Strict new rules have been introduced in India for social media platforms in an effort to curb the spread of AI-generated and deepfake material.
Platforms must label synthetic content clearly and remove flagged posts within three hours instead of allowing manipulated material to circulate unchecked. Government notifications and court orders will trigger mandatory action, creating a fast-response mechanism for potentially harmful posts.
Synthetic media has already raised concerns about public safety, misinformation and reputational harm, prompting the government to strengthen oversight of online platforms and their handling of AI-generated imagery.
The measure forms part of a broader push by India to regulate digital environments and anticipate the risks linked to advanced AI tools.
Authorities maintain that early intervention and transparency around manipulated content are vital for public trust, particularly during periods of political sensitivity or high social tension.
Platforms are now expected to align swiftly with the guidelines and cooperate with legal instructions. The government views strict labelling and rapid takedowns as necessary steps to protect users and uphold the integrity of online communication across India.
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!
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!
A global health organisation is urging the EU to make fuller use of its digital rules to curb health disinformation as concerns grow over the impact of deepfakes on public confidence.
Warnings point to a rising risk that manipulated content could reduce vaccine uptake instead of supporting informed public debate.
Experts argue that the Digital Services Act already provides the framework needed to limit harmful misinformation, yet enforcement remains uneven. Stronger oversight could improve platforms’ ability to detect manipulated content and remove inaccurate claims that jeopardise public health.
Campaigners emphasise that deepfake technology is now accessible enough to spread false narratives rapidly. The trend threatens vaccination campaigns at a time when several member states are attempting to address declining trust in health authorities.
The EU officials continue to examine how digital regulation can reinforce public health strategies. The call for stricter enforcement highlights the pressure on Brussels to ensure that digital platforms act responsibly rather than allowing misleading material to circulate unchecked.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
In his article, Richard Gunderman argues that writing is not merely a way to present ideas but a core human activity through which people think, reflect and form meaning.
He contends that when AI systems generate text on behalf of users, they risk replacing this cognitive process with automated output, weakening the connection between thought and expression.
According to the piece, writing serves as a tool for reasoning, emotional processing and moral judgment. Offloading it to AI can diminish originality, flatten individual voice and encourage passive consumption of machine-produced ideas.
Gunderman warns that this shift could lead to intellectual dependency, where people rely on AI to structure arguments and articulate positions rather than developing those skills themselves.
The article also raises ethical concerns about authenticity and responsibility. If AI produces large portions of written work, it becomes unclear who is accountable for the ideas expressed. Gunderman suggests that overreliance on AI writing tools may undermine trust in communication and blur the line between human and machine authorship.
Overall, the piece calls for a balanced approach: AI may assist with editing or idea generation, but the act of writing itself should remain fundamentally human, as it is central to critical thinking, identity and social responsibility.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Discord is preparing a global transition to teen-appropriate settings that will apply to all users unless they confirm they are adults.
The phased rollout begins in early March and forms part of the company’s wider effort to offer protection tailored to younger audiences rather than relying on voluntary safety choices. Controls will cover communication settings, sensitive content and access to age-restricted communities.
The update is based on an expanded age assurance system designed to protect privacy while accurately identifying users’ age groups. People can use facial age estimation on their own device or select identity verification handled by approved partners.
Discord will also rely on an age-inference model that runs quietly in the background. Verification results remain private, and documents are deleted quickly, with users able to appeal group assignments through account settings.
Stricter defaults will apply across the platform. Sensitive media will stay blurred unless a user is confirmed as an adult, and access to age-gated servers or commands will require verification.
Message requests from unfamiliar contacts will be separated, friend-request alerts will be more prominent and only adults will be allowed to speak on community stages instead of sharing the feature with teens.
Discord is complementing the update by creating a Teen Council to offer advice on future safety tools and policies. The council will include up to a dozen young users and aims to embed real teen insight in product development.
The global rollout builds on earlier launches in the UK and Australia, adding to an existing safety ecosystem that includes Teen Safety Assist, Family Centre, and several moderation tools intended to support positive and secure online interactions.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Two decisions taken on the same day in February 1996 continue to shape how the internet, and now AI, is governed today. That is the central argument of Jovan Kurbalija’s blog ‘Thirty years of Original Sin of digital and AI governance,’ which traces how early legal and ideological choices created a lasting gap between technological power and public accountability.
The first moment unfolded in Davos, where John Perry Barlow published his Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, portraying the internet as a realm beyond the reach of governments and existing laws. According to Kurbalija, this vision helped popularise the idea that digital space was fundamentally separate from the physical world, a powerful narrative that encouraged the belief that technology should evolve faster than, and largely outside of, politics and law.
In reality, the blog argues, there is no such thing as a stateless cyberspace. Every online action relies on physical infrastructure, data centres, and networks that exist within national jurisdictions. Treating the internet as a lawless domain, Kurbalija suggests, was less a triumph of freedom than a misconception that sidelined long-standing legal and ethical traditions.
The second event happened the same day in Washington, D.C., when the United States enacted the Communications Decency Act. Hidden within it was Section 230, a provision that granted internet platforms broad immunity from liability for the content they host. While originally designed to protect a young industry, this legal shield remains in place even as technology companies have grown into trillion-dollar corporations.
Kurbalija notes that the myth of a separate cyberspace and the legal immunity of platforms reinforced each other. The idea of a ‘new world’ helped justify why old legal principles should not apply, despite early warnings, including from US judge Frank Easterbrook, that existing laws were sufficient to regulate new technologies by focusing on human relationships rather than technical tools.
Today, this unresolved legacy has expanded into the realm of AI. AI companies, the blog argues, benefit from the same logic of non-liability, even as their systems can amplify harm at a scale comparable to, or even greater than, that of other heavily regulated industries.
Kurbalija concludes that addressing AI’s societal impact requires ending this era of legal exceptionalism and restoring a basic principle that those who create, deploy, and profit from technology must also be accountable for its consequences.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
A ban on social media use for under-15s is being weighed in Czechia, with government officials suggesting the measure could be introduced before the end of the year.
Prime Minister Andrej Babiš has voiced strong support and argues that experts point to potential harm linked to early social media exposure.
France recently enacted an under-15 restriction, and a growing number of European countries are exploring similar limits rather than relying solely on parental guidance.
The discussion is part of a broader debate about children’s digital habits, with Czech officials also considering a ban on mobile phones in schools. Slovakia has already adopted comparable rules, giving Czech ministers another model to study as they work on their own proposals.
Not all political voices agree on the direction of travel. Some warn that strict limits could undermine privacy rights or diminish online anonymity, while others argue that educational initiatives would be more effective than outright prohibition.
UNICEF has cautioned that removing access entirely may harm children who rely on online platforms for learning or social connection instead of traditional offline networks.
Implementing a nationwide age restriction poses practical and political challenges. The government of Czechia heavily uses social media to reach citizens, complicating attempts to restrict access for younger users.
Age verification, fair oversight and consistent enforcement remain open questions as ministers continue consultations with experts and service providers.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
