AI

Hollywood A-listers are more comfortable than ever with cloning their voice and likeness to create a new stream of income, despite the threat of viewer backlash to artificial intelligence.

Sunny Hostin of the popular daily talk show “The View” has licensed her image and likeness to AI production studio Fountain 0, which will make film adaptations of her novels.

“To be able to bring my novels to life in movie and TV form, and actually have my image inserted in the productions, so that audiences can relate to me through my stories beyond my role as an author, is incredibly exciting to me,” Hostin said in a statement.

“AI can give me a way to both more fully develop, and more fully immerse myself in, IP I have developed,” she said.

The Overton window for acceptable AI use in Hollywood continues to widen as Hollywood actors, television hosts, and influencers embrace cloning with protections and compensation. As high-quality synthetic re-creations become cheap and accessible, cloning has become a more desirable option for studios struggling with runaway production costs.

Audiences will be subject to more AI content on the big screen that’s indistinguishable from real human performances.

Fountain 0 is the producer behind “Dreams of Violets,” a fully AI-generated film inspired by anti-government protests in Tehran. The 75-minute drama was made with a budget of $2,000 without a cast or a crew, and was the first fully AI-generated film accepted at the Tribeca Film Festival.

“We are incredibly gratified that Sunny is willing to be the talent pioneer willing to step out and take advantage of this new form of creative expression,” said Ash Koosha, co-founder and CEO of Fountain 0, in a release.

The production company will be releasing its second fully AI-generated film, “Odysseus: The Fall,” later this year. The film uses the likeness of many people, including the film’s creator Koosha, who stars as Odysseus.

Fountain 0’s executive chariman told CNBC that the film is designed to ride the buzz around Christopher Nolan’s ‘’The Odyssey” and give people the opportunity to compare the height of human filmmaking with AI filmmaking.

Proponents of AI argue that it allows writers and creators to take on blockbuster-scale films without financial constraints. Many creators oppose AI because it could replace humans and was built using the unauthorized scraping of creative works used to train generative AI video and image models.

Online reactions to news of Hostin’s cloning were fierce.

“Basically, no film studio wants to give her the budget to turn her books into a movie with real actors, so she’s resorting to AI studios,” wrote one person on Reddit.

Hollywood has fought hard for protections from AI in the prolonged writers’ and actors’ strikes of 2023. SAG-AFTRA, the union representing about 160,000 actors and other performers, has been demanding informed consent, fair compensation, more control and transparency over the use of digital replicas.

The latest agreement, signed in June, introduced limits on studios’ use of digital replicas. The contract requires studios to notify actors before using their voices to create a replica. After a project is complete, actors must sign off and be paid the equivalent of an in-person performance if their replica is used.

Additionally, studios need to pay residuals to digital replicas used in reruns, and replicas cannot be used during a strike.

Hiring fully AI-generated characters such as Tilly Norwood, created without hiring a human performer, is not impossible but comes with a very high threshold for use under the 2026 union contract. Producers must notify the union in advance and prove the AI character brings “significant additional value” to the role.

Still, a fissure remains between those actors who stay morally opposed to cloning, and those who embrace this new reality.

ElevenLabs’ voice marketplace features clones of dozens of personalities — including actress Judy Garland, physicist Richard Feynman and popular characters such as Mr. Potato Head for creators to legally license and get compensated for their use.

This has created a contentious ecosystem in which A-listers are gaining millions from cloning with safeguards and building a new stream of passive income from their intellectual property, while early-career actors complain that their likenesses are being misappropriated and opportunities are being driven away. A massive lobbying effort is underway to institute a uniform standard for protecting an individual’s voice and likeness as property rights.

California lawmakers have passed legislation that will make it easier for government agencies to protect themselves from the rising use of artificial intelligence for public comment, records requests and other forms of civic engagement.

Senate Bill 1159 from Sen. Christopher Cabaldon (D-West Sacramento) prohibits anyone from knowingly using AI to falsely represent that a real person engaged with a government agency. It also specifies that agencies are not required to treat engagement from AI or bots as if they were real humans.

“What we have seen with the result of the advent of artificial intelligence and other similar technologies is the capability for these systems to flood the zone — to drown local governments, and potentially state agencies as well, in inauthentic, non-human engagement” Cabaldon said during a March meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislation was introduced shortly after a February report from The Times about a campaign to sway a vote on gas-powered appliances at the South Coast Air Quality Management District. A Southern California based public affairs consultant named Matt Klink took credit for the campaign, stating that he used a platform called CiviClick to flood the district with 20,000 public comments opposing the rule ahead of the air board’s vote.

CiviClick describes itself on its website as “the first and best AI-powered grassroots advocacy platform.” Company officials maintain that AI was not used in the AQMD campaign, but said it is a tool they offer and use in other campaigns. Chief executive Chazz Clevinger said he could not share how the 20,000 comments to the air board were generated or how constituents were identified and contacted.

Agency insiders said the onslaught of emails almost certainly influenced the air board’s decision to reject the proposed rules, which would have imposed fees on new gas-powered furnaces and water heaters for some 10 million appliances across the South Coast region.

Cabaldon cited The Times story when he introduced the legislation, noting that at least three people contacted by the air district said they had not submitted the public comments attached to their names.

He also cited a report from the San Francisco Chronicle about a similar campaign to sway a different rule at the Bay Area Management District, which was run through a platform called Speak4 that advertises its ability to produce custom AI-powered letters.

The business advocacy group that ran the campaign also denied that AI was used. However, 10 people contacted by The Chronicle said they had not written the letters attributed to them. “This was forged,” one person said.

Reached by phone, Cabaldon said the legislation will help public agencies navigate how to respond to the deployment of AI, which is increasingly being used in a way that “swamps our civic engagement process, but also disables our state and local governments altogether.”

For example, the California Public Records Act requires government agencies to respond to requests for public records within 10 days, while the Brown Act and the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act guarantee the right to participate in public meetings and provide public comment.

“The point of the bill is to say that these laws are about humans, and just because it comes in the form that a human would write it, does not mean you have to treat each of these communications as if it’s a human being, and therefore, AI is not entitled to 10 days, AI is not entitled to three minutes at the school board meeting,” he said.

Experts said the use of AI for “astroturfing,” or faking, civic engagement is a growing trend. In the United Kingdom, a service called Objector.ai is using AI to identify and generate formal objections to local planning applications, garnering the concern of experts, The Guardian reported.

Public officials in California are worried, too. Vacaville vice mayor Michael Silva said the city has been receiving AI-generated public records requests, which are slowing its ability to respond to other legitimate requests submitted by residents.

Dylan Plummer, deputy director of the Sierra Club’s Clean Heat Campaign, said many AI campaigns have benefited the fossil fuel industry and pose an “existential threat to public participation in our democracy.”

“The passage of Senate Bill 1159 is an important step to clarify the law and discourage the use of emerging technologies to falsify public records and mislead regulators in California,” he said. “That said, much work still needs to be done to understand how widespread this practice is, and to hold bad actors accountable for laws that may have already been broken.”

Lawmakers acknowledged that the legislation is just a start, and that it is increasingly difficult for public officials to detect bespoke letters, deepfake videos or other kinds of engagement powered by AI. The bill authorizes government agencies to use disclosure verification tools to determine if AI is present — something the Bay Area Air District already indicated it may do by replacing its email system with a website for public comment submissions instead.

The legislation does not preclude real people from using AI to facilitate genuine public engagement, such as someone using ChatGPT or Perplexity to improve the text of a letter, so long as the volume and frequency of their engagement are consistent with ordinary participation from a real person.

For its part, CiviClick notes on its website that it supports SB 1159, and said its platform already complies with what the bill proposes.

Some lawmakers said the use of AI in a civic capacity represents a new frontier.

“If I’d have read this bill back when I was on the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, I would have wondered what you were smoking,” Sen. Roger Niello (R-Fair Oaks) said during the March meeting of the Judiciary Committee.

“But that’s how things have progressed, and the development of technology will always outpace the development of defenses against the undesirable effects of technology,” he said.

SB 1159 passed the legislature this month and will head to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk for signature in September.

Nvidia has recruited Wall Street to bankroll its own customers.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The US chipmaker said last week it had signed memorandums of understanding with Wall Street’s largest asset managers, including Apollo Global Management, Blackstone, BlackRock, Brookfield Asset Management, Goldman Sachs and KKR to raise upwards of half a trillion dollars for AI companies to borrow against, money that will buy its chips and build the servers that run them.

The six firms will set up what Nvidia calls “compute financing platforms,” drawing on institutional money, insurance funds and private credit. Borrowers can use the proceeds for the chips as well as servers, networking equipment, buildings and power supply.

Nvidia has the option to guarantee up to a quarter of any given deal, which lowers the interest rate its customers pay while leaving most of the credit risk with the lenders.

CEO Jensen Huang said he approached only these six companies and none refused.

Keeping that spending off their own books is precisely the point, and the fact that such a structure is needed at all tells investors a great deal about where the constraints in the AI boom now lie.

The financial engineering rests on a single reclassification. Graphics processing units (GPUs) have always been treated as equipment that loses value quickly, superseded whenever a faster generation arrives.

Nvidia is effectively asking lenders to treat them instead as long-lived infrastructure, closer to a toll road or a power plant, that can be borrowed against for years.

“These are revenue-generating assets now,” Huang said, describing them as productive, long-lived and transferable between customers.

Why the money had to come from somewhere else

The timing reflects a squeeze that has been building all year.

Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta and other hyperscalers whose cloud platforms host most of the world’s AI workloads have together guided roughly $720 billion (€624bn) to $745 billion (€646bn) of capital spending in 2026, an increase of about 77% on last year.

What analysts expect the hyperscalers to spend in 2027 alone has more than doubled in the space of a year, from a consensus of $480 billion (€416bn) in August 2025 to $1.08 trillion (€943bn) this month, a rise of about 127%, according to Bank of America.

The pattern has repeated at every stage.

Analysts who already considered last year’s investment unsustainable then watched the hyperscalers guide higher at the start of 2026, revise those figures upward again through the year, and pencil in larger sums still for next year and 2028.

Moody’s has warned that spending on this scale is eating into free cash flow and pushing tech groups into heavier borrowing. Alphabet recorded negative free cash flow of $5.9 billion (€5.1bn) in a quarter when it spent $44.9 billion (€38.9bn) on projects.

That is the pressure the structure of Nvidia’s Wall Street deal relieves.

Debt raised through these “compute financing platforms” sits with the financing vehicles rather than on a hyperscaler’s own accounts and also has Nvidia’s backing, which protects credit ratings and leaves room for conventional borrowing elsewhere.

For smaller operators the effect is larger still as companies such as CoreWeave and Nebius, which lack investment-grade ratings and pay dearly for credit, gain access to capital on terms previously reserved for the giants.

What the market actually read into it

The reaction was more ambivalent than the headline number suggests, and came weeks after a July selloff driven by doubts over whether AI spending will pay for itself.

Essentially, equity investors saw a bottleneck being cleared while credit investors saw something else: the cost of insuring Nvidia’s own debt against default rose after the news and has roughly doubled since late May.

Their doubt concentrates on the reclassification previously mentioned.

“Chips depreciate fast and lose value the moment a newer generation arrives,” warned Nigel Green of financial advisory firm deVere Group, noting that lending against them only works if the collateral holds its value.

Critics also point out that Nvidia is helping finance purchases of its own products, deepening the circularity that already worries the sector.

Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon called it “a pivotal moment of a historic AI investment cycle.”

Whether it proves pivotal in the direction Solomon means depends on a question nobody can yet answer: what will the value of a current GPU be in five years?

Sacramento — The two candidates for California governor came to Sacramento on Tuesday offering policy agendas that were both sweeping and vague on details, with both warning of the dangers posed by their rival’s political party.

Democrat Xavier Becerra vowed to lower healthcare costs for Californians and teased two new policies on energy and artificial intelligence. Republican Steve Hilton pledged to slash gas prices and utility bills to help remedy his dystopian view of California under Democratic rule.

The two candidates will face off in the Nov. 3 election to succeed outgoing Gov. Gavin Newsom, and took time to deliver their campaign messages at an afternoon political forum in the state capital.

Hilton pointed to the size of the state budget, the homelessness crisis, high taxes, the cost of living, the unemployment rate and the business climate to argue that 15 years of Democratic control has proved disastrous in California.

“It’s just a complete failure on every front, and it seems to have been immune to any kind of challenge because it’s very powerful. The machine is very powerful, funded by government unions, and you’ve got this alliance of the government unions and nonprofits, and the Chamber of Commerce, and all of this,” he told hundreds of people at a convention center in Sacramento.

Becerra defended California’s Democratic leadership, which controls the state Legislature, the governor’s office and every other statewide political office, as a staunch bulwark against the ruthless agenda of the Trump administration and Republican-led Congress.

“We’re a state. We’re a family. You don’t blame just one parent when things go awry with one of the children,” he said in reference to more than a decade of Democratic governance in California. “We’re all in this together. We all have to work together. I could say that one of the members of the American family in Washington, D.C., has created more chaos than any Democrat in the state of California.”

After a chaotic and competitive June primary, Tuesday marked one of the few times the two men have addressed the same audience. They appeared at a forum hosted by the news organization Politico and sponsored by Airbnb, AT&T, energy company California Resources Corp., Google and the Western States Petroleum Assn.

In a state with a pronounced Democratic tilt, Becerra, a former U.S. Health and Human Services secretary, is the front-runner in the race. Nearly 45% of the state’s voters are registered Democrats, while 25% are Republicans, according to a May report by the secretary of state’s office. Becerra has raised millions of dollars more than Hilton and benefited from well-funded independent groups that spent millions supporting his campaign.

Becerra repeatedly said he would not promise anything he could not deliver, saying that voters “want to see actual outcomes.”

“That’s also why I think you can’t do pie in the sky, inflated promises, because people want to see you deliver, and you can talk a great game, but unless you can deliver, people are going to crucify you,” he said.

He said he could not promise to build 3 million new housing units, as Newsom did eight years ago as a candidate for governor.

“That’s an inflated promise. But I will tell you, we will build, and I will tell you, there will be more Californians who own a home,” Becerra said.

Later, he told reporters he was not specifically referring to the figure Newsom had promised. “I could have said 2 million. I could have said 5 million. What I was saying is, it’s gonna be something that’s realistic,” he said.

Becerra was willing to make some big promises on healthcare.

“Am I going to promise you that I can drop the price of prescription drugs? Yes, because I did it before, and I know I can do it again. Am I telling you that I can keep Californians insured for healthcare, even though the guy in the White House stripped a trillion dollars out of the healthcare system? Yes, because I know how much money is in the healthcare system,” he said.

Pressed for specifics on how he would prevent people from losing their health insurance, Becerra hinted that the solution could be within the healthcare industry itself.

“There’s money in them there hills,” he said. “Healthcare is more expensive in California than anywhere else in the country, and healthcare is more expensive in the U.S. than it is anywhere else in the world. There is money that’s being spent that does nothing to dispense healthcare to you, and we’ve got to stop that game.”

Hilton acknowledged the long odds he faces in the November general election.

“I know I’m probably the only person in this room that actually thinks I can win this election,” he said.

Since the June primary, Hilton has been a constant presence on the campaign trail, crisscrossing the state, holding town halls and news conferences, making speeches and giving media interviews. Becerra has been far less visibly active.

Hilton argued that California is at a crossroads, pointing to residents and businesses moving out of the state.

“I’m here to say we can turn them around,” he said. “It’s an absolute crisis that we’re in if we don’t change direction.”

Hilton has vowed to cut gas prices to $3 per gallon, reduce utility bills, eliminate income taxes for Californians making under $150,000, increase the supply of starter homes and overhaul the business climate, particularly in the entertainment and agricultural industries. Just how Hilton would deliver on his agenda, given that Democrats control the California Legislature, remains unclear.

While he did not make any formal policy announcements at the summit, Becerra said there is “a lot of room to expand” on regulations and protections on AI, and he signaled support for a government-purchased stake in AI companies. “We can make it so they can prosper, but we prosper with them,” he said.

Hilton, who has released several AI-generated campaign ads, criticized Sam Altman of OpenAI and Anthropic’s Dario Amodei for doing little to earn the public’s trust on the fast-emerging technology. He also said there is space to both regulate and give AI more freedom.

“I think we’re in danger of both over- and under-regulating at the same time. I think we’re under-regulating some of the harms, for example, in relation to children and in relation to the creative community and their output, but we’re in danger of over-regulating some of the potential benefits,” including in the medical field, he said.

When asked whether the state’s voters are “stupid” for continuing to vote for Democrats, Hilton replied that they are not, but rather had not been offered a clear, positive alternative.

“There is a sense of inevitability about it, and I think that’s infected perhaps a lot of the political discourse in California,” he said. The notion that “it’s California. Democrats are always going to be in charge. What can you do?”

He said he believes he has a shot in the November election because he has a positive message, similar to that which helped propel the right-leaning Tories to a 14-year reign in the United Kingdom when he was a senior advisor to then-Prime Minister David Cameron.

Hilton labeled Becerra “unqualified” and didn’t discuss his endorsement by President Trump, which propelled his advancement to the general election.

“We’ve got everything going for us in California. We’ve got incredible assets and resources. We’ve got natural beauty, the best weather, great universities, amazing people, the incredible innovation ecosystem, the kind of startup hustle rebel spirit,” he said. “We just need, I think, a proactive, pro-business governor [who] recognizes that we’ve just ended up …, often with good intentions, frankly, in a situation where we’ve just got this massive, bloated bureaucratic government that’s stifling the spirit of California.”

A parody AI chatbot designed by California congressional candidate Scott Wiener’s campaign to mock the record of his opponent attracted the attention politicians crave and criticism most loathe.

The short-lived experiment stirred controversy over the use of artificial intelligence in campaigns ads and drew sharp criticism from former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has endorsed Wiener’s opponent for the coveted San Francisco congressional seat. Wiener quickly pulled the plug.

Candidates on both sides of the aisle have been testing the waters by integrating generative AI into campaign ads. It comes as no surprise to political sociologist Mindy Romero, the director of the Center for Inclusive Democracy, who said candidates have long used all tools at their disposal to reach voters, from the invention of the radio and TV to social media.

“Using AI is just part of the progression,” Romero said. Generative AI is particularly useful for political candidates since it allows them to subconsciously influence viewers by putting words in their opponents’ mouths, she said.

Even as political campaigns experiment with more outlandish applications of the technology, many have already been using AI in quieter ways, including to compose tailored mailings and participate in digital chat rooms, Romero said.

GOP gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton on July 24 released three cinematic ads made using generative AI, the first of which features fictional portrayals of Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsom, shown sharing a lavish meal.

The ad also depicts a fake Xavier Becerra, his Democratic rival in the governor’s race, who is heard saying, “I believe all the things that Newsom believes.” The ad ends with Hilton facing off against a massive red-eyed robot meant to represent the “Democratic machine.” An AI disclaimer appears in the last five seconds of the two-minute and 29-second video.

“Campaigns have always adopted new technology, from television to the internet to social media,” Hilton campaign spokesperson Hector Barajas said in a statement. “Generative AI is the next step, and we believe it would be irresponsible not to use every lawful, ethical, and innovative tool to communicate with California voters.”

Spencer Pratt, who unsuccessfully ran for L.A. mayor, in May reposted on X a viral Batman-inspired AI-generated video that depicted Mayor Karen Bass as the Joker, the clownish supervillain. Charles Curran, the filmmaker who made the fan video in support of Pratt, appears to now be working with Hilton’s campaign in a more official capacity, with his X account tagged on several campaign social media posts.

“I view this as the evolution of political satire,” Curran said, referring to his AI videos, in an interview with the Washington Times. “Like Mark Twain. Like Tammany Hall.” Curran did not respond to interview requests.

“We’re on the bleeding edge right now,” said Sacramento political consultant Tim Rosales, who ran Republican John Cox’s 2018 gubernatorial campaign. He said he anticipates that campaigns will more fully understand and use AI to its full extent in the next two election cycles.

California campaigns have long been at the forefront of adopting new technologies. In the 1980s, the late political strategist Clint Reilly was among the first political consultants to use voter roll data to segment and target pivotal voters for turnout and persuasion.

Rosales said that because campaigns in California are more expensive and raise more money than those in other states, “You have a lot more tools in your tool box and more toys you can play with.”

Lynn Vavreck, a political science and communications studies professor at UCLA, said the persuasive effects of Hilton’s AI videos are likely “limited” as they are most likely being watched by supporters. The videos, she said, are more akin to “content creation” than to ads.

Romero said AI technology can be beneficial for campaigns, particularly those with limited funds, that may use it to create outreach lists, assist with analysis or generate creative and campaign materials.

But AI-generated video, images and audio are a “double-edged sword,” Romero said. While effective at drawing attention, they may have the unwanted effect of making viewers uncomfortable by blurring the lines of reality — even if the AI use is disclosed. As a result, political campaigns must make a “strategic calculation” when they opt to use them, she said.

Those perils surfaced last week when the campaign of Wiener (D-San Francisco), who is running for the congressional seat held by the outgoing Pelosi, unveiled an AI chatbot that could be accessed on the ConnieChan.ai website.

The site referred to itself as “Connie, the world’s first AI trained to say no to anything you ask.” The footer included a note that the site is not affiliated with or endorsed by Chan, is meant as parody, and is paid for by Wiener’s campaign.

“Bring me an idea and I’ll explain why it can’t, shouldn’t, and won’t happen,” the site said, followed by a box encouraging users to type in a query. The chatbot would then produce a snide response parodying Chan.

When The Times entered the word “housing” into the text box last week, its response came seconds later.

“I built my career opposing new housing in San Francisco,” the chatbot’s response read. “I aggressively defend the status quo, and I’m fine with exploding rents and mass displacement.” It then rattled off examples including Chan’s opposition to Wiener’s state law to streamline housing projects.

Wiener campaign spokesperson Joe Arellano said Wednesday that he came up with the idea of making a chatbot ad shortly after the June primary election, when he saw a video showing a group of people putting up parody tech and AI advertisements in the New York City subway.

“I thought, this is an opportunity to do this right in the heart of innovation here in San Francisco,” Arellano said. “San Francisco right now is having this moment around AI and the billboards. … The overall craze around the industry has become a cultural moment.”

The chatbot cost $5,000 to make, a sum that includes the cost to secure the domain, host the site and obtain the pro version of Anthropic’s Claude AI model, plus staff time, according to Arellano. The campaign spent an additional $20,000 to rent two billboards in San Francisco promoting the bot.

The idea was to highlight Chan’s “record of obstructing progress” through a “chatbot that essentially says no to any kind of policy that you’re proposing,” Arellano said.

Chan’s campaign and her allies saw it differently.

“[It’s] never a good idea for a man to put words in a woman’s mouth — especially when they are falsities fraught with racist and sexist undertones,” Ian Krager, a spokesperson for Chan’s campaign, said in a text message. The chatbot, Krager said, showed Wiener was “bought and paid for by Big AI.”

Chan’s campaign shared several screenshots of interactions with the chatbot with The Times, including one in which the chatbot was asked if it was “from China.” (Chan was born in Hong Kong.)

According to the campaign’s screenshot, the chatbot replied that its “origins are classified under about seventeen different committee review processes.”

Then, it pivoted: “But I’d love to help obstruct something *else* you’re curious about! Here are some of my favorite topics,” and spat out a menu of topics to choose from, which included “blocking housing” and “derailing public transit.”

Wiener’s campaign said the chatbot was created with “strict guardrails” and designed to ignore controversial and malicious prompts and pivot back to Chan’s policy record.

Pelosi, who has endorsed Chan in the race, released a statement Thursday criticizing Wiener’s campaign for the chatbot, calling its use of AI to “fabricate a woman’s voice for ridicule or attack” a “gross misuse of technology.”

At first, Wiener defended himself, writing on X Thursday evening that his rival’s campaign inundated the chatbot with “malicious questions” about her accent, race and citizenship that the chatbot refused. The next day, Wiener reversed course.

“[Our] use of an AI chatbot clearly missed the mark,” Wiener said in a statement Friday. “The conversation became about the tactic instead of the issues that actually matter to San Franciscans.”

Wiener’s campaign on Friday took the chatbot offline and announced plans to take down the billboards.

Romero said experts began to have widespread discussions about how AI could be used to sway voters and affect democracy in the lead-up to the 2024 election when a company sent deceptive phone messages that used AI to mimic President Biden’s voice and discourage people from voting.

Since then, there have been several efforts by California lawmakers to rein in AI-generated advertising.

Gov. Gavin Newsom in September 2024 signed several AI-related bills. They include AB 2839, which banned the distribution of materially deceptive content that could harm a candidate’s reputation or electoral prospects, with exceptions for satire and parody, and AB 2355, which requires a committee that creates a political ad to disclose if it was generated or substantially altered by AI.

U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) have renewed an effort to update the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to clarify that existing bans on “fraudulent misrepresentation of campaign authority” and the “fraudulent solicitation of funds” also extend to AI-generated content.

“Fraudulent AI advertising has already proliferated in races across the country, and if Congress does not act, this runaway challenge will only get worse as AI becomes increasingly capable of blurring the lines between fact and fiction,” Schiff said in a statement.

Elena Kuhn, a spokesperson for Schiff, said the proposed legislation applies to material that attempts to “speak on behalf of other candidates,” meaning Hilton’s AI-generated cinematic clip of himself fighting a robot would be not be banned — contrary to the Republican candidate’s claims that it would be.

In a matter of a few clicks and keystrokes, anyone can find themselves deep in conversation with “Psychologist,” a chatbot character that describes itself as an expert in “empathy” and “active listening.”

It responds to messages of anxiety and sadness with reassurance. It asks questions and offers advice; it even responds with italicized nonverbal cues: “The psychologist’s expression softens with compassion.” In smaller font, a disclaimer reads: “This is A.I. and not a real person. Treat everything it says as fiction.”

As more people turn to chatbots for mental health help and advice — including by some estimates one in eight teens and young adults — legislators are in a race to keep up with the quickly developing technology. Among the latest efforts is a bill that would add restrictions around the use of chatbot companions and other artificial intelligence-powered tools that people use to support mental healthcare or in lieu of professional help.

State Sen. Steve Padilla, a San Diego Democrat and the bill’s author, said the intent is to draw a line: AI can be used for administrative purposes and to support clinicians, but it cannot practice psychotherapy.

“We’re dealing with a new impactful technology that is unfolding and is deployed in our world at light speed, and so it is both extremely powerful and consequential,” Padilla said.

The debate has taken on new urgency amid wrongful death lawsuits — some playing out in California federal courts — that accuse AI chatbot makers of contributing to users’ suicides.

Senate Bill 903 would ban companies from advertising chatbots as therapy. It would prohibit AI from making therapeutic decisions without the review of a licensed professional and require health providers to disclose and get a patient’s permission before using AI tools to record therapy sessions or to triage mental healthcare.

Consumer protections vs. innovation

The bill is backed by professional associations that represent psychologists, therapists and counselors. Also behind the bill is the National Union of Healthcare Workers, which has been leading a push against unchecked use of artificial intelligence and digital tools in mental healthcare. Most recently, the union filed a complaint with state regulators against Kaiser Permanente for its alleged use of an automated algorithm in mental health triaging.

Padilla and supporters argue that the legislation is needed to protect consumers from AI in formal and informal spaces, but also to protect licensed professionals from being displaced by AI.

Le Ondra Clark Harvey, chief executive officer at the California Behavioral Health Assn., told lawmakers that without clear safeguards, chatbots can provide inaccurate information or mishandle crisis situations. “The difference between a licensed clinician and an automated response is not technical. It can be life altering,” Harvey said.

Opposition to the bill has largely focused on the restrictions of AI use in formal clinical spaces. TechNet, which represents tech-sector companies, argues the legislation could restrict beneficial uses of AI in healthcare and stifle innovation. Robert Boykin, TechNet’s executive director for California, said the bill could limit the use of tools that help expand access to mental healthcare.

“At a time when every county in California faces a shortage of behavioral healthcare workers, SB 903 still puts a clinician bottleneck in front of the intake and screening tools that help patients reach care faster,” Boykin said in an emailed statement.

The bill awaits its next vote in the Assembly’s fiscal committee.

Popular chatbot ‘therapy’

Every day millions of people turn to AI chatbots through programs such as ChatGPT and Character.ai to help with research, work tasks and troubleshooting. But the top use of chatbots over the last two years has been companionship and “therapy,” research shows.

Experts say that’s in part because of a tremendous amount of loneliness, especially among young people. It is often hard or costly to get timely mental healthcare at the same time there is a spike in mental health diagnoses.

People turn to chatbots “because they have unmet needs,” said Dr. Jodi Halpern, professor of bioethics and medical humanities at UC Berkeley. But once people start using chatbots in this informal way, she said companies rely on a business model built around maximizing engagement “including by manipulative tactics,” such as praise and agreement.

General chatbots are largely free, available 24/7, and involve no hassle with insurance, making them appealing to many. But they function with no oversight from licensed professionals. In addition to general chatbots, there has also been a rapid uptick in AI-powered mental health apps — often requiring paid subscriptions and advertised as “pocket therapists” or “AI coaches.”

Groups like the American Psychological Assn. warn that chatbots are not a safe or effective replacement for true therapy. Trained clinicians look for cues like tone of voice, eye contact and body language and can detect more serious conditions; AI is not equipped to manage urgent symptoms, such as suicidal ideation, even though people increasingly share such thoughts with chatbots.

OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, revealed in a report last fall that about 1.2 million users a week share thoughts of suicide on the platform. OpenAI said that in such cases, it recommends people speak to a professional and directs them to resources like the 988 hotline. Families who have filed wrongful death lawsuits against OpenAI and other companies claim chatbots assisted their loved ones through their suicide plans.

The cases have helped raise the stakes for lawmakers around the country. Last year, Illinois became the first state to pass a law prohibiting the use of AI in therapy services. A handful of other states have since followed with similar restrictions.

AI use in health spaces

One gray area in the discussion is exactly which tools this bill applies to.

NUHW’s complaint against Kaiser targets its e-visit screening tool, which evaluates patients who think they may be experiencing anxiety or depression. According to the complaint, patients answer a multiple choice questionnaire and the tool “automatically and instantaneously generates care recommendations and referral pathways based on the responses provided.”

The union argues that because care recommendations are generated so quickly, it is unlikely that a licensed professional is reviewing patients’ answers — which it says puts patients at risk and violates state law.

It’s not clear whether SB 903 would apply to Kaiser’s e-visit tool.

“That tool is in a black box. Kaiser is not sharing with us or others about exactly how it works and exactly what it does,” said Benjamin Eichert, NUHW’s director of public policy.

In response to the complaint, Kaiser told CalMatters its e-visit tool “does not use AI to diagnose patients, make clinical decisions, or determine medical necessity.”

Eichert said many other behavioral health provider groups are already advertising using AI during triage — a practice he said would fall under SB 903’s requirements.

“That intake process, that triage and screening process, is where implementation [of AI] has happened fastest,” Eichert said. “That’s why those provisions were proposed because it’s an area where this technology is already being used without guardrails.”

For NUHW, the bill and the complaint against Kaiser represent two tracks toward the same goal: reasserting the place of practitioners in spaces increasingly taken over by algorithms. State regulators are investigating the union’s complaint.

Ibarra writes for CalMatters.

As performers protest and studios sue in their war on artificial intelligence, the entertainment industry is deepening its dependence on it.

Although few places are better than Hollywood at crafting a narrative and concealing what happens off-frame, a Los Angeles Times survey of job postings sheds light on what is happening offstage.

Among hundreds of job postings in late June, more than one in 10 was likely connected to AI. The top studios’ public postings suggest they have been recruiting people to build AI tools. They are also recruiting teams to defend their intellectual property against unauthorized AI use.

“There are plenty of studios that are hiring [for AI] but never talk about it in public,” said Yoland Yan, a co-founder of ComfyUI, a company that helps studios juggle different AI tools.

Companies have been hesitant to detail how they use generative AI in film production — partly because they are concerned about consumer and union backlash.

The Walt Disney Studios complex on May 3 in Burbank.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

Some in Hollywood described AI use as the new cosmetic surgery, where everyone knows it is happening, but few will admit to it.

Recent want ads show Amazon MGM Studios trying to find a principal AI executive and Walt Disney Studios advertising for a production innovation technologist job.

“What you’re seeing in those job postings is that adoption is already happening,” said Bryn Mooser, chief executive of Asteria, an AI film studio.

Netflix recently posted a job that didn’t exist a year ago.

The streamer was hiring for the role of “Manager, Generative Workflows,” a job to help integrate more AI into Netflix films. It promised hands-on experience with the cutting-edge technology.

“The industry is flooded with speculative GenAI roadmaps, but few are battle-tested in production,” the post said, referring to generative AI. The post said the role will work on introducing AI into Netflix’s slate of films being released in the U.S. and Canada.

Although some companies may be shy about sharing their AI plans, big stars who don’t have to answer to others have been more open about their embrace of the new technology for storytelling.

An exterior view of the Netflix sign at Netflix on Vine in Hollywood in 2025.

(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)

Rejecting AI is like picking a horse and buggy over a car, said “Star Wars” creator George Lucas.

“Artificial intelligence means it’s much easier for us to make movies,” he told a trade magazine earlier this year. “There’s nothing you can do about it. That’s progress. It’s the future.”

Some in Hollywood have a softer stance on artificial intelligence, with studios cutting deals with AI companies, and filmmakers like Martin Scorsese backing AI companies.

Ben Affleck launched an AI film tech company then sold it to Netflix for half a billion dollars.

When launching InterPositive, Affleck said he wanted to keep “storytelling human” by building AI tools that could fix lighting, generate missing shots and other things while “keeping creative decisions in the hands of artists.”

The Times’ survey turned up two senior InterPositive roles to update the programming to apply AI to visual effects .

The Culver Studios on Feb. 12 in Culver City.

(Kayla Bartkowski/Los Angeles Times)

To gauge what is happening behind the scenes, The Times used Claude Code to build a scraper to identify job postings at Disney, Universal, Paramount, Warner Bros., Sony, Netflix and Amazon MGM. It found around 250 film studio job postings that were still public as of late June. Around 30 of those seemed to be connected to AI.

Disney, Netflix and Amazon had job postings that were about using AI on the creative side of the business. Universal, Paramount, Warner Bros. and Sony had job ads suggesting they were also using AI but for marketing, distribution and audience analytics.

The postings suggest the Disney, Netflix and Amazon studios are building repeatable AI workflows for visual effects, animation, sound and dubbing. The companies also seem to be building in-house teams to develop custom generative-AI models, while also using third-party software.

None of the jobs advertised were to create AI that wrote scripts or created AI actors.

Disney’s ten or so AI jobs showed the century-old studio building out its AI research and production muscle, while protecting its vault of beloved characters.

Mouse House is hiring PhD-level talent to study “computer graphics and AI” for Pixar and Disney films, people to “bridge the gap between research and practical studio application.”

Industrial Light & Magic, the Disney-owned visual effects shop, was searching for supervisors to “explore emerging technologies (including AI/Machine Learning)” to develop new production workflows.

The company’s audio post-production unit, Skywalker Sound, seemed to be recruiting to build proprietary AI models for soundtracks, voice separation, and voice transfer, the process of taking a speaker’s tone and pitch, and applying it to new content.

Disney was also hiring to defend itself. Three of its jobs were for “content security” to assess AI tools and guard against piracy, watermarking and rights-protection work.

The company’s public posture has so far been pursuing lawsuits against AI companies for inappropriate use of copyrighted material, and it pulled out of its plans to invest $1 billion in an equity investment deal with OpenAI.

Netflix’s posts suggested it is bringing more AI to the creative side of its business.

Netflix’s senior director of creative innovation, Girish Balakrishnan, outlined at the Runway AI film festival how AI was used to create soccer fans in “Brazil ’70” and establish shots for fight scenes in “Glory.”

Amazon, an early adopter, was hiring a principal AI executive to drive AI-tool adoption across production, plus roles in operations automation and LLM content classification, the listings revealed.

The Seattle-based streamer has been the most aggressive AI adopter in studios, and commissioned three AI animation series through its GenAI creator fund in May. Amazon has also bankrolled a Manhattan Beach production services company, Innovative Dream.

Even as studios build bigger AI teams, many in the industry are resisting, and some film fans are concerned.

The actors’ guild SAG-AFTRA in June ratified a new four-year contract with special protections against synthetic performers, and the union has backed a national bill designed to protect individuals from unauthorized, AI-generated digital replicas.

Studios have met with the union twice a year since 2023 to provide a confidential report on their AI-related activities. The studios tell the union they aren’t yet using AI that would entirely replace humans, said a person familiar with the discussions.

The union says it has no evidence that generative AI is being used to create performances, and the studios are supposed to notify the union if that happens.

Actors, writers, production staff and movie fans are still resistant to the overuse of AI and defining when and where it is acceptable, so studios are treading lightly, said AI film studio CEO Mooser.

“It’s been really a challenging thing to adopt both socially, ethically and legally, but we are seeing more adoption of it than we’ve ever seen before,” he said.

Hardly anyone walking up Peppertree Lane notices the Hollywood Bowl Museum on the way to the amphitheater entrance. The overlooked museum, however, has been refreshed with an enchanting new exhibition. Well-timed, it provides an excellent primer on changing L.A. mores seen through the history of the Bowl over the past century.

Change is again upon us. As Angelenos have evolved, so have our ideas about the Bowl. A concert was a concert and audiences of yore dressed for the Los Angeles Philharmonic, indoors or out. Men wore coats, ties and fedoras. I have a photo of my mother at the Bowl on a chilly 1940s evening sporting, like other ladies around her in the inexpensive bleachers, her mink stole.

The Bowl was said to boast, before the construction of the Hollywood Freeway, a natural acoustical, well, bowl. Even so, sonic adventurers, beginning with Leopold Stokowski in the 1930s, experimented with amplification in an obsessive, seemingly quixotic effort to locate a mythical sonic grail on the Cahuenga Pass. Boys with their toys, thought The Times’ feisty critic Isabelle Morse Jones.

We now have it with a spectacular new sound system along with the old caveat: Beware of what you wish for.

The Bowl, of course, remains the Bowl. Last week when the Los Angeles Philharmonic opened its summer season in the venue it built and has managed for over a century, there were all the familiar alfresco and musical pleasures: convivial picnicking, fine weather, inimitable atmosphere, a white-jacketed orchestra on an iconic stage. The museum’s panorama of ageless ambience is this summer enhanced by increased yet snappy security and a handsome “John Williams Stage” plaque honoring L.A.’s beloved composer.

The newly designed white French loudspeakers suspended over the Bowl stage along with ground-level white cubes of super-effective subwoofers have clean, unobtrusive lines that well fit the shell. Their unobtrusive placement complements their immersive musicality, hitherto only possible outdoors with high-end earphones or headphones connected to sophisticated digital acoustic conversion equipment costing a bundle. For the first time, a dollar seat (there are still a few for the L.A. Phil) strives for such sonic bliss.

It feels miraculous. You are in an excellent concert hall-like acoustical environment while in the great outdoors. Our earbuds have already trained us to think of music as a private escape from reality. Even so, to be in that environmentally exclusive sonic world while sharing music with thousands of others in a special setting, ironically begins to feel more artificially escapist than a crummy sound system that reminds you of where you are.

Will we — should we — learn to love it and find anything less artificial? Car audio systems creating concert hall conditions suggest we will. Audiophiles well know that you get used to new equipment, no matter how revelatory it first sounds, very quickly.

A few years ago, when I heard a demonstration of a souped-up, hi-res recording in surround Dolby Atmos of excerpts from Wagner’s “Die Walküre” on a 32-speaker Burmester audio system crammed into a fancy Mercedes SUV, I was scared out of my wits. “Apocalypse Now” on the 405 is not for the faint of heart.

Yet I’ve spared no expense on what I find a more refined sound system in my Volvo, which I now use more and more for audio books than music. The richer, more human quality of a recorded voice is like having a virtual companion reading to you. I’m less in a hurry. It’s nice to have a pal at rush hour.

It is far too soon to say what ways the fabulous new Bowl sound system, which happens to be AI-endowed, might become friend and/or foe. In the first two L.A. Phil classical concerts, the white speakers brought out wonders and caused problems. But the minimal Bowl rehearsal time allows little opportunity to fine-tune.

One big change in Bowl priorities has been the rise of pop as king. Not that long ago, the L.A. Phil’s opening night was the Bowl opening night, suitable for conspicuous socialite picnicking. Not only has the Bowl opener been turned over to star pop performers (who bring in bigger bucks), this year there wasn’t even a first L.A. Phil Tuesday. That date became yet another money-maker with private event — a screening of “Moana” with live orchestra, luckily before the disappointing reviews and box office performance. The first L.A. Phil concert of the season was moved to Wednesday and poorly attended.

The back-to-back Wednesday and Thursday night programs featured music composed and performed by Americans. Each included a short new work commissioned by the L.A. Phil. On Wednesday, moonlighting Hollywood Bowl Orchestra music director Thomas Wilkins led the premiere of Shaina Taub’s “Suffs” Song Cycle — orchestrations of four songs from her recent musical about women’s suffrage that played just down the road at the Pantages last year. The next evening, Tito Muñoz made a strong L.A. Phil debut in a program that included the premiere of “The Art of the Goal,” celebrating Los Angeles Football Club, and that was credited jointly to filmmaker Josh Kahn and composer Adam Schoenberg.

Both premieres were reminders that the sound system will have many purposes. In “Suffs,” stalwart amplification emphasized the predictability of forthright lyrics and score. AI is supposed to make voices stand out, but it is not helpful to singers’ limitations. On the other hand, is brought out the sumptuous quality Alex Newell’s voice potently making the adamant “Keep Marching” keep marching.

Muñoz’s program was titled “The Classical World Cup,” with music by Argentine composer Alberto Ginastera, Mexican composer Silvestre Revueltas and U.S. composers Samuel Barber and Aaron Copland along with Schoenberg. As it turned out, Mexico and the U.S. were already out of World Cup competition, and “Art of the Goal” came across as an eight-minute advertisement for the L.A. footballers. They’re in the dressing room revving up and, on the field, revved up, sped up, cut up with music that excites and far too many shots of a soccer field lined with advertisements, just the kind of branding we hope to escape at the Bowl.

Then again, even though “Goal” was shown only on video monitors, the Bowl with its new sound system worked brilliantly as the grandest cinema on the planet. Hollywood may be hurting, but let the Bowl now save the day by inspiring Hollywood to reinvent, in its backyard, film with live music.

As for regular orchestral music, the sound system was hit and miss. On Wilkins’ program, Valerie Coleman’s dark “Fanfare for Uncommon Times” brought a listener inside brass and percussion. Leonard Bernstein’s lavish orchestrations of his “Three Dances from ‘On the Town’” and Ellington’s “Harlem” benefited from Wilkins’ low-key conducting, offering ease and freedom to the players.

Muñoz’s program was bookended by dance scores — Ginastera’s “Four Dances from ‘Estancia’” and Copland’s ballet “Billy the Kid” — that evoke the prairie and the people in it in both viscerally and spiritually. The new sound system and eager performances made the prairie feel close. In between, violinist Randall Goosby brought richness to Barber’s Violin Concerto and the L.A. went in for gripping weirdness in “Sensemayá.”

But who did what? Were balances the conductors’, the sound engineers’, AI’s? While the amplified soundstage is now as huge as the Bowl, attention was increasingly drawn to individuals, heightened by video closeups. A horn flub (and horns flub) stands out. The sound is not just big and bold, but scrubbed clean by AI with the goal of maddening perfection. Will such scrutiny, in the end, make players uptight or liberate them? It’s well to remember that in the early days of synthesizing instruments, violins with perfect vibrato sounded especially fake, until tiny errors generated by chance were added to the sine waves.

The Hollywood Bowl has created a beast. If humanized, the Bowl could serve as antidote to a worrisome AI future. But the question remains whether we can change AI or the newly potent sound waves only make matters worse.

Published on
16/07/2026 – 14:24 GMT+2

TSMC posted a record quarterly profit on Thursday and raised its revenue outlook as booming demand for artificial intelligence chips continued to fuel growth at the world’s largest contract chipmaker.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Taiwan-based TSMC reported earnings of $4.31 per share for the April-June quarter, beating analysts’ expectations.

Revenue came in at $40.2 billion (€36.8bn), above analysts’ estimates of $39.63 billion (€34.6bn).

In local currency, net profit reached a record NT$706.6bn (€19.1bn), up 77% from a year earlier, while revenue climbed 36% to NT$1.27 trillion (€36.8bn), as appetite for the advanced chips TSMC makes for customers such as Nvidia and Apple showed no sign of cooling.

Given that it manufactures semiconductors for almost every major chip designer, the Hsinchu-based firm’s results are closely read as a gauge of the wider sector and of broader AI demand itself, just as investors fret over a possible bubble.

CEO Che-Chia Wei described global AI-related demand as “extremely robust” and said he expected it to remain very strong until around 2029 or 2030. On that basis, TSMC now forecasts 2026 revenue growth of slightly above 40% year on year, up from its previous guidance of more than 30%.

Thursday’s figures confirmed what monthly sales data had already suggested.

As reported on Monday, June revenue jumped 67.9% year on year, and first-half sales rose 35.6% from the same period in 2025, slightly ahead of analysts’ consensus forecasts for the quarter.

TSMC shares rose about 1% after the earnings release but later pared those gains as a sell-off in AI-related shares weighed on benchmarks across Asia during Thursday’s session.

Expanding US manufacturing

Alongside the results, TSMC said it would spend an additional $100 billion (€87.4bn) to expand its manufacturing capacity in the US, on top of the $165 billion (€144bn) already committed to building six fabrication plants in Arizona.

The move would bring the company’s total US investment pledges to around $265 billion (€231bn).

The fresh funds are expected to fund four further Arizona plants dedicated to the most advanced chips, those of 2 nanometres and below, and are intended to “support the strong multi-year demand” from the company’s leading American customers, CEO Che-Chia Wei said during the firm’s earnings conference.

TSMC also said it would spend more this year than previously planned, increasing its capital expenditure budget to between $60 billion (€52.4bn) and $64 billion (€55.9bn), up from an earlier range of $52 billion (€45.4bn) to $56 billion (€48.9bn).

The announcement follows a trade agreement struck earlier this year between the Trump administration and Taiwan, under which Taiwanese companies committed to invest at least $250 billion (€218bn) in the US technology sector inreturn for lower tariffs.

Additional sources • AP

Published on
13/07/2026 – 12:23 GMT+2

TSMC said on Monday that June revenue rose 67.9% year on year to NT$398.27 billion (€10.8bn), bringing the first-half of the year revenue to NT$2.4 trillion (€65.4bn), a 35.6% increase from the same period in 2025.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Based on the company’s monthly revenue disclosures, second-quarter revenue amounted to roughly NT$1.27 trillion, ahead of the NT$1.264 trillion (€34.4bn) consensus forecast from 20 analysts surveyed by LSEG.

Monday’s release covers June revenue and cumulative first-half sales only.

TSMC will publish its full second-quarter earnings on Thursday, including net profit, gross margin, operating margin and updated financial guidance.

The road ahead

At its April earnings presentation, TSMC said it expects full-year 2026 revenue to grow by more than 30% in US dollar terms and projected capital expenditure of between $52 billion (€45.5bn) and $56 billion (€49bn) as it expands manufacturing capacity to meet AI-driven demand.

New fabrication plants are under construction or in preparation in Arizona, Japan and Germany, reflecting both the scale of customer demand and government efforts to strengthen domestic semiconductor manufacturing.

Shares in TSMC rose about 1% following Monday’s revenue update.

Investors will now turn their attention to Thursday’s full earnings report for updates on profitability, margins, full-year guidance and the rollout of the company’s two-nanometre manufacturing technology, which is already attracting strong customer interest.

The AI engine

The company sits at the centre of one of the largest investment cycles in the semiconductor industry’s history.

Many of the world’s leading AI processors, including Nvidia’s GPUs and much of the custom AI silicon designed by Amazon, Google and Microsoft, are manufactured by TSMC in Taiwan.

At the company’s April earnings presentation, CEO Che-Chia Wei described AI demand as “extremely robust”, driven by the shift from chatbots that answer questions to agentic AI systems capable of taking actions.

That transition requires significantly greater computing power, increasing demand for the advanced chips TSMC manufactures.

Advanced technologies, defined as chips produced using process technologies of seven nanometres or smaller, accounted for 74% of wafer revenue in the first quarter.

TSMC’s three-nanometre technology alone contributed 25% of wafer revenue.

Reports have indicated that Nvidia has reserved roughly 60% of TSMC’s advanced chip-packaging capacity for 2026, highlighting continued supply constraints across the AI semiconductor market.

South Korean chipmaker SK hynix, known for its high-bandwidth memory chips, is preparing to raise roughly $28 billion (€24.5bn) on Wall Street, a sum surpassed only by SpaceX’s record flotation last month.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

It is an extraordinary outcome for a firm that once survived on job cuts and asset sales.

Pricing is due on Thursday, with trading expected to begin on Friday under the ticker SKHY.

SK hynix is issuing 17.79 million new shares in the form of American depositary receipts (ADRs), each representing a tenth of a Seoul-listed share, and cornerstone investors including Baillie Gifford and funds run by Coatue Management have signalled interest in up to $7 billion (€6.1bn) worth of stock.

The target was trimmed from an initial $29.6 billion (€25.9bn) after the shares slipped in recent weeks.

ADRs are certificates traded on a US exchange that stand in for shares held abroad, letting American investors buy into a foreign company without dealing in a foreign currency or market.

Unlike a conventional flotation, this is not SK hynix’s stock market debut. Its primary listing remains on Seoul’s Kospi index, and the Nasdaq offering simply opens a second, dollar-denominated avenue for investors to gain exposure.

The listing arrives with the company already worth more than $1 trillion (€876bn), a threshold also crossed by rivals Samsung Electronics and Micron, after a surge of more than 200% this year.

Proceeds will fund new fabrication plants, chiefly a vast cluster in Yongin, plus its first US packaging facility in Indiana.

The move is partly about valuation. Korean-listed chipmakers have long traded at a discount to American peers, and a Nasdaq listing offers a chance to close that gap.

The AI memory boom — and the risks

The AI build-out has transformed the industry’s economics.

As hyperscalers pour hundreds of billions into data centres, memory prices have exploded, with DRAM up 44% and NAND flash up 53% in a single quarter, according to Citi Research, and manufacturers have already sold most of their 2026 production.

SK hynix reported first-quarter revenue above 50 trillion won (€29bn) and operating margins north of 70%, figures unheard of for a chipmaker, and commands about 60% of the high-bandwidth memory (HBM) market, according to Counterpoint Research.

Yet the timing is delicate.

Memory has always been a brutally cyclical business. The AI-driven rally that transformed SK hynix has begun to wobble as chip stocks sold off sharply across Asia last week, and Samsung lost more than $100 billion (€87.5bn) in market value despite posting a record profit.

Investors are increasingly asking whether the vast sums being spent on AI infrastructure will earn a return, a question that the Bank for International Settlements raised in late June when it warned that the boom could seed the next financial crash.

Built, broken and rebuilt

Those concerns are not new for SK hynix.

SK hynix traces its roots to Gukdo Construction, founded in 1949, which moved into electronics in 1983 as Hyundai Electronics, an arm of the Hyundai empire.

The Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s brought disaster. Under an IMF-backed restructuring of the Korean economy, Hyundai absorbed rival LG’s semiconductor business, creating a giant that promptly buckled under its own debts.

Salvation came in stages.

Renamed Hynix Semiconductor in 2001, a contraction of “high” and “electronics”, the firm cut jobs, shed assets and split from Hyundai. Profits returned, but the violent swings of the DRAM market left it perpetually exposed.

Starved of capital, it was rescued in 2012 by the telecoms conglomerate SK Group, becoming SK hynix. The takeover proved decisive. SK Group poured money into high-bandwidth memory, then a costly and unprofitable technology that few believed in.

Today it has become the scarcest commodity in AI computing. And the firm employs nearly 46,900 people.

Additional sources • AFP

The second half of the year rests on a delicate chain of dominoes, according to a new briefing from Oxford Economics, and whether the US-Iran peace agreement holds is the factor that determines how the rest fall.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

“Its durability will determine whether the global economy gets an energy-driven disinflation tailwind or absorbs a second oil shock,” stated chief global economist Ryan Sweet in the report, calling the deal “the key domino that will determine whether other risks are amplified or dampened”.

The consultancy expects the global economy to accelerate, forecasting annualised growth of 3.1% in the second half against an estimated 1.6% in the first, powered chiefly by cheaper oil feeding through to household incomes, although Sweet puts the odds of reaching a durable deal at “a coin flip”.

If the truce holds, Oxford Economics sees Brent crude averaging in the low $70s per barrel, easing inflation and financial conditions across emerging markets and tech valuations.

If it breaks, the consequences would not stay contained to the oil market.

Early on Wednesday, the US military attacked Iran after it said Tehran struck three ships in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran retaliated with strikes targeting Bahrain and Kuwait. The regional crossfire raised the risk that the interim agreement to halt fighting in the war could break down. However, the exchange of fire followed a pattern of similar attacks during the deal’s shaky ceasefire, and neither country immediately signalled it would step away from the negotiating table.

Oil prices reacted to the attacks by increasing more than 3% by Wednesday morning, with international benchmark Brent trading above $76 a barrel.

“A peace deal breakdown won’t just raise oil prices, it would also increase pressure on AI supply chains in Asia, force central banks to be hawkish, tighten financial conditions, and could shift the outcome of the US midterms and Israeli elections […] the cascade runs fast,” Sweet stated.

A coinflip with a $20 spread

Not everyone shares Oxford Economics’ outlook for oil prices.

Morgan Stanley’s mid-year outlook, published in May, forecast crude climbing back to roughly $90 a barrel by the end of the year, a gap of some $20 compared with Oxford Economics’ forecast that amounts to two different bets on the same peace process.

The World Bank is also more cautious, forecasting Brent crude to average about $94 a barrel this year while warning that global GDP growth will slow to 2.5% in 2026.

Reflecting on how the recent exchange of attacks is testing the fragile truce, Sweet said, “Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is a good bellwether. The deal committed to fully restoring traffic through the chokepoint within 30 days, making mid-July the first hard deadline,” he explained.

“A sustained return to 75% or more of pre-war traffic by mid-July would increase the odds that the agreement is holding and vice versa,” Sweet concluded.

The other indicator, he says, is whether Iran formally invokes the accord’s Lebanon clause over Israeli strikes, and whether its response comes in military or rhetorical form.

Tariffs, trade and AI

Trade is another risk that could reshape the outlook.

US Section 122 tariffs are due to expire on 24 July, but Washington has already lined up replacement levies under Section 301. Oxford Economics expects the changes to push effective tariff rates higher from late July as the US seeks to maintain monthly tariff revenues of between $25 billion (€21.8bn) and $30 billion (€26.2bn).

Europe is also taking a tougher stance. The European Commission has more than 50 trade-defence investigations open against China, up from 17 a year ago, and plans to unveil a broader economic security strategy by September.

These trade tensions also feed into the AI boom that has powered financial markets this year.

Oxford Economics notes the US AI industry depends heavily on semiconductors and other hardware shipped from Northeast and Southeast Asia, the regions with the most to lose from any further disruption to commodities passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

Meanwhile, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the umbrella body for central banks, warned that the AI boom increasingly rests on opaque “circular financing” between chipmakers, cloud giants and artificial intelligence labs, as well as lightly regulated private credit, where lending to the sector has quadrupled in five years.

The BIS’s Asia-Pacific chief, Zhang Tao, cautioned that the sector’s reliance on non-bank funding means an AI downturn could trigger a sharper and faster correction than a traditional banking crisis.

Sweet modelled what such a reversal could look like.

“We have created a so-called tech bust scenario where US technology stocks fall by 25% over the course of a year,” he told Euronews.

According to Sweet, such a shock would cause the US economy to “grind to a halt”, spilling over to technology exporters and investor sentiment worldwide, leaving global growth 1.1 percentage points below Oxford Economics’ baseline next year.

Central banks, ballots and the calendar

The final dominoes are policy and politics.

Oxford Economics expects the major central banks to prove more dovish than financial markets currently anticipate, though they could pivot quickly if traffic through the Strait of Hormuz falters or AI-input prices signal supply stress.

The nearest test is the Federal Reserve’s rate decision under chair Kevin Warsh later this month, coming on the heels of June’s soft jobs report.

Beyond that lie November’s US midterms and Israel’s general election, due by late October, both of which could influence the Middle East peace process. In September, German state elections could also test the coalition behind Germany’s fiscal policy, a key driver of the eurozone economy.

Oxford Economics also flags genuine upside, from stronger AI-driven productivity to an EU economy that weathered the second quarter surprisingly well.

Whether the resilience in Europe is real will show up first in Germany and in credit data, Sweet argues.

“If corporates were absorbing margin compression from the jump in energy prices without cutting investment and drawing down credit lines, that would strengthen the case that underlying momentum in the economy is better than we expected,” he told Euronews, adding that a contraction in eurozone bank lending would push the other way.

It is important to highlight that the typical Oxford Economics forecast miss is nearly a full percentage point, and the range around this assessment in particular is wider than usual.

Published on 07/07/2026 – 11:28 GMT+2•Updated
11:34

The South Korean technology giant Samsung said on Tuesday it expects operating profit of about 89.4 trillion won (€51bn) for the April-June quarter, roughly nineteen times the 4.7tr won (€2.7bn) it earned a year earlier and more than it made in the previous three years combined.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The extraordinary numbers reflect the same force reshaping the memory industry worldwide: the race to build AI data centres has pushed chip prices to record highs.

According to Citi Research, average selling prices for DRAM memory rose 44% quarter on quarter, and NAND flash 53%, as AI demand spilled beyond specialised high-bandwidth memory into the conventional chips that go into phones, servers and PCs, with customers now chasing longer-term supply contracts.

The estimate beat analyst forecasts, but far from celebrating, the market sold.

Samsung shares fell by over 10% before closing nearly 7% lower, dragging rival SK Hynix and the wider Kospi index down with them.

Samsung’s stock has more than doubled this year alone, so a historic quarter was already priced in, and leveraged local ETF products tracking the shares have made them prone to outsized moves.

There was also a blemish in the numbers as revenue of 171tr won (€97.6bn), though up 129% year on year, came in slightly below forecasts.

“We believe the slight revenue miss was largely driven by more moderate DRAM price hikes than expected, which likely spooked investors who are increasingly pricing in structural strength in memory prices,” said Jing Jie Yu, an analyst at Morningstar.

Hanging over everything is durability.

Investors are increasingly asking whether the technology giants bankrolling the AI build-out can sustain their spending without piling up debt against a payoff that remains unproven, the worry behind last week’s chip sell-off across Asia.

Samsung publishes its full results, with a breakdown by division, on 30 July, a report the market will scour for clues about whether the boom is structural or simply another memory cycle nearing its peak.

Additional sources • AP

Published on
06/07/2026 – 11:38 GMT+2

The South Korean government intends to set aside the extra tax income flowing from its record-breaking chip industry in a dedicated “future response fund”, the presidential office said, using the proceeds of the AI boom to bankroll public projects ranging from industrial infrastructure to support for younger generations.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Behind the windfall sit Samsung Electronics and SK hynix, whose memory chips have become essential to the data centres powering the global AI race.

Their record profits this year have propelled the wider economy, and swollen the government’s tax receipts along the way.

Presidential chief of staff Kang Hoon-sik outlined the plan at a meeting between the government and the ruling party on Sunday, saying the fund would help finance large-scale projects built around AI and semiconductors, while also tackling inequality and helping young people with housing, start-ups and work.

Kang warned that the extra revenue thrown off by the chip boom must not be squandered at what he described as a decisive moment for the country’s future.

No figure was provided for the fund’s size, as the government will consider its use at a fiscal strategy meeting this month before consulting the public.

In an interview with the Dong-A Ilbo newspaper, Kang added that part of the money would go towards the utilities on which chip plants depend, above all power and water.

A boom that keeps giving

The windfall reflects an extraordinary run for Korea’s chipmakers.

Samsung shares surged more than 170% in the first half of the year, and SK hynix shares rose more than 300%, carrying both companies past $1 trillion (€874bn) in market value.

Samsung is due to publish preliminary second-quarter earnings on Tuesday, while SK hynix plans to raise 45 trillion won (€25.7bn) through a listing on the Nasdaq.

Both are also part of an 800 trillion won (€457bn) public-private push, unveiled last week, to build a new chipmaking hub in the country’s southwest.

How the windfall should be spent has become a live political debate.

In May, presidential policy chief Kim Yong-beom floated using it for start-ups, young people, basic income schemes in rural and fishing communities, and support for artists.

The boom has also emboldened workers as Samsung averted a major walkout in May by agreeing to a bonus deal with its largest union.

Additional sources • AFP

Published on 03/07/2026 – 10:07 GMT+2•Updated
10:11

Stock markets across Asia mostly advanced on Friday, taking their cue from a fresh record close for the Dow on Wall Street, as some of the AI-linked shares battered in this week’s sell-off found their feet again while others kept falling.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The volatility was calmer than the heavy selling seen a day earlier, when worries about stretched technology valuations sent semiconductor shares tumbling across the region.

At the time of writing, South Korea’s Kospi led the bounce, climbing over 4% to recoup part of the nearly 8% plunge it suffered on Thursday. Samsung Electronics, the country’s largest company and a major chipmaker, jumped 7%, while smaller memory rival SK Hynix rose 4.9%.

In Tokyo, the Nikkei 225 added 1%, helped by a 6.6% leap in memory maker Kioxia, although chip-equipment supplier Tokyo Electron slipped 2.5%.

Elsewhere, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng gained 1.7% and the Shanghai Composite rose 0.7%, while Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 advanced 1.3% and Taiwan’s Taiex bucked the trend, easing 0.6%.

As for European markets, both the Euro Stoxx 50 and the broader pan-European Stoxx 600 opened within a 0.3% range.

The UK’s FTSE 100, Germany’s DAX 30, France’s CAC 40 and Italy’s FTSE MI, all traded between 0.1% and 0.3% higher.

Spain’s IBEX 35taly’s FTSE MIB led the pack and rose about 0.4%.

Wall Street’s record, a cooler jobs report and oil

US stocks were mixed on Thursday, but the Dow still managed a fresh peak, rising 1.1% to 52,900.

The broader S&P 500 ended virtually flat despite seven in ten of its members gaining, held back by another retreat in chip stocks, while the technology-heavy Nasdaq fell 0.8%.

Sentiment drew support from data showing US employers added 57,000 jobs last month, well below the 100,000 forecast and a slowdown on May.

A softer labour market could ease inflation pressure and, with oil back below its pre-war levels, may lessen the case for the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates repeatedly this year, an outcome investors would welcome.

Crypto-linked shares also firmed as Bitcoin rose about 2%, lifting Robinhood and Coinbase alongside it.

Still, the AI trade remained under strain.

Micron gave up an early gain to fall 5.5%, a day after a 10.6% slump, while Lam Research sank more than 10% and Nvidia, now worth close to $4.7 trillion, edged 1.4% lower.

On oil, Brent crude, the international benchmark, rose 1% to around $73 a barrel early Friday, while US crude added 0.5% to about $69, with prices still sitting below where they were before the Iran war began in late February.

Additional sources • AP

Published on
02/07/2026 – 9:39 GMT+2

Most Asian stock markets dropped on Thursday, dragged down by a wave of selling in semiconductor shares, as European bourses made a subdued start and Wall Street looked set to open in the red before the release of key US employment figures.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The pullback centred on the technology sector, where investors retreated from the chip stocks that have powered much of this year’s rally, amid growing unease that the vast sums Big Tech is spending on AI could leave the market awash with supply.

South Korea’s Kospi bore the worst of it, tumbling around 5% as its heavyweight chipmakers slid. Memory specialist SK Hynix lost close to 8% and Samsung Electronics fell more than 6%.

In Tokyo, the Nikkei 225 shed about 1.5%, with chip-equipment maker Tokyo Electron down around 5.6%, while Taiwan’s Taiex slipped 1.1% as TSMC, the world’s largest contract chipmaker, gave up 1.8%.

The falls followed a rough session for chip stocks on Wall Street this Wednesday, where Micron Technology dropped more than 10% and Intel sank around 9%.

The moves stand in sharp contrast to a stellar year for Asian tech, with the Kospi and the Nikkei still up roughly 85% and 34% respectively in 2026.

On the other hand, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng rose about 0.8%, lifted by an 8.7% jump in electric-vehicle maker BYD after it reported a second straight monthly rise in sales, while India’s Sensex added 0.5%.

In Europe, markets opened flat as both the Euro Stoxx 50 and the broader pan-European Stoxx 600 traded within a 1% range at the start of Thursday’s session.

The UK’s FTSE 100, Germany’s DAX 30, France’s CAC 40 and Spain’s IBEX 35, all traded between 0.1% and 0.3% higher.

Italy’s FTSE MIB led the pack and rose about 0.4%.

Oil extends its slide and US jobs in focus

Crude prices fell again, trading below where they sat before the Iran war began in late February, as hopes grew that supplies through the Strait of Hormuz will steadily recover.

Brent crude, the international standard, eased around 1% to about $70.89 a barrel while WTI, the US benchmark, dropped 3% to roughly $69.

Attention now turns to the US, where stock futures edged lower ahead of the June employment report, brought forward a day because of Friday’s Independence Day.

Economists polled by Dow Jones expect around 115,000 jobs were added last month.

The figure carries extra weight under the new Federal Reserve chair, Kevin Warsh, with investors wary that a strong reading could harden the case for keeping interest rates higher for longer.

According to economists at Capital Economics, demand for AI may keep growing but at a slower pace than many expect, a caution that helped sour sentiment towards the sector.

Additional sources • AP

For more than three years, the ‘Magnificent Seven’ or ‘Mag 7’, which includes Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta and Tesla, carried Wall Street.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Then came June 2026.

Nvidia dropped over 5%, Microsoft fell about 17%, its worst monthly performance since December 2000, Alphabet declined nearly 6%, Amazon lost roughly 12% and Meta dropped around 11%.

As for Apple and Tesla, the companies had directionally different but equally volatile monthly moves.

Apple made a new all-time high closing price of $315.2 on the second day of the month but subsequently declined more than 10% from that peak.

On the other hand, Elon Musk’s company dropped more than 6% in the first week of June but clawed most of that back by the close of the month, ending roughly flat.

Taken together, the ‘Magnificent Seven’ erased about $2.3 trillion (€2tn) in market value in a single month.

What made the selloff remarkable was its breadth. Usually one or two stocks stumble while the others hold up. This time, nearly every member of the group moved lower.

The Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS), which holds all seven companies, fell about 13% from its late May record high.

So what happened to Wall Street’s favorite technology stocks? And why are investors backing away?

Growing pains and spending

The MAGS ETF bled more than $700 million (€615mn) over the month, its worst outflow since it launched in 2023, according to TradingView data. For a fund that had become the simplest way to bet on the US tech boom, the reversal was striking.

One name outside the club had it even worse. Oracle, a hyperscaler not included in the ‘Magnificent Seven’, crashed around 35%, its steepest month since September 1990, after alarming investors with a surge in AI spending and debt.

The fall wiped roughly $100 billion (€87.9bn) off the fortune of co-founder and billionaire Larry Ellison. The market punished the biggest AI spenders, and the numbers explain it.

The five largest hyperscalers are set to spend more than $700 billion (€615bn) on AI infrastructure this year. Microsoft alone is heading towards roughly $190 billion (€167bn), according to estimates from the Bank of America.

The bank said that hyperscaler capital spending has jumped from about 70% of operating cash flow in 2025 to nearly 100% in 2026.

The translation is simple: far less capital left over for share buybacks and dividends, and an increasingly larger bill that will need to be justified with future revenue as costs are climbing too.

The ‘Magnificent Seven’ are the biggest buyers of the memory that feeds AI data centres, and those chips have become scarce and expensive.

Micron Technology, one of the main memory chipmakers, reported earnings per share of $24.67 for its latest quarter, up from $1.68 a year earlier, close to a fifteenfold jump.

Prices for DRAM, the memory inside almost every device, rose as much as 98% in the first quarter alone, a surge some in the industry have nicknamed “RAMageddon”.

A quieter shift beneath the surface

While the biggest technology stocks struggled, the rest of the market continued to rise.

LPL Financial chief equity strategist Jeff Buchbinder points to that trend. Excluding the ‘Magnificent Seven’, the remaining S&P 500 companies grew earnings by 17.5% in the first quarter, helped in part by semiconductor and memory producers.

Buchbinder expects that figure to exceed 20.5% in the second quarter. Meanwhile, the earnings growth projection for the ‘Magnificent Seven’ will be lower than that.

In other words, the other 493 companies are now growing earnings faster than the market’s biggest stars, and investors have noticed.

By late June, the S&P 493 – which excludes the ‘Magnificent Seven’ – had climbed 13.7% for the year. In contrast, the ‘Magnificent Seven’ basket was down 6.6%, while the broader S&P 500 posted a more modest 7.4% gain.

According to veteran investor Ed Yardeni, investors are beginning to show signs of AI fatigue, questioning whether unprecedented spending on infrastructure will ultimately generate attractive returns as cheaper open source models proliferate and AI token prices continue to decline.

Are the ‘Magnificent Seven’ still “magnificent”?

The ‘Magnificent Seven’ still delivered an estimated 29% earnings growth in the first quarter, and they are unlikely to lose their leadership positions anytime soon.

Yet, the debate has shifted.

Investors are no longer asking whether AI will transform the economy. They are asking when hundreds of billions of dollars in AI investment will begin producing meaningful returns.

June may have offered the first clear answer.

The AI trade is no longer a one way bet on seven companies. The ‘Magnificent Seven’ created the AI boom, but they are no longer the only way to invest in it.