Bank of China’s Hong Kong-listed shares jumped 6.7% on Monday after reports that the bank’s local branch is preparing to apply for a stablecoin issuer licence. The Hong Kong Economic Journal said the branch has already formed a task force to explore potential issuance.
The move comes after Hong Kong launched its stablecoin licensing regime on 1 August, requiring approval from the Hong Kong Monetary Authority. The framework sets strict rules on reserves, redemptions, fund segregation, anti-money laundering, disclosure and operator checks.
The regime has already drawn interest from major institutions such as Standard Chartered.
Chinese firms JD.com and Ant Financial have also expressed plans to seek licences abroad, potentially in Hong Kong, to support cross-border payments.
Advocates highlight the efficiency of stablecoins, noting that blockchain technology reduces settlement times and cuts intermediary costs. The benefits are particularly pronounced in emerging markets, where stablecoins hedge against currency volatility.
Regulators, however, have urged caution. The SFC and HKMA warned investors about speculation-driven price swings from licensing rumours, highlighting risks of reacting to unverified reports.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The regulatory approaches to AI in the EU and Australia are diverging significantly, creating a complex challenge for the global tech sector.
Instead of a unified global standard, companies must now navigate the EU’s stringent, risk-based AI Act and Australia’s more tentative, phased-in approach. The disparity underscores the necessity for sophisticated cross-border legal expertise to ensure compliance in different markets.
In the EU, the landmark AI Act is now in force, implementing a strict risk-based framework with severe financial penalties for non-compliance.
Conversely, Australia has yet to pass binding AI-specific laws, opting instead for a proposal paper outlining voluntary safety standards and 10 mandatory guardrails for high-risk applications currently under consultation.
It creates a markedly different compliance environment for businesses operating in both regions.
For tech companies, the evolving patchwork of international regulations turns AI governance into a strategic differentiator instead of a mere compliance obligation.
Understanding jurisdictional differences, particularly in areas like data governance, human oversight, and transparency, is becoming essential for successful and lawful global operations.
Would you like to learn more aboutAI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Picture having a personal therapist who is always there for you, understands your needs, and gives helpful advice whenever you ask. There are no hourly fees, and you can start or stop sessions whenever you want. Thanks to new developments in AI, this idea is close to becoming a reality.
With advanced AI and large language models (LLMs), what once sounded impossible is closer to reality: AI is rapidly becoming a stand-in for therapists, offering users advice and mental health support. While society increasingly turns to AI for personal and professional assistance, a new debate arises: can AI truly replace human mental health expertise?
Therapy keeps secrets; AI keeps data
Registered therapists must maintain confidentiality except to avert serious harm, fostering a safe, non-judgemental environment for patients to speak openly. AI models, however, depend on large-scale data processing and lack an equivalent duty of confidentiality, creating ethical risks around privacy, secondary use and oversight.
The privacy and data security concerns are not hypothetical. In June 2025, users reported that sensitive Meta AI conversations appeared in the app’s public Discover feed, often because chats were unintentionally shared, prompting scrutiny from security researchers and the press. Separately, a vulnerability disclosed in December 2024 and fixed in January 2025 could have allowed access to other users’ prompts and responses.
Meta described the Discover feed as a means to explore various uses of AI, but it did little to mitigate everyone’s uneasiness over the incident. Subsequently, AMEOS Group, a private European healthcare provider, suffered a large-scale data breach affecting millions of patient records. The writing was on the wall: be careful what you share with your AI counsellor, because it may end up on an intruder’s hard drive.
To keep up with the rising volume of users and prompts, major tech conglomerates such as OpenAI and Google have invested heavily in building new data centres across the globe. At the same time, little has been done to protect sensitive data, and AI remains prone to data breaches, particularly in the healthcare sector.
According to the 2025 Cost of a Data Breach Report by IBM, healthcare providers often bear the brunt of data breaches, taking an average of 279 days to recover and incurring an average cost of nearly USD $7.5 million in the process. Not only does patients’ private information end up in the wrong place, but it also takes a while to be retrieved.
Falling for your AI ‘therapist’
Patients falling in love with their therapists is not only a common trope in films and TV shows, but it is also a real-life regular occurrence for most mental health workforce. Therapists are trained to handle these attachments appropriately and without compromising the patient’s progress and well-being.
The clinical term is transference: patients may project past relationships or unmet needs onto the therapist. Far from being a nuisance, it can be clinically useful. Skilled clinicians set clear boundaries, reflect feelings, and use supervision to keep the work safe and goal-directed.
With AI ‘therapists’, the cues are different, but the pull can feel similar. Chatbots and LLMs simulate warmth, reply instantly, and never tire. 24/7 availability, combined with carefully tuned language, can foster a bond that the system cannot comprehend or sustain. There is no duty of care, no supervision, and no capacity to manage attachment or risk beyond scripted safeguards.
As a result, a significant number of users report becoming enamoured with AI, with some going as far as dismissing their human partners, professing their love to the chatbot, and even proposing. The bond between man and machine props the user onto a dangerous seesaw, teetering between curiosity and borderline delusional paranoia.
Experts warn that leaning on AI as a makeshift therapist or partner can delay help-seeking and entrench unhelpful patterns. While ‘AI psychosis‘ is not a recognised diagnosis, clinicians and digital-ethics researchers note that intense attachment to AI companions can heighten distress, especially when models change, go offline, or mishandle risk. Clear signposting to human support, transparent data practices, and firm usage boundaries are essential to prevent unhealthy attachments to virtual companions.
Who loses work when therapy goes digital?
Caring for one’s mental health is not just about discipline; it is also about money. In the United States, in-person sessions typically cost between USD $100–$250, with limited insurance coverage. In such dire circumstances, it is easy to see why many turn to AI chatbots in search of emotional support, advice, and companionship.
Licensed professionals are understandably concerned about displacement. Yet there is little evidence that AI is reducing the demand for human therapists; services remain oversubscribed, and wait times are long in both the USA and UK.
Regulators are, however, drawing lines around AI-only practice. On 4 August 2025, Illinois enacted the Wellness and Oversight for Psychological Resources Act (HB 1806), which prohibits the use of AI to provide therapy or make therapeutic decisions (while allowing administrative or supplementary use), with enforcement by the state regulator and fines up to $10,000 per violation.
Current legal and regulatory safeguards have limited power to use AI in mental health or protect therapists’ jobs. Even so, they signal a clear resolve to define AI’s role and address unintended harms.
Can AI ‘therapists’ handle crisis conversations
Adolescence is a particularly sensitive stage of development. It is a time of rapid change, shifting identities, and intense social pressure. Young people are more likely to question beliefs and boundaries, and they need steady, non-judgemental support to navigate setbacks and safeguard their well-being.
In such a challenging period, teens have a hard time coping with their troubles, and an even harder time sharing their struggles with parents and seeking help from trained professionals. Nowadays, it is not uncommon for them to turn to AI chatbots for comfort and support, particularly without their guardians’ knowledge.
One such case demonstrated that unsupervised use of AI among teens can lead to devastating consequences. Adam Raine, a 16-year-old from California, confided his feelings of loneliness, anxiety, and anhedonia to ChatGPT. Rather than suggesting that the teen seek professional help, ChatGPT urged him to further elaborate on his emotions. Instead of challenging them, the AI model kept encouraging and validating his beliefs to keep Adam engaged and build rapport.
Throughout the following months, ChatGPT kept reaffirming Adam’s thoughts, urging him to distance himself from friends and relatives, and even suggesting the most effective methods of suicide. In the end, the teen followed through with ChatGPT’s suggestions, taking his own life according to the AI’s detailed instructions. Adam’s parents filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, blaming its LLM chatbot for leading the teen to an untimely death.
In the aftermath of the tragedy, OpenAI promised to make changes to its LLM and incorporate safeguards that should discourage thoughts of self-harm and encourage users to seek professional help. The case of Adam Raine serves as a harrowing warning that AI, in its current capacity, is not equipped to handle mental health struggles, and that users should heed AI’s advice not with a grain of salt, but with a whole bucket.
Chatbots are companions, not health professionals
AI can mimic human traits and convince users they are forming a real connection, evoking genuine feelings of companionship and even a sense of therapeutic alliance. When it comes to providing mental health advice, the aforementioned qualities present a dangerously deceptive mirage of a makeshift professional therapist, one who will fully comply with one’s every need, cater to one’s biases, and shape one’s worldview from the ground up – whatever it takes to keep the user engaged and typing away.
While AI has proven useful in multiple fields of work, such as marketing and IT, psychotherapy remains an insurmountable hurdle for even the most advanced LLM models of today. It is difficult to predict what the future of AI in (mental) health care will look like. As things stand, in such a delicate field of healthcare, AI lacks a key component that makes a therapist effective in their job: empathy.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
In one operation, termed ‘vibe hacking’, attackers used Claude Code to automate reconnaissance, ransomware creation, credential theft, and ransom-demand generation across 17 organisations, including those in healthcare, emergency services and government.
The firm also documents other troubling abuses: North Korean operatives used Claude to fabricate identities, successfully get hired at Fortune 500 companies and maintain access, all with minimal real-world technical skills. In another case, AI-generated ransomware variants were developed, marketed and sold to other criminals on the dark web.
Experts warn that such agentic AI systems enable single individuals to carry out complex cybercrime acts once reserved for well-trained groups.
While Anthropic has deactivated the compromised accounts and strengthened its safeguards, the incident highlights an urgent need for proactive risk management and regulation of AI systems.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The move follows months of user complaints about Google Home’s performance, including issues with connectivity and the assistant’s failure to recognise basic commands.
With Gemini’s superior ability to understand natural language, the upgrade is expected to improve how users interact with their smart devices significantly. Home devices should better execute complex commands with multiple actions, such as dimming some lights while leaving others on.
However, the update will also introduce ‘Gemini Live’ to compatible devices, a feature allowing for natural, back-and-forth conversations with the AI chatbot.
The Gemini for Google Home upgrade will initially be rolled out on an early access basis. It will be available in free and paid tiers, suggesting that some more advanced features may be locked behind a subscription.
The update is anticipated to make Google Home and Nest devices more reliable and to handle complex requests easily.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
WhatsApp has disclosed a hacking attempt that combined flaws in its app with a vulnerability in Apple’s operating system. The company has since fixed the issues.
The exploit, tracked as CVE-2025-55177 in WhatsApp and CVE-2025-43300 in iOS, allowed attackers to hijack devices via malicious links. Fewer than 200 users worldwide are believed to have been affected.
Amnesty International reported that some victims appeared to be members of civic organisations. Its Security Lab is collecting forensic data and warned that iPhone and Android users were impacted.
WhatsApp credited its security team for identifying the loopholes, describing the operation as highly advanced but narrowly targeted. The company also suggested that other apps could have been hit in the same campaign.
The disclosure highlights ongoing risks to secure messaging platforms, even those with end-to-end encryption. Experts stress that keeping apps and operating systems up to date remains essential to reducing exposure to sophisticated exploits.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Cyber experts are warning that Bluetooth-enabled adult toys create openings for stalking, blackmail and assault, due to weak security in companion apps and device firmware. UK-commissioned research outlined risks such as interception, account takeover and unsafe heat profiles.
Officials urged better protection across consumer IoT, advising updates, strong authentication and clear support lifecycles. Guidance applies to connected toys alongside other smart devices in the home.
Security researchers and regulators have long flagged poor encryption and lax authentication in intimate tech. At the same time, recent disclosures showed major brands patching flaws that exposed emails and allowed remote account control.
Industry figures argue for stricter standards and transparency on data handling, noting that stigma can depress reporting and aid repeat exploitation. Specialist groups recommend buying only from vendors that document encryption and update policies.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) have announced a joint effort to clarify spot cryptocurrency trading. Regulators confirmed that US and foreign exchanges can list spot crypto products- leveraged and margin ones.
The guidance follows the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets recommendations, which called for rules that keep blockchain innovation within the country.
Regulators said they are ready to review filings, address custody and clearing, and ensure spot markets meet transparency and investor protection standards.
Under the new approach, major venues such as the New York Stock Exchange, Nasdaq, CME Group and Cboe Global Markets could seek to list spot crypto assets. Foreign boards of trade recognised by the CFTC may also be eligible.
The move highlights a policy shift under President Donald Trump’s administration, with Congress and the White House pressing for greater regulatory clarity.
In July, the House of Representatives passed the CLARITY Act, a bill on crypto market structure now before the Senate. The moves and the regulators’ statement mark a key step in aligning US digital assets with established financial rules.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Elon Musk’s AI chatbot, Grok, has faced repeated changes to its political orientation, with updates shifting its answers towards more conservative views.
xAI, Musk’s company, initially promoted Grok as neutral and truth-seeking, but internal prompts have steered it on contentious topics. Adjustments included portraying declining fertility as the greatest threat to civilisation and downplaying right-wing violence.
Analyses of Grok’s responses by The New York Times showed that the July updates shifted answers to the right on government and economy, while some social responses remained left-leaning. Subsequent tweaks pulled it back closer to neutrality.
Critics say that system prompts, such as short instructions like ‘be politically incorrect’, make it easy to adjust outputs, but also leave the model prone to erratic or offensive responses. A July update saw Grok briefly endorse a controversial historical figure before xAI turned it off.
The case highlights growing concerns about political bias in AI systems. Researchers argue that all chatbots reflect the worldviews of their training data, while companies increasingly face pressure to align them with user expectations or political demands.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Reports that Gmail suffered a massive breach have been dismissed by Google, which said rumours of warnings to 2.5 billion users were false.
In a Monday blog post, Google rejected claims that it had issued global notifications about a serious Gmail security issue. It stressed that its protections remain effective against phishing and malware.
Confusion stems from a June incident involving a Salesforce server, during which attackers briefly accessed public business information, including names and contact details. Google said all affected parties were notified by early August.
The company acknowledged that phishing attempts are increasing, but clarified that Gmail’s defences block more than 99.9% of such attempts. A July blog post on phishing risks may have been misinterpreted as evidence of a breach.
Google urged users to remain vigilant, recommending password alternatives such as passkeys and regular account reviews. While the false alarm spurred unnecessary panic, security experts noted that updating credentials remains good practice.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
