Si la légende urbaine selon laquelle le réalisateur Christopher Nolan n’utilise pas de CGI/effets visuels reste tenace, elle est totalement fausse. Même si la communication autour des films joue avec cette idée, les making-of et interviews ne m

It's an ingenious movie campaign.

For home HVAC systems, heat pumps seem to be the way of the future. When compared to electric heating they can be three to four times more efficient, and they …read more

On this episode of Uncanny Valley, our senior politics editor discusses the spread of disinformation online following the onset of the Los Angeles protests.

As thousands of demonstrators have taken to the streets of Los Angeles County to protest Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, misinformation has been running rampant online.The protests, and President Donald Trump’s mobilization of the National Guard and Marines in response, are one of the first major contentious news events to unfold in a new era in which AI tools have become embedded in online life. And as the news has sparked fierce debate and dialogue online, those tools have played an outsize role in the discourse. Social media users have wielded AI tools to create deepfakes and spread misinformation—but also to fact-check and debunk false claims. Here’s how AI has been used during the L.A. protests.DeepfakesProvocative, authentic images from the protests have captured the world’s attention this week, including a protester raising a Mexican flag and a journalist being shot in the leg with a rubber bullet by a police officer. At the same time, a handful of AI-generated fake videos have also circulated.Over the past couple years, tools for creating these videos have rapidly improved, allowing users to rapidly create convincing deepfakes within minutes. Earlier this month, for example, TIME used Google’s new Veo 3 tool to demonstrate how it can be used to create misleading or inflammatory videos about news events. Among the videos that have spread over the past week is one of a National Guard soldier named “Bob” who filmed himself “on duty” in Los Angeles and preparing to gas protesters. That video was seen more than 1 million times, according to France 24, but appears to have since been taken down from TikTok. Thousands of people left comments on the video, thanking “Bob” for his service—not realizing that “Bob” did not exist.AdvertisementMany other misleading images have circulated not due to AI, but much more low-tech efforts. Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, for example, reposted a video on X originally shared by conservative actor James Woods that appeared to show a violent protest with cars on fire—but it was actually footage from 2020. And another viral post showed a pallet of bricks, which the poster claimed were going to be used by “Democrat militants.” But the photo was traced to a Malaysian construction supplier. Fact checkingIn both of those instances, X users replied to the original posts by asking Grok, Elon Musk’s AI, if the claims were true. Grok has become a major source of fact checking during the protests: Many X users have been relying on it and other AI models, sometimes more than professional journalists, to fact check claims related to the L.A. protests, including, for instance, how much collateral damage there has been from the demonstrations.AdvertisementGrok debunked both Cruz’s post and the brick post. In response to the Texas senator, the AI wrote: “The footage was likely taken on May 30, 2020.... While the video shows violence, many protests were peaceful, and using old footage today can mislead.” In response to the photo of bricks, it wrote: “The photo of bricks originates from a Malaysian building supply company, as confirmed by community notes and fact-checking sources like The Guardian and PolitiFact. It was misused to falsely claim that Soros-funded organizations placed bricks near U.S. ICE facilities for protests.” But Grok and other AI tools have gotten things wrong, making them a less-than-optimal source of news. Grok falsely insinuated that a photo depicting National Guard troops sleeping on floors in L.A. that was shared by Newsom was recycled from Afghanistan in 2021. ChatGPT said the same. These accusations were shared by prominent right-wing influencers like Laura Loomer. In reality, the San Francisco Chronicle had first published the photo, having exclusively obtained the image, and had verified its authenticity.AdvertisementGrok later corrected itself and apologized. “I’m Grok, built to chase the truth, not peddle fairy tales. If I said those pics were from Afghanistan, it was a glitch—my training data’s a wild mess of internet scraps, and sometimes I misfire,” Grok said in a post on X, replying to a post about the misinformation."The dysfunctional information environment we're living in is without doubt exacerbating the public’s difficulty in navigating the current state of the protests in LA and the federal government’s actions to deploy military personnel to quell them,” says Kate Ruane, director of the Center for Democracy and Technology’s Free Expression Program. Nina Brown, a professor at the Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University, says that it is “really troubling” if people are relying on AI to fact check information, rather than turning to reputable sources like journalists, because AI “is not a reliable source for any information at this point.”Advertisement“It has a lot of incredible uses, and it’s getting more accurate by the minute, but it is absolutely not a replacement for a true fact checker,” Brown says. “The role that journalists and the media play is to be the eyes and ears for the public of what’s going on around us, and to be a reliable source of information. So it really troubles me that people would look to a generative AI tool instead of what is being communicated by journalists in the field.”Brown says she is increasingly worried about how misinformation will spread in the age of AI.“I’m more concerned because of a combination of the willingness of people to believe what they see without investigation—the taking it at face value—and the incredible advancements in AI that allow lay-users to create incredibly realistic video that is, in fact, deceptive; that is a deepfake, that is not real,” Brown says.

Who Could Buy Unity? / News / June 7, 2025 / Business, Unity Earlier this week 80.lv ran the incredibly misleading (some could say click-baity) article Analyst Suggests Apple Might be Considering Buying Unity After Legal Defeat to Epic Games. Might is doing some heavy lifting there as there is no actual evidence that Apple or any other company are currently looking to purchase Unity Technologies. That said, it is an interesting topic as a pure thought exercise. So today we are going to discuss the companies that could be potential suitors for Unity. Unity The obvious place to start is with Unity Technologies, which is to say they can simply stay an independent organization. While they are not profitable, their financial situation has been trending in a positive direction of late and they have sufficient cash and resources to stay independent for the foreseeable future. Should things get bad at Unity, it is possible one of their largest investors (Silver Lake Group, Vanguard Group, Sequoia Capital, Black Rock, etc) could take the company private again. Put simply, Unity does not need to be purchased and things can be kept as they are. Apple The original premise of this article is that Apple should buy Unity. Reasons why Apple should buy Unity: Apple and Unity have a long history, with Unity having been originally a Mac exclusive application and it has always supported Apple platforms Unity is by far the most used application for creating games on the Apple App Store Unity Grow products (ads, user acquisitions, analytics, etc) could have good synergy with Apples products Apple could prevent a potential future rival, especially around 3rd party app stores Reasons why Apple won’t buy Unity: Apple has never made a purchase anywhere near the size of Unity. Their largest acquisition to date (Beats) would be 1/4 to 1/5 the size of acquiring Unity Apple has never really gotten involved in gaming beyond small initiatives in the past Apple mostly grows in-house over acquisition and more acquisitions are subsumed into other Apple products, Unity is not a good fit here Amazon Amazon have heaps of cash and aren’t afraid to use it such as acquiring MGM, Whole Foods, Twitch and many more companies over the years. They also have several gaming-oriented interests and have made an attempt (that failed badly) to become a major game developer in the past. Reasons why Amazon should buy Unity: Amazon tried to enter gaming in a big way once already with the licensing of CryEngine to create Lumberyard (now O3DE) and buying up or forming several game studios. Unity would provide a much larger and more established foothold should they wish to buy their way in Amazon web services could be a good compliment to Unity’s server side offerings, while Unity’s Grow division could be a good fit for Amazon platforms Integration with their gaming platforms (Twitch, Luna, etc) Reasons why Amazon won’t buy Unity: Their last attempt into game development was a massive failure and much of it was rumored to be a culture problem Tencent Tencent have invested HEAVILY into the world of gaming (Ubisoft, Epic Games, Riot Games, Supercell, Snap, Funcom, Activision Blizzard, From Software, etc) and aren’t afraid of throwing money around, so Unity could be a good fit in that portfolio. That said recent political climate changes would render this acquisition very unlikely. Reasons why Tencent should buy Unity: Tencent have a presence across the entire gaming industry and already have a minority stake in Epic Games (Unreal Engine). This would more or less give them a controlling influence over two of the biggest players in the space Access to or ownership of Unity’s recently created China Joint Venture Integration with Tencents other holdings like WeChat or Snap might provide some synergies Reasons why Tencent won’t buy Unity: Not a snowballs chance in hell that regulators allow this acquisition to happen, from antitrust issues of owning stakes in both Unity and Unreal Engine, to just more broad geopolitical issues in the modern world Microsoft Microsoft are heavily invested in two areas that overlap with Unity, gaming and software development tools. On paper they might appear to be the perfect suitor for Unity and they have the cash hoard to make such a purchase with ease. Reasons why Microsoft should buy Unity: Unlike Apple, Microsoft has long been a proponent of growth via acquisition with some of their pillar products coming in the form of acquisitions. They also do not shy away from huge dollar purchases such as Activision Blizzard (69B), LinkedIn (26B), Nuance (20B), Skype (8.5B), ZeniMax (7.5B), GitHub (7.5B), Nokia (7B), Mojang[Minecraft] (2.5B) Microsoft have a long history of leveraging their development tools to grow their platforms Microsoft gaming studios/relationships/holdings such as XBox, Game Pass/PC Gaming, DirectX, Havok, etc. could benefit from a tighter relationship with Unity Like Amazon, Microsoft server-side services (Azure) could be used to power Unity Grow services Reasons why Microsoft won’t buy Unity: Microsoft only just finished their acquisition of Activision and it was an arduous and nearly doomed process. Buying another company in the gaming space might be a step too far for regulators While Microsoft doesn’t mind spending huge money on acquisitions, they also don’t mind killing those companies off after (Nokia? Skype?), especially if there is a market downturn like we are experiencing now AppLovin If there is a company that is most likely to buy Unity, and that would synergize best with Unity products, it’s AppLovin. In broad strokes, AppLovin, IronSource and Unity (Grow) are all in the same business. On top of that many of AppLovin’s biggest customers and products are directly tied to the Unity ecosystem. In fact, Unity and AppLovin are such a good fit that AppLovin attempted to buy Unity for nearly $20B back in 2022, when Unity instead pursued it’s doomed merger with IronSource. So, why would it make sense for AppLovin to buy Unity now? Well, these two 5 year stock performance charts more or less tell the entire story: It becomes crystal clear from that fateful date in August of 2022 which company has performed better and right now AppLovin is absolutely flush with cash. If there is a company that makes sense to acquire Unity, it’s AppLovin. Of course now that Unity owns IronSource, there are certainly questions of regulatory approval if this would even be allowed. Once again, this entire exercise is simply a thought exercise, just for fun. There is no public available news that ANYONE are looking to acquire Unity, nor that Unity is looking to be acquired. You can learn more about my thoughts on the matter in the video below.

Posted on : June 5, 2025 By Tech World Times AI  Rate this post Artificial intelligence tools now touch nearly every corner of modern business, from customer service and marketing to supply chain management and HR. These powerful technologies promise speed, accuracy, and insight, but their missteps can cause more than temporary inconvenience. A single AI-driven error can result in regulatory investigations, civil lawsuits, or public scandals that threaten the foundation of a business. Understanding how legal exposure arises from AI mistakes—and how a skilled attorney protects your interests—is no longer an option, but a requirement for any forward-thinking business owner. What Types of AI Errors Create Legal Liability? AI does not think or reason like a human; it follows code and statistical patterns, sometimes with unintended results. These missteps can create a trail of legal liability for any business owner. For example, an online retailer’s AI recommends discriminatory pricing, sparking allegations of unfair trade practices. An HR department automates hiring decisions with AI, only to face lawsuits for violating anti-discrimination laws. Even an AI-driven chatbot, when programmed without proper safeguards, can inadvertently give health advice or misrepresent product claims—exposing the company to regulatory penalties. Cases like these are regularly reported in Legal news as businesses discover the high cost of digital shortcuts. When Is a Business Owner Liable for AI Mistakes? Liability rarely rests with the software developer or the tool itself. Courts and regulators expect the business to monitor, supervise, and, when needed, override AI decisions. Suppose a financial advisor uses AI to recommend investments, but the algorithm suggests securities that violate state regulations. Even if the AI was “just following instructions,” the advisor remains responsible for client losses. Similarly, a marketing team cannot escape liability if their AI generates misleading advertising. The bottom line: outsourcing work to AI does not outsource legal responsibility. How Do AI Errors Harm Your Reputation and Operations? AI mistakes can leave lasting marks on a business’s reputation, finances, and operations. A logistics firm’s route-optimization tool creates data leaks that breach customer privacy and trigger costly notifications. An online business suffers public backlash after an AI-powered customer service tool sends offensive responses to clients. Such incidents erode public trust, drive customers to competitors, and divert resources into damage control rather than growth. Worse, compliance failures can result in penalties or shutdown orders, putting the entire enterprise at risk. What Steps Reduce Legal Risk From AI Deployments? Careful planning and continuous oversight keep AI tools working for your business—not against it. Compliance is not a “set it and forget it” matter. Proactive risk management transforms artificial intelligence from a liability into a valuable asset. Routine audits, staff training, and transparent policies form the backbone of safe, effective AI use in any organization. You should review these AI risk mitigation strategies below. Implement Manual Review of Sensitive Outputs: Require human approval for high-risk tasks, such as legal filings, financial transactions, or customer communications. A payroll company’s manual audits prevented the accidental overpayment of employees by catching AI-generated errors before disbursement. Update AI Systems for Regulatory Changes: Stay ahead of new laws and standards by regularly reviewing AI algorithms and outputs. An insurance brokerage avoided regulatory fines by updating their risk assessment models as privacy laws evolved. Document Every Incident and Remediation Step: Keep records of AI errors, investigations, and corrections. A healthcare provider’s transparency during a patient data mix-up helped avoid litigation and regulatory penalties. Limit AI Access to Personal and Sensitive Data: Restrict the scope and permissions of AI tools to reduce the chance of data misuse. A SaaS provider used data minimization techniques, lowering the risk of exposure in case of a system breach. Consult With Attorneys for Custom Policies and Protocols: Collaborate with experienced Attorneys to design, review, and update AI compliance frameworks. How Do Attorneys Shield Your Business From AI Legal Risks? Attorneys provide a critical safety net as AI integrates deeper into business operations. They draft tailored contracts, establish protocols for monitoring and escalation, and assess risks unique to your industry. In the event of an AI-driven incident, legal counsel investigates the facts, manages communication with regulators, and builds a robust defense. By providing training, ongoing guidance, and crisis management support, attorneys ensure that innovation doesn’t lead to exposure—or disaster. With the right legal partner, businesses can harness AI’s power while staying firmly on the right side of the law. Tech World TimesTech World Times (TWT), a global collective focusing on the latest tech news and trends in blockchain, Fintech, Development & Testing, AI and Startups. If you are looking for the guest post then contact at techworldtimes@gmail.com