Australia Warns Social Media Platforms Against Age Verification for All Ahead of a Ban on Children 

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

Australia Warns Social Media Platforms Against Age Verification for All Ahead of a Ban on Children 

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

Australian authorities said Tuesday that social media platforms should not demand age verification for all account holders starting from December, when a ban on children under 16 having accounts goes into effect in the country.

The government released guidelines on how platforms such as TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram should apply the world's first ban on children using social media from Dec. 10. It says verifying the ages of all account holders would be unreasonable.

"We think it would be unreasonable if platforms reverified everyone’s age," said Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, who drafted the guidelines. Her use of the word "reverified" suggested the platforms usually already had sufficient data to verify a user was older than 16.

She said the platforms have "targeting technology" to focus on those under 16.

"They can target us with deadly precision when it comes to advertising. Certainly they can do this around the age of a child," she added.

Australia’s Parliament enacted the ban last year, giving the platforms a year to work out its implementation. The platforms face fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent children younger than 16 from holding accounts.

Critics of the legislation fear that banning young children from social media will impact the privacy of all users who must establish they are older than 16.

Inman Grant said claims the ban would see every Australian account holder subjected to age verification as a "scare tactic."

Communications Minister Anika Wells said the government seeks to keep platform users’ data as private as possible.

"These social media platforms know an awful lot about us" already, Wells said. "If you have been on, for example, Facebook since 2009, then they know you are over 16. There is no need to verify."

Wells and Inman Grant will travel to the United States next week to discuss the guidelines with the platforms’ owners.

Inman Grant said the platforms would need to demonstrate to her agency that they were taking "reasonable steps" to exclude children younger than 16.

"We don’t expect that every under-16 account is magically going to disappear on Dec. 10," Inman Grant said. "What we will be looking at is systemic failures to apply the technologies, policies and processes."

Melbourne’s RMIT University expert on information sciences Lisa Given told Australian Broadcasting Corp. that the government’s approach acknowledges that age verification technologies make errors.

"It’s going to be up to each of the platforms to determine how they’re going to comply and it will be interesting to see if they test the limits of the definition of ‘reasonable steps,’" Given said.



Four Takeaways from Musk vs OpenAI Trial

 OpenAI CEO Sam Altman arrives at the federal courthouse, as the trial in Elon Musk's lawsuit over OpenAI's for-profit conversion continues, in Oakland, California, US, May 14, 2026. (Reuters)
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman arrives at the federal courthouse, as the trial in Elon Musk's lawsuit over OpenAI's for-profit conversion continues, in Oakland, California, US, May 14, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

Four Takeaways from Musk vs OpenAI Trial

 OpenAI CEO Sam Altman arrives at the federal courthouse, as the trial in Elon Musk's lawsuit over OpenAI's for-profit conversion continues, in Oakland, California, US, May 14, 2026. (Reuters)
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman arrives at the federal courthouse, as the trial in Elon Musk's lawsuit over OpenAI's for-profit conversion continues, in Oakland, California, US, May 14, 2026. (Reuters)

After three weeks of intense hearings, Silicon Valley's first major AI trial -- over the lawsuit filed by Elon Musk against the co-founders of OpenAI -- is nearing an end. It is expected to go to the jury on Monday.

Here are four scenes that defined the trial:

Musk blames his own naivety

At the opening of the trial on April 28, Musk portrayed himself as a selfless benefactor and Good Samaritan concerned with protecting humanity from an AI that, if left in the wrong hands, could "kill us all."

"I came up with the idea, the name, recruited the key people, taught them everything I know, provided all of the initial funding," the SpaceX CEO said regarding OpenAI's founding in 2015.

"I gave $38 million essentially for nothing, which they used to build a company worth $800 billion. I was literally an idiot," he said, blaming his own naivety.

Musk was visibly annoyed during the trial as he called out OpenAI's lawyer for asking questions "designed to trap me."

"Mr. Musk, you are a brilliant man," said OpenAI's lawyer William Savitt, as he doubled down on his attacks, disguised with a show of courtesy.

Altman strikes back

Swapping his usual T-shirt, jeans and sneakers for a dark suit and tie, OpenAI CEO and co-founder Sam Altman sat stone-faced in the front row of the Oakland courtroom for most of the proceedings.

But on May 12, it was finally his turn. Musk's lawyer, Steven Molo, was waiting for him, asking if he had always told the truth.

Altman responded: "I'm sure there have been times in my life when I didn't."

But then, with a blank expression and wide eyes, he struck back, saying Musk in 2017 had demanded "90 percent of the equity" and "refused to commit in writing" to sharing power.

Altman said he had no choice as "we did not think that artificial general intelligence should be under the control of a single person."

Brockman's notebook

Every day in the courtroom, Greg Brockman, the president and co-founder of OpenAI, took extensive notes on yellow notepads.

During his questioning on May 4, old journals he kept from years ago took center stage, with Musk's lawyer highlighting some of the most embarrassing excerpts.

Brockman wanted to make money, writing, "financially, what will take me to $1B?" He also wanted "to convert to a b-corp without him (Musk)," a reference to a private company with social and environmental standards.

The journal recorded his concerns about a plan to "steal the non-profit from him (Musk)" as "pretty morally bankrupt."

"There's nothing in there I'm ashamed of," Brockman hit back, claiming that the journal did not include details of an outburst from Musk in 2017.

"I really thought he was going to hit me," Brockman said of the incident. Musk did not touch him, but took a painting of a Tesla, a gift from one of the co-founders, down from the wall and left the room, he said.

Brockman's shares in the company are now worth $30 billion.

The secret go-between

Shivon Zilis -- the mother of four of Musk's children -- is a woman in the shadows, rarely appearing in public.

So her May 6 appearance in the courtroom attracted intense curiosity.

Zilis, who was appointed to the OpenAI board from 2020 to 2023, was asked about her awkward role as both Musk's colleague at Neuralink and Altman's friend.

At the time, her mysterious relationship with Musk was secret. Their children were conceived through in vitro fertilization.

OpenAI accuses her of working as a mole for Musk.

Zilis responded to questions briefly and, at times, sarcastically.

"Relationship is a relative term," she said when asked about her relationship with Musk, before conceding, "there have been romantic moments."

But ultimately, her testimony may matter less than the content of her messages to Musk and Altman.

Those could lead the jury to conclude that Musk, having been sufficiently informed by Zilis, knew of OpenAI's direction long before 2023. If so, his lawsuit could be thrown out before the jury even starts deliberating the merits of the case.


YouTube, Snap and TikTok Settle School District’s Social Media Addiction Claims

The TikTok logo is displayed on signage outside TikTok social media app company offices in Culver City, California on September 30, 2025. (AFP)
The TikTok logo is displayed on signage outside TikTok social media app company offices in Culver City, California on September 30, 2025. (AFP)
TT

YouTube, Snap and TikTok Settle School District’s Social Media Addiction Claims

The TikTok logo is displayed on signage outside TikTok social media app company offices in Culver City, California on September 30, 2025. (AFP)
The TikTok logo is displayed on signage outside TikTok social media app company offices in Culver City, California on September 30, 2025. (AFP)

Alphabet's YouTube, Snap and TikTok have reached settlements in the first case set for trial in litigation seeking to force social media platforms to cover the costs school districts incur to combat a youth mental health crisis they say the companies fueled.

The settlements were detailed in court filings on Friday in federal court in Oakland, California, and resolve claims by a Kentucky school district that is still due to take Facebook and Instagram parent Meta Platforms to trial on June 15.

Terms of the settlements with ‌Breathitt County School District ‌in rural Eastern Kentucky were not disclosed.

"This ‌matter ⁠has been amicably resolved ⁠and our focus remains on building age-appropriate products and parental controls that deliver on that promise," a YouTube spokesperson said in a statement.

Snap, the parent company of Snapchat, said it resolved the case amicably. TikTok did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

More than 3,300 lawsuits involving addiction claims are pending in California state court against the social media companies. ⁠Another 2,400 cases brought by individuals, municipalities, states and ‌school districts have been centralized in California ‌federal court.

In a landmark trial, a Los Angeles jury on March ‌25 found Meta and Alphabet's Google negligent for designing social media platforms that ‌are harmful to young people. It awarded a combined $6 million to a 20-year-old woman who said she became addicted to social media as a child.

The companies have denied the allegations and say they take extensive steps to keep ‌teens and young users safe on their platforms.

Breathitt is one of about 1,200 school districts suing the social ⁠media companies ⁠over claims they caused a mental health crisis among students and then saddled schools with the fallout.

The school district has been seeking over $60 million to cover the costs of counteracting social media's impact on students’ mental health and to fund a 15-year mental health program to abate the problem.

It also seeks a court order requiring the companies to modify their platforms to reduce addictive features.

Its case is a bellwether, or test case, for over a thousand similar school districts' lawsuits.

Judges and attorneys often use bellwether verdicts to assess the potential value of remaining claims and guide settlement talks. Typically, several bellwether cases are tried before reaching a broader resolution.


Foxconn Logs Quarterly Net Profit Jump on AI Demand

FILE PHOTO: A signage at Foxconn booth at the International Automobile & Motorcycle Parts & Accessories Show (AMPA) trade show in Taipei, Taiwan, April 14, 2026. REUTERS/Edgar Su/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: A signage at Foxconn booth at the International Automobile & Motorcycle Parts & Accessories Show (AMPA) trade show in Taipei, Taiwan, April 14, 2026. REUTERS/Edgar Su/File Photo
TT

Foxconn Logs Quarterly Net Profit Jump on AI Demand

FILE PHOTO: A signage at Foxconn booth at the International Automobile & Motorcycle Parts & Accessories Show (AMPA) trade show in Taipei, Taiwan, April 14, 2026. REUTERS/Edgar Su/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: A signage at Foxconn booth at the International Automobile & Motorcycle Parts & Accessories Show (AMPA) trade show in Taipei, Taiwan, April 14, 2026. REUTERS/Edgar Su/File Photo

Taiwanese tech hardware giant Foxconn on Thursday announced a 19-percent jump in quarterly net profit as the booming market for artificial intelligence servers drives growth, despite geopolitical uncertainty.

Foxconn, whose official name is Hon Hai Precision Industry, has gone beyond assembling low-margin iPhones to making AI servers for Nvidia, along with electric vehicles and robots.

Soaring global demand for generative AI tools is boosting business for Foxconn, even as the war in the Middle East has threatened supply chain volatility.

On Thursday the company said net profit for January-March came to NT$49.9 billion (US$1.6 billion), up from NT$42.1 billion in the same period the previous year.

The figure beat estimates of $48.4 billion in a Bloomberg survey of analysts, AFP reported.

Foxconn said it expects "strong demand for AI servers" to continue this year, forecasting "high double-digit quarter-on-quarter growth" for AI rack shipments in the second quarter.

When the company reported its annual results in March, chairman Young Liu had shrugged off concerns that market volatility caused by global conflict would dent profits.

Taiwanese contract chipmaker TSMC has also said it does not expect geopolitics to impact its supply of key materials such as helium and hydrogen in the near term.

On Wednesday, some of Foxconn's factories in North America suffered a cyberattack, according to a company statement.

"The affected factories are currently resuming normal production," after a response from the cybersecurity team, said the statement dated Wednesday afternoon in Taiwan.

TechCrunch and other media outlets reported that ransomware gang Nitrogen had claimed responsibility for the hack on the dark web.