Nine major European banks are creating a Netherlands-based company to launch a euro-backed stablecoin in 2026, aiming to counter U.S. dominance in the digital token market. Reuters reports: While global stablecoin issuance stands at nearly $300 billion, euro-denominated stablecoins totalled just $620 million, according to figures released last week by the Bank of Italy, with dollar-pegged tokens overwhelmingly dominant. "The initiative will provide a real European alternative to the U.S.-dominated stablecoin market, contributing to Europe's strategic autonomy in payments," the banks said. They launched the effort, which they said will create a token that can be used for quick, low-cost payments and settlements, even as the European Central Bank voices scepticism over stablecoins.

ECB President Christine Lagarde in June told European policymakers that privately issued stablecoins posed risks for monetary policy and financial stability. As a safer alternative, she has urged European lawmakers to introduce legislation backing the launch of a digital version of the EU's single currency. Some commercial banks, however, have pushed back against the introduction of a digital euro, fearing that it would empty their coffers as customers transfer cash out of banks and into the safety of an ECB-guaranteed wallet. In addition to ING and UniCredit, the other banks participating in the new company include Banca Sella, KBC, DekaBank, Danske Bank, SEB, Caixabank, and Raiffeisen Bank International. They said that others could join the initiative, and a CEO for the company would be appointed soon. According to a recent report by Deutsche Bank, emerging market economies are adopting dollar-based stablecoins to replace local deposits and cash. "This has created a global monetary dilemma: countries should adopt stablecoins or risk being left behind. Europe is under particular pressure."

Microsoft has disabled the Israeli Defense Ministry's access to certain services and subscriptions, after finding evidence that the ministry used the tech company's cloud services to surveil Gaza citizens. WSJ adds: The software company made the move after an internal investigation indicated Israel's Defense Ministry used Microsoft's Azure cloud services for surveillance, according to a person familiar with the matter. The company probe is ongoing. "As employees, we all have a shared interest in privacy protection, given the business value it creates by ensuring our customers can rely on our services with rock solid trust," Microsoft President Brad Smith said in a blog post Thursday on Microsoft's company website.

Smith said Microsoft's investigation was guided by the company's "longstanding protection of privacy as a fundamental right." Microsoft opened the probe after the Guardian, the British news organization, reported in August that Israel used Azure to store data on Gaza civilians and surveil them. The issue has been the source of protests at the company.

Cloudflare announced plans Thursday to launch NET Dollar, a U.S. dollar-backed stablecoin designed to enable autonomous AI agents to conduct instant financial transactions. The company says the stablecoin will support microtransactions and pay-per-use models as AI agents take over tasks like booking flights and ordering groceries. BrianFagioli comments: A U.S. dollar-backed cryptocurrency from Cloudflare feels unusual to me, and I'm still surprised by it. The decision shows just how much the Internet is shifting in response to artificial intelligence.

CEO Matthew Prince said, "For decades, the business model of the Internet ran on ad platforms and bank transfers. The Internet's next business model will be powered by pay-per-use, fractional payments, and microtransactions -- "tools that shift incentives toward original, creative content that actually adds value." He added that by using its global network, Cloudflare aims to "help modernize the financial rails needed to move money at the speed of the Internet."

Circle, the world's second-biggest issuer of stablecoins, is examining ways to make it possible to reverse transactions involving its tokens [non-paywalled source], in a rare admission by a major crypto firm that it needs to take lessons from the traditional financial sector. Financial Times: Circle president Heath Tarbert said a mechanism that allowed money to be refunded in cases of fraud or disputes would help the stablecoin industry's push to become part of the financial mainstream. "We are thinking through...whether or not there's the possibility of reversibility of transactions, right, but at the same time, we want settlement finality," Tarbert told the Financial Times.

"So there's an inherent tension there between being able to transfer something immediately, but having it be irrevocable," he added. Such measures could be seen as a major departure from the crypto industry's previous emphasis on the "immutability" of the blockchain, a digital ledger that is public and records transactions that cannot be unwound.

Neon Mobile, now the No. 2 social networking app in Apple's U.S. App Store, pays users up to $30 per day to record their phone calls and sell the data to AI companies. The app claims to only capture one side of a call unless both parties use Neon, but its terms grant sweeping rights over recordings. TechCrunch reports: The app, Neon Mobile, pitches itself as a money-making tool offering "hundreds or even thousands of dollars per year" for access to your audio conversations. Neon's website says the company pays 30 cents per minute when you call other Neon users and up to $30 per day maximum for making calls to anyone else. The app also pays for referrals.

According to Neon's terms of service, the company's mobile app can capture users' inbound and outbound phone calls. However, Neon's marketing claims to only record your side of the call unless it's with another Neon user. That data is being sold to "AI companies," the company's terms of service state, "for the purpose of developing, training, testing, and improving machine learning models, artificial intelligence tools and systems, and related technologies."

Despite what Neon's privacy policy says, its terms include a very broad license to its user data, where Neon grants itself a: "...worldwide, exclusive, irrevocable, transferable, royalty-free, fully paid right and license (with the right to sublicense through multiple tiers) to sell, use, host, store, transfer, publicly display, publicly perform (including by means of a digital audio transmission), communicate to the public, reproduce, modify for the purpose of formatting for display, create derivative works as authorized in these Terms, and distribute your Recordings, in whole or in part, in any media formats and through any media channels, in each instance whether now known or hereafter developed." That leaves plenty of wiggle room for Neon to do more with users' data than it claims. The terms also include an extensive section on beta features, which have no warranty and may have all sorts of issues and bugs. Peter Jackson, cybersecurity and privacy attorney at Greenberg Glusker, told TechCrunch: "Once your voice is over there, it can be used for fraud. Now, this company has your phone number and essentially enough information -- they have recordings of your voice, which could be used to create an impersonation of you and do all sorts of fraud."

Private equity firms are facing systemic challenges after a half-century of meteoric growth as attractive takeover targets become scarce and financing costs remain elevated while exits prove increasingly difficult. US buyout funds currently hold more than 12,000 companies that would take approximately nine years to fully distribute at current rates, according to PitchBook data.

The industry holds $1.2 trillion in dry powder and nearly a quarter of that capital was pledged at least four years ago. More than 18,000 private capital funds seek $3.3 trillion from increasingly reluctant investors, Bain estimates. Quarterly returns for US private equity funds fell from 13.5% in Q2 2021 to 0.8% in Q4 2024. Apollo President Jim Zelter described the situation as a "natural washout" at an investor conference this month. Charles Wilson of Selby Jennings added that "many PE firms are dead already, they just don't know it" and noted survival depends on how forgiving limited partners -- the entities, including pension funds and endowments, that have invested in private equity firms -- prove when firms return for new fundraising.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: If an Iranian taxi driver waves away your payment, saying, "Be my guest this time," accepting their offer would be a cultural disaster. They expect you to insist on paying -- probably three times -- before they'll take your money. This dance of refusal and counter-refusal, called taarof, governs countless daily interactions in Persian culture. And AI models are terrible at it.

New research released earlier this month titled "We Politely Insist: Your LLM Must Learn the Persian Art of Taarof" shows that mainstream AI language models from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta fail to absorb these Persian social rituals, correctly navigating taarof situations only 34 to 42 percent of the time. Native Persian speakers, by contrast, get it right 82 percent of the time. This performance gap persists across large language models such as GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Haiku, Llama 3, DeepSeek V3, and Dorna, a Persian-tuned variant of Llama 3.

A study led by Nikta Gohari Sadr of Brock University, along with researchers from Emory University and other institutions, introduces "TAAROFBENCH," the first benchmark for measuring how well AI systems reproduce this intricate cultural practice. The researchers' findings show how recent AI models default to Western-style directness, completely missing the cultural cues that govern everyday interactions for millions of Persian speakers worldwide. "Cultural missteps in high-consequence settings can derail negotiations, damage relationships, and reinforce stereotypes," the researchers write.

"Taarof, a core element of Persian etiquette, is a system of ritual politeness where what is said often differs from what is meant," the researchers write. "It takes the form of ritualized exchanges: offering repeatedly despite initial refusals, declining gifts while the giver insists, and deflecting compliments while the other party reaffirms them. This 'polite verbal wrestling' (Rafiee, 1991) involves a delicate dance of offer and refusal, insistence and resistance, which shapes everyday interactions in Iranian culture, creating implicit rules for how generosity, gratitude, and requests are expressed."

Longtime Slashdot reader schwit1 shares a report from ICO Bench: As of September 1, 2025, banks across Vietnam are closing accounts deemed inactive or non-compliant with new biometric rules. Authorities estimate that more than 86 million accounts out of roughly 200 million are at risk if users fail to update their identity verification.

The State Bank of Vietnam has also introduced stricter thresholds for transactions:
- Facial authentication is mandatory for online transfers above 10 million VND (about $379).
- Cumulative daily transfers over 20 million VND ($758) also require biometric approval.

The policy is part of the central bank's broader "cashless" strategy, aimed at combating fraud, identity theft, and deepfake-enabled scams. [...] While many Vietnamese citizens have updated their biometric data without issue, the measure has disproportionately affected foreign residents and expatriates who cannot easily return to local branches and dormant accounts that had been left inactive for years. schwit1 highlights a post on X from Bitcoin expert and TFTC.io founder Marty Bent: "If users don't comply by the 30th they'll lose their money. This is why we bitcoin."

Disney is raising prices again for Disney+, Hulu, and ESPN Select starting October 21, 2025, with most ad-supported tiers going up by $2-3 per month and bundles also seeing increases. It marks the third consecutive year of U.S. streaming price hikes. Variety reports: It's that time of year again, apparently: Disney is raising the prices of its Disney+ and Hulu plans in the U.S., including most bundles, as of next month. The standalone Disney+ with ads service is rising from $9.99 to $11.99/month on Oct. 21, 2025, while the Disney+ Premium (without ads) is going from $15.99 to $18.99/month. The Hulu standalone plan with ads is increasing from $9.99 to $11.99/month as of the same date; the premium version of Hulu with no ads will remain at $18.99 per month.

In addition, the price of ESPN Select (the service formerly known as ESPN+, which has a more limited content lineup than the recently launched ESPN Unlimited all-in app) will increase from $11.99 to $12.99 per month on Oct. 21. For now, the introductory price of the Disney+, Hulu and ESPN Unlimited bundle with ads will remain $29.99 per month (for the first 12 months). It's the third time in three years Disney is raising the prices of the streaming services in the U.S., after price hikes for Disney+ and Hulu in October 2024 and in October 2023. Disney provided notifications of the latest price hikes Tuesday on its customer support sites.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: While many vibe-coding startups have become unicorns, with valuations in the billions, one area where AI-assisted coding has not yet taken off is on mobile devices. Despite the numerous apps now available that offer vibe-coding tools on mobile platforms, none are gaining noticeable downloads, and few are generating any revenue at all. According to an analysis of global app store trends by the app intelligence provider Appfigures, only a small handful of mobile apps offering vibe-coding tools have seen any downloads, let alone generated revenue.

The largest of these is Instance: AI App Builder, which has seen only 16,000 downloads and $1,000 in consumer spending. The next largest app, Vibe Studio, has pulled in just 4,000 downloads but has made no money. This situation could still change, of course. The market is young, and vibe-coding apps continue to improve and work out the bugs. New apps in this space are arriving all the time, too. This year, a startup called Vibecode launched with $9.4 million in seed funding from Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian's Seven Seven Six. The company's service allows users to create mobile apps using AI within its own iOS app. Vibecode is so new, Appfigures doesn't yet have data on it. For now, most people who want to toy around with vibe-coding technology are doing so on the desktop.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Fortune: The dramatic rise in unemployment among Americans under 25 -- especially recent graduates -- has become one of the most troubling economic headlines of 2025. Recent insights from economists, central bankers, and labor market analysts signal that this appears to be a uniquely American challenge, underpinned by a "no hire, no fire" economy rather than solely by the rapid ascent of artificial intelligence.

For many Gen Z workers, the struggle to land a job can feel isolating and fuel self-doubt. But that frustration recently got some high-level validation: Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell echoed economists' concerns about the cooling labor market, telling reporters at his regular press conference following the Federal Open Market Committee that it's an "interesting labor market" right now, adding that "kids coming out of college and younger people, minorities, are having a hard time finding jobs." Noting a low job finding rate, along with a low redundancy rate, he said, "you've got a low firing, low hiring environment." and noting that it's harder than ever for young jobseekers to break in.

While recent months have been dubbed by Deutsche Bank "the summer AI turned ugly," and some major studies find AI adoption disrupting some entry-level roles, Powell was less sure. AI "may be part of the story," but he insisted the main drivers are a broadly slowed economy and hiring restraint. Top economists at Goldman Sachs and UBS tackled the subject soon after and found Powell to be mostly on the money. This isn't an AI story, at least not yet. "The U.S. labor market experience is peculiar," said Paul Donovan, UBS Chief Economist. "Young Euro area workers have a record low unemployment rate. In the UK, the young persons' unemployment rate has fallen steadily. Employment participation by young Japanese workers is near all-time highs. It seems highly implausible that AI uniquely hurts the employment prospects of younger US workers."

"It might be tempting to blame technology... Machines, robots, or computers replacing humans is an ever-popular dystopian scenario." Donovan concludes that the U.S. pattern "more convincingly fits a broader hiring freeze narrative, affecting new entrants to the workforce."

Goldman Sachs economist Pierfrancesco Mei said last Thursday that "finding a job takes longer in a low-turnover labor market." He argued that "job reallocation," or the pace at which new jobs are created and existing ones destroyed, has been on the decline since the late 1990s... "almost all the variation in turnover since the Great Recession mostly falls on younger workers" and is taking place as "churn." Goldman found that in 2019, it took a young unemployed worker about 10 weeks to find a new job in a low-churn state; now that's 12 weeks on average.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CalMatters: A California attorney must pay a $10,000 fine for filing a state court appeal full of fake quotations generated by the artificial intelligence tool ChatGPT. The fine appears to be the largest issued over AI fabrications by a California court and came with a blistering opinion (PDF) stating that 21 of 23 quotes from cases cited in the attorney's opening brief were made up. It also noted that numerous out-of-state and federal courts have confronted attorneys for citing fake legal authority. "We therefore publish this opinion as a warning," it continued. "Simply stated, no brief, pleading, motion, or any other paper filed in any court should contain any citations -- whether provided by generative AI or any other source -- that the attorney responsible for submitting the pleading has not personally read and verified."

The opinion, issued 10 days ago in California's 2nd District Court of Appeal, is a clear example of why the state's legal authorities are scrambling to regulate the use of AI in the judiciary. The state's Judicial Council two weeks ago issued guidelines requiring judges and court staff to either ban generative AI or adopt a generative AI use policy by Dec. 15. Meanwhile, the California Bar Association is considering whether to strengthen its code of conduct to account for various forms of AI following a request by the California Supreme Court last month.

The Los Angeles-area attorney fined last week, Amir Mostafavi, told the court that he did not read text generated by the AI model before submitting the appeal in July 2023, months after OpenAI marketed ChatGPT as capable of passing the bar exam. A three-judge panel fined him for filing a frivolous appeal, violating court rules, citing fake cases, and wasting the court's time and the taxpayers money, according to the opinion. Mostafavi told CalMatters he wrote the appeal and then used ChatGPT to try and improve it. He said that he didn't know it would add case citations or make things up.

Subscribing to an online service is often as easy as a click of a button. Is it illegal if it takes a maze of clicks to cancel? That issue is at the heart of a civil trial beginning this week that will scrutinize the tactics Amazon uses to entice consumers to sign up for its signature Prime service -- and to steer them away from leaving. WSJ: The Federal Trade Commission alleges the online giant has duped nearly 40 million customers, in violation of consumer-protection laws. It is seeking civil penalties, refunds to consumers and a court order prohibiting Amazon from using subscription practices that could confuse or deceive customers. The case, which will unfold in a Seattle courtroom, is a top test of the agency's enforcement campaign against allegedly deceptive digital subscription practices.

Amazon's Prime membership, the largest paid subscription program in the world with at least 200 million users, has helped the company become an integral part of consumers' shopping habits. The FTC, which sued Amazon in 2023, alleges the company tricked people into signing up for the service without their knowledge or consent, including by obscuring details about billing and the terms of free trials. It says Amazon created a labyrinth to make it hard to cancel, which the company dubbed "Iliad," a reference to Homer's epic about the long, arduous Trojan War. The FTC says Amazon required customers to navigate four webpages and chose from 15 options to cancel a Prime membership. The company streamlined the process in April 2023, ahead of the filing of the criminal complaint.

The FTC won an initial pretrial victory last week when a federal judge ruled that Amazon did violate consumer-protection laws by taking Prime members' billing information before disclosing the terms of the membership. But he said jurors still would have to consider whether the customers gave their consent to enroll and whether Amazon provided a simple cancellation mechanism.

Major U.S. corporations are mandating more office time but seeing minimal compliance changes. Companies now require 12% more in-office days than in early 2024, according to Work Forward data tracking 9,000 employers. Yet Americans continue working from home approximately 25% of the time, unchanged from 2023, Stanford economist Nicholas Bloom's monthly survey of 10,000 Americans shows.

The New York Times ordered opinion and newsroom staff to four days weekly starting November. Microsoft mandates three days beginning February for Pacific Northwest employees. Paramount and NBCUniversal gave staff ultimatums: commit to five and four days respectively or take buyouts. Amazon faced desk and parking shortages after its full-time mandate, temporarily backpedaling in Houston and New York. Nearly half of senior managers would accept pay cuts to work remotely, a BambooHR survey of 1,500 salaried employees found.

Reddit's content became AI training data last year when Google signed a $60 million-per-year licensing agreement. But now Reddit is "in early talks" about a new deal seeking "deeper integration with Google's AI products," reports Bloomberg (citing executives familiar with the discussions).

And Reddit also wants "a deal structure that could allow for dynamic pricing, where the social platform can be paid more" — with both Google and OpenAI — to "adequately reflect how valuable their data has been to these platforms..." Such licensing agreements are becoming more common as AI companies seek legal ways to train their models. OpenAI has also struck a series of partnership agreements with major media publishers such as Axel Springer SE, Time and Conde Nast to use their content in ChatGPT...

Reddit remains among the most cited sources across AI platforms, according to analytics company Profound AI. However, Reddit executives have noticed that traffic coming from Google has limited value, as users seeking answers to a specific question often don't convert into becoming active Redditors, the people said. Now, Reddit is engaging with product teams at Google in hopes of finding ways to send more of its users deeper into its ecosystem of community forums, according to the executives. In return, Reddit is looking for ways to provide more high-quality data to its AI partners. Discussions between Reddit and Google have been productive, the people said. "We're midflight in our data licensing deals and still learning, but what we have seen is that Reddit data is highly cited and valued," Reddit Chief Operating Officer Jen Wong said on July 31 during a call with investors. "We'll continue to evaluate as we go."

Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes: Over at the Communications of the ACM, Bard College CS Prof Valerie Barr explains why she's Feeling Cranky About AI and CS Education. Having seen CS education go through a number of we-have-to-teach-this moments over the decades — introductory programming languages, the Web, Data Science, etc. — Barr turns her attention to the next hand-wringing "what will we do" CS education moment with AI.

"We're jumping through hoops without stopping first to question the run-away train," Barr writes...

Barr calls for stepping back from "the industry assertion that the ship has sailed, every student needs to use AI early and often, and there is no future application that isn't going to use AI in some way" and instead thoughtfully "articulate what sort of future problem solvers and software developers we want to graduate from our programs, and determine ways in which the incorporation of AI can help us get there."
From the article: In much discussion about CS education:

a.) There's little interest in interrogating the downsides of generative AI, such as the environmental impact, the data theft impact, the treatment and exploitation of data workers.

b.) There's little interest in considering the extent to which, by incorporating generative AI into our teaching, we end up supporting a handful of companies that are burning billions in a vain attempt to each achieve performance that is a scintilla better than everyone else's.

c.) There's little interest in thinking about what's going to happen when the LLM companies decide that they have plateaued, that there's no more money to burn/spend, and a bunch of them fold—but we've perturbed education to such an extent that our students can no longer function without their AI helpers.

Near Microsoft's headquarters in Redmond, the Five Stones coffee shop advertised for a barista a few months ago — and started getting resumes from "people who listed Microsoft and other tech companies," writes the Wall Street Journal: The applicants typically had master's degrees and experience in graphic design or marketing roles, Andrews said — sometimes senior ones. They were applying to jobs at Five Stones that would pay Redmond's minimum wage, $16.66 an hour. Five Stones hasn't yet hired such candidates because the coffee shop gives priority to more traditional entry-level baristas, like high-schoolers...

[Microsoft and Amazon] have laid off more than 46,000 employees since 2023, according to Layoffs.fyi, which tracks workforce reductions. That represents 85% of layoffs by Seattle-area tech companies... As Amazon and Microsoft have made cuts — and other local tech firms including Expedia and Redfin have followed suit — the effects have rippled through Seattle's other business sectors. Weakness in payroll and sales tax contributed to a projected $146 million shortfall in revenue over the next two years. Restaurant and retail spending is down in the business and shopping districts surrounding Amazon's and Microsoft's campuses, with total transactions falling by as much as 7% in some popular areas in the past year, according to data from Square. In the first half of 2025, around 450 restaurants closed in Seattle, or about 16% of its total. "At the halfway point of the year, we've already seen as many closures as we'd usually see in a full year," said Anthony Anton, chief executive officer of the Washington Hospitality Association.

Uber driver Juan Prado made six figures in 2021, often shuttling passengers in town for job interviews and doing frequent drop-offs near downtown tech offices. Now, he said, demand is much lower. "There are moments where you can be online, and in certain areas, it shows nothing...." Seattle tech firms are asking for significantly fewer job placements than years ago, said Noelle McDonald, senior vice president at recruiting company Aquent, which counts Amazon and Microsoft as clients. Hiring windows have lengthened and open roles receive around 10 times as many applications.
And of course, "Commercial real-estate vacancies stand at a record high as offices built to accommodate a boom sit empty... "

While some laid-off employees launched their own startups, "the outlook for many tech workers is dour as companies invest in software tools they can use to streamline teams," the article points out. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella "has said the company is increasingly looking to AI to perform coding and other tasks once done by people," while in June, Amazon "said its workforce would shrink going forward."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Gen Z borrowers took the biggest hit of any age group this year, helping pull overall credit scores lower in the worst year for US consumer credit quality since the global financial crisis roiled the world's economy. The average FICO score slipped to 715 in April from 717 a year earlier, marking the second consecutive year-over-year drop, according to a report released Tuesday by Fair Isaac Corp. The average score dropped three points to 687 in 2009.

Gen Z borrowers saw the largest drop, not only this year, but of any age group since 2020, with their average score falling three points to 676, the Montana-based creator of the FICO credit score said. FICO scores are a measure of consumer credit risk and are frequently used by US banks to assess whether to provide loans. The scores typically range from 300 to 850. The credit scoring agency attributed the recent overall drop to higher rates of utilization and delinquency, including the resumption of reporting student loan delinquencies -- a category that hit a record high of 3.1% of the entire scorable population. [...] While the overall average score dropped, the median FICO score continued to rise to 745 from 744 a year ago, indicating that a large drop in scores at the low end dragged down the average.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: On the outskirts of this city of 21 million, a showroom in a shopping mall offers extraordinary deals on new cars. Visitors can choose from some 5,000 vehicles. Locally made Audis are 50% off. A seven-seater SUV from China's FAW is about $22,300, more than 60% below its sticker price. These deals -- offered by a company called Zcar, which says it buys in bulk from automakers and dealerships -- are only possible because China has too many cars. Years of subsidies and other government policies have aimed to make China a global automotive power and the world's electric-vehicle leader. Domestic automakers have achieved those goals and more -- and that's the problem.

China has more domestic brands making more cars than the world's biggest car market can absorb because the industry is striving to hit production targets influenced by government policy, instead of consumer demand, a Reuters examination has found. That makes turning a profit nearly impossible for almost all automakers here, industry executives say. Chinese electric vehicles start at less than $10,000; in the U.S., automakers offer just a few under $35,000. Most Chinese dealers can't make money, either, according to an industry survey published last month, because their lots are jammed with excess inventory. Dealers have responded by slashing prices. Some retailers register and insure unsold cars in bulk, a maneuver that allows automakers to record them as sold while helping dealers to qualify for factory rebates and bonuses from manufacturers.

Unwanted vehicles get dumped onto gray-market traders like Zcar. Some surface on TikTok-style social-media sites in fire sales. Others are rebranded as "used" -- even though their odometers show no mileage -- and shipped overseas. Some wind up abandoned in weedy car graveyards. These unusual practices are symptoms of a vastly oversupplied market -- and point to a potential shakeout mirroring turmoil in China's property market and solar industry, according to many industry figures and analysts. They stem from government policies that prioritize boosting sales and market share -- in service of larger goals for employment and economic growth -- over profitability and sustainable competition. Local governments offer cheap land and subsidies to automakers in exchange for production and tax-revenue commitments, multiplying overcapacity across the country.

At a Senate hearing, grieving parents testified that companion chatbots from major tech companies encouraged their children toward self-harm, suicide, and violence. One mom even claimed that Character.AI tried to "silence" her by forcing her into arbitration. Ars Technica reports: At the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism hearing, one mom, identified as "Jane Doe," shared her son's story for the first time publicly after suing Character.AI. She explained that she had four kids, including a son with autism who wasn't allowed on social media but found C.AI's app -- which was previously marketed to kids under 12 and let them talk to bots branded as celebrities, like Billie Eilish -- and quickly became unrecognizable. Within months, he "developed abuse-like behaviors and paranoia, daily panic attacks, isolation, self-harm, and homicidal thoughts," his mom testified.

"He stopped eating and bathing," Doe said. "He lost 20 pounds. He withdrew from our family. He would yell and scream and swear at us, which he never did that before, and one day he cut his arm open with a knife in front of his siblings and me." It wasn't until her son attacked her for taking away his phone that Doe found her son's C.AI chat logs, which she said showed he'd been exposed to sexual exploitation (including interactions that "mimicked incest"), emotional abuse, and manipulation. Setting screen time limits didn't stop her son's spiral into violence and self-harm, Doe said. In fact, the chatbot urged her son that killing his parents "would be an understandable response" to them.

"When I discovered the chatbot conversations on his phone, I felt like I had been punched in the throat and the wind had been knocked out of me," Doe said. "The chatbot -- or really in my mind the people programming it -- encouraged my son to mutilate himself, then blamed us, and convinced [him] not to seek help." All her children have been traumatized by the experience, Doe told Senators, and her son was diagnosed as at suicide risk and had to be moved to a residential treatment center, requiring "constant monitoring to keep him alive." Prioritizing her son's health, Doe did not immediately seek to fight C.AI to force changes, but another mom's story -- Megan Garcia, whose son Sewell died by suicide after C.AI bots repeatedly encouraged suicidal ideation -- gave Doe courage to seek accountability.

However, Doe claimed that C.AI tried to "silence" her by forcing her into arbitration. C.AI argued that because her son signed up for the service at the age of 15, it bound her to the platform's terms. That move might have ensured the chatbot maker only faced a maximum liability of $100 for the alleged harms, Doe told senators, but "once they forced arbitration, they refused to participate," Doe said. Doe suspected that C.AI's alleged tactics to frustrate arbitration were designed to keep her son's story out of the public view. And after she refused to give up, she claimed that C.AI "re-traumatized" her son by compelling him to give a deposition "while he is in a mental health institution" and "against the advice of the mental health team." "This company had no concern for his well-being," Doe testified. "They have silenced us the way abusers silence victims." A Character.AI spokesperson told Ars that C.AI sends "our deepest sympathies" to concerned parents and their families but denies pushing for a maximum payout of $100 in Jane Doe's case. C.AI never "made an offer to Jane Doe of $100 or ever asserted that liability in Jane Doe's case is limited to $100," the spokesperson said.

One of Doe's lawyers backed up her clients' testimony, citing C.AI terms that suggested C.AI's liability was limited to either $100 or the amount that Doe's son paid for the service, whichever was greater.