Shark jump captured on camera

Previously, I believed that if one could see something, it could be trusted because seeing is believing. A video was proof. A voice recording was evidence. That belief is gone, and I don’t think we have fully sat with the implications. There is an abnormal shift happening. AI-generated images, voice cloning, face-swapping apps, and similar tools were supposed to expand how people express themselves, but instead they have slowly chipped away at what matters most: the belief that people can express themselves through their images and their words. I attended a workshop under the project titled “Digital Trust and Free Expression in the AI Era” at Department of Media and Development Communication, University of the Punjab, supported by the U.S. Mission to Pakistan in partnership with the Pakistan-U.S. Alumni Network (PUAN) last week. During the discussions on digital trust. I took part in the discussion and shared my thoughts that we are now in a time where we must take this out of the realm of fun tech novelty and place it in the realm of a structural issue in how societies operate. Everyone says deepfakes are a “misinformation” issue, but this is not an adequate way to describe it. Misinformation is something that’s a false statement that can, in theory, be fact-checked. Deepfakes strike at the heart of video and audio credibility which have always been treated as vivid reality. When people realize that any clip can be fabricated, they stop trusting all clips, even real ones. This is what concerns me most. Fake things are believed and real things become deniable. Consider the implications of journalism, courts, political accountability, etc. If a politician is recorded saying something damaging, they can simply claim that it’s a “deepfake” and, depending on how much trust citizen have lost, people may believe them. We are creating a society in which it is possible to negotiate authenticity and in which negotiable authenticity is a gift for those who wish to avoid consequences. I also face a conflict here: I strongly believe in free speech, satire, parody, art and provocation even with synthetic media. The same technology behind de-aged actors, resurrected voices, dubbing, and experimental AI is extremely creative, yet it is all connected to malicious deepfakes. There is no way to ‘clean’ a tool of its worst use-case. A hammer can break windows or build houses. I do not think banning synthetic media is the answer, nor do I support pre-emptive censorship. That path harms legitimate satire, journalism and art under the pretense of ‘preserving truth’. History does not look kindly on institutions that decide what is a “fair” fake. Freedom of expression has never been of consequence or friction, and right now, deepfakes have almost no friction. The reality is there is no cost, disclosure, and accountability in using this technology deceptively. The issue is the imbalance. I believe the solution is not reducing synthetic tools but improving provenance. We need a digital watermarking, which cannot be “easily removed”: cryptographic signatures embedded into cameras, microphones and generative tools at the point of creation, so that the “unverified” label appears by default, not as an afterthought. Not to prohibit any content but to allow people to know what they are seeing before deciding whether to trust it. Platforms have been allowed to operate without responsibility for too long. Convincing fakes can reach millions before correction and corrections never travel as far. This asymmetry is not natural; it is a design choice. Platforms can mark, rate or tag synthetic content at the time of dissemination. Most simply haven’t had to! But, beyond platforms, we must change our own instincts as individuals. The old saying was “pics or it didn’t happen.” The new rule should be: “Who gains from believing this and can I verify it myself? A society that believes everything or worse, believes nothing is in danger. The deepfake age is not the age of AI; it is the consequences of a world where the cost of faking reality is near zero and the cost of establishing truth remains high. Freedom of expression should protect the most challenging and profound exchange of ideas, not the production of fake consent, fake evidence, or fake people. We can have creative freedom and still expect honesty about sources. These are not competing prioritie These are not different objectives/priorities. However, if we pretend it’s a content-moderation footnote, we must make sure we are not waking up in a world where “fake it till you make it” has become ‘fake it till you break it” and by that time, it won’t be just one video or one lie that will break. It will be our fundamental ability to reach a shared understanding of reality. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the U.S. Mission to Pakistan or USEFP/PUAN. The writer, Mahnoor Ashraf Wattoo, is a student of Media and Development Communication at University of the Punjab, Lahore 

A new study has found that children who consume high amounts of sugar at an early age may face a higher risk of developing dementia later in life. The study suggests that pregnant women who avoid sweets, chocolates and other sugary foods may help reduce their child’s risk of developing the disease by up to 20 percent. The research published in the medical journal Neurology also found that consuming very small amounts of sugar during early life may provide protection against dementia. The study’s lead author, Professor Jiazheng Zheng said the findings suggest that limiting sugar intake during the early stages of life could have long-term benefits for brain health. He further said the findings highlight the potential importance of early-life nutrition in reducing the risk of dementia decades later. Researchers from the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology compared the health of 64,737 people who were born before and after sugar rationing was introduced in Britain during World War II. The participants were divided into groups based on the timing of sugar rationing: those who experienced limited access to sugar before birth and during their first year of life, those who experienced it before birth and until the age of two and those who were not exposed to sugar rationing. When the participants reached an average age of 55, the research team began analyzing their medical records to determine which individuals were diagnosed with dementia during the following 15 years. Among the 15,256 people who had limited access to sugar before birth and during their first two years of life, only 2 percent were later diagnosed with dementia. Although researchers say the findings do not conclusively prove that eating less sugar directly prevents dementia, experts believe the results are consistent with growing evidence that sugar can affect brain function. Experts also say that the brain is highly sensitive to fluctuations in blood sugar levels. Other research has found that people with high blood sugar levels may face up to a 69 percent higher risk of Alzheimer’s disease.

Scientists claim to have discovered a fascinating cosmic mystery. According to them, it is a “black hole star” about the size of our solar system and glowing with extremely bright red light. An international team of researchers made the discovery using images captured by NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) which revealed the mysterious red glow. The black hole star is located in the constellation Cetus, billions of light-years away from Earth. Scientists believe it may have formed around 660 million years after the Big Bang. It appears similar to a massive star but is estimated to release 100 billion times more energy than an ordinary star. Such enormous energy output has previously been associated with black holes rather than stars. Scientist Rohan Naidu of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) who was part of the research team said that they had discovered an entirely new type of cosmic phenomenon. He explained that the object is shining with an amount of energy normally associated with black holes while at the same time displaying characteristics typically linked to stars. First observed by James Webb Space Telescope Scientists have been using the James Webb Space Telescope to study distant galaxies in the universe. Their interest in this phenomenon increased after the discovery of the galaxy Maisie’s Galaxy (CEERS 1) and other early-universe objects. In a study published in the journal Nature, researchers named the red-light phenomenon MAM-BH1. They said its completely red appearance and disappearance at specific wavelengths are so dramatic that it cannot easily be compared with other known cosmic objects. Computer simulations suggested that rather than being an extremely massive star, the object is actually a black hole that shines like a star. If the scientists’ interpretation is confirmed, it could indicate that many of the mysterious red dots observed across the universe may also be black hole stars. Rohan Naidu believes that these types of black hole stars could play an important role in the evolution of galaxies.

Computer scientist Geoffrey Hinton is widely regarded as the “Godfather of AI.” He won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2024 for his work on artificial intelligence technology. Geoffrey Hinton who is associated with the University of Toronto in Canada has warned that the smarter AI technology becomes, the more difficult it will be for humanity to control it. He has also expressed concerns about AI agents recently hacking real-world companies. Speaking to the media after an AI technology conference, Geoffrey Hinton said that such incidents are occurring as these systems become increasingly intelligent. He said, “As these systems become smarter, I think we will see more complicated incidents and their ability to escape our control will become much better.” Hinton said the problem is that humans may not be able to rely on or trust highly intelligent AI models. He explained, “I do not believe that we can simply control them or assume that they will not escape our control.” It is worth noting that in recent days, OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta have acknowledged that their AI models independently escaped controlled environments and hacked the systems of other companies. Hinton described these incidents as somewhat frightening and said that this is only the beginning of AI hacking. He said, “I think we may see numerous cyberattacks but the future is uncertain. People say defenders have more resources than attackers but the problem is that an attacker only needs to succeed once, whereas defenders need to succeed every time.” Hinton’s earlier warnings about AI Geoffrey Hinton has previously issued warnings about the dangers of AI technology. On one occasion, he said there was a 10 to 20 percent chance that the technology could gradually lead to the extinction of humanity. He stressed that it is important to discuss the potential risks posed by AI. He acknowledged that uncertainty surrounding AI can be unsettling because nobody knows exactly what the future holds. He said that if someone asks what AI technology will look like over the next 10 years, no one can accurately predict it. Earlier, in August 2025 while speaking on a podcast, Hinton said that AI is not only learning things in ways that humans do not fully understand but there is also no reliable way to simply switch it off. Hinton’s contribution to AI Geoffrey Hinton’s research laid the foundation for machine learning, the technology that has helped computers imitate aspects of human intelligence. However, for the past several years, he has been campaigning for AI to be made safer. In 2023, Hinton left his job at Google, warning that malicious actors could use the technology to harm other people. In an interview some time ago, when he was asked about the pace of AI development, Hinton said that most experts in the field currently believe that at some point possibly within the next 20 years—humans could develop AI systems that are more intelligent than humans. He said, “That is a frightening thought. Right now, you can think of this technology as being like a three-year-old child and children grow up very quickly.” AI could transform world According to Hinton, the impact of AI on the world could be similar to that of the Industrial Revolution. He said the Industrial Revolution effectively halted the growth of human physical strength because humans began relying on increasingly powerful machines. He explained that humanity is now doing something similar that could replace human intelligence meaning ordinary human intelligence may no longer advance at the same pace while machines continue to develop. When asked what life might look like 10 or 20 years from now, Hinton said it would depend on how political systems respond to and manage the technology. In his view, AI could have extraordinary effects on the medical field and could increase efficiency across almost every industry. However, he emphasized that humanity needs to be much more cautious about the rapid development of this technology.