Lawmakers in the European Parliament remain divided over whether a direct ban on AI-driven ‘pornification’ should be added to the emerging digital omnibus.
Left-wing members push for an explicit prohibition, arguing that synthetic sexual imagery generated without consent has created a rapidly escalating form of online abuse. They say a strong legal measure is required instead of fragmented national responses.
Centre and liberal groups take a different position by promoting lighter requirements for industrial AI and seeking clarity on how any restrictions would interact with the AI Act.
They warn that an unrefined ban could spill over into general-purpose models and complicate enforcement across the European market. Their priority is a more predictable regulatory environment for companies developing high-volume AI systems.
Key figures across the political spectrum, including lawmakers such as Assita Kanko, Axel Voss and Brando Benifei, continue to debate how far the omnibus should go.
Some argue that safeguarding individuals from non-consensual sexual deepfakes must outweigh concerns about administrative burdens, while others insist that proportionality and technical feasibility need stronger assessment.
The lack of consensus leaves the proposal in a delicate phase as negotiations intensify. Lawmakers now face growing public scrutiny over how Europe will respond to the misuse of generative AI.
A clear stance from the Parliament is still pending, rather than an assured path toward agreement.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Chile has introduced Latam-GPT to strengthen Latin America’s presence in global AI.
The project, developed by the National Centre for Artificial Intelligence with support across South America, aims to correct long-standing biases by training systems on the region’s own data instead of material drawn mainly from the US or Europe.
President Gabriel Boric said the model will help maintain cultural identity and allow the region to take a more active role in technological development.
Latam-GPT is not designed as a conversational tool but rather as a vast dataset that serves as the foundation for future applications. More than eight terabytes of information have been collected, mainly in Spanish and Portuguese, with plans to add indigenous languages as the project expands.
The first version has been trained on Amazon Web Services. At the same time, future work will run on a new supercomputer at the University of Tarapacá, supported by millions of dollars in regional funding.
The model reflects growing interest among countries outside the major AI hubs of the US, China and Europe in developing their own technology instead of relying on foreign systems.
Researchers in Chile argue that global models often include Latin American data in tiny proportions, which can limit accurate representation. Despite questions about resources and scale, supporters believe Latam-GPT can deliver practical benefits tailored to local needs.
Early adoption is already underway, with the Chilean firm Digevo preparing customer service tools based on the model.
These systems will operate in regional languages and recognise local expressions, offering a more natural experience than products trained on data from other parts of the world.
Developers say the approach could reduce bias and promote more inclusive AI across the continent.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
More than 100 organisations have urged governments to outlaw AI-nudification tools after a surge in non-consensual digital images.
Groups such as Amnesty International, the European Commission, and Interpol argue that the technology now fuels harmful practices that undermine human dignity and child safety. Their concerns intensified after the Grok nudification scandal, where users created sexualised images from ordinary photographs.
Campaigners warn that the tools often target women and children instead of staying within any claimed adult-only environment. Millions of manipulated images have circulated across social platforms, with many linked to blackmail, coercion and child sexual abuse material.
Experts say the trauma caused by these AI images is no less serious because the abuse occurs online.
Organisations within the coalition maintain that tech companies already possess the ability to detect and block such material but have failed to apply essential safeguards.
They want developers and platforms to be held accountable and believe that strict prohibitions are now necessary to prevent further exploitation. Advocates argue that meaningful action is overdue and that protection of users must take precedence over commercial interests.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The European Commission has launched an Action Plan Against Cyberbullying aimed at protecting the mental health and well-being of children and teenagers online across the EU. The initiative focuses on reporting access, national coordination, and prevention.
A central element is the development of an EU-wide reporting app that would allow victims to report cyberbullying, receive support, and safely store evidence. The Commission will provide a blueprint for Member States to adapt and link to national helplines.
To ensure consistent protection, Member States are encouraged to adopt a shared understanding of cyberbullying and develop national action plans. This would support comparable data collection and a more coordinated EU response.
The Action Plan builds on existing legislation, including the Digital Services Act, the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, and the AI Act. Updated guidelines will strengthen platform obligations and address AI-enabled forms of abuse.
Prevention and education are also prioritised through expanded resources for schools and families via Safer Internet Centres and the Better Internet for Kids platform. The Commission will implement the plan with Member States, industry, civil society, and children.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Authorities in Russia have tightened their grip on Telegram after the state regulator Roskomnadzor introduced new measures accusing the platform of failing to curb fraud and safeguard personal data.
Users across the country have increasingly reported slow downloads and disrupted media content since January, with complaints rising sharply early in the week. Although officials initially rejected claims of throttling, industry sources insist that download speeds have been deliberately reduced.
Telegram’s founder, Pavel Durov, argues that Roskomnadzor is trying to steer people toward Max rather than allowing open competition. Max is a government-backed messenger widely viewed by critics as a tool for surveillance and political control.
While text messages continue to load normally for most, media content such as videos, images and voice notes has become unreliable, particularly on mobile devices. Some users report that only the desktop version performs without difficulty.
The slowdown is already affecting daily routines, as many Russians rely on Telegram for work communication and document sharing, much as workplaces elsewhere rely on Slack rather than email.
Officials also use Telegram to issue emergency alerts, and regional leaders warn that delays could undermine public safety during periods of heightened military activity.
Pressure on foreign platforms has grown steadily. Restrictions on voice and video calls were introduced last summer, accompanied by claims that criminals and hostile actors were using Telegram and WhatsApp.
Meanwhile, Max continues to gain users, reaching 70 million monthly accounts by December. Despite its rise, it remains behind Telegram and WhatsApp, which still dominate Russia’s messaging landscape.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Meta has introduced a new group of Facebook features that rely on Meta AI to expand personal expression across profiles, photos and Stories.
Users gain the option to animate their profile pictures, turning a still image into a short motion clip that reflects their mood instead of remaining static. Effects such as waves, confetti, hearts and party hats offer simple tools for creating a more playful online presence.
The update also includes Restyle, a tool that reimagines Stories and Memories through preset looks or AI-generated prompts. Users may shift an ordinary photograph into an illustrated, anime or glowy aesthetic, or adjust lighting and colour to match a chosen theme instead of limiting themselves to basic filters.
Facebook will highlight Memories that work well with the Restyle function to encourage wider use.
Feed posts receive a change of their own through animated backgrounds that appear gradually across accounts. People can pair text updates with visual backdrops such as ocean waves or falling leaves, creating messages that stand out instead of blending into the timeline.
Seasonal styles will arrive throughout the year to support festive posts and major events.
Meta aims to encourage more engaging interactions by giving users easy tools for playful creativity. The new features are designed to support expressive posts that feel more personal and more visually distinctive, helping users craft share-worthy moments across the platform.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
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!
