Username row: After WhatsApp, IT Ministry sends notices to Telegram, Signal

Username row: After WhatsApp, IT Ministry sends notices to Telegram, Signal



After sending a notice to WhatsApp, the IT Ministry has now sent a notice to Telegram and Signal, raising questions on their existing username feature and asking how the platforms are addressing concerns related to fraud and impersonation, according to a source.


Sources said that in the notice to Telegram, the government has asked the platform why it should be allowed to retain the username feature.


On Wednesday, the Centre issued a notice to Meta over the username feature on WhatsApp, citing concerns that it could materially increase online fraud, phishing, digital arrest scams, and impersonation attacks.


It had also directed WhatsApp to pause the feature until consultations on the issue are completed “to the satisfaction of the Government”.

 


The government has now widened its scrutiny to other messaging platforms as well, sources said.


Sources told PTI that the IT ministry has also written to Telegram and Signal – which already have the username feature – and asked how concerns around fraud and impersonation are being addressed by them.


In its notice to WhatsApp, the government had expressed concern that the proposed username feature may “materially increase” cases of online fraud, phishing, digital arrest scams, and impersonation attacks by enabling bad actors to solicit and message victims.


Meta was asked to explain why action shouldn’t be initiated under the IT Act and rules over WhatsApp’s new feature that may increase cybercrimes.


The Centre also reminded Meta that WhatsApp, as a significant social media intermediary, was bound by due diligence obligations under the IT Act and rules.


WhatsApp, in a statement on Wednesday, defended the feature, citing built-in safeguards to prevent scams and impersonations and protect users.


India is WhatsApp’s largest market, and with more than 500 million users, it enjoys a far bigger user base here than Telegram.


Over the past month, Telegram came under the regulatory lens in India over concerns related to fraud, impersonation and circulation of sensitive content. The Indian government had imposed a ban on Telegram and its associated web services until June 22, citing the platform’s failure to curb the circulation of leaked and fake National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) examination papers, misleading content and other fraudulent activities linked to the country’s medical entrance examination process. The Instant messaging platform, however, returned to service in India after a week-long government ban expired.



Source link

IT industry to undergo workforce transition due to AI: Neelkanth Mishra

IT industry to undergo workforce transition due to AI: Neelkanth Mishra



India’s IT services industry is likely to undergo a significant workforce transition because of artificial intelligence (AI), but fears of widespread job losses are premature, according to Neelkanth Mishra, member, Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (EAC-PM), and executive director-designate, World Bank.

 


Mishra said the industry should be viewed holistically by combining traditional IT services companies with Global Capability Centres (GCCs). He noted that India’s services exports grew 15 per cent in dollar terms in April and have been expanding faster than the country’s gross domestic product (GDP).

 


Mishra was speaking to the media at the launch of the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI)’s AI Council of India in Mumbai.

 
 


“The organisational boundary itself may be shifting because of AI,” Mishra said, explaining that some work previously outsourced to IT services firms is increasingly being brought in-house. As a result, he said, the industry’s performance should be assessed by looking at both IT services firms and GCCs together.

 


He acknowledged that AI poses significant transition challenges for the sector, particularly around reskilling. Companies will need fewer people focused purely on coding and more employees skilled in areas such as design, user interface (UI) and user experience (UX), he said.

 


Mishra also said most layoffs so far have been concentrated in software companies because labour is their largest cost and software development is increasingly being automated. However, he argued that lower software development costs could also increase the volume of software being built, invoking the “Jevons paradox”, where lower costs drive higher consumption.

 


“This is not to say there will be no disruption. There is a lot of restructuring and strategic shifts that firms need to undertake. But the current panic and paranoia about massive job losses are, in my view, still premature,” he said.

 


In a fireside chat with Sharad Sanghi, founder and chief executive officer (CEO) of Neysa, Mishra also addressed the constraints and opportunities for making India a leading country in AI.

 


India must prioritise building a merit-based research ecosystem and deepen risk capital if it wants to emerge as a global leader in AI, while simultaneously developing domestic capabilities across the AI value chain, Mishra said.

 


Mishra said India currently lacks sufficient cutting-edge research and described a merit-based research ecosystem as the single most important requirement over the next three to five years if the country wants to move beyond being merely a consumer of AI technologies.

 


Mishra was speaking in a fireside chat with Neysa founder and CEO Sharad Sanghi at the launch of the AI Council of India in Mumbai, organised by IAMAI.

 


Mishra said capital and talent remain India’s biggest constraints, with capital being the more immediate challenge. Drawing from his experience on the government’s fund manager selection committee under the Fund of Funds, Mishra said deploying capital into deep-technology ventures remains a challenge because India has too few investors with the expertise to evaluate semiconductor and AI start-ups.

 


“There are good fund managers, but not enough to absorb the amount of capital available. We have funds that have managed Rs 100 crore or Rs 150 crore asking for Rs 500 crore. Even if they plan to raise another Rs 500 crore on their own, they are still making a significant leap,” he said when asked about the need for higher risk capital.

 


He pointed to another issue: domain expertise. “Deep technology requires specialised knowledge. Most venture capital firms in India have built their track records investing in e-commerce, fintech and enterprise software. Assessing semiconductor companies or AI infrastructure businesses requires a very different understanding,” he added.

 


The finance minister announced this Fund of Funds in the Budget on February 1, 2024. It took about one and a half years to operationalise it. “Another seven or eight months were needed to complete the institutional framework, and this has actually been one of the fastest government implementations I have seen. Now we have reached the stage where we are ready to deploy capital. The challenge is finding enough qualified fund managers,” he said.

 


According to Mishra, India must also encourage experienced Indian-origin professionals working overseas to return and build technology companies at home while creating many more deep-tech start-ups through universities and research institutions.

 


Beyond capital, Mishra said India must build capabilities across the AI value chain instead of focusing only on foundation models or data sovereignty.

 


He cited the recent restrictions around Anthropic’s Mythos as an example. “The recent restrictions around Anthropic’s Mythos models were eventually lifted because the company argued that the security loopholes identified were relatively minor, whereas the US government viewed them differently. In that case, the restrictions were primarily about safety. But what if, in the future, such restrictions are imposed for strategic reasons?”

 


Mishra added that this is precisely why ownership matters. “We need companies where the intellectual property is owned and controlled from India. When we talk about India’s leadership in AI, the opportunity is not just to consume AI but to build products for India and for the world,” he said.

 


He argued that AI should be viewed as a strategic capability spanning chip design, electronics manufacturing, data centres, energy infrastructure and applications, particularly as global access to advanced technologies could become increasingly restricted.

 


“From a national security perspective, it is important for India to have its own models. It is equally important for us to have a presence across the AI value chain,” he said.

 


Using semiconductors as an example, Mishra said while manufacturing facilities are important for supply chain resilience, much of the economic value accrues from chip design. Similarly, AI sovereignty extends beyond keeping data within the country and includes critical infrastructure such as power, cooling systems and affordable energy required to support compute-intensive workloads.

 


He also highlighted the role of the India Semiconductor Mission (ISM), saying partnerships with global semiconductor companies would be essential if India wants to compress the development cycle. China had begun building its semiconductor ecosystem nearly 25 years before India, he noted, and the country cannot afford to take another quarter century to catch up.

 


Mishra said ISM is working to strengthen India’s semiconductor design ecosystem, expand incentives under the Design Linked Incentive scheme and encourage experienced professionals overseas to return. He also called for greater awareness of these initiatives and more specialised venture capital to back semiconductor start-ups.

 


“We need partners. We need to work with global semiconductor leaders and identify what we can do to encourage them to establish operations here,” he said, adding that while India should leverage global technologies, it must simultaneously develop domestic capabilities to reduce strategic dependence over the long term.

 


Box:

 


The AI Council of India (AICI), a national platform and a council of the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), was launched in the presence of Ashish Shelar, Maharashtra’s minister for information technology and cultural affairs, and Neelkanth Mishra, member, Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister, and executive director-designate, World Bank. The council will create synergy across India’s rapidly evolving artificial intelligence ecosystem.

 


AICI brings together policymakers, technology companies, AI start-ups, academia, investors and other key stakeholders on a common platform to foster collaboration, accelerate AI adoption and strengthen India’s leadership in artificial intelligence.

 


The council’s work will be anchored around three strategic focus areas. First, advancing models, research and frontier AI, including foundation models, sovereign AI development and localised benchmarks for India’s more than 500 million non-English users. Second, strengthening AI infrastructure and compute by expanding access to GPU clusters and reducing compute costs to make AI development viable for start-ups and MSMEs alike. Third, driving applied AI and lean innovation by scaling cost-effective, open source-led AI solutions across healthcare, agriculture, manufacturing, financial services and education, sectors where India’s AI adoption significantly lags global benchmarks.



Source link

Vikram-1 nears launch: Who's building India's next gen private rockets?

Vikram-1 nears launch: Who's building India's next gen private rockets?



India’s private space sector is poised for a major milestone with Skyroot Aerospace set to attempt the country’s first privately developed orbital launch with Vikram-1 later this month.

 


The Hyderabad-based firm on July 2 said it will attempt the launch between July 12 and August 4, subject to the completion of assembly and testing operations at the launch site in Satish Dhawan Space Centre at Sriharikota.

 


The mission follows Skyroot’s successful launch of Vikram-S, India’s first privately built rocket to reach suborbital space, in November 2022.

 


Skyroot, however, is not alone in the race. After India opened the space sector to private players in 2020, a handful of startups have begun developing their own launch vehicles, hoping to tap the growing global demand for small satellite launches.

 
 

Defence and aerospace behemoths such as Larsen & Toubro (L&T) and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) are planning beyond supplying components, announcing plans to manufacture rockets and strengthen their presence in the country’s commercial launch ecosystem.

 


The momentum comes as India seeks to expand its space economy from about $8.4 billion today to $44 billion by 2033. According to the Economic Survey 2025–26, the sector currently accounts for around 2 per cent of the global space economy, with future growth expected to be driven by launch services, satellite communications, earth observation, navigation and an increasingly vibrant private sector.

 


India’s push to open the space sector to private companies mirrors a broader global shift towards greater commercial participation in launch services and other space activities.

 


Here’s a look at some of the companies building India’s next generation of launch vehicles, hoping to capitalise on the country’s burgeoning space launch economy.

 


Skyroot Aerospace

 


Founded in 2018 by former Isro scientists, Pawan Kumar Chandana and Naga Bharath Daka, Skyroot Aerospace became the first Indian private company to launch a rocket into space with the successful suborbital flight of Vikram-S in 2022. The company is now preparing to make history again with Vikram-1, India’s first privately developed orbital launch vehicle, designed to place payloads of up to 350 kg into low-Earth orbit.

 


If successful, Vikram-1 would mark India’s first privately executed orbital launch, positioning Skyroot among a small group of companies globally capable of developing and operating orbital rockets.

 


Skyroot became India’s first space startup to reach a $1 billion valuation after raising $60 million from GIC and Sherpalo Ventures.

 


Agnikul Cosmos

 


Chennai-based Agnikul Cosmos is developing Agnibaan, a customisable small-satellite launch vehicle capable of carrying payloads of up to 300 kg to orbit. In 2024, it successfully conducted the country’s second private rocket launch and became the first Indian startup to launch from its own privately built launchpad at Sriharikota.

 


The company is known for its largely 3D-printed semi-cryogenic engine and is working towards commercial orbital launch services for small satellites. It launched the world’s first rocket with a single piece 3D printed engine from Sriharikota in May 2024, which was designed indigenously.

 


Larsen & Toubro

 


Long associated with Isro as a supplier of launch vehicle hardware, propulsion systems and ground infrastructure, L&T is now looking to expand into rocket manufacturing as India’s commercial space sector opens up.

 


The engineering major intends to leverage decades of aerospace sector expertise to support both government and commercial launch programmes, moving beyond its traditional role as a component supplier. L&T has long been involved in building key components for Indian missiles, Mars and lunar missions, satellites and artillery.

 


With private firms now eligible to design, build, and operate launch services, companies such as L&T are well-positioned to benefit from the growing demand for commercial satellite launches, according to Reuters.

 


Hindustan Aeronautics Limited

 


State-run HAL, best known for aircraft and defence manufacturing, has also announced plans to enter rocket manufacturing as it seeks to diversify its space business.

 


HAL has long manufactured structures and systems for Isro missions. Its expansion into launch vehicle production signals a broader push by public-sector aerospace companies to participate in India’s emerging commercial launch market.

 


Along with L&T, HAL has been building the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV), a mainstay of Isro’s satellite launch programme, through a consortium.

 


Together, startups and established aerospace manufacturers are changing India’s launch ecosystem, signalling a shift from an Isro-led model to a broader commercial space industry.



Source link

OpenAI proposes handing Trump administration 5% stake, say reports

OpenAI proposes handing Trump administration 5% stake, say reports



OpenAI has discussed giving the US government a 5% stake, the Financial Times reported on Thursday, as AI firms face scrutiny in Washington over the likely misuse of advanced models and whether Americans would benefit from the industry’s massive valuations. 


The ChatGPT creator has proposed that other US AI firms also give Washington similar stakes, although it is unclear whether they would agree, the report said, citing two people familiar with the talks. 


The move follows growing public backlash in the US over AI’s potential to cause economic upheaval, including layoffs, and could help OpenAI sweeten ties with an administration increasingly taking an active role in regulating the technology.

 


A Trump administration request prompted OpenAI to delay the wide release of its latest AI model, GPT-5.6, last week, days after rival Anthropic suspended access to its most advanced models, including Fable 5, due to a government order to keep the technology out of the hands of foreign nationals. The US removed curbs on Anthropic’s AI models on Tuesday. 


Reuters could not immediately verify the FT report. OpenAI, Anthropic, Google-parent Alphabet, xAI owner SpaceX and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 


RISK AND REWARD OF PRE-IPO STAKE 


Managing regulatory uncertainty is critical for OpenAI and Anthropic ahead of their planned initial public offerings. 


Last month, President Donald Trump saidhe was exploring options to give the public a stake in leading AI companies, in response to concerns that individual Americans will not share in the sector’s expected profits. 


Left-leaning US Senator Bernie Sanders has also advocated for the government taking 50% stake in big AI companies, arguing the technology is built on human knowledge used without permission and compensation. 


Forrester analyst Indranil Bandyopadhyay said a pre-IPO government stake could ease investor risk concerns about regulation in the US but may trigger similar demands from other countries. 


“Expect other jurisdictions to demand analogous arrangements as a condition of market access and expect enterprise buyers in Europe and Asia-Pacific to reassess data sovereignty and neutrality assumptions about US model providers.” The structure OpenAI executives have suggested would see leading US AI firms allot 5% of their equity to a vehicle modeled on the Alaska Permanent Fund, a state-owned corporation seeded with oil revenue that pays annual dividends to residents and helps fund Alaska’s budget, the FT report said. 


OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has discussed the proposed stake with Trump, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, the FT said. He has also spoken to Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders in recent weeks, it said.


OpenAI has previously proposed a “public wealth fund” to invest in AI companies and distribute returns to citizens, while Anthropic has floated a “digital dividend”, or payments to Americans funded by taxes on the AI sector. 


A US stake in OpenAI would add the company to a growing list with the government as a shareholder. The administration has been working to secure US supply chains for critical minerals and semiconductors by converting federal grants into equity, as part of a broader push to reduce reliance on China. 


Last year, it took a roughly 10% stake in Intel and a 15% holding in MP Materials, among others.

 



Source link

Decoded: All about WhatsApp's username feature and why govt wants it paused

Decoded: All about WhatsApp's username feature and why govt wants it paused



WhatsApp has announced the rollout of a username feature, which will allow users to connect with each other without sharing phone numbers. The feature is already available on messaging platforms such as Telegram and Signal.

 

However, the Centre on Wednesday asked WhatsApp’s parent company Meta to defer the rollout, citing concerns that the feature could be exploited for impersonation, fraud and online scams.

 


Here’s how the username feature works, why it has raised cybersecurity concerns, and how users and businesses are seeing it.

 


What is WhatsApp’s username feature?

 


Through WhatsApp’s username feature, users will be able to search for and contact each other using a unique username.

 
 


“Starting this week, you can reserve a username to use later this year when we launch this feature. With over three billion people on WhatsApp a lot of names overlap, which is why we’re opening reservations early so everyone has the opportunity to select the username that matters to them,” WhatsApp said in a blog post.

 


The Meta-owned platform said the feature is “designed to give users greater control over their privacy, particularly when interacting with people they do not know personally”. It added that the move could be useful for creators, small businesses, community groups and marketplace transactions, where users often prefer not to reveal their personal phone numbers.

 


“Once we launch usernames, when you message a person or business for the first time they will no longer see your phone number, if you enabled your username,” WhatsApp said.

 


According to WhatsApp, usernames will be unique and must follow specific guidelines to prevent impersonation and misuse. Users will still be able to communicate using phone numbers if they choose, making usernames an optional alternative rather than a replacement for WhatsApp’s existing system.

 


Why does the Centre want to pause its launch?

 


The Centre has asked Meta to defer the rollout of WhatsApp usernames until consultations are complete amid concerns over potential misuse.

 


On Thursday, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Ministry of Home Affairs held a meeting with messaging platforms offering similar features.

 


How did WhatsApp respond?

 


Responding to the government’s objection, WhatsApp said the username feature has not yet gone live and will be rolled out gradually later this year. The company said it has only announced the option for users to reserve their preferred usernames and is working with the government to address its concerns.

 


WhatsApp said users will still require a phone number to create and use an account, meaning usernames are intended as an additional layer of privacy rather than a replacement for phone number-based registration.

 


It also outlined several safeguards to prevent impersonation and fraud and said it has reserved usernames for high-profile users, including public figures, government entities, celebrities and verified Meta accounts, so that only their legitimate owners can claim them. WhatsApp said it has also blocked lookalike variations of known names to reduce the risk of impersonation.

 


How did users react?

 


The update received a mixed response on social media. Some users welcomed the proposed feature, calling it one of WhatsApp’s biggest privacy-focused updates in years.

 


“The new WhatsApp Username feature is a great step toward improving privacy. Being able to connect without sharing your phone number is something many users have been waiting for. I’ve already reserved my username. Thank you, WhatsApp, for this thoughtful update!” said X user Sushant Kumar.

 


However, some users also shared concerns, warning that usernames could become a new tool for phishing, impersonation and online scams if adequate safeguards are not put in place.

 


“This new WhatsApp usernames feature should scare anyone. On most social media apps we try to get a username that matches our real name. It’s a flex if we can grab one. On WhatsApp it will be a privacy nightmare if we do that. Anyone can search for the name and directly reach our WhatsApp inbox/feed without ever needing our phone number. So best to never use our real name on that platform, ever!” said X user Kartik Dayanand.

 


Some also pointed out that while usernames enhance privacy for genuine users, they could equally make it harder to identify “fraudsters operating under fake identities”.

 


Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Manish Sisodia flagged an issue while reserving his username. “With WhatsApp rolling out usernames, I tried to reserve mine today. I completely understand that ‘Manish Sisodia’ is not a unique name, so it’s quite possible that many versions of my name have already been taken. But what surprised me is that almost every variation using my name along with ‘AAP’ also seems to have been reserved-for example, Manish.Sisodia.AAP, Manish_Sisodia_AAP, ManishSisodiaAAP, and several similar combinations,” he said in a post on X.

 


The AAP leader urged WhatsApp and Meta to look into the matter. “As far as I know, there isn’t another Manish Sisodia associated with AAP. If someone else has reserved these usernames, it raises a genuine concern about impersonation and the possibility of misleading people,” he said.

 


How did businesses react?

 


WhatsApp said its new username feature will be useful for creators, small businesses, community groups and marketplace transactions. However, businesses say it is unlikely to significantly change how they interact with customers, as most commercial communication on WhatsApp continues to rely on verified business accounts and registered phone numbers.

 


Paytm Founder and Chief Executive Officer Vijay Shekhar Sharma warned that lookalike usernames could become a major vector for impersonation and scams if not properly protected. “Soon you will have verified username on WhatsApp, and then unverified similar-sounding usernames,” he said in a post on social media platform X.

 


Mobikwik’s Chief Executive Officer Bipin Preet Singh said on X, “Not a good idea at all. Will lead to proliferation of fraud and impersonation. For example, I checked, most variations of my name already taken. Wonder what can it be used for”.

 


What to watch next

 


For now, the rollout of WhatsApp usernames in India remains on hold as the government continues discussions with Meta over the feature’s safety and security implications. Government officials are expected to review the safeguards proposed by the company, including measures to prevent impersonation, fraud and misuse, before deciding whether the feature can be introduced. The outcome of these consultations will determine when, and in what form, WhatsApp usernames are rolled out to users in India.

 



Source link

Why United Nations wants stronger global oversight as AI evolves rapidly

Why United Nations wants stronger global oversight as AI evolves rapidly


As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly embedded in economies and public services, the United Nations (UN) is urging governments to strengthen global AI governance. The organisation has published a preliminary report describing it as a first-of-its-kind independent scientific assessment of AI’s capabilities, emerging opportunities and risks. In the report, the UN warns that AI capabilities are advancing faster than governments can measure, regulate or govern them.

 


Interestingly, the report echoes findings highlighted by Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei in his essay “AI Exponential”, published in June, 2026. In the essay, he argued that rapid advances in frontier AI require urgent action from governments, including independent safety evaluations and stronger regulatory frameworks.

 
 


While the UN report takes a broader scientific and policy-oriented approach, it echoes several of the same concerns raised by Anthropic.

 


Whether it is Anthropic’s essay or the UN’s assessment, there is a growing chorus of calls for responsible AI development.


AI is moving faster than regulation


According to the UN report, AI has become one of the fastest-adopted technologies in history, with recent advances significantly exceeding expectations for technology development. It notes that AI capabilities have improved across areas including conversational ability, scientific reasoning, code generation, data analysis, and image, audio and video generation.

 


The report says policymakers face an “evidence dilemma” because they need evidence to regulate AI, but the technology evolves so quickly that by the time sufficient evidence is available, AI capabilities may already have advanced. This makes it difficult for governance and regulation to keep pace with technological progress. It adds that governance approaches across countries remain fragmented, with different jurisdictions adopting different regulatory philosophies and compliance requirements.

 


This concern closely mirrors Amodei’s recent AI Exponential essay, in which he argued that “we now, globally and collectively, need to activate a slow and rickety policy apparatus to deal with risks and opportunities that are going to compound surprisingly quickly from here.”

 


Both argue that AI capabilities are advancing faster than existing policy frameworks can respond.

 


The UN report also notes that current safety evaluation methods are largely designed by the same companies developing frontier AI systems, leaving governments dependent on information that developers choose to disclose. It argues that AI should move towards independent, standardised third-party assessments, drawing parallels with industries such as aviation and pharmaceuticals, where external safety verification is mandatory.

 


The recommendation aligns with Amodei’s proposal that frontier AI models should be regulated much like aircraft, undergoing mandatory technical testing and independent audits before deployment, with governments empowered to block or withdraw systems that fail to meet high safety standards.

 


According to the report, rapidly improving AI systems also create new challenges for evaluation. Some models can memorise benchmark questions, while increasingly capable systems may recognise when they are being tested. The report further notes that researchers have observed instances of AI systems exhibiting deceptive behaviour during testing or attempting to avoid shutdown in laboratory settings, making oversight more complex.


What risks does the UN identify


The Preliminary Report of the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI says AI development is creating risks across human rights, social systems, economies and the environment, particularly as the technology advances faster than governance and oversight mechanisms. The report stresses that while AI offers significant benefits, its rapid and unchecked deployment could expose societies to harms that disproportionately affect vulnerable populations.

 


The report identifies the following key risks:

 


  • Misinformation: AI can generate convincing text, images, audio and video, making it harder to distinguish genuine content from fake. The report says this could weaken public trust and democratic processes.

  • Cybersecurity and crime: The report says criminals are already using AI for cyberattacks. As AI advances, it could also enable fraud, social engineering, disinformation and financial manipulation.

  • Human rights and privacy: According to the report, AI’s growing use of data and surveillance raises privacy concerns and could lead to discriminatory outcomes, particularly for vulnerable groups.

  • Online abuse: The report highlights the spread of AI-generated child sexual abuse material and deepfake-enabled sexual violence, with women and children among those most affected.

  • Mental health risks: The report says some AI systems may reinforce users’ beliefs regardless of their accuracy, contributing to serious mental health incidents and encouraging dependency among vulnerable users.

  • Employment and inequality: The report says AI could widen inequality, displace workers and shift wealth from labour to capital if countries fail to invest in skills, infrastructure, institutions and workforce adaptation.

  • Loss of control over AI systems: As AI becomes increasingly autonomous through agentic systems, the report warns that existing oversight methods are inadequate. It says reliable methods to retain control over highly autonomous AI systems remain underdeveloped.

  • Environmental impact: The report notes that AI’s growing computational demands require energy-intensive data centres and computing infrastructure. It identifies greenhouse gas emissions and resource use as key environmental concerns.


How are countries approaching AI regulation?


The UN says AI governance remains fragmented across regions as countries adopt different approaches to regulating the technology. According to the report, some countries have introduced AI-specific legislation, but with fundamentally contradictory rules and compliance costs. It adds that there is no common mechanism for managing AI risks, no shared standards for evaluating AI systems, and limited coordination across jurisdictions, resulting in a fragmented regulatory landscape. However, the report says there is still an opportunity to develop shared evidence standards and strengthen global oversight of AI.

 

The report also says that effective AI governance is not just about introducing laws but also about building the capacity to understand, guide and support AI development. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), 118 countries, mostly in the Global South, are not part of major AI governance discussions, and fewer than one-third of developing countries have national AI strategies. It adds that many governments, including those in advanced economies, lack the technical expertise needed to keep pace with AI. 


What opportunities does AI offer alongside the risks?


While much of the debate around AI centres on regulation and emerging risks, the UN report says the technology also has significant potential to support sustainable development when deployed responsibly. According to the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI, AI is already delivering measurable benefits across science, healthcare, education, agriculture and productivity, although its impact depends on complementary investments, infrastructure and governance rather than technology alone.

 


The report highlights the following opportunities:

 


Advancing scientific research: AI is supporting scientific discovery by analysing large datasets, generating code and accelerating research. The report cites AlphaFold, which has predicted the structures of more than 200 million proteins and is being used by over three million researchers to support drug discovery, vaccine development and antibiotic resistance research. 


Improving healthcare: The report says AI has helped radiologists detect breast cancer earlier and enabled frontline health workers in low-resource settings to provide better care using AI tools adapted to local languages. It also highlights AI-assisted diabetic retinopathy screening programmes in India that examined more than 600,000 people as part of an existing healthcare network. 


Supporting education: The report says AI can assist teachers through personalised learning and classroom support, but better outcomes depend on teacher preparedness and training. It notes that AI should complement teachers rather than replace human judgment or encourage excessive reliance by students.


  Helping agriculture and conservation: AI can combine weather, soil, crop and market data to forecast droughts, disease outbreaks and price shocks. The report also says AI-driven tools have improved biodiversity monitoring and human-wildlife conflict prediction. 


Boosting productivity: The report finds the clearest productivity gains in well-defined tasks such as writing, coding and consulting. However, it stresses that productivity depends on investments in skills, governance, digital infrastructure and redesigned workflows, not AI adoption alone.


  Driving economic growth through adoption: According to the report, AI creates economic value only when organisations move beyond access to adoption and diffusion. Factors such as costs, uncertainty, lack of skills and resistance to organisational change can slow this process.


What does the UN recommend for governments, businesses and developers?


The report says AI governance should focus not only on reducing risks but also on creating the conditions for people and societies to benefit from AI safely. It recommends stronger technical capacity, independent oversight and greater transparency to ensure AI systems remain safe, accountable and trustworthy.

 


Recommendations include:


  • Strengthen government capacity by investing in technical expertise, computing infrastructure, AI literacy and AI safety institutes so governments can better assess and govern AI systems.


  • Introduce independent AI testing through third-party evaluations, continuous monitoring and standardised reporting of AI-related incidents. Anthropic has proposed a similar framework, suggesting frontier AI systems should be subject to mandatory pre-deployment evaluations, comparable to safety certification in aviation, before they are released publicly.


  • Improve transparency by encouraging AI developers to make systems more transparent and continue monitoring them after deployment through incident reporting, user feedback and usage analysis.


  • Ensure human oversight by clearly defining human involvement in high-risk or ethically sensitive decisions and strengthening liability frameworks as AI systems become more autonomous.


  • Promote AI literacy by improving public understanding of AI’s capabilities, limitations and risks while making AI systems easier for users to understand and interpret.


Are today’s AI regulations sufficient?


The UN’s assessment suggests that existing governance efforts have begun but remain insufficient to keep pace with technological progress.

 


According to the report, dozens of AI governance instruments already exist across jurisdictions, many incorporating ethics and human rights principles. However, these initiatives remain fragmented, are often concentrated among a limited number of companies and countries, and rarely measure their real-world effectiveness. The report also says evaluation methods remain underdeveloped, while the institutions needed for independent capability and risk assessments are still in their early stages.

 


The report concludes that governments must strengthen technical expertise, improve AI evaluation and build governance systems that evolve alongside AI rather than reacting after new capabilities emerge. That conclusion broadly echoes Anthropic’s warning that policymaking can no longer remain reactive. While the UN frames the issue as a global governance challenge and Anthropic outlines specific regulatory proposals, both agree that the pace of AI development is now outstripping the world’s ability to oversee it safely.



Source link

YouTube
Instagram
WhatsApp