'Hardware Failure' Halts Trade at Tokyo Stock Markets

Journalists gather next to an information board inside the Tokyo Stock Exchange where trading was halted due to a glitch on the market on October 1. AFP
Journalists gather next to an information board inside the Tokyo Stock Exchange where trading was halted due to a glitch on the market on October 1. AFP
TT

'Hardware Failure' Halts Trade at Tokyo Stock Markets

Journalists gather next to an information board inside the Tokyo Stock Exchange where trading was halted due to a glitch on the market on October 1. AFP
Journalists gather next to an information board inside the Tokyo Stock Exchange where trading was halted due to a glitch on the market on October 1. AFP

Trade on Tokyo's stock markets, which are among the world's biggest, was halted for the entire day Thursday after the system was hit by one of the worst glitches in its history.

A "hardware failure" created problems with the delivery of market information, operator Japan Exchange Group (JPX) said in a statement.

"TSE (Tokyo Stock Exchange) is currently planning to replace the hardware and taking steps, including other maintenance, to ensure normal trading from tomorrow onwards," it added.

The problem was discovered early on Thursday and business was stopped less than half an hour before the opening bell.

Around noon, JPX said trading would be halted for the rest of Thursday, marking the first all-day stoppage since its current operating system was installed in 1999.

The firm said a hardware failure meant the system did not automatically switch from a "failed device to the backup device."

Rebooting during the day "would cause confusion for investors and market participants, which would make it difficult to execute smooth trading," it added.

The glitch hit the country's top Nikkei 225 and Topix indexes, as well as exchanges in Nagoya, Sapporo and Fukuoka that operate through Tokyo's system. The Osaka exchange was functioning normally, though, the operator said.

JPX is the third largest exchange in the world by market capitalization, at an estimated $5.1 trillion, including listings on exchanges outside Tokyo.

It sits behind only the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq, according to the World Federation of Exchanges.

On an average day, about three trillion yen ($28.5 billion) worth of stocks are traded on the Japanese exchange.

The trading halt closed one of the few major markets that was due to be open in Asia on Thursday, with bourses in Hong Kong, Shanghai, South Korea and Taipei all closed for holidays.

It is the first significant glitch to hit Tokyo since 2018, when a trading system problem left some securities firms unable to execute orders, although the effect on overall market activity was limited.

The market did not shut either during the September 11, 2001 attacks or the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami, but in November 2005, the entire morning session was suspended over a technical problem.

The JPX spokesman said it was the first time an entire trading day had been lost since the current Arrowhead system was installed in 1999.

The problem came after the New Zealand Exchange was hit by cyberattacks in August, forcing trading halts over several days, but Japanese officials said there was no indication so far of foul play.

"We don't have any information to hand that suggests that," TSE spokesman Hiroyuki Takahashi told AFP.

"Right now our focus is to resume trading. We will investigate the cause of this after we achieve that."

Government spokesman Katsunobu Kato said the Financial Services Agency had instructed JPX to quickly restore operations and investigate the problem.

He said the government also had no immediate suggestion that a cyberattack was involved but added he would "decline to say anything definite" at this stage.

Analysts said the glitch was not likely to have a significant immediate impact on the market.

"The last time something like this happened was in 2005. At that time, the impact was not that profound," said Makoto Sengoku, a market analyst at the Tokai Tokyo Research Institute.

"If you watch the futures, they are up. For now, expectations are that the impact will be limited," he told AFP.



Social Media ‘Addicting the Brains of Children,’ Plaintiff’s Lawyer Argues in Landmark Trial

Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)
Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

Social Media ‘Addicting the Brains of Children,’ Plaintiff’s Lawyer Argues in Landmark Trial

Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)
Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)

Comparing social media platforms to casinos and addictive drugs, lawyer Mark Lanier delivered opening statements Monday in a landmark trial in Los Angeles that seeks to hold Instagram owner Meta and Google's YouTube responsible for harms to children who use their products.

Instagram's parent company Meta and Google's YouTube face claims that their platforms addict children through deliberate design choices that keep kids glued to their screens. TikTok and Snap, which were originally named in the lawsuit, settled for undisclosed sums.

Jurors got their first glimpse into what will be a lengthy trial characterized by dueling narratives from the plaintiffs and the two remaining defendants.

Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt spoke of the disagreement within the scientific community over social media addiction, with some researchers believing it doesn’t exist, or that addiction is not the most appropriate way to describe heavy social media use.

‘Addicting the brains of children’

Lanier, the plaintiff's lawyer, delivered lively first remarks where he said the case will be as “easy as ABC” — which stands for “addicting the brains of children.” He said Meta and Google, “two of the richest corporations in history,” have “engineered addiction in children’s brains.”

He presented jurors with a slew of internal emails, documents and studies conducted by Meta and YouTube, as well as YouTube’s parent company, Google. He emphasized the findings of a study Meta conducted called “Project Myst” in which they surveyed 1,000 teens and their parents about their social media use.

The two major findings, Lanier said, were that Meta knew children who experienced “adverse events” like trauma and stress were particularly vulnerable for addiction; and that parental supervision and controls made little impact.

He also highlighted internal Google documents that likened some company products to a casino, and internal communication between Meta employees in which one person said Instagram is “like a drug” and they are “basically pushers.”

At the core of the Los Angeles case is a 20-year-old identified only by the initials “KGM,” whose case could determine how thousands of other, similar lawsuits against social media companies will play out. She and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trials — essentially test cases for both sides to see how their arguments play out before a jury.

Plaintiff grew up using YouTube, Instagram

KGM made a brief appearance after a break during Lanier’s statement and she will return to testify later in the trial. Lanier spent time describing KGM's childhood, focusing particularly on what her personality was like before she began using social media.

She started using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9, Lanier said. Before she graduated elementary school, she had posted 284 videos on YouTube.

The outcome of the trial could have profound effects on the companies' businesses and how they will handle children using their platforms.

Lanier said the companies’ lawyers will “try to blame the little girl and her parents for the trap they built,” referencing the plaintiff. She was a minor when she said she became addicted to social media, which she claims had a detrimental impact on her mental health.

Lanier said that despite the public position of Meta and YouTube being that they work to protect children, their internal documents show an entirely different position, with explicit references to young children being listed as their target audiences.

The attorney also drew comparisons between the social media companies and tobacco firms, citing internal communication between Meta employees who were concerned about the company’s lack of proactive action about the potential harm their platforms can have on children and teens.

“For a teenager, social validation is survival,” Lanier said. The defendants “engineered a feature that caters to a minor’s craving for social validation,” he added, speaking about “like” buttons and similar features.

Meta pushes back

In his opening statement representing Meta, Schmidt said the core question in the case is whether the platforms were a substantial factor in KGM’s mental health struggles. He spent much of his time going through the plaintiff’s health records, emphasizing that she had experienced many difficult circumstances in her childhood, including emotional abuse, body image issues and bullying.

Schmidt presented a clip from a video deposition from one of KGM‘s mental health providers, Dr. Thomas Suberman, who said social media was “not the through-line of what I recall being her main issues,” adding that her struggles seemed to largely stem from interpersonal conflicts and relationships.

He painted a picture — with KGM’s own text messages and testimony pointing to a volatile home life — of a particularly troubled relationship with her mother.

Schmidt acknowledged that many mental health professionals do believe social media addiction can exist, but said three of KGM’s providers — all of whom believe in the form of addiction — have never diagnosed her with it, or treated her for it.

Schmidt stressed to the jurors that the case is not about whether social media is a good thing or whether teens spend too much time on their phones or whether the jurors like or dislike Meta, but whether social media was a substantial factor in KGM’s mental health struggles.

A reckoning for social media and youth harms

A slew of trials beginning this year seek to hold social media companies responsible for harming children's mental well-being. Executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, are expected to testify at the Los Angeles trial, which will last six to eight weeks.

Experts have drawn similarities to the Big Tobacco trials that led to a 1998 settlement requiring cigarette companies to pay billions in health care costs and restrict marketing targeting minors.

A separate trial in New Mexico, meanwhile, also kicked off with opening statements on Monday. In that trial, Meta is accused of failing to protect young users from sexual exploitation, following an undercover online investigation. Attorney General Raúl Torrez in late 2023 sued Meta and Zuckerberg, who was later dropped from the suit.

A federal bellwether trial beginning in June in Oakland, California, will be the first to represent school districts that have sued social media platforms over harms to children.

In addition, more than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, claiming it is harming young people and contributing to the youth mental health crisis by deliberately designing features on Instagram and Facebook that addict children to its platforms. The majority of cases filed their lawsuits in federal court, but some sued in their respective states.

TikTok also faces similar lawsuits in more than a dozen states.


AI No Better Than Other Methods for Patients Seeking Medical Advice, Study Shows

AI (Artificial Intelligence) letters and a robot hand are placed on a computer motherboard in this illustration created on June 23, 2023. (Reuters)
AI (Artificial Intelligence) letters and a robot hand are placed on a computer motherboard in this illustration created on June 23, 2023. (Reuters)
TT

AI No Better Than Other Methods for Patients Seeking Medical Advice, Study Shows

AI (Artificial Intelligence) letters and a robot hand are placed on a computer motherboard in this illustration created on June 23, 2023. (Reuters)
AI (Artificial Intelligence) letters and a robot hand are placed on a computer motherboard in this illustration created on June 23, 2023. (Reuters)

Asking AI about medical symptoms does not help patients make better decisions about their health than other methods, such as a standard internet search, according to a new study published in Nature Medicine.

The authors said the study was important as people were increasingly turning to AI and chatbots for advice on their health, but without evidence that this was necessarily the best and safest approach.

Researchers led by the University of Oxford’s Internet Institute worked alongside a group of doctors to draw up 10 different medical scenarios, ranging from a common cold to a life-threatening hemorrhage causing bleeding on the brain.

When tested without human participants, three large-language models – Open AI's Chat GPT-4o, ‌Meta's Llama ‌3 and Cohere's Command R+ – identified the conditions in ‌94.9% ⁠of cases, ‌and chose the correct course of action, like calling an ambulance or going to the doctor, in an average of 56.3% of cases. The companies did not respond to requests for comment.

'HUGE GAP' BETWEEN AI'S POTENTIAL AND ACTUAL PERFORMANCE

The researchers then recruited 1,298 participants in Britain to either use AI, or their usual resources like an internet search, or their experience, or the National Health Service website to ⁠investigate the symptoms and decide their next step.

When the participants did this, relevant conditions were identified in ‌less than 34.5% of cases, and the right ‍course of action was given in ‍less than 44.2%, no better than the control group using more traditional ‍tools.

Adam Mahdi, co-author of the paper and associate professor at Oxford, said the study showed the “huge gap” between the potential of AI and the pitfalls when it was used by people.

“The knowledge may be in those bots; however, this knowledge doesn’t always translate when interacting with humans,” he said, meaning that more work was needed to identify why this was happening.

HUMANS OFTEN GIVING INCOMPLETE INFORMATION

The ⁠team studied around 30 of the interactions in detail, and concluded that often humans were providing incomplete or wrong information, but the LLMs were also sometimes generating misleading or incorrect responses.

For example, one patient reporting the symptoms of a subarachnoid hemorrhage – a life-threatening condition causing bleeding on the brain – was correctly told by AI to go to hospital after describing a stiff neck, light sensitivity and the "worst headache ever". The other described the same symptoms but a "terrible" headache, and was told to lie down in a darkened room.

The team now plans a similar study in different countries and languages, and over time, to test if that impacts AI’s performance.

The ‌study was supported by the data company Prolific, the German non-profit Dieter Schwarz Stiftung, and the UK and US governments.


Meta Criticizes EU Antitrust Move Against WhatsApp Block on AI Rivals

(FILES) This illustration photograph taken on December 1, 2025, shows the logo of WhatsApp displayed on a smartphone's screen, in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany. (Photo by Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV / AFP)
(FILES) This illustration photograph taken on December 1, 2025, shows the logo of WhatsApp displayed on a smartphone's screen, in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany. (Photo by Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV / AFP)
TT

Meta Criticizes EU Antitrust Move Against WhatsApp Block on AI Rivals

(FILES) This illustration photograph taken on December 1, 2025, shows the logo of WhatsApp displayed on a smartphone's screen, in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany. (Photo by Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV / AFP)
(FILES) This illustration photograph taken on December 1, 2025, shows the logo of WhatsApp displayed on a smartphone's screen, in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany. (Photo by Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV / AFP)

Meta Platforms on Monday criticized EU regulators after they charged the US tech giant with breaching antitrust rules and threaten to halt its block on ⁠AI rivals on its messaging service WhatsApp.

"The facts are that there is no reason for ⁠the EU to intervene in the WhatsApp Business API. There are many AI options and people can use them from app stores, operating systems, devices, websites, and ⁠industry partnerships," a Meta spokesperson said in an email.

"The Commission's logic incorrectly assumes the WhatsApp Business API is a key distribution channel for these chatbots."