislation at the Capitol, RMGO published images of me and other legislators on their website,” she noted. An RMGO tweet depicted Daugherty alongside a bold “Traitor” stamp.
The group disseminated misinformation regarding the bill’s implications on gun ownership, as reported by sources who participated in the legislative discussions.
“My support for the bill and the veto override stemmed from concerns about child trafficking and safeguarding children,” stated Republican Senator Rod Pelton, who voted in favor of overriding the veto in the Senate. “I did not subscribe to the entire argument pertaining to the second amendment.”
The bill garnered support from 23 district attorneys in Colorado as well as bipartisan backing from the state House of Representatives.
RMGO’s late-stage opposition to the social media bill deviated from its usual tactics. Typically, the organization weighs in on legislation early in the process, according to eight sources, including co-sponsors Daugherty and Representative Andy Boesenecker.
“Their surge of focused efforts caught my attention,” Boesenecker remarked. “It was curious to note that their resistance materialized so late in the process and appeared to be well-financed.”
In recent years, RMGO has experienced reduced activity attributed to financial difficulties that limited their legislative campaigning capacity. In a 2024 interview, the organization’s leader candidly acknowledged struggles with fundraising. Daugherty believes RMGO’s capacity for such a substantial outreach campaign would be unlikely without considerable funding. Others within Colorado’s political landscape echoed this sentiment.
“The Rocky Mountain Gun Owners had been largely ineffective in the legislature for several years due to financial constraints. Suddenly, they increased their influence, seemingly backed by substantial funds,” said Dawn Reinfeld, from a Colorado-based nonprofit focused on youth rights.
This context caused lawmakers to feel pressured, especially concerning primary elections in their districts, following RMGO’s recent social media attacks on supporters of the bill.
“The bill had given me hope that Avery’s legacy would make a difference, and its failure was incredibly disappointing.” Illustration: Andrei Cojocaru/Guardian
“There was a palpable concern among many about party affiliation; it certainly played a role,” remarked Dorgerty.
Aaron Ping’s 16-year-old son, Avery, passed away from an overdose in December after buying what he believed to be ecstasy on Snapchat, only to receive a substance laced with fentanyl instead. Ping viewed the organized opposition to the bill as a purposeful distortion.
“The narrative painted the bill as an infringement on gun rights, depicting it as merely a tool for targeting people purchasing illegal firearms online,” he stated.
Ping had testified in support of the bill alongside other families, recovering teens, and district attorneys back in February before the initial Senate vote.
“This bill carried the hope that Avery’s legacy would incite change; its rejection was truly disheartening,” Ping shared.
In the absence of federal action, states initiate online child safety legislation
A number of states, including California, Maryland, Vermont, Minnesota, Hawaii, Illinois, New Mexico, South Carolina, and Nevada, have introduced legislation over the past two years aimed at enhancing online safety for minors. These initiatives encounter vigorous resistance from the technology sector, which includes extensive lobbying efforts and legal challenges.
Maryland successfully passed the Children’s Code bill in May 2024, marking it as the first state to enact such legislation. However, this victory may be short-lived. The high-tech industry coalition, NetChoice, representing companies such as Meta, Google, and Amazon, has already launched legal challenges against these measures.
In the meanwhile, federal efforts have stalled, with the Children’s Online Safety Act (KOSA) faltering in February after failing to pass the House despite years of modifications and deliberations. A newly revised version of the bill was reintroduced in Congress on May 14th.
California’s similar initiative, the age-appropriate design code law, which mirrors UK legislation, was halted in late 2023 following a NetChoice injunction citing potential First Amendment infringements.
The Trump administration has publicly stated that Russia is not considered a cyber threat to US national security or critical infrastructure, marking a significant departure from previous assessments.
Experts warn that this policy shift could leave the US vulnerable to Russian hacking attacks and may signal warming relations between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Recent incidents indicate that the US no longer views Russia as a cybersecurity threat.
Liesyl Franz, the State Department’s deputy director of international cybersecurity, did not mention Russia as a threat in her recent speech before the UN Working Group on Cybersecurity. This contrasts with statements from European Union and UK officials who highlighted the threat posed by Moscow.
US policy changes regarding cybersecurity have been made behind closed doors, with new directives focusing on China and neglecting to mention Russia.
Anonymous sources familiar with the matter have expressed concern that the US is ignoring the Russian cyber threat, which was previously a primary focus for agencies like the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).
Reports indicate that CISA officials have been reassigned, raising questions about the US government’s approach to protecting against cyber threats from Russia.
The New York Times reported that CISA officials tasked with safeguarding elections from cyberattacks have also been reassigned.
Concerns have been raised about the shift in US policy towards Russia, as many believe that Russia remains a significant cyber threat to US interests.
The CISA and State Department have not provided comments on these developments.
The change in US policy regarding Russia’s cyber threat is seen as a departure from previous assessments and has raised concerns among experts.
For over a quarter-century, Putin’s Russia has been active in cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns, posing a challenge to the international order.
If you have any tips about this story, you can reach out to us at +1 646 886 8761 on Signal
Alphabet, Google’s parent company, saw a drop of over 6% following the release of its quarterly results on Tuesday. The company reported revenue of $96.5 billion, slightly below analysts’ expectations of $96.67 billion. While Alphabet exceeded investors’ earnings per share (EPS) expectation of $2.13 by reporting $2.15, the company highlighted a strong fourth quarter led by AI advancements and overall business momentum.
Revenue breakdown included $84 billion from Google Search and services, with $12 billion from YouTube advertising and cloud revenue. Analysts are closely watching Alphabet’s competitive position in AI search and cloud revenues amidst growing competition from players like Chinese DeepSeek and OpenAI.
The company’s deceleration reflects a challenging year for Google, raising concerns about its future competitiveness. Alphabet plans to invest $750 billion in capital spending in the coming year to further develop AI and infrastructure.
Despite ongoing AI development efforts across the industry, Alphabet remains focused on AI innovation with a significant investment plan. The company aims to leverage its AI capabilities for monetization in the coming years.
Concerns about rising AI costs and their impact on Alphabet’s AI advertising strategy have emerged in light of recent developments. Analysts are closely monitoring how these developments will shape Alphabet’s future AI initiatives and competitiveness.
Additionally, Alphabet remains committed to responsible AI development practices, emphasizing the importance of democracy, human rights, and global cooperation in AI leadership. The company reaffirms its commitment to using AI for positive impact and national security.
Legal challenges, including antitrust investigations, pose further uncertainties for Alphabet’s future. The Ministry of Justice’s case against a major search company raises concerns about potential regulatory actions that could affect the tech industry.
In light of geopolitical tensions, particularly with China, Alphabet faces additional challenges as regulatory scrutiny intensifies. China’s response to tariff announcements and antitrust investigations adds to the uncertain outlook for Google.
Apple has lost its high-profile 13 billion euro (11 billion pounds) Irish tax battle with the EU, but the ruling will bolster efforts by the European Commission to crack down on “preferential” tax regimes favoring multinational companies.
The long-awaited ruling from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) came after a years-long legal battle over whether the European Commission was right in 2016 to demand the return of 13 billion euros of “illegal” tax breaks given to Apple for giving the iPhone maker an unfair advantage.
ECJ (European Court of Justice) The verdict was given The Commission argued that a lower court ruling in favor of Apple should be overturned, upholding a 2016 European Commission decision that found Ireland had provided unlawful assistance to Apple in the tax treatment of profits from Apple’s activities outside the United States and that Ireland was required to recoup the money.
In 2020, a lower court, the General Court, annulled the 2016 European Commission decision, finding that it had not been sufficiently established that Apple’s subsidiaries enjoyed a selective advantage. That ruling has now been set aside by the European Court of Justice, which has confirmed the European Commission’s 2016 decision.
The ruling was a victory for EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, who concluded: 2016 The iPhone maker benefited from billions of dollars worth of unfair tax breaks from the Irish government.
Vestager, who is due to step down this year, has been seen as a tough enforcer who has boldly taken on powerful multinationals such as Fiat, Amazon and Starbucks over their tax claims. But some of the cases have not stood the test of time, with a 2022 ruling against Fiat that was later overturned.
The case brings to an end a years-long legal battle that began in 2016 when the European Commission ordered Apple to pay billions of euros for significant underpayment of tax on profits from 2003 to 2014. Apple, which has had its European headquarters in Cork since 1980, was found by the EU’s competition watchdog to have benefited from a tax ruling by Irish authorities and to have paid an effective tax rate of 0.005 percent in 2014.
Apple has denied the accusations, saying the government aid money had not been paid, and CEO Tim Cook said: It is called The claim is “political nonsense.”
Apple challenged the Commission at the General Court, the EU’s second-highest court, and won. Conclusion In July 2020, Brussels ruled that Apple had failed to prove that it had obtained an illegal economic benefit in terms of tax in Ireland.
The Commission appealed, and last year the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice, Giovanni Pitruzzella, recommended that the Commission overturn the General Court’s earlier ruling. Advocate General Pitruzzella said the General Court had made an error of law and needed to carry out a new assessment. He recommended that the European Court of Justice remit the case back to the General Court for a new ruling on the substance of the case.
Pitruzella’s recommendation was not legally binding and did not have to be followed by the ECJ, but the attorney general’s opinion carries great weight and usually influences the court’s final decision.
Following the ECJ ruling, Apple said: “This case is not about how much tax we pay, but which government we owe tax to. We have always paid all taxes wherever we do business and have never had any special arrangements. Apple is a driver of growth and innovation in Europe and around the world, and we are proud to have consistently been one of the world’s largest taxpayers.”
“The European Commission is seeking to change the rules retroactively, ignoring the fact that our income is already subject to tax in the United States under international tax law. We are disappointed by today’s decision because the European Court of Justice previously reviewed the facts and invalidated this case in its entirety.”
Meanwhile, the ECJ It also ruled He upheld the 2.4 billion euro fine imposed by the European Commission against Google in an antitrust case. Whether Google falsely favored its online shopping service. In this case, the Attorney General said In January, the ECJ ruled that Google’s appeal should be dismissed.
Google said: “We are disappointed with the court’s decision, which concerns very specific facts. We made changes in 2017 to comply with the European Commission’s decision. Our approach has been successful for more than seven years, generating billions of clicks across over 800 comparison shopping services.”
Three years ago, Google launched an ambitious plan to address climate change, aiming to achieve “net zero” emissions by 2030. This goal entails not emitting more climate-affecting gases into the atmosphere than it removes.
However, a recent report released by Google indicated that it is far from reaching this objective. Emissions are projected to increase by 13% in 2023 compared to the previous year and have surged by 48% since the base year of 2019.
The company attributes last year’s emission growth to electricity-intensive agriculture. The burning of coal or natural gas for electricity production releases greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane, contributing to global warming and more extreme weather events.
Despite being a leader in climate change initiatives, Google faces challenges in meeting its net-zero target. Experts suggest that the rapid expansion of data centers, which require significant energy and resources, could hinder the transition to clean electricity and exacerbate climate change.
To address these issues, Google’s chief sustainability officer, Kate Brandt, emphasized the need for continued evolution and innovation in the company’s approach. She acknowledged the uncertainties surrounding the environmental impact of AI and the importance of partnering with cleaner companies and investing in sustainable practices.
Ultimately, achieving a net-zero goal by 2030 will require concerted efforts and collaboration across industries to accelerate the transition to clean energy sources and mitigate the effects of climate change.
Google’s commitment to using renewable energy and implementing energy-efficient practices in its data centers and offices is a step in the right direction. However, there is a need for ongoing improvement and collaboration to address the challenges posed by climate change.
SpaceX’s third and most ambitious Starship test flight appears to have been at least partially successful today, as it reached space, conducted fuel transfer tests, and traveled farther and faster than ever before. It looked like. However, the spacecraft failed to make its planned landing and appears to have either self-destructed or burned up in Earth’s atmosphere.
After launching from SpaceX’s property in Boca Chica, Texas, the first and second stages separate cleanly and the first stage (the booster that lifts the craft during the first part of its journey) descends to land at sea. started. SpaceX ultimately intends to recover and reuse both stages, but these early test flights are slated for a safer, easier water landing for both.
The first stage steered itself downhill, but seemed to struggle to slow its fall as intended and appeared to hit the sea at breakneck speed.
The second stage reached an altitude of approximately 230 kilometers and successfully opened and closed the payload door as a test. It was also possible to swap fuel from one tank to another, an experimental first step towards eventually refueling from one spacecraft to another. This is essential for long-range missions.
However, during reentry, the spacecraft reached such high temperatures that live video showed glowing plasma around the surface, and both video and telemetry data were lost.
The spacecraft would attempt to reignite the Raptor engines, something never before done in space, as it entered the atmosphere in a controlled manner at about 27,000 kilometers per hour. However, the relighting portion of this mission was omitted by the company, and the spacecraft was subsequently lost.
A view of SpaceX’s Starship taken nine minutes into the mission.
space x
US Federal Aviation Administration permission granted In preparation for the test flight on March 13th, the day before the scheduled launch date, tweeted SpaceX said it “met all safety, environmental, policy and financial responsibility requirements.”
starship It is the most powerful rocket ever made. The 121-meter-long ship consists of her two stages, a booster and a spacecraft, both of which are designed to be reusable, keeping costs down and allowing quick turnaround between flights. Masu.
Starship heated up during re-entry into Earth’s atmosphere after a flight of approximately 47 minutes, leading to the loss of the spacecraft.
space x
Today’s announcement marks the company’s third Starship announcement. In the first test in April last year, the first and second stages exploded before they separated, and in the test in November, the upper second stage reached space, but, which self-destructed when it stopped transmitting data, following the explosion of the first stage. Immediately after separation.
The ultimate goal of this project is to land humans on the moon and later on Mars.
Climate change protester Risipriya Kangujam takes the stage during the COP28 debate on December 11th
Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto via Getty Image
The COP28 climate summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, has gone into extra time, with a real possibility that negotiations will fail given how far countries are separated on the future of oil, gas, and coal. It has become a target. But whatever the outcome, this summit changed the way the world talks about fossil fuels and climate change.
“The calculations are being made for fossil fuels,” he says. David Waskow at the World Resources Institute, an environmental nonprofit organization. “This has put the issue front and center and changed the conversation around it, and I hope that will continue to be the case.”
At the summit, and in the months leading up to it, many countries and many civil society organizations lobbied for strong language on phasing out fossil fuels in any deal reached in Dubai. The phasing out of fossil fuels received unexpected attention near the end of last year’s COP27 summit in Egypt, but the role of fossil fuels in driving climate change as a major source of greenhouse gas emissions has never been more important. There has never been a COP with such continuous focus.
“Even a year ago, the historic debate on phasing out fossil fuels currently taking place at COP28 was completely unthinkable,” he says. Jonas Kuehl At the International Institute for Sustainable Development, Canada. “The joint efforts of nearly 130 countries and civil society forced them into a process that has been fruitless for many years.”
The draft core agreement, published on December 11, drew heavy criticism from a number of countries and organizations yesterday for not mentioning the phasing out of fossil fuels. However, the draft does mention the need to reduce the production and use of fossil fuels and makes two other references to these fuels. This alone represents a significant change from past summits, which referred to emissions but not major sources.
“This is the first COP to actually include the word fossil fuels in a draft decision,” he said. Mohamed Addo At Powershift Africa, a Kenyan energy think tank. “This is the beginning of the end of the fossil fuel era.”
Summit participants are fundamentally divided on what should be included in the agreement. High-income Western countries, as well as small island states and some low-income countries such as Colombia and Kenya, are demanding stronger language on ending the use of fossil fuels to be part of the agreement. We are united. But countries that rely on oil and gas revenues, and those that consider fossil fuel development essential to future development, oppose disqualifying language.
“The United States, Canada, and Australia are all fossil fuel producers, but they are all perfectly aligned with European countries,” he says. Andrew Deutz At the Nature Conservancy. “This puts even more pressure on fossil fuel producing countries.”
Countries that oppose language phasing do so for a variety of reasons. For example, the Group of African States, while not totally opposed to such an agreement, recognizes that any agreement would have different responsibilities and timelines for phase-out, and that it is important for countries to implement energy transitions. It claims to provide support to do so.
“Asking Africa to phase out fossil fuels is like asking Africa to stop breathing without life support,” Nigeria’s Environment Minister Isiak Kunle Salako said at a press conference at the summit on December 12. African ministers also emphasized the need for further support. This is to adapt to the climate change that is already occurring.
Nigeria is part of a group of oil-exporting countries called OPEC, and its members, especially Saudi Arabia, have been the strongest opponents of the phase-out. But the overwhelming focus on fossil fuels means it may not matter in the long run.
“I think because of the pressure from oil and gas interests, if we don’t agree to phase out fossil fuels here, it’s likely to be a pyrrhic victory for them,” he said. bill hare At the think tank Climate Analytics. “They would have kept it going, but they wouldn’t have stopped it.”
A complete failure at COP28 could help build momentum towards an unjust end to the fossil fuel era, Hare says. “Next year we’ll probably see more countries wanting to phase out fossil fuels, more countries thinking about it more and putting more pressure on oil and gas producers.”
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
