Outdated coding practices and memory-unsafe languages like C are putting software, including cryptographic libraries, at risk. Fortunately, memory-safe languages like Rust, along with formal verification tools, are now mature enough to be used at scale, helping prevent issues like crashes, data corruption, flawed implementation, and side-channel attacks. To address these vulnerabilities and improve memory safety, we’re rewriting SymCrypt (opens in new tab)—Microsoft’s open-source cryptographic library—in Rust. We’re also incorporating formal verification methods. SymCrypt is used in Windows, Azure Linux, Xbox, and other platforms. Currently, SymCrypt is primarily written in cross-platform C, with limited use of hardware-specific optimizations through intrinsics (compiler-provided low-level functions) and assembly language (direct processor instructions). It provides a wide range of algorithms, including AES-GCM, SHA, ECDSA, and the more recent post-quantum algorithms ML-KEM and ML-DSA.  Formal verification will confirm that implementations behave as intended and don’t deviate from algorithm specifications, critical for preventing attacks. We’ll also analyze compiled code to detect side-channel leaks caused by timing or hardware-level behavior. Proving Rust program properties with Aeneas Program verification is the process of proving that a piece of code will always satisfy a given property, no matter the input. Rust’s type system profoundly improves the prospects for program verification by providing strong ownership guarantees, by construction, using a discipline known as “aliasing xor mutability”. For example, reasoning about C code often requires proving that two non-const pointers are live and non-overlapping, a property that can depend on external client code. In contrast, Rust’s type system guarantees this property for any two mutably borrowed references. As a result, new tools have emerged specifically for verifying Rust code. We chose Aeneas (opens in new tab) because it helps provide a clean separation between code and proofs. Developed by Microsoft Azure Research in partnership with Inria, the French National Institute for Research in Digital Science and Technology, Aeneas connects to proof assistants like Lean (opens in new tab), allowing us to draw on a large body of mathematical proofs—especially valuable given the mathematical nature of cryptographic algorithms—and benefit from Lean’s active user community. Compiling Rust to C supports backward compatibility   We recognize that switching to Rust isn’t feasible for all use cases, so we’ll continue to support, extend, and certify C-based APIs as long as users need them. Users won’t see any changes, as Rust runs underneath the existing C APIs. Some users compile our C code directly and may rely on specific toolchains or compiler features that complicate the adoption of Rust code. To address this, we will use Eurydice (opens in new tab), a Rust-to-C compiler developed by Microsoft Azure Research, to replace handwritten C code with C generated from formally verified Rust. Eurydice (opens in new tab) compiles directly from Rust’s MIR intermediate language, and the resulting C code will be checked into the SymCrypt repository alongside the original Rust source code. As more users adopt Rust, we’ll continue supporting this compilation path for those who build SymCrypt from source code but aren’t ready to use the Rust compiler. In the long term, we hope to transition users to either use precompiled SymCrypt binaries (via C or Rust APIs), or compile from source code in Rust, at which point the Rust-to-C compilation path will no longer be needed. Microsoft research podcast Ideas: AI and democracy with Madeleine Daepp and Robert Osazuwa Ness As the “biggest election year in history” comes to an end, researchers Madeleine Daepp and Robert Osazuwa Ness and Democracy Forward GM Ginny Badanes discuss AI’s impact on democracy, including the tech’s use in Taiwan and India. Listen now Opens in a new tab Timing analysis with Revizor  Even software that has been verified for functional correctness can remain vulnerable to low-level security threats, such as side channels caused by timing leaks or speculative execution. These threats operate at the hardware level and can leak private information, such as memory load addresses, branch targets, or division operands, even when the source code is provably correct.  To address this, we’re extending Revizor (opens in new tab), a tool developed by Microsoft Azure Research, to more effectively analyze SymCrypt binaries. Revizor models microarchitectural leakage and uses fuzzing techniques to systematically uncover instructions that may expose private information through known hardware-level effects.   Earlier cryptographic libraries relied on constant-time programming to avoid operations on secret data. However, recent research has shown that this alone is insufficient with today’s CPUs, where every new optimization may open a new side channel.  By analyzing binary code for specific compilers and platforms, our extended Revizor tool enables deeper scrutiny of vulnerabilities that aren’t visible in the source code. Verified Rust implementations begin with ML-KEM This long-term effort is in alignment with the Microsoft Secure Future Initiative and brings together experts across Microsoft, building on decades of Microsoft Research investment in program verification and security tooling. A preliminary version of ML-KEM in Rust is now available on the preview feature/verifiedcrypto (opens in new tab) branch of the SymCrypt repository. We encourage users to try the Rust build and share feedback (opens in new tab). Looking ahead, we plan to support direct use of the same cryptographic library in Rust without requiring C bindings.  Over the coming months, we plan to rewrite, verify, and ship several algorithms in Rust as part of SymCrypt. As our investment in Rust deepens, we expect to gain new insights into how to best leverage the language for high-assurance cryptographic implementations with low-level optimizations.  As performance is key to scalability and sustainability, we’re holding new implementations to a high bar using our benchmarking tools to match or exceed existing systems. Looking forward  This is a pivotal moment for high-assurance software. Microsoft’s investment in Rust and formal verification presents a rare opportunity to advance one of our key libraries. We’re excited to scale this work and ultimately deliver an industrial-grade, Rust-based, FIPS-certified cryptographic library. Opens in a new tab

Last year, MACK Books published Architecture from Below, which anthologized writings by the French Brazilian architect, theorist, and painter Sérgio Ferro. (Douglas Spencer reviewed it for AN.) Now, MACK follows with Design and the Building Site and Complementary Essays, the second in the trilogy of books dedicated to Ferro’s scholarship. The following excerpt of the author’s 2023 preface to the English edition, which preserves its British phrasing, captures Ferro’s realization about the working conditions of construction sites in Brasília. The sentiment is likely relatable even today for young architects as they discover how drawings become buildings. Design and the Building Site and Complementary Essays will be released on May 22. If I remember correctly, it was in 1958 or 1959, when Rodrigo and I were second- or third year architecture students at FAUUSP, that my father, the real estate developer Armando Simone Pereira, commissioned us to design two large office buildings and eleven shops in Brasilia, which was then under construction. Of course, we were not adequately prepared for such an undertaking. Fortunately, Oscar Niemeyer and his team, who were responsible for overseeing the construction of the capital, had drawn up a detailed document determining the essential characteristics of all the private sector buildings. We followed these prescriptions to the letter, which saved us from disaster. Nowadays, it is hard to imagine the degree to which the construction of Brasilia inspired enthusiasm and professional pride in the country’s architects. And in the national imagination, the city’s establishment in the supposedly unpopulated hinterland evoked a re-founding of Brazil. Up until that point, the occupation of our immense territory had been reduced to a collection of arborescent communication routes, generally converging upon some river, following it up to the Atlantic Ocean. Through its ports, agricultural or extractive commodities produced by enslaved peoples or their substitutes passed towards the metropolises; goods were exchanged in the metropolises for more elaborate products, which took the opposite route. Our national identity was summed up in a few symbols, such as the anthem or the flag, and this scattering of paths pointing overseas. Brasilia would radically change this situation, or so we believed. It would create a central hub where the internal communication routes could converge, linking together hithertoseparate junctions, stimulating trade and economic progress in the country’s interior. It was as if, for the first time, we were taking care of ourselves. At the nucleus of this centripetal movement, architecture would embody the renaissance. And at the naval of the nucleus, the symbolic mandala of this utopia: the cathedral. Rodrigo and I got caught up in the euphoria. And perhaps more so than our colleagues, because we were taking part in the adventure with ‘our’ designs. The reality was very different — but we did not know that yet. At that time, architects in Brazil were responsible for verifying that the construction was in line with the design. We had already monitored some of our first building sites. But the construction company in charge of them, Osmar Souza e Silva’s CENPLA, specialized in the building sites of modernist architects from the so-called Escola Paulista led by Vilanova Artigas (which we aspired to be a part of, like the pretentious students we were). Osmar was very attentive to his clients and his workers, who formed a supportive and helpful team. He was even more careful with us, because he knew how inexperienced we were. I believe that the CENPLA was particularly important in São Paulo modernism: with its congeniality, it facilitated experimentation, but for the same reason, it deceived novices like us about the reality of other building sites. Consequently, Rodrigo and I travelled to Brasilia several times to check that the constructions followed ‘our’ designs and to resolve any issues. From the very first trip, our little bubble burst. Our building sites, like all the others in the future capital, bore no relation to Osmar’s. They were more like a branch of hell. A huge, muddy wasteland, in which a few cranes, pile drivers, tractors, and excavators dotted the mound of scaffolding occupied by thousands of skinny, seemingly exhausted wretches, who were nevertheless driven on by the shouts of master builders and foremen, in turn pressured by the imminence of the fateful inauguration date. Surrounding or huddled underneath the marquees of buildings under construction, entire families, equally skeletal and ragged, were waiting for some accident or death to open up a vacancy. In contact only with the master builders, and under close surveillance so we would not speak to the workers, we were not allowed to see what comrades who had worked on these sites later told us in prison: suicide abounded; escape was known to be futile in the unpopulated surroundings with no viable roads; fatal accidents were often caused by weakness due to chronic diarrhoea, brought on by rotten food that came from far away; outright theft took place in the calculation of wages and expenses in the contractor’s grocery store; camps were surrounded by law enforcement. I repeat this anecdote yet again not to invoke the benevolence of potential readers, but rather to point out the conditions that, in my opinion, allowed two students (Flávio Império joined us a little later) still in their professional infancy to quickly adopt positions that were contrary to the usual stance of architects. As the project was more Oscar Niemeyer’s than it was our own, we did not have the same emotional attachment that is understandably engendered between real authors and their designs. We had not yet been imbued with the charm and aura of the métier. And the only building sites we had visited thus far, Osmar’s, were incomparable to those we discovered in Brasilia. In short, our youthfulness and unpreparedness up against an unbearable situation made us react almost immediately to the profession’s satisfied doxa. Unprepared and young perhaps, but already with Marx by our side. Rodrigo and I joined the student cell of the Brazilian Communist Party during our first year at university. In itself, this did not help us much: the Party’s Marxism, revised in the interests of the USSR, was pitiful. Even high-level leaders rarely went beyond the first chapter of Capital. But at the end of the 1950s, the effervescence of the years to come was already nascent:  […] this extraordinary revival […] the rediscovery of Marxism and the great dialectical texts and traditions in the 1960s: an excitement that identifies a forgotten or repressed moment of the past as the new and subversive, and learns the dialectical grammar of a Hegel or an Adorno, a Marx or a Lukács, like a foreign language that has resources unavailable in our own. And what is more: the Chinese and Cuban revolutions, the war in Vietnam, guerrilla warfare of all kinds, national liberation movements, and a rare libertarian disposition in contemporary history, totally averse to fanaticism and respect for ideological apparatuses of (any) state or institution. Going against the grain was almost the norm. We were of course no more than contemporaries of our time. We were soon able to position ourselves from chapters 13, 14, and 15 of Capital, but only because we could constantly cross-reference Marx with our observations from well-contrasted building sites and do our own experimenting. As soon as we identified construction as manufacture, for example, thanks to the willingness and even encouragement of two friends and clients, Boris Fausto and Bernardo Issler, I was able to test both types of manufacture — organic and heterogeneous — on similar-sized projects taking place simultaneously, in order to find out which would be most convenient for the situation in Brazil, particularly in São Paulo. Despite the scientific shortcomings of these tests, they sufficed for us to select organic manufacture. Arquitetura Nova had defined its line of practice, studies, and research. There were other sources that were central to our theory and practice. Flávio Império was one of the founders of the Teatro de Arena, undoubtedly the vanguard of popular, militant theatre in Brazil. He won practically every set design award. He brought us his marvelous findings in spatial condensation and malleability, and in the creative diversion of techniques and material—appropriate devices for an underdeveloped country. This is what helped us pave the way to reformulating the reigning design paradigms.  We had to do what Flávio had done in the theatre: thoroughly rethink how to be an architect. Upend the perspective. The way we were taught was to start from a desired result; then others would take care of getting there, no matter how. We, on the other hand, set out to go down to the building site and accompany those carrying out the labor itself, those who actually build, the formally subsumed workers in manufacture who are increasingly deprived of the knowledge and know-how presupposed by this kind of subsumption. We should have been fostering the reconstitution of this knowledge and know-how—not so as to fulfil this assumption, but in order to reinvigorate the other side of this assumption according to Marx: the historical rebellion of the manufacture worker, especially the construction worker. We had to rekindle the demand that fueled this rebellion: total self-determination, and not just that of the manual operation as such. Our aim was above all political and ethical. Aesthetics only mattered by way of what it included—ethics. Instead of estética, we wrote est ética [this is ethics]. We wanted to make building sites into nests for the return of revolutionary syndicalism, which we ourselves had yet to discover. Sérgio Ferro, born in Brazil in 1938, studied architecture at FAUUSP, São Paulo. In the 1960s, he joined the Brazilian communist party and started, along with Rodrigo Lefevre and Flávio Império, the collective known as Arquitetura Nova. After being arrested by the military dictatorship that took power in Brazil in 1964, he moved to France as an exile. As a painter and a professor at the École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Grenoble, where he founded the Dessin/Chantier laboratory, he engaged in extensive research which resulted in several publications, exhibitions, and awards in Brazil and in France, including the title of Chevalier des Arts et des Lettres in 1992. Following his retirement from teaching, Ferro continues to research, write, and paint.

Once again, Sam Altman wants to show you the future. The CEO of OpenAI is standing on a sparse stage in San Francisco, preparing to reveal his next move to an attentive crowd. “We needed some way for identifying, authenticating humans in the age of AGI,” Altman explains, referring to artificial general intelligence. “We wanted a way to make sure that humans stayed special and central.” The solution Altman came up with is looming behind him. It’s a white sphere about the size of a beach ball, with a camera at its center. The company that makes it, known as Tools for Humanity, calls this mysterious device the Orb. Stare into the heart of the plastic-and-silicon globe and it will map the unique furrows and ciliary zones of your iris. Seconds later, you’ll receive inviolable proof of your humanity: a 12,800-digit binary number, known as an iris code, sent to an app on your phone. At the same time, a packet of cryptocurrency called Worldcoin, worth approximately $42, will be transferred to your digital wallet—your reward for becoming a “verified human.” Altman co-founded Tools for Humanity in 2019 as part of a suite of companies he believed would reshape the world. Once the tech he was developing at OpenAI passed a certain level of intelligence, he reasoned, it would mark the end of one era on the Internet and the beginning of another, in which AI became so advanced, so human-like, that you would no longer be able to tell whether what you read, saw, or heard online came from a real person. When that happened, Altman imagined, we would need a new kind of online infrastructure: a human-verification layer for the Internet, to distinguish real people from the proliferating number of bots and AI “agents.”And so Tools for Humanity set out to build a global “proof-of-humanity” network. It aims to verify 50 million people by the end of 2025; ultimately its goal is to sign up every single human being on the planet. The free crypto serves as both an incentive for users to sign up, and also an entry point into what the company hopes will become the world’s largest financial network, through which it believes “double-digit percentages of the global economy” will eventually flow. Even for Altman, these missions are audacious. “If this really works, it’s like a fundamental piece of infrastructure for the world,” Altman tells TIME in a video interview from the passenger seat of a car a few days before his April 30 keynote address.Internal hardware of the Orb in mid-assembly in March. Davide Monteleone for TIMEThe project’s goal is to solve a problem partly of Altman’s own making. In the near future, he and other tech leaders say, advanced AIs will be imbued with agency: the ability to not just respond to human prompting, but to take actions independently in the world. This will enable the creation of AI coworkers that can drop into your company and begin solving problems; AI tutors that can adapt their teaching style to students’ preferences; even AI doctors that can diagnose routine cases and handle scheduling or logistics. The arrival of these virtual agents, their venture capitalist backers predict, will turbocharge our productivity and unleash an age of material abundance.But AI agents will also have cascading consequences for the human experience online. “As AI systems become harder to distinguish from people, websites may face difficult trade-offs,” says a recent paper by researchers from 25 different universities, nonprofits, and tech companies, including OpenAI. “There is a significant risk that digital institutions will be unprepared for a time when AI-powered agents, including those leveraged by malicious actors, overwhelm other activity online.” On social-media platforms like X and Facebook, bot-driven accounts are amassing billions of views on AI-generated content. In April, the foundation that runs Wikipedia disclosed that AI bots scraping their site were making the encyclopedia too costly to sustainably run. Later the same month, researchers from the University of Zurich found that AI-generated comments on the subreddit /r/ChangeMyView were up to six times more successful than human-written ones at persuading unknowing users to change their minds.  Photograph by Davide Monteleone for TIMEBuy a copy of the Orb issue hereThe arrival of agents won’t only threaten our ability to distinguish between authentic and AI content online. It will also challenge the Internet’s core business model, online advertising, which relies on the assumption that ads are being viewed by humans. “The Internet will change very drastically sometime in the next 12 to 24 months,” says Tools for Humanity CEO Alex Blania. “So we have to succeed, or I’m not sure what else would happen.”For four years, Blania’s team has been testing the Orb’s hardware abroad. Now the U.S. rollout has arrived. Over the next 12 months, 7,500 Orbs will be arriving in dozens of American cities, in locations like gas stations, bodegas, and flagship stores in Los Angeles, Austin, and Miami. The project’s founders and fans hope the Orb’s U.S. debut will kickstart a new phase of growth. The San Francisco keynote was titled: “At Last.” It’s not clear the public appetite matches the exultant branding. Tools for Humanity has “verified” just 12 million humans since mid 2023, a pace Blania concedes is well behind schedule. Few online platforms currently support the so-called “World ID” that the Orb bestows upon its visitors, leaving little to entice users to give up their biometrics beyond the lure of free crypto. Even Altman isn’t sure whether the whole thing can work. “I can see [how] this becomes a fairly mainstream thing in a few years,” he says. “Or I can see that it’s still only used by a small subset of people who think about the world in a certain way.” Blania (left) and Altman debut the Orb at World’s U.S. launch in San Francisco on April 30, 2025. Jason Henry—The New York Times/ReduxYet as the Internet becomes overrun with AI, the creators of this strange new piece of hardware are betting that everybody in the world will soon want—or need—to visit an Orb. The biometric code it creates, they predict, will become a new type of digital passport, without which you might be denied passage to the Internet of the future, from dating apps to government services. In a best-case scenario, World ID could be a privacy-preserving way to fortify the Internet against an AI-driven deluge of fake or deceptive content. It could also enable the distribution of universal basic income (UBI)—a policy that Altman has previously touted—as AI automation transforms the global economy. To examine what this new technology might mean, I reported from three continents, interviewed 10 Tools for Humanity executives and investors, reviewed hundreds of pages of company documents, and “verified” my own humanity. The Internet will inevitably need some kind of proof-of-humanity system in the near future, says Divya Siddarth, founder of the nonprofit Collective Intelligence Project. The real question, she argues, is whether such a system will be centralized—“a big security nightmare that enables a lot of surveillance”—or privacy-preserving, as the Orb claims to be. Questions remain about Tools for Humanity’s corporate structure, its yoking to an unstable cryptocurrency, and what power it would concentrate in the hands of its owners if successful. Yet it’s also one of the only attempts to solve what many see as an increasingly urgent problem. “There are some issues with it,” Siddarth says of World ID. “But you can’t preserve the Internet in amber. Something in this direction is necessary.”In March, I met Blania at Tools for Humanity’s San Francisco headquarters, where a large screen displays the number of weekly “Orb verifications” by country. A few days earlier, the CEO had attended a $1 million-per-head dinner at Mar-a-Lago with President Donald Trump, whom he credits with clearing the way for the company’s U.S. launch by relaxing crypto regulations. “Given Sam is a very high profile target,” Blania says, “we just decided that we would let other companies fight that fight, and enter the U.S. once the air is clear.” As a kid growing up in Germany, Blania was a little different than his peers. “Other kids were, like, drinking a lot, or doing a lot of parties, and I was just building a lot of things that could potentially blow up,” he recalls. At the California Institute of Technology, where he was pursuing research for a masters degree, he spent many evenings reading the blogs of startup gurus like Paul Graham and Altman. Then, in 2019, Blania received an email from Max Novendstern, an entrepreneur who had been kicking around a concept with Altman to build a global cryptocurrency network. They were looking for technical minds to help with the project. Over cappuccinos, Altman told Blania he was certain about three things. First, smarter-than-human AI was not only possible, but inevitable—and it would soon mean you could no longer assume that anything you read, saw, or heard on the Internet was human-created. Second, cryptocurrency and other decentralized technologies would be a massive force for change in the world. And third, scale was essential to any crypto network’s value. The Orb is tested on a calibration rig, surrounded by checkerboard targets to ensure precision in iris detection. Davide Monteleone for TIMEThe goal of Worldcoin, as the project was initially called, was to combine those three insights. Altman took a lesson from PayPal, the company co-founded by his mentor Peter Thiel. Of its initial funding, PayPal spent less than $10 million actually building its app—but pumped an additional $70 million or so into a referral program, whereby new users and the person who invited them would each receive $10 in credit. The referral program helped make PayPal a leading payment platform. Altman thought a version of that strategy would propel Worldcoin to similar heights. He wanted to create a new cryptocurrency and give it to users as a reward for signing up. The more people who joined the system, the higher the token’s value would theoretically rise. Since 2019, the project has raised $244 million from investors like Coinbase and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. That money paid for the $50 million cost of designing the Orb, plus maintaining the software it runs on. The total market value of all Worldcoins in existence, however, is far higher—around $12 billion. That number is a bit misleading: most of those coins are not in circulation and Worldcoin’s price has fluctuated wildly. Still, it allows the company to reward users for signing up at no cost to itself. The main lure for investors is the crypto upside. Some 75% of all Worldcoins are set aside for humans to claim when they sign up, or as referral bonuses. The remaining 25% are split between Tools for Humanity’s backers and staff, including Blania and Altman. “I’m really excited to make a lot of money,” ” Blania says.From the beginning, Altman was thinking about the consequences of the AI revolution he intended to unleash. (On May 21, he announced plans to team up with famed former Apple designer Jony Ive on a new AI personal device.) A future in which advanced AI could perform most tasks more effectively than humans would bring a wave of unemployment and economic dislocation, he reasoned. Some kind of wealth redistribution might be necessary. In 2016, he partially funded a study of basic income, which gave $1,000 per-month handouts to low-income individuals in Illinois and Texas. But there was no single financial system that would allow money to be sent to everybody in the world. Nor was there a way to stop an individual human from claiming their share twice—or to identify a sophisticated AI pretending to be human and pocketing some cash of its own. In 2023, Tools for Humanity raised the possibility of using the network to redistribute the profits of AI labs that were able to automate human labor. “As AI advances,” it said, “fairly distributing access and some of the created value through UBI will play an increasingly vital role in counteracting the concentration of economic power.”Blania was taken by the pitch, and agreed to join the project as a co-founder. “Most people told us we were very stupid or crazy or insane, including Silicon Valley investors,” Blania says. At least until ChatGPT came out in 2022, transforming OpenAI into one of the world’s most famous tech companies and kickstarting a market bull-run. “Things suddenly started to make more and more sense to the external world,” Blania says of the vision to develop a global “proof-of-humanity” network. “You have to imagine a world in which you will have very smart and competent systems somehow flying through the Internet with different goals and ideas of what they want to do, and us having no idea anymore what we’re dealing with.”After our interview, Blania’s head of communications ushers me over to a circular wooden structure where eight Orbs face one another. The scene feels like a cross between an Apple Store and a ceremonial altar. “Do you want to get verified?” she asks. Putting aside my reservations for the purposes of research, I download the World App and follow its prompts. I flash a QR code at the Orb, then gaze into it. A minute or so later, my phone buzzes with confirmation: I’ve been issued my own personal World ID and some Worldcoin.The first thing the Orb does is check if you’re human, using a neural network that takes input from various sensors, including an infrared camera and a thermometer. Davide Monteleone for TIMEWhile I stared into the Orb, several complex procedures had taken place at once. A neural network took inputs from multiple sensors—an infrared camera, a thermometer—to confirm I was a living human. Simultaneously, a telephoto lens zoomed in on my iris, capturing the physical traits within that distinguish me from every other human on Earth. It then converted that image into an iris code: a numerical abstraction of my unique biometric data. Then the Orb checked to see if my iris code matched any it had seen before, using a technique allowing encrypted data to be compared without revealing the underlying information. Before the Orb deleted my data, it turned my iris code into several derivative codes—none of which on its own can be linked back to the original—encrypted them, deleted the only copies of the decryption keys, and sent each one to a different secure server, so that future users’ iris codes can be checked for uniqueness against mine. If I were to use my World ID to access a website, that site would learn nothing about me except that I’m human. The Orb is open-source, so outside experts can examine its code and verify the company’s privacy claims. “I did a colonoscopy on this company and these technologies before I agreed to join,” says Trevor Traina, a Trump donor and former U.S. ambassador to Austria who now serves as Tools for Humanity’s chief business officer. “It is the most privacy-preserving technology on the planet.”Only weeks later, when researching what would happen if I wanted to delete my data, do I discover that Tools for Humanity’s privacy claims rest on what feels like a sleight of hand. The company argues that in modifying your iris code, it has “effectively anonymized” your biometric data. If you ask Tools for Humanity to delete your iris codes, they will delete the one stored on your phone, but not the derivatives. Those, they argue, are no longer your personal data at all. But if I were to return to an Orb after deleting my data, it would still recognize those codes as uniquely mine. Once you look into the Orb, a piece of your identity remains in the system forever. If users could truly delete that data, the premise of one ID per human would collapse, Tools for Humanity’s chief privacy officer Damien Kieran tells me when I call seeking an explanation. People could delete and sign up for new World IDs after being suspended from a platform. Or claim their Worldcoin tokens, sell them, delete their data, and cash in again. This argument fell flat with European Union regulators in Germany, who recently declared that the Orb posed “fundamental data protection issues” and ordered the company to allow European users to fully delete even their anonymized data. (Tools for Humanity has appealed; the regulator is now reassessing the decision.) “Just like any other technology service, users cannot delete data that is not personal data,” Kieran said in a statement. “If a person could delete anonymized data that can’t be linked to them by World or any third party, it would allow bad actors to circumvent the security and safety that World ID is working to bring to every human.”On a balmy afternoon this spring, I climb a flight of stairs up to a room above a restaurant in an outer suburb of Seoul. Five elderly South Koreans tap on their phones as they wait to be “verified” by the two Orbs in the center of the room. “We don’t really know how to distinguish between AI and humans anymore,” an attendant in a company t-shirt explains in Korean, gesturing toward the spheres. “We need a way to verify that we’re human and not AI. So how do we do that? Well, humans have irises, but AI doesn’t.”The attendant ushers an elderly woman over to an Orb. It bleeps. “Open your eyes,” a disembodied voice says in English. The woman stares into the camera. Seconds later, she checks her phone and sees that a packet of Worldcoin worth 75,000 Korean won (about $54) has landed in her digital wallet. Congratulations, the app tells her. You are now a verified human.A visitor views the Orbs in Seoul on April 14, 2025. Taemin Ha for TIMETools for Humanity aims to “verify” 1 million Koreans over the next year. Taemin Ha for TIMEA couple dozen Orbs have been available in South Korea since 2023, verifying roughly 55,000 people. Now Tools for Humanity is redoubling its efforts there. At an event in a traditional wooden hanok house in central Seoul, an executive announces that 250 Orbs will soon be dispersed around the country—with the aim of verifying 1 million Koreans in the next 12 months. South Korea has high levels of smartphone usage, crypto and AI adoption, and Internet access, while average wages are modest enough for the free Worldcoin on offer to still be an enticing draw—all of which makes it fertile testing ground for the company’s ambitious global expansion. Yet things seem off to a slow start. In a retail space I visited in central Seoul, Tools for Humanity had constructed a wooden structure with eight Orbs facing each other. Locals and tourists wander past looking bemused; few volunteer themselves up. Most who do tell me they are crypto enthusiasts who came intentionally, driven more by the spirit of early adoption than the free coins. The next day, I visit a coffee shop in central Seoul where a chrome Orb sits unassumingly in one corner. Wu Ruijun, a 20-year-old student from China, strikes up a conversation with the barista, who doubles as the Orb’s operator. Wu was invited here by a friend who said both could claim free cryptocurrency if he signed up. The barista speeds him through the process. Wu accepts the privacy disclosure without reading it, and widens his eyes for the Orb. Soon he’s verified. “I wasn’t told anything about the privacy policy,” he says on his way out. “I just came for the money.”As Altman’s car winds through San Francisco, I ask about the vision he laid out in 2019: that AI would make it harder for us to trust each other online. To my surprise, he rejects the framing. “I’m much more [about] like: what is the good we can create, rather than the bad we can stop?” he says. “It’s not like, ‘Oh, we’ve got to avoid the bot overrun’ or whatever. It’s just that we can do a lot of special things for humans.” It’s an answer that may reflect how his role has changed over the years. Altman is now the chief public cheerleader of a $300 billion company that’s touting the transformative utility of AI agents. The rise of agents, he and others say, will be a boon for our quality of life—like having an assistant on hand who can answer your most pressing questions, carry out mundane tasks, and help you develop new skills. It’s an optimistic vision that may well pan out. But it doesn’t quite fit with the prophecies of AI-enabled infopocalypse that Tools for Humanity was founded upon.Altman waves away a question about the influence he and other investors stand to gain if their vision is realized. Most holders, he assumes, will have already started selling their tokens—too early, he adds. “What I think would be bad is if an early crew had a lot of control over the protocol,” he says, “and that’s where I think the commitment to decentralization is so cool.” Altman is referring to the World Protocol, the underlying technology upon which the Orb, Worldcoin, and World ID all rely. Tools for Humanity is developing it, but has committed to giving control to its users over time—a process they say will prevent power from being concentrated in the hands of a few executives or investors. Tools for Humanity would remain a for-profit company, and could levy fees on platforms that use World ID, but other companies would be able to compete for customers by building alternative apps—or even alternative Orbs. The plan draws on ideas that animated the crypto ecosystem in the late 2010s and early 2020s, when evangelists for emerging blockchain technologies argued that the centralization of power—especially in large so-called “Web 2.0” tech companies—was responsible for many of the problems plaguing the modern Internet. Just as decentralized cryptocurrencies could reform a financial system controlled by economic elites, so too would it be possible to create decentralized organizations, run by their members instead of CEOs. How such a system might work in practice remains unclear. “Building a community-based governance system,” Tools for Humanity says in a 2023 white paper, “represents perhaps the most formidable challenge of the entire project.”Altman has a pattern of making idealistic promises that shift over time. He founded OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015, with a mission to develop AGI safely and for the benefit of all humanity. To raise money, OpenAI restructured itself as a for-profit company in 2019, but with overall control still in the hands of its nonprofit board. Last year, Altman proposed yet another restructure—one which would dilute the board’s control and allow more profits to flow to shareholders. Why, I ask, should the public trust Tools for Humanity’s commitment to freely surrender influence and power? “I think you will just see the continued decentralization via the protocol,” he says. “The value here is going to live in the network, and the network will be owned and governed by a lot of people.” Altman talks less about universal basic income these days. He recently mused about an alternative, which he called “universal basic compute.” Instead of AI companies redistributing their profits, he seemed to suggest, they could instead give everyone in the world fair access to super-powerful AI. Blania tells me he recently “made the decision to stop talking” about UBI at Tools for Humanity. “UBI is one potential answer,” he says. “Just giving [people] access to the latest [AI] models and having them learn faster and better is another.” Says Altman: “I still don’t know what the right answer is. I believe we should do a better job of distribution of resources than we currently do.” When I probe the question of why people should trust him, Altman gets irritated. “I understand that you hate AI, and that’s fine,” he says. “If you want to frame it as the downside of AI is that there’s going to be a proliferation of very convincing AI systems that are pretending to be human, and we need ways to know what is really human-authorized versus not, then yeah, I think you can call that a downside of AI. It’s not how I would naturally frame it.” The phrase human-authorized hints at a tension between World ID and OpenAI’s plans for AI agents. An Internet where a World ID is required to access most services might impede the usefulness of the agents that OpenAI and others are developing. So Tools for Humanity is building a system that would allow users to delegate their World ID to an agent, allowing the bot to take actions online on their behalf, according to Tiago Sada, the company’s chief product officer. “We’ve built everything in a way that can be very easily delegatable to an agent,” Sada says. It’s a measure that would allow humans to be held accountable for the actions of their AIs. But it suggests that Tools for Humanity’s mission may be shifting beyond simply proving humanity, and toward becoming the infrastructure that enables AI agents to proliferate with human authorization. World ID doesn’t tell you whether a piece of content is AI-generated or human-generated; all it tells you is whether the account that posted it is a human or a bot. Even in a world where everybody had a World ID, our online spaces might still be filled with AI-generated text, images, and videos.As I say goodbye to Altman, I’m left feeling conflicted about his project. If the Internet is going to be transformed by AI agents, then some kind of proof-of-humanity system will almost certainly be necessary. Yet if the Orb becomes a piece of Internet infrastructure, it could give Altman—a beneficiary of the proliferation of AI content—significant influence over a leading defense mechanism against it. People might have no choice but to participate in the network in order to access social media or online services.I thought of an encounter I witnessed in Seoul. In the room above the restaurant, Cho Jeong-yeon, 75, watched her friend get verified by an Orb. Cho had been invited to do the same, but demurred. The reward wasn’t enough for her to surrender a part of her identity. “Your iris is uniquely yours, and we don’t really know how it might be used,” she says. “Seeing the machine made me think: are we becoming machines instead of humans now? Everything is changing, and we don’t know how it’ll all turn out.”—With reporting by Stephen Kim/Seoul. This story was supported by Tarbell Grants.Correction, May 30The original version of this story misstated the market capitalization of Worldcoin if all coins were in circulation. It is $12 billion, not $1.2 billion.

Scientific research across fields like chemistry, biology, and artificial intelligence has long relied on human experts to explore knowledge, generate ideas, design experiments, and refine results. Yet, as problems grow more complex and data-intensive, discovery slows. While AI tools, such as language models and robotics, can handle specific tasks, like literature searches or code analysis, they rarely encompass the entire research cycle. Bridging the gap between idea generation and experimental validation remains a key challenge. For AI to autonomously advance science, it must propose hypotheses, design and execute experiments, analyze outcomes, and refine approaches in an iterative loop. Without this integration, AI risks producing disconnected ideas that depend on human supervision for validation. Before the introduction of a unified system, researchers relied on separate tools for each stage of the process. Large language models could help find relevant scientific papers, but they didn’t directly feed into experiment design or result analysis. Robotics can assist in automating physical experiments, and coding libraries like PyTorch can help build models; however, these tools operate independently of each other. There was no single system capable of handling the entire process, from forming ideas to verifying them through experiments. This led to bottlenecks, where researchers had to connect the dots manually, slowing progress and leaving room for errors or missed opportunities. The need for an integrated system that could handle the entire research cycle became clear. Researchers from the NovelSeek Team at the Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory developed NovelSeek, an AI system designed to run the entire scientific discovery process autonomously. NovelSeek comprises four main modules that work in tandem: a system that generates and refines research ideas, a feedback loop where human experts can interact with and refine these ideas, a method for translating ideas into code and experiment plans, and a process for conducting multiple rounds of experiments. What makes NovelSeek stand out is its versatility; it works across 12 scientific research tasks, including predicting chemical reaction yields, understanding molecular dynamics, forecasting time-series data, and handling functions like 2D semantic segmentation and 3D object classification. The team designed NovelSeek to minimize human involvement, expedite discoveries, and deliver consistent, high-quality results. The system behind NovelSeek involves multiple specialized agents, each focused on a specific part of the research workflow. The “Survey Agent” helps the system understand the problem by searching scientific papers and identifying relevant information based on keywords and task definitions. It adapts its search strategy by first doing a broad survey of papers, then going deeper by analyzing full-text documents for detailed insights. This ensures that the system captures both general trends and specific technical knowledge. The “Code Review Agent” examines existing codebases, whether user-uploaded or sourced from public repositories like GitHub, to understand how current methods work and identify areas for improvement. It checks how code is structured, looks for errors, and creates summaries that help the system build on past work. The “Idea Innovation Agent” generates creative research ideas, pushing the system to explore different approaches and refine them by comparing them to related studies and previous results. The system even includes a “Planning and Execution Agent” that turns ideas into detailed experiments, handles errors during the testing process, and ensures smooth execution of multi-step research plans. NovelSeek delivered impressive results across various tasks. In chemical reaction yield prediction, NovelSeek improved performance from a baseline of 24.2% (with a variation of ±4.2) to 34.8% (with a much smaller variation of ±1.1) in just 12 hours, progress that human researchers typically need months to achieve. In enhancer activity prediction, a key task in biology, NovelSeek raised the Pearson correlation coefficient from 0.65 to 0.79 within 4 hours. For 2D semantic segmentation, a task used in computer vision, precision improved from 78.8% to 81.0% in just 30 hours. These performance boosts, achieved in a fraction of the time typically needed, highlight the system’s efficiency. NovelSeek also successfully managed large, complex codebases with multiple files, demonstrating its ability to handle research tasks at a project level, not just in small, isolated tests. The team has made the code open-source, allowing others to use, test, and contribute to its improvement. Several Key Takeaways from the Research on NovelSeek include: NovelSeek supports 12 research tasks, including chemical reaction prediction, molecular dynamics, and 3D object classification. Reaction yield prediction accuracy improved from 24.2% to 34.8% in 12 hours. Enhancer activity prediction performance increased from 0.65 to 0.79 in 4 hours. 2D semantic segmentation precision improved from 78.8% to 81.0% in 30 hours. NovelSeek includes agents for literature search, code analysis, idea generation, and experiment execution. The system is open-source, enabling reproducibility and collaboration across scientific fields. In conclusion, NovelSeek demonstrates how combining AI tools into a single system can accelerate scientific discovery and reduce its dependence on human effort. It ties together the key steps, generating ideas, turning them into methods, and testing them through experiments, into one streamlined process. What once took researchers months or years can now be done in days or even hours. By linking every stage of research into a continuous loop, NovelSeek helps teams move from rough ideas to real-world results more quickly. This system highlights the power of AI not just to assist, but to drive scientific research in a way that could reshape how discoveries are made across many fields. Check out the Paper and GitHub Page . All credit for this research goes to the researchers of this project. Also, feel free to follow us on Twitter and don’t forget to join our 95k+ ML SubReddit and Subscribe to our Newsletter. NikhilNikhil is an intern consultant at Marktechpost. He is pursuing an integrated dual degree in Materials at the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur. Nikhil is an AI/ML enthusiast who is always researching applications in fields like biomaterials and biomedical science. With a strong background in Material Science, he is exploring new advancements and creating opportunities to contribute.Nikhilhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/nikhil0980/This AI Paper Introduces ARM and Ada-GRPO: Adaptive Reasoning Models for Efficient and Scalable Problem-SolvingNikhilhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/nikhil0980/This AI Paper Introduces WEB-SHEPHERD: A Process Reward Model for Web Agents with 40K Dataset and 10× Cost EfficiencyNikhilhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/nikhil0980/This AI Paper Introduces MMaDA: A Unified Multimodal Diffusion Model for Textual Reasoning, Visual Understanding, and Image GenerationNikhilhttps://www.marktechpost.com/author/nikhil0980/This AI Paper Introduces Differentiable MCMC Layers: A New AI Framework for Learning with Inexact Combinatorial Solvers in Neural Networks

Posted on : May 30, 2025 By Tech World Times SEO  Rate this post Starting a blog can feel confusing at first. Many platforms are available, but not all are straightforward. If you’re new to blogging, Blogsternation-com is a good place to start. This guide will help you begin your journey. Step by step, we’ll cover each part. You don’t need any tech skills to follow along. Step 1: Visit the Blogsternation-com Website Go to Blogsternation-com in your browser. Wait for the homepage to load. The design is clean and simple. You will see a clear “Sign Up” or “Join Now” button. Step 2: Create a New Account Click the “Sign Up” button. You will be asked for basic details. Enter your name and email address. Choose a strong password you can remember. Make sure your email is active and correct. You’ll need it for verification. Step 3: Verify Your Email Address After signing up, check your email inbox. Look for a message from Blogsternation-com. It will contain a link. Click on that link to verify your account. This step helps keep your account safe. Step 4: Log in to Your Account After verifying, go back to the website. Click “Login” at the top right. Enter your email and password. Click “Submit.” You are now inside your dashboard. This is your control panel. You will use this area to manage your blog. Step 5: Set Up Your Blogger Profile Click on your name or profile icon. Select “Edit Profile.” Add a profile photo. Write a short bio. Let people know who you are. This builds trust with your readers. Choose a username that fits your blog style. Step 6: Pick Your Blog Niche Before writing, decide your niche. A niche is your blog’s main topic. It could be travel, health, fashion, tech, or anything else. Stick to one area for now. This helps readers know what to expect. Pick a topic you love. That will keep you motivated. Step 7: Create Your First Blog Click “New Blog” or “Start Blogging.” A writing editor will open. Add a catchy title. Then start writing your content. Use short paragraphs and simple words. Make your blog easy to read. You don’t need to write long articles. Quality is more important than length. Step 8: Format Your Blog Post Use bold text for headings. Use bullet points or numbers for lists. Add images to make posts engaging. Blogsternation-com allows you to upload images directly. Use free stock photos if you don’t have your own. Always credit the source if needed. Step 9: Preview Before Publishing Once you finish writing, click “Preview.” This shows how your post will look. Check for grammar mistakes. Make sure links work. Edit anything that looks off. Take your time to make it right. Step 10: Publish Your Blog If everything looks good, hit “Publish.” Your blog is now live. Share it with friends and family. Use social media to get more readers. Keep sharing whenever you post something new. Step 11: Stay Consistent Try to post regularly. Once a week is a good start. Don’t disappear for months. Regular posts help build an audience. Over time, more people will visit your blog. Consistency also improves your writing skills. Step 12: Engage with Readers Reply to comments on your blog. Thank readers for their feedback. Ask them questions to start a conversation. This builds a community. Loyal readers are key to blog growth. Step 13: Learn from Other Bloggers Follow successful bloggers on Blogsternation-com. Read their posts. Notice their style and structure. See what works for them. Learning from others helps you grow faster. Step 14: Share Useful Content Your blog should help people. Give tips, guides, or real stories. Add value to your readers’ lives. Useful content gets shared more. That means more traffic and readers for you. Step 15: Use SEO Basics SEO stands for Search Engine Optimization. Use keywords people search for. Add them naturally in your post. Include keywords in your title and headings. Blogsternation-com has basic SEO tools you can use. These help your post show up on search engines. Step 16: Join Blogsternation-com Communities There are groups and forums on the site. Join communities related to your niche. Ask questions. Share your blogs. Support others. Networking helps you grow faster. Step 17: Check Your Blog Analytics Go to your dashboard. Click on “Analytics” or “Stats.” You’ll see how many people read your blog. You’ll also see which posts get the most views. Use this info to plan future posts. Step 18: Monetize Your Blog (Optional) After you gain some traffic, think about monetizing. You can add ads or affiliate links. Some users also sell products or services. Don’t rush into it. Focus on building good content first. Monetization can come later. Step 19: Stay Updated Technology changes often. So does blogging. Blogsternation-com often shares updates and tips. Read their blog and help guides. These help you stay ahead. Step 20: Keep Improving Blogging is a journey. Don’t stop learning. Watch free YouTube videos on blogging. Take online courses if possible. Read other blogs for ideas. The more you learn, the better you blog. Bonus Tips for Success Always check grammar before posting Avoid copying content from others Write from your heart Be honest in your posts Keep your layout clean and easy to read Use headings to break long sections Back up your content regularly Final Thoughts Starting a blog can seem hard. But with the right steps, it gets easier. Blogsternation-com makes blogging simple. It’s beginner-friendly and full of helpful tools. Whether you’re sharing tips or stories, your voice matters. Start today and grow with time. Remember, everyone starts small. Your first post may not be perfect. That’s okay. The important thing is to keep going. The more you write, the better you become. Take that first step now. Good luck and happy blogging with Blogsternation-com! 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

A Simple Guide for Engineers in AustraliaIf you're an engineer working in Australia or planning to start your engineering career here, you might have come across the National Engineering Register or NER. But what exactly is it, and why is it becoming so important for engineers across the country?In this article, we’ll break it down in plain language so you can understand what the NER Engineers Australia program is all about—and why joining the National Engineering Register could be a great move for your career.What Is the National Engineering Register?The National Engineering Register (NER) is an official list of qualified and experienced engineers who meet professional standards in Australia. It is managed by Engineers Australia, which is the peak professional body for engineers in the country.Being on the NER means:You’ve been assessed and recognised as a competent, responsible engineer.Your name is listed in a public register, making it easy for employers and clients to find and trust you.You commit to ongoing learning and ethical professional conduct.Think of it as your professional badge that proves you are serious about your work.Who Are NER Engineers Australia?NER Engineers Australia are professionals who have gone through a formal review process and have been accepted onto the National Engineering Register. These engineers:Have a recognised qualification in engineeringHave at least five years of relevant work experienceShow continued professional development (CPD)Follow a strict code of ethicsAre capable of taking full responsibility for their engineering workWhether you’re a civil, mechanical, electrical, structural, or software engineer, if you meet these criteria, you can become an NER-registered engineer.Why Should You Join the National Engineering Register?Here are the top reasons why joining the NER Engineers Australia program is worth your time and effort:1. Build Trust and CredibilityThe NER is managed by Engineers Australia, which is highly respected in both public and private sectors. If you’re listed on the National Engineering Register, it tells others that you:Meet national standards of engineering competenceHave up-to-date skillsFollow ethical and safety standardsAre a reliable professionalEmployers and clients are more likely to choose engineers they can trust—and NER status helps you stand out.2. Improve Your Career OpportunitiesMany companies in Australia prefer or even require engineers to be on the NER. In some cases, you can’t apply for government jobs, contracts, or senior roles unless you're NER-registered.Having NER Engineers Australia status can also:Help you get promotedIncrease your salary potentialMake you more competitive for tenders and projectsLet you work independently without supervision3. Open International DoorsThe National Engineering Register is recognised beyond Australia. If you're planning to work in countries like the UK, UAE, New Zealand, or parts of Asia, having NER credentials can help you meet their professional standards too.4.  Meet Legal RequirementsIn states like Queensland and Victoria, certain types of engineering work must be done by registered professionals. Being listed on the NER ensures you meet the legal standards and avoid penalties.5. Pathway to Chartered StatusIf you’re aiming to become a Chartered Professional Engineer (CPEng), joining the NER is often the first step. The NER process prepares you to meet the same competency standards required for chartership.What Do You Need to Apply?To become one of the NER Engineers Australia, you’ll need: An engineering degree (Australian or internationally recognised)At least five years of relevant work experience Evidence of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) A Competency Self-Assessment Two professional referees who can confirm your experience A signed ethics declarationYou can apply online through Engineers Australia. The process involves reviewing your documents and verifying your competencies.What If You Are from Overseas?If you studied or worked outside Australia, you can still apply. Many overseas-qualified engineers join the NER every year.However, you may first need to go through a Migration Skills Assessment to confirm your qualifications meet Australian standards.Once assessed, you can apply for the NER like any local engineer.Real-World ExampleLet’s say Rahul, a mechanical engineer from India, has been working in Australia for six years. He wants to apply for a senior position in a local council, but they require NER registration.Rahul submits his application to Engineers Australia with help from his previous supervisors as referees. After a successful review, he gets listed on the National Engineering Register.Now Rahul can confidently apply for senior roles and even start consulting work, knowing he’s recognised as a trusted professional.Quick Recap: Why Join NER Engineers Australia? BenefitWhat It Means for You✅ Trusted Professional StatusBuilds credibility and shows you meet Australian standards📈 Better Job OpportunitiesAccess more jobs, tenders, and promotions⚖️ Legal ComplianceRequired in some states for regulated engineering work🛤 Step Toward ChartershipEasier path to CPEng or RPEQ status🌎 Global RecognitionAccepted in many countries worldwideFinal ThoughtsThe National Engineering Register is more than just a list—it’s a way to prove your value, grow your career, and gain professional respect. Whether you're early in your career or already experienced, joining the NER Engineers Australia community can take your engineering journey to the next level.It’s simple: if you’re a skilled, qualified, and responsible engineer, the NER helps you show that to the world.Ready to Take the First Step?You can apply for the National Engineering Register on the Engineers Australia website. If you need help preparing your documents, consider speaking with a professional or mentor familiar with the process.Invest in your future. Join the NER Engineers Australia community today and get recognised for the great work you do.

close Meta launches community notes for Facebook to replace fact-checking Founder and Hedgehog CEO John Matze joined 'FOX & Friends First' to discuss his optimism surrounding the community notes program, staying competitive globally with AI and the possibility of Oracle buying TikTok.  Reviewing your Facebook data allows you to see what personal information Facebook has collected about you, helping you make informed decisions about your privacy settings. You might also need a copy of your data, which serves as a backup of your photos, messages and memories in case you lose access to your account or decide to delete it. Additionally, understanding what data Facebook stores can help you better comprehend how the platform uses your information for advertising and content personalization. Here's how to do it. A person logging onto Facebook. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)What data can you access on Facebook?Facebook collects a wide range of data from you, including your profile information, posts, photos, comments, likes, friends list, location data, search history and interactions with ads and pages. The company uses this data to personalize your experience and show you targeted ads. It also uses the data and shares it with third-party partners to improve its services.When you request your data, you can access files containing the information you've provided (like your name, email and address) as well as account activity such as posts, photos, messages and data logs. These logs include your interactions, device information and connections to third-party apps, websites and services.Keep in mind that not all data Facebook collects about you will be included in your download. How to download your Facebook data on desktopThe process of accessing and downloading your data from Facebook can change. As of May 2025, you can access and download your information on Facebook using the steps below:Click your profile picture icon in the top-right corner of the screen. When the menu appears, clickSettings & Privacy. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Click Settings in the submenu that appears.WHAT HACKERS CAN LEARN ABOUT YOU FROM A DATA BROKER FILE Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Click Accounts Center in the left sidebar. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)In the left menu, click Your information and permissions. Then, click Access your information in the right panel.5 MOBILE PRIVACY TERMS YOU NEED TO KNOW TO PROTECT YOURSELF Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)After verifying that all the information you need is there, scroll to the bottom and click Download your information. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop   (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)In the pop-up, click Download or transfer information. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Select your Facebook account from the list of accounts and click Next. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Now you need to select how much information you want to receive. We recommend clicking Available information to get a complete copy of everything you need. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Click Download to device so that it's downloaded to your computer. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Now you need to select your file options. In the Date range field, select the period from which you want Facebook to send your data. The default is Last year, but you can choose Last 3 years or All time for a more comprehensive dataset (note that longer periods take more time to prepare the data). In the Notify field, verify that your email address is correct. Keep the Format and Media quality fields set to HTML and Medium, respectively. Then, click Create files. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Wait for an email notification from Facebook that your requested file is ready to download. That can take up to an hour. Once you receive it, you have four days until the download request expires. When you receive the notification, log into your Facebook account and follow the steps below to download the requested information:Click the bell icon in the top-right corner. In the menu, click the notification that says "The files you requested are ready to download." Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Click Download in the pop-up. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Enter your Facebook password and click Continue to download the file to your computer. Steps to download your Facebook data on desktop. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)How to download your Facebook data on mobileThe steps below are for iPhone, but they will also work on Android. However, some menu items may appear in slightly different locations or use slightly different names compared to the iPhone. Follow the steps below:Tap Menu (the profile picture icon) in the bottom-right corner of the screen. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Tap Settings & Privacy to expand it and then tap Settings. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Tap Accounts Center. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Tap Your information and permissions. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Tap Access your information. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)You can review the information to see if it includes everything you need. Afterward, scroll to the bottom and tap Download your information.Tap Download or transfer information.Select the Facebook account(s) you want to download the information from and tap Next.On the screen for selecting how much information you want, tap Available information to get a complete copy. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Next, tap Download to device to store the information on your phone. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Next, you will need to create the file to download. Set Date range to Last 3 years or All time (might take longer to create). Ensure the email address in the Notify field is the one where you want the notification to be sent. Keep the Format and Media quality fields as they are: HTML and Medium, respectively. Finally, tap the Create files button. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Wait for an email notification from Facebook that your requested file is ready to download. That can take up to an hour. Once you receive it, you have four days until the download request expires. When you receive the notification, follow the steps below to download the requested information:Open the Facebook app and tap the Notifications (the bell icon) in the bottom-right corner. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)In the Notifications screen, tap the notification that says "The files you requested are ready to download." Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Tap Download in the pop-up. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Enter your Facebook password and tap Continue to download the file to your phone. Steps to download your Facebook data on mobile. (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Kurt's key takeawaysDownloading your Facebook data helps you understand what information the platform holds about you. While it may take some time to compile, especially for longer periods, it's worth doing periodically so you’re aware of your digital footprint on the platform and keep a personal backup in case something happens to the online version.CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APPDid you find any surprising information that made you reconsider your social media usage? Let us know by writing to us atCyberguy.com/ContactFor more of my tech tips and security alerts, subscribe to my free CyberGuy Report Newsletter by heading to Cyberguy.com/NewsletterAsk Kurt a question or let us know what stories you'd like us to cover.Follow Kurt on his social channels:Answers to the most-asked CyberGuy questions:New from Kurt:Copyright 2025 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.  Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson is an award-winning tech journalist who has a deep love of technology, gear and gadgets that make life better with his contributions for Fox News & FOX Business beginning mornings on "FOX & Friends." Got a tech question? Get Kurt’s free CyberGuy Newsletter, share your voice, a story idea or comment at CyberGuy.com.

With the weather warming up, your thoughts may be turning to spending lazy summer afternoons at the beach with a good book. Tina, an online creator and co-host of the podcast Book Talk, Etc., opened her edition of the Chicago Sun-Times on Monday to find the newspaper's "Summer reading list for 2025." If Tina were me, someone who isn't in-tune with the latest in literature, this article might have seemed like a useful jumping-off point for some new book recommendations. But seeing as Tina creates content all about books, I imagine she is acutely aware of which authors are writing which books—which is why she was able to immediately spot a number of books on the list that simply do not exist.Tina took a photo of the article and posted it to her Threads account, accusing the newspaper of using AI to generate its recommendations. That image of the article is now circulating on Bluesky, as well as the Chicago subreddit. I'm not a subscriber, and the article doesn't appear to be on the Sun-Times' website, so I can't verify the list myself. But the Sun-Times has since confirmed the list is real. View on Threads Of the 15 "books" on this summer reading list, only five are real books you can actually, you know, read: Bonjour Tristesse by Françoise Sagan; Beautiful Ruins by Jess Walter; Dandelion Wine by Ray Bradbury; Call Me By Your Name by André Aciman; and Atonement by Ian McEwan. Coincidentally, they are the last five books on the list, and are not new. The other 10 are totally made up, including such "hey, I'd read that" entries as The Last Algorithm, a new AI thriller from The Martian author Andy Weir; and Boiling Point, a smart-sounding story of environmental ethics by critical darling Rebecca Makki. Alas. Given these fake books have real authors attached to them, fans of those authors may believe their favorite writer has a new, intriguing novel out. Even if you have no idea who any of the named authors are, you might use this piece to head to your library or book store to get a jump on your summer reading list—and if you're pulling from the first 10 recommendations, you're going to be looking for a long time. What happened here?According to a Bluesky post from the Sun-Times, the article was not editorial content, and was not approved or created by the newsroom. The post does not say one way or another whether the content is AI-generated, however 404 Media spoke with the author, who admitted to using AI for this article as well as others: "I do use AI for background at times but always check out the material first. This time, I did not and I can't believe I missed it because it's so obvious. No excuses."Even before we had this confirmation, it did seem like the newspaper used generative AI to write this piece. That's not just because the writing is stilted. AI often hallucinates, or, in other words, sometimes makes things up. It's not totally clear why the models do this—it could be an issue with the training data, or the conclusions the models draw from that training—but the problem is only getting worse even as AI models ostensibly improve. This isn't something you can avoid with better prompts, either: If you use generative AI, it's going to hallucinate sometimes, which means you need to check the outputs for inaccuracies (or straight-up lies). I follow that someone who doesn't understand this technology would see what a program like ChatGPT can do and want to use it to generate articles like this, but as many writers and artists have been arguing for years now, you can't replace a human worker with an AI chatbot and expect the same quality work. Sure, ChatGPT will happily generate you a list of 15 book recommendations in under a minute—but it's possible some (if not most) of those recommendations will be garbage.I don't believe in using generative AI to publish stories like this. But if a newspaper is going to outsource the writing to a bot, it needs a human fact-checker (or perhaps, I don't know, an editor) to review the generation and make sure everything is correct. Though at that point, I'd suggest just paying a human writer to offer the book recommendations themself. I guarantee you there are plenty of out-of-work or underemployed journalists who would jump at the chance. While it seems the Sun-Times has such a human writer behind the AI, that work needs to happen with each generation. If not, you get articles like this.Out of curiosity, I asked ChatGPT for the synopsis of The Last Algorithm by Andy Weir. The bot searched the web for an answer, and, to its credit, accurately reported that the book doesn't actually exist. It made some assumptions, saying the Sun-Times definitely used AI to generate the article (though I suppose a very lazy intern who was hoping to be fired could have made up the books as well), likely because the social media posts it was pulling from suggested as much. But I also found its final thought to be particularly on-point (and accidentally self-aware): "This incident underscores the importance of verifying information, especially when AI-generated content is involved," ChatGPT wrote.

Republican lawmakers have been battling over a bill that includes massive tax and spending cuts. Much of their disagreement has been over provisions intended to reduce the cost of Medicaid. The popular health insurance program, which is funded by both the federal and state governments, covers about 78.5 million low-income and disabled people—more than 1 in 5 Americans. On May 22, 2025, the House of Representatives narrowly approved the tax, spending, and immigration bill. The legislation, which passed without any support from Democrats, is designed to reduce federal Medicaid spending by requiring anyone enrolled in the program who appears to be able to get a job to either satisfy work requirements or lose their coverage. It’s still unclear, however, whether Senate Republicans would support that provision. Although there are few precedents for such a mandate for Medicaid, other safety net programs have been enforcing similar rules for nearly three decades. I’m a political scientist who has extensively studied the work requirements of another safety net program: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). As I explain in my book, Living Off the Government? Race, Gender, and the Politics of Welfare, work requirements place extra burdens on low-income families but do little to lift them out of poverty. Work requirements for TANF TANF gives families with very low incomes some cash they can spend on housing, food, clothing, or whatever they need most. The Clinton administration launched it as a replacement for a similar program, Aid to Families With Dependent Children, in 1996. At the time, both political parties were eager to end a welfare system they believed was riddled with abuse. A big goal with TANF was ending the dependence of people getting cash benefits on the government by moving them from welfare to work. Many people were removed from the welfare rolls, but not because work requirements led to economic prosperity. Instead, they had trouble navigating the bureaucratic demands. TANF is administered by the states. They can set many rules of their own, but they must comply with an important federal requirement: Adult recipients have to work or engage in an authorized alternative activity for at least 30 hours per week. The number of weekly hours is only 20 if the recipient is caring for a child under the age of 6. The dozen activities or so that can count toward this quota range from participating in job training programs to engaging in community service. Some adults enrolled in TANF are exempt from work requirements, depending on their state’s own policies. The most common exemptions are for people who are ill, have a disability, or are over age 60. To qualify for TANF, families must have dependent children; in some states pregnant women also qualify. Income limits are set by the state and range from $307 a month for a family of three in Alabama to $2,935 a month for a family of three in Minnesota. Adult TANF recipients face a federal five-year lifetime limit on benefits. States can adopt shorter time limits; Arizona’s is 12 months. An administrative burden Complying with these work requirements generally means proving that you’re working or making the case that you should be exempt from this mandate. This places what’s known as an “administrative burden” on the people who get cash assistance. It often requires lots of documentation and time. If you have an unpredictable work schedule, inconsistent access to child care, or obligations to care for an older relative, this paperwork is hard to deal with. What counts as work, how many hours must be completed, and who is exempt from these requirements often comes down to a caseworker’s discretion. Social science research shows that this discretion is not equally applied and is often informed by stereotypes. The number of people getting cash assistance has fallen sharply since TANF replaced Aid to Families With Dependent Children. In some states caseloads have dropped by more than 50% despite significant population growth. Some of this decline happened because recipients got jobs that paid them too much to qualify. The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan office that provides economic research to Congress, attributes, at least in part, an increase in employment among less-educated single mothers in the 1990s to work requirements. Not everyone who stopped getting cash benefits through TANF wound up employed, however. Other recipients who did not meet requirements fell into deep poverty. Regardless of why people leave the program, when fewer low-income Americans get TANF benefits, the government spends less money on cash assistance. Federal funding has remained flat at $16.5 billion since 1996. Taking inflation into account, the program receives half as much funding as when it was created. In addition, states have used the flexibility granted them to direct most of their TANF funds to priorities other than cash benefits, such as pre-K education. Many Americans who get help paying for groceries through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program are also subject to work requirements. People the government calls “able-bodied adults without dependents” can only receive SNAP benefits for three months within a three-year period if they are not employed. A failed experiment in Arkansas Lawmakers in Congress and in statehouses have debated whether to add work requirements for Medicaid before. More than a dozen states have applied for waivers that would let them give it a try. When Arkansas instituted Medicaid work requirements in 2018, during the first Trump administration, it was largely seen as a failure. Some 18,000 people lost their health care coverage, but employment rates did not increase. After a court order stopped the policy in 2019, most people regained their coverage. Georgia is currently the only state with Medicaid work requirements in effect, after implementing a waiver in July 2023. The program has experienced technical difficulties and has had trouble verifying work activities. Other states, including Idaho, Indiana, and Kentucky, are already asking the federal government to let them enforce Medicaid work requirements. What this may mean for Medicaid The multitrillion-dollar bill the House passed by a vote of 215-214 would introduce Medicaid work requirements nationwide by late 2026 for childless adults ages 19 to 64, with some exemptions. But most people covered by Medicaid in that age range are already working, and those who are not would likely be eligible for work requirement waivers. An analysis by KFF—a nonprofit that informs the public about health issues—shows that in 2023, 44% of Medicaid recipients were working full time and another 20% were working part time. In 2023, that was more than 16 million Americans. About 20% of the American adults under 65 who are covered by Medicaid are not working due to illness or disability, or because of caregiving responsibilities, according to KFF. This includes both people caring for young children and those taking care of relatives with an illness or disability. In my own research, I read testimony from families seeking work exemptions because caregiving, including for children with disabilities, was a full-time job. The rest of the adults under 65 with Medicaid coverage are not working because they are in school, are retired, cannot find work, or have some other reason. It’s approximately 3.9 million Americans. Depending on what counts as “work,” they may be meeting any requirements that could be added to the program. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that introducing Medicaid work requirements would save around $300 billion over a decade. Given past experience with work requirements, it is unlikely those savings would come from Americans finding jobs. My research suggests it’s more likely that the government would trim spending by taking away the health insurance of people eligible for Medicaid coverage who get tangled up in red tape. This article was updated on May 22, 2025, with details about the House of Representatives’ passage of the budget bill. Anne Whitesell is an assistant professor of political science at Miami University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.