Digital business models

SoftBank profit jumps on AI-driven rebound

SoftBank Group reported a 124% surge in quarterly profit, driven by booming AI demand that lifted chip sales and startup valuations. Net income reached ¥517.18 billion ($3.5 billion) in the fiscal fourth quarter, with the Vision Fund swinging back to a profit of ¥26.1 billion.

The results provide momentum for SoftBank’s ambitions to invest heavily in OpenAI and US-based AI infrastructure. Plans include a $30 billion stake in OpenAI and leading a $100 billion push into data centres under the Stargate project, which could eventually grow to $500 billion.

However, investor caution amid tariffs and tech protectionism has delayed detailed financing discussions. Despite these hurdles, SoftBank’s chip unit Arm Holdings has benefited from rising global AI investments, even as near-term forecasts remain mixed.

For the full year, SoftBank earned ¥1.15 trillion, reversing a significant loss from the previous year. The company continues to navigate risks tied to the volatile tech start-up market, especially as Vision Fund portfolio firms go public in India.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Google tests AI tool to automate software development

Google is internally testing an advanced AI tool designed to support software engineers through the entire development cycle, according to The Information. The firm is also expected to demonstrate integration between its Gemini chatbot in voice mode and Android-powered XR headsets.

The agentic AI assistant is said to handle tasks such as code generation and documentation, and has already been previewed to staff and developers ahead of Google’s I/O conference on 20 May. The move reflects a wider trend among tech giants racing to automate programming.

Amazon is developing its own coding assistant, Kiro, which can process both text and visual inputs, detect bugs, and auto-document code. While AWS initially targeted a June launch, the current release date remains uncertain.

Microsoft and Google have claimed that around 30% of their code is now AI-generated. OpenAI is also eyeing expansion, reportedly in talks to acquire AI coding start-up Windsurf for $3 billion.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

M&S urges password reset after major cyber incident

Marks & Spencer has confirmed that hackers accessed personal customer information in a cyber-attack that began in late April. The retailer stated that no payment details or account passwords were compromised, and there is currently no evidence the stolen data has been shared.

Customers will be prompted to reset their passwords as a precaution. Chief executive Stuart Machin called the breach a result of a sophisticated attack and apologised for the disruption, which has impacted online orders, app functionality, and some in-store services.

Although stores remain open, the company has been unable to process online purchases since 25 April. A hacking group known as Scattered Spider is believed to be behind the incident.

M&S has contacted affected customers and provided guidance on online safety. The company said it is working ‘around the clock’ to resolve the issue and restore normal operations. Customers are thanked for their patience and continued support.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Bitcoin’s political puppeteers: From code to clout

Bitcoin was once seen as the cornerstone of a financial utopia — immune to political control, free from traditional banking systems, and governed solely by blockchain protocols. For a while, that dream felt real — and we lived it.

Today, things have changed. The whole crypto market has become increasingly sensitive to political influence, the actions of crypto whales, and rising global tensions.

While financial markets are expected to respond to global developments, Bitcoin’s price volatility has started to reflect something more concerning. Instead of being driven primarily by innovation or organic adoption, BTC price movements are increasingly shaped by media exposure and the strategic trades by influential figures.

In this shifting ecosystem, manipulation and concentrated influence are gradually undermining the core ideals of decentralisation and financial autonomy. Is this really the revolution we were promised? 

Trump’s family growing grip on the crypto market

Donald Trump has not always been a crypto fan. Once critical of Bitcoin, he is now positioning himself as a pro-crypto leader. It is a shift driven by opportunity — not just political, but financial. Trump understands that supporting digital assets could help the USA become a global crypto hub. But it also aligns perfectly with his reputation as a businessman first, politician second. 

The issue lies in the outsized influence his words now have in the crypto space. A single post on social media like X or Truth can send Bitcoin’s price up or down. Whether he is praising crypto or denying personal gain, the market reacts instantly. 

His sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump are also active — often promoting the narrative that banks are obsolete and crypto is the future. They frequently make suggestive remarks about market trends. At times, they even imply where investors should put their money — all while staying within legal limits. Still, this pattern subtly steers market sentiment, raising concerns about coordinated influence and the deliberate shaping of market trends.

The launch of politically themed meme coins like $TRUMP and $MELANIA added fuel to the fire. These coins sparked massive rallies — and equally dramatic crashes. In fact, Bitcoin’s all-time high was followed by a sharp fall, partially triggered by the hype and eventual dump around these tokens.

Investigations now suggest insider activity. One wallet made $39 million in just 12 hours after buying $MELANIA before it was even announced. Meanwhile, $TRUMP coin insiders moved $4.6 million in USDC right before the major token unlock.

While technically legal, these actions raise serious ethical concerns. Also, 80% of its supply is controlled by insiders — including Donald Trump himself. It points to a clear pattern of influence, where strategic actions are being used to shape market movements and drive profits for a select few.

What we are seeing is the unprecedented impact of a single family. The combination of political clout and financial ambition is reshaping crypto sentiment, and Bitcoin is reflecting the shift as well. It is no longer subtle — and it is certainly troubling. Crypto is supposed to be free from central influence — yet right now, it bends under the weight of a single name.

Whales and the Michael Saylor effect 

Beyond politics, crypto whales are playing their part in manipulating Bitcoin’s movements. They can cause major price swings by buying or selling in bulk. 

One of the most influential is Michael Saylor, co-founder of Strategy. His company holds approximately 555,450 BTC and is still buying. Every time he announces a new purchase, Bitcoin prices spike. Traders monitor his every move — his tweets are treated like trading signals. 

But Saylor has bigger plans. He once said he could become a Bitcoin bank — a statement that sparked backlash. What is particularly striking is that a businessman who has supported Bitcoin’s decentralised nature from the beginning is now acting in ways that appear to contradict it. Bitcoin was designed to avoid central control — not to be dominated by one player, no matter how bullish. When too much BTC ends up concentrated in one place, the autonomous promise begins to crack. 

Market trust is shifting from code to individuals — and that is risky.

Global tensions as a Bitcoin barometer

Bitcoin does not just respond to tweets anymore. Global tensions have made it a geopolitical asset — a barometer of financial anxiety. 

Recent US tariffs, particularly on Chinese mining equipment, have raised mining costs. Tariffs also disrupted the supply chain for mining rigs, slowing down expansion and affecting hash rates.

At the same time, when the US exempted tech products like iPhones and laptops from tariffs, Bitcoin surged — reaching $86,000. It shows how trade policy and tech pressure are now directly linked to Bitcoin price action. 

Yet, there always seems to be a push-and-pull dynamic at play — not necessarily coordinated, but clearly driven by short-term momentum and opportunistic interests.

It is where irony lies — Bitcoin was built to be apolitical. But today, it is tightly tied to global politics. Its price now swings in response to elections, sanctions, and international conflicts — the very forces it was meant to bypass. What was once a decentralised alternative to traditional finance is becoming a mirror of the same systems it sought to disrupt. 

Bitcoin: from decentralised dream to politically-driven reality 

Bitcoin is no longer moved by natural market fundamentals alone. It dances to the tune of political tweets, whale decisions, and global conflicts. A decentralised dream now faces a centralised reality.

It all started when governments and financial institutions began taking an active interest in Bitcoin and the broader cryptocurrency market. While mainstream adoption was essential for legitimising digital assets, that level of attention came with strings attached — most notably, external influence.

What was once an alternative movement powered by decentralised ideals has gradually attracted the gaze of political leaders, regulators, and corporate giants. The tale of two sides of the sword: the promise of legitimacy, tempered by the risk of losing the system’s independence. 

In this environment, the absence of central control and the self-governing nature of the system are becoming increasingly symbolic. The market reacts not just to algorithms or adoption metrics, but also to the opinions and actions of a powerful few — raising concerns about market manipulation, unequal access, and the long-term health of crypto’s founding vision. Is that really a non-centralised structure?

Crypto was meant to free us from financial gatekeepers. But if Bitcoin can be shaken by one man’s post on a social network, we must ask: can it still considered free? 

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Mayor Adams pushes for New York’s rise as a crypto hub

New York City Mayor Eric Adams has reaffirmed ambition to turn the city into the world’s leading crypto capital. At a press conference ahead of the 20 May NYC Crypto Summit, Adams highlighted New York’s growing blockchain sector and its role in boosting financial inclusion.

The mayor appeared alongside leading tech figures, including June Ou from Figure Firm and Richard Hecker from Traction and Scale. Adams pointed to his 2022 move to convert his first three payslips into Bitcoin and Ethereum as proof of his early support for crypto.

He also positioned New York as a serious competitor to Silicon Valley when it comes to innovation and startup growth in the crypto space.

Adams said the summit would foster public-private cooperation to shape digital assets through balanced rules, focusing on long-term blockchain use over short-lived trends like memecoins.

Without naming them directly, his remarks may also appeal to crypto super PACs, as he prepares for a possible independent re-election campaign following the dismissal of a federal investigation.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot! 

Masked cybercrime groups rise as attacks escalate worldwide

Cybercrime is thriving like never before, with hackers launching attacks ranging from absurd ransomware demands of $1 trillion to large-scale theft of personal data. Despite efforts from Microsoft, Google and even the FBI, these threat actors continue to outpace defences.

A new report by Group-IB has analysed over 1,500 cybercrime investigations to uncover the most active and dangerous hacker groups operating today.

Rather than fading away after arrests or infighting, many cybercriminal gangs are re-emerging stronger than before.

Group-IB’s May 2025 report highlights a troubling increase in key attack types across 2024 — phishing rose by 22%, ransomware leak sites by 10%, and APT (advanced persistent threat) attacks by 58%. The United States was the most affected country by ransomware activity.

At the top of the cybercriminal hierarchy now sits RansomHub, a ransomware-as-a-service group that emerged from the collapsed ALPHV group and has already overtaken long-established players in attack numbers.

Behind it is GoldFactory, which developed the first iOS banking trojan and exploited facial recognition data. Lazarus, a well-known North Korean state-linked group, also remains highly active under multiple aliases.

Meanwhile, politically driven hacktivist group NoName057(16) has been targeting European institutions using denial-of-service attacks.

With jurisdictional gaps allowing cybercriminals to flourish, these masked hackers remain a growing concern for global cybersecurity, especially as new threat actors emerge from the shadows instead of disappearing for good.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

US scraps Biden AI chip export rule

The US Department of Commerce has scrapped the Biden administration’s Artificial Intelligence Diffusion Rule just days before it was due to come into force.

Introduced in January, the rule would have restricted the export of US-made AI chips to many countries for the first time, while reinforcing existing controls.

Rather than enforcing broad restrictions, the Department now intends to pursue direct negotiations with individual countries.

The original rule divided the world into three tiers, with countries like Japan and South Korea spared restrictions, middle-tier countries such as Mexico and Portugal facing new limits, and nations like China and Russia subject to tighter controls.

According to Bloomberg, a replacement rule is expected at a later date.

Instead of issuing immediate new regulations, officials released industry guidance warning companies against using Huawei’s Ascend AI chips and highlighted the risks of allowing US chips to train AI in China.

Secretary Jeffrey Kessler criticised the Biden-era policy, promising a ‘bold, inclusive’ AI strategy that works with allies while limiting access for adversaries.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

US Copyright Office avoids clear decision on AI and fair use

The US Copyright Office has stopped short of deciding whether AI companies can legally use copyrighted material to train their systems under fair use.

Its newly released report acknowledges that some uses—such as non-commercial research—may qualify, while others, like replicating expressive works from pirated content to produce market-ready AI output, likely won’t.

Rather than offering a definitive answer, the Office said such cases must be assessed by the courts, not through a universal standard.

The latest report is the third in a series aimed at guiding how copyright law applies to AI-generated content. It reiterates that works entirely created by AI cannot be copyrighted, but human-edited outputs might still qualify.

The 108-page document focuses heavily on whether AI training methods transform content enough to justify legal protection, and whether they harm creators’ livelihoods through lost sales or diluted markets.

Instead of setting new policy, the Office highlights existing legal principles, especially the four factors of fair use: the purpose, the nature of the work, the amount used, and the impact on the original market.

It notes that AI-generated content can sometimes alter original works meaningfully, but when styles or outputs closely resemble protected material, legal risks remain. Tools like content filters are seen as helpful in preventing infringement, even though they’re not always reliable.

The timing of the report has been overshadowed by political turmoil. President Donald Trump reportedly dismissed both the Librarian of Congress and the head of the Copyright Office days before the report’s release.

Meanwhile, creators continue urging the government not to permit fair use in AI training, arguing it threatens the value of original work. The debate is now expected to unfold further in courtrooms instead of regulatory offices.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

BlackRock raises concerns over quantum computing risks to Bitcoin ETFs

BlackRock has flagged quantum computing as a potential risk to its iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT) in a recent regulatory filing. BlackRock highlighted the threat from emerging technologies, specifically quantum computing, to the cryptographic security of Bitcoin and blockchain networks.

BlackRock warned that advances in quantum computing could undermine the cryptographic algorithms protecting digital assets like Bitcoin. It is the first time BlackRock has explicitly mentioned this risk in relation to the IBIT ETF, with $64 billion in net assets.

Despite the warnings, analysts suggest that such risk disclosures are standard practice for financial products. James Seyffart, an analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence, noted that firms are required to flag all possible risks, even those with a very low likelihood of occurring.

Meanwhile, Bitcoin ETFs have seen a surge in popularity, attracting over $41 billion in net inflows since their launch.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot! 

Jamie Lee Curtis calls out Zuckerberg over AI scam using her likeness

Jamie Lee Curtis has directly appealed to Mark Zuckerberg after discovering her likeness had been used without consent in an AI-generated advert.

Posting on Facebook, Curtis expressed her frustration with Meta’s lack of proper channels to report such abuse, stating she had exhausted all official avenues before resorting to a public plea.

The fake video reportedly manipulated footage from an emotional interview following the January wildfires in Los Angeles, inserting false statements under the guise of a product endorsement.

Instead of remaining silent, Curtis urged Zuckerberg to take action, saying the unauthorised content damaged her integrity and voice. Within hours of her public callout, Meta confirmed the video had been removed for breaching its policies, a rare example of a swift response.

‘It worked! Yay Internet! Shame has its value!’ she wrote in a follow-up, though she also highlighted the broader risks posed by deepfakes.

The actress joins a growing list of celebrities, including Taylor Swift and Scarlett Johansson, who’ve been targeted by AI misuse.

Swift was forced to publicly clarify her political stance after an AI video falsely endorsed Donald Trump, while Johansson criticised OpenAI for allegedly using a voice nearly identical to hers despite her refusal to participate in a project.

The issue has reignited concerns around consent, misinformation and the exploitation of public figures.

Instead of waiting for further harm, lawmakers in California have already begun pushing back. New legislation signed by Governor Gavin Newsom aims to protect performers from unauthorised digital replicas and deepfakes.

Meanwhile, in Washington, proposals like the No Fakes Act seek to hold tech platforms accountable, possibly fining them thousands per violation. As Curtis and others warn, without stronger protections, the misuse of AI could spiral further, threatening not just celebrities but the public as a whole.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Diplo chatbot can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.