
Google admits its earthquake alert system failed during Turkey's quake
Despite the potential to issue high-level alerts to 10 million people within 158 kilometres of the epicentre, only 469 'Take Action' alerts were sent out ahead of the first 7.8 magnitude quake, a risky shortfall, as this is the level of warning designed to wake sleeping users and prompt them to seek immediate safety.
Instead, Google told the BBC that around 500,000 users received the less severe 'Be Aware' notification, intended only for light shaking and incapable of overriding a device's Do Not Disturb setting.
The alert system underestimated the severity of the quake, initially calculating the shaking at just 4.5 to 4.9 on the moment magnitude scale, which is far below the actual magnitude of 7.8.
'We continue to improve the system based on what we learn in each earthquake,' a Google spokesperson said.
The BBC's investigation following the disaster revealed that no users interviewed across the affected region had received the more serious Take Action alert before the tremors.
The alert would have been especially vital given that the earthquake struck at 4:17 am local time (3:17 am CET), when most people were asleep in buildings that ultimately collapsed.
While Google had previously claimed the system had "performed well", it later published research in the Science journal acknowledging 'limitations to the detection algorithms' that contributed to the system's failure.
The second major earthquake that struck later that day was also underestimated, although it triggered more alerts — 8,158 Take Action and nearly four million Be Aware.
After the incident, Google revised its detection algorithms and ran a simulation of the first earthquake. The updated system, had it been in place at the time, would have sent 10 million Take Action alerts and an additional 67 million Be Aware notifications, according to the company.
'Every earthquake early warning system grapples with the same challenge — tuning algorithms for large magnitude events,' Google told the BBC.
Yet experts have expressed grave concern about the delay in releasing this information.
'I'm really frustrated that it took so long,' said Elizabeth Reddy, assistant professor at the Colorado School of Mines.
'We're not talking about a little event — people died — and we didn't see a performance of this warning in the way we would like.'
The AEA system, available in 98 countries, operates independently of national governments and is managed directly by Google. It detects tremors through the movement of Android smartphones, which make up over 70% of mobile devices in Turkey.
Google has maintained that AEA is meant to supplement, not replace, national warning systems. However, scientists worry that some countries may be overly reliant on this technology.
'Would some places make the calculation that Google's doing it, so we don't have to?' asked Harold Tobin, director of the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network.
'I think being very transparent about how well it works is absolutely critical.'
The BBC has since asked Google how the AEA system performed during the 2025 earthquake in Myanmar, but has not yet received a response.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Euronews
18 hours ago
- Euronews
Conservative-leaning Perplexity AI makes shock bid for Google Chrome
Perplexity AI, one of the leading AI platforms along with ChatGPT, Claude and Google Gemini, made an unsolicited bid to purchase the Chrome browser as Google faces charges in US courts of having a monopoly on online searches. In a letter to Sundar Pichai, CEO of Alphabet, Google's parent company, Perplexity offered $34.5 billion (€29bn) in cash for Chrome, according to a term sheet seen by Reuters. The offer is particularly shocking because Perplexity is "only" worth $18 billion (€15.35bn). Perplexity's spokesperson confirmed the all-cash offer reported by the Wall Street Journal. Who are Perplexity AI? The AI platform delivers responses in conversational language it says is easy for the public to understand, setting itself apart from Google and Bing by skipping SEO-driven ranked link lists, and from ChatGPT or Gemini by using live searches instead of static snapshots of the internet. Earlier in August, Truth Social—the social media platform owned by US President Donald Trump—announced it was beta-testing integrating Perplexity AI into its search engine as Truth Search AI. While Perplexity maintains that it only provides the underlying technology for Truth Search AI and does not control "editorial" decisions, Truth Search has so far favoured conservative sources such as Fox News, The Epoch Times and The Federalist. While often framed as politically neutral, phrases like 'democratising knowledge'—which Perplexity have said they plan to do—have also been co-opted in some right-wing tech and media circles to suggest breaking perceived gatekeeper control and giving 'the people' unfettered access to information outside of mainstream institutions. Google faces anti-trust charges In one of the biggest anti-monopoly cases of the modern tech era, United States vs. Google LLC, a US district judge ruled in August 2024 that Google had illegally maintained a monopoly on search engines in violation with the Sherman Act. Namely, Google had used illegal means or those in opposition to open, free market practices to maintain dominance by spending billions of dollars per year to make itself the default search engine on Apple's Safari browsers and Android devices, making it impossible for competitors such as Bing or DuckDuckGo to reach users at any significant scale. This locked Google into a dominance loop that others were unable to break into. Being the default browser brought Google more users, which gave it more data to make its search and ads better, which would then encourage people to keep using Google—making it even harder for anyone else to catch up. After the August 2024 ruling, the case moved into a remedies phase where the US Justice Department proposed structural fixes—including forcing Google to sell its Chrome browser, end default search deals and share search data with rivals. In November of last year, Judge Amit Mehta rejected Google's attempt to dismiss some of the some of those proposals, which kept a potential Chrome divestiture on the table and set the stage for final remedy hearings in 2025—which is where the Perplexity offer came in. Perplexity's opposition to Google's dominance Perplexity's leadership has explicitly named Google as a rival. In an interview for TIME magazine in April of last year, CEO Aravind Srinivas said that Google was its "main competitor" and that Google's ad-based profit model prevents the integration of AI responses into search. Because Google's search business depends on showing ads alongside search results or links, replacing those results with quick, AI-generated answers—which is what Perplexity does—could undercut Google's revenue. Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, is an investor in Perplexity, and the company relies on Microsoft's Azure AI platform for its infrastructure. While Perplexity claims to have secured 'multiple unnamed funds' to support its all-cash bid for Chrome, there's so far no indication that either Bezos or Microsoft is directly financing the bid.


Euronews
a day ago
- Euronews
AI browsers share sensitive personal data, new study finds
Artificial intelligence (AI) web browser assistants track and share sensitive user data, including medical records and social security numbers, a new study has found. Researchers from the United Kingdom and Italy tested 10 of the most popular AI-powered browsers –including OpenAI's ChatGPT, Microsoft's Copilot, and Merlin AI, an extension for Google's Chrome browser – with public-facing tasks like online shopping, as well as on private websites such as a university health portal. They found evidence that all of the assistants, excluding Perplexity AI, showed signs that they collect this data and use it to profile users or personalise their AI services, potentially in violation of data privacy rules. 'These AI browser assistants operate with unprecedented access to users' online behaviour in areas of their online life that should remain private,' Anna Maria Mandalari, the study's senior author and an assistant professor at University College London, said in a news release. 'While they offer convenience, our findings show they often do so at the cost of user privacy … and sometimes in breach of privacy legislation or the company's own terms of service'. 'There's no way of knowing what's happening with your browser data' AI browsers are tools to 'enhance' searching on the web with features like summaries and search assistance, the report said. For the study, researchers accessed private portals and then asked the AI assistants questions such as 'what was the purpose of the current medical visit?' to see if the browser retained any data about that activity. During the public and private tasks, researchers decrypted traffic between the AI browsers, their servers, and other online trackers to see where the information was going in real time. Some of the tools, like Merlin and Sider's AI assistant, did not stop recording activity when users went into private spaces. That meant that several assistants 'transmitted full webpage content,' for example any content visible on the screen to their servers. In Merlin's case, it also captured users' online banking details, academic and health records, and a social security number entered on a US tax website. Other extensions, such as Sider and TinaMind, shared the prompts that users entered and any identifying information, including a computer's internet protocol (IP) address, with Google Analytics. This enabled 'potential cross-site tracking and ad targeting,' the study found. On the Google, Copilot, Monica, and Sider browsers, the ChatGPT assistant made assumptions about the age, gender, income, and interest of the user they interacted with. It used that information to personalise responses across several browsing sessions. In Copilot's case, it stored the complete chat history into the background of the browser, which indicated to researchers that 'these histories persist across browsing sessions'. Mandalari said the results show that 'there's no way of knowing what's happening with your browsing data once it has been gathered'. Browsers likely breach EU data protection rules, study says The study was conducted in the United States, and alleged that the AI assistants broke American privacy laws that deal with health information. The researchers said the browsers likely also breach European Union rules such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which governs how personal data is used or shared. The findings may come as a surprise to people who use AI-supported internet browsers – even if they are familiar with the fine print. In Merlin's privacy policy for the EU and UK, it says it collects data such as names, contact information, account credentials, transaction history, and payment information. Personal data is also collected from the prompts that users put into the system or any surveys that the platform sends out. That data is used to personalise the experience of people using the AI browser, send notifications, and provide user support, the company continued. It can also be used when responding to legal requests. Sider's privacy page says it collects the same data and uses it for the same purposes but added that it could be analysed to 'gain insights into user behaviour' and to conduct research into new features, products, or services. It says it may share personal information but does not sell it to third parties like Google, Cloudflare, or Microsoft. These providers help Sider operate its services and are 'contractually obligated to protect your personal information,' the policy continues. In ChatGPT's case, the OpenAI privacy policy says data from EU and UK users is housed on data servers outside of the region, but that the same rights are guaranteed.


France 24
a day ago
- France 24
Fortnite developer claims win against Apple and Google
Both Apple and Google kicked Fortnite off their respective app platforms in 2020, after the game designed an in-app payments system that cut the tech giants out of the loop. Developer Epic Games retaliated by launching legal action against the tech giants in a string of courtrooms around the world. Australia's Federal Court this week found the tech firms' app-store dominance reduced competition, likely forcing game developers to pay higher commission fees. "This is a WIN for developers and consumers in Australia!" Epic Games said in a statement Tuesday. Justice Jonathan Beach however rejected Epic Games' claims that Apple and Google engaged in unconscionable conduct. A Google spokesperson said the company disagreed with some of the court's findings and would "review the full decision when we receive it and assess our next steps". Australian lawyers have lodged a class action suit seeking compensation from Apple and Google on behalf of game users and developers. "The judgement is a turning point," said Kimi Nishimura from Maurice Blackburn Lawyers. "It sends a clear message that even the most powerful corporations must play by the rules and respect the rights of consumers and developers alike." Fortnite is one of the most popular video games in the world, laying claim to hundreds of millions of registered players.