Human

From what one should eat to what one should say, AI chatbots on your phone have the final say. The choice of bots, though, is totally in your hands, but what choice you will make with it is barely in your hands. Are you by any chance handing your decision-making power to bots, which you assume makes your life easy? If yes, then let’s consider a few things before your next chatbot conversation. First, understand the dual system model by Daniel Kahneman. According to that, there are two types of systems in the human brain. System 1 is associated with fast, intuitive, emotional, and automatic thinking. System 2 is associated with analytical, slow, effortful, and deliberate thinking. The majority of the technology that is available for the general masses urges individuals to use system 1, as it does not require much effort. Decision-making needs system 2 and is complex and requires time and effort, though this is something that people tend to avoid at all costs. Machines were built to reduce human effort, and artificial intelligence is there to reduce the decision-making efforts, something that differentiated the individual from the technology or innovation earlier.

Now at the state level, artificial intelligence is being integrated; take the example of the United States National Defense Strategy of 2022, where the inclusion of artificial intelligence in decision-making processes was of prime importance. At the systematic level, unfortunately, until now, there have not been concrete efforts towards establishing rules regarding artificial intelligence, except for the Bletchley Declaration, which was a landmark international agreement on AI safety. Though at the individual level, rather than being careful, people are playing with and handing over their decision-making power. As was reported by the BBC, in an interview, Megan Garcia, the mother of a 14-year-old, said that an AI chatbot encouraged her son to commit suicide. Another case involving a young Ukrainian woman with poor mental health received suicide advice from an AI chatbot. Another report by Vice of a person who committed suicide after having multiple conversations with a chatbot over environmental issues. AI chatbots that run on algorithms have been taken as emotional support beings, which they are not.

They are given different names to grab the attention of the user, such as “your goth friend,” “your possessive girlfriend,” and several others. They are targeting the emotional side, or System 1, of the user, and they have been quite successful in that. Everyone today almost has an AI chatbot with whom they have a conversation at least once a day. According to Chabot’s 2025 statistics, more than 987 million people use AI chatbots today. ChatGPT dominates the AI chatbot market share with 81.85%, using it globally, followed by OpenAI’s GPT-4, Microsoft Co-Pilot, Google Gemini, Claude, and DeepSeek with 11.05%, 3.07%, 2.97%, 1.05%, and 0.01%, respectively. With that, it is becoming dangerous and needs to be handled with more care and caution. The responsibility lies on individuals as much as it lies on the state and the international organizations.

Technology has been advancing for decades, and it has been creating ease and comfort for its users. Artificial intelligence, being one such technology, is beneficial too, but it should be used to enhance the mental capabilities and not hand over one’s control over things. AI is expanding and advancing at an immeasurable speed, and it will not wait for people to wake up and make better decisions for themselves. Social media platforms will not adjust themselves to the needs of the time, as they are markets, and all they care about is what is bought, which is the thing that should be sold. If people are buying the emotional support AI, then there will be multiple chatbots with attention-grabbing titles.

An individual might take it as a joke or play with it for fun, but what they do not realize is that they are providing their personal and sensitive information to a machine whose data can be sabotaged. People nowadays, without realizing, would jump on the ongoing trends without realizing what it will do to their data. The trend of Ghibli-style photos, where photos were being generated to the extent that it led to the melting of OpenAI’s servers, prompted the company to temporarily implement rate limits. In addition to that, it resulted in an intellectual property issue involving Studio Ghibli centers. As it mimicked the iconic style of Studio Ghibli, which has been working for decades, AI stole the art, and there was no genuine accountability. This is how dangerous it gets: stealing someone’s work and then getting away with it without being charged or held accountable. This intellectual property theft by AI resulted in Hollywood writers’ protest, leading to the establishment of the 2023 WGA AI contract. WGA (Writers Guild of America) led to AI not being treated as a writer and prevented it from getting any credit or being considered “literary material.” Where the threat is so imminent, laws are not efficient, control is lost, and profit is being generated, would you really let bots decide what you will do in your life?

Uganda Ministry of Foreign Affairs says Mohamed Dagalo’s meeting with President Yoweri Museveni focused on ending war.

Sudan has condemned Uganda for hosting the head of the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, as an “insult” to humanity and the Sudanese people.

In a statement on Sunday, Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs denounced the reception of Dagalo, also known as “Hemedti”, in the “strongest terms” and his meeting on Friday with Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni.

“This unprecedented step insults humanity before it insults the Sudanese people, and at the same time, it disregards the lives of innocent people killed due to the behaviour of Hemedti and his terrorist militia,” the Foreign Ministry wrote.

Rights groups and international organisations have accused the RSF of war crimes and targeting civilians in Sudan.

Khartoum said hosting Dagalo “disregards” human values.

It “completely disregards the laws governing relations between member states of regional and international organisations that prohibit providing any support for rebel forces against a legitimate, internationally recognised government”, the Foreign Ministry added.

In 2023, Sudan was plunged into a civil war between the Sudanese army, led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the RSF.

According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), at least 11.7 million people have been displaced by the conflict and an estimated 150,000 people have been killed.

Last week, the United States imposed sanctions on three RSF commanders over their alleged roles in the 18-month siege and capture of el‑Fasher, the capital of North Darfur State in western Sudan.

In a statement, the US Department of the Treasury accused the RSF of perpetrating “a horrific campaign of ethnic killings, torture, starvation, and sexual violence” during the siege and capture of el-Fasher, which fell to the RSF in October.

Separately, a UN mission found that the RSF campaign in el-Fasher was a “planned and organised operation that bears the defining characteristics of genocide”.

‘Poisonous’ identity politics

Uganda’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued its own statement on Dagalo’s visit and said his meeting with Museveni focused on “ending the ongoing conflict in Sudan and restoring regional stability”.

Museveni reiterated in his remarks to Hemedti that peace in Sudan could only be achieved through dialogue and warned against what he described as identity politics.

“When I last came to Sudan, I met [former] President [Omar al-] Bashir and advised against the politics of identity instead of the politics of interest,” Museveni said.

“Identity politics is poisonous. It does not yield good results. What is important are shared interests that unite people,” he said while calling for both parties to prioritise “peace over military confrontation”.

For his part, Dagalo thanked Museveni and said he shares the Ugandan president’s “principles and your commitment to peace”, according to a statement released by the Ugandan government.

“He noted that Sudan continues to face serious humanitarian and institutional challenges as a result of the conflict and stressed the need for a peaceful resolution,” the statement added.

The Israeli Knesset is pushing through a bill that, if passed, would allow the occupation authorities to legally execute Palestinians. This development has attracted hardly any international attention, but for Palestinians, it is yet another looming horror.

The bill is part of the deal that allowed the formation of Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government in late 2022. It was demanded by Itamar Ben-Gvir, now national security minister, who has led a reign of terror across the West Bank for the past three years.

In November, the bill passed its first reading, and in January, its provisions were revealed: execution carried out within 90 days of sentencing, no appeals, and death by hanging. Palestinians charged with planning attacks or killing Israelis would face the death penalty. Ben-Gvir has repeatedly called for the execution of Palestinians, most recently during his visit to Ofer Prison, where he filmed himself overseeing the abuse of detainees.

That we got to this point is hardly surprising. For decades, the international community has neglected the fate of Palestinian prisoners. In the past two and a half years, there has been almost no global reaction to the mass brutalisation of Palestinians held in Israeli jails with or without charges. Israeli efforts to legalise executions of Palestinian is the logical next step in eliminating the Palestinian question.

‘Prisoners’ or captives?

The use of the term “prisoners” to refer to Palestinians held by Israel is deceptive. It strips this cruelty of its context – the military occupation and colonisation Palestinians live under. Prisoners of war or captives are much more accurate terms. That is because Palestinians are taken away either for resisting the occupation or for no reason at all – for the sake of terrorising their families and communities.

Currently, more than a third of the Palestinians Israel is holding are under “administrative detention” – ie, they are being held without charge – and some are women and children. Palestinians are also “tried” in military courts, which are blatantly biased against the occupied population.

I, myself, was a victim of this system of oppression through unjust detention.

In November 2015, Israeli soldiers burst into my home in Ramallah and took me away.  They tortured and isolated me for weeks without even telling me what I was accused of.

Eventually, they came up with an accusation of “incitement”, for which they did not produce any evidence. They kept me under their “administrative detention”, or what is really an arbitrary arrest. The abuse continued, and during one interrogation session, an Israeli officer threatened me with rape.

They treated me like an animal without rights or legal protection. Representatives from the International Committee of the Red Cross were prevented from visiting me. I was released only after I went on a hunger strike for three months and my condition deteriorated to a dangerous level.

This happened to me 10 years ago, long before October 7, 2023. Back then, the international community was turning a blind eye to Israel’s violations of international law through administrative detention and abuse.

After October 7, the conditions in Israeli military prisons worsened, with rampant torture, starvation and medical neglect. At least 88 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli detention since then. The international community has remained silent, issuing an occasional weak condemnation.

Legalising the illegal

Israel’s brutal mistreatment of detained Palestinians is in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, which it is a party to. By virtue of being under occupation, Palestinians are considered a protected population and have rights which the Israeli authorities have systematically denied.

Nevertheless, the international community has accepted these flagrant violations. Under the guise of anti-terrorism, the international discourse has transformed Palestinians from an occupied people to threats to Israeli and international security.

Not even the shocking images and testimonies of mass rape at Israeli detention centres managed to overturn this flawed framing.

In this context, the death penalty bill is not an extremist proposal; it fits right into the pattern of the brutalisation of Palestinian detainees.

From the perspective of the Palestinians, this bill is yet another tool of Israeli revenge. If passed, it would spread more fear and further diminish any peaceful resistance against the Israeli settlers’ violent assaults on the Palestinian people and their property.

The bill is also a nightmare for every family that has a member in an Israeli prison. They have already been pushed to the edge by the lack of information about their loved ones since a ban on visiting amid the spike in deaths in detention.

Even more horrific is the prospect that the bill may be applied retroactively. This means anyone with the charges of planning or causing the death of an Israeli could be executed.

There are currently reports in Israeli media that supposedly, the Israeli government is under pressure not to push forward with this law. There have been some suggestions to amend the text to make it more palatable. But we know that Israel will eventually get to executing Palestinians. Just as it has done with other laws, it will deceptively manoeuvre to minimise reactions but still proceed with what it wants to do.

As Israel is well on its way to bulldozing through yet another international legal norm, the most it will likely get is “calls for restraint” or “statements of condemnation”. Such weak rhetoric has enabled its onslaught against international law for the past few decades, and especially during the past two and a half years.

If the international community wants to salvage what is left of the international legal regime and save face, it is time to radically change its approach.

Instead of making weak statements about respect for international law, they must impose sanctions on Israel. Israeli officials who have been accused of committing crimes against Palestinians should not be hosted but held to account.

Only then can there be hope for the safe and peaceful return of all Palestinian prisoners – something that was already agreed upon during the Oslo Accords. And only then can there be hope that Israeli efforts to dismantle international law so it can do as it pleases in Palestine will be stopped.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

More than 600 people may be in custody for political reasons, one Venezuelan rights group estimates.

Venezuela’s acting president has signed into law an amnesty bill that could see hundreds of politicians, activists and lawyers released soon, while tacitly acknowledging what the country has denied for years – that it has political detainees in jail.

The law, signed on Thursday, in effect reverses decades of denials in the government’s latest about-face since the United States military’s January 3 attack in the country’s capital, Caracas, and the abduction of President Nicolas Maduro.

Opposition members, activists, human rights defenders, journalists and others who were targeted by the governing party over the past 27 years could benefit from the new law.

But families hoping for the release of relatives say acting President Delcy Rodriguez has failed to deliver on earlier promises to release prisoners. Some of them have been gathered outside detention centres for weeks.

Venezuela-based prisoners’ rights group Foro Penal has tallied 448 releases since January 8 and estimates that more than 600 people are still in custody for political reasons.

The new law provides amnesty for involvement in political protests and “violent actions” which took place during a brief coup in 2002 and during demonstrations or elections in certain months going back to 2004.

It does not detail the exact crimes which would be eligible for amnesty, though a previous draft laid out several, including instigation of illegal activity, resistance to authorities, rebellion and treason.

People convicted of “military rebellion” for involvement in events in 2019 are excluded. The law also does not return assets of those detained, revoke public office bans given for political reasons or cancel sanctions against media outlets.

Opposition divided

“It’s not perfect, but it is undoubtedly a great step forward for the reconciliation of Venezuela,” opposition politician Nora Bracho said during a debate on the bill in the legislature on Thursday.

But the law was criticised by other members of the opposition, including Pedro Urruchurtu, international relations director for opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Corina Machado.

“A true amnesty doesn’t require laws, but rather will, something that is lacking in this discussion,” he said on X on Thursday. “It is not only an invalid and illegitimate law, but also a trap to buy time and revictimize those persecuted.”

Since Madura’s abduction, US President Donald Trump has praised Rodriguez, Maduro’s former deputy, while downplaying the prospect of supporting the opposition.

For her part, Rodriguez has overseen several concessions to the US, including freezing oil shipments to Cuba and supporting a law to open the state-controlled oil industry to foreign companies.

The US has said it will control the proceeds ⁠from Venezuela’s oil sales until a “representative government” is established.

China has previously criticised the role, accusing the US of interfering in China’s internal affairs.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced that the Trump administration has appointed an envoy to the position of United States special coordinator for Tibetan issues.

The role, which was created by the US Congress in 2002, will be filled by Riley Barnes, who is currently also serving as the assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights, and labour.

Rubio announced Barnes’s appointment in a statement on the occasion of Losar, the Tibetan New Year, on Tuesday.

“On this first day of the Year of the Fire Horse, we celebrate the fortitude and resilience of Tibetans around the world,” Rubio said in a statement.

“The United States remains committed to supporting the unalienable rights of Tibetans and their distinct linguistic, cultural, and religious heritage,” he added.

The new appointment comes as the administration of US President Donald Trump has stepped back from speaking out on a range of human rights issues globally, and as the US has either intervened directly or threatened other countries, including Venezuela, Iran, Cuba, and Denmark’s Greenland.

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately respond to Rubio’s announcement, which comes during the Chinese New Year holiday, but Beijing has criticised similar appointments in the past.

“The setting up of the so-called coordinator for Tibetan issues is entirely out of political manipulation to interfere in China’s internal affairs and destabilise Tibet. China firmly opposes that,” Zhao Lijian, a spokesman at the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said after a similar appointment was made by the US State Department in 2020, during Trump’s first presidency .

“Tibet affairs are China’s internal affairs that allow no foreign interference,” Lijian had said.

China has governed the remote region of Tibet since 1951, after its military marched in and took control in what it called a “peaceful liberation”.

Exiled Tibetan leaders have long condemned China’s policies in Tibet, accusing Beijing of separating families in the Himalayan region, banning their language, and suppressing Tibetan culture.

China has denied any wrongdoing and says its intervention in Tibet ended “backward feudal serfdom”.

More than 80 percent of the Tibetan population is ethnic Tibetan, while Han Chinese make up the remainder. Most Tibetans are also Buddhists, and while China’s constitution allows for freedom of religion, the governing Communist Party adheres strictly to atheism.

Also on Tuesday, the head of the Washington-based Radio Free Asia announced that the US-government-funded news outlet has resumed broadcasting into China, after shutting down its news operations in October due to cuts from the Trump administration.

Radio Free Asia President and CEO Bay Fang wrote on social media that the resumed broadcast to audiences in China in “Mandarin, Tibetan, and Uyghur” languages was “due to private contracting with transmission services” and congressional funding approved by Trump.

Feb. 13 (UPI) — A restructuring of the Department of Health and Human Services will see two top people leave ahead of the midterm elections, unnamed officials familiar with the decision told media outlets Friday.

HHS Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill and General Counsel Mike Stuart are expected to soon leave the agency, sources have reported to Axios, Politico and CNN.

“They are being offered jobs within the administration but will not be remaining in their current positions,” one source told Politico.

O’Neill is the second-in-command behind HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and is the interim leader of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. He has boosted anti-vax messaging, allegations of Medicaid fraud and the United States leaving the World Health Organization.

On Thursday, Kennedy announced that Chris Klomp, deputy administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, would become chief counselor in charge of overseeing all Health and Human Services Department operations. Before joining the administration, he was a health tech executive and venture capitalist.

Kennedy also promoted Kyle Diamantas, deputy commissioner for human foods, and Grace Graham, deputy commissioner for policy, legislation and international affairs, to senior counselors for the Food and Drug Administration. They will also keep their current positions. John Brooks will also be a senior counselor at Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services while keeping his job as chief policy and regulatory officer.

The moves are intended to focus attention on Make America Healthy Again policies, like dietary guidelines changes, eliminating artificial food dyes and improving healthcare affordability.

“What basically happened was that HHS Secretary Kennedy, and also the White House, realized that we want to be most efficiently and most effectively implementing that policy and moving the needle on these issues that we see as very clear and unambiguous wins for us,” the White House official told Politico. “And obviously the polling and such is very clear on these topics as well.”

Five European countries say findings ‘conclusively’ confirm the deadly toxin in the Russian opposition leader’s body as Moscow calls it Western propaganda.

Five European countries – the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands – have accused Russia of poisoning and killing opposition leader Alexey Navalny in 2024 based on lab results from a sample taken from his body.

The five governments said in a statement on Saturday that tissue samples “conclusively” confirmed the lethal toxin epibatidine. The poison is found in wild dart frogs from South America.

“The UK, Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands are confident that Alexey Navalny was poisoned with a lethal toxin,” the statement issued during the Munich Security Conference said.

Russia had “the means, motive, and opportunity to administer this poison”, the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office added in a statement.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova told state-run RIA Novosti news agency she’ll comment once the test results are publicly presented – something she noted has not yet been done.

The five countries said they’re reporting Russia to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons for a breach of the Chemical Weapons Convention. There was no immediate comment from the organisation.

Navalny, who crusaded against official corruption and staged anti-Kremlin protests as President Vladimir Putin’s fiercest foe, died in an Arctic penal colony on February 16, 2024, while serving a 19-year sentence he called politically motivated.

Epibatidine is found naturally in dart frogs and can also be manufactured in a lab, something European scientists suspect was the case in the alleged poisoning of Navalny.

The poison works by causing shortness of breath, convulsions, seizures and a slowed heart rate and can kill on contact.

The five countries said Russia needs to be held accountable for its “repeated violations” of the convention.

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper met Navalny’s widow, Yulia Navalnaya, at the Munich Security Conference. She said the new findings are “shining a light on the Kremlin’s barbaric plot to silence his voice”.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot wrote on X the alleged poisoning shows “Vladimir Putin is prepared to use biological weapons against his own people in order to remain in power.”

The Russian government has repeatedly denied any involvement in Navalny’s death. Authorities said he became ill after a walk and died from natural causes.

“Once there are test results – once there are formulas for the substances – there will be a comment. Without this, all talk and statements are just information leaks aimed at distracting attention from the West’s pressing problems,” said Zakharova.

‘Science-proven fact’?

It’s unclear how the samples from Navalny’s body were obtained or where they were assessed. Cooper told reporters “UK scientists worked with our European partners to pursue the truth” on Navalny’s death.

Navalnaya said the “murder” of her husband is now a “science-proven fact”.

“Two years ago, I came on stage here and said that it was Vladimir Putin who killed my husband,” Navalnaya said on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference.

“I was, of course, certain that it was a murder, … but back then, it was just words. But today these words have become science-proven fact,” Navalnaya added.

Navalny was the previous target of a nerve agent poisoning in 2020 that he blamed on the Kremlin.

He was flown to Germany for treatment, and when he returned to Russia five months later, he was immediately arrested and imprisoned for the remaining three years of his life.

The UK held a ‌public inquiry into the poisoning in Britain of Russian double agent Sergey Skripal in 2018. It concluded last year that Putin must have ordered the Novichok nerve agent attack. The Kremlin has denied involvement.

Russia also denied poisoning Alexander Litvinenko, a former Russian agent-turned-Kremlin critic who died in London in 2006 after ingesting the radioactive isotope polonium-210. A British inquiry concluded that two Russian agents killed Litvinenko.

Vital organs of the same cinematic body, the artists who handcrafted Guillermo del Toro’s imposing “Frankenstein” helped ensure the experience of watching it feels immersive.

“When a movie is the best possible incarnation of itself, it’s a universe you fall into; as the youth says, it’s a vibe,” Del Toro says during an interview at the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah, where he was in attendance to screen a restoration of his 1992 feature debut, “Cronos.”

Like Victor Frankenstein, who diligently selects body parts from corpses to stitch together his humanoid creation, the Mexican director carefully assembled his troupe of movie magicians. Of course, their talents mattered immensely to him, but so did their drive and their willingness to participate in the “team sport” of filmmaking.

“The cohesive personality of the film, the expressiveness of the film, depends on every aspect being orchestrated without an ego,” Del Toro says. “Each department sustains the department next to them.”

Del Toro clearly knows how to pick them. The Envelope recently caught up with makeup effects veteran Mike Hill, seasoned production designer Tamara Deverell, costume virtuosa Kate Hawley and acclaimed composer Alexandre Desplat, all Oscar-nominated for their work on “Frankenstein.”

And just like organs that constantly communicate with each other, their work is intimately intertwined. Nothing is conceived in isolation on a Del Toro film. “We all know what everyone’s doing within the different departments, so we all echo each other,” says Hawley.

1

2

1. Tamara Deverell. 2. Kate Hawley. (Lauren Fleishman / For The Times)

In casting his acolytes, Del Toro seeks the alchemy that only human minds and hands can accomplish building tangible worlds. “The audience knows when something is digital, and when something has been crafted with real materials,” Del Toro explains. “I really believe people can tell the difference. Maybe they can’t articulate it, but they can feel it.”

Hill agrees. His mandate to create the prosthetics and makeup that transformed Jacob Elordi into the Creature aimed to make him look like an artwork that Victor Frankenstein handcrafted. Every part of him was by design, with the scars on his body reflecting incisions that those studying human anatomy in the 18th century would have made.

“If the monster felt fake, we would’ve lost the movie,” says Hill. “The Creature had to feel real. Not to put down VFX, but there’s a human quality they can’t catch.”

For Deverell, “Frankenstein” represented both the continuation of a creative partnership that dates back to the 1990s and an opportunity to showcase her multi-faceted skills. “Guillermo and I speak in a language of art history, and he is steeped in cinematic history,” she says.

With a team of technicians and craftspeople, Deverell constructed breathtaking sets, including Victor’s laboratory with giant batteries that required intricate steam and lighting mechanisms.

Undoubtedly, her pièce de resistance is the full-size Arctic ship where the opening sequence unfolds. Though the production considered existing vessels, none of them measured up. “There were specific action beats that Guillermo wanted, and a look that we all wanted,” she says. “To have complete creative control, there’s only one way to do it.”

To anyone who disagreed with the need for a ship, Del Toro would explain that it was not an extravagance. “It’s actually what tells the audience the scale of the movie,” he says.

1

2

1. Alexandre Desplat. 2. Mike Hill. (Lauren Fleishman / For The Times)

The first half hour of the film, Del Toro believes, establishes its ambition and operatic quality. There are no digital doubles in that sequence, but real stunt performers aboard a ship that’s not a miniature but a massive structure that moves thanks to a giant gimbal.

It’s the way Del Toro pursues ideas by way of collaboration that brings Hawley back to his worlds (she even worked with him on his unmade version of “The Hobbit”). She’s learned to conceive her pieces considering that in his movies real water, mud, snow and fake blood might be in play.

“There’s something that happens with real materiality, real construction, there’s an alchemy to it,” Hawley says. “What a fabric does and performs is not always predictable, but the outcome and the potential you see in something then becomes the magic.”

As production timelines get shorter and A.I. utilization creeps into the filmmaking process, Hawley believes artists are trying to hold onto the craft as much as possible. “We came here to build worlds,” she says. “That’s what we did as kids. That’s what we do. This is our church.”

Del Toro admits he can be a “pain in the ass,” especially when dealing with his film’s production design and makeup effects. He atones by constantly reassuring his artisans. “They need to know that even if you are torturing them you admire them,” he says.

The only element of the film where Del Toro actively hopes to be surprised is the score. And Desplat is committed to delivering.

“Writing music is using your imagination. It’s not using references. It makes no sense to me,” says Desplat, who believes most scores today sound like work that has come before. “I hear many composers use references, but what for? That’s not what we do. We have the film to be inspired by. That’s enough.”

For “Frankenstein” — his third creature movie with Del Toro, after “The Shape of Water” and “Pinocchio” — Desplat thus avoided Gothic compositions to create a counterpoint to the images, highlighting the fragility of Elordi’s Creature, who he thinks of as the core of the film.

Also tying together the film’s craftsmanship is Del Toro’s awards campaign for “Frankenstein,” which he’s navigated to the tune of “F— AI.” The chant has resonated with those fighting to keep art made by humans for humans. “Frankenstein,” in turn, is the director’s latest monument to the beauty of imperfection.

“Art is the thing that we should never let go of, never surrender to mechanization or artificial intelligence,” Del Toro adds. “We need to grasp on it because this is the last point of contact between humans.”

Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein’s convicted associate and former girlfriend, invoked her Fifth Amendment right and refused to testify before a US congressional committee, with her lawyers saying she would only answer questions if granted clemency.

Feb. 5 (Asia Today) — Artificial intelligence is no longer a distant prospect. It is rapidly advancing into areas once considered uniquely human, including translation, medical diagnosis, law and content creation. With the possibility of human-level general AI now openly discussed, its impact is widely viewed as greater than any previous technological breakthrough.

Optimists foresee a long-awaited utopia. Self-driving cars dominate roads, AI assistants handle household chores and administrative work, doctors deliver more precise care with AI support, and teachers focus on personalized education. Like electricity or the internet, AI is expected to function as a general-purpose technology that raises productivity across the entire economy. Some forecasts suggest it could add about one percentage point to annual productivity growth over the next decade, potentially accelerating research and development and sustaining long-term economic expansion.

History, however, offers a more complex picture. General-purpose technologies often depress productivity in their early stages because firms and workers need time to adapt and reorganize. This so-called productivity J-curve may also apply to AI, as high implementation costs and training requirements delay gains and concentrate benefits among a limited number of firms and industries.

More immediate concerns are emerging in labor markets. Automation is already replacing clerical and repetitive tasks, while mid-skilled jobs are shrinking. As AI evolves from generative models to autonomous agents and physical systems, even highly educated workers may struggle to find stable employment. A small group with advanced AI skills may enjoy rising wages, while many others face job insecurity, raising fears of a society where algorithms dominate and humans are treated as expendable.

The debate over whether AI leads to utopia or dystopia ultimately centers on a single question: will AI replace humans. The answer lies in understanding the fundamental differences between artificial and human intelligence. AI excels at processing vast data and making predictions, but humans interpret context, make judgments under uncertainty and weigh ethics and values. Humans also build trust through empathy, communication and responsibility.

What matters most in the AI era is not intelligence itself but wisdom – the capacity to reflect on purpose, distinguish right from wrong and respect others. Rather than competing with AI, humans must cultivate complementary abilities that guide technology in constructive directions.

The future shaped by the AI revolution remains open. Its outcome depends on whether individuals and societies can develop the knowledge, skills and wisdom suited to this era. Continuous learning is essential, as is education that moves beyond test scores to nurture curiosity, critical thinking, ethics and responsibility.

At the societal level, education systems must shift away from standardized knowledge delivery. As AI handles information retrieval and analysis, priorities should include creativity, problem definition, collaboration and lifelong learning. Universities need closer alignment with labor market needs, while labor systems must become more flexible and competency-based.

Vocational training and retraining are equally urgent. In an age of rapid job transformation, a single education cannot last a lifetime. Governments, businesses and schools must cooperate to support mid-career workers and vulnerable groups. At the same time, governance frameworks ensuring transparency, accountability and fairness in AI use are essential for building public trust.

Artificial intelligence can expand human capabilities rather than replace them. True competitiveness in the AI era will come not from algorithms alone, but from the intellectual synergy created when humans and AI work together. What is needed now is not abstract optimism or fear, but deliberate investment in people.

Lee Jong-hwa is a chair professor of economics at Korea University. The views expressed are the author’s own.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260205010002059

An amnesty law that would provide clemency to political prisoners in Venezuela has passed an initial vote unanimously in the National Assembly, stirring hopes among the country’s opposition.

On Thursday, members of both the governing socialist party and the opposition delivered speeches in favour of the new legislation, known as the Amnesty Law for Democratic Coexistence.

“The path of this law is going to be full of obstacles, full of bitter moments,” said Jorge Rodriguez, the head of the National Assembly.

But he added that it would be necessary to “swallow hard” in order to help the country move forward.

“We ask for forgiveness, and we also have to forgive,” Rodriguez said.

But critics nevertheless pointed out that the text of the bill has yet to be made public, and it offers no clemency for individuals accused of serious crimes, including drug trafficking, murder, corruption or human rights violations.

Instead, media reports about the legislation indicate that it focuses on charges often levelled against protesters and opposition leaders.

What does the bill say?

The bill would grant amnesty to individuals accused of crimes like treason, terrorism, rebellion, resisting authorities, instigation of illegal activities, and spreading hate, if those crimes were committed in the context of political activism or protest.

Opposition leaders like Maria Corina Machado would also see bans on their candidacy for public office lifted.

In addition, the legislation specifies certain events that would qualify for amnesty, including the demonstrations that unfolded in 2007, 2014, 2017, 2019 and 2024.

That period stretches from the presidency of the late President Hugo Chavez, founder of the “chavismo” movement, through the presidency of his handpicked successor, Nicolas Maduro.

Both Chavez and Maduro were accused of the violent suppression of dissent, through arbitrary arrest, torture and extrajudicial killings.

But on January 3, the administration of United States President Donald Trump launched a military operation in Venezuela to abduct Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. They have since been transported to New York City, where they await trial on charges related to drug trafficking.

While members of Venezuela’s opposition have cheered the military operation as a long overdue move, experts have argued that the US likely violated international law as well as Venezuela’s sovereignty in removing Maduro from power.

Weighing Maduro’s legacy

Images of Chavez were a common sight during Thursday’s debate at the National Assembly, which has been dominated since 2017 by members of the chavismo movement.

That year, Venezuela’s top court dissolved the opposition-led National Assembly and briefly absorbed its powers, before re-establishing a legislature stacked with Maduro supporters.

In 2018 and again in 2024, Maduro claimed victory in contested elections that critics say were marred by fraud.

In the July 2024 vote, for instance, the government refused to release voter tallies, as was previously standard practice. The opposition, however, obtained copies of nearly 80 percent of the tallies, which contradicted the government’s claims that Maduro had won a third six-year term.

After Maduro’s abduction last month, the remnants of his government remained in power.

Within days, his vice president — Delcy Rodriguez, the sister of the National Assembly leader — was sworn in as interim president.

She used her inaugural speech to denounce the “kidnapping of two heroes who are being held hostage: President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores”.

Rodriguez has nevertheless cooperated with US demands, including by supporting a bill to open Venezuela’s nationalised oil industry to foreign investment.

On the floor of the National Assembly on Thursday, her brother Jorge raised a photo of Chavez holding a crucifix while he spoke. Maduro’s son, National Assembly member Nicolas Maduro Guerra, also presented remarks.

“Venezuela cannot endure any more acts of revenge,” Maduro Guerra said as he appealed for “reconciliation”.

Venezuela’s opposition reacts

Still, opposition members in the National Assembly expressed optimism about the bill.

National Assembly representative Tomas Guanipa, for instance, called it the start of a “new, historic chapter” in Venezuelan history, one where political dissidents would no longer be “afraid to speak their minds for fear of being imprisoned”.

Nearly 7.9 million Venezuelans have left the country in recent decades, fleeing political persecution and economic instability.

But there have been lingering concerns about the human rights situation in Venezuela in the weeks following Maduro’s abduction — and whether it is safe to return home.

President Rodriguez has pledged to release political detainees and close the infamous prison El Helicoide, where reports of torture have emerged. But some experts say the number of people released does not match the number the government has reported.

The human rights group Foro Penal, for instance, has documented 383 releases since January 8.

That figure, however, is lower than the 900 political prisoners the government has claimed to have released. Foro Penal estimates 680 political prisoners remain in detention.

Opposition figures also allege that the government continues to intimidate and harass those who voice sympathy for Maduro’s removal and other opinions that run contrary to the chavismo movement.

Still, the head of Foro Penal, Alfredo Romero, applauded the initial passage of the amnesty law as a step forward.

“Amnesty is the framework that will ensure… that the past does not serve to halt or derail transition processes,” Romero told the news agency AFP.

A second vote is expected to be held on Tuesday next week.