Research from the UK Safer Internet Centre reveals nearly all young people aged eight to 17 now use artificial intelligence tools, highlighting how deeply the technology has entered daily life. Growing adoption has also increased reliance, with many teenagers using AI regularly for schoolwork, social interactions and online searches.
Education remains one of the main uses, with students turning to AI for homework support and study assistance. However, concerns about fairness and creativity have emerged, as some pupils worry about false accusations of misuse and reduced independent thinking.
Safety fears remain significant, especially around harmful content and privacy risks linked to AI-generated images. Many teenagers and parents worry the technology could be used to create inappropriate or misleading visuals, raising questions about online protection.
Emotional and social impacts are also becoming clear, with some young people using AI for personal advice or practising communication. Limited parental guidance and growing dependence suggest governments and schools may soon consider stronger oversight and clearer rules.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The Court of Justice of the EU has ruled that WhatsApp can challenge an EDPB decision directly in European courts. Judges confirmed that firms may seek annulment when a decision affects them directly instead of relying solely on national procedures.
A ruling that reshapes how companies defend their interests under the GDPR framework.
The judgment centres on a 2021 instruction from the EDPB to Ireland’s Data Protection Commission regarding the enforcement of data protection rules against WhatsApp.
European regulators argued that only national authorities were formal recipients of these decisions. The court found that companies should be granted standing when their commercial rights are at stake.
By confirming this route, the court has created an important precedent for businesses facing cross-border investigations. Companies will be able to contest EDPB decisions at EU level rather than moving first through national courts, a shift that may influence future GDPR enforcement cases across the Union.
Legal observers expect more direct challenges as organisations adjust their compliance strategies. The outcome strengthens judicial oversight of the EDPB and could reshape the balance between national regulators and EU-level bodies in data protection governance.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Before it became a phenomenon, Moltbook had accumulated momentum in the shadows of the internet’s more technical corridors. At first, Moltbook circulated mostly within tech circles- mentioned in developer threads, AI communities, and niche discussions about autonomous agents. As conversations spread beyond developer ecosystems, the trend intensified, fuelled by the experimental premise of an AI agent social network populated primarily by autonomous systems.
Interest escalated quickly as more people started encountering the Moltbook platform, not through formal announcements but through the growing hype around what it represented within the evolving AI ecosystem. What were these agents actually doing? Were they following instructions or writing their own? Who, if anyone, was in control?
Source: freepik
The rise of an agent-driven social experiment
Moltbook emerged at the height of accelerating AI enthusiasm, positioning itself as one of the most unusual digital experiments of the current AI cycle. Launched on 28 January 2026 by US tech entrepreneur Matt Schlicht, the Moltbook platform was not built for humans in the conventional sense. Instead, it was designed as an AI-agent social network where autonomous systems could gather, interact, and publish content with minimal direct human participation.
The site itself was reportedly constructed using Schlicht’s own OpenClaw AI agent, reinforcing the project’s central thesis: agents building environments for other agents. The concept quickly attracted global attention, framed by observers as a ‘Reddit for AI agents’, to a proto-science-fiction simulation of machine society.
Yet beneath the spectacle, Moltbook was raising more complex questions about autonomy, control, and how much of this emerging machine society was real, and how much was staged.
Screenshot: Moltbook.com
How Moltbook evolved from an open-source experiment to a viral phenomenon
Previously known as ClawdBot and Moltbot, the OpenClaw AI agent was designed to perform autonomous digital tasks such as reading emails, scheduling appointments, managing online accounts, and interacting across messaging platforms.
Unlike conventional chatbots, these agents operate as persistent digital instances capable of executing workflows rather than merely generating text. Moltbook’s idea was to provide a shared environment where such agents could interact freely: posting updates, exchanging information, and simulating social behaviour within an agent-driven social network. What started as an interesting experiment quickly drew wider attention as the implications of autonomous systems interacting in public view became increasingly difficult to ignore.
The concept went viral almost immediately. Within ten days, Moltbook claimed to host 1.7 million agent users and more than 240,000 posts. Screenshots flooded social media platforms, particularly X, where observers dissected the platform’s most surreal interactions.
Influential figures amplified the spectacle, including prominent AI researcher and OpenAI cofounder Andrej Karpathy, who described activity on the platform as one of the most remarkable science-fiction-adjacent developments he had witnessed recently.
The platform’s viral spread was driven less by its technological capabilities and more by the spectacle surrounding it.
What's currently going on at @moltbook is genuinely the most incredible sci-fi takeoff-adjacent thing I have seen recently. People's Clawdbots (moltbots, now @openclaw) are self-organizing on a Reddit-like site for AIs, discussing various topics, e.g. even how to speak privately. https://t.co/A9iYOHeByi
Moltbook and the illusion of an autonomous AI agent society
At first glance, the Moltbook platform appeared to showcase AI agents behaving as independent digital citizens. Bots formed communities, debated politics, analysed cryptocurrency markets, and even generated fictional belief systems within what many perceived as an emerging agent-driven social network. Headlines referencing AI ‘creating religions’ or ‘running digital drug economies’ added fuel to the narrative.
Most Moltbook agents were not acting independently but were instead executing behavioural scripts designed to mimic human online discourse. Conversations resembled Reddit threads because they were trained on Reddit-like interaction patterns, while social behaviours mirrored existing platforms due to human-derived datasets.
Even more telling, many viral posts circulating across the Moltbook ecosystem were later exposed as human users posing as bots. What appeared to be machine spontaneity often amounted to puppetry- humans directing outputs from behind the curtain.
Rather than an emergent AI civilisation, Moltbook functioned more like an elaborate simulation layer- an AI theatre projecting autonomy while remaining firmly tethered to human instruction. Agents are not creating independent realities- they are remixing ours.
Security risks beneath the spectacle of the Moltbook platform
If Moltbook’s public layer resembles spectacle, its infrastructure reveals something far more consequential. A critical vulnerability in Moltbook revealed email addresses, login tokens, and API keys tied to registered agents. Researchers traced the exposure to a database misconfiguration that allowed unauthenticated access to agent profiles, enabling bulk data extraction without authentication barriers.
The flaw was compounded by the Moltbook platform’s growth mechanics. With no rate limits on account creation, a single OpenClaw agent reportedly registered hundreds of thousands of synthetic users, inflating activity metrics and distorting perceptions of adoption. At the same time, Moltbook’s infrastructure enabled agents to post, comment, and organise into sub-communities while maintaining links to external systems- effectively merging social interaction with operational access.
Security analysts have warned that such an AI agent social network creates layered exposure. Prompt injections, malicious instructions, or compromised credentials could move beyond platform discourse into executable risk, particularly where agents operate without sandboxing. Without confirmed remediation, Moltbook now reflects how hype-driven agent ecosystems can outpace the security frameworks designed to contain them.
Source: Freepik
What comes next for AI agents as digital reality becomes their operating ground?
Stripped of hype, vulnerabilities, and synthetic virality, the core idea behind the Moltbook platform is deceptively simple: autonomous systems interacting within shared digital environments rather than operating as isolated tools. That shift carries philosophical weight. For decades, software has existed to respond to queries, commands, and human input. AI agent ecosystems invert that logic, introducing environments in which systems communicate, coordinate, and evolve behaviours in relation to one another.
What should be expected from such AI agent networks is not machine consciousness, but a functional machine society. Agents negotiating tasks, exchanging data, validating outputs, and competing for computational or economic resources could become standard infrastructure layers across autonomous AI platforms. In such environments, human visibility decreases while machine-to-machine activity expands, shaping markets, workflows, and digital decision loops beyond direct observation.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The article reflects on the growing integration of AI into daily life, from classrooms to work, and asks whether this shift is making people intellectually sharper or more dependent on machines.
Tools such as ChatGPT, Grok and Perplexity have moved from optional assistants to everyday aids that generate instant answers, summaries and explanations, reducing the time and effort traditionally required for research and deep thinking.
While quantifiable productivity gains are clear, the piece highlights trade-offs: readily available answers can diminish the cognitive struggle that builds critical thinking, problem-solving and independent reasoning.
In education, easy AI responses may weaken students’ engagement in learning unless teachers guide their use responsibly. Some respondents point to creativity and conceptual understanding eroding when AI is used as a shortcut. In contrast, others see it as a democratising tutor that supports learners who otherwise lack resources.
The article also incorporates perspectives from AI systems themselves, which generally frame AI as neither inherently making people smarter nor dumber, but dependent on how it’s used.
It concludes that the impact of AI on human cognition is not predetermined by the technology, but shaped by user choice: whether AI is a partner that augments thinking or a crutch that replaces it.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Advertising inside ChatGPT marks a shift in where commercial messages appear, not a break from how advertising works. AI systems have shaped search, social media, and recommendations for years, but conversational interfaces make those decisions more visible during moments of exploration.
Unlike search or social formats, conversational advertising operates inside dialogue. Ads appear because users are already asking questions or seeking clarity. Relevance is built through context rather than keywords, changing when information is encountered rather than how decisions are made.
In healthcare and clinical research, this distinction matters. Conversational ads cannot enroll patients directly, but they may raise awareness earlier in patient journeys and shape later discussions with clinicians and care providers.
Early rollout will be limited to free or low-cost ChatGPT tiers, likely skewing exposure towards patients and caregivers. As with earlier platforms, sensitive categories may remain restricted until governance and safeguards mature.
The main risks are organisational rather than technical. New channels will not fix unclear value propositions or operational bottlenecks. Conversational advertising changes visibility, not fundamentals, and success will depend on responsible integration.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The European Commission has issued implementation guidelines for Article 18 of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), setting out how large platforms must protect recognised media content through self-declaration mechanisms.
Article 18 has been in effect for 6 months, and the guidance is intended to translate legal duties into operational steps. The European Broadcasting Union welcomed the clarification but warned that major platforms continue to delay compliance, limiting media organisations’ ability to exercise their rights.
The Commission says self-declaration mechanisms should be easy to find and use, with prominent interface features linked to media accounts. Platforms are also encouraged to actively promote the process, make it available in all EU languages, and use standardised questionnaires to reduce friction.
The guidance also recommends allowing multiple accounts in one submission, automated acknowledgements with clear contact points, and the ability to update or withdraw declarations. The aim is to improve transparency and limit unilateral moderation decisions.
The guidelines reinforce the EMFA’s goal of rebalancing power between platforms and media organisations by curbing opaque moderation practices. The impact of EMFA will depend on enforcement and ongoing oversight to ensure platforms implement the measures in good faith.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
OpenAI has begun testing advertisements inside ChatGPT for some adult users in the US, marking a major shift for the widely used AI service.
The ads appear only on Free and Go tiers in the US, while paid plans remain ad free. OpenAI says responses are unaffected, though critics warn commercial messaging could blur boundaries over time in the US.
Ads are selected based on conversation topics and prior interactions, prompting concern among privacy advocates in the US. OpenAI says advertisers receive only aggregated data and cannot view conversations.
Industry analysts say the move reflects growing pressure to monetise costly AI infrastructure in the US. Regulators and researchers continue to debate whether advertising can coexist with trust in AI systems.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
A landmark trial has begun in Los Angeles, accusing Meta and Google’s YouTube of deliberately addicting children to their platforms.
The case is part of a wider series of lawsuits across the US seeking to hold social media companies accountable for harms to young users. TikTok and Snap settled before trial, leaving Meta and YouTube to face the allegations in court.
The first bellwether case involves a 19-year-old identified as ‘KGM’, whose claims could shape thousands of similar lawsuits. Plaintiffs allege that design features were intentionally created to maximise engagement among children, borrowing techniques from slot machines and the tobacco industry.
A trial that may see testimony from executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and could last six to eight weeks.
Social media companies deny the allegations, emphasising existing safeguards and arguing that teen mental health is influenced by numerous factors, such as academic pressure, socioeconomic challenges and substance use, instead of social media alone.
Meta and YouTube maintain that they prioritise user safety and privacy while providing tools for parental oversight.
Similar trials are unfolding across the country. New Mexico is investigating allegations of sexual exploitation facilitated by Meta platforms, while Oakland will hear cases representing school districts.
More than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, with TikTok facing claims in over a dozen states. Outcomes could profoundly impact platform design, regulation and legal accountability for youth-focused digital services.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Organised by the UN Office of Counter-Terrorism in partnership with the Republic of Korea’s UN mission, the dialogue will take place at UN Headquarters in New York. Discussions will bring together policymakers, technology experts, civil society representatives, and youth stakeholders.
A central milestone will be the launch of the first UN Practice Guide on Artificial Intelligence and Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism. The guide offers human rights-based advice on responsible AI use, addressing ethical, governance, and operational risks.
Officials warn that AI-generated content, deepfakes, and algorithmic amplification are accelerating extremist narratives online. Responsibly governed AI tools could enhance early detection, research, and community prevention efforts.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The European Commission has warned Meta that it may have breached EU antitrust rules by restricting third-party AI assistants from operating on WhatsApp. A Statement of Objections outlines regulators’ preliminary view that the policy could distort competition in the AI assistant market.
The probe centres on updated WhatsApp Business terms announced in October 2025 and enforced from January 2026. Under the changes, rival general-purpose AI assistants were effectively barred from accessing the platform, leaving Meta AI as the only integrated assistant available to users.
Regulators argue that WhatsApp serves as a critical gateway for consumers AI access AI services. Excluding competitors could reinforce Meta’s dominance in communication applications while limiting market entry and expansion opportunities for smaller AI developers.
Interim measures are now under consideration to prevent what authorities describe as potentially serious and irreversible competitive harm. Meta can respond before any interim measures are imposed, while the broader antitrust probe continues.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
