The Central Bank of the UAE has partnered with Abu Dhabi-based AI company Core42 to develop a sovereign financial cloud infrastructure in the UAE. The system is designed to ensure data sovereignty and strengthen protection against cyber threats.
According to the Central Bank of the UAE, the platform will operate on a centralised, highly secure and isolated infrastructure. It aims to support continuous financial services while boosting operational agility across the UAE.
The infrastructure will be powered by AI and provide automation and real-time data analysis for licensed institutions in the UAE. It will also enable unified management of multi-cloud services within a single regulatory framework.
Core42, established by G42 in 2023, said finance must remain sovereign as it relies on digital infrastructure. The Central Bank of the UAE described the project as a key pillar of its financial infrastructure transformation programme.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
US policymakers are increasingly treating personal data as a dual use asset that carries both economic value and national security risks. Regulators have raised concerns about sensitive information, including geolocation data linked to military personnel.
Measures such as the Protecting Americans Data from Foreign Adversaries Act of 2024 and the Department of Justice Data Security Program aim to curb misuse by designated foreign adversaries. Both frameworks impose broad restrictions on cross border data transfers.
Experts warn that compliance remains complex and uncertain, with companies adapting in what one adviser described as a fog. Enforcement signals have already emerged, including a draft noncompliance letter from the Federal Trade Commission and litigation.
Organizations are being urged to integrate national security expertise into privacy and cybersecurity teams. Observers say early preparation is essential as selective enforcement risks increase under strict but evolving US data protection regimes.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The first enforcement provisions of the EU AI Act entered into force on 2 February 2025, marking a turning point for Europe’s AI startup ecosystem. The initial phase targets ‘unacceptable risk’ systems, including social scoring, real-time biometric surveillance in public spaces, and manipulative AI practices.
Under the regulation, penalties can reach €35 million or 7% of global annual turnover, whichever is higher. Although the current enforcement covers only prohibited practices, the move signals that Europe’s AI rulebook is now operational rather than theoretical.
Broader obligations for high-risk AI systems, such as hiring tools, credit scoring, and medical diagnostics, will apply from August 2026. Separate rules for general-purpose AI models are scheduled to take effect in August 2025.
Surveys from European SME groups indicate that many smaller technology companies feel unprepared. A significant share of reports have not conducted formal risk classification of their AI systems, despite this being a foundational requirement under the EU AI Act’s tiered framework.
While some founders warn that compliance costs could slow innovation, others point to long-term benefits from clearer governance standards. For startups, the coming months will focus on aligning products with AI Act risk tiers and strengthening documentation and oversight before stricter rules apply.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office has fined Reddit £14.47 million after finding that the platform unlawfully used children’s personal information and failed to put in place adequate age checks.
Although Reddit updated its processes in July 2025, self-declaration remained easy to bypass, offering only a veneer of protection. Investigators also found that the company had not completed a data protection impact assessment until 2025, despite a large number of teenagers using the service.
Concerns were heightened by the volume of children affected and the risks created by relying on inadequate age checks.
The regulator noted that unlawful data processing occurred over a prolonged period, and that children were at risk of viewing harmful material while their information was processed without a lawful basis.
UK Information Commissioner John Edwards said companies must prioritise meaningful age assurance and understand the responsibilities set out in the Children’s Code.
The ICO said it will continue monitoring Reddit’s current controls and expects online platforms to align with robust age-assurance standards rather than rely on weak verification.
It will coordinate its oversight with Ofcom as part of broader efforts to strengthen online safety and ensure under-18s benefit from high privacy protections by default.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
In December 2025, the Macquarie Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and the American Dialect Society named ‘slop’ as the Word of the Year, reflecting a widespread reaction to AI-generated content online, often referred to as ‘AI slop.’ By choosing ‘slop’, typically associated with unappetising animal feed, they captured unease about the digital clutter created by AI tools.
As LLMs and AI tools became accessible to more people, many saw them as opportunities for profit through the creation of artificial content for marketing or entertainment, or through the manipulation of social media algorithms. However, despite video and image generation advances, there is a growing gap between perceived quality and actual detection: many overestimate how easily AI content evades notice, fueling scepticism about its online value.
As generative AI systems expand, the debate goes beyond digital clutter to deeper concerns about trust, market incentives, and regulatory resilience. How will societies manage the social, economic, and governance impacts of an information ecosystem increasingly shaped by automated abundance? In simplified terms, is AI slop more than a simple digital nuisance, or do we needlessly worry about a transient vogue that will eventually fade away?
The social aspect of AI slop’s influence
The most visible effects of AI slop emerge on large social media platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram. Users frequently encounter AI-generated images and videos that appropriate celebrity likenesses without consent, depict fabricated events, or present sensational and misleading scenarios. Comment sections often become informal verification spaces, where some users identify visual inconsistencies and warn others, while many remain uncertain about the content’s authenticity.
However, no platform has suffered the AI slop effect as much as Facebook, and once you take a glance at its demographics, the pieces start to come together. According to multiple studies, Facebook’s user base is mostly populated by adults aged 25-34, but users over the age of 55 make up nearly 24 percent of all users. While seniors do not constitute the majority (yet), younger generations have been steadily migrating to social platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and X, leaving the most popular platform to the whims of the older generation.
Due to factors such as cognitive decline, positivity bias, or digital (il)literacy, older social media users are more likely to fall for scams and fraud. Such conditions make Facebook an ideal place for spreading low-quality AI slop and false information. Scammers use AI tools to create fake images and videos about made-up crises to raise money for causes that are not real.
The lack of regulation on Meta’s side is the most glaring sore spot, evidenced by the company pushing back against the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA), viewing them as ‘overreaching‘ and stifling innovation. The math is simple: content generates engagement, resulting in more revenue for Facebook and other platforms owned by Meta. Whether that content is authentic and high-quality or low-effort AI slop, the numbers don’t care.
The economics behind AI slop
At its core, AI content is not just a social media phenomenon, but an economic one as well. GenAI tools drastically reduce the cost and time required to produce all types of content, and when production approaches zero marginal cost, the incentive to churn out AI slop seems too good to ignore. Even minimal engagement can generate positive returns through advertising, affiliate marketing, or platform monetisation schemes.
AI content production goes beyond exploiting social media algorithms and monetisation policies. SEO can now be automated at scale, thus generating thousands of keyword-optimised articles within hours. Affiliate link farming allows creators to monetise their products or product recommendations with minimal editorial input.
On video platforms like TikTok and YouTube, synthetic voice-overs and AI-generated visuals are on full display, banking on trending topics and using AI-generated thumbnails to garner more views on a whim. Thanks to AI tools, content creators can post relevant AI-generated content in minutes, enabling them to jump on the hottest topics and drive clicks faster than with any other authentic content creation method.
To add salt to the wound, YouTube content creators share the sentiment that they are victims of the platform’s double standards in enforcing its strict community guidelines. Even the largest YouTube Channels are often flagged for a plethora of breaches, including copyright claims and depictions of dangerous or illegal activities, and harmful speech, to name a few. On the other hand, AI slop videos seem to fly under YouTube’s radar, leading to more resentment towards AI-generated content.
Businesses that rely on generative AI tools to market their services online are also finding AI to be the way to go, as most users are still not too keen on distinguishing authentic content, nor do they give much importance to those aspects. Instead of paying voice-over artists and illustrators, it is way cheaper to simply create a desired post in under a few minutes, adding fuel to an already raging fire. Some might call it AI slop, but again, the numbers are what truly matter.
The regulatory challenge of AI slop
AI slop is not only a social and economic issue, but also a regulatory one. The problem is not a single AI-generated post that promotes harmful behaviour or misleading information, but the sheer scale of synthetic content entering digital platforms. When large volumes of low-value or deceptive material circulate on the web, they can distort information ecosystems and make moderation a tough challenge. Such a predicament shifts the focus from individual violations to broader systemic effects.
In the EU, the DSA requires very large online platforms to assess and mitigate the systemic risks linked to their services. While the DSA does not specifically target AI slop, its provisions on transparency, content recommendation algorithms, and risk mitigation could apply if AI content significantly affects public discourse or enables fraud. The challenge lies in defining when content volume prevails over quality control, becoming a systemic issue rather than isolated misuse.
Debates around labelling AI slop and transparency also play a large role. Policymakers and platforms have explored ways to flag AI-generated content throughout disclosures or watermarking. For example, OpenAI’s Sora generates videos with a faint Sora watermark, although it is hardly visible to an uninitiated user. Nevertheless, labelling alone may not address deeper concerns if recommendation systems continue to prioritise engagement above all else, with the issue not only being whether users know the content is AI-generated, but how such content is ranked, amplified, and monetised.
More broadly, AI slop highlights the limits of traditional content moderation. As generative tools make production faster and cheaper, enforcement systems may struggle to keep pace. Regulation, therefore, faces a structural question: can existing digital governance frameworks preserve information quality in an environment where automated content production continues to grow?
Building resilience in the era of AI slop
Humans are considered the most adaptable species on Earth, and for good reason. While AI slop has exposed weaknesses in platform design, monetisation models, and moderation systems, it may also serve as a catalyst for adaptation. Unless regulatory bodies unite under one banner and agree to ban AI content for good, it is safe to say that synthetic content is here to stay. However, sooner or later, systemic regulations will evolve to address this new AI craze and mitigate its negative effects.
The AI slop bubble is bound to burst at some point, as online users will come to favour meticulously crafted content – whether authentic or artificial over low-quality content. Consequently, incentives may also evolve along with content saturation, leading to a greater focus on quality rather than quantity. Advertisers and brands often prioritise credibility and brand safety, which could encourage platforms to refine their ranking systems to reward originality, reliability, and verified creators.
Transparency requirements, systemic risk assessments, and discussions around provenance disclosure mechanisms imply that governance is responding to the realities of generative AI. Instead of marking the deterioration of digital spaces, AI slop may represent a transitional phase in which platforms, policymakers, and users are challenged to adjust their expectations and norms accordingly.
Finally, the long-term outcome will depend entirely on whether innovation, market incentives, and governance structures can converge around information quality and resilience. In that sense, AI slop may ultimately function less as a permanent state of affairs and more as a stress test to separate the wheat from the chaff. In the upcoming struggle between user experience and generative AI tools, the former will have the final say, which is an encouraging thought.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Digital sovereignty is gaining urgency as organisations seek infrastructure that remains secure and reliable under strict regulatory conditions.
Microsoft is expanding its Sovereign Cloud to help public bodies, regulated industries and enterprises maintain control of data and operations even when environments must operate without external connectivity.
The updated portfolio allows customers to choose how each workload is governed, rather than relying on a single deployment model.
Azure Local now supports disconnected operations, keeping mission-critical systems running with full Azure governance within sovereign boundaries. Management, policies and workloads stay entirely on site, so services continue during periods of isolation.
Microsoft 365 Local extends the resilience to the productivity layer by enabling Exchange Server, SharePoint Server and Skype for Business Server to run locally, giving teams secure collaboration within the same protected boundary as their infrastructure.
Support for large multimodal AI models is delivered through Foundry Local, which enables advanced inference on customer-controlled hardware using technology from partners such as NVIDIA.
Such an approach helps organisations bring modern AI capabilities into highly restricted environments while preserving control over data, identities and operational procedures.
Microsoft positions it as a unified stack that works across connected, hybrid and fully disconnected modes without increasing operational complexity.
These additions create a framework designed for governments and regulated industries that regard sovereignty as a strategic priority.
With global availability for qualified customers, the Sovereign Cloud aims to preserve continuity, reinforce governance and expand AI capability while keeping every layer of the environment within local control.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Digital sovereignty has moved to the boardroom as geopolitical tensions rise and cloud adoption accelerates. Organisations are reassessing infrastructure to protect autonomy, ensure compliance, and manage jurisdictional risk. Cloud strategy is increasingly shaped by data location, control, and resilience.
Regulations such as NIS2, DORA, and national data laws have intensified scrutiny of cross-border dependencies. Sovereignty concerns now extend beyond governments to sectors such as healthcare and finance. Vendor selection increasingly prioritises sovereign regions and stricter data controls.
Hybrid cloud remains dominant. Organisations place sensitive workloads on private platforms to strengthen oversight while retaining public cloud innovation. Large-scale repatriation is rare due to cost and complexity, though compliance pressures are driving broader multicloud diversification.
Government investment and oversight are reinforcing the shift. Sovereignty is becoming part of national resilience policy, prompting stricter audits and governance expectations. Enterprises face growing pressure to demonstrate control over critical systems, supply chains, and data flows.
A pragmatic approach, often described as minimum viable sovereignty, helps reduce exposure without unnecessary complexity. Organisations can identify critical workloads, secure enforceable vendor commitments, and plan for disruption. Early adaptation supports resilience and long-term flexibility.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Privacy regulators from around the world have issued a joint warning about the rise of AI-generated deepfakes, arguing that the spread of non-consensual images poses a global risk instead of remaining a problem confined to individual countries.
Sixty-one authorities endorsed a declaration that draws attention to AI images and videos depicting real people without their knowledge or consent.
The signatories highlight the rapid growth of intimate deepfakes, particularly those targeting children and individuals from vulnerable communities. They note that such material often circulates widely on social platforms and may fuel exploitation or cyberbullying.
The declaration argues that the scale of the threat requires coordinated action rather than isolated national responses.
European authorities, including the European Data Protection Board and the European Data Protection Supervisor, support the effort to build global cooperation.
Regulators say that only joint oversight can limit the harms caused by AI systems that generate false depictions, rather than protecting individuals’ privacy as required under frameworks such as the General Data Protection Regulation.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Crypto.com has secured conditional approval from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to move ahead with plans to launch a federally regulated national trust bank in the United States.
Approval marks a notable step in the firm’s regulatory roadmap. It also signals continued alignment with US supervisory expectations as the digital asset sector seeks deeper integration with traditional financial infrastructure.
Plans focus on establishing Foris Dax National Trust Bank. The entity is designed to provide a consolidated suite of services, including digital asset custody, staking across multiple blockchain ecosystems such as Cronos, and trade settlement.
Full approval would place the entity under direct federal oversight, positioning it to serve institutional clients that require qualified custodians operating within a clear regulatory perimeter.
Leadership described the decision as recognition of its compliance and risk management framework. Executives said the structure would offer institutions a single regulated gateway to digital asset infrastructure and strengthen market confidence.
Existing operations at Crypto.com Custody Trust Company in New Hampshire will continue without interruption. Final authorisation will determine the timeline for launching the national trust bank and expanding federally supervised US services.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
South Korea’s leading terrestrial broadcasters have filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, claiming that the company trained its ChatGPT model using their news content without permission. KBS, MBC, and SBS are seeking an injunction to halt the alleged infringement and to recover damages.
The Korea Broadcasters Association said OpenAI generates significant revenue from its GPT services and has licensing agreements with media organisations worldwide.
Despite this, the company has refused to negotiate with the South Korean networks, leaving them without recourse to ensure proper use of their content.
The lawsuit emphasises the protection of intellectual property and creators’ rights, arguing that domestic copyright holders face high legal costs and barriers when confronting global technology companies. It also raises broader questions about South Korea’s data sovereignty in the age of AI.
Earlier action against Naver set a precedent for copyright enforcement in AI applications.
Although KBS subsequently partnered with Naver for AI-driven media solutions, the current case underscores continuing disputes over lawful access to broadcast content for generative AI training.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
