Category: 3. Business

Generative AI is getting really good, really fast. You’ve probably already experienced someone you know, maybe yourself, mistaking a video or image that’s completely AI generated for something that is real. There are some tells, but we’re rapidly approaching a point where AI images, videos, and text will be completely indistinguishable from real life. So. How can we continue to trust what we see online?

To get perspective on this and some possible solutions, GBH’s Morning Edition host Mark Herz spoke with MIT professor and member of the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, David Karger. What follows is a lightly edited transcript.

Mark Herz: So how good is AI getting at making videos, audio, whatever it is? We always talk about AI slop, but how much of this is getting not-so sloppy?

David Karger: It’s really getting quite good. We’ve been seeing tremendous progress over the past few years and I expect it to continue. There are still some current limitations on AI. You’ve probably noticed that most AI generated videos are pretty short, because AI is still struggling to manage consistency over a very long span of time. But I think we’re going to get there and I think it’s going to be easier and cheaper. You’re gonna be able to start doing this on your own devices instead of relying on big powerful servers in the cloud to do it. I think it’s going to be everywhere and we’re gonna have to deal with that.

Herz: You’ve talked about how it’s unrealistic for social media websites to flag all AI-generated content or to filter it out. And these websites, notably, and under political pressure at times, have abandoned, sometimes dangerously, any institutionalized fact-checking. Are you saying that could be okay somehow?

Karger: I’m not saying that it could be okay. I have been arguing for some time that we can’t really leave that kind of checking in the hands of the platforms because they’re subject to political pressure, as you just mentioned. If the platforms really become the source of fact checking, then whoever is in power is going to be trying to push that fact checking in whatever direction that they want, not just governments, but any organization with an axe to grind is going to try to pressure the platforms. So I think we need to involve more entities, more people, more sources in the fact-checking process. We need to figure out how to ensure that that fact checking can propagate into the platforms, even though the platforms are not doing the fact checking themselves.

Herz: So how do we do that?

Karger: Well, there are a number of groups trying to develop a variety of standards and techniques for labeling content in various ways. There’s something called the Web Consortium Web Credibility Community Group, which is trying to develop some of these standards where you might be able to annotate information in a standardized way with metadata that says that it is real or metadata that say that it’s AI, and you can imagine tools that know how to look for this metadata and make use of it in appropriate ways. For example, I might want to configure my social media to not show me information that has been labeled as AI generated in certain contexts, or, and I actually think that we’re going to have to head more in this direction, I might want to configure my social media to only show me things that have been verified as true or accurate or real by some authority that I trust, but not the platforms.

Herz: But will the platforms let us do that?

Karger: Well, I think we’re gonna have to exert some pressure there. That’s a place for regulation. We’ve seen regulations like the regulation that allows people to download their data from social platforms, which say that, sure, we want to let the platforms operate, but we want to give their users a certain amount of control over their own data and over their experience. I think in similar ways, we want to ensure that users are able to indicate who it is that they trust, which sources. I think news organizations are going to play a very important role here going forward, that they may move from creators of content to more of a fact checking and publishing of what’s true role. I do not think that this is something that can be done with technology. This is all about how we as a society construct knowledge. Most of what each of us thinks we know is something that we have heard from other sources that we trust, whether it be teachers or journalists or governments or whatever. Those aren’t technologies. Those are entities and actors and they are going to continue to be the sources of insight about what is true and what is not. What technology can do is help to transmit that information from the sources somebody trusts to that person through the tools that they’re using.

Herz: So I’m a little confused because we started by talking about how good AI is getting at fooling people. So how are people going to get un-fooled and flag that for other people?

Karger: It’s all about provenance. You need to understand where did this content come from. If I have a particular piece of video that I’m looking at, for starters, I have to believe that it might be real or it might be AI generated. What’s going to differentiate that is somebody who says, “I took this video at this location at this time, and I am trusted by an organization that you rely on so you can trust the video that I took because I am asserting its authenticity.” So the technology is going to support those assertions, and delivering them to people who need them. But the technology’s not going to be able to make that decision for you, “is this accurate or is it not.” The technology is it going to a medium for communicating that information from people who have it to people want it.

Herz: So it sounds like what you’re saying is, it’s gonna be on everybody and not just journalism, although we may have a big part to play, to be highly skeptical. Reminds me when I was in journalism school, they taught us an old saw. They said, “Your mother says she loves you? Check it out.”

Karger: That’s exactly right. I think that we’ve had, for a long time, people talking about critical reading and so on and so forth, being more skeptical of what they see. And I think we need to shift attention from looking at whether the story is internally consistent, which is what you’re often doing with critical reading. That’s not going to survive AI’s ability to create internal consistency. But checking your sources, checking the provenance, where did this come from? Who says that it’s true? That is something that we’re going to have to become much more used to doing. And it’s not enough for us to just develop those habits. We need support from our technology, from our tools. Nobody has the energy or the resources to carefully investigate the sourcing of every single piece of content they encounter on social media. This is where technology can help. Technology is a way to make it easier to do things that we want to do. So if I want to carefully check the sources of every piece of information that crosses my path, well, technological tools can take care of doing that for me under direction.

LONDON, Feb. 2, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — Clarivate Plc (NYSE: CLVT), a leading global provider of transformative intelligence, today announced that its subsidiary, Camelot Finance S.A., has redeemed the remaining $100 million aggregate principal amount of its 4.50% senior secured notes due 2026, originally issued on October 31, 2019 (the “2026 Notes”).

The 2026 Notes were redeemed on January 30, 2026 (the “Redemption Date”) at a cash redemption price equal to 100% of the remaining principal amount, or $100 million, plus accrued and unpaid interest through the Redemption Date. With this transaction, the 2026 Notes have now been fully redeemed.

This redemption was funded with cash on hand and is consistent with Clarivate’s ongoing efforts to simplify its capital structure, reduce debt, and enhance financial flexibility.

As part of its broader capital allocation strategy, Clarivate also announced that it repurchased approximately 21 million ordinary shares for $75 million during the fourth quarter of 2025. For the full year of 2025, Clarivate repurchased approximately 56 million ordinary shares for $225 million. These share repurchases reflect Clarivate’s disciplined approach to returning capital to shareholders while investing for long‑term growth.

“The full redemption of our remaining 2026 Notes, combined with our share repurchase activity throughout 2025, reflects the continued execution of our disciplined capital allocation strategy,” said Jonathan Collins, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. “We remain focused on strengthening our balance sheet, enhancing financial flexibility, and driving long‑term value creation for our shareholders.”

Forward-Looking Statements
This release includes statements that express our opinions, expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions, or projections regarding future events or future results and therefore are, or may be deemed to be, “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the “safe harbor provisions” of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements can generally be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology, including the terms “believes,” “estimates,” “anticipates,” “expects,” “seeks,” “projects,” “intends,” “plans,” “may,” “will,” or “should” or, in each case, their negative or other variations or comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements include all matters that are not historical facts, and include statements regarding our intentions, beliefs, or current expectations concerning, among other things, anticipated cost savings, results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, prospects, growth, strategies, and the markets in which we operate. Such forward-looking statements are based on available current market material and management’s expectations, beliefs, and forecasts concerning future events impacting us. There can be no assurance that future developments affecting us will be those that we have anticipated. These forward-looking statements involve a number of risks and uncertainties (some of which are beyond our control) or other assumptions that may cause actual results or performance to be materially different from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, those factors described in Item 1A. Risk Factors in our annual report on Form 10-K, along with our other filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should any of the assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary in material respects from those projected in these forward-looking statements. We do not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required under applicable securities laws. Please consult our public filings with the SEC, which are also available on our website at www.clarivate.com.

About Clarivate 
Clarivate™ is a leading global provider of transformative intelligence. We offer enriched data, insights & analytics, workflow solutions and expert services in the areas of Academia & Government, Intellectual Property and Life Sciences & Healthcare. For more information, please visit www.clarivate.com.

SOURCE Clarivate Plc

Multi-country recalls of several infant formula products are ongoing following the detection of cereulide – a toxin produced by the bacterium Bacillus cereus. The European Commission asked EFSA to deliver urgent scientific advice to support risk management The management of risks which have been identified by risk assessment. It includes the planning, implementation and evaluation of any resulting actions taken to protect consumers, animals and the environment decisions across the EU.

In its rapid risk assessment, EFSA’s scientists established an acute reference dose (ARfD) for cereulide in infants and established cereulide concentrations in infant formula of potential safety concern. This advice is intended to help EU risk managers determine when products should be withdrawn from the market as a precautionary public health measure.

Key scientific findings

A health-based guidance value Guidance on safe consumption of substances that takes into account current safety data, uncertainties in these data, and the likely duration of consumption for infants

EFSA’s scientists proposed an ARfD An acute reference dose (ARfD) is the estimate of the amount of a substance in food – normally expressed on a body-weight basis (mg/kg or μg/kg of body weight) – that can be ingested in a period of 24 hours or less without appreciable health risk to the consumer. of 0.014 μg/kg body weight for cereulide in infants. Emesis (vomiting) is the critical acute adverse effect A change in the health, growth, behaviour or development of an organism that impairs its ability to develop or survive used to set the ARfD, which was derived using benchmark dose The minimum dose of a substance that produces a clear, low level health risk, usually in the range of a 1-10% change in a specific toxic effect such as cancer induction modelling. Because very young infants (below 16 weeks) metabolise substances differently from adults, EFSA took a cautious approach and added an extra safety factor when setting an ARfD.

Consumption values used to estimate acute exposure A one-off or very short term exposure to a substance, usually less than 24 hours

For infant formula, EFSA confirmed that a value of 260 mL per kilogram of body weight remains appropriate for estimating short-term (24-hour) exposure Concentration or amount of a particular substance that is taken in by an individual, population or ecosystem in a specific frequency over a certain amount of time. For follow-on formula Breast milk substitute aimed at infants who have commenced complementary feeding (i.e. the introduction of solid foods at or around 6 months of age) – which is generally not consumed by infants younger than 16 weeks – EFSA confirmed a value of 140 mL per kilogram of body weight for the same purpose. These values are based on the higher end of what infants typically drink, so that the assessment stays conservative.

Concentrations that may lead to exceedance of the ARfD

By comparing the ARfD with these high consumption values, EFSA concluded that cereulide concentrations in reconstituted (liquid) infant formula above:

• 0.054 μg/L or infant formula, and
• 0.1 μg/L for follow-on formula,

may lead to safe levels being exceeded.

Public health advice and recommendations

Recalled products should not be given to infants or young children. Consumers are advised to follow the instructions and guidance issued by national food safety authorities.

For infants who develop vomiting or diarrhoea after consuming infant formula included in the recall, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) recommends seeking medical advice from a healthcare professional, such as a paediatrician, or, if the symptoms are severe (e.g., dehydration or persistent vomiting), at an emergency department. Gastrointestinal symptoms in infants can rapidly lead to complications, regardless of the underlying cause.

More information

The Court of Appeal of Tanzania (CAT) has recently reaffirmed the strict statutory standards governing mortgagee sales under the Land Act, Cap. 113 [R.E. 2023] in its decision in CRDB Bank PLC & Others (the Appellant / Mortgagee) vs Jonas Marco Mgeni (the Mortgagor / Respondent) (Civil Appeal No. 355 of 2024) [2025 TZCA 1246] (10 December 2025). This case highlights the consequences of mortgage enforcement conducted without proper valuation and due diligence.

Background of the Case

The appeal arose from a TZS 50,000,000 (approx. USD 19,650) loan facility extended to the Mortgagor in 2016, secured by a legal mortgage over the Respondent’s property to finance a trading business in Mbeya City. The facility was initially granted for 12 months at an interest rate of 20% per annum. In 2017, the parties restructured the loan, extending the repayment period to 72 months, with maturity scheduled for 30 December 2023. Despite the revised arrangement, the Respondent defaulted on repayment.

Following default, the Mortgagee issued a notice of default and appointed an auctioneer to sell the mortgaged property without obtaining a fresh valuation report. The property was eventually sold at public auction to the third appellant for TZS 22,500,000 (approx. USD 8,843), a sum not only below market value but also insufficient to meet statutory expectations of obtaining the best price.

The Respondent challenged the sale before the District Land and Housing Tribunal (the Tribunal) seeking nullification of the auction and reinstatement of the revised loan terms. The Tribunal declared the auction and sale illegal on grounds of undervaluation while affirming that the Mortgagee had breached the loan agreement.

The Mortgagee appealed to the High Court (Mbeya Registry), which dismissed the appeal with costs. Dissatisfied, the Mortgagee lodged a further appeal to the CAT.

Court of Appeal Decision

In upholding the lower court’s findings, the CAT addressed two key issues:

1. Whether the Mortgagee discharged its statutory duty to ascertain the value of the mortgaged property before sale; and 
2. Whether the purchaser qualified as a bona fide purchaser entitled to statutory protection.

Regarding statutory duty to ascertain value, the CAT emphasized that sections 143(1) and (2) of the Land Act Cap 113 R.E 2023 (the Land Act) set strict conditions for the exercise of a mortgagee’s rights of sale. These conditions are:

1. The mortgagee must exercise a duty of care towards the mortgagor and obtain the best price possible for the property at auction;
2. The property must be sold for not less than 25% of its market value; and
3. A fresh valuation report must be prepared by a professional valuer and approved by the Chief Valuer to ascertain the current market value and ensure compliance with the 25% rule.

In this case, the amount owed at the time of sale was approximately TZS 20,000,000 (approx. USD 7,860). The property had been valued at TZS 68,000,000 when the loan was granted in 2016. It is an undisputed fact that the value of landed property generally appreciates rather than depreciates over time. Accordingly, the sale of the property in 2021 for TZS 22,500,000, without any evidence of an updated market valuation, amounted to a gross undervaluation and was contrary to the statutory duty imposed on a mortgagee. The CAT stressed that before exercising the right of sale, the Mortgagee had a legal obligation to ensure a proper valuation to establish both the market value and forced sale value of the property.

Regarding bona fide purchasers, the CAT clarified that statutory protection under section 145(3) of the Land Act is conditional, not absolute. While the provision may cure certain procedural defects, such as serving notice, it does not protect a purchaser where the sale is affected by illegality, fraud, or dishonest conduct.

The CAT found that the sale process was marred by misconduct, including:

1. Failure to conduct a fresh valuation;
2. Sale at a gross undervalue;
3. Irregular handling of purchase monies; and
4. Failure to account to the mortgagor.

Importantly, the CAT noted that the purchaser had actual or constructive notice of these defects and therefore, could not claim to have acquired the property in good faith within the meaning of section 145(1)(b) of the Land Act.

Conclusion

This decision sends a clear message to financial institutions: mortgage enforcement must strictly adhere to statutory safeguards. Conducting a fresh valuation and complying with the 25% rule are legal prerequisites, not optional risk-management tools. Failure to observe them exposes lenders to litigation and potential invalidation of sales.

For purchasers of mortgaged property, the case serves as a cautionary tale. Due diligence extends beyond attending an auction and paying the purchase price. Where a sale is fundamentally unlawful, statutory protection will not rescue a purchaser who knew, or ought to have known, of material irregularities.

SINGAPORE, Feb 2 (Reuters) – Singapore will launch its own space agency on April 1 ​as it bids to “fully harness the ‌value and opportunities of the growing global space economy”, ‌the country’s trade ministry announced on Monday.

“Singapore’s strengths in advanced manufacturing, aerospace, micro-electronics, precision engineering and artificial intelligence position us well to capture ⁠new opportunities in ‌the space technology sector,” said the Ministry of Trade and Industry, which ‍will run the new agency.

Global investment in space technology is expected to climb further after hitting record ​levels in 2025, according to data from ‌investment firm Seraphim Space.

The announcement was made at an inaugural space summit by Tan See Leng, a minister in charge of energy technology at the Ministry of Trade and Industry.

The National ⁠Space Agency of Singapore ​will develop and operate the ​nation’s space capabilities and develop legislation and regulations which support innovation and businesses, ‍among other ⁠functions, the ministry said.

Singapore currently hosts 70 space companies, employing around 2,000 professionals in ⁠diverse roles and activities across the value chain, the ‌ministry said.

(Reporting by Jun Yuan Yong; ‌Editing by David Stanway)

Lebanon, N.H., February 2, 2026 –FUJIFILM Dimatix, Inc.,  a leading global manufacturer and supplier of piezoelectric, drop-on-demand industrial inkjet printheads, announced the launch of its new Dimatix Material Printer DMP-2850 S (DMP-2850 S), a benchtop materials deposition system designed for micro-precision jetting for a variety of functional fluids for virtually any surface, including plastic, glass, ceramics, and silicon, as well as flexible substrates from membranes, gels, and thin films to paper products. The DMP-2850 S materials printer is an upgraded and enhanced version of the inkjet deposition research platform, the DMP-2850, designed for use by researchers and universities.

“Universities and R&D teams greatly benefit from a complete platform that can offer precision printing of materials, jetting analysis, and fluid development, as it allows users to rapidly produce new prototype designs, reduce costs and lead times, and accelerate the innovation process,” said Steve Billow, president and chief executive officer, FUJIFILM Dimatix. “We’re thrilled to offer customers the DMP-2850 S, a powerful printing tool for R&D work spanning applications such as prototyping and sample generation, product development, deposition of biological fluids including cell patterning, DNA arrays, and more.”

The DMP-2850 S boasts improved software features from its previous model, including drop analysis which helps developers optimize print head settings, waveform designs for precise ejection of ink droplets, and ink formulations to achieve desired print quality without needing expert knowledge in utilizing a drop watcher and developing a waveform. The new print job feature allows users to save all settings associated with a particular job and allow for batching multiple jobs within a run so the user can walk away. The new printer supports multiple file types, including BMP, JPEG, TIF, and PNG. Hardware improvements to its built-in computer include a more powerful CPU, dual USB ports for data transfer, ample storage for print jobs and data needed during the printing process. This integrated computer runs on Microsoft Windows 10 IoT Enterprise LTSC.

The DMP-2850 S materials printer features FUJIFILM Dimatix’s Samba^(R) based print cartridge, which leverages the company’s renowned Silicon MEMS (Si-MEMS) processing with sputtered PZT (Lead Zirconate Titanate) for consistent, precise and high-quality printing. The system supports precision jetting for a wide range of functional fluids, including UV, aqueous, solvent, acidic and basic fluids.

The new materials printer is now available to ship to customers. To learn more about the DMP-2850 S, visit the product page.