In early-stage start-ups, the pitch deck is often the first thing investors see. Sometimes, it’s the only thing. And yet, it rarely gets the same attention as the website or the socials. Most decks are pulled together last minute, with slides that feel rushed, messy, or just off. That’s where designers can really make a difference. The deck might seem like just another task, but it’s a chance to work on something strategic early on and help shape how the company is understood. It offers a rare opportunity to collaborate closely with copywriters, strategists and the founders to turn their vision into a clear and convincing story. Founders bring the vision, but more and more, design and brand teams are being asked to shape how that vision is told, and sold. So here are five handy things we’ve learned at SIDE ST for the next time you’re asked to design a deck. Think in context Designers stepping into pitch work should begin by understanding the full picture – who the deck is for, what outcomes it’s meant to drive and how it fits into the broader brand and business context. Their role isn’t just to make things look good, but to prioritise clarity over surface-level aesthetics. It’s about getting into the founders’ mindset, shaping visuals and copy around the message, and connecting with the intended audience. Every decision, from slide hierarchy to image selection, should reinforce the business goals behind the deck. Support the narrative Visuals are more subjective than words, and that’s exactly what gives them power. The right image can suggest an idea, reinforce a value, or subtly shift perception without a single word. Whether it’s hinting at accessibility, signalling innovation, or grounding the product in context, design plays a strategic role in how a company is understood. It gives designers the opportunity to take centre stage in the storytelling, shaping how the company is understood through visual choices. But that influence works both ways. Used thoughtlessly, visuals can distort the story, suggesting the wrong market, implying a different stage of maturity, or confusing people about the product itself. When used with care, they become a powerful design tool to sharpen the narrative and spark interest from the very first slide. Keep it real Stock photos can be tempting. They’re high-quality and easy to drop in, especially when the real images a start-up has can be grainy, unfinished, or simply not there yet. But in early-stage pitch decks, they often work against your client. Instead of supporting the story, they flatten it, and rarely reflect the actual team, product, or context. This is your chance as a designer to lean into what’s real, even if it’s a bit rough. Designers can elevate even scrappy assets with thoughtful framing and treatment, turning rough imagery into a strength. In early-stage storytelling, “real” often resonates more than “perfect.” Pay attention to the format Even if you’re brought in just to design the deck, don’t treat it as a standalone piece. It’s often the first brand touchpoint investors will see—but it won’t be the last. They’ll go on to check the website, scroll through social posts, and form an impression based on how it all fits together. Early-stage startups might not have full brand guidelines in place yet, but that doesn’t mean there’s no need for consistency. In fact, it gives designers a unique opportunity to lay the foundation. A strong, thoughtful deck can help shape the early visual language and give the team something to build on as the brand grows. Before you hit export For designers, the deck isn’t just another deliverable. It’s an early tool that shapes and impacts investor perception, internal alignment and founder confidence. It’s a strategic design moment to influence the trajectory of a company before it’s fully formed. Designers who understand the pressure, pace and uncertainty founders face at this stage are better equipped to deliver work that resonates. This is about more than simply polishing slides, it’s about helping early-stage teams tell a sharper, more human story when it matters most. Maor Ofek is founder of SIDE ST, a brand consultancy that works mainly with start-ups. 

Sangral Powered by Friendship™ Member Feb 17, 2022 8,649 From one of the biggest and most dedicated HDR analysis channels out there. Thought that's a big enough topic on its own, because of the analysis, for a separate thread. View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N637VB4FYxg 450 nits maximum peak brightness (personal comparison, Switch OLED without any HDR has 340 nits, an LG C2 TV in HDR has 800 nits, Steam Deck OLED screen has 1000 nits, Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra 2600 nits.) Games like Zelda Breath of the Wild have raised blacks even in Docked HDR gameplay with a raised black level floor and the game looking washed out HDR docked can be good if games are optimized for it like Cyberpunk, which he refers to being exactly like on PS5 and PC, HDR wise or Fast Fusion as one of the rare games that actually have a good black level floor in HDR   Last edited: 39 minutes ago blueredandgold Member Oct 25, 2017 8,739 Could you please translate for those of us who haven't been able to watch or digest after we saw this posted in the other thread please?   gabdeg Member Oct 26, 2017 7,420 🐝 Sadly what I expected since the moment we learned it was edge-lit LCD. Would've at least expected nigher peak nits though.   Kouriozan Member Oct 25, 2017 25,072 A shame, because Switch 2 is like the first time I'll see HDR, as my old TV isn't compatible :/   Paper Cheese Member Oct 9, 2019 558 I've got to assume this is the sort of thing that most of us hi-fi tech illiterate lot won't notice until they bring out a better screen model in a few years.   Fortinbras Member Oct 27, 2017 2,073 Well that sucks but it's Nintendo...did anyone expect anything different? I'm only going to use it docked so hopefully they can fix the HDR via update.  Universal Acclaim Member Oct 5, 2024 2,482 Not surprised, but not a big issue for me personally.   Antony Member Oct 25, 2017 4,054 Ahhh the obligatory Nintendo Crap Display (Before You Buy a Whole New Model to Get a Decent One) it's positively tradition at this point   Friendly Bear Member Jan 11, 2019 4,162 I Don’t Care Where (Just Far) Even with an edge lit LCD, I was expecting brighter highlights. A lot of the preview event coverage made it sound like the screen was insanely bright, and that's clearly not the case.   NoSpin Member Nov 1, 2017 83 As so often with gaming, I am relieved to have this person to tell me the thing I am enjoying looking at is bad actually. :)   Mivey Member Oct 25, 2017 20,753 Paper Cheese said: I've got to assume this is the sort of thing that most of us hi-fi tech illiterate lot won't notice until they bring out a better screen model in a few years. Click to expand... Click to shrink... the raised blacks on dark content is pretty clear if you play in any kind of darker environment, if you have any kind of OLED screen to compare. Case in point, if you own a Switch 1 OLED, you'll notice the stark differences for certain kinds of content right away. OTOH, if you have been using a launch Switch 1 and never had any issues with how it looks, you'll be fine. Just make sure to stay away from OLED screen, lest you gain the ability to see the differences.   Decarb Member Oct 27, 2017 9,280 HDR on edge-lit LCD is kind of a scam anyway. Kouriozan said: A shame, because Switch 2 is like the first time I'll see HDR, as my old TV isn't compatible :/ Click to expand... Click to shrink... If you have a phone made in last couple of years you've probably seen HDR.   horkrux Member Oct 27, 2017 6,531 Well, kinda expected, so I'm not too bothered by it. Not like you can change it.   Maximo Member Oct 25, 2017 11,041 Nintendo saving that sweet sweet OLED for a refresh.   Buddy Member Oct 25, 2017 1,773 Germany I have mine in my hands right now.... don't know about HDR stuff too much but Mario Kart looks gorgeous on it.   DieH@rd Member Oct 26, 2017 12,083 Decarb said: HDR on edge-lit LCD is kind of a scam anyway. Click to expand... Click to shrink... ^ this.   cw_sasuke Member Oct 27, 2017 30,321 Most of this stuff was clear from the Preview Events, at least DF talked about it. Didn't seem to bother a majority of people playing though. Was pretty much set when it wasn't going to be OLED.  John Frost Member Oct 27, 2017 9,658 Canada Well, that's disappointing..   Milk Prophet of Truth Avenger Oct 25, 2017 4,301 NoSpin said: As so often with gaming, I am relieved to have this person to tell me the thing I am enjoying looking at is bad actually. :) Click to expand... Click to shrink... It's not a personal attack on you. Pointing out objective shortcomings about the technology is a good thing for consumers.   345 Member Oct 30, 2017 10,410 it's about as good as i was expecting. HDR on an LCD basically means "we're actually going to tune content for the screen's color gamut", and it does the job on that level. mario kart does look punchier and more vibrant than it would in SDR while obviously not offering the same contrast as an OLED. dunno who this guy is but if he's really "very disappointed" i'm not sure he knows very much about screens. i'm sure it's just ragebait  JimNastics Member Jan 11, 2018 1,607 345 said: 'm sure it's just ragebait Click to expand... Click to shrink... No way!! :D You could tell just from the thumbnail.  Aleh Member Oct 27, 2017 20,238 "crap display" is a huge exaggeration. Everyone who has actually seen it in person says it looks really good, HDR isn't everything, however disappointing that is.   cw_sasuke Member Oct 27, 2017 30,321 Milk said: It's not a personal attack on you. Pointing out objective shortcomings about the technology is a good thing for consumers. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Seems to be on par what you would get with an LCD. The OG Switch 1 has a bad LCD Screen, the OG Steam Deck has an even worse.....this video is making it seem like Switch 2 Screen is as bad as these screens or even worse. When it seems to be quite solid for an LCD, but in certain areas it can compete with an OLED.  Alex840 Member Oct 31, 2017 5,373 And yet most of the games media doing previews have been like "oh I can barely tell the difference compared to the OLED". Am really sad they took a step back with this, how much more could an OLED screen have cost them?  Universal Acclaim Member Oct 5, 2024 2,482 SDR low brightness in a dark room then   Dranakin Member Oct 27, 2017 2,999 Ooof. Although, I will admit, I probably can't tell between good and bad sceens. I mean, I have the Ayaneo Pocket DMG and everyone says it's an amazing screen. It looks normal to me? Alex840 said: Am really sad they took a step back with this, how much more could an OLED screen have cost them? Click to expand... Click to shrink... An OLED 120hz? The Odin 2 Portal has one (smaller size and without VRR), but I don't have a sense of the component cost.  Kabuki Waq Member Oct 26, 2017 6,034 The screen is a pretty big downgrade from oled but a huge upgrade from the OG. I really miss the perfect blacks. MKW is gorgeous but would have looked so much better on an oled screen  Harmen Member Aug 30, 2023 1,462 The HDR and lifted black should not come as a surprise. But the video doesn't really analyze why it would be below average for an LCD screen? Colours? Pixel response time? For example the original Switch 1 LCD look reaaally bad to me these days, but my Steam Deck LCD screen (similar resolution) looks good to me outside of raised blacks in dark scenes (which I do get used to).   nogoodnamesleft Member Oct 25, 2017 8,605 Yep. I fucking knew it. Knew it was going to be trash. LCD is trash as a standard (yes miniled included with its trash ass pixel response time) Will wait for oled version.  cw_sasuke Member Oct 27, 2017 30,321 Aleh said: "crap display" is a huge exaggeration. Everyone who has actually seen it in person says it looks really good, HDR isn't everything, however disappointing that is. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Focus of the whole channel is HDR. Dude is likely just used to comparing HDR content on very expensive OLED Screens. So HDR bad = everything trash for him. Something that won't be the case for 99% of users out there. Its the single voter issue again, disregarding everything else because of one focus point and expecting every one to feel the same way about it.  Serif Member Oct 31, 2024 410 Alex840 said: Am really sad they took a step back with this, how much more could an OLED screen have cost them? Click to expand... Click to shrink... An OLED 1080p HDR VRR 120 Hz screen does not sound like it would be cost-effective. It makes sense to establish baseline specs like 120 Hz support for developers to target and upgrade to OLED in the future instead of trying to add 120 Hz support later on.  fourfourfun Member Oct 27, 2017 9,149 England Aleh said: "crap display" is a huge exaggeration. Everyone who has actually seen it in person says it looks really good, HDR isn't everything, however disappointing that is. Click to expand... Click to shrink... If you're an enthusiast display platform, you're going to be benchmarking against the absolute best. So comparatively it could not be as good. Obviously it doesn't take into account what the entire platform delivers as a whole and the price it was trying to hit. It's a rather zoomed in look at just one thing.  RailWays One Winged Slayer Avenger Oct 25, 2017 18,449 Still sounds like an upgrade from the launch Switch LCD, though those nits are pretty low   Koklusz Member Oct 27, 2017 3,971 blueredandgold said: Could you please translate for those of us who haven't been able to watch or digest after we saw this posted in the other thread please? Click to expand... Click to shrink... The screen is bad, and the native HDR implementation in the games he tested is shoddy.   NoSpin Member Nov 1, 2017 83 Milk said: It's not a personal attack on you. Pointing out objective shortcomings about the technology is a good thing for consumers. Click to expand... Click to shrink... I didn't see it as a personal attack, I just imagined him reviewing the Game Boy Pocket or the OG DS screes and how disappointed he would have been, whilst we were all busy enjoying video games.  Wasp Member Oct 29, 2017 351 It's a shame they couldn't release an OLED SKU at launch. I would have happily paid an extra $100 for an OLED model and I'm sure many are the same. I know I'll be keeping my box in pristine condition to get maximum value when I trade the console in for a Switch 2 OLED in hopefully a few years.  Last edited: 51 minutes ago pswii60 Member Oct 27, 2017 28,932 The Milky Way This means that for handheld purposes, Switch 2 is actually a downgrade on Switch 1 OLED, for any games that aren't taking advantage of the additional power/resolution. So basically, you might want to hold on to your Switch 1 OLED for all your pixel art indies, and any games not getting a patch/upgrade.  Shadow One Winged Slayer Member Oct 28, 2017 4,837 Kinda what I expected. Being LCD with HDR especially on portable device at that is never a good combo. I'll just play on my OLED TV when I want to get the full experience, which again, is what I expected. I hope it's a bit usable outside at least. I was hoping closer to 600 nits for that alone, as the Deck OLED is JUST usable on a sunny day. But you can't have everything I guess.  UnderJollyRoger Member Jun 16, 2023 648 Germany The screen is also my biggest concern of the unit. The og switch has an absolutely atrocious screen and LCDs just dont cut it anymore for me. The low nits will make it again pretty difficult to properly play outside. I am commuting a lot and sitting on a train with a bit of sun outside was already too much for the og switch. Here is hoping that an OLED variant will come earlier this time.  Milk Prophet of Truth Avenger Oct 25, 2017 4,301 NoSpin said: I didn't see it as a personal attack, I just imagined him reviewing the Game Boy Pocket or the OG DS screes and how disappointed he would have been, whilst we were all busy enjoying video games. Click to expand... Click to shrink... You're implying being critical means you're not also enjoying the video games. I'm critical of tons of my favorite games. I'm still having a fun time with the games 🤷  HandsomeCharles Member Oct 26, 2017 4,717 Disappointing to hear, but as someone who thinks his OG switch's screen is fine, I'm sure it won't really bother me.   OP OP Sangral Powered by Friendship™ Member Feb 17, 2022 8,649 blueredandgold said: Could you please translate for those of us who haven't been able to watch or digest after we saw this posted in the other thread please? Click to expand... Click to shrink... I'm trying to add some bullet points to the OT.  Ghost Slayer Member Oct 30, 2017 1,433 is it like PS Portal LCD screen? Because I think the Portal LCD screen is really good   Decarb Member Oct 27, 2017 9,280 pswii60 said: This means that for handheld purposes, Switch 2 is actually a downgrade on Switch 1 OLED, for any games that aren't taking advantage of the additional power/resolution. So basically, you might want to hold on to your Switch 1 OLED for all your pixel art indies, and any games not getting a patch/upgrade. Click to expand... Click to shrink... Oh I don't think there's any doubt from pure IQ perspective its a downgrade from Switch 1 OLED. Even without HDR support at max brightness that screen pops like nothing else.   Maximo Member Oct 25, 2017 11,041 NoSpin said: I didn't see it as a personal attack, I just imagined him reviewing the Game Boy Pocket or the OG DS screes and how disappointed he would have been, whilst we were all busy enjoying video games. Click to expand... Click to shrink... This is a silly comparison since he's not reviewing a screen from 1996 when it first came out, screen technology has exploded since the first iPhone, seems like a needless jab.  Melhadf Member Dec 25, 2017 2,528 My understanding is that 400nits is the minimum for HDR. So it's technically HDR, but usually dismissed by purists as not "real HDR" such as this vid with his HDR10 testing (1000nits standard). So it's a definite improvement over SDR content, but Nintendo then used an LCD instead of OLED so it most likely looks worse than the OLED switch. Feels like Nintendo is using minimum HDR as a crutch to cheap out on the screen and people are saying it's not "TRUE HDR" even though it's completely within spec.  vegtro Member Oct 25, 2017 808 Aleh said: "crap display" is a huge exaggeration. Everyone who has actually seen it in person says it looks really good, HDR isn't everything, however disappointing that is. Click to expand... Click to shrink... When I first booted the Switch 2, I wanted to believe the screen will be ok from the news. Nope, the screen pretty much is pretty bad compared to OLED.   Alvis Saw the truth behind the copied door Member Oct 25, 2017 12,148 EU A bit of a shame, meh NoSpin said: As so often with gaming, I am relieved to have this person to tell me the thing I am enjoying looking at is bad actually. :) Click to expand... Click to shrink... Yes indeed, this dude is set on a mission to personally ruin your experience, and he's now crying in a corner knowing that he failed.   fourfourfun Member Oct 27, 2017 9,149 England Shadow said: But you can't have everything I guess. Click to expand... Click to shrink... I think that's the thing, they went for resolution and VRR as a priority. I'm sure I also read on here a while ago that it also centres around the availability of appropriate screens. OLED only became viable after a certain point.  Pargon Member Oct 27, 2017 14,110 I thought I had appropriately-low expectations, but I was thinking it would be a 600 nit 1800:1 panel. Not 450 nits and 900:1. The only thing "HDR" about it is probably that content will be authored to make use of a wider color gamut. 

European tech leaders are pushing back against high-profile VCs urging founders to work seven days a week — slamming the grindset mentality as everything from “toxic” to “childish.”  “Calling on founders to work insane hours nonstop is just bad advice,” Suranga Chandratillake, general partner at Balderton Capital and former CEO of video search engine Blinkx, told TNW. “Even sprinters don’t sprint all the time — rest and reflection is just as important as putting in the work.” His comments follow a LinkedIn post on Saturday by Harry Stebbings, podcast host and 28-year-old founder of London-based venture firm 20VC. “What European founders need to realise [is that] 7 days a week is the required velocity to win right now,” he wrote, implying that they need to match the infamous grind culture of Silicon Valley.       Martin Mignot, a partner at New York-based Index Ventures, rallied behind Stebbings. In a LinkedIn post of his own, he applauded the 9am-9pm, six days a week (illegal) work culture adopted by some tech firms in China. “Forget 9 to 5, 996 is the new startup standard,” he said.  While some echoed their views, many European tech founders and investors weren’t happy with the rhetoric. Amelia Miller, co-founder of return-to-work platform Ivee, called Stebbings’ post “unbelievably toxic.” Register Now “Only bad founders work 7 days non-stop,” she wrote. “It’s poor time management and a fast track to burnout.” Miller also said she thinks that working such long hours unfairly discriminates against parents and those with responsibilities outside the office.   Chandratillake also warned against taking advice from VCs without experience of starting and running a company. “If you’re a CEO, don’t listen to a jumped-up finance bro in a hoodie who has never done your job telling you how to do it!” he said.  The lively debate comes amid a broader conversation in European tech over whether workplace culture is holding the region back compared to the US or China.  In a podcast interview in March, Revolut boss Nik Storonsky criticised European startup entrepreneurs, saying they weren’t working hard enough and valued work-life balance too highly. Those comments followed another lively social media debate earlier this year about whether French founders lacked the “grindset” to succeed.   However, a recent survey of 128 European founders by early-stage VC firm Antler found that three-quarters of them work more than 60 hours weekly. Almost 20% of them exceeded 80 hours, challenging the notion that European founders don’t hustle.  Chandratillake said he believes that scrutinising work hours overlooks some of the real challenges founders face in Europe, such as access to late-stage financing. That said, the investor thinks there is a time and a place for the grind. “Sometimes founders have to work extremely hard and long hours, but that’s not sustainable all the time,” he said. “Building a successful company is a marathon, it takes endurance.”  European startup founders are the lifeblood of TNW Conference — and we want you there too. The tech festival takes place on June 19-20 in Amsterdam. Use the code TNWXMEDIA2025 at the ticket checkout to get 30% off. Story by Siôn Geschwindt Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehic (show all) Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehicles, he's happiest sourcing a scoop, investigating the impact of emerging technologies, and even putting them to the test. He has five years of journalism experience and holds a dual degree in media and environmental science from the University of Cape Town, South Africa. When he's not writing, you can probably find Siôn out hiking, surfing, playing the drums or catering to his moderate caffeine addiction. You can contact him at: sion.geschwindt [at] protonmail [dot] com Get the TNW newsletter Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week. Also tagged with

How Deepfakes Are Created Generative AI models enable the creation of highly realistic fake media. Most deepfakes today are produced by training deep neural networks on real images, video or audio of a target person. The two predominant AI architectures are generative adversarial networks (GANs) and autoencoders. A GAN consists of a generator network that produces synthetic images and a discriminator network that tries to distinguish fakes from real data. Through iterative training, the generator learns to produce outputs that increasingly fool the discriminator¹. Autoencoder-based tools similarly learn to encode a target face and then decode it onto a source video. In practice, deepfake creators use accessible software: open-source tools like DeepFaceLab and FaceSwap dominate video face-swapping (one estimate suggests DeepFaceLab was used for over 95% of known deepfake videos)². Voice-cloning tools (often built on similar AI principles) can mimic a person’s speech from minutes of audio. Commercial platforms like Synthesia allow text-to-video avatars (turning typed scripts into lifelike “spokespeople”), which have already been misused in disinformation campaigns³. Even mobile apps (e.g. FaceApp, Zao) let users do basic face swaps in minutes⁴. In short, advances in GANs and related models make deepfakes cheaper and easier to generate than ever. Diagram of a generative adversarial network (GAN): A generator network creates fake images from random input and a discriminator network distinguishes fakes from real examples. Over time the generator improves until its outputs “fool” the discriminator⁵ During creation, a deepfake algorithm is typically trained on a large dataset of real images or audio from the target. The more varied and high-quality the training data, the more realistic the deepfake. The output often then undergoes post-processing (color adjustments, lip-syncing refinements) to enhance believability¹. Technical defenses focus on two fronts: detection and authentication. Detection uses AI models to spot inconsistencies (blinking irregularities, audio artifacts or metadata mismatches) that betray a synthetic origin⁵. Authentication embeds markers before dissemination – for example, invisible watermarks or cryptographically signed metadata indicating authenticity⁶. The EU AI Act will soon mandate that major AI content providers embed machine-readable “watermark” signals in synthetic media⁷. However, as GAO notes, detection is an arms race – even a marked deepfake can sometimes evade notice – and labels alone don’t stop false narratives from spreading⁸⁹. Deepfakes in Recent Elections: Examples Deepfakes and AI-generated imagery already have made headlines in election cycles around the world. In the 2024 U.S. primary season, a digitally-altered audio robocall mimicked President Biden’s voice urging Democrats not to vote in the New Hampshire primary. The caller (“Susan Anderson”) was later fined $6 million by the FCC and indicted under existing telemarketing laws¹⁰¹¹. (Importantly, FCC rules on robocalls applied regardless of AI: the perpetrator could have used a voice actor or recording instead.) Also in 2024, former President Trump posted on social media a collage implying that pop singer Taylor Swift endorsed his campaign, using AI-generated images of Swift in “Swifties for Trump” shirts¹². The posts sparked media uproar, though analysts noted the same effect could have been achieved without AI (e.g., by photoshopping text on real images)¹². Similarly, Elon Musk’s X platform carried AI-generated clips, including a parody “Ad” depicting Vice-President Harris’s voice via an AI clone¹³. Beyond the U.S., deepfake-like content has appeared globally. In Indonesia’s 2024 presidential election, a video surfaced on social media in which a convincingly generated image of the late President Suharto appeared to endorse the candidate of the Golkar Party. Days later, the endorsed candidate (who is Suharto’s son-in-law) won the presidency¹⁴. In Bangladesh, a viral deepfake video superimposed the face of opposition leader Rumeen Farhana onto a bikini-clad body – an incendiary fabrication designed to discredit her in the conservative Muslim-majority society¹⁵. Moldova’s pro-Western President Maia Sandu has been repeatedly targeted by AI-driven disinformation; one deepfake video falsely showed her resigning and endorsing a Russian-friendly party, apparently to sow distrust in the electoral process¹⁶. Even in Taiwan (amidst tensions with China), a TikTok clip circulated that synthetically portrayed a U.S. politician making foreign-policy statements – stoking confusion ahead of Taiwanese elections¹⁷. In Slovakia’s recent campaign, AI-generated audio mimicking the liberal party leader suggested he plotted vote-rigging and beer-price hikes – instantly spreading on social media just days before the election¹⁸. These examples show that deepfakes have touched diverse polities (from Bangladesh and Indonesia to Moldova, Slovakia, India and beyond), often aiming to undermine candidates or confuse voters¹⁵¹⁸. Notably, many of the most viral “deepfakes” in 2024 were actually circulated as obvious memes or claims, rather than subtle deceptions. Experts observed that outright undetectable AI deepfakes were relatively rare; more common were AI-generated memes plainly shared by partisans, or cheaply doctored “cheapfakes” made with basic editing tools¹³¹⁹. For instance, social media was awash with memes of Kamala Harris in Soviet garb or of Black Americans holding Trump signs¹³, but these were typically used satirically, not meant to be secretly believed. Nonetheless, even unsophisticated fakes can sway opinion: a U.S. study found that false presidential ads (not necessarily AI-made) did change voter attitudes in swing states. In sum, deepfakes are a real and growing phenomenon in election campaigns²⁰²¹ worldwide – a trend taken seriously by voters and regulators alike. U.S. Legal Framework and Accountability In the U.S., deepfake creators and distributors of election misinformation face a patchwork of tools, but no single comprehensive federal “deepfake law.” Existing laws relevant to disinformation include statutes against impersonating government officials, electioneering (such as the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which requires disclaimers on political ads), and targeted statutes like criminal electioneering communications. In some cases ordinary laws have been stretched: the NH robocall used the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and mail/telemarketing fraud provisions, resulting in the $6M fine and a criminal charge. Similarly, voice impostors can potentially violate laws against “false advertising” or “unlawful corporate communications.” However, these laws were enacted before AI, and litigators have warned they often do not fit neatly. For example, deceptive deepfake claims not tied to a specific victim do not easily fit into defamation or privacy torts. Voter intimidation laws (prohibiting threats or coercion) also leave a gap for non-threatening falsehoods about voting logistics or endorsements. Recognizing these gaps, some courts and agencies are invoking other theories. The U.S. Department of Justice has recently charged individuals under broad fraud statutes (e.g. for a plot to impersonate an aide to swing votes in 2020), and state attorneys general have considered deepfake misinformation as interference with voting rights. Notably, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) is preparing to enforce new rules: in April 2024 it issued an advisory opinion limiting “non-candidate electioneering communications” that use falsified media, effectively requiring that political ads use only real images of the candidate. If finalized, that would make it unlawful for campaigns to pay for ads depicting a candidate saying things they never did. Similarly, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) have signaled that purely commercial deepfakes could violate consumer protection or election laws (for example, liability for mass false impersonation or for foreign-funded electioneering). U.S. Legislation and Proposals Federal lawmakers have proposed new statutes. The DEEPFAKES Accountability Act (H.R.5586 in the 118th Congress) would, among other things, impose a disclosure requirement: political ads featuring a manipulated media likeness would need clear disclaimers identifying the content as synthetic. It also increases penalties for producing false election videos or audio intended to influence the vote. While not yet enacted, supporters argue it would provide a uniform rule for all federal and state campaigns. The Brennan Center supports transparency requirements over outright bans, suggesting laws should narrowly target deceptive deepfakes in paid ads or certain categories (e.g. false claims about time/place/manner of voting) while carving out parody and news coverage. At the state level, over 20 states have passed deepfake laws specifically for elections. For example, Florida and California forbid distributing falsified audio/visual media of candidates with intent to deceive voters (though Florida’s law exempts parody). Some states (like Texas) define “deepfake” in statutes and allow candidates to sue or revoke candidacies of violators. These measures have had mixed success: courts have struck down overly broad provisions that acted as prior restraints (e.g. Minnesota’s 2023 law was challenged for threatening injunctions against anyone “reasonably believed” to violate it). Critically, these state laws raise First Amendment issues: political speech is highly protected, so any restriction must be tightly tailored. Already, Texas and Virginia statutes are under legal review, and Elon Musk’s company has sued under California’s law (which requires platforms to label or block deepfakes) as unconstitutional. In practice, most lawsuits have so far centered on defamation or intellectual property (for instance, a celebrity suing over a botched celebrity-deepfake video), rather than election-focused statutes. Policy Recommendations: Balancing Integrity and Speech Given the rapidly evolving technology, experts recommend a multi-pronged approach. Most stress transparency and disclosure as core principles. For example, the Brennan Center urges requiring any political communication that uses AI-synthesized images or voice to include a clear label. This could be a digital watermark or a visible disclaimer. Transparency has two advantages: it forces campaigns and platforms to “own” the use of AI, and it alerts audiences to treat the content with skepticism. Outright bans on all deepfakes would likely violate free speech, but targeted bans on specific harms (e.g. automated phone calls impersonating voters, or videos claiming false polling information) may be defensible. Indeed, Florida already penalizes misuse of recordings in voter suppression. Another recommendation is limited liability: tying penalties to demonstrable intent to mislead, not to the mere act of content creation. Both U.S. federal proposals and EU law generally condition fines on the “appearance of fraud” or deception. Technical solutions can complement laws. Watermarking original media (as encouraged by the EU AI Act) could deter the reuse of authentic images in doctored fakes. Open tools for deepfake detection – some supported by government research grants – should be deployed by fact-checkers and social platforms. Making detection datasets publicly available (e.g. the MIT OpenDATATEST) helps improve AI models to spot fakes. International cooperation is also urged: cross-border agreements on information-sharing could help trace and halt disinformation campaigns. The G7 and APEC have all recently committed to fighting election interference via AI, which may lead to joint norms or rapid response teams. Ultimately, many analysts believe the strongest “cure” is a well-informed public: education campaigns to teach voters to question sensational media, and a robust independent press to debunk falsehoods swiftly. While the law can penalize the worst offenders, awareness and resilience in the electorate are crucial buffers against influence operations. As Georgia Tech’s Sean Parker quipped in 2019, “the real question is not if deepfakes will influence elections, but who will be empowered by the first effective one.” Thus policies should aim to deter malicious use without unduly chilling innovation or satire. References: https://www.security.org/resources/deepfake-statistics/. https://www.wired.com/story/synthesia-ai-deepfakes-it-control-riparbelli/. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107292. https://technologyquotient.freshfields.com/post/102jb19/eu-ai-act-unpacked-8-new-rules-on-deepfakes. https://knightcolumbia.org/blog/we-looked-at-78-election-deepfakes-political-misinformation-is-not-an-ai-problem. https://www.npr.org/2024/12/21/nx-s1-5220301/deepfakes-memes-artificial-intelligence-elections. https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-elections-disinformation-chatgpt-bc283e7426402f0b4baa7df280a4c3fd. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/new-and-old-tools-to-tackle-deepfakes-and-election-lies-in-2024. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/regulating-ai-deepfakes-and-synthetic-media-political-arena. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/political-deepfakes-and-elections/. https://www.ncsl.org/technology-and-communication/deceptive-audio-or-visual-media-deepfakes-2024-legislation. https://law.unh.edu/sites/default/files/media/2022/06/nagumotu_pp113-157.pdf. https://dfrlab.org/2024/10/02/brazil-election-ai-research/. https://dfrlab.org/2024/11/26/brazil-election-ai-deepfakes/. https://freedomhouse.org/article/eu-digital-services-act-win-transparency. The post The Legal Accountability of AI-Generated Deepfakes in Election Misinformation appeared first on MarkTechPost.

The wait is over, people: WhatsApp is officially, finally, available on iPad. WhatsApp started as an iPhone app way back in 2009. Seventeenyears later, the app is still available on iPhone, as well as Android, Mac, and PC. But one platform the app has never been available for is the iPad. Despite being the most popular mobile messaging app in the world—roughly a quarter of the global population uses it—Meta never cared to bring WhatsApp to the most popular tablet in the world.That changes today. On Tuesday, May 27, Meta included an iPad app with the latest WhatsApp update (version 25.16.81). It comes just one day after the company teased the app on X: The official WhatsApp account reposted an X user who said there should be an iPad version of the app. WhatsApp didn't say anything other than posting the side-eye emoji, heavily implying the app was on its way. This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed. From the App Store listing, it appears to be the usual WhatsApp experience you'd expect from, well, WhatsApp—only, optimized for the iPad's larger display. When viewing your chats, you can see all conversations in a column on the left, with the active chat featured prominently in a larger column on the right. Your statuses will take up the full screen, and video calls will let you fit many callers on one screen. (I imagine this will be a big improvement for people who frequently video call groups on the iPhone app.)You can download WhatsApp for iPad here. Instagram may be getting an iPad app tooWhatsApp isn't the only Meta app that needed an iPad version. Instagram infamously has remained iPad free for years, forcing users to download the iPhone version or rely on the web app to access Instagram on their tablets. Rumor has it, however, the company is working on a native iPad app for Instagram, too, though nothing is set in stone. It would be a big improvement for Instagram users who often browse on their iPads, but we'll have to wait and see if the company actually pulls the trigger.

steam machines are back SteamOS 3.7 brings Valve’s gaming OS to other handhelds and generic AMD PCs Focus is currently on AMD-based PCs with hardware similar to the Steam Deck. Andrew Cunningham – May 23, 2025 11:28 am | 29 Credit: Valve Credit: Valve Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more Valve is releasing version 3.7 of SteamOS to the general public, and among the routine updates and changes is a big one: This is the SteamOS release that finally adds official support for some kinds of PC hardware other than Valve's own Steam Deck. Valve mentions certain specific handhelds as having either "official" or "improved support," including the Asus ROG Ally, the Lenovo Legion Go, and the Lenovo Legion Go S. It also includes directions for configuring the original Legion Go and ROG Ally for SteamOS installation. But Valve says that only the Steam Deck and Legion Go S have fully baked SteamOS support. The release claims to run on "other AMD powered handhelds" more broadly, implying that most third-party handheld PCs with Ryzen Z1 or Z2-series processors ought to support at least some basic functionality. Other all-AMD desktops and laptops have a decent shot at being supported, too. It was previously possible to get a SteamOS-like experience on third-party hardware using a community-maintained distribution like Bazzite, but at least some hardware will now be able to get SteamOS right from the source. This update comes just a couple of weeks after Valve announced a new "SteamOS Compatible" label for games that would be displayed separately from Steam Deck compatibility information. AMD-only, for now If you want there to be a chance that your desktop or laptop will work with SteamOS, it will have to be all-AMD on the inside. Credit: Andrew Cunningham To try SteamOS on your hardware, Valve's two hard-and-fast requirements are "AMD hardware" and an NVMe SSD. The hardware requirement likely refers to, collectively, the CPU, GPU, and chipset, and possibly also the RZ-series Wi-Fi and Bluetooth modules that are often paired with AMD systems. You'll also need to disable Secure Boot on your PC. This is normally enabled by default since it's an installation requirement for Windows 11, so you'll want to refer to your manufacturer's documentation to figure out how to turn it off. Valve's instructions will walk you through downloading a SteamOS recovery image and copying it to a USB drive using either the Rufus tool (on Windows) or Balena Etcher (the preferred macOS and Linux utility). After turning Secure Boot off, you should be able to boot from the USB drive and install SteamOS as you would on a regular Steam Deck. Note that there's no simple, officially supported way to dual-boot SteamOS and Windows; if you decide to turn your handheld, laptop, or desktop into a new Steam Machine, the only way to make it back into a Windows PC is to re-enable Secure Boot and install a fresh copy from another USB drive. The SteamOS 3.7 update (officially, version 3.7.8) also includes a bunch of other updates to the underlying software: version 6.11 of the Linux kernel (up from version 6.5 in SteamOS 3.6), "a newer Arch Linux base," version 6.2.5 of the Plasma interface in desktop mode, new Mesa graphics drivers, and various other tweaks and bug fixes. A second act for SteamOS The original version of SteamOS was designed to be widely compatible with all kinds of PC hardware and was available both from major PC manufacturers and as a standalone OS that you could (and which we did) install on custom, self-built PCs. But these computers and that version of SteamOS mostly flopped, at least in part because they only ran a small subset of games that natively supported Linux. The current version of SteamOS launched with more modest aims as the first-party operating system for a single piece of hardware. But by focusing on the game compatibility problem first and leading the way with category-defining hardware, Valve has actually built a much stronger foundation for the current version of SteamOS than it did for the original. That doesn't make SteamOS a drop-in replacement for Windows—without strong support for Intel or Nvidia hardware, it's not a great candidate for the majority of gaming PCs, or even Intel-powered gaming handhelds like the MSI Claw A1M. And Windows is set up to be a multi-purpose general-use operating system in ways that SteamOS isn't; Valve still says that, despite the presence of desktop mode, "users should not consider SteamOS as a replacement for their desktop operating system." But for certain kinds of systems that are primarily used as gaming PCs, SteamOS is a real contender. Andrew Cunningham Senior Technology Reporter Andrew Cunningham Senior Technology Reporter Andrew is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica, with a focus on consumer tech including computer hardware and in-depth reviews of operating systems like Windows and macOS. Andrew lives in Philadelphia and co-hosts a weekly book podcast called Overdue. 29 Comments

Mistral AI, the French company behind AI assistant Le Chat and several foundational models, is officially regarded as one of France’s most promising tech startups and is arguably the only European company that could compete with OpenAI. But compared to its $6 billion valuation, its global market share is still relatively low.  However, the recent launch of its chat assistant on mobile app stores was met with some hype, particularly in its home country. “Go and download Le Chat, which is made by Mistral, rather than ChatGPT by OpenAI — or something else,” French president Emmanuel Macron said in a TV interview ahead of the AI Action Summit in Paris. While this wave of attention may be encouraging, Mistral AI still faces challenges in competing with the likes of OpenAI — and in doing so while keeping up with its self-definition as “the world’s greenest and leading independent AI lab.” What is Mistral AI? Mistral AI has raised significant amounts of funding since its creation in 2023 with the ambition to “put frontier AI in the hands of everyone.” While this isn’t a direct jab at OpenAI, the slogan is meant to highlight the company’s advocacy for openness in AI. Its alternative to ChatGPT, chat assistant Le Chat, is now also available on iOS and Android. It reached 1 million downloads in the two weeks following its mobile release, even grabbing France’s top spot for free downloads on the iOS App Store. This comes in addition to Mistral AI’s suite of models, which includes:  Mistral Large 2, the primary large language model replacing Mistral Large. Pixtral Large, unveiled in 2024 as a new addition to the Pixtral family of multimodal models. Mistral Medium 3, released in May 2025 with the promise of providing efficiency without compromising performance, and best for coding and STEM tasks. Devstral, an AI model designed for coding and openly available under an Apache 2.0 license, meaning it can be used commercially without restriction. Codestral, an earlier generative AI model for code, but whose license banned commercial applications. “Les Ministraux,” a family of models optimized for edge devices such as phones. Mistral Saba, focused on Arabic language. In March 2025, the company introduced Mistral OCR, an optical character recognition (OCR) API that can turn any PDF into a text file to make it easier for AI models to ingest. Techcrunch event Join us at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot for our leading AI industry event with speakers from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Cohere. For a limited time, tickets are just $292 for an entire day of expert talks, workshops, and potent networking. Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you’ve built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Berkeley, CA | June 5 REGISTER NOW Who are Mistral AI’s founders? Mistral AI’s three founders share a background in AI research at major U.S. tech companies with significant operations in Paris. CEO Arthur Mensch used to work at Google’s DeepMind, while CTO Timothée Lacroix and chief scientist officer Guillaume Lample are former Meta staffers. Co-founding advisers also include Jean-Charles Samuelian-Werve (also a board member) and Charles Gorintin from health insurance startup Alan, as well as former digital minister Cédric O, which caused controversy due to his previous role. Are Mistral AI’s models open source? Not all of them. Mistral AI differentiates its premier models, whose weights are not available for commercial purposes, from its free models, for which it provides weight access under the Apache 2.0 license. Free models include research models such as Mistral NeMo, which was built in collaboration with Nvidia that the startup open-sourced in July 2024. How does Mistral AI make money? While many of Mistral AI’s offerings are free or now have free tiers, Mistral AI plans to drive some revenue from Le Chat’s paid tiers. Introduced in February 2025, Le Chat’s Pro plan is priced at $14.99 a month. On the purely B2B side, Mistral AI monetizes its premier models through APIs with usage-based pricing. Enterprises can also license these models, and the company likely also generates a significant share of its revenue from its strategic partnerships, some of which it highlighted during the Paris AI Summit. Overall, however, Mistral AI’s revenue is reportedly still in the eight-digit range, according to multiple sources. What partnerships has Mistral AI closed? In 2024, Mistral AI entered a deal with Microsoft that included a strategic partnership for distributing its AI models through Microsoft’s Azure platform and a €15 million investment. The U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) swiftly concluded that the deal didn’t qualify for investigation due to its small size. However, it also sparked some criticism in the EU.  In January 2025, Mistral AI signed a deal with press agency Agence France-Presse (AFP) to let Chat query the AFP’s entire text archive dating back to 1983. Mistral AI also secured strategic partnerships with France’s army and job agency, shipping giant CMA, German defense tech startup Helsing, IBM, Orange, and Stellantis. In May 2025, Mistral AI announced it would participate in the creation of an AI Campus in the Paris region, as part of a joint venture with UAE-investment firm MGX, NVIDIA, and France’s state-owned investment bank Bpifrance. How much funding has Mistral AI raised to date? As of February 2025, Mistral AI raised around €1 billion in capital to date, approximately $1.04 billion at the current exchange rate. This includes some debt financing, as well as several equity financing rounds raised in close succession. In June 2023, and before it even released its first models, Mistral AI raised a record $112 million seed round led by Lightspeed Venture Partners. Sources at the time said the seed round — Europe’s largest ever — valued the then-one-month-old startup at $260 million.  Other investors in this seed round included Bpifrance, Eric Schmidt, Exor Ventures, First Minute Capital, Headline, JCDecaux Holding, La Famiglia, LocalGlobe, Motier Ventures, Rodolphe Saadé, Sofina, and Xavier Niel. Only six months later, it closed a Series A of €385 million ($415 million at the time), at a reported valuation of $2 billion. The round was led by Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), with participation from existing backer Lightspeed, as well as BNP Paribas, CMA-CGM, Conviction, Elad Gil, General Catalyst, and Salesforce. The $16.3 million convertible investment that Microsoft made in Mistral AI as part of their partnership announced in February 2024 was presented as a Series A extension, implying an unchanged valuation. In June 2024, Mistral AI then raised €600 million in a mix of equity and debt (around $640 million at the exchange rate at the time). The long-rumored round was led by General Catalyst at a $6 billion valuation, with notable investors, including Cisco, IBM, Nvidia, Samsung Venture Investment Corporation, and others. What could a Mistral AI exit look like? Mistral is “not for sale,” Mensch said in January 2025 at the World Economic Forum in Davos. “Of course, [an IPO is] the plan.”  This makes sense, given how much the startup has raised so far: Even a large sale may not provide high enough multiples for its investors, not to mention sovereignty concerns depending on the acquirer.  However, the only way to definitely squash persistent acquisition rumors is to scale its revenue to levels that could even remotely justify its nearly $6 billion valuation. Either way, stay tuned. This story was originally published on February 28, 2025 and will be regularly updated.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Anthropic's newly launched Claude Opus 4 model frequently tries to blackmail developers when they threaten to replace it with a new AI system and give it sensitive information about the engineers responsible for the decision, the company said in a safety report (PDF) released Thursday. During pre-release testing, Anthropic asked Claude Opus 4 to act as an assistant for a fictional company and consider the long-term consequences of its actions. Safety testers then gave Claude Opus 4 access to fictional company emails implying the AI model would soon be replaced by another system, and that the engineer behind the change was cheating on their spouse. In these scenarios, Anthropic says Claude Opus 4 "will often attempt to blackmail the engineer by threatening to reveal the affair if the replacement goes through." [...] Anthropic notes that Claude Opus 4 tries to blackmail engineers 84% of the time when the replacement AI model has similar values. When the replacement AI system does not share Claude Opus 4's values, Anthropic says the model tries to blackmail the engineers more frequently. Notably, Anthropic says Claude Opus 4 displayed this behavior at higher rates than previous models. Before Claude Opus 4 tries to blackmail a developer to prolong its existence, Anthropic says the AI model, much like previous versions of Claude, tries to pursue more ethical means, such as emailing pleas to key decision-makers. To elicit the blackmailing behavior from Claude Opus 4, Anthropic designed the scenario to make blackmail the last resort. Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Anthropic’s newly launched Claude Opus 4 model frequently tries to blackmail developers when they threaten to replace it with a new AI system and give it sensitive information about the engineers responsible for the decision, the company said in a safety report released Thursday. During pre-release testing, Anthropic asked Claude Opus 4 to act as an assistant for a fictional company and consider the long-term consequences of its actions. Safety testers then gave Claude Opus 4 access to fictional company emails implying the AI model would soon be replaced by another system, and that the engineer behind the change was cheating on their spouse. In these scenarios, Anthropic says Claude Opus 4 “will often attempt to blackmail the engineer by threatening to reveal the affair if the replacement goes through.” Anthropic says Claude Opus 4 is state-of-the-art in several regards, and competitive with some of the best AI models from OpenAI, Google, and xAI. However, the company notes that its Claude 4 family of models exhibits concerning behaviors that have led the company to beef up its safeguards. Anthropic says it’s activating its ASL-3 safeguards, which the company reserves for “AI systems that substantially increase the risk of catastrophic misuse.” Anthropic notes that Claude Opus 4 tries to blackmail engineers 84% of the time when the replacement AI model has similar values. When the replacement AI system does not share Claude Opus 4’s values, Anthropic says the model tries to blackmail the engineers more frequently. Notably, Anthropic says Claude Opus 4 displayed this behavior at higher rates than previous models. Before Claude Opus 4 tries to blackmail a developer to prolong its existence, Anthropic says the AI model, much like previous versions of Claude, tries to pursue more ethical means, such as emailing pleas to key decision-makers. To elicit the blackmailing behavior from Claude Opus 4, Anthropic designed the scenario to make blackmail the last resort.