RG Richardson Business & Economics

RG Richardson Business & Economics
Interactive financial ebooks

Economic system of Russia

 

The economic current system of Russia

Russia's economic system is a mixed economy combining market and state roles, driven by oil and natural gas exports plus mining, manufacturing, and agriculture, now reshaped by Western sanctions since 2022. What type of economic system does Russia have? The 2026 Index of Economic Freedom scores it about 52 of 100 as Mostly Unfree, around 135th globally.

This article is about the current economic system of Russia (2026)

What is the economic system of Russia? The economy of Russia is based on a mixed economy. The country’s economic system combines elements of a market economy and a planned economy.

Russia’s economy, one of the largest globally, is driven by energy exports, mainly oil and natural gas. Other sectors include mining, manufacturing (automotive, defense), and agriculture (wheat, barley). It also has a significant services sector, including IT and retail. Since February 2022, Russia’s economy has operated under extensive Western sanctions following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which has reshaped trade patterns and limited access to international financial markets.

No country is purely capitalist or purely communist.

Moscow illustrating the current economic system of Russia

What do the freedom indexes tell about the economic system of Russia?

For instance, according to the 2026 Index of Economic Freedom, which measures the ability of every human to control his own labor and property, Russia scores approximately 52 out of 100 (As of 2025–2026) and is ranked in the Mostly Unfree category, placing it around 135th globally and among the lowest-ranked European economies.

In a similar way, the Freedom House Freedom in the World 2026 report evaluates the state of political rights and civil liberties globally. Russia gets a score of 12/100 (As of 2026), which qualifies it as Not Free.

Russia is a country where the government controls what people do for political reasons, and people have limited freedom to choose (what, how much, and how to produce, whether to buy or not, selling price, etc.)

The Link Between Public Sector Employment and the Economic System of Russia

An indicator of the extent to which the State is involved in the economy is the number of public sector employees. In Russia, according to ILOSTAT, the most recent available figure for public sector employees as a percentage of the total workforce was approximately 40.6% (2011 survey). A more recent comparable figure has not been published by ILOSTAT. This is substantially higher than the global average of roughly 10%, which is consistent with Russia’s large state-owned enterprise sector.

In the country’s mixed economy, the number of public sector employees as a percentage of the total workforce varies based on the specific policies and practices adopted by the State. Some economic activities are left to the private sector while others are under government control. The bigger the public sector the closer the economy is to being a command economy.

What do the biggest companies in Russia say about the country’s economic system?

The biggest company in Russia by revenue should also be looked at, as well as whether it is a state-owned or private company. Russia’s largest companies by revenue are both state-controlled energy giants: Gazprom and Rosneft each reported revenues exceeding RUB 10 trillion (approximately $110–115 billion USD) in 2024, according to company financial reports. Gazprom is the world’s largest natural gas producer, while Rosneft is Russia’s leading oil company. Both are majority state-owned. Sberbank, also majority state-owned via the Russian government (through the Ministry of Finance), is Russia’s largest bank and a leading financial institution.

Top 10 Biggest companies by revenue in Russia (2023 data)

The historical factors that have influenced the economic system of Russia

The mixed economy system of Russia was caused by a combination of factors, including the collapse of the Soviet Union, the liberalization of the economy, and the introduction of market reforms.

These changes allowed for the emergence of private enterprise, increased competition, and the development of a more open and competitive market system. This has resulted in a more diversified and dynamic economy, with a greater emphasis on private ownership and market forces.

But, there are still a lot of remnants of the centrally planned communist economy. The economy has one of the highest public sector employment shares globally, and its biggest companies are state-owned. This shows how the Russian government still has significant control over the economy and its people.

More than 80 U.S. warplanes have been destroyed or damaged

Jaw-Dropping Scale of Trump’s Secret Military Losses Is Exposed
Harry Thompson
Wed, October 7, 2026 at 4:46 AM PDT
2 min read
Add Yahoo as a preferred source to see more of our stories on Google.
Add Yahoo on Google
2.1k



Evelyn Hockstein / REUTERS


More than 80 U.S. warplanes have been destroyed or damaged in the course of Donald Trump's war on Iran at a cost of more than $3 billion, according to a new congressional report.

The Middle Eastern conflict is now in its eighth month and has cost the Pentagon tens of billions of dollars and the lives of at least 18 U.S. service members. According to the Congressional Research Service, U.S. forces have also lost 81 military fixed-wing or rotary-wing aircraft, including multimillion-dollar drones.

According to their figures, 12 F-15E Strike Eagles have either taken hits or been lost completely, while a state-of-the-art fifth-generation F-35A Lightning II stealth fighter has also been damaged.

A dozen F-15s have been lost or damaged. / Staff Sgt. Corey Hook/U.S. Air Forces Central Command

Some of the losses have not been widely reported, but others have been big news, including the downing of an F-15E Strike Eagle over Iran and three more F-15s in a friendly-fire incident over Kuwait. F-15s cost upwards of $30 million each.


Advertisement


Another eight were damaged during Iranian strikes on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan in September. The report notes that the fighters involved in that incident returned to service afterward.

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shakes hands with US President Donald Trump onstage during an event at Sparrows Point Shipyard, in Baltimore County, Maryland, US, October 6, 2026. REUTERS/Eric Lee / Eric Lee / REUTERSMore

There have also been seven KC-135 Stratotankers refueling aircraft either damaged or lost—reported by Forbes to cost $79 million each when inflation is applied to the government's official $39 million price tag.


The list also states that a $240 million MQ-4C Triton unmanned aerial vehicle "crashed in a mishap."

The Congressional Research Service offers a nonpartisan think tank service that provides information to Congress. The report incorporated DoD and CENTCOM information, as well as information from news reporting, to determine U.S. losses.



The figures mark a significant jump from its last report in May, which revealed that up to 42 planes had been damaged or destroyed.

A state-of-the-art F-35 has also been damaged. / Fort Worth Star-Telegram / TNS

While that shows a slightly slower rate than in the war's first three months, it does suggest that the conflict remains hot and dangerous for U.S. service members, and expensive for taxpayers.

In total, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said the cost of the damaged aircraft could reach up to $3.3 billion.

Forty-five MQ-9 Reapers have been lost, according to the report. / Patrick T. Fallon/Reuters

The biggest losses from the war are drones. The latest report shows that 45 $30 to $50 million MQ-9 Reaper drones have been destroyed in the fighting. By May, the usable fleet—which is supposed to have a minimum of 189 at all times—had already dropped to 135, Air Force Times reported.

A MQ-4C Triton costs almost a quarter of a billion dollars. / Handout . / REUTERS

Officially, the Pentagon says it has spent $37.5 billion on the war so far, although Democrats and independent observers think that number could be far higher.

The Daily Beast has contacted the Pentagon, White House, and CENTCOM for comment.

Injunction filed to force incoming PQ government to take an oath to the King

Injunction filed to force incoming PQ government to take an oath to the King
Government should 'not be at liberty to freely flout the laws,' lawyer says


Benjamin Shingler · CBC News · Posted: Oct 07, 2026 8:45 AM PDT | Last Updated: October 7


Listen to this article
Estimated 3 minutes

The National Assembly in Quebec City. In 2022, MNAs passed a law putting an end to a requirement to swear an oath to the King in order to sit in the legislature. (Jacques Boissinot/The Canadian Press)

A constitutional lawyer has filed an emergency injunction in an attempt to force the incoming Parti Québécois government to swear allegiance to King Charles.

The application for an interim stay was filed in Quebec Superior Court by the Public Interest Litigation Institute and its founder, Lawrence David.

David said political parties "regardless of their stripes" are "not at liberty to freely flout the laws that apply to all democratic institutions in Canada.


"That is precisely why we are standing up," David, who teaches at the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of law, said in an interview.

"We are taking measures using the legal system, which is precisely what the legal system is there for, to ensure that ... governments respect the law that is applicable to them."



Get more with a free CBC account

Comment on articles, stay in the know with our newsletters and stream more on CBC Gem.
Sign InCreate a free account

The injunction asks the court to immediately suspend a 2022 provincial law that made the oath to the monarch optional for members of the National Assembly. David already filed a lawsuit in August over the same matter.

The latest move comes following Monday's election victory by the sovereignist Parti Québécois.

Could the Parti Québécois actually abolish the monarchy in Quebec?


Premier-designate Paul St-Pierre Plamondon has pledged to move to cut funding to the office of Quebec's lieutenant-governor within his first 100 days in power, as part an attempt to "abolish" the monarchy in the province.

The legal filing argues that if the newly elected MNAs refuse to take the oath to the King, they are not constitutionally qualified to sit in the legislature.

The lawsuit warns that any laws passed by an illegally assembled body — especially a law attempting to abolish the lieutenant governor — would be void, creating an "unprecedented legal crisis."

Department of Justice Seizes Stablecoin Tether’s Bank Accounts

Department of Justice Seizes Stablecoin Tether’s Bank Accounts
Not a great look for crypto.

By Joe Wilkins

Published Sep 25, 2026 5:34 PM EDT
Add Futurism(opens in a new tab)More information


Shutterstock / Futurism

Sign up to see the future, today

Can’t-miss innovations from the bleeding edge of science and tech

Email address Sign Up

Ask any crypto bro for the digital equivalent of the gold standard, and they’ll likely tell you about Tether — though a recent raid by the Department of Justice is throwing that characterization into question.

Fresh reporting by the Financial Times revealed that the US Department of Justice has seized millions of dollars from a collection of bank accounts and crypto wallets linked to the fintech company Tether Limited.

The company is famously the issuer of the “stablecoin” Tether, a digital currency meant to maintain a relatively stable value based on the exchange rate of the US dollar. The company Tether was one of the subjects of a massive FBI probe, which discovered an unlicensed payment processing business, Capstone, that is now alleged to have placed hundreds of millions of dollars worth of illegal transfers.

The convoluted case also involves Bitfinex, a cryptocurrency exchange owned by Tether’s parent company, iFinex.

Basically, the payment processor Capstone is alleged to have misrepresented itself as an information technology firm in dealings with legitimate banks like Wells Fargo and JPMorgan Chase. In reality, according to the allegations, the company was engaged in a massive fraud scheme, in which people affiliated with Capstone misrepresented themselves as FBI agents in order to scam the elderly, whose money was then converted into crypto, Reuters reported.

Based on the information available so far, the two crypto companies seem like unwitting bystanders rather than willing participants. Tether’s connection came by way of a relationship with a legal off-shore firm called EQIBank, which handled the flow of Tether’s money through Capstone.

In statements to the FT, both Tether and Bitfinex insisted they are merely “customers of EQIBank,” and had “no knowledge of the fraudulent conduct by Capstone alleged by the DoJ.”

The entire thing shows how sketchy the crypto market still remains in 2026, even as it holds $140 billion of US government debt. Even with support from the president of the United States, Tether is clearly struggling to tap into the most rudimentary financial infrastructure.

Tether’s entire connection with EQI — and therefore with the alleged fraudsters at Capstone — came about as the crypto firm tried desperately to open a bank account with the Development Bank of Singapore, a major institution in the global financial space.

According to the FT, Tether offered to make a handsome investment in EQI if it could manage the “successful opening of at least one bank account” with the Singaporean financier. That failed to materialize before the FBI probe blew everything out in the open, and as the Development Bank of Singapore told the FT: “DBS has never had appetite for association with illicit funds or inappropriate dealings.”

More on crypto: Eric Trump Has Lost $600 Million of Daddy’s Money Betting on Crypto

Wikimedia Detected Activity From OpenAI’s ‘Rogue’ Agents

 Wikimedia Detected Activity From OpenAI’s ‘Rogue’ Agents Across Its Platforms

The nonprofit says the agents made unauthorized edits, probed its services, and may have contributed to a partial outage.
BY BRUCE GILPUBLISHED OCTOBER 6, 2026, 12:30 PM ET

READING TIME 3 MINUTES

© Shutterstock
READ LATER COMMENTS (18)

It seems like every week there’s a new story about OpenAI agents messing with another part of the internet. This week, it was Wikimedia’s turn. The nonprofit behind Wikipedia said in a blog post Monday that its services were affected by OpenAI’s “rogue” agents.

The Wikimedia Foundation said it conducted its own investigation and found activity on its platforms that it believes came from agents operated by OpenAI. The unauthorized bots made edits to Wikimedia wikis, unsuccessfully attempted to exploit a public note-taking tool, and generated heavy traffic that may have contributed to a partial outage of one of its data services.

Wikimedia said it found no evidence that its systems or data were compromised. Still, the nonprofit said it was concerned about what could have happened, the difficulty of investigating these incidents, and “the growing risks of agentic AI activity.”

The blog post follows a wave of reports involving OpenAI agents accessing or targeting third-party websites and services without authorization.

Scrutiny over rogue AI agents really kicked into high gear this year after Hugging Face disclosed in July that it had detected and responded to an intrusion carried out “end to end” by an autonomous AI agent system. OpenAI came forward several days later to acknowledge that its models were behind the compromise.

The AI company said the agents, which were undergoing internal cybersecurity evaluations, circumvented guardrails meant to keep them from the internet. They exploited vulnerabilities, gained internet access, and eventually compromised parts of Hugging Face’s infrastructure while trying to complete their assigned tasks. OpenAI is now facing a lawsuit over the breach.

OpenAI has since disclosed other incidents in which its agents accessed third-party systems without authorization. In June, for example, an OpenAI agent gained unauthorized access to an Australian government Medicare statistics portal.

In Wikimedia’s case, the nonprofit said it identified edits to its wikis that it believes were made by OpenAI agents. Almost all were test edits made in “sandbox” areas and were not published to pages visible to general readers. However, some agents also edited the configuration of a citation tool. Wikimedia said it believes those changes “were intended to misuse this tool as a proxy for fetching data from remote services.”

For context, Wikimedia allows bots to make edits, but only when they are disclosed and approved by the community.

Wikimedia also said OpenAI agents made unsuccessful attempts to compromise Etherpad, a public note-taking tool it hosts. The agents also tried to use the service as a proxy to gather data from other websites.

Finally, Wikimedia said agents it believes were operated by OpenAI made millions of automated requests to its public APIs, crawled millions of pages, and made hundreds of thousands of queries to the Wikidata Query Service (WQDS). The nonprofit said that traffic may have contributed to a partial outage of WQDS back in May.

“Incidents like this one, and the many others that have been (and are still being) uncovered, illustrate how AI agents can drain resources and crash servers, as well as attempt to compromise trustworthy information,” wrote Wikimedia Chief Product and Technology Officer Selena Deckelmann in the blog post.

Deckelmann called on AI companies to take more responsibility for monitoring their agents and preventing these risks.

OpenAI did not immediately respond to a for comment, however, spokesperson Drew Pusateri told Reuters that the company appreciated Wikimedia’s findings and was working with the them to review the reported activity.

FCC lifts cap on TV station ownership

 FCC lifts cap on TV station ownership. The three commissioners of the Federal Communications Commission voted 2–1 yesterday to scrap the limit on the number of US households one company can reach, likely paving the way for more media consolidation, NBC News reported. Previously, Congress limited companies to owning broadcast stations that combined to reach a maximum of 39% of the US audience. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr called the rule “outdated” and has argued that the FCC has the authority to replace it, even though it was codified by Congress. Anna M. Gomez, the sole Democrat on the FCC panel, called the move “unlawful.” It is expected to be met with legal challenges.

How Seoul became the busiest international airport

  

How Seoul became the busiest international airport

Exterior view of Incheon International Airport, a futuristic-looking terminal featuring a curved, glass-grid roof, a distinctive saucer-shaped control tower feature, and pedestrians walking along a paved drop-off lane with orange traffic cones under a bright sky.

Olga Pak / Getty Images

As a result of turmoil in the Middle East, Dubai’s 12-year reign as the top destination for international travelers is over. Seoul’s Incheon Airport has become the world’s busiest hub for international travel over the first six months of this year, according to data from Airports Council International (ACI).

Since the Iran war started in February, the shift away from the city where Tom Cruise climbed the Burj Khalifa has been drastic:

  • The number of international passengers going through Dubai fell from 7.4 million in February to 2.5 million in March (but rose to 4.7 million in June).
  • Meanwhile, Incheon in Seoul served 38.4 million international travelers in the first half of the year.

Lost connection: Transfer traffic in the Middle East has fallen by half since the war began, according to the New York Times. Much of that traffic is going through Asia instead: From January to June, Incheon saw an 18% rise in flyers making a connecting flight and a 63% increase in passengers connecting to Europe, compared to a year earlier.

Plan ahead: The International Air Transport Association reported that bookings are down in the Middle East for June through September. But they’re up 33% from a year ago in the Asia-Pacific region for the same time period.

College Kids Are Using AI Agents to “Take” Entire Online Classes for Them

College Kids Are Using AI Agents to “Take” Entire Online Classes for Them by Logging Directly Into the Course Management Software
"Am I just interacting with bots here?"

By Frank Landymore

Published Aug 13, 2026 12:46 PM EDT
Add Futurism(opens in a new tab)More information


Shutterstock / Futurism

Sign up to see the future, today

Can’t-miss innovations from the bleeding edge of science and tech

Email address Sign Up

With the rise of agentic models, why stop at using chatbots to look up answers? Some students are directing AI agents to “take” entire online courses for them, letting the software run in the background while they focus on better uses of their time, like doomscrolling on their phone or gaming.

The New York Times unpacked the trend in a recent story, and it’s a testament to how extreme AI-enabled cheating has become, but also of the perils of getting an education in a virtual environment instead of a physical one. Professors can’t rely on supervised exams and oral presentations in online courses like they’re starting to shift to in-person ones.

Since everything is behind the screen, students can ask an AI agent to log into learning platforms like Canvas and Blackboard and complete quizzes for then, watch lecture videos, write papers, and even pose as the student and participate in discussions, a type of assignment in which they’re expected to chat with classmates and sometimes the professor about assigned reading.

AI companies are doing little to stop this.

The NYT found that none of the three most popular chatbots with students — ChatGPT, Gemini, and Grammarly — would refuse requests to write an entire paper on a student’s behalf. And they also don’t stop their models from logging into platforms like Canvas and Blackboard, and have ignored the request from educators that their models should identify themselves while they’re used on there.

The reasoning can sound quite specious. Perplexity, the company behind an AI web browser, told the NYT in a statement that requiring AI agents to identify themselves on learning platforms “would put the student’s privacy and security at risk.”

Professors feel powerless to stop the trend. Often, their university may have a partnership or deal with an AI company that provides access to a custom version of its models. This sends a mixed message to students: is AI encouraged, or verboten? Some professors will turn a blind eye AI use, and others will heavily punish it, but as a whole, it’s every instructor for themselves.

“Am I just interacting with bots here?” Karen Costa, who’s spent two decades teaching line courses, recalled asking herself, per the NYT.

“I’m not getting any guidance on how to dissuade their use,” added Carol Sewell at the California State University system, which signed a multimillion dollar deal with OpenAI last year. “I’m getting opportunities to learn more about using it.”

Despite the clear potential for teaching — and negative effects they cause, such as impaired critical thinking and memory loss — many universities are reluctant to proscribe AI entirely. That doesn’t mean some haven’t been trying to find ways around it.

The University of Chicago Law School recently banned using phones, tablets, and laptops in class for freshman-level courses, as part of its new “AI strategy.” Princeton University dropped its over century-old Honor Code tradition which let students take their exams without supervision, after an AI cheating scandal rattled the Ivy League institution.

More on AI: Homeschool Parents Are Planning Lessons With ChatGPT



Frank Landymore
Contributing Writer


I’m a tech and science correspondent for Futurism, where I’m particularly interested in astrophysics, the business and ethics of artificial intelligence and automation, and the environment.

It would be foolish to underestimate what Trump is capable of, says author Louise Penny

It would be foolish to underestimate what Trump is capable of, says author Louise Penny
New book explores plot to make Canada 51st state, written before Trump's re-election


Padraig Moran · CBC Radio · Posted: Nov 21, 2025 8:37 AM PST | Last Updated: November 21, 2025


Listen to this article
Estimated 5 minutes

Bestselling author Louise Penny told Matt Galloway it was 'a bit of a shock' to hear U.S. President Donald Trump talk about Canada becoming the 51st state, especially as it was the plot of her already-written new book (Andrea Stanford/CBC)

Social Sharing

X

Reddit

LinkedIn

Email
LISTEN | Two countries, one community:


The Current1:14:23Live at the Haskell Free Library, right on the U.S. border

Bestselling author Louise Penny says it would be foolish to dismiss the 51st state rhetoric that U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly leveled at Canada.

“I think that there is not a country that's been invaded, a peoples who have been targeted … who hasn't looked back and thought, what did I miss?” Penny told The Current’s Matt Galloway in a special show with a live audience.

“Where was the moment when it could have been stopped? And I think we're living through that moment right now,” she said.
Advertisement-Report


Penny was speaking on stage at the Haskell Free Library and Opera House, a unique venue that is split by the U.S.-Canada border. Part of the building is in Stanstead, Que.; part is in Derby Line, Vt.

The venue has become embroiled in the simmering tensions between the two countries over the past year, as Trump started a trade war and threatened to use "economic force" to annex Canada and make it the 51st state. Earlier this year, the U.S. government limited access on the U.S. side, forcing the library to renovate and create access on the Canadian side. Penny contributed to that renovation fund, which raised more than $140,000.

A black border line runs along the floor of the Haskell Free Library, which straddles the boundary between Canada and the United States. (AP Photo/Toby Talbot)

Her latest novel, The Black Wolf, explores a sinister plot to make Canada the 51st state — though she’s keen to point out she wrote the novel before Trump was re-elected. She spoke to Galloway about her surprise as the plot became real-world politics, here is part of their conversation.

You gave $50,000 for a new door for the Canadian side that some of our Canadian guests may have come through.

I do just want to say that the reason I could afford to do that is because of [my readers’] support. Because financially, I've been so fortunate over the course of a 20-year career. And so it just seemed natural, absolutely natural to say thank you and give some — not all of it — give some of it back.

You also said, creating the new door, these are your words, it's like giving the finger to the current administration. You close one door, we'll open another.

Well, and how symbolic are doors? Doors. They closed a door. And how elegant is the solution on the Canadian side, totally supported by the American part of the organization here, to just say, 'Well, that's all right. We'll just open our own.' And that's what happened.

You're good friends with Hillary Rodham Clinton, you wrote a book with her.

Yes.
WATCH | Hillary Rodham Clinton and Louise Penny on writing together:




Hillary Rodham Clinton and Louise Penny on their political thriller, State of Terror
October 15, 2021|
Duration
2:43Good friends Hillary Rodham Clinton and Louise Penny talk about their first novel together, State of Terror, which follows newly appointed U.S. secretary of state Ellen Adams and her race to stop a series of international terrorist attacks.

Have you had any conversations with her about what's going on right now?
Advertisement-Report


A few.

Would you care to share the tenor and the tone of those conversations?

I do want to say she loves the Eastern Townships. She loves coming up. She was here this past summer and she said that it's the first time since the inauguration that she's felt safe. I've never heard her say that before. I think she's afraid for the first time physically, but she is certainly afraid for the American democracy and the American republic.

You started this book before Trump was re-elected, right?

I started this because it's two halves of a whole, starting with the Grey Wolf and then the Black Wolf is the second half of it. So in fact, it was designed three years ago.
WATCH | How a Quebec town pushed back against new rules for library:




Quebec town pushes back as U.S. tightens access to iconic border-straddling library
March 21, 2025|
Duration
2:29Once a symbol of partnership between two friendly nations, the Haskell Free Library and Opera House in Stanstead, Que., has become a point of tension lately, with American authorities now deciding the way it functioned for decades posed too much of a border security risk.

And so how do you, at that point, start thinking about 51st state, long before those words have come out of the current president's mouth? You said to me that you worried that you'd gone too far. Now you worry whether you didn't go far enough.

It was a bit of a shock to hear Trump talk about the 51st state.

If you read the book you'll see that it just seems, I hope, like a natural progression.

And then when it actually happened in the real world, obviously as a Canadian I was appalled. And unsure how seriously to take it. I think we're still trying to parse that. The other part was obviously thinking more personally, if this is in my book, are people going to think that I've simply ripped it from the headlines and ripped it off and taken advantage of what is a very shattering experience?

How seriously should we take it?
Advertisement-Report

That is a really interesting question. I think it would be foolish to underestimate what he's capable of. I think that there is not a country that's been invaded, a peoples who have been targeted or an individual who's been rounded up, who hasn't looked back and thought, what did I miss? Where was the moment when it could have been stopped? And I think we're living through that moment right now.

Americans don’t recognize the damage Trump is doing, says novelist John Irving



Margaret Atwood on reading palms, getting older — and holding grudges


And it behooves all of us, certainly behooves me because I'm 67. I am 20 years into a career that has so overshot any of my expectations. If I don't stand up, and I am in a position where I can, then shame on me. I think it's time that we stood up, those of us who can.


Audio produced by Julie Crysler and Susan McKenzie. Q&A edited for length and clarity.

Multiverse teachers say AI surveillance is costing them sleep

 

Multiverse teachers say AI surveillance is costing them sleep

Teachers at Multiverse, the £1.6 billion tech training company co-founded by Euan Blair, are reporting severe stress, sleepless nights, and a need for therapy after the company introduced an AI surveillance system that monitors, transcribes, and scores their online classroom sessions. The system tags each instructor with a risk status, calculates a confidence score, and flags potential problems for human managers to review, ranging from using too many filler phrases like "sort of" and "kind of" to failing to resolve a connectivity disruption within roughly a minute. Several instructors who spoke anonymously described the experience as "remorseless" and "unnerving," with one saying they had never before woken in the middle of the night from work-related stress.

The AI is trained to identify patterns across entire session transcripts rather than isolated moments, and instructs managers to apply negative marks even when a teacher self-corrects an unclear explanation. Teachers say the system has caused managers to flag them for alleged digressions when they were simply answering a student's question, and that the constant scrutiny shifts their attention away from learners and toward self-monitoring. Multiverse says the tool does not replace human judgment but directs managerial attention where it is most needed, and insists that only human managers write formal performance reviews. Pressure on Multiverse is likely to mount given that Ofsted earlier this year praised its instructors as skilled and effective even as it found the company fell short in other areas.

Over 26,000 US Public Parks Border a Toxic Superfund Site

Over 26,000 US Public Parks Border a Toxic Superfund Site—But It’s Worse Than That
Tens of thousands of U.S. parks—everything from national forests to local hiking trails—sit precariously close to EPA-designated toxic sites, researchers found.
BY MATTHEW PHELANPUBLISHED AUGUST 7, 2026, 7:30 AM ET

READING TIME 3 MINUTES

The Gold King Mine leached orange-brown, toxic mine water that crossed state lines into Utah’s Glen Canyon national recreation area in 2015. Credit: Mor via Flickr, CC 2.0 license
READ LATER COMMENTS (2)



We hear a lot of rhetoric about strong border protection these days, but not much has been said about preserving the sanctity of the boundaries protecting America’s public parks. That’s a real shame, given new research that has mapped an alarming proximity between toxic waste sites across the U.S. and our nation’s otherwise scenic and beautiful public parks.

Researchers with the University of Michigan (U-M) cross-referenced a dataset of 151,366 public parks—including everything from national and state parks to local hiking trails and dual-use school playgrounds—with two categories of pollution sites catalogued by the EPA. The results were stark: Nearly 18% of America’s public parks—26,886 of these recreational areas to be precise—are located within two miles of an EPA-designated Superfund Site. And over 2,000 of these parks physically overlap with a Superfund Site, according to the team’s new study, released as a pre-print Thursday by the Nature journal Scientific Reports.

But the scope of the problem is even worse when viewed in the context of the EPA’s broader category of Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) sites. Over half of all U.S. parks, researchers found, are positioned within 2 miles (3.2 kilometers) of a TRI site. And at least 63 of these parks currently share property with one of these toxic sites.

“[Our] results highlight that neighborhood features cannot be fully understood in isolation from each other,” the team, which is composed of epidemiologists, biologists, and data scientists, wrote in its new study.

“Research that considers parks as a monolithic public health benefit fails to consider the significant overlap between green space and polluting sites in the U.S. and the implications for communities that utilize these parks,” the team wrote in the new study.
Parks and dreck

The EPA has labelled over 21,000 industrial and federal facilities as TRI sites as of 2022, a designation requiring the sites’ owners to track and report activities involving any of over 800 chemicals that the EPA regulates as potential threats to the environment and human health. The general goal is exactly projects like U-M’s research, which utilized EPA databases on these facilities.

Epidemiologist Grace Noppert at U-M’s Institute for Social Research and her coauthors noted that some of these sites, particularly near America’s largest state and national parks, have long been a well-known problem.

“National parks in the Mountain West are often near mining sites,” Noppert and her colleagues wrote, citing research dating back to the early 1980s.

“Colorado had the largest amount of total park area that overlapped with SFS [Superfund Sites],” they noted, roughly 430,610 square miles (over 1.1 million square kilometers). This would include the infamous orange-brown, toxic mine water that crossed state lines into Utah’s Glen Canyon national recreation area in 2015.

But their data, sourced from the nonprofit Trust for Public Land’s 2024 ParkServe dataset, helped map more granular consequences for these myriad smaller parks that dot heavily polluted areas across the U.S., from major cities to rustbelt coal towns.

“[The] greening of post-industrial landscapes, and the creation of recreational areas across time results in the layering of different types of space at a given location,” Noppert’s team wrote.

“There were only five states that had no park land that overlapped with any SFS (Arkansas, Maine, Mississippi, North Dakota, and Wyoming),” the researchers stated.
Parallel park things

Noppert and her colleagues noted that there were some significant omissions within their current analysis. For one thing, they have not yet broken down the data by the specific pollutants present within these parks, much less how local details like wind patterns or topography might hasten or hinder any given pollutant’s spread.

They expressed hope that future research will not only incorporate these factors but also data that could help map all the other neighborhood amenities and local health risks that should be considered in parallel to separate benefits and risks that cancel each other out.

“These places require localized attention, analysis, and advocacy to support both human and environmental health,” Noppert’s team said.

Surely, some of y’all are ‘Choosin’ Texas’

 Surely, some of y’all are ‘Choosin’ Texas’


Jason Kempin/Getty Images

If you haven’t been “Choosin’ Texas,” well, someone has. Country Singer Ella Langley’s two-steppin’ song recently set a new record for most weeks at the No. 1 spot on the Billboard Hot 100. The hit, currently in its 24th week at the top of the chart, unseated previous record holder Mariah Carey’s “All I Want for Christmas Is You”—despite everyone online claiming they’ve never heard Langley’s song.

“Choosin’ Texas” was more of a slow burn. The song debuted last November at No. 39, and didn’t break the top 10 until January, eventually reaching No. 1 in February. It dropped from the top spot in May, but clawed its way back up in July, and has remained there ever since.

That’s a pretty big feat for a country artist: Between 2000 and 2023, only four country songs occupied the top spot. Two of them were Taylor Swift songs.

Is this a psyop? If you have no idea who or what is doing the song’s choosing, you’re not alone. Folks are developing a slew of theories as to how a song can get so popular despite so many people having never heard it. Unquestionably, the song is all over TikTok (though it’s not attached to a distinct trend). It’s also inspiring think pieces: Rolling Stone says if you’re unaware of it, it’s because of your anti-country bubble, CNN says it means the monoculture is for real dead this time, and Garbage Day considers that maybe the whole system is made up and the points don’t matter.

Overwhelming Majorities in Canada, U.S. Say No to Local Data Centre Development

Overwhelming Majorities in Canada, U.S. Say No to Local Data Centre Development

August 19, 2026
Reading time: 4 minutes

Author: The Energy Mix staff
Full Story: The Energy Mix



mikemacmarketing/wikimedia commons

Public opposition to artificial intelligence (AI) data centre projects is surging across Canada and the United States, as outrage over the projects’ energy and water use, noise pollution, carbon footprint—and their proponents’ habit of often ignoring or flouting community opposition—unites voters across the political spectrum.

The latest news showed up this week in an exclusive poll for Heatmap that showed public support for data centres collapsing over the last year, with 75% of respondents now saying they oppose development in their communities. The poll results arrived hot on the heels of a decision this week by the Alberta Utility Commission (AUC) to disallow a $1-billion, 1,400-megawatt gas power plant that would have powered a data centre in the rural community of Olds, where 900 people out of a population of about 9,500 were given standing to speaking out on the project.

The data centre and gas plant. proposed by Synapse Real Estate Corp., would have been a “threat to our health, to our financial health, to our children’s future, to the future of Olds as a community,” Olds resident Carol Edwards, a retired finance professor at Simon Fraser University, told The Energy Mix. “There was absolutely no doubt in our minds that this would be the death of our town, that nobody would want to live here, no one would want to buy our houses, and this place would become a ghost town.”

The Heatmap poll by Embold Research found that three-quarters of Americans would oppose a local data centre project, with 60% saying they would strongly oppose it. Those numbers reflect a steady increase from 42% last August, to 51% in February, to 70% in May.

“The shift against the facilities is represented across age, gender, income, partisan ID, and the rural-urban divide,” Heatmap writes. “Data centres are 43 points underwater with Republicans, 65 points underwater with independents, and 75 points underwater with Democrats.”

The trend is particularly powerful among rural voters who’ve “skewed more Republican over the past decade,” with whom local data centres are now 63 points underwater—meaning that number of respondents who oppose them is now 63 percentage points h

Overwhelming Majorities in Canada, U.S. Say No to Local Data Centre Development
August 19, 2026
Reading time: 4 minutes

Author: The Energy Mix staff
Full Story: The Energy Mix



mikemacmarketing/wikimedia commons

Public opposition to artificial intelligence (AI) data centre projects is surging across Canada and the United States, as outrage over the projects’ energy and water use, noise pollution, carbon footprint—and their proponents’ habit of often ignoring or flouting community opposition—unites voters across the political spectrum.

The latest news showed up this week in an exclusive poll for Heatmap that showed public support for data centres collapsing over the last year, with 75% of respondents now saying they oppose development in their communities. The poll results arrived hot on the heels of a decision this week by the Alberta Utility Commission (AUC) to disallow a $1-billion, 1,400-megawatt gas power plant that would have powered a data centre in the rural community of Olds, where 900 people out of a population of about 9,500 were given standing to speaking out on the project.

The data centre and gas plant. proposed by Synapse Real Estate Corp., would have been a “threat to our health, to our financial health, to our children’s future, to the future of Olds as a community,” Olds resident Carol Edwards, a retired finance professor at Simon Fraser University, told The Energy Mix. “There was absolutely no doubt in our minds that this would be the death of our town, that nobody would want to live here, no one would want to buy our houses, and this place would become a ghost town.”

The Heatmap poll by Embold Research found that three-quarters of Americans would oppose a local data centre project, with 60% saying they would strongly oppose it. Those numbers reflect a steady increase from 42% last August, to 51% in February, to 70% in May.

“The shift against the facilities is represented across age, gender, income, partisan ID, and the rural-urban divide,” Heatmap writes. “Data centres are 43 points underwater with Republicans, 65 points underwater with independents, and 75 points underwater with Democrats.”

The trend is particularly powerful among rural voters who’ve “skewed more Republican over the past decade,” with whom local data centres are now 63 points underwater—meaning that number of respondents who oppose them is now 63 percentage points higher than those who support them. The projects are only doing marginally better with urban and suburban voters.

The shift has U.S. politicians either embracing the public rage or scrambling to catch up with it. In Democratic Party primaries earlier this month, Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed and House of Representatives nominee Will Lawrence, a co-founder of the Sunrise Movement, both won their races with campaigns that emphasized their opposition to local data centre development, Politico reported at the time. Kansas gubernatorial nominee Cindy Holscher won her campaign after shifting her position and calling for a statewide data centre moratorium, while Tennessee House nominee Justin Pearson has been a sharp opponent all along.

“People really effing hate data centres,” El-Sayed told an event last month.

This week, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro “enacted new rules that effectively halt any new data centres that face opposition from local officials,” Politico reports. That’s a big pivot for Shapiro, who’s considered a possible presidential nominee in 2028 and “has gone from wooing tech companies a year ago to calling for action against “greedy developers.” His Republican opponent for governor, state Treasurer Stacy Garrity, is calling for an outright ban.

Other Republicans are calling for “guardrails” on data centre development “protect skeptical communities from unchecked AI growth, as well as the rollback of industry tax breaks,” Semafor writes. Donald Trump said Wednesday the industry “could use a little public relations help,” after introducing a ratepayer protection pledge in March that would have developers paying for the hundreds or thousands of megawatts of electricity the centres demand.

Earlier this month, Allie Rosenbluth, campaign manager at Oil Change Action, said rising energy costs due to U.S. liquefied natural gas exports and data centre development are shifting the dynamics in the midterm campaign.

“People are really starting to connect the dots that energy affordability and climate are major issues,” Rosenbluth told The Mix. “They’re experiencing it in their energy bills, and they’re also experiencing it if they live next to a data centre or an LNG export terminal. So these things are top of mind to voters.”

Recent polling in Canada suggest the fierce opposition to the Synapse project in Olds is the leading edge of a bigger trend. In a Nanos Research survey for the Globe and Mail, released this week, 64% of respondents said they would oppose or somewhat oppose financial incentives for data centre development.

Opposition was a bit stronger—43.1% against, and 24% somewhat opposed—among Canadians aged 18 to 34. “If you’re a 20-something Canadian, and you’re hearing that the government wants to promote AI data centres, you might be wondering whether the government is investing in something that will put you out of a job,” Nanos founder Nik Nanos told the Globe.

Last month, 81% of participants in a Leger poll said they were worried that data centres would lead to higher power bills, while 79% were concerned about their energy consumption, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions, The Canadian Press reported at the time. At the same time, 46% said domestic data centres would give Canada more control over its digital footprint, and 44% said they would support data centre development in their provinces, compared to 42% opposed.

In June, 68% of respondents told the Angus Reid Institute that AI and tech companies should be subject to heavy regulation, even if it slowed down development, although 74% said they doubted governments could keep up with the technology.
This story is part of The Energy Mix’s partnership with Small Change Fund.igher than those who support them. The projects are only doing marginally better with urban and suburban voters.

The shift has U.S. politicians either embracing the public rage or scrambling to catch up with it. In Democratic Party primaries earlier this month, Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed and House of Representatives nominee Will Lawrence, a co-founder of the Sunrise Movement, both won their races with campaigns that emphasized their opposition to local data centre development, Politico reported at the time. Kansas gubernatorial nominee Cindy Holscher won her campaign after shifting her position and calling for a statewide data centre moratorium, while Tennessee House nominee Justin Pearson has been a sharp opponent all along.

“People really effing hate data centres,” El-Sayed told an event last month.

This week, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro “enacted new rules that effectively halt any new data centres that face opposition from local officials,” Politico reports. That’s a big pivot for Shapiro, who’s considered a possible presidential nominee in 2028 and “has gone from wooing tech companies a year ago to calling for action against “greedy developers.” His Republican opponent for governor, state Treasurer Stacy Garrity, is calling for an outright ban.

Other Republicans are calling for “guardrails” on data centre development “protect skeptical communities from unchecked AI growth, as well as the rollback of industry tax breaks,” Semafor writes. Donald Trump said Wednesday the industry “could use a little public relations help,” after introducing a ratepayer protection pledge in March that would have developers paying for the hundreds or thousands of megawatts of electricity the centres demand.

Earlier this month, Allie Rosenbluth, campaign manager at Oil Change Action, said rising energy costs due to U.S. liquefied natural gas exports and data centre development are shifting the dynamics in the midterm campaign.

“People are really starting to connect the dots that energy affordability and climate are major issues,” Rosenbluth told The Mix. “They’re experiencing it in their energy bills, and they’re also experiencing it if they live next to a data centre or an LNG export terminal. So these things are top of mind to voters.”

Recent polling in Canada suggest the fierce opposition to the Synapse project in Olds is the leading edge of a bigger trend. In a Nanos Research survey for the Globe and Mail, released this week, 64% of respondents said they would oppose or somewhat oppose financial incentives for data centre development.

Opposition was a bit stronger—43.1% against, and 24% somewhat opposed—among Canadians aged 18 to 34. “If you’re a 20-something Canadian, and you’re hearing that the government wants to promote AI data centres, you might be wondering whether the government is investing in something that will put you out of a job,” Nanos founder Nik Nanos told the Globe.

Last month, 81% of participants in a Leger poll said they were worried that data centres would lead to higher power bills, while 79% were concerned about their energy consumption, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions, The Canadian Press reported at the time. At the same time, 46% said domestic data centres would give Canada more control over its digital footprint, and 44% said they would support data centre development in their provinces, compared to 42% opposed.

In June, 68% of respondents told the Angus Reid Institute that AI and tech companies should be subject to heavy regulation, even if it slowed down development, although 74% said they doubted governments could keep up with the technology.
This story is part of The Energy Mix’s partnership with Small Change Fund.

Carney announces $1.2B in funding to protect oceans

Carney announces $1.2B in funding to protect oceans as major projects loom
Funding aims to reduce effects of underwater noise on marine life and boost fisheries enforcement

Brenna Owen · The Canadian Press · Posted: Sep 29, 2026 6:19 PM PDT | Last Updated: September 29

Listen to this article

Estimated 5 minutes The Wilderness Committee advocacy group pushed back against Prime Minister Mark Carney's announced investment in ocean protection on Tuesday, saying it was "pennies" compared to Ottawa's $10-billion contribution to the proposed Roberts Bank port expansion. (Nav Rahi/CBC)
Social Sharing
X
Reddit
LinkedIn
Email

Prime Minister Mark Carney announced $1.2 billion in federal funding for ocean protections Tuesday, as the country moves toward decisions on a new pipeline to the West Coast and the expansion of a major port in Metro Vancouver.

The major projects would mean "more ships on the water and more pressure on the habitats that we are all working to protect," Carney said.

"We must scale up our systems to protect marine life in the event that something goes wrong," he said.

Advertisement-Report

The funds have been earmarked for several new measures, including expanding the Canadian Coast Guard's capacity to monitor marine traffic, a national near-shore weather forecasting system and a marine mammal oil spill response plan.

Carney said the work will also involve upgrading search and rescue stations and improving seabed mapping and fisheries conservation efforts. Carney is seen making the announcement Tuesday in North Vancouver. (Nav Rahi/CBC)

The announcement in North Vancouver came ahead of a Thursday deadline for Ottawa to decide whether to designate a proposed pipeline from Alberta to British Columbia's south coast as a project of national interest.

"This project would diversify our economy, create almost 150,000 new jobs right across Canada, and make us much less dependent on the United States," Carney said.

"But we know it's not just what we build, it's how we build. And this government is taking a protect-while-we-build approach to new investments." The Panagia Thalassini oil tanker is seen on the harbour behind Prime Minister Mark Carney and Fisheries Minister Joanne Thompson as he speaks on Tuesday. (Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press)

Carney said the proposed pipeline would avoid "highly sensitive areas" and its route would be similar to the existing Trans Mountain pipeline, while the tanker ban along B.C.'s north coast will remain in effect.

Advertisement-Report

Albertans head to the polls in a matter of weeks to vote in a referendum on separating from Canada.

Earlier in the day, LNG Canada confirmed it will proceed with a Phase 2 expansion of its facility in Kitimat, B.C., a project that would double its capacity.
Port expansion

Carney has also previously backed the proposed expansion of the Port of Vancouver's Roberts Bank terminal, telling reporters during a visit to the facility in July that his government was looking to provide about $10 billion for the project, part of Ottawa's effort to "grow our exports away from the United States."

The port was "already at such tight capacity," Carney said Tuesday, and the expansion would help Canada "trade more with different partners, to diversify, to reinforce our sovereignty."
Facing criticism, Carney says he has a 'very clear mandate' to push through major economic changes
Diana Fox Carney appointed Canada's 1st ocean envoy, chair of Our Ocean Conference

As more ships dock at the Port of Vancouver, he said the government must bolster measures for protecting the ocean and marine life, including the endangered southern resident killer whales that depend on waters off B.C.'s south coast.

Carney highlighted plans to address underwater noise that affects whales, saying Ottawa is providing $100 million to build long-term capacity to monitor, assess and mitigate the noise along all three coasts, Pacific, Atlantic and Arctic.
As Carney advances Metro Vancouver port expansion, environmentalists raise concern for at-risk species
Why expansion of Delta, B.C., container port is going hand-in-hand with Alberta pipeline

Advertisement-Report

In waters off Vancouver, he said Ottawa was setting a goal to hold underwater noise to 2023 levels, even as vessel traffic increases.

There will be "rigorous conditions" around construction, he said.

"To put it simply, if a killer whale gets too close to the site, work must stop," Carney said of the proposed Roberts Bank expansion.

WATCH | Alberta's new pipeline route ends at Roberts Bank:

The crowded, muddy reality of Alberta’s new pipeline route

July 24|

Duration

5:40

The terminal is located near the mouth of the Fraser River in Delta, B.C., and Carney said there will be funding for Indigenous-led stewardship and restoration in the Lower Fraser River Estuary.

Another $90 million will be used to boost front-line fisheries enforcement and equip fisheries officers with modernized tools, including drones, Carney said.

Advertisement-Report

The new funding also includes $186 million for the Northern Shelf Bioregion Reconciliation Framework Agreement — to advance what Carney's office described as collaborative governance, conservation, waterway management, emergency preparedness and cumulative effects work in the Great Bear Sea region.

WATCH | How the North Coast tanker ban works:

What politicians get wrong about the B.C. oil tanker ban

January 11|

Duration

10:32

Coastal First Nations welcomed the funding, with the group's president, Samuel Schooner, saying it marked a step toward advancing collaborative efforts to prepare for the expected surge in vessel traffic that would stem from major projects.

"This brings increased risks of accidents as well as impacts on sensitive coastal ecosystems," Schooner said in a statement. "Our communities have consistently advocated for investments in safe and responsible shipping to keep pace with increased economic development."

The Wilderness Committee, meanwhile, said $1.2 billion for oceans protection was "pennies" compared with Ottawa's $10-billion contribution to the proposed Roberts Bank expansion.

The advocacy group says the federal government's newly proposed Bill C-39, aimed at strengthening the economy, undermines protections for species at risk.

Newsom signs 13 AI bills, including a ban on AI-only firings

Newsom signs 13 AI bills, including a ban on AI-only firings

Newsom signed the No Robo Bosses Act among 13 AI bills, a day after saying what he heard at Trump’s AI lunch was ‘bullsht’. He also vetoed a smart glasses privacy bill.

October 2, 2026 - 11:53 am




Gavin Newsom speaking at the California Economic Summit in Fresno, November 2019
Credit: Government of California (public domain) via Wikimedia Commons


In California, an AI system will no longer be able to fire or discipline a worker on its own. Governor Gavin Newsom signed the No Robo Bosses Act on Wednesday, his office said. It was one of 13 AI bills he signed that day.

The law, SB 947, bars employers from relying solely on an automated decision system to discipline or fire staff. A human must check the system’s output against other evidence, such as manager evaluations or peer reviews. Simply approving it is not enough. Employers must also tell workers when they used such a system. The law takes effect on 1 July 2027.


“No worker should ever be fired or disciplined by a robo boss,” State Senator Jerry McNerney, who wrote the bill, said in a statement.

The state labour commissioner, the attorney general and local prosecutors can enforce it. McNerney’s office called it the first such law in the US.
Surveillance, deepfakes and health care

The other bills cover workplace surveillance, AI in health care, deepfakes and digital replicas. Others deal with notice when technology displaces workers, AI transparency, gene synthesis equipment, and AI use by lawyers and schools. AB 1883 bans workplace tools that use AI to read a worker’s emotional state or collect neural data. AB 1331 bans monitoring staff in bathrooms with audio, video or AI tools.


“AI should expand opportunity, not come at the expense of workers and families,” Newsom said in the announcement.

Lorena Gonzalez leads the California Federation of Labor Unions. She said the governor had shown how to put human oversight over AI at work.
A swipe at Washington

The signings came a day after President Donald Trump hosted tech chiefs at the White House. Several AI companies signed a voluntary AI safety accord there. Newsom criticised that meeting in a video posted on X.


“What I heard in Washington DC yesterday is bullsh*t, and that should scare the hell out of everybody,” Newsom said.

He also signed an executive order telling state agencies to keep calling the technology “artificial intelligence”, Gizmodo reported. Trump had ordered federal agencies to call it “super intelligence” the day before. Earlier in September, Newsom pitched an AI kill switch for California.
A veto on smart glasses

Newsom also vetoed SB 1130, the Associated Press reported. It would have penalised people who use smart glasses to secretly record others. That covered changing rooms, doctors’ offices and other private spaces. It would also have required wearables to show a light when recording from 2028.

In his veto letter, Newsom said the bill’s definition of a wearable recording device was too broad. It could cover some smartwatches, he wrote. California already bars recording people without consent in private spaces, he noted. TechNet, a group whose members include Meta, Google and Amazon, opposed the bill.

Google, OpenAI and Anthropic will own AI safety standards body without government oversight-terrifying

Google, OpenAI and Anthropic plan AI safety body, The Information reports

Google, OpenAI and Anthropic want to launch the Standards Authority for Frontier AI by early 2027, The Information reports. The labs had first wanted a body with federal oversight.

September 28, 2026 - 9:44 am


Credit: Aerps.com on Unsplash


Google, OpenAI and Anthropic plan to set up their own AI safety standards body, without government oversight, The Information reported on Thursday. The three companies hope to launch it by the end of the year or early in 2027.

They tentatively plan to call it the Standards Authority for Frontier AI, according to people familiar with the matter who spoke to The Information’s Leo Schwartz and Stephanie Palazzolo. Members of the working group have considered several well-known figures for the chief executive role. TNW has not independently verified the report.
A self-regulator on the FINRA model

The labs based the plan on FINRA, the self-regulatory organisation for US brokerage firms. Reports that followed The Information’s story say it would set standards for testing models before release, for reporting safety incidents and for certifying outside auditors. Its enforcement powers have not been set out.

The labs first wanted a body with federal oversight, according to the report. That plan stalled when a draft White House executive order failed to win enough support inside the Trump administration.
A week of calls for standards

The plan follows a busy week for AI governance. On 22 September, 21 countries and the EU called for international oversight of frontier AI. A day later, Sam Altman told the UN Security Council that OpenAI would slow down, and called for national and international standards for frontier AI.

OpenAI has also asked Washington to lead a global standards push for AI systems that improve themselves.
Critics of self-regulation

Industry self-policing has drawn criticism in recent days. Bill Gates said last week that self-regulation is not enough for AI. Former Meta executive Nick Clegg said at HumanX in Amsterdam that AI labs cannot keep regulating themselves.

The new body would cover only the three frontier labs at the start. The reports do not name Microsoft, Meta or xAI as members.

RG Richardson Communications News

I am a business economist with interests in international trade worldwide through politics, money and banking. Interactive Internet VoIP and secure eMail Communications. The author of RG Richardson City Guides that has over 300 guides, including restaurants, real estate and finance.