#Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang will join #US President Donald #Trump on his visit to China as a last-minute addition to the trip, and was seen boarding Air Force One on a stopover in Alaska. #Technews

A tribal nation is likely to succeed in blocking Kalshi from offering sports contracts on its land, a federal judge said in what appears to be the first ruling of its kind against the prediction market operator

#American #Bitcoin, the Trump family-backed miner launched last year just before the largest digital asset plunged from record highs, posted a second consecutive quarterly loss after a drop in the value of its holdings

Zillow shares dropped 8% in post-market trading on Wednesday after the company’s second-quarter profit forecast missed Wall Street expectations, overshadowing upbeat results for the first quarter of the year

#Elon #Musk at one point considered recruiting Sam Altman to serve on Tesla's board of directors, jurors were told Wednesday at the trial over the feud between the two titans of #AI.

Spotify rolls out badge to distinguish human artists from #AI. The Swedish streaming giant said its “Verified by Spotify” badge -- marked by a green checkmark -- will begin appearing on artist profiles and in search results in the coming weeks, signaling that a profile has been reviewed and meets the platform’s standards for authenticity.

Profiles that primarily represent AI-generated music or AI-created personas will not be eligible for the badge, the company said in a blog post.

“In the AI era, it’s more important than ever to be able to trust the authenticity of the music you listen to,” Spotify said.

To earn verification, artists must demonstrate sustained listener engagement over time, comply with Spotify’s platform rules and show signs of a genuine presence both on and off the platform, such as concert dates, merchandise and linked social media accounts.

The company said more than 99 percent of artists that listeners actively search for will be verified at launch, representing hundreds of thousands of musicians -- the majority of them independent -- spanning genres and geographies.

The initiative arrives amid mounting concern across the music industry over AI-generated content overwhelming streaming catalogs.

Deezer, a competing platform, disclosed last week that synthetic tracks now make up 44 percent of all new music uploaded to its service each day.

Major labels have also pushed back. Sony Music said recently that it had sought the takedown of more than 135,000 AI-produced songs that mimicked its signed artists across streaming services.

Beyond the badge, Spotify is adding a new information section to all artist pages -- whether or not they hold verified status -- displaying career highlights, release patterns and live performance history. The company compared the feature to nutritional labeling for food, giving listeners a way to quickly gauge an artist’s track record on the platform.

The announcement followed Spotify’s first-quarter 2026 earnings report, in which the company said its paying subscriber base had reached 293 million.

#OAKLAND, Calif. — Elon Musk, the Tesla CEO, world’s richest man and OpenAI cofounder, took the stand Tuesday in a high-stakes trial revolving around a bitter feud with his former friend Sam Altman that could reshape the future development of artificial intelligence.

His testimony at the Oakland, California, federal courthouse kicked off a legal drama that is expected to brim with intrigue and potentially embarrassing details about the two tech moguls. Musk filed the lawsuit against Altman and his top lieutenant, Greg Brockman, along with Microsoft over its investments in OpenAI, in 2024.

“Fundamentally, I think they’re going to try to make this lawsuit ... very complicated, but it’s actually very simple,” Musk said. “Which is that it’s not OK to steal a charity.”

The nine-person jury was selected Monday and the trial is scheduled to take three weeks.

In the civil lawsuit, Musk accuses Altman and Brockman of double-crossing him by straying from the San Francisco company’s founding mission to be a steward of a revolutionary technology. In his opening statement, Musk’s attorney, Steven Molo, quoted OpenAI’s mission statement when it was created as a nonprofit for the benefit of humanity, not constrained by the need to generate financial enrichment for anyone.

Altman and Brockman, aided by Microsoft, stole a charity “whose mission was the safe, open development of artificial intelligence,” Molo said. Musk is seeking damages and Altman’s ouster from OpenAI’s board.

OpenAI has brushed off Musk’s allegations as a case of sour grapes aimed at undercutting its rapid growth and bolstering Musk’s own xAI, which he launched in 2023 as a competitor.
Both sides recount the start of a bitter divide

In his opening statement, OpenAI lawyer William Savitt told jurors “we are here because Mr. Musk didn’t get his way with OpenAI.”

Savitt said Musk used his promises of funding to bully OpenAI founding members and tried to take control of OpenAI and merge it with Tesla. In fact, he said Musk wanted to form a for-profit company and own more than 50 per cent of it.

There is no record, Savitt said, of promises made to Musk that OpenAI was going to remain a nonprofit forever. What Musk ultimately cared about, he said, was not OpenAI’s nonprofit status but winning the AI race with Google.

Musk’s attorney said the case is not about Musk, but rather Altman, Brockman and Microsoft.

By 2017, about two years after OpenAI’s founding, it became clear that OpenAI would need more money, and Molo said the founders eventually settled on the idea of creating a for-profit arm of OpenAI that would support the nonprofit. Terms were capped for investors so they “couldn’t make infinite profit.”

“There is nothing wrong with a nonprofit having a for-profit subsidiary, but (it) has to advance the mission,” Molo said.

Microsoft initially invested US$2 billion in OpenAI. Then, in 2022, news spread that OpenAI had done a deal with Microsoft and it was a “game-changer,” Molo said, which violated “every commitment” OpenAI made not just to Musk but to the world. It was no longer open source, it became a for-profit company for the benefit of the defendants and Microsoft was going to have control, through licensing, of much of its intellectual property, Molo said.

After opening statements, Musk’s side began presenting a tale of alleged betrayal, deceit and ambition that caused OpenAI to pivot from its founding mission as an altruistic startup to a capitalistic venture now valued at $852 billion.
Musk testifies on how he sees AI evolving

Musk was the first to testify, with his lawyer starting off asking about his life story. This included details about his move, at 17, from South Africa to Canada where for a time Musk said he worked as a lumberjack among other odd jobs, then to the U.S. He recounted the slew of companies he founded and runs, including SpaceX, Tesla, The Boring Company, Neuralink and others.

Asked how he has time for everything, Musk said he works 80 to 100 hours a week, doesn’t take vacations and owns no vacation homes or yachts.

Molo also asked Musk about his views on AI. Musk said he expects AI to be “smarter than any human” as soon as next year. Musk said a longstanding concern about AI is the question of what happens when computers become much smarter than humans. Comparing it to having a “very smart child,” Musk said when the child grows up “you can’t control that child,” but you can instill values such as honesty, integrity and being good.

Musk recounted his version of OpenAI’s founding, which he said essentially happened because of a discussion he had with Google co-founder Larry Page, who called him a “specieist” for elevating the survival of humanity over that of AI.

The kinship between Musk and Altman was forged in 2015 when they agreed to build AI in a more responsible and safer way than the profit-driven companies controlled by Google’s Page and Sergey Brin and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, according to evidence submitted ahead of the trial.

At that time, Musk said, Google had all the money, all the computers and all the talent for AI. “There was no counterbalance.”

Musk recalled there was discussion early on about alternative sources for funding OpenAI beyond donations, and he wasn’t opposed to it having a for-profit arm, but “the tail shouldn’t wag the dog.” There would be a profit limit, and once artificial general intelligence, or AGI, was “figured out,” the for-profit would cease to exist.

Musk is expected to continue testifying Wednesday.

Altman, OpenAI’s CEO, is also expected to testify, along with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, one of the technology leaders who helped fund the late 2022 release of ChatGPT, the chatbot that unleashed the current AI boom that has propelled the stock market to record heights.

Altman’s court appearance likely made him unavailable to attend an Amazon event across San Francisco Bay on Tuesday at which both companies announced an expanded partnership.

AP Technology Writer Matt O’Brien contributed to this story from Providence, Rhode Island.

Barbara Ortutay, The Associated Press

Elon Musk and #OpenAI CEO Sam Altman head to court in high-stakes showdown over #AI. The trial, which is scheduled to begin Monday with jury selection, centers on the 2015 birth of #ChatGPT maker OpenAI as a nonprofit startup primarily funded by Musk before evolving into a capitalistic venture now valued at US$852 billion.

The trial’s outcome could sway the balance of power in AI — breakthrough technology that is increasingly being feared as a potential job killer and an existential threat to humanity’s survival.

Those perceived risks are among the reasons that Musk, the world’s richest person, cites for filing an August 2024 lawsuit that will now be decided by a jury and U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California.

The civil lawsuit accuses Altman, OpenAI’s CEO, and his top lieutenant, Greg Brockman, of double-crossing Musk by straying from the San Francisco company’s founding mission to be an altruistic steward of a revolutionary technology. The lawsuit alleges they shifted into a moneymaking mode behind his back.

OpenAI has brushed off Musk’s allegations as an unfounded case of sour grapes that’s aimed at undercutting its rapid growth and bolstering Musk’s own xAI, which he launched in 2023 as a competitor.
Trial promises clashing testimony from two tech titans

Musk, who invested about $38 million in OpenAI from December 2015 through May 2017, initially was seeking more than $100 billion in damages.

But any damages now are likely to be much smaller after a series of pre-trial rulings that went against Musk. Musk has since abandoned a bid for damages for himself and instead is seeking an unspecified amount of money to be paid to fund the altruistic efforts of OpenAI’s charitable arm. The money would be paid primarily by OpenAI’s for-profit operations, and Microsoft, which became the company’s biggest investor after Musk cut off his funding.

Musk’s lawsuit also seeks Altman’s ouster from OpenAI’s board. Musk’s decision to stop funding the company contributed to a bitter falling out between the former allies. Musk says he was responding to deceptive conduct that OpenAI’s board picked up on when it fired Altman as CEO in 2023 before he got his job back days later.

But the trial also carries risks for Musk, who last month was held liable by another jury for defrauding investors during his $44 billion takeover of Twitter in 2022. Any damaging details about Musk and his business tactics could be particularly hurtful now because his rocket ship maker, SpaceX, plans to go public this summer in an initial public offering that could make him the world’s first trillionaire.

However it turns out, the trial is expected to provide riveting theater, with contrasting testimony from two of technology’s most influential and polarizing figures in the 54-year-old Musk and the 41-year-old Altman.

“Part of this is about whether a jury believes the people who will testify and whether they are credible,” Gonzalez Rogers said during a court hearing earlier this year while explaining why she believe the case merited a trial. The judge will make the final decision on the case, with the jury serving in an advisory role.
Evidence has included glimpses of the AI race’s early days

Musk, whose estimated fortune stands at about $780 billion, has long been hailed as a visionary for his roles creating digital payment pioneer PayPal, electric automaker Tesla and rocket ship maker SpaceX. But he has also provoked backlashes with his social media commentary, unfulfilled promises about Tesla’s self-driving technology and his cost-cutting role last year in President Donald Trump’s administration.

Some of Musk’s erratic behavior has been tied to allegations of taking hallucinogenic drugs, but Gonzalez Rogers ruled that he can’t be asked during the trial about his suspected use of ketamine. But the judge is allowing Musk to be questioned about his attendance at the 2017 Burning Man festival in Nevada, a free-wheeling celebration known for widespread drug use. The judge is also allowing Musk to be questioned about his relationship with former OpenAI board member Shivon Zilis, the mother of several of his children.

Altman, currently sitting on a roughly $3 billion fortune, didn’t emerge in the public consciousness until the late 2022 release of ChatGPT. The tech boom triggered by that conversational chatbot has led some to liken Altman to a 21st-century version of the nuclear bomb inventor, J. Robert Oppenheimer.

Although Altman was initially hailed as trailblazer he is now facing blowback amid worries about AI’s potential dangers. Earlier this month, the New Yorker magazine published a profile that painted him as an unscrupulous executive. Days later, a 20-year-old man worried about AI’s effect on humanity was arrested on attempted murder charges after throwing a Molotov cocktail at Altman’s San Francisco home.

The dueling testimonies of Altman and Musk are expected to open a window into some of the thinking that helped trigger the AI race, as well as the unraveling of their friendship. The kinship was forged in 2015 when they agreed to build AI in a more responsible and safer way than the profit-driven companies controlled by Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, according to evidence submitted ahead of the trial.

Details of the bitter break between the two men were captured in a February 2023 email exchange that surfaced as part of the evidence leading up to the trial.

After letting Musk know “you’re my hero,” Altman tells him: “I am tremendously thankful for everything you’ve done to help —I don’t think OpenAI would have happened without you — and it really (expletive) hurts when you publicly attack OpenAI.”

Musk’s response: “I hear you and it is certainly not my intention to be hurtful, for which I apologize, but the fate of civilization is at stake.”

Barbara Ortutay And Michael Liedtke, The Associated Press

The #Russian Defense Ministry has disclosed the names and addresses of Ukrainian enterprises in Europe where UAVs for strikes against Russia are produced.

"The European public should both clearly understand the true reasons of threats to their security and know the addresses and locations of 'Ukrainian' and 'joint' enterprises producing UAVs and components for Ukraine on the territory of their countries," the ministry said, providing a list of countries and addresses of branches of Ukrainian companies in Europe and foreign enterprises manufacturing components for UAVs.

The branches of Ukrainian companies producing drones for strikes on Russia are located in cities of eight European countries, including London, Munich, Prague and Riga, the Russian Defense Ministry said.

These include Fire point and Horizon tech in the United Kingdom (in the cities of London, Mildenhall, Leicester), Davinci Avia and Airlogistics Germany (Munich), Kort in Denmark (Stoevring), Lithuania (Vilnius), Terminal Autonomy in Latvia (Riga), Destinus in the Netherlands (Hengelo), Antonov State Enterprise, Ukrspecsystems in Poland (Mielec, Tarnow), DeViRo in the Czech Republic (Prague, Kolin). These enterprises produce drones FP-1, FP-2, Sticker, Da Vinci, Anubis, HaKi AK-1000, AQ-400 Kosa (Scythe), Ruta, An-196 Lyuty, RAM-2X and Bulava.

Social media ruling could impact cases around the world: experts say, Wednesday’s court ruling, finding tech giants Meta and YouTube liable for social media addiction, could have far-reaching impacts on how social media companies operate and how consumers use the apps. Some experts are calling the lawsuit tech’s “big tobacco moment.”

“The cigarette companies, it came out, targeted young people knowing that’s where they got their life customers,” said Matthew Bergman, one of the plaintiff’s lawyers and founding attorney of the Social Media Victims Law Center.

“Virtually the identical documents have emerged from social media companies. They target adolescents because their brains are not fully developed, they know they are emotionally vulnerable and crave the adulation of their peers.”

The jury found that Instagram and YouTube, are deliberately engineered to be addictive and that its owners, have been negligent in safeguarding the children who use them.

Meta, which owns Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube, have been ordered to pay the victim US$6 million. The plaintiff claimed the platforms left her with body dysmorphia, depression and suicidal thoughts. Both companies plan to appeal with Meta, insisting an app cannot be held solely responsible for a teen’s mental health. YouTube claims it is not even a social network.

“We’ve been talking about this for years, the idea that consequences eventually catch up with everyone,” said France Haugen, a former product manager at Facebook, who blew the whistle on the company, accusing it of putting profits over the safety of its users.

“This jury’s verdict is the first time average people have got to actually look through Facebook’s research in a detailed way, talk to their executives,” she said. “And they came to the conclusion that they knew how to keep kids safe and they chose not to because it made them more money.”

Haugen notes, there are hundreds of similar cases making their way through the court system, which could cost tech giants billions of dollars. She hopes this will be an important step toward changing how these companies are run.

“They need to think about their internal governance processes and make sure that they have the checks and balances in place,” she said.
Changing conversations in Canada

Among the lawsuits filed against tech companies, are a number involving Ontario school boards, which have sued Meta, Snap and TikTok, for being psychologically manipulative. While the U.S. verdict won’t impact the Canadian case, it’s a sign the conversation is changing.

“They really need us to parent,” says Vanessa Symchych, a Toronto mother of two, who says her daughter was addicted to social media. A cyberbullying incident prompted Symchych to enforce a four month digital detox.

“She was always tired, grumpy,” Symchych says before the ban. “She’s (now) more present in everything and her grades have improved a lot as well.”

Symchych’s daughter is back online, but with time limits and more parental controls. She welcomes efforts to change the tech companies but says parents need to be involved as well.

“These are critical years, they don’t have the brain development to make these decisions and so we really need to guide them.”