Tag Archives: halts

Nexperia Halts Chip Supply to China Amid Global Automotive Production Concerns

Posted on by
Reply

Nexperia, the automotive semiconductor manufacturer based in the EU and at the heart of the geopolitical tensions, has stopped all supplies to its factories in China, intensifying a trade war that risks shuttering production for automakers globally.

This week, the company communicated with its clients about the suspension of all supplies to its Chinese facility.

In September, the Netherlands utilized national security legislation to take control of the semiconductor maker due to fears that its Chinese owner, Wingtech Technologies, intended to transfer intellectual property to another affiliated company. The Dutch authorities stated: Threatened the future of Europe’s chip production capacity and subsequently dismissed Wingtech Chairman Zhang Xuezheng as CEO.

In retaliation, China ceased exports from all Nexperia factories and warned that this embargo could lead to the closure of production lines at EU car manufacturers within days.

The continuing lockdown jeopardizes the supply chain, as numerous Nexperia products produced in Europe—including wafers used to manufacture chips—were typically sent to factories in China for packaging and distribution.

Nexperia’s interim CEO, Stephen Tilger, stated on Sunday that shipments to its Dongguan factory in Guangdong province have been halted due to a “direct result of local management’s recent failure to comply with agreed contractual payment terms,” according to excerpts first released by Reuters.

Nexperia remains optimistic about resuming shipments and is hoping to de-escalate the situation. A source familiar with the developments indicated that shipments might recommence once contractual payments are made. Additionally, the company will continue sending products to its Malaysian facility, which is smaller than the Chinese one.

Automakers are expressing concerns over potential disruptions caused by shortages of crucial components essential for modern vehicles.

The automotive sector faced severe semiconductor shortages following the coronavirus pandemic, but it was not Nexperia’s lower-cost power control chips that were impacted—it was more advanced chips. The company usually ships over 100 billion items annually, utilized in various applications from airbags and adjustable seating to side mirrors and central locking.

Nissan Motor Co. announced this week that it has sufficient chips to last until early November, while competitor Honda reported halting production at its Mexican facility. Mercedes-Benz described its situation as “manageable” in the short term, yet is exploring alternatives. Volkswagen suggested that its annual profit goals could be compromised without adequate chip supply.

Conversely, Toyota, the world’s largest automaker, informed reporters at an auto show in Tokyo on Friday that it is not experiencing significant supply challenges, even though production might ultimately be affected.

EU trade commissioner Maroš Šefčović aims to initiate further discussions with Chinese officials following meetings in Brussels with both Chinese and EU representatives to address the export ban on Nexperia and restrictions on rare earth minerals supply.

Additionally, on the same day, the bloc’s technical commissioner Hena Virkunen met with Nexperia’s interim leader after discussions with European chip manufacturers Infineon, ST, and NXP the previous day.

Post-meeting, he noted that discussions with Nexperia underscored the EU’s necessity for new tipping laws as three lessons identified from the ongoing crisis: enhanced visibility of chip inventory in the pipeline, the importance of investing in chip supply despite costs, and the need for reserve inventories.

Skip past newsletter promotions

“Diversifying stockpiles and supplies is crucial to our collective resilience,” she stated.

The German Automotive Industry Association (VDA) expressed concern on Thursday that without a swift resolution to the situation at Nexperia, it could lead to “significant production restrictions and even suspensions in the near future.”


Businesses in the UK are likely to be impacted as well. Nexperia manufactures some of its chip wafers at a plant established by Dutch company Philips in Manchester.

Previously, Nexperia owned another factory in south Wales but was blocked by the UK government from completing its acquisition of the Newport wafer factory due to national security concerns, given its ultimate Chinese ownership. Subsequently, US semiconductor firm Vishay Intertechnology acquired the factory in November 2023.

Wingtech has yet to respond to requests for comments.

Source: www.theguardian.com

US Halts Support for COVID-19 Vaccines for Children—Are Other Vaccines Next?

Posted on by
Reply

US Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy JR

Tasos Katopodis/Getty

One of the leading vaccine specialists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Lakshmi Panagiotakopoulos, resigned on June 4th, just a week after Robert F. Kennedy JR announced that the Covid-19 vaccine would no longer be advised for most children and pregnancies.

This declaration prompted several days of uncertainty regarding the availability of the Covid-19 vaccine in the U.S. Although there has not been a significant shift in access, parents may face new challenges when trying to vaccinate their children. Nonetheless, Kennedy’s statement reflects a concerning departure from established public health practices.

“My career in public health and vaccinology began with a deep-seated desire to assist the most vulnerable members of our population. This is not something I can continue in this role,” Reuters reported.

Panagiotakopoulos was part of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) since 1964. However, last week, Kennedy, as the highest authority in public health in the country, reversed decades of protocol. “As of today, we are unable to announce that the Covid vaccine for healthy children and pregnant women has been removed from the CDC’s recommended vaccination schedule,” he stated in a video shared on the social media platform X on May 27th.

Despite his directive, the CDC has only made minor modifications to its recommendations regarding the Covid-19 vaccine. Rather than a full endorsement for children, it is now recommended “Based on shared clinical decisions,” meaning parents should consult their doctors prior to making a decision. It remains uncertain how this will impact vaccine access in various situations, but it may complicate obtaining vaccinations for children at pharmacies.

The CDC’s guidance on vaccination during pregnancy is rather unclear as well. The relevant website still recommends Covid-19 shots during pregnancy, noting that “This page will be updated to reflect your new vaccination schedule.”

Kennedy’s declaration also stands in stark contrast to the positions of major public health organizations. Both the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) have expressed opposition to this stance.

“The CDC and HHS advise individuals to consult healthcare providers regarding personal medical choices,” a spokesperson for HHS told New Scientist. “Under Secretary Kennedy’s leadership, HHS is re-establishing the connection between doctors and patients.”

However, Linda Eckart of Washington University in Seattle argues that these conflicting messages create confusion for the public, stating, “It opens doors for misinformation and undermines overall confidence in vaccines. I cannot fathom that vaccination rates will not decline.”

Numerous studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of Covid-19 vaccinations during adolescence and pregnancy. In fact, Martin McCurry, head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, emphasized this in a risk assessment for severe Covid-19 published a week before Kennedy’s announcement, further complicating the government’s public health message.

Kennedy’s announcement aligns with similar community policies in several countries. For instance, Australia and the UK do not recommend the Covid-19 vaccine for children unless they are at high risk of severe illness. Likewise, they advise against Covid-19 vaccinations during pregnancy for those already vaccinated.

Asma Khalil, a member of the UK’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization, stated that the UK’s choice is informed by a reduced risk from omicron variants, the cost-effectiveness of vaccinations, and high herd immunity. Nevertheless, these variables can differ from one country to another. Eckart notes that the UK population generally has better access to healthcare than that of the U.S. “These evaluations necessitate a meticulous consideration of risks and benefits for the national populace,” Khalil asserts. HHS did not respond to New Scientist regarding whether a similar assessment influenced Kennedy’s decision.

Perhaps the most concerning aspect of Kennedy’s announcement is its circumvention of the expected ACIP vote on proposed revisions to COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, which was slated for later this month. “This method of decision-making—by individual professionals who carefully review conflicts of interest and scrutinize the data—has never occurred in our country,” Eckart emphasizes. “We are traversing uncharted territory,” and she fears that Kennedy’s actions could establish precedents for other vaccine recommendations. “I am aware there are numerous vaccines he has actively opposed,” she continues, recalling Kennedy’s previous denunciations of vaccines linked to autism and false claims regarding the polio vaccine.

“What this implies is that [Kennedy] is undermining established scientific guidelines,” stated Amesh Adalja from Johns Hopkins University.

Topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

“Out of Touch”: US Tech Firm Cuts Jobs and Halts Global IT Operations to Implement AI

Posted on by
Reply

The cybersecurity firm that gained notoriety last year for causing a significant global IT outage has revealed plans to partially reduce its workforce by 5% citing “AI efficiency.”

In a memo to employees earlier this week, CEO George Kurtz, who was released to the US stock market, stated that 500 jobs, or 5% of the total workforce, would be eliminated globally due to AI advancements created by businesses.

“We are at a pivotal point in the market and technology, where AI is transforming every sector, accelerating threats, and changing customer demands,” he explained.

Kurtz emphasized that AI “will streamline the adoption process and enable quicker innovation from concepts to products,” adding that it “enhances efficiency in both front and back offices.”


“AI acts as a force multiplier across the enterprise,” he added.

Other factors contributing to the layoffs include the need for sustainable market growth and expanded product lines.

The company anticipates incurring costs of up to USD 53 million due to the job reductions.

CrowdStrike reported a revenue of USD 1 billion in the fourth quarter of 2025, reflecting a 25% increase from the same period in 2024, despite a loss of USD 92 million.

Last July, CrowdStrike unintentionally promoted an erroneous software update intended to detect cybersecurity threats, which affected 8.5 million Windows systems globally.

The incident caused widespread disruption, impacting airports, hospitals, television networks, payment systems, and individual computers.

Aaron McCann, VP of research and advisory at Gartner, expressed skepticism regarding claims of AI efficiencies amid declining revenue forecasts, as seen with CrowdStrike in March.

“I view it as a justification for workforce reductions, particularly in tech. It’s fundamentally a financial decision,” he remarked, expressing immediate skepticism.

McEwan noted that firms are under pressure to justify significant investments made in AI.

“The productivity improvements we anticipated from AI are not materializing.”


Gartner’s survey indicates that fewer than 50% of employees utilize AI in their roles, with only 8% employing AI tools to boost productivity.

Toby Walsh, a professor of artificial intelligence at the University of New South Wales, described CrowdStrike’s announcement as “somewhat alarming” following last year’s suspension.

“They would be more effective by reallocating these 5% of employees to emergency responses and bug fixes,” he advised.

Walsh suggested that the market should brace itself for more such announcements in the future.

“It’s straightforward. Increased profits for companies, fewer jobs for workers. We should learn from the first industrial revolution. By uniting, we could use these savings to enhance the quality and quantity of work for everyone.”

Niusha Shafiabady, an associate professor of computational intelligence at the Australian Catholic University, stated that AI-induced job displacement is an “inevitable reality.”

“Even with good intentions, this transformation will occur. Regrettably, many will lose their traditional roles due to AI and technology,” she remarked.

“If companies can save costs by leveraging AI and technology, they will do so, resulting in job losses. This is the stark reality.”

The 2023 World Economic Forum report predicted that AI and other macroeconomic factors would affect nearly 23% of jobs globally within five years. While 69 million jobs are expected to be created, 83 million are projected to be eliminated, leading to a net decline of 2%, according to Shafiabady.

McEwan asserted that companies, especially in high-tech sectors, are exploring ways to gradually reduce their workforce through AI.

“I firmly believe that companies are emerging that can effectively shrink their workforce thanks to AI,” he noted.

“It largely depends on the type of product being sold. However, most companies at this juncture would benefit more from enhancing their workforce rather than using AI as a replacement.”

Has your job been lost to AI? Please reach out at josh.taylor@theguardian.com

Source: www.theguardian.com

If Apple Halts Production in China, Its Value Could plummet by 50%

Posted on by
Reply

Several years prior to Donald J. Trump’s entry into politics, Apple, together with its partners, established extensive factories throughout China to assemble the iPhone. Trump’s presidential campaign began by promising his supporters that he would compel Apple to manufacture those products domestically.

Nearly a decade later, the situation has changed little. Rather than shifting manufacturing back home, Apple has transferred production from China to India, Vietnam, and Thailand, with approximately 80% of iPhones still being made in China.

Despite enduring pressure over the years, Apple’s business remains heavily reliant on China, making it impossible for the tech giant to operate without it. After actions taken by the Trump administration, the risks associated with Apple’s operations have prompted concerns for the world’s most valuable publicly traded companies. Significant efforts to relocate Apple’s production to the US would require immense collaboration between the company and the federal government.

Just four days after President Trump announced tariffs on 145% of Chinese exports last month, Apple saw a decline of $770 billion in its market capitalization. The company recouped some of these losses after the President granted a temporary reprieve to Chinese appliance manufacturers.

On Thursday, Wall Street analysts are anticipating a 4% increase in Apple’s most recent quarterly report. This surge comes as consumers rushed to purchase iPhones before the tariffs took effect. The report will provide an opportunity for analysts to question Apple CEO Tim Cook regarding future tariffs, price hikes, and potential risks in both China and the US.

An Apple representative declined to provide executives for interviews for this article. The company announced plans to invest $500 billion in the US over the next four years and will commence manufacturing artificial intelligence servers in Houston by 2026.

“The scrutiny is warranted as they are most at risk from a complete breakdown between the US and China,” stated David Yoffie, a Harvard Business School professor who has authored a case study on Apple.

Gene Munster, managing partner at Deepwater Asset Management, which invests in emerging technology firms, estimates that a total breakdown in relations between the US and China could diminish Apple’s value by more than half. Even if a third of sales moves production to alternate countries, a significant portion of that revenue still relies on products manufactured in China, potentially reducing a $3.2 trillion company to a $1.6 trillion entity. Additionally, if Apple loses sales to Chinese consumers, similar to rival Samsung during the South Korea-China conflict, the value could plummet to $1.2 trillion, especially considering that Beijing has already discouraged government officials from purchasing iPhones.

A substantial decrease in Apple’s value would create significant ripples throughout the stock market, as the company accounts for around 6% of the S&P 500 index. This implies that for every dollar invested in the fund, approximately six cents would be allocated to Apple stocks, leading to a potential halving of returns for investors and the majority of 401(k) holders.

Apple’s connections within China run deep. Decades ago, the company collaborated with Beijing to establish manufacturing operations in China without needing to create a joint venture with local firms, a requirement faced by many US companies. This groundwork allowed Apple to assemble devices affordably in China and sell to the rising middle class, resulting in over 80% of global smartphone profits and generating $67 billion in annual sales in the region.

Over time, Apple’s relationships with China have only strengthened. Today, not only are most iPhones manufactured in China, but Chinese suppliers also produce components for devices made in India and create parts and AirPods in Vietnam.

Apple’s dependence on China has transformed the supply chain into a Rorschach test for the Trump administration. Apple wields more power than any other technology company and achieves its management objectives effectively. The company produces more smartphones than anyone else, invests heavily in components, and significantly impacts the operational landscape of its suppliers.

The Trump administration is hopeful that Apple will initiate a shift. During an interview in April, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick remarked, “A workforce of millions is assembling the screws that make iPhones — similar operations will come to America.”

However, pressure on Apple to exit China may prove counterproductive. New tariffs could compel Apple to increase iPhone prices or diminish its smartphone profits. Samsung’s devices, manufactured in Vietnam and exempt from Chinese tariffs, could become cheaper as a result. This could lead to reduced competition in the domestic market, a scenario that Trump is reluctant to embrace.

Apple has resisted the notion of manufacturing iPhones and other devices in the US, as its operations team concluded it would be unfeasible, according to two individuals familiar with the discussions who spoke on condition of anonymity. Ten years ago, finding dependable workers to procure screws and assemble Mac computers in Texas proved challenging.

In China, Apple’s suppliers can recruit around 200,000 workers, who operate in factories monitored by thousands of engineers with extensive manufacturing experience. Many reside in dormitories close to iPhone factories, where components move along the assembly line spanning distances longer than a soccer field.

Wayne Lam, an analyst from TechInsights, states that many employees and seasoned engineers have found it nearly impossible to replicate this in most American cities. He asserts that Apple must develop more automated processes using robotics to compensate for the lower population in the US.

Lam estimates that if Apple were to establish operations in the US, it may have to charge around $2,000 for an iPhone (currently about $1,000) to sustain its existing profit margins. Prices could fall to $1,500 in the future as the company mitigates employee training costs and component production expenses.

“In the short term, it’s not economically viable,” Lam remarked. He also noted that shifting device production back home after nearly 20 years would seem impractical and may complicate the introduction of new products to consumers.

Apple has demonstrated a willingness to adjust its supply chain when adequately incentivized. In 2017, the company began the process of manufacturing an iPhone in India due to elevated import taxes that would inflate prices, hindering their ability to capture market share in the world’s fastest-growing smartphone sector.

Currently, Apple sells approximately 20% of its iPhones globally in India and also produces several components, including metal frames there. However, they still depend on Chinese manufacturers for assembling displays and other intricate parts.

Matthew Moore, a former manufacturing design manager at Apple, emphasized that India offers an advantage the US lacks: “engineers are plentiful everywhere.”

Moore argues that in order to attract Apple and other electronics firms to the United States, the Trump administration must invest in education for science, technology, engineering, and math degrees. Additionally, he believes that there should be incentives for loans towards new manufacturing facilities and affordable housing through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Last month, Apple temporarily benefitted from a delay. Cook, who has personally donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration, lobbied the administration for the exemption that spared iPhones and other electronic devices from the 145% tax on Chinese imports. However, this reprieve is temporary, as the administration plans to implement more targeted tariffs on high-tech products.

Without governmental investment, Apple and smaller manufacturers will continue their production in China, as they possess the surplus equipment and engineering staff necessary, according to Moore.

“I don’t believe the ship has sailed; however, it is unrealistic to expect them to manufacture an iPhone here,” Moore commented. “This will require a decade.”

Source: www.nytimes.com

When Trump Halts the Study, the Experimental Animal is Euthanized

Posted on by
Reply

On April 1, the Trump administration initiated its budget cuts, impacting Morgantown, W.Va. Federal scientists were focusing on health and safety concerns for American workers. That morning, hundreds of staff members at the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health learned they had been laid off and would lose building access.

More than 900 lab animals remained on site. The institute managed to transfer approximately two-thirds (mainly mice) to a university lab, as reported by two recently terminated employees. Unfortunately, the remaining 300 animals were euthanized last week.

In recent months, the Trump administration aimed to reformat American research, resulting in mass firings of federal scientists, withdrawal of active research grants, and proposals to fund essential laboratory operations.

These actions have disbanded various research initiatives and significantly affected lab animals, crucial for much of the nation’s biomedical research.

“Many animals will face sacrifice—they will be terminated,” remarked a researcher on the potential use of non-animal alternatives at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Experts indicate that predicting the total impact is challenging, as much of the administration’s actions are embroiled in legal disputes. Furthermore, animal research is often discreet, leaving no clear count of animals in U.S. laboratories.

Numerous scientists are hesitant to discuss the fate of lab animals due to fears of backlash from animal rights activists or retaliation from employers or the administration. Many requests for interviews with research facilities remain unanswered.

“It’s a terrible situation for them,” Dr. Rock stated. “Retaining animals can incur high costs, while sacrificing them can provoke public outrage.”

Some animal rights advocates welcome the uncertainty, even if it leads to euthanasia. However, many researchers feel devastated by the dual loss—many animals could perish without contributing to scientific knowledge.

“We don’t engage with animals lightly,” said pulmonary toxicologist Kyle Mandler, recently laid off from the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, part of the CDC. He was in the midst of research on harmful dust generated in certain construction materials. About 20 of his mice were euthanized last week, leaving his study incomplete and without data.

“Knowing that their lives and sacrifices were completely wasted is both depressing and infuriating,” he expressed.

The Department of Health and Human Services did not directly respond to inquiries regarding the seized Morgantown animals. However, an unnamed HHS official stated via email that changes at NIOSH are part of a “broader reorganization,” integrating multiple programs for a healthier U.S.

“Staffing and operational adjustments occur in phases,” the statement noted. “Animal care operations are ongoing, and HHS is committed to upholding all federal animal welfare standards throughout this transition.”

In recent years, many countries, including the U.S., have shifted away from animal research due to its costs and ethical concerns, often poor relevance to human outcomes. This month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration revealed plans to phase out animal testing requirements for certain drugs, favoring three-dimensional human organ models made from lab-grown cells, like organoids and “organs on a chip.”

Experts agree these emerging technologies show great promise. However, for the time being, lab animals remain vital to biomedical research, with some arguing that certain data can only be gathered through animal studies.

“We aim to exit this realm,” stated Naomi Charalanbakis, director of science policy at a nonprofit advocating for the continuation of animal use in biomedical research. “But we’re not there yet.”

Research involving lab animals requires careful planning over years, stable funding, and skilled veterinarians and technicians for daily care. The Trump administration’s actions jeopardize all of this.

At the NIOSH facility in Morgantown, initial budget cuts encompassed animal care staff. “But they resisted, insisting they couldn’t leave while animals remained on site,” said a former lab technician.

After the Trump administration froze funding at Harvard this month, researchers developing a new tuberculosis vaccine faced the grim prospect of euthanizing rhesus macaques. This study and the monkeys were saved only after private donors stepped in to provide funding.

Animals involved in halted projects might be relocated to different labs, but others may be undergoing experimental treatments or exposure to pathogens or toxins. Many are retained to illustrate specific behavioral or health vulnerabilities, and lab animals, not being wild, cannot simply be released. Experts noted that the sudden influx of surplus lab animals may overwhelm the nation’s animal sanctuaries.

Anne Linder, associate director of the Animal Law and Policy Program at Harvard Law School, expressed concern that the fate of many lab animals would hinge on the “whims and temperament” of individual researchers and lab staff.

“In the absence of oversight, some decisions may be misguided, driven by harsh needs rather than the welfare of the animals involved,” she said in an email.

Many researchers have expressed concerns regarding the National Institutes of Health’s attempts to impose severe caps on “indirect costs” related to scientific research, including those tied to maintaining animal care facilities.

A federal judge halted the NIH from implementing these funding caps, but the agency has appealed. Should these policies pass, the repercussions could be disastrous for institutions utilizing non-human primates in their research.

The Washington National Center for Research on Primates, located at the University of Washington, houses over 800 non-human primates. The indirect funding cap represents a loss of around $5 million annually, forcing the colony’s size to shrink, according to director Deborah Fuller.

“This could shatter the entire infrastructure we’ve established,” she cautioned.

If that occurs, the center will strive to find new homes for the animals, yet other research facilities share similar issues, and primate sanctuaries may struggle to accommodate the influx.

As a last resort, primates may have to be euthanized. “This is the worst-case scenario,” warned Sally Thompson Iritani, assistant deputy director of the university’s research department. “Even if it’s uncomfortable to consider, it’s a possibility.”

For some animal rights advocates, the reduction of federal animal research facilities is a cause for celebration. “For many of these animals, euthanasia before experimentation may be the best scenario,” noted Justin Goodman, senior vice president of the White Coat Waste Project, a nonprofit advocating for the cessation of federally funded animal research. (He did stress that finding new homes for lab animals would be preferable.)

Deluciana Winder, director of the Institute for Animal Law and Policy at Vermont Law School, hopes that these cuts could lead to the closure of the National Primate Center. Nevertheless, she expressed concern that reductions at the USDA could weaken already lax oversight of lab animal welfare.

Dr. Locke believes the crisis could serve as a “wake-up call” for the nation to pursue alternatives to animal research, albeit in a thoughtful manner.

“I don’t find it acceptable to cull millions of animals from research,” Dr. Locke stated. “It’s not socially or scientifically acceptable. We need to acknowledge that it’s a likely outcome.”

Source: www.nytimes.com

Marks & Spencer Halts Online Orders Amid Cyberattack Fallout

Posted on by
Reply

Marks & Spencer has halted all orders via its website and app as retailers grapple with the aftermath of a cyberattack that began on Monday.

The company expressed regret to customers for “the inconvenience,” stating that the suspension of digital orders is “part of an aggressive management strategy for cyber incidents.”

“Our experienced team is collaborating with key cyber experts, and we are diligently working to restore online and app shopping,” he remarked.

Customers can still browse online and make purchases at physical stores using cash or credit cards.

The website’s shutdown follows several days of problems at retail locations, where contactless payments and online order collections were severely affected since Monday. Contactless payments resumed late Thursday.

Customers with existing online orders can collect them in-store once they receive confirmation, but placing new orders is not permitted. M&S clarified that customers do not need to take any action and assured that their details were not accessed.

The retailer’s shares have dropped by as much as 4%, following a 2.3% decline at Friday’s close, marking a significant fall within the FTSE 100.

Only about one-third of M&S’ clothing and home goods sales occur online, and the order suspension comes just before an anticipated heatwave, likely to increase demand for clothing and outdoor entertainment gear during busy weekends.

The cyber incident initiated on Monday impacted contactless payments and click-and-collect orders at stores throughout the UK. Notably, a separate technical issue affected only contactless payments during the busy Easter weekend.

M&S has enlisted cybersecurity specialists to aid in investigating and managing the situation, implementing measures to bolster network security and continue serving customers effectively.

Security experts cautioned shoppers to be vigilant against scammers exploiting high-profile cases.

Nicholas, head of commercial content at Retail Economics, stated, “The Marks & Spencer cyberattacks serve as a reminder that no retailer, regardless of its establishment or digital sophistication, is safe from the growing threat of cybercrime.”

Skip past newsletter promotions

“While M&S is bearing the impact of this specific attack, it’s important to note that this isn’t an isolated incident. Cyberattacks represent a systemic risk facing the retail sector as a whole.”

The cyber incidents targeting M&S have occurred alongside a series of similar events in recent years. Last September, Transport for London had to shut down several online services due to a cyber attack.

In 2023, Royal Mail was compelled to halt international parcel and letter dispatches after a cyber attack caused significant disruption to its services, while WH Smith suffered an attack that illegally accessed data, including personal information of current and former employees, occurring less than a year after a cyber incident on their Funky Pigeon website led to a week-long order suspension.

In 2022, the Guardian requested many staff members to work from home following a ransomware attack that compromised the personal data of UK employees.

According to a government report, in 2022, two out of five UK businesses reported experiencing cybersecurity breaches or attacks within the prior year.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Google halts use of AI-generated images of people following backlash over ethnic portrayal

Posted on by
Reply

Google has temporarily blocked a new artificial intelligence model that generates images of people after it depicted World War II German soldiers and Vikings as people of color.

The company announced that its Gemini model would be used to create images of people after social media users posted examples of images generated by the tool depicting historical figures of different ethnicities and genders, such as the Pope and the Founding Fathers of the United States. announced that it would cease production.

“We are already working to address recent issues with Gemini's image generation functionality. While we do this, we will pause human image generation and re-release an improved version soon. “We plan to do so,” Google said in a statement.

Google did not mention specific images in its statement, but examples of Gemini's image results are widely available on X, along with commentary on issues surrounding AI accuracy and bias. 1 former Google employee “It was difficult to get Google Gemini to acknowledge the existence of white people,” he said.


1943 illustration of German soldier Gemini. Photo: Gemini AI/Google

Jack Krawczyk, a senior director on Google's Gemini team, acknowledged Wednesday that the model's image generator (not available in the UK and Europe) needs tweaking.

“We are working to improve this type of depiction immediately,” he said. “His AI image generation in Gemini generates a variety of people, which is generally a good thing since people all over the world are using it. But here it misses the point.”

We are already working to address recent issues with Gemini's image generation capabilities. While we do this, we will pause human image generation and plan to re-release an improved version soon. https://t.co/SLxYPGoqOZ

— Google Communications (@Google_Comms) February 22, 2024


In a statement on X, Krawczyk added that Google's AI principles ensure that its image generation tools “reflect our global user base.” He added that Google would continue to do so for “open-ended” image requests such as “dog walker,” but added that response prompts have a historical trend. He acknowledged that efforts are needed.

“There's more nuance in the historical context, and we'll make further adjustments to accommodate that,” he said.

We are aware that Gemini introduces inaccuracies in the depiction of some historical image generation and are working to correct this immediately.

As part of the AI principles https://t.co/BK786xbkeywe design our image generation capabilities to reflect our global user base and…

— Jack Klotzyk (@JackK)
February 21, 2024


Reports on AI bias are filled with examples of negative impacts on people of color.a Last year's Washington Post investigation I showed multiple examples of image generators show prejudice Not just against people of color, but also against sexism. Although 63% of U.S. food stamp recipients are white, the image generation tool Stable Diffusion XL shows that food stamp recipients are primarily non-white or dark-skinned. It turned out that there was. Requesting images of people “participating in social work” yielded similar results.

Andrew Rogoiski, from the University of Surrey's Institute for Human-Centered AI, said this is “a difficult problem to reduce bias in most areas of deep learning and generative AI”, and as a result there is a high likelihood of mistakes. said.

“There is a lot of research and different approaches to eliminating bias, from curating training datasets to introducing guardrails for trained models,” he said. “AI and LLM are probably [large language models] There will still be mistakes, but it is also likely that they will improve over time. ”

Source: www.theguardian.com