AI doesn’t have a boss. It doesn’t really care about rules. And most of us don’t have any say over what it will do next.

Yet the technology is all around us, firmly established in workplaces, financial systems, healthcare and defence. So maybe it needs someone to keep an eye on its progress and set some boundaries.

The UN certainly thinks so, and recently decided to set up an independent panel to monitor AI’s future development. It seems like a sensible move, but this attempt to create a successful forum for “rigorous, independent scientific insight” also highlights the inherent difficulties of governing technology on a global scale.

For a start, the US, which dominates AI development, doesn’t want anything to do with the panel. It voted against the UN’s idea (so did Paraguay), calling it “significant overreach”.

But the UN argues that AI affects everyone, and requires some global coordination. UN secretary-general António Guterres has described the new panel as the first “fully independent scientific body dedicated to helping close the AI knowledge gap and assess the real impacts of AI”.

As with some of the UN’s other forums, like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or the International Atomic Energy Agency, the AI panel would not write the laws, but would help establish common ground rules and standards that everyone can agree on.

AI is a different beast though. Unlike climate policy or nuclear materials, which are the responsibility of national governments, AI’s progress is largely driven by private – and very wealthy – firms.

International coordination is much more difficult, and already the US, the EU and China are taking different approaches to governance.

The EU takes a fairly cautious line, with strict rules on high-risk applications in areas like recruitment or law enforcement. The US favours voluntary standards within the industry. Meanwhile, China treats AI development and control as a matter of state.

When different parts of the world approach things so differently, there is a risk that any attempt at global cooperation will simply not work. Big firms could simply move their headquarters to whichever part of the world they consider to be the least restrictive. Technical rules can then become geopolitical tools rather than shared protections.

But the biggest challenge goes beyond technical coordination, because AI is fundamentally a technology of power which involves control over information, opportunity and surveillance.

À lire aussi :
Could revisiting Asimov’s laws help us avoid AI’s ‘Chernobyl moment’?

There have already been cases of AI being used in predictive policing models that disproportionately target communities. It has been part of automated welfare systems that exclude the vulnerable and decide on access to credit or housing.

Digital accountability

This is not the first time that a powerful digital force has surged ahead while oversight lags behind.

I witnessed this firsthand with research I carried out with colleagues about Bitcoin.

When we published our findings about Bitcoin’s massive energy footprint in 2021, the reaction was immediate and global. It triggered a debate that shook the industry, and demonstrated that digital systems can cause to the world.

AI is now on the same path, but the stakes are exponentially higher, affecting not just energy grids, but society itself.

AI-generated political statements, religious sermons and news footage circulate on screens everywhere. And when people cannot reliably distinguish authentic authority from artificial output, social trust is eroded.

AI could make online incitement easier, cheaper, more personalised and more widespread. Some civil leaders have claimed that digital radicalisation, the process by which people adopt extremist views through online content, could be intensified by these tools.

Societies everywhere are already grappling with AI’s wider social consequences.

The head of the Muslim World League, an international non-governmental Islamic organisation, Mohammad bin Abdulkarim Al-Issa, has warned that AI may “manipulate the ideologies and beliefs that connect and influence billions” with extremist messaging.

Having seen how groups like Islamic State exploited social platforms for recruitment and division, he also argues that the danger lies not only in what is said, but in the loss of identifiable authority behind it. Elsewhere, the Pope has warned that AI must never diminish human dignity or reduce people to data points.

À lire aussi :
AI laws overlook environmental damage – here’s what needs to change

These kinds of worry reflect legitimate concerns about how technological platforms can fracture societies when ethical guardrails fall behind. And this is precisely where the UN may have an important role to play.

Historically, its strength has never depended on enforcement power so much as on symbolic authority and its ability to articulate widely shared goals designed to improve people’s lives.

The UN’s 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights became the foundation of modern human rights law, by reshaping what governments could plausibly justify. Likewise, the global eradication of smallpox showed how a shared UN-backed objective could enable cooperation even across geopolitical divides.

Perhaps the real question, then, is not whether the UN should try to regulate AI directly. It is whether the world can afford a fragmented AI order defined solely by markets, geopolitics and billionaires, with no common ground.

Because while the promise of AI is staggering, serious and dangerous failings could yet emerge from the unfilled gaps in governance. The UN could help to avoid them.

Part of the A470 in Powys is blocked in both directions due to a fire. According to traffic service Inrix the incident has been ongoing since 8.14pm from the A4059 to Llwyn Onn Guest House, Merthyr Tydfil.

A social media report suggests affects a mountainside of Bannau Brycheiniog (Brecon Beacons National Park). Stay informed on everything Merthyr Tydfil by signing up to our newsletter here

The post states: “The smoke was pretty intense on the A470 as I had been coming through… Especially on me passing the junction for Garwnant.” According to Inrix the fire is “serious”.

The incident comes as a separate fire continues to cause disruption in Port Talbot.

Get daily breaking news updates on your phone by joining our WhatsApp community here.

We occasionally treat members to special offers, promotions and ads from us and our partners. See our Privacy Notice

One star of Coronation Street has revealed that bosses told her that there were initially plans for her to kill her off when she signed on to appear in the soap last year

Pauline McLynn was told by Coronation Street bosses that there were plans for her to be killed off when she first joined the soap.

The actress, 69, who is best known her her role as Mrs Doyle on classic sitcom Father Ted, arrived on the world’s longest-running TV soap towards the end of last year as the Irish matriarch who had bought the Rovers Return Inn.

It was established early on that Maggie had a dark past and a flashback set in Ireland revealed she had been responsible for the death of her husband Alan, pushing him down the stairs in an argument all those decades ago, witnessed by their son Finlay.

READ MORE: Coronation Street Jodie’s fate ‘sealed’ as actress warns fans will be ‘shocked’ by deathREAD MORE: Coronation Street star Sally Dynevor: I’d play breast cancer storyline ‘differently’

In a radical format change, bosses decided to air a flashforward earlier this year that confirmed that either Maggie, or one of her fellow villains – Carl Webster (Jonathan Howard), Theo Silverton (James Cartwright), Megan Walsh (Beth Nixon), Jodie Ramsey (Olivia Frances Brown) would be killed off in scenes that are playing out this week, with each episode detailing the same day’s events but from each character’s point of view.

Asked how she feels about playing one of the soap’s many antagonists, Pauline said: “It’s nearly the biggest compliment I’ve been paid for a long time! I’m not interested in nice people. I far prefer to be a villain.” The star then revealed that she was told early on that Maggie would not be leaving the soap alive.

She added: “I will say this, when I joined the show, I was told that the plan for the character was to kill her. So we shall see! I think you’ll find when you watch all of the five stories that it’s very possible more than one person is dead, that’s another thing I will say.

“And the third thing, is that the wonderful [producer] Kate Brooks said to me once, you’re going to get a set of scripts and it looks like you’re dead – and you might be. I just wanted to warn you! We don’t know.”

Pauline then teased that it could indeed seem like Maggie is the victim in question by the end of the week, but warned fans to not be so sure.

She added: “I do seem very dead at the end of the week. Assume nothing. You might be being fed one thing which is true, but it could be more than one. It’s also brilliantly clear that any one of the five could be a killer, whether or not they’ve killed the person you believe to be dead or not. It’s brilliantly seeded in. There is a justice in Coronation Street, if you do a crime, you have to pay the price.”

Coronation Street boss Kate Brooks said of the big week: “It was a very complicated storylining process! I did lose a bit of sleep and my hair went a little bit greyer. Usually in a murder week you’ve got one victim, then the suspects – we had five potential suspects had to make sure all the stories aligned, made sense and they were all getting to the right place and coming together.

In the build-up it’s gearing up and the momentum is really strong, it could be any of them. Stars aligned to get to this juicy week. The flipside is going forward, there’s so many consequences for each individual character.

Then we’ve also got the who did it, that big story as well going forward as well as unpacking what’s going on with all those other characters. Very complex, but satisfying and enjoyable as well.”

Coronation Street airs weeknights at 8:30pm on ITV1 and ITV X.

* Follow Mirror Celebs and TV on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads .

Police found Shane Sweeney’s DNA on a bone left in the property he’d just burgled, event though he claimed it couldn’t have been his as he ‘didn’t like chicken’

A thief who broke into a student’s house and stole items including car keys and a laptop was caught after his DNA was discovered on a chicken bone left at the scene. He disputed being responsible following his arrest, claiming he “didn’t like chicken”.

Shane Sweeney, 28, carried out a burglary in Cardiff between January 24 and 25 while his victim was out working in the early hours of the morning. Upon her return, she discovered a number of items had been taken including a 65-inch television, two laptops, jewellery, a gold bar, bank cards and car keys.

A sentencing hearing at Cardiff Crown Court on Wednesday heard the victim’s Vauxhall Corsa was taken, but this was not connected to the defendant. Make sure you never miss Wales’ biggest updates by getting our daily newsletter.

The vehicle was later abandoned and discovered in Trowbridge.

The back door of the property, in Cathays, had been left open, the window was left ajar and a safety cable had been snapped.

A chicken bone was found on the kitchen table and when analysed, it was found to contain a DNA profile matched with Sweeney.

He was arrested and told police he was not responsible for the burglary, claiming he “didn’t like chicken”.

The victim said the burglary had affected her “physically, psychologically and financially” and she had been forced to pause her studies due to the stolen laptops containing her diploma assessment.

She added: “I can’t believe someone could do this to me.”

Prosecutor Hannah Head said the defendant was also to be dealt with for seven cases of shoplifting, committed between November last year and March.

The thefts took place at stores including Spar, in Abergale Road, Trowbridge, Sainsbury’s, in Newport Road, One Stop Shop, in Llanrumney, and the Co-Op in Pontcanna.

Among the items taken by Sweeney were cans of Coke, washing pods, alcohol, cleaning products, chocolate, meat, and Lindt easter eggs.

The total value of these items was £686.

Sweeney, of no fixed abode, later pleaded guilty to burglary and seven counts of theft from shops.

The court heard he had previous convictions, including 23 offences of theft and offences of non-dwelling burglary and shoplifting.

In mitigation, Hannah Friedman said her client was remorseful for his offending and wished to apologise to the victim of the burglary, having stated he was “not a burglar but a shoplifter”.

The defence barrister said the defendant did not carry out the offences alone, and was “misled” by a group of friends.

He moved to Wales from Ireland at the age of 18 and suffered a fractured vertebrae in a bike accident which left him addicted to opiates as pain relief.

This caused the defendant’s life to “spiral” but he wished to rebuild his life and establish a relationship with his three children.

Recorder Andrew Hammond sentenced Sweeney to a total of 24 months imprisonment.

Get daily breaking news updates on your phone by joining our WhatsApp community here. We occasionally treat members to special offers, promotions and ads from us and our partners. See our Privacy Notice.

Some villains are just too evil to change their ways. Coronation Street’s child groomer Megan Walsh is a prime example. Now Megan’s dirty secret is out, actress Beth Nixon reveals that the predatory teacher will receive justice – one way or another.

The monster is revealed. Now that everyone on the Street knows that doe-eyed, butter-wouldn’t melt athletics coach Megan Walsh has been grooming underage Will Driscoll (Lucas Hodgson-Wale) into a perverse ‘relationship’, she’s personal non-grata on the Cobbles.

Although Megan plays the victim and maintains she’s the victim of a schoolboy crush gone wrong, nobody believes her. The Driscolls are baying for her blood, and the Barlows want her to pay for her torment of Sam Blakeman (Jude Riordan) who she tried to bully into keep quiet about her predatory ways.

Now that Corrie’s murder Whodunnit story upon us, Megan is one of five potential victims who could be for the chop. With the end possibly in sight, actress Beth Nixon reflects on her time portraying the villain.

‘I mean, I love playing Megan because she’s so horrible. They’re my favourite types of characters to play. But I’ve loved it. It’s such a, like, there’s so much room to play with her because she just tells lies like they’re nothing. So there’s so many layers to the character.’

‘I’ve loved playing Megan. And then the public reaction, I think obviously people hate her and, she’s a cow. But then it’s quite interesting because I think there’s people who are trying to understand her because we’ve never gone into why she’s doing the things that she’s doing.’

‘Like, why is she grooming young boys? There’s no justification because it’s unjustifiable, isn’t it, really? But I think that’s really nice from the storytelling point of view that there’s no point in justifying it, we don’t know why she’s doing it and it doesn’t matter.  So I think that’s great because it’s great for me because I can kind of just justify it as Megan, however she would.’

Beth raises a good point. The only thing missing from Megan’s story is motive.

Quite rightly, the story has been largely focused on Will’s experience and the perspective of his dad Ben Driscoll (Aaron McCusker) and his stepmother Eva Price (Catherine Tyldesley). There’s been little exploration of Megan’s past, or why she chooses to target the young and vulnerable.

‘I think that she doesn’t think that she’s doing anything wrong because she’s just so delusional.’ Beth explains.

‘But it’s been interesting to see the public try and figure out like, I wonder why she’s doing this? Why is she doing that? Like, it makes no sense, why would she do that? But it does make no sense because why would you be attracted to a child? ‘

‘Exactly like with Carl (Jonathan Howard), he’s a tortured soul. He’s had all of these things happen to him through his life. So you can kind of go, ‘oh yeah’. Whereas with Megan, which is great because you can go so far with her. She’s unredeemable. So you can just like go for it.’

Don’t miss a Soaps scoop! Add us as a Preferred Source

As a loyal Metro Soaps reader, we want to make sure you never miss our articles when searching for stories. We have all the latest soaps news, spoilers, videos, and interviews, with a vibrant community of highly engaged readers.

Click the button below and tick Metro.co.uk to ensure you see stories from us first in Google Search.

Advertisement

Add us as a Preferred Source

Irredeemable is right. Even now her sickening crimes have come to light, the police have not been able to charge Megan because she was careful enough not to leave a shred of evidence – aside from the baby she was carrying.

While she told everyone that Daniel Osbourne (Rob Mallard) was the biological father, her relationship with the unfortunate Headmaster of Weatherfield High was only ever a cover for her grooming. Will was the father, and when his grandmother Maggie Driscoll (Pauline McLynn) attacked her in a fury, Megan had the perfect opportunity to have a termination in a secret and pretend she lost the baby due to the assault.

‘I think she believes that she can talk herself out of anything. I think she just thinks that she can play everybody into the palm of her hand. She’s obviously a master manipulator and she turns the waterworks on and she victimises herself a lot. And if that doesn’t work, then she changes tact.’

‘So I think as it progresses, she does have moments of worry. But I think that she almost goes: “Right, my image that I’m building, get back into that, put the victim front on.” I think that she thinks she can worm her way out of it. And obviously, Will is key to that because if he starts admitting what’s been happening then it’s over pretty much because they don’t have any evidence, of course, at the moment. ‘

Will just might be the least of Megan’s problems.

Right now, Eva has teamed up with Leanne (Jane Danson) and Toyah Battersby to form a terrifying trio hellbent on getting a confession from the peadophile by any means necessary.

Unfortunately, all they did was manage to plant a tracker in Megan’s bag. Megan reported Eva to the police for assault, and rubbed salt in the wound by gloating to her face about sleeping with Will.

Now more determined to prove Megan’s guilt than ever, the three women confront the abuser in tomorrow’s episode. But when things go south, Toyah loses her temper and makes things worse by punching the abuser in the nose!

Up until now, Megan’s underestimate the trio. Beth Nixon explains why.

‘They’re not natural kidnappers. They don’t know what they’re doing. They’re like: “oh, I don’t know”. Don’t get blood on me. Obviously, Eva’s like in her pink and in her heels, like dragging me down the street, like clippy clopping her heels. She just thinks, what are you going to do, seriously? And then obviously when Toyah hits her, she goes, right, I’ve got you now.’

‘You’ve assaulted me. I haven’t touched you, because she’s clever. She doesn’t attack anyone. Like, she just lets them do it to her. She winds them up and winds them up because then she can use that as ammunition.’

But there’s someone Megan underestimates at her peril. Maggie.

The acid-tongued landlady of the Rovers’ Return is prepared to go to drastic lengths to protect her family. She already killed her husband for threatening to expose the fact that Ben was secretly Jim McDonald’s love child.

That makes her a dangerous enemy indeed, which Megan will discover for herself in tomorrow’s episode. After escaping the wrath of Toyah, Leanne and Eva, she finds herself face to face will the killer granny.

Beth admits that Megan isn’t taking any chances.

‘Out of all the characters, I think Maggie is probably the one that Megan would be most scared of. She’s got a few secrets of Maggie’s. Like, she knows what she’s capable of. So I think, yeah, in a way she does get to her a little bit.’

‘But [Megan], again has got such a high opinion of herself that I think that she just thinks that she can outsmart her. And I think, if anything, if she goes head-to-head with her, then that makes Maggie look bad as well. Just using that again as ammunition. But yeah, I think she probably is a little bit scared. Quaking in her boots a little bit.’

So she should be. Megan is one of five cobbles villains who could be killed off in Corrie’s much anticipated murder week. There’s certainly no shortage of suspects. Is it curtains for Megan? Beth looks back on her time in the show.

‘It’s crazy. It’s crazy. This is my first TV job, so this is all, like, completely new to me. So, yeah, it’s just exciting. Like, when I watched the promo, then I was like, it looks like I’m in a movie. Yeah, it’s just amazing, I’ve had so much fun with it. And then especially doing Murder Week, like, it’s just honestly, like, one of the most amazing experiences I’ve ever had. So, yeah, I’m excited for you all to see it properly.’

So are we, Beth. So are we.

If you’ve got a soap or TV story, video or pictures get in touch by emailing us soaps@metro.co.uk – we’d love to hear from you.

Join the community by leaving a comment below and stay updated on all things soaps on our homepage.

MORE: Coronation Street star confirms boss’ plan to kill Maggie

MORE: Coronation Street confirms major Toyah twist and a big shock will follow

MORE: ‘Mixed emotions’: Emmerdale’s James Hooton shares rare family update

Donald Trump has claimed that King Charles “probably would have helped us” in Iran in another attack on Sir Keir Starmer and Nato.

Speaking during the King’s state visit, the US president said the monarch was a “phenomenal representative for his country” and suggested he would have differed in his approach to the conflict from the prime minister.

He said: “The King loves his country, and he’s a great king, and he’s a great friend of mine. And I think if that it were up to him, he would have probably helped us with Iran.”

Asked by reporters whether the King’s speech that referred to the need for a strong Nato alliance had changed his mind, Trump said he was very disappointed in Nato after the US “asked them to do some things about Ukraine and Iran”.

Praising the King as “fantastic”, he added: “He would have done– he would have followed the suggestions we made with respect to Ukraine, because, you know, we have some disagreements on Ukraine and not having to do with Nato so much as European countries.”

Trump said the King would see him before he left for home. “And, you know, but I think he’s a phenomenal representative for his country,” he said.

“I think the people in the United Kingdom should be proud.

“I love this speech yesterday. I watched it. I loved the speech last night. I don’t know about my speech. I thought my speech was okay, too, but I thought he was I think he’s an unbelievable King, and, by the way, an unbelievable queen. They are a great couple.”

The US president has repeatedly condemned Nato for what he sees as relying too much on the US for funding and has attacked other allies, including the UK, for not supporting the US-Israeli war on Iran.

He has more than once threatened to pull America out of the defensive alliance.

But he has been unwavering in his flattery of Britain’s royal family.

More to follow…

A TOP bakery has revealed the location of its first cafe in North Yorkshire.

Premium chain Gail’s will be moving into premises at 7 James Street in Harrogate.

The location has been a Russell & Bromley shoe shop for many years.

In January, The Press reported how the future of the well-known British shoe brand was uncertain after a rescue deal was agreed and the company – with more than 150 years of history – was bought by Next.

Next said it would only retain three of its shops – in Chelsea, Mayfair and the Bluewater Shopping Centre – as part of the deal, leaving the fate of the brand’s remaining 33 stores and nine concessions uncertain.

Russell & Bromley store in Harrogate. Google Street View

Media reports have announced that Russell & Bromley has been advertising 20 per cent off products as it prepares to shut its James Street store.

Artisan bakery chain Gail’s confirmed to The Press last week that it will be opening its first store in Yorkshire in the spa town.

It has also been looking for staff for its first cafe in the county.

The well‑known business, which bakes fresh, handmade bread, pastries and cakes every day, operates more than 170 bakeries across the UK, with expansions in the pipeline.

The company is currently looking for a bakery manager (salary at £42,000 pa), and an assistant manager (at £32,900) – both located in Harrogate – with the jobs listed on its own website and elsewhere online.

Recommended reading:

Its locations are primarily in London and the south east, including Oxford and Brighton, as well as Manchester and the surrounding area.

Speculation has been rife online about the company’s planned move into Yorkshire.

Some reports suggested the first Yorkshire site would be in Knaresborough, but the appearance of job adverts for Harrogate pointed in a different direction.

Gail’s began life in London in the1990s as a wholesale supplier to restaurants, before opening its first neighbourhood bakery cafe on Hampstead High Street in London in 2005.

An exterior of one of Gail’s bakery – the business is recruting staff for a new store in Harrogate

The brand has since expanded rapidly – and continues to do so.

Positioning itself as a premium, mid‑range alternative in a market dominated by high‑street chains, Gail’s is known for handmade breads using natural ingredients and longer fermentation methods.

Its range includes sourdough loaves, baguettes and pastries, alongside sweet treats such as buns and cookies, plus speciality coffees.

Its seasonal menu, listed on line, features six varieties of sourdough bread, and sweet treats including a malted chocolate and stout cake, chocolate tahini bite, and pecan crumb cake. The drinks menu boasts a range of match drinks and a turmeric latte.

Often labelled “posh” the chain has built a loyal following for its focus on quality and traditional baking techniques.

Aries

Taurus

Gemini

Cancer

Leo

Virgo

Libra

Scorpio

Saggitarius

Capricorn

Aquarius

Pisces

Shortly before 22:00 BST on 7 May, Lavryovych sent Pochynok a message on Telegram saying: “Look, we won’t talk much on the phone. At that address, there’ll be a car, need to check if it’s there. If it is there then basically today we’ll do the job. We’ll have money. And this week, if we plan everything well today, tomorrow there may be another one, we’ll make more money.”