Negotiations over a technology deal between the UK and US have stalled due to stumbling blocks in wider trade negotiations between the two sides.

The Technology Prosperity Deal – which was billed as “historic” when it was unveiled during US President Donald Trump’s state visit in September – saw both countries pledge to co-operate in areas such as AI.

However, talks on the agreement are now being held up because of US concerns about what it considers to be wider UK trade barriers.

A government spokesperson said “our special relationship with the US remains strong and the UK is firmly committed to ensuring the Tech Prosperity Deal delivers opportunity for hardworking people in both countries”.

The New York Times – which first reported the story – said there were “broader disagreements” between the two sides, including over digital regulations and food safety rules.

The UK government did not comment on these specific claims. The White House has not responded to the BBC’s request for a comment.

When the deal was announced the government was keen to highlight the benefits it said it would bring.

“This Tech Prosperity Deal marks a generational step change in our relationship with the US, shaping the futures of millions of people on both sides of the Atlantic,” Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said in a statement.

Technology secretary Liz Kendall said the partnership would “transform lives across Britain” and was a “vote of confidence in Britain’s booming AI sector.”

At the same time the deal was revealed, a series of US tech firms announced a flurry of investment in the UK.

A total of £31bn in planned spending was set out by tech giants including Microsoft, Nvidia and Google.

It is believed those investment plans are unaffected.

Google, Microsoft and Nvidia have also been approached for comment, but the firms have not yet responded to the BBC.

Nvidia boss Jensen Huang said in September his company’s UK investment reflected his belief it could become an “AI superpower” – an ambition championed by Sir Keir’s government.

It said investment announced by tech firms alongside the Tech Prosperity Deal would be used to scale-up AI infrastructure such as data centres, across the UK.

The tech pact between the UK and US in September was documented in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which said both countries would seek to collaborate across AI, quantum computing and nuclear power.

It said this could include working together to build “powerful quantum machines,” support innovation in AI hardware and explore potential new ways to use advanced nuclear energy.

The document also suggests UK and US agencies could collaborate to advance research in such areas.

But the MOU also states any proposals are not binding and that it only “becomes operative alongside substantive progress being made to formalise and implement” the wider US-UK Economic Prosperity Deal, signed in May.

Allie Renison, director of communications firm SEC Newgate UK and former government trade adviser, said it reflected the US and UK’s “slightly piecemeal approach” to inking trade deals.

“Instead of having everything done at once, different areas are being linked to different parts,” she told the BBC – noting how concerns about separate trade areas may now be affecting tech agreements.

While questions hung over what the potential roadblocks could mean for US tech firms’ pledged investments in the UK, Ms Renison added, it was unlikely to be little more than “a bit of posturing in the wider negotiations”.

SOURCE PAGE

The sign outside Tom Hermes’s farmyard in Perkins Township in Ohio, a short drive south of the shores of Lake Erie, proudly claims that his family have farmed the land here since 1900. Today, he raises 130 head of cattle and grows corn, wheat, grass and soybeans on 1,200 acres of land.

For his family, his animals and wider business, water is life.

So when, in May 2024, the Texas-based Aligned Data Centers broke ground on its NEO-01, four-building, 200,000 sq ft data center on a brownfield site that abuts farmland that Hermes rents, he was concerned.

“We have city water here. That’s going to reduce the pressure if they are sucking all the water,” he says of the data center.

“They’re not good, I know that.”

Two years ago, the company said it would invest about $202m on a “hyperscale” data center that would employ 18 people and dozens more in the construction process. Although the company claims it uses a closed-loop, air-cooled system for cooling its computers that can reduce the need for water, artificial intelligence, machine-learning and other high power-demand processes do rely on water as a cooling agent.

All the while, a 10-minute drive north, the shoreline of Lake Erie hasn’t been this low in years.

Water levels across all five Great Lakes have begun to drop in recent months as part of a long-term fall. Since 2019, the Great Lakes have seen water-level decreases of two to four feet. While experts say this is a natural decrease given the record highs the lakes have experienced since 2020, it’s happening at a time when a huge new consumer of water has appeared on the horizon: data centers.

The source of the largest single deposit of freshwater on the planet, the Great Lakes, in particular Lake Erie, are already struggling with the fallout of drought and warmer water temperatures that, at this time of year, fuel major lake-effect snowstorms, and greater than normal levels of evaporation due to the absence of ice cover.

With major cities such as Chicago, Toronto, Detroit and Pittsburgh all within a few hundred miles of each other, small, under-resourced communities around the Great Lakes have become hugely attractive for data-center companies.

In Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin, Microsoft is building what it calls the “world’s most-powerful AI data center” that is set to open early next year and expected to use up to 8.4bn gallons of municipal water from the city of Racine every year. Racine gets its water from Lake Michigan. Similar stories are playing out in Hobart, Indiana, where AWS is planning to build a data center two miles from Lake Michigan’s shoreline, and in Port Washington, Wisconsin.

In Benton Harbor, Michigan, locals are concerned that a proposed $3bn data center would contribute to environmental pollution and traffic.

Forty miles west of Aligned’s under-construction data center in Ohio, in Woodville Township, hundreds of people showed up to a public meeting last October to voice concern about another proposed data center project in their rural community.

“The Great Lakes region, especially in states such as Illinois and Ohio, [is] among the most data-center dense states in the region. In addition to the high volumes of water used on site for cooling, our recent research found that even more water may be consumed to generate electricity to power data centers’ energy needs,” says Kirsten James, senior program director for water at Ceres, a nonprofit headquartered in Boston.

“These impacts can conflict with communities’ water-resource planning efforts.”

The Great Lakes Compact, a 2005 accord signed by the governors of eight US states and two Canadian provinces, means that Great Lakes Water must only be used within the regional basin.

Research by Purdue University found that data centers on average consume about 300,000 gallons of water a day. Water used by data centers is warmed significantly and for those that do not use a closed loop system, that heated effluent water, just 20% of the initial amount, is often discharged back into local wastewater systems or the environment, with potentially serious consequences for flora, fauna and human consumers. Even closed-loop systems that reuse the same water repeatedly need millions of gallons of water.

While many new data centers are drawing water from local municipalities that, in turn, get their water from groundwater, much of that supply comes from the Great Lakes watersheds.

Some communities are fighting back. Last month, residents of Fife Lake, Michigan, were overjoyed after hearing a plan for a data center in their town of 471 residents would be scrapped due to local opposition.

Similar stories of successful opposition have played out in Indiana and elsewhere.

But the data centers are fighting back.

Private firms representing data center companies have often successfully sued community authorities, accusing them of illegally excluding certain types of developments, making small towns powerless in the battle to keep out giant water-guzzling corporations.

In Michigan’s Saline Township, a community of about 400 people outside Ann Arbor, OpenAI and Oracle used a representative company to successfully sue the local authority to overcome opposition and build a massive facility that would use 1.4 gigawatts of electricity – roughly the equivalent of powering 1.4 million homes.

The Detroit Free Press editorial board assailed the move, calling it a “a fait accompli, hammered into this tiny Washtenaw county community over the objections of residents, the elected board that represents them, and Michigan’s attorney general, absent expert or outside testimony save a cursory public hearing held over Microsoft Teams”.

Data companies and their backers, however, say their presence is a net gain for Great Lakes communities by providing jobs and investment over the course of years.

Aligned has paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to Perkins Township, the local school system and a career center. In return, it gets a 15-year tax exemption from local authorities. A representative declined to respond to questions from the Guardian asking how much water it intends to use at the data center and from where it originates.

Local municipalities that support these facilities claim that the data centers will increase tax revenue and help rebuild ageing infrastructure such as water delivery systems that, in some places, are in significant need of upgrading. Calls, emails and messages left with Erie county commissioners asking if local authorities plan to supply the Perkins Township data center with water were not responded to.

Some Perkins Township residents say a number of local companies have been hired during the construction phase, bringing work to the area.

But many argue those investments are not worth the long-term price the community may pay.

Amanda Voegle, who works at a heating business now directly facing the data center, is concerned about water and many other issues.

“A couple of years ago, there was a water pollution issue at the site. I’m very concerned. Is this [water] going back into the lake?”

Two years ago, the construction site upon which the data center is being built was found to be the source of contamination of a river that flows into Lake Erie, with the remediation company responsible cited by the Ohio EPA for unauthorized discharges into state waters.

“I don’t understand why they built it so close to the street, because it’s an eyesore,” says Voegle.

She says there have been other unusual incidents at her workplace recently, including power surges.

“I don’t know if it’s related [to the data center]. It’s probably almost weekly that we lose power and have to fully reboot everything. There was a couple of things we actually had to replace because [the power surge] fried it.”

SOURCE PAGE

By SHIVALI BEST, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY EDITOR

Published: 07:50 EST, 16 December 2025 | Updated: 07:50 EST, 16 December 2025

Showering is something most people do at least once a day, often in a sleepy daze.

Now, it turns out you’ve probably been doing it wrong this entire time. 

That’s according to Dr Nicole Negbenebor, a dermatologist at Iowa Health Care, who has revealed the secret to a successful shower. 

While many people enjoy dousing themselves in hot water, the dermatologist warns that this can strip away the natural oils your skin needs. 

Instead, she recommends opting for a short shower – using lukewarm water.  

Slathering your body with expensive body rubs, cleansers, exfoliators, and shower oils is also a no–no, according to Dr Negbenebor.  

‘Your skin is a barrier,’ she told The Associated Press.  

‘So you want to treat it right, and then sometimes there can be too much of a good thing.’

Showering is something most people do at least once a day, often in a sleepy daze. Now, it turns out you’ve probably been doing it wrong this entire time (stock image)

Whether you do it morning or night, showering helps to remove dirt and oil from your skin, as well as sweat, which can lead to body odour if left untouched. 

However, getting carried away with fancy products can actually cause more damage than good. 

Thankfully, help is at hand, as doctors have revealed their top five tips to ensure you lather up without getting carried away. 

1. Pay attention to time and temperature

After a busy day at work, a long, hot shower might sound pretty tempting. 

However, staying in the shower too long or cranking up the temperature too high can actually strip away natural oils your skin needs. 

So, to avoid being dry and irritated, it’s better to opt for a short, lukewarm soak. 

2. Pick the right soap

After a busy day at work, a long, hot shower might sound pretty tempting. However, staying in the shower too long or cranking up the temperature too high can actually strip away natural oils your skin needs (stock image

The correct order to wash in the shower

Original Source says your hair should be the first thing you wash – with shampoo first, followed by conditioner.

It’s only after your hair has been tackled that you should move on to your body, according to the experts.

Ditch the overly–perfumey soaps, and instead choose one for sensitive skin. 

Unless you have hidradenitis suppurativa (a condition that causes abscesses and boils on the skin), it’s also best to avoid antibacterial soaps, which can cause dryness.

3. Don’t double–cleanse 

It’s a technique widely promoted by influencers across social media. 

But using an oil–based cleanser in the shower followed by a water–based cleanser to remove any remaining residue is unneccessary.

4. Oil up after your shower

While oil–based cleansers aren’t needed in the shower, using an oil after you get out can help to lock in moisture. 

5. Don’t overdo it with the exfoliating

Finally, don’t be too overzelous with the exfoliating – whether it’s with a body scrub or a traditional loofah. 

This can leave you with dry or irritated skin. 

If you do want to exfoliate, opt for products that contain lactic or glycolic acid instead, as these tend to be more gentle on the skin.

Share or comment on this article:
You’re showering wrong! Scientist reveals why you should be using LUKEWARM water for your daily wash

SOURCE PAGE

Hello!

Welcome back to Francophone Weekly by TechCabal, your weekly deep dive into the tech ecosystem across French-speaking Africa. Previous editions have been published on the web, but email versions of the newsletter will land directly in your inbox every Tuesday at noon. By default, this newsletter is in French—but don’t worry, you can click the button below to switch to the English version.

Avant de nous plonger dans la newsletter d’aujourd’hui, nous aimerions connaître votre avis. Préférez-vous recevoir les e-mails de Francophone Weekly en anglais ou en français ? Répondez à notre rapide sondage ici. Votre opinion compte. Aidez-nous à améliorer cette newsletter. Merci!

Remarque : Francophone Weekly fermera ses portes la semaine prochaine, le 23 décembre, et reprendra ses activités le 6 janvier 2026.

Au cours du mois dernier, nous avons abordé la question de la croissance des start-ups africaines francophones : comment le financement par emprunt peut-il favoriser la croissance au-delà du capital initial, et pourquoi les bourses locales méritent davantage d’attention en tant que sources de capitaux viables, alors que l’écosystème réduit progressivement sa dépendance vis-à-vis des capitaux étrangers.

Aujourd’hui, nous nous concentrons sur le Sénégal, le pays qui a produit la première licorne francophone d’Afrique et qui écrit actuellement un deuxième chapitre plus important. L’histoire de Dakar s’est orientée vers la construction délibérée d’une échelle de financement, conçue pour soutenir les entreprises depuis l’idée jusqu’à leur expansion.

Au cœur de cette approche se trouvent des institutions soutenues par l’État, telles que la Délégation générale pour l’entrepreneuriat rapide des femmes et des jeunes (DER) et le Fonds souverain pour les investissements stratégiques (FONSIS), qui jouent un rôle de plus en plus actif dans la réduction des risques liés à l’innovation. En absorbant les risques liés aux premières étapes, en fournissant des capitaux patients et en structurant des financements adaptés aux réalités locales, ces institutions créent un espace pour que les capitaux privés suivent. Des sociétés de capital-risque mondiales, dont Partech, participent à leurs côtés, non pas malgré la présence de l’État, mais grâce à elle.

Dans la newsletter d’aujourd’hui, nous explorons cette courbe en S pour le Sénégal, en examinant comment les capitaux publics et privés sont superposés pour construire un écosystème technologique plus résilient, inclusif et évolutif, et ce que ce modèle pourrait signifier pour le reste de l’Afrique francophone.

1. La nouvelle phase de formation de capital au Sénégal

Photo du Dakar épinglé sur une carte de l’Afrique/Source de l’image : The Fintech Times

Le Sénégal occupe depuis quelques années une place croissante dans le paysage tech et PME d’Afrique francophone, portée par des success stories et l’arrivée d’acteurs d’investissement internationaux. Le cas le plus marquant reste Wave, qui a été annoncé « unicorn » après une levée majeure (Série A) annoncée en 2021 (≈ $200 million) et qui a continué à lever des dettes importantes ensuite (ex. rondes de dette reportées dans la presse en 2025). Parmi les autres opérations notables récentes figurent des tours de seed/early-stage comme Logidoo (≈ $1.55M, 2024) et plusieurs levées de scale-up et dettes pour des fintechs et plateformes logistiques sénégalaises et régionales. Ces opérations confirment une dynamique où l’écosystème commence à produire des acteurs prêts pour des séries plus importantes ou des opérations de dette structurée.

Sur le plan des montants agrégés, les rapports sectoriels montrent que l’activité de financement en Afrique a repris de la vigueur en 2023–2024 avec plusieurs vagues d’investissement et une résilience progressive des marchés VC ; pour le seul Sénégal, des bases de données d’investissements rapportent des montants équivalents à plusieurs millions de dollars levés par des start-ups locales au cours de l’année 2024 (ex. Tracxn signale 14,5 million $ d’opérations équity enregistrées sur 2024). Ces chiffres maskent toutefois une grande hétérogénéité : quelques opérations de grande taille (fintechs, logistique) concentrent une large part du capital.

Enfin, la présence d’investisseurs internationaux se renforce : Partech possède un siège africain avec activité Dakar (Partech Africa) et a clos un grand fonds Afrique (Partech Africa II) en 2024 ; d’autres acteurs et fonds locaux ou régionaux (Teranga Capital, Haskè Ventures, Brightmore Capital, Wuri Ventures, 216 Capital, Founders Factory Africa, etc.) sont actifs au Sénégal ou investissent régulièrement dans des sociétés basées au Sénégal. Cette intensification de l’offre de capital aide la maturation de la chaîne de financement locale.

2. Des institutions publiques et quasi-publiques qui structurent l’écosystème

Délégation sénégalaise pour l’entrepreneuriat/Source de l’image : Winrock International

Délégation Générale à l’Entrepreneuriat Rapide des Femmes et des Jeunes — DER / DER-FJ

La DER est l’instrument public lancé par l’État pour stimuler l’entrepreneuriat des jeunes et des femmes. Créée par décret en 2017, elle combine financement direct, assistance technique et animation de l’écosystème : accompagnement d’incubation/accélération, financement de TPE/PME et programmes sectoriels (pêche, agriculture, numérique, etc.). La DER opère avec plusieurs « guichets » (autonomisation, soutien TPME, etc.) et développe des outils digitaux et plateformes pour la sélection et le suivi des bénéficiaires. Elena Dia dirige l’unité d’animation de l’écosystème au sein de la DER, où elle conçoit des programmes d’accompagnement (incubation, accélération, formation) et coordonne les partenaires locaux et internationaux.

FONSIS (Fonds souverain d’investissements stratégiques)

Le FONSIS est le fonds souverain du Sénégal, dédié à l’investissement dans des projets stratégiques. Il gère plusieurs véhicules et a lancé des fonds thématiques comme WE! Fund (focalisé sur l’autonomisation économique des femmes) et d’autres solutions capables d’apporter à la fois dette et equity. FONSIS peut jouer un rôle de « scaling » pour des projets ayant dépassé le stade d’amorçage, et la coordination DER-FONSIS est en cours d’approfondissement (DER alimente des pipelines que FONSIS peut prendre en charge pour des tickets plus élevés ou en equity). 

ADEPME (Agence de Développement et d’Encadrement des PME)

L’ADEPME est l’agence étatique chargée de l’accompagnement technique et de la formalisation des PME : formation, e-rating, subventions partielles pour l’accès à des services de consultants, labellisation pour faciliter l’accès au financement bancaire. Elle agit comme bras opérationnel pour renforcer la compétitivité des PME sénégalaises.

Autres acteurs publics et instruments

Le paysage complet inclut des mécanismes de garantie et d’appui (fonds de garantie publics), des bureaux de mise à niveau industrielle, des instances de promotion des investissements, et des banques publiques ou semi-publiques partenaires (ex. BNDE, Pamecas et autres IFP cités par la DER comme partenaires de décaissement pour des tickets supérieurs). Ces acteurs travaillent en coordination — parfois de façon formelle, parfois via des tables rondes opérationnelles — pour accompagner les chaînes de valeur et les projets structurants.

3. Des programmes et produits d’accompagnement

Source de l’image : Bpifrance

Ces dernières années, plusieurs programmes structurants ont été mis en œuvre ou soutenus par la DER et ses partenaires :

Line Stack Invest, co-construit et copiloté avec l’Ambassade de France et Bpifrance, lancé pour dynamiser l’accélération tech, est un programme qui combine financement direct (un volet de financement guichet), accélération de startups, roadshows internationaux et mise en relation investisseurs via EuroQuity (BPI France). Ce programme doit son succès à la qualité du montage projet-partenaire, la rigueur des KPIs et l’effet structurant sur l’écosystème.

BE YES, programme financé par la Mastercard Foundation, vise principalement l’inclusion numérique et territoriale : création d’espaces d’innovation (FabLabs) et plateaux d’innovation dans différentes régions, mise à disposition d’équipements (imprimantes 3D, broderie numérique), et formations pratiques pour jeunes entrepreneurs hors Dakar. Ce programme répond au manque de talents InnoTech régional et développe des capacités locales.

Les guichets DER qui sont des offres structuré de financement :

• Guichet Autonomisation : tickets petits (≈ 50 000 à 2 000 000 FCFA) avec process digitalisé, scoring en ligne et décaissement via mobile money (permet l’inclusion territoriale et l’accès pour les femmes). Ce guichet évite de passer systématiquement par des comptes bancaires traditionnels pour les petits montants, ce qui accélère l’accès au financement. 
• Guichet Soutien au TPME : financements plus structurants (> 2 millions de FCFA ≈ 3 500 $), où la DER structure et instruit les dossiers mais les décaissements passent par des institutions financières partenaires (BNDE, Pamecas, CMS, ASSEP, LBA, etc.). Ce modèle donne accès à des montants plus élevés mais implique une dépendance aux délais et procédures des partenaires IFPs. La DER travaille à l’interconnexion pour fluidifier le processus.

Des acteurs privés et fonds qui jouent un rôle visible

Sur le plan du capital-risque et des fonds, le Sénégal accueille désormais des équipes et véhicules locaux/régionaux : Partech Africa (avec présence Dakar), Teranga Capital (fonds centré sur le Sénégal/Gambie), Haskè Ventures (venture builder/dakar), Brightmore Capital (bureau à Dakar), ainsi que plusieurs fonds pan-africains et régionaux (Founders Factory Africa, 216 Capital, Seedstars/Seedstars Africa Ventures, etc.). Ces acteurs fournissent capital, programmes d’accompagnement et réseau d’investisseurs internationaux.

Touchez les acteurs qui font bouger l’écosystème technologique et commercial francophone. Faites de la publicité dans la newsletter hebdomadaire francophone de TechCabal et présentez votre marque aux décideurs, opérateurs, fondateurs et chefs d’entreprise qui comptent le plus pour votre croissance. Prêt à vous lancer ? Envoyez un e-mail à ads@bigcabal.com.

SOURCE PAGE

Cashmere sweaters are everywhere these days, often at unbelievably low prices. The appeal is obvious: if you’ve ever worn cashmere, you know it’s soft, light, and warm — an impressive fiber that’s hard to give up. Unfortunately, those bargain prices usually come with a catch.

Cashmere comes from the fine undercoat of a handful of goat breeds. Typically, one goat will be sheared twice a year, producing just four to six ounces (113 to 170 grams) of cashmere annually. That’s not a lot of supply for a growing market.

“The producers of raw materials are actually under a lot of stress,” Sim Gulati, co-founder and CEO of Everbloom, told TechCrunch. “What you’re seeing now, especially with the advent of $50 cashmere sweaters, is that they’re being sheared way more often. The quality of the fiber is not as good, and it’s creating unsustainable herding practices.”

Rather than try to change herding practices or convince consumers to only buy high-quality cashmere, Gulati and his team at Everbloom had a different idea. The startup, which has raised over $8 million from investors including Hoxton Ventures and SOSV, set out to create an upcycled material that’s nearly indistinguishable from the real thing.

To do this, Everbloom has created a material science AI called Braid.AI. The model can fine tune various parameters to create fibers with different qualities. Cashmere is one target, but so are other materials widely used in the textile industry.

At its core, Everbloom’s process is the same regardless of final product. To make its material, the company currently collects waste from across the fiber supply chain, including cashmere and wool farms and mills, as well as down bedding suppliers. In the future, it plans to expand to other waste sources, including feathers from the poultry industry. These waste streams share one thing in common: they’re all made of keratin, the key protein that underpins Everbloom’s process.

The company then chops the waste to size and combines it with proprietary compounds. The mix is pressed through a plastic extrusion machine (which shapes material by forcing it through a die), and the pellets that come out the other end are fed through spinning machines that are normally used to produce polyester fiber. “That equipment is used for 80% of the textile market,” Gulati said. “You have to be a drop in replacement.”

Techcrunch event

San Francisco
|
October 13-15, 2026

To transform waste into new fiber, all of the necessary chemical reactions occur within those two machines. Everbloom can create fibers that replicate everything from polyester to cashmere by using its AI to tweak the formulation and how the two machines process it.

The startup said every fiber it produces should be biodegradable, even the polyester replacement. 

“All the components that we’re using are biodegradable,” Gulati said, adding that his company is currently running its products through accelerated testing to prove the hypothesis. And because Everbloom uses waste products, the environmental impact will be dramatically lower, he said.

Plus, it should be cheaper, too. “We want it to be more economically viable for brands and consumers,” Gulati said. “I don’t believe in a ‘sustainable premium’” — the idea that eco-friendly products should cost more. “In order for a material to be successful — both in the supply chain [and for] the consumer — you have to have both a product benefit and an economic benefit to everyone who touches the product. That’s what we’re aiming for.”

SOURCE PAGE

As of yesterday, December 15, 2025, Meta has officially discontinued the Facebook Messenger desktop client for both Windows and macOS, ending a five-year run marked by technical inconsistencies and an inability to compete with enterprise-grade rivals.

Users attempting to launch the app are now met with a redirection screen. The behavior splits by account type: users with a connected Facebook profile are sent to Facebook.com, while those using Messenger without a Facebook account are routed to Messenger.com.

The shutdown is the final step in a decline that began years ago. In 2023, Meta started reintegrating Messenger back into the main Facebook mobile app, signaling a retreat from its standalone messaging strategy.

Remember OG Facebook? Meta’s New “Friends” Tab Aims to Revive that Feeling

Meta bets on nostalgia with a new “Friends” tab design

That shift was followed by steady degradation on desktop. The app moved from Electron to React Native, then to a poorly received Catalyst port on macOS and a basic PWA wrapper on Windows, reducing performance and stripping away any native feel.

Beyond platform changes, the desktop app lagged in core functionality. It lacked seamless screen sharing, easy-to-share meeting links, and support for large video calls, leaving it uncompetitive against Zoom and Microsoft Teams.

For remaining users, the immediate concern is data preservation. Because the desktop client stored some end-to-end encryption keys locally, Meta is advising users to enable Secure Storage on the web version. Without setting up this PIN-based backup, encrypted chat histories that lived only on the desktop app could be lost permanently.

How to Disable Meta’s Activity Tracking on Facebook & Instagram

If you don’t want Meta to keep tabs on what you do outside Facebook and Instagram, here’s how to do it with a few steps.

Updated

December 16, 2025

Link copied!
Copy failed!

SOURCE PAGE

This was the year that AI-generated music went from jokey curiosity to mainstream force. Velvet Sundown, a wholly AI act, generated millions of streams; AI-created tracks topped Spotify’s viral chart and one of the US Billboard country charts; AI “artist” Xania Monet “signed” a record deal. BBC Introducing is usually a platform for flesh-and-blood artists trying to make it big, but an AI-generated song by Papi Lamour was recently played on the West Midlands show. And jumping up the UK Top 20 this month is I Run, a track by dance act Haven, who have been accused of using AI to imitate British vocalist Jorja Smith (Haven claim they simply asked the AI for “soulful vocal samples”, and did not respond to an earlier request to comment).

The worry is that AI will eventually absorb all creative works in history and spew out endless slop that will replace human-made art and drive artists into penury. Those worries are being deepened by how the major labels, once fearful of the technology, are now embracing it – and heralding a future in which ordinary listeners have a hand in co-creating music with their favourite musicians.

AI music platforms analyse huge amounts of recorded music in order to learn its sounds, structures and expressions, and then allow users to create their own AI-generated music via text or speech prompts. You might ask for a moody R&B song about a breakup sung by a female vocalist, and it will come up with a decent approximation of one, because it’s absorbed hundreds of such songs.

Artists and labels initially saw AI as the biggest existential threat since Napster-fuelled piracy: if not a replacement for human creativity, then certainly a force that could undermine its value. Gregor Pryor, a managing partner at legal firm Reed Smith, says background music for things such as advertising, films and video games, where you’re not relating to a personality as you would in pop music, “is where the real damage will be done” first of all. “People will ask: why would I pay anyone to compose anything?”

‘New creative possibilities’ … screengrab from the Suno AI music generator. Photograph: Suno

Aware of the scale of the shift, last year the Recording Industry Association of America, representing the three major labels, initiated legal action against AI music companies Suno and Udio for copyright infringement, alleging they had trained their AI platforms on the labels’ artists without their permission. But then there was an extraordinary about-turn. They didn’t just settle the matter out of court – Universal Music Group (UMG) then partnered with Udio, and Warner Music Group (WMG) with Udio and Suno. They also have deals in place with AI company Klay, the first to get all three major labels on board, adding Sony Music (discussions with indie labels are ongoing). WMG chief executive Robert Kyncl has said these recent deals are to ensure the “protection of the rights of our artists and songwriters” and to fuel “new creative and commercial possibilities” for them, while UMG chief Lucien Grainge heralded “a healthy commercial AI ecosystem in which artists, songwriters, music companies and technology companies can all flourish and create incredible experiences for fans”.

Kyncl made another bold statement as to why these deals are taking place: “Now, we are entering the next phase of innovation. The democratisation of music creation.”

Monet maker … AI artist Xania Monet. An AI-generated image from ‘her’ Instagram account. Photograph: xania_monet

Announcing its Universal tie-in, Udio chief executive Andrew Sanchez has said Udio users will be able to “create [music] with an artist’s voice and style”: so not just create the aforementioned moody R&B song, but one with a specific existing artist’s voice. He also says Udio will allow users to “remix and reimagine your favourite songs with AI … take your favourite artists, songs or styles and combine them in novel ways. In our internal experimentation, the team has gotten some truly remarkable and unusual results that will definitely delight.”

Klay meanwhile states that “fans can mould their musical journeys in new ways”, but it’s essentially the same offering: a subscription service where you can manipulate the music of others, or create your own from it. Ary Attie, Klay’s founder and chief executive, says his company will properly compensate artists whose work is used, and won’t supplant the work of human musicians: “This technology is not going to change any of that.”

Klay is a rarity in that it signed up all three major labels before it started training its AI system on their music: “A core part of our philosophy,” Attie says. He argues that rival AI companies – he doesn’t name names – have been “acting in a way that doesn’t respect the work of artists, and then being forced into a corner”. Suno did not respond to an interview request; Udio claimed its executives were “extremely swamped” and therefore unable to answer questions. The current, and synchronised, messaging from labels and gen AI companies with licensing deals is that they all respect both art and artists and that their deals will reflect this.

They are also positioning gen AI as the single biggest democratising leap ever in remix culture, effectively enabling everyone to become musically creative. The counterargument is that, by lowering all barriers to entry and by allowing the manipulation of a song or a musician’s character at scale, it vastly devalues and negates the creative act itself.

But what do musicians actually think of the prospect of their work being used to train AI, and reworked by the general public? “Everybody should be selling or licensing their voice and their skills to these companies,” Dave Stewart of Eurythmics argued to me this week. “Otherwise they’re just going to take it anyway.” That view is directly countered by the major labels and AI companies, who have insisted artists and songwriters get to opt in to have their music made available, and if they do, get royalties when their music is used to train AI, or manipulated by users on platforms such as Udio, Suno and Klay.

Others take a grimmer view about how these companies might reshape the industry. Irving Azoff, legendarily forthright artist manager and founder of the Music Artists Coalition in the US, responded to the Universal/Udio deal with biting cynicism. “We’ve seen this before – everyone talks about ‘partnership,’ but artists end up on the sidelines with scraps,” he said. In the wake of the same deal, the Council of Music Makers in the UK accused the major labels of “spin” and called for a more robust set of artist-label agreements. And the European Composer and Songwriter Alliance says there is a disturbing “lack of transparency” around the deals (though more detail is likely to emerge on what users can do with any music they create, and any potential commercial uses of it).

‘I’m yet to be convinced’ … Catherine Anne Davies performing as the Anchoress in 2024. Photograph: TeeGeePix/Alamy

Catherine Anne Davies, who records as the Anchoress and also sits on the board of directors at the Featured Artists Coalition (FAC), has many reservations here. “Most people don’t even want their work to be used for training AI,” she says. “I’m on the dystopian side, or maybe what I call the realist side of things. I’m interested in the way that AI can be assistive in the creative process – if it can make us more efficient, if it can streamline our processes. But generative AI for me, in terms of creative output, is a big no-no at the moment. I’m yet to be convinced.”

Musician Imogen Heap feels that AI itself is not to be feared as a tool – she uses an AI she calls Mogen to listen to every aspect of her life, with a view to it being a creative partner (as explored in a recent Guardian article). To help address some of the issues, she has created Auracles, an artist-led, non-profit platform she hopes will be the place where the rights and permissions around AI are set out. It’s not enough to say you’re happy with your music being used by AI, she says – instead, what’s needed are “permissions that grow and evolve over time”.

Other companies are cropping up with similar offers. “We must protect the artists at all costs,” says Sean Power, chief executive of Musical AI, who aims to give musicians “an exact portion of the influence they’re having on all the generative outputs” – meaning compensation every time even a tiny bit of one of their songs is used by a user of Udio et al.

Terms of these deals are undisclosed, but labels are likely to be seeking settlement for any past use of their artists’ copyrights as well as an advance on future use, plus an equity stake in the platform. And while artists will be able to opt out of including their work, they probably won’t be consulted on these partnerships going ahead, with this lack of consultation being something that artist representative bodies such as FAC have been particularly critical of. “The big artists, the labels need to be nice to; those who have a platform will be consulted to some degree,” says a music licensing expert, speaking anonymously. “The very few, who as individual artists are able to make a dent on share price, will have approval.”

I approached Universal, Sony and Warner about the specific concerns raised by artists here: namely limited transparency around the deals, their commercial terms and how opt-ins work; if there is a risk of gen AI undermining existing revenue sources; and if there is significant artist refusal to assign their works for gen AI training. None of the companies would comment on the record about the specifics. Though in an internal Universal memo about AI deals, sent to all staff earlier this year and seen by the Guardian, Grainge said “we will NOT license any model that uses an artist’s voice or generates new songs which incorporate an artist’s existing songs without their consent.”

The Guardian understands that labels are currently having discussions with artists and their managers to better explain how these deals will work and why they believe they can bring in additional revenue, although they will need to convince artists that gen AI will not damage other sources of income, notably from streaming.

But it isn’t clear whether consumers will actually pay to play around with music in the way Udio and others hope they will. AI is the single biggest hype category in Silicon Valley right now, with an average of $2bn of venture capital investment going into AI companies every week in the first half of this year. Sundar Pichai, chief executive of Alphabet (parent company of Google), recently warned of the catastrophic domino effect across the tech sector if this AI bubble bursts, a concern the Bank of England also recently raised.

Reed Smith’s Gregor Pryor argues that AI music could, counterintuitively, end up being positive for human musicians. “By its nature, AI is derivative and cannot create new music,” he says. “Some investors in music catalogues that I speak to say it’s good for artists, because music ‘verified’ as created by humans will have greater value.”

Artists will frame their work as having an invaluable human essence, their music speaking entirely from the heart, but it will become incrementally more difficult for the casual listener to distinguish between music created by a human and that created by AI. The Guardian understands that radio stations and DJs are currently extremely nervous about AI-powered music slipping through their quality filters, effectively hoodwinking them and hanging question marks over how their playlists work. The example of Papi Lamour might force them to do much greater due diligence on what they put forward for airplay consideration. Or they could be the first trickles of a flood that roars through radio and streaming services as the boundaries between AI and human-created music crumble.

Davies is especially worried about artists not thinking through the long-term implications of licensing to AI services. “We cannot think of ourselves selfishly as entities that will be unaffected, because the entire ecosystem will experience a knock-on effect financially. What about your fellow composers and creators? But also what about the generations to come after? Are we fucking this completely, just to make sure that we can pay our mortgages now?”

AI’s current level of sophistication means it is really producing composites of existing music, creating a Frankenstein’s monster of melodies. However, when AGI (artificial general intelligence) finally arrives, with Anthropic co-founder Dario Amodei suggesting that could happen as soon as next year, we will be catapulted into an exhilarating and terrifying realm of uncertainty for the future and the purpose of human-created art.

“It’s literally happening under our noses,” warns Davies. “We should be so much more concerned than we are.”

SOURCE PAGE

After a three-year journey together through the heart of the country, the ‘three norths’ have left England. 

The historic triple alignment of ‘true’, ‘magnetic’ and ‘grid’ north – the three definitions of what north is – met on the south coast of Dorset back in November 2022 before travelling northwards.

On December 13, 2025, the alignment left England at Berwick-upon-Tweed and moved into the North Sea, say experts at the British Geological Survey (BGS). 

It will reach Scotland in a few months before eventually leaving the British National Grid – but for how long exactly is unknown. 

This alignment – the first here since records began – has been called a ‘once-in-a-lifetime occurrence’ as it may be several hundred years before it comes to Britain again.

‘It’s been a privilege to be able to observe this phenomenon over the past few years,’ said Dr Ciarán Beggan, geophysicist at BGS.

‘Although part of geospatial history, there is no impact for navigators, pilots and captains once the alignment leaves.’ 

Although the concept of ‘north’ may seem straightforward, there are actually three definitions –  true north, magnetic north and grid north. 

This map displays a series of locations along the alignment line, from Langton Matravers in November 2022 to Berwick-upon-Tweed this month 

True north is the direction to the geographic north pole, while grid north is where the vertical blue lines shown on Ordnance Survey (OS) maps converge. 

Meanwhile, ‘magnetic north’ is the direction that a compass needle points as it aligns with the Earth’s magnetic field – controlled by molten iron deep down in Earth’s core.

For just over three years, there has been a point in England where the three versions of north have aligned (as of Saturday this point has entered the North Sea).

At this location, a compass, an Ordnance Survey map and the Earth’s axis would all have been aligned with each other – and in agreement on which way was north. 

The historic alignment started at Langton Matravers, west of Swanage in Dorset in November 2022 before heading up into Devizes in Wiltshire in May 2023. 

It then passed through Lower Dowdeswell in Gloucestershire in September 2023, Woodgate Valley Country Park in Birmingham (January 2024), Leek in Staffordshire (May 2024) and Hebden Bridge in West Yorkshire (October 2024). 

By April 2025 it reached Eggleston in the North Pennines, followed by Flotterton in Northumberland in August and Berwick-upon-Tweed, England’s northernmost town, in December.

This ‘special line’ where true north and grid north align is the 2°W longitude meridian (pictured), and it is along this line that magnetic north has coincided

The three norths

True north is the direction of the lines of longitude along the surface of the Earth that end at the location of the North Pole. It is defined by the planet’s rotation.

Magnetic north is the direction compasses point and where the Earth’s magnetic field points vertically downward. The direction of magnetic north changes continually due to natural changes in the magnetic field.

Grid north is the direction the grid lines on a map point ie. the top of the map. 

However, its journey through Britain is not quite done – once it has travelled through the North Sea it will hit land again at the end of October 2026 in Drums, just south of Newburgh in Scotland. 

After passing through the large village Mintlaw in Aberdeenshire, its last stop in Scotland will be Fraserburgh around mid-December 2026, before it returns to the North Sea.

Once over the North Sea, the three norths are expected to continue northwards before leaving the Ordnance Survey National Grid, also known as the British National Grid. 

They will also stay in alignment for another couple of years before magnetic north separates from true north and grid north. 

According to the experts, the alignment’s progress has slowed slightly since the initial predictions back in 2022. 

When it crossed the coast at Berwick-upon-Tweed, it had racked up about 358 miles (576km) of travel in 1127 days.

That’s about 1,676 feet (511 metres) per day, or about 0.23-inch (5.9 mm) per second, or about 0.013 miles per hour.

Dr Beggan said the three norths combining in Britain has been ‘a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence’ largely due to the wandering magnetic north. 

November 2022: The red line shows magnetic north, while the blue ‘special line’ is true north and the grid north line which are perfectly aligned as they made landfall at the village of Langton Matravers just west of Swanage, Dorset, (pictured)

Magnetic north is the direction compasses point and the location where the Earth’s magnetic field points vertically downward. The direction of magnetic north changes continually due to natural changes in the magnetic field 

Magnetic north moves slowly – about 30 miles per year – so it may be several hundred years before this alignment comes around again. 

‘The magnetic field is not predictable in the long term, so we don’t know how many hundreds of years it will take for this historic alignment to occur again,’ said Dr Beggan.

Earth’s magnetic field is created by the movement of liquid iron in the Earth’s outer core, some 1,800 miles below our feet.

The iron is super hot (more than 5,432 degrees Fahrenheit) and as runny as water meaning it flows very easily.

As the liquid flows, it drags the magnetic field with it – meaning the magnetic north and south poles are constantly drifting around. 

The alignment began back in 2014, when magnetic north became east of grid north for some locations in Britain for the first time in more than 350 years. 

This affected navigators using a compass, who needed to adjust their bearing by subtracting instead of adding the difference between magnetic and grid north. 

EARTH’S LIQUID IRON CORE CREATES THE MAGNETIC FIELD

Our planet’s magnetic field is believed to be generated deep down in the Earth’s core.

Nobody has ever journeyed to the centre of the Earth, but by studying shockwaves from earthquakes, physicists have been able to work out its likely structure.

At the heart of the Earth is a solid inner core, two thirds of the size of the moon, made mainly of iron. 

At 5,700°C, this iron is as hot as the Sun’s surface, but the crushing pressure caused by gravity prevents it from becoming liquid.

Surrounding this is the outer core there is a 1,242 mile (2,000 km) thick layer of iron, nickel, and small quantities of other metals. 

The metal here is fluid, because of the lower pressure than the inner core.

Differences in temperature, pressure and composition in the outer core cause convection currents in the molten metal as cool, dense matter sinks and warm matter rises.

The ‘Coriolis’ force, caused by the Earth’s spin, also causes swirling whirlpools.

This flow of liquid iron generates electric currents, which in turn create magnetic fields.

Charged metals passing through these fields go on to create electric currents of their own, and so the cycle continues.

This self-sustaining loop is known as the geodynamo.

The spiralling caused by the Coriolis force means the separate magnetic fields are roughly aligned in the same direction, their combined effect adding up to produce one vast magnetic field engulfing the planet.

SOURCE PAGE

The smartphone industry is no stranger to incremental updates, but recent reports suggest the Samsung Galaxy S26 series may be pushing that approach too far. A new report from Android Authority has even already branded the unreleased device the “worst phone of 2026,” citing not failure, but a striking lack of ambition in a year when competitors are moving faster.

According to the report, the Galaxy S26 and S26 Plus are expected to closely mirror the 2025 Galaxy S25 lineup, with most meaningful changes reserved for the Ultra model. That leaves the base devices feeling like afterthoughts, and points to a deeper issue inside Samsung’s flagship strategy rather than a one-off conservative cycle.

That context matters, because the S26 Plus reportedly exists less by design than by circumstance. Early leaks suggested Samsung planned to replace it with a Galaxy S26 Edge, a more distinct model intended to sit between the base version and the Ultra. When that plan was scrapped late in development, Samsung appears to have defaulted to a fallback. The result is a Galaxy S26 Plus that largely reuses S25-era designs, with only minor updates such as a small wireless charging bump and a unified camera housing. It fills a slot in the lineup, but offers little reason to exist on its own.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Leaked Design (Image: Android Headline)

What makes this more consequential is the pace of change elsewhere in the Android market. Google’s upcoming Pixel 10 series is expected to push display and AI capabilities further, while manufacturers like Vivo and OPPO continue to normalize hardware Samsung still treats as premium. Faster charging and higher-resolution camera systems are no longer differentiators, they are baseline expectations, which makes Samsung’s familiar camera setup and charging speeds harder to defend.

The risk, then, isn’t that the Galaxy S26 will be unexciting, but that Samsung may be misjudging what drives upgrades heading into 2026. As highlighted in our analysis of Q3 2025 smartphone shipments, consumer spending is currently being driven by visible hardware gains and clear value, not incremental refinements. If the base Galaxy S26 models arrive as near replicas of their predecessors, Samsung risks ceding ground to rivals offering more tangible progress, including Apple, which is regaining momentum in key markets.

Even a stronger S26 Ultra may not offset that imbalance. In a year defined by aggressive competition, leaving the highest-volume models unchanged assumes loyalty will do more work than innovation. As 2026 approaches, Samsung’s challenge is not to prove it can still build a great phone, but to show it understands where the flagship bar has moved.

Samsung Galaxy S26 Leaks Reveal Possible Redesign and Specs

Here’s a rundown on some of the biggest changes to expect.

Updated

December 16, 2025

Link copied!
Copy failed!

SOURCE PAGE

A campaign fronted by popstars including Elton John and Dua Lipa to protect artists’ works from being mined to train AI models without consent has received a boost after almost every respondent to a government consultation backed their case.

Ninety-five per cent of the more than 10,000 people who had their say over how music, novels, films and other works should be protected from copyright infringements by tech companies called for copyright to be strengthened and a requirement for licensing in all cases or no change to copyright law.

By contrast, only 3% of people backed the government’s initial preferred tech company-friendly option, which was to require artists and copyright holders to actively opt out of having their material fed into data-hungry AI systems.

Ministers subsequently dropped that preference in the face of a backlash. Artists who have opposed any dilution of their copyright include Sam Fender, Kate Bush and the Pet Shop Boys. Campaigners to protect artists’ copyright have voiced fears that ministers have paid too much attention to US tech companies’ interests.

The US president, Donald Trump, has said: “We have to allow AI to use that [copyrighted] pool of knowledge without going through the complexity of contract negotiations,” and warned international governments not to “make rules and regulations that … make it impossible” for AI companies to do business.

Last month Paul McCartney stepped up the campaign to protect copyright by releasing a new recording, which was almost entirely silent save for some ambient clattering in the studio as a protest against copyright theft by AI companies.

Liz Kendall, the secretary of state for science, innovation and technology, told parliament on Monday there was “no clear consensus” on the issue and the government would “take the time to get this right”, and promised to make policy proposals by 18 March 2026.

“Our approach to copyright and AI must support prosperity for all UK citizens, and drive innovation and growth for sectors across the economy, including the creative industries,” she said. “This means keeping the UK at the cutting edge of science and technology so UK citizens can benefit from major breakthroughs, transformative innovation and greater prosperity.

“It also means continuing to support our creative industries, which make a huge economic contribution, shape our national identity and give us a unique position on the world stage.”

But campaigners for copyright holders said the consultation response set a clear course for the government to take.

“This is an overwhelming show of support for the commonsense position that AI companies should pay for the resources they use, and a total rejection of the government’s ‘preferred option’ of handing AI companies the work of the UK’s creatives for free,” said Ed Newton-Rex, a composer and campaigner for copyright fairness.

“Liz Kendall should listen to the people and rule out changing copyright law to benefit AI companies.”

Owen Meredith, the chief executive of the New Media Association, urged Kendall to rule out any new copyright exception and end the uncertainty created by “this prolonged process”.

“This will send a clear message to AI developers that they must enter into licensing agreements with the UK’s media and creative copyright owners, unlocking investment and strengthening the market for the high-quality content that is the most valuable ingredient in producing safe, trustworthy AI models,” he said.

Last month, Kendall indicated she was sympathetic to artists’ demands not to have their copyrighted works scraped by AI companies without payment and wanted to “reset” the debate. “People rightly want to get paid for the work that they do,” she said, and “we have to find a way that both sectors can grow and thrive in future”.

SOURCE PAGE