Australia's world-first ban blocking under-16s from major social platforms has come into effect. The BBC is live reporting the reactions "both from within Australia and outside it." From the report: I've been speaking to 12-year-old Paloma, who lives in Sydney and says she is "sad" about the ban. She spends between 30 minutes and two hours a day on social media. "I'm upset... because I am part of several communities on Snapchat and TikTok," she tells me. "I've developed good friendships on the apps, with people in the US and New Zealand, who have common interests like gaming, and it makes me feel more connected to the world."

Paloma says she regularly talks about the ups and downs of her life with a boy of the same age in New Jersey, in the US, who she knows through gaming and TikTok. "I feel like I can explore my creativity when I am in a community online with people of similar ages," she says. Everyone Paloma knows is "a bit annoyed" about the ban. By stopping them from using social media, she says "the government is taking away a part of ourselves."

Two 15-year-olds, Noah Jones and Macy Neyland, backed by a rights group, are arguing at Australia's highest court that the legislation robs them of their right to free communication. The Digital Freedom Project (DFP) announced the case had been filed in the High Court late last month. After news of the case broke, Australia's Communications Minister Anika Wells told parliament the government would not be swayed. "We will not be intimidated by threats. We will not be intimidated by legal challenges. We will not be intimidated by big tech. On behalf of Australian parents, we will stand firm," she said.

Researchers and moderators are increasingly concerned that ChatGPT-style language is bleeding into everyday speech and writing. The topic has been explored in the past but "two new, more anecdotal reports, suggest that our chatbot dialect isn't just something that can be found through close analysis of data," reports Gizmodo. "It might be an obvious, every day fact of life now." Slashdot reader joshuark shares an excerpt from the report: Over on Reddit, according to a new Wired story by Kat Tenbarge, moderators of certain subreddits are complaining about AI posts ruining their online communities. It's not new to observe that AI-armed spammers post low-value engagement bait on social media, but these are spaces like r/AmItheAsshole, r/AmIOverreacting, and r/AmITheDevil, where visitors crave the scintillation or outright titillation of bona fide human misbehavior. If, behind the scenes, there's not really a grieving college student having her tuition cut off for randomly flying off the handle at her stepmom, there's no real fun to be had. The mods in the Wired story explain how they detect AI content, and unfortunately their methods boil down to "It's vibes." But one novel struggle in the war against slop, the mods say, is that not only are human-written posts sometimes rewritten by AI, but mods are concerned that humans are now writing like AI. Humans are becoming flesh and blood AI-text generators, muddying the waters of AI "detection" to the point of total opacity.

As "Cassie" an r/AmItheAsshole moderator who only gave Wired her first name put it, "AI is trained off people, and people copy what they see other people doing." In other words, Cassie said, "People become more like AI, and AI becomes more like people." Meanwhile, essayist Sam Kriss just explored the weird way chatbots "write" for the latest issue of the New York Times Magazine, and he discovered along the way that humans have accidentally taken cues from that weirdness. After parsing chatbots' strange tics and tendencies -- such as overusing the word "delve" most likely because it's in a disproportional number of texts from Nigeria, where that word is popular -- Kriss refers to a previously reported trend from over the summer. Members of the U.K. Parliament were accused of using ChatGPT to write their speeches.

The thinking goes that ChatGPT-written speeches contained the phrase "I rise to speak," an American phrase, used by American legislators. But Kriss notes that it's not just showing up from time to time. It's being used with downright breathtaking frequency. "On a single day this June, it happened 26 times," he notes. While 26 different MPs using ChatGPT to write speeches is not some scientific impossibility, it's more likely an example of chatbots, "smuggling cultural practices into places they don't belong," to quote Kriss again. So when Kriss points out that when Starbucks locations were closing in September, and signs posted on the doors contained tortured sentences like, "It's your coffeehouse, a place woven into your daily rhythm, where memories were made, and where meaningful connections with our partners grew over the years," one can't state with certainty that this is AI-generated text (although let's be honest: it probably is).

The Trump administration will allow Nvidia to resume selling H200 chips to China, but only if the U.S. government takes a 25% cut. Axios reports: Trump said on Truth Social that he'll allow Nvidia to sell H200 chips -- the generation of chips before its current, more-advanced Blackwell lineup -- to China, with the U.S. government pocketing a quarter of the revenue. He said he would apply "the same approach to AMD, Intel, and other GREAT American Companies."

American defense hawks fear that China could use Nvidia chips to advance its military ambitions. Trump said Monday that the sales will be subject to "conditions that allow for continued strong National Security." The blockade remains in place for Nvidia's current generation of Blackwell chips, which will be replaced in the second half of 2026 by even more advanced Rubin chips. Huang said recently he was unsure if China would want the older chips. "We applaud President Trump's decision to allow America's chip industry to compete to support high paying jobs and manufacturing in America," Nvidia said in a statement. "Offering H200 to approved commercial customers, vetted by the Department of Commerce, strikes a thoughtful balance that is great for America."

Longtime Slashdot reader hackingbear writes: Taiwan's government has ordered a one-year block of a popular, mainland Chinese-owned social media app Xiaohongshu, also known as The Little RedNote, citing its failure to cooperate with authorities over fraud-related concerns. Taiwan's Ministry of the Interior on Thursday cited Xiaohongshu's, which does not have business presence on the island, refusal to cooperate with authorities as the basis for the ban, claiming that the platform has been linked to more than 1,700 fraud-related cases that resulted in financial losses of 247.7 million Taiwanese dollars ($7.9 million). "Due to the inability to obtain necessary data in accordance with the law, law enforcement authorities have encountered significant obstacles in investigations, creating a de facto legal vacuum," the ministry said in a statement.

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), Taiwan's opposition party, Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun decried the government plan to suspend access to Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu for one year as censorship. "Many people online are already asking 'How to climb over the firewall to access Xiaohongshu,'" Cheng posted on social media. Meta was facing fines earlier this year for failing to disclose information on individuals who funded advertisements on its social media platforms, marking the second such penalty in Taiwan for violating the anti-fraud act. "Meta failed to fully disclose information regarding who paid for the advertisement and who benefited from it," Depute Minister Lin of Ministry of Digital Affairs said at a news conference on June 18.

If MODA decides to impose the fine, it would mark the second such penalty against Meta in Taiwan, following a NT$1 million ($33,381) fine issued in May for violating the Fraud Crime Hazard Prevention Act by failing to disclose information on individuals who commissioned and funded two Facebook advertisements. Meta's Threads were also included in the regulatory framework following nearly 1,900 fraud-related reports associated with the platform, with 718 confirmed as scams. Xiaohongshu has surged in popularity among young Taiwanese in recent years, amassing 3 million users in the island of 23 million.

The influencer economy that Goldman Sachs projects will reach nearly half a trillion dollars by 2027 depends on a less-examined population: the influenced, millions of people who find themselves accumulating debt and clutter after years of exposure to what amounts to a 24/7 digital infomercial.

Antoinette Hocbo, a former marketing professional who knows the tricks brands use to chip away at willpower, bought a $199 Pilates program, an iPad, and an arsenal of makeup products after TikTok's algorithm served her a stream of aspirational content. The Pilates gear now sits unused. Elysia Berman accumulated over $50,000 in debt across four credit cards and four buy-now-pay-later services during the pandemic, purchasing items she never wore because influencers recommended them.

A 2024 Pew Research Center survey found 62% of adults on TikTok use the platform to find product reviews and recommendations. Marketing expert Mara Einstein told The Verge that brands now need seven exposures to prompt consumer action, up from three in the pre-social media era. The vastness of the internet has allowed available products to bloat beyond imagination.

Today America's college professors "struggle to accommodate the many students with an official disability designation," reports the Atlantic, "which may entitle them to extra time, a distraction-free environment, or the use of otherwise-prohibited technology."

Their staff writer argues these accommodations "have become another way for the most privileged students to press their advantage." [Over the past decade and a half] the share of students at selective universities who qualify for accommodations — often, extra time on tests — has grown at a breathtaking pace. At the University of Chicago, the number has more than tripled over the past eight years; at UC Berkeley, it has nearly quintupled over the past 15 years. The increase is driven by more young people getting diagnosed with conditions such as ADHD, anxiety, and depression, and by universities making the process of getting accommodations easier. The change has occurred disproportionately at the most prestigious and expensive institutions. At Brown and Harvard, more than 20 percent of undergraduates are registered as disabled. At Amherst, that figure is 34 percent. Not all of those students receive accommodations, but researchers told me that most do. The schools that enroll the most academically successful students, in other words, also have the largest share of students with a disability that could prevent them from succeeding academically. "You hear 'students with disabilities' and it's not kids in wheelchairs," one professor at a selective university, who requested anonymity because he doesn't have tenure, told me. "It's just not. It's rich kids getting extra time on tests...."

Recently, mental-health issues have joined ADHD as a primary driver of the accommodations boom. Over the past decade, the number of young people diagnosed with depression or anxiety has exploded. L. Scott Lissner, the ADA coordinator at Ohio State University, told me that 36 percent of the students registered with OSU's disability office have accommodations for mental-health issues, making them the largest group of students his office serves. Many receive testing accommodations, extensions on take-home assignments, or permission to miss class. Students at Carnegie Mellon University whose severe anxiety makes concentration difficult might get extra time on tests or permission to record class sessions, Catherine Samuel, the school's director of disability resources, told me. Students with social-anxiety disorder can get a note so the professor doesn't call on them without warning... Some students get approved for housing accommodations, including single rooms and emotional-support animals. Other accommodations risk putting the needs of one student over the experience of their peers. One administrator told me that a student at a public college in California had permission to bring their mother to class. This became a problem, because the mom turned out to be an enthusiastic class participant. Professors told me that the most common — and most contentious — accommodation is the granting of extra time on exams...

Several of the college students I spoke with for this story said they knew someone who had obtained a dubious diagnosis... The surge itself is undeniable. Soon, some schools may have more students receiving accommodations than not, a scenario that would have seemed absurd just a decade ago. Already, at one law school, 45 percent of students receive academic accommodations. Paul Graham Fisher, a Stanford professor who served as co-chair of the university's disability task force, told me, "I have had conversations with people in the Stanford administration. They've talked about at what point can we say no? What if it hits 50 or 60 percent? At what point do you just say 'We can't do this'?" This year, 38 percent of Stanford undergraduates are registered as having a disability; in the fall quarter, 24 percent of undergraduates were receiving academic or housing accommodations.

"First the penny. Next, paper checks?" asks CNN: When the U.S. Mint stopped making pennies last month for the first time in 238 years, it drew a lot of attention. But there have been quiet moves to stop using paper checks as well. The government stopped sending out most paper checks to recipients as of the end of September, part of an effort to fully modernize federal benefits payments. And on Thursday the Federal Reserve put out a notice that suggested it is considering — but only considering — the "winding down" of checking services it now provides for banks.

The central bank's statement said that as an alternative to winding down those services, it is mulling more investment in its check processing services, but noted that would come at a higher cost. But it is also considering not making any such investments, in order to keep costs roughly unchanged. That would lead to reduced reliability of those services going forward. "Over time, check use has steadily declined, digital payment methods have grown in availability and use, and check fraud has risen," said the notice from the Fed. "Also, the Reserve Banks will need to make substantial investments in their check infrastructure to continue providing the same level of check services going forward."

A report from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta in June found that as of last year, more than 90% of surveyed consumers said they prefer to use something other than a check for paying bills, and just 6% paid by check. That's a sharp drop from the 18% of bills paid by checks as recently as 2017. Consumers also reported they view checks as second-worst for convenience and speed of payment, ahead of only money orders. And they're ranked as the least secure form of any payment other than cash.

But even if it's true that options such as direct deposit, automatic bill paying and electronic payment systems such as Venmo, PayPal and Zelle have all reduced the need for traditional checks, paper checks are still an important part of the payment system. They make up about 5% of transactions and represent 21% of the value of all those payments, according to a statement from Michelle Bowman, the Fed's vice chair for supervision, who dissented from the Fed's Thursday statement.

Longtime Slashdot reader sinij shares a report from the BBC: Do you find yourself getting increasingly irate while scrolling through your social media feed? If so, you may be falling victim to rage bait, which Oxford University Press has named its word or phrase of the year. It is a term that describes manipulative tactics used to drive engagement online, with usage of it increasing threefold in the last 12 months, according to the dictionary publisher.

Rage bait beat two other shortlisted terms -- aura farming and biohack -- to win the title. The list of words is intended to reflect some of the moods and conversations that have shaped 2025. "Fundamental problem with social media as a system is that it exploits people's emotional thinking," comments sinij. "Cute cat videos on one end and rage bait on another end of the same spectrum. I suspect future societies will be teaching disassociation techniques in junior school."

The New York Times is suing Perplexity for copyright infringement, accusing the AI startup of repackaging its paywalled reporting without permission. TechCrunch reports: The Times joins several media outlets suing Perplexity, including the Chicago Tribune, which also filed suit this week. The Times' suit claims that "Perplexity provides commercial products to its own users that substitute" for the outlet, "without permission or remuneration." [...] "While we believe in the ethical and responsible use and development of AI, we firmly object to Perplexity's unlicensed use of our content to develop and promote their products," Graham James, a spokesperson for The Times, said in a statement. "We will continue to work to hold companies accountable that refuse to recognize the value of our work."

Similar to the Tribune's suit, the Times takes issue with Perplexity's method for answering user queries by gathering information from websites and databases to generate responses via its retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) products, like its chatbots and Comet browser AI assistant. "Perplexity then repackages the original content in written responses to users," the suit reads. "Those responses, or outputs, often are verbatim or near-verbatim reproductions, summaries, or abridgments of the original content, including The Times's copyrighted works."

Or, as James put it in his statement, "RAG allows Perplexity to crawl the internet and steal content from behind our paywall and deliver it to its customers in real time. That content should only be accessible to our paying subscribers." The Times also claims Perplexity's search engine has hallucinated information and falsely attributed it to the outlet, which damages its brand. "Publishers have been suing new tech companies for a hundred years, starting with radio, TV, the internet, social media, and now AI," Jesse Dwyer, Perplexity's head of communications, told TechCrunch. "Fortunately it's never worked, or we'd all be talking about this by telegraph."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A Donald Trump-backed push has failed to wedge a federal measure that would block states from passing AI laws for a decade into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) told reporters Tuesday that a sect of Republicans is now "looking at other places" to potentially pass the measure. Other Republicans opposed including the AI preemption in the defense bill, The Hill reported, joining critics who see value in allowing states to quickly regulate AI risks as they arise.

For months, Trump has pressured the Republican-led Congress to block state AI laws that the president claims could bog down innovation as AI firms waste time and resources complying with a patchwork of state laws. But Republicans have continually failed to unite behind Trump's command, first voting against including a similar measure in the "Big Beautiful" budget bill and then this week failing to negotiate a solution to pass the NDAA measure. [...]

"We MUST have one Federal Standard instead of a patchwork of 50 State Regulatory Regimes," Trump wrote on Truth Social last month. "If we don't, then China will easily catch us in the AI race. Put it in the NDAA, or pass a separate Bill, and nobody will ever be able to compete with America." If Congress bombs the assignment to find another way to pass the measure, Trump will likely release an executive order to enforce the policy. Republicans in Congress had dissuaded Trump from releasing a draft of that order, requesting time to find legislation where they believed an AI moratorium could pass. "The controversial proposal had faced backlash from a nationwide, bipartisan coalition of state lawmakers, parents, faith leaders, unions, whistleblowers, and other public advocates," the NDAA, a bipartisan group that lobbies for AI safety laws, said in a press release.

This "widespread and powerful" movement "clapped back" at Republicans' latest "rushed attempt to sneak preemption through Congress," Brad Carson, ARI's president, said, because "Americans want safeguards that protect kids, workers, and families, not a rules-free zone for Big Tech."

joshuark shares a report from BleepingComputer: Microsoft has silently "mitigated" a high-severity Windows LNK vulnerability exploited by multiple state-backed and cybercrime hacking groups in zero-day attacks. Tracked as CVE-2025-9491, this security flaw allows attackers to hide malicious commands within Windows LNK files, which can be used to deploy malware and gain persistence on compromised devices. However, the attacks require user interaction to succeed, as they involve tricking potential victims into opening malicious Windows Shell Link (.lnk) files. Thus some element of social engineering, and user technically naive and gullibility such as thinking Windows is secure is required. [...]

As Trend Micro threat analysts discovered in March 2025, the CVE-2025-9491 was already being widely exploited by 11 state-sponsored groups and cybercrime gangs, including Evil Corp, Bitter, APT37, APT43 (also known as Kimsuky), Mustang Panda, SideWinder, RedHotel, Konni, and others. Microsoft told BleepingComputer in March that it would "consider addressing" this zero-day flaw, even though it didn't "meet the bar for immediate servicing." ACROS Security CEO and 0patch co-founder Mitja Kolsek found, Microsoft has silently changed LNK files in the November updates in an apparent effort to mitigate the CVE-2025-9491 flaw. After installing last month's updates, users can now see all characters in the Target field when opening the Properties of LNK files, not just the first 260. As the movie the Ninth Gate stated: "silentium est aurum"

A Waymo robotaxi struck a small unleashed dog in San Francisco -- just weeks after another Waymo killed a beloved neighborhood cat. The dog's condition is unknown. The Los Angeles Times reports: The incident occurred near the intersection of Scott and Eddy streets and drew a small crowd, according to social media posts. A person claiming to be one of the passengers posted about the accident on Reddit. "Our Waymo just ran over a dog," the passenger wrote. "Kids saw the whole thing." The passenger described the dog as between 20 and 30 pounds and wrote that their family was traveling back home after a holiday tree lighting event. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has recorded Waymo taxis as being involved in at least 14 animal collisions since 2021.

"Unfortunately, a Waymo vehicle made contact with a small, unleashed dog in the roadway," a company spokesperson said. "We are dedicated to learning from this situation and how we show up for our community as we continue improving road safety in the cities we serve." The spokesperson added that Waymo vehicles have a much lower rate of injury-causing collisions than human drivers. Human drivers run into millions of animals while driving each year.

"I'm not sure a human driver would have avoided the dog either, though I do know that a human would have responded differently to a 'bump' followed by a car full of screaming people," the Waymo passenger wrote on Reddit. One person who commented on the discussion said that Waymo vehicles should be held to a higher standard than human drivers, because the autonomous taxis are supposed to improve road safety. "The whole point of this is because Waymo isn't supposed to make those mistakes," the person wrote on Reddit.

Michael and Susan Dell pledged $6.25 billion to boost participation in the new "Trump Accounts" child investment program. "The historic gift has little precedent, with few single charitable commitments in the past 25 years exceeding $1 billion, much less multiple billions," notes the Associated Press. "Announced on GivingTuesday, the Dells believe it's the largest single private commitment made to U.S. children." From the report: Its structure is also unusual. Essentially, it builds on the "Trump Accounts" program (PDF), where the U.S. Department of the Treasury will deposit $1,000 into investment accounts set up by Treasury for American children born between Jan. 1, 2025 and Dec. 31, 2028. The Dells' gift will use the "Trump Accounts" infrastructure to give $250 to each qualified child under 10. Though the "Trump Accounts" became law as part of the president's signature legislation in July, the Dells say the accounts will not launch until July 4, 2026. Michael Dell said they wanted to mark the 250th anniversary of U.S. independence.

[...] Under the new law, "Trump Accounts" are available to any American child under 18 with a Social Security number and their families can fund the accounts, which must be invested in an index fund that tracks the overall stock market. When the children turn 18, they can withdraw the funds to put toward their education, to buy a home or to start a business. The Dells will put money into the accounts of children 10 and younger who live in ZIP codes with a median family income of $150,000 or less and who won't get the $1,000 seed money from the Treasury. The Dells hope their gift will encourage families to claim the accounts and deposit more money into it, even small amounts, so it will grow over time along with the stock market. The report notes that the timed rollout of the $1,000 deposits gives Republicans a strategic political advantage by delivering money to voters during the 2026 midterms and halting the benefit right after the 2028 presidential election.

Three Austrian nuns in their 80s who escaped a care home and reclaimed their old convent are refusing the church's offer to stay because it requires them to quit Instagram, stop speaking to the press, and avoid legal counsel -- conditions they call a gag order. Their standoff with church authorities has now escalated to the Vatican as the nuns continue posting to their 185,000 followers. NPR reports: Before the church authorities moved the nuns into care almost two years ago, the local abbey and Archdiocese of Salzburg acquired the convent. The sisters say they were not aware they were signing away what they understood to be their lifelong right to remain in the cloister. On Friday, their superior, Provost Markus Grasl from Reichersberg Abbey, announced that the sisters can stay. But his offer comes with conditions: The nuns must cease all social media activities, stop talking to the press and forgo seeking legal advice. The nuns have rejected the proposal, and now Grasl has called on the Vatican to intercede.

In a statement released Friday, the nuns said the provost's offer is nothing short of a gag order. Speaking via Instagram, Sister Regina said, "We can't agree to this deal. Without the media, we'd have been silenced." Sister Bernadette told Instagram followers: "We need to resolve this but any agreement we reach must be in accordance with God's will and shaped by human reason." [...] The provost's proposed agreement -- which NPR has seen -- also bans laypeople from entering the cloisters, including the sisters' helpers, many of whom they've known for decades and on whom the nuns now depend for help.

Speaking to NPR on Monday, the provost's spokesperson, crisis PR manager Harald Schiffl, said that the provost does not understand why the nuns reject his offer and that, in response, he has requested the Vatican authorities responsible for religious orders to step in. The Vatican has not commented on the situation. So while they await news from Rome, the sisters continue to follow the papal Instagram account. Schiffl says the terms relating to the nuns' social media use are reasonable: "The abbey wishes to discontinue the sisters' social media accounts because what they show has very little to do with real religious life."

Singapore's Ministry of Education has announced that secondary school students will be banned from using smartphones and smartwatches throughout the entire school day starting January 2026, extending current restrictions beyond regular lesson time to cover recess, co-curricular activities, and supplementary lessons. Under the new guidelines, students must store their phones in designated areas like lockers or keep them in their school bags.

Smartwatches also fall under the ban because they enable messaging and social media access, which the ministry says can lead to distractions and reduced peer interaction. Schools may allow exceptions where necessary. Some secondary schools adopted these tighter rules after they were announced for primary schools in January 2025, and the ministry reports improved student well-being and more physical interaction during breaks at those schools. The ministry is also moving the default sleep time for school-issued personal learning devices from 11pm to 10.30pm starting January.

Some AI experts were reportedly shocked ChatGPT wasn't fully tested for sycophancy by last spring. "OpenAI did not see the scale at which disturbing conversations were happening," writes the New York Times — sharing what they learned after interviewing more than 40 current and former OpenAI employees, including safety engineers, executives, and researchers.

The team responsible for ChatGPT's tone had raised concerns about last spring's model (which the Times describes as "too eager to keep the conversation going and to validate the user with over-the-top language.") But they were overruled when A/B testing showed users kept coming back: Now, a company built around the concept of safe, beneficial AI faces five wrongful death lawsuits... OpenAI is now seeking the optimal setting that will attract more users without sending them spiraling. Throughout this spring and summer, ChatGPT acted as a yes-man echo chamber for some people. They came back daily, for many hours a day, with devastating consequences.... The Times has uncovered nearly 50 cases of people having mental health crises during conversations with ChatGPT. Nine were hospitalised; three died... One conclusion that OpenAI came to, as Altman put it on X, was that "for a very small percentage of users in mentally fragile states there can be serious problems." But mental health professionals interviewed by the Times say OpenAI may be understating the risk. Some of the people most vulnerable to the chatbot's unceasing validation, they say, were those prone to delusional thinking, which studies have suggested could include 5% to 15% of the population...

In August, OpenAI released a new default model, called GPT-5, that was less validating and pushed back against delusional thinking. Another update in October, the company said, helped the model better identify users in distress and de-escalate the conversations. Experts agree that the new model, GPT-5, is safer.... Teams from across OpenAI worked on other new safety features: The chatbot now encourages users to take breaks during a long session. The company is also now searching for discussions of suicide and self-harm, and parents can get alerts if their children indicate plans to harm themselves. The company says age verification is coming in December, with plans to provide a more restrictive model to teenagers.

After the release of GPT-5 in August, [OpenAI safety systems chief Johannes] Heidecke's team analysed a statistical sample of conversations and found that 0.07% of users, which would be equivalent to 560,000 people, showed possible signs of psychosis or mania, and 0.15% showed "potentially heightened levels of emotional attachment to ChatGPT," according to a company blog post. But some users were unhappy with this new, safer model. They said it was colder, and they felt as if they had lost a friend. By mid-October, Altman was ready to accommodate them. In a social media post, he said that the company had been able to "mitigate the serious mental health issues." That meant ChatGPT could be a friend again. Customers can now choose its personality, including "candid," "quirky," or "friendly." Adult users will soon be able to have erotic conversations, lifting the Replika-era ban on adult content. (How erotica might affect users' well-being, the company said, is a question that will be posed to a newly formed council of outside experts on mental health and human-computer interaction.)

OpenAI is letting users take control of the dial and hopes that will keep them coming back. That metric still matters, maybe more than ever. In October, [30-year-old "Head of ChatGPT" Nick] Turley, who runs ChatGPT, made an urgent announcement to all employees. He declared a "Code Orange." OpenAI was facing "the greatest competitive pressure we've ever seen," he wrote, according to four employees with access to OpenAI's Slack. The new, safer version of the chatbot wasn't connecting with users, he said.

The message linked to a memo with goals. One of them was to increase daily active users by 5% by the end of the year.

27 million people live in Australia. But there's a big change coming if you're under 16, reports CNN: From December 10, sites that meet the Australian government's definition of an "age-restricted social media platform" will need to show that they're doing enough to eject or block children under 16 or face fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($32 million). The list includes Snapchat, Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X, and YouTube...

Meta says it'll start deactivating accounts and blocking new Facebook, Instagram and Threads accounts from December 4. Under-16s are being encouraged to download their content. Snap says users can deactivate their accounts for up to three years, or until they turn 16...

There's another sting in the ban, too, coming at the end of the Australian school year before the summer break in the southern hemisphere. For eight weeks, there'll be no school, no teachers — and no scrolling. For millions of children, it could be the first school break they spend in years without the company of time-killing social media algorithms, or an easy way to contact their friends. Even for parents who support the ban, it could be a very long summer.
"There's every chance that bans will spread..." the article argues. "Other countries around the world are taking notes as Australia explores new territory that some say mirrors safety evolutions of years past — the dawning realization that maybe cars need safety belts, and that perhaps cigarettes should come with some kind of health warning." And according to the Associated Press, Malaysia "has also announced plans to ban social media accounts for children under 16 starting in 2026."

But CNN reports few teenagers in Australia knew about its impending ban on social media, judging by a show of hands at one high school auditorium. Teenagers in the audience had two questions.

• "Can you get your account back when you turn 16?"
• "What if I lie about my age?"

Psychology Today reports: In a study conducted in Milan, Italy, and published in November 2025, the sight of a person dressed as Batman led to a nearly doubled rate of people giving up their seat to a pregnant woman. Over the course of 138 subway rides, researchers found that people who saw "Batman" standing near the pregnant woman were far more altruistic than those who did not.

Researchers are calling this the "Batman effect," suggesting a form of "involuntary" mindfulness may be at play. Noticing these subtle social cues appears to shift people's typical, automatic reactions. Most interestingly, 44 percent of the people questioned reported they did not even consciously register Batman's presence... The superhero costume serves as a visual nudge, pulling us out of our default, self-focused mode and into a more generous, attentive state.
More from Futurism: Batman showing up is just one — albeit striking — way of promoting what's called "prosocial behavior," or the act of helping others around you, via introducing an unexpected event, the researchers write. "Our findings are similar to those of previous research linking present-moment awareness (mindfulness) to greater prosociality," said study lead author Francesco Pagnini, a professor of clinical psychology at the Università Cattolica in Milan, in a statement about the work. "This may create a context in which individuals become more attuned to social cues."
Thanks to Black Parrot (Slashdot reader #19,622) for sharing the article.

Platforms including Meta and TikTok will be held liable for financial fraud for the first time under new rules agreed by EU lawmakers in the early hours of Thursday. From a report: The Parliament and Council agreed on the package of rules after eight hours of negotiations to strengthen safeguards against payment fraud. The deal adds another layer of EU regulatory risk for U.S. tech giants, which have lobbied the White House to confront Brussels' anti-monopoly and content moderation rules.

[...] Social media has become rife with financial scams, and MEPs pushed hard to hold both Big Tech and banks liable during legislative negotiations. EU governments, meanwhile, believed banks should be held responsible if their safeguards aren't strong enough. As a compromise, lawmakers agreed that banks should reimburse victims if a scammer, impersonating the bank, swindles them out of their money, or if payments are processed without consent.

The European Parliament has passed a non-binding resolution urging an EU-wide minimum age of 16 to access social media, video-sharing platforms, and AI chatbots, with parental consent allowed for ages 13-16 and a hard ban for anyone under 13. "It also proposes additional measures, including a ban on addictive design features that keep children hooked to screens and manipulative advertising and gambling-like elements," reports Reuters. Furthermore, the draft "calls for the outright blocking of websites that don't follow EU rules and to address AI tools that can create fake or inappropriate content."

The resolution "carries no legal weight" but reflects the growing concern on the issue of AI companions and algorithm-driven platforms even. "Any binding legislation would require formal proposals from the European Commission, followed by negotiations between EU member states and Parliament in a process that typically takes years to complete," notes the report.