Tech
Nearly Half of Europeans Support Banning Social Media Platform X Over EU Rule Breaches
A new survey across Germany, France, Spain, Italy, and Poland shows that nearly half of Europeans would support banning social media platform X from the European Union if it continues to break EU rules. Conducted by YouGov, the polling highlights rising frustration among EU citizens over what they perceive as the platform’s failure to comply with European digital regulations.
The survey found that between 60 and 78 percent of respondents in each country believe the EU should take stronger action against X if it does not address breaches identified by the European Commission last year. Of those in favour of further measures, a majority—ranging from 62 to 73 percent—said the platform should be banned if it refuses to comply. Overall, 47 percent of respondents backed a potential ban.
The European Commission fined X €120 million in December under the Digital Services Act (DSA) for failing to meet transparency obligations. Central to the investigation is the blue checkmark system, previously free to verify official accounts but now sold for €7 a month, which could mislead users about account authenticity. The Commission also found the platform did not meet transparency requirements for advertising, raising concerns that users could be exposed to financial scams. X has 90 working days to respond to the Commission’s findings.
Since the fine, the platform and its built-in AI assistant, Grok, have faced additional scrutiny. Critics argue that X amplifies harmful content, including deepfake pornography and child sexual abuse material. French prosecutors recently raided X’s Paris office as part of an ongoing investigation into child abuse content.
The YouGov survey indicates strong public support for tougher enforcement against large tech platforms. If X fails to comply with the Commission’s ruling, 70 percent of respondents said they would support consequences. Among these, 17 to 28 percent favoured further fines, 23 to 29 percent supported banning the platform outright, and the largest group—40 to 52 percent—wanted a combination of fines and a ban.
Ava Lee, executive director of People vs Big Tech, said the data shows Europeans are “done with empty warnings.” She added that X could set a precedent for how the EU enforces its rules on major technology companies.
Despite public support for tougher measures, banning a major social media platform would be considered an extreme step under EU law. The Commission has not indicated that it is currently considering such a move.
The survey comes amid wider debates in Europe over social media regulation. Several countries, including Spain, France, Italy, Germany, and the United Kingdom, are considering restrictions or outright bans on social media for minors, citing concerns over illegal or harmful content. Australia has already implemented strict rules for users under 16, but experts caution that enforcement challenges mean it is too early to judge the effectiveness of such bans.
Professor Kathryn Modecki from the University of Western Australia noted that many children continue to access banned apps through simple workarounds, suggesting policymakers should monitor results carefully before expanding similar restrictions elsewhere.
Tech
Robotics Firm Says AI-Powered Humanoid Robots Could Carry Weapons by 2027
A U.S. robotics company developing artificial intelligence-powered humanoid robots says weaponised versions of the technology could begin testing as early as next year, following field trials in Ukraine, raising fresh questions about the future of autonomous systems in modern warfare.
Foundation Future Industries, which builds humanoid robots for commercial and military applications, has already tested its Phantom robots in Ukraine in non-combat roles. Chief Executive Officer Sankaet Pathak said the company expects to explore weaponisation after evaluating the results of those pilot programs.
Pathak said public fears are often shaped by science fiction but argued that humanoid robots would not replace existing weapons such as missiles or drones.
“I think we have this psychological reaction, which is like the Terminator, but the reality is not really like that,” he said.
Instead, he believes humanoid robots could be deployed for highly precise military operations where limiting damage to infrastructure and reducing civilian casualties are priorities.
According to Pathak, drones and conventional weapons remain more effective for large-scale attacks, while humanoid robots would be better suited to complex ground missions requiring careful movement through buildings and urban environments.
He added that robots are unlikely to replace drones on the battlefield but could help reduce risks faced by soldiers in increasingly dangerous combat zones.
Currently, there is no international treaty specifically regulating humanoid or autonomous combat robots. Their use falls under existing international humanitarian law, which requires distinction between military targets and civilians during armed conflict.
The issue has drawn increasing attention from the United Nations. Last week, UN Secretary-General António Guterres renewed calls for restrictions on lethal autonomous weapons systems, describing them as “killer robots” capable of selecting and attacking targets without human judgment. The UN has been negotiating a treaty on lethal autonomous weapons since 2023, with proposals calling for a legally binding agreement by 2026.
Pathak argued that humanoid robots should be treated similarly to other precision-guided military systems already in service, including armed drones and unmanned ground vehicles.
Foundation’s robots rely on artificial intelligence built around so-called world models. Unlike large language models that predict text, these systems learn from video, simulations and spatial information to understand physical environments and predict how objects and people move over time.
The company believes these models are essential for creating robots capable of safely navigating complex surroundings.
While concerns persist about advanced AI becoming uncontrollable, Pathak said the greater short-term threat comes from criminals or extremist groups misusing publicly available AI tools for cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns or modifying commercial drones for attacks.
He believes scenarios involving AI independently rewriting its own objectives and improving itself remain several major technological breakthroughs away.
Beyond combat, Foundation sees immediate military uses for its humanoid robots in logistics, reconnaissance and building inspections. Those capabilities have already been evaluated in Ukraine, helping shape the development of the company’s next-generation Phantom 2 robot.
The upgraded model is designed for harsh outdoor conditions, offering waterproof and dustproof protection, an increased payload capacity of around 80 kilograms and greater resistance to impacts.
Foundation currently leases Phantom robots to commercial customers for about $100,000 annually per unit, while military buyers purchase the machines at similar prices. Its investors include Eric Trump, payment company Stripe and venture capital firm Define.
Tech
AI-Powered Parapharmacy in Lisbon Lets Customers Shop Without Staff or Checkout Lines
Tech
Global Rights Groups Call for AI Companies to Be Held Responsible for Children’s Safety
-
Entertainment2 years agoMeta Acquires Tilda Swinton VR Doc ‘Impulse: Playing With Reality’
-
Sports2 years agoChina’s Historic Olympic Victory Sparks National Pride Amid Controversy
-
Business2 years agoSaudi Arabia’s Model for Sustainable Aviation Practices
-
Business2 years agoRecent Developments in Small Business Taxes
-
Home Improvement2 years agoEffective Drain Cleaning: A Key to a Healthy Plumbing System
-
Politics2 years agoWho was Ebrahim Raisi and his status in Iranian Politics?
-
Sports2 years agoKeely Hodgkinson Wins Britain’s First Athletics Gold at Paris Olympics in 800m
-
Business2 years agoCarrectly: Revolutionizing Car Care in Chicago
