Latest news with #WorldTrump
Straits Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Straits Times
Protests held across Israel calling for end to Gaza war, hostage deal
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox Demonstrators block a road during a protest in Israel on Aug 17, demanding an end to the war and the return of hostages. TEL AVIV - Demonstrators took to the streets across Israel on Aug 17, calling for an end to the war in Gaza and a deal to release hostages still held by militants, as the military prepares a new offensive . The protests come more than a week after Israel's security Cabinet approved plans to capture Gaza City , following 22 months of war that have created dire humanitarian conditions in the Palestinian territory. The war was triggered by Palestinian militant group Hamas's October 2023 attack on Israel , during which 251 were taken hostage. Forty-nine captives remain in Gaza, including 27 the Israeli military says are dead. A huge Israeli flag covered with portraits of the remaining captives was unfurled in Tel Aviv's so-called Hostage Square – which has long been a focal point for protests throughout the war. Demonstrators also blocked several roads in the city, including the highway connecting Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, where demonstrators set tires on fire and caused traffic jams, according to local media footage. Protest organisers and the main campaign group representing the families of hostages also called for a general strike on Aug 17. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore I want to divorce my husband and be a single mother: More victims speaking up on emotional abuse World Trump drops Ukraine ceasefire demand after Putin summit Singapore Buying hope: Inside S'pore's love affair with the lottery Singapore She won big in Genting, but getting $240k winnings back to Singapore was dicey Life These cats may have disabilities, but they are resilient and capable of being affectionate Singapore PM Wong's National Day Rally speech to begin at 6.45pm on Aug 17 Singapore Motorcyclist dies after multi-vehicle collision on TPE Opinion Confessions of a born-again Singaporean 'I think it's time to end the war. It's time to release all of the hostages. And it's time to help Israel recover and move towards a more stable Middle East,' said Mr Doron Wilfand, a 54-year-old tour guide, at a rally in Jerusalem. However, some government members who oppose any deal with Hamas slammed the demonstrations. Israel's far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich decried 'a perverse and harmful campaign that plays into the hands of Hamas'. He argued that public pressure to secure a deal effectively 'buries the hostages in tunnels and seeks to push the State of Israel to surrender to its enemies and jeopardise its security and future'. APTFV footage showed protesters at a rally in Beeri, a kibbutz near the Gaza border that was one of the hardest-hit communities in the Hamas attack, and Israeli media reported protests in numerous locations across the country. Israeli plans to expand the war into Gaza City and nearby refugee camps have sparked an international outcry as well as domestic opposition. United Nations-backed experts have warned of widespread famine unfolding in the territory, where Israel has drastically curtailed the amount of humanitarian aid it allows in. According to Gaza's civil defence agency, Israeli troops shot dead at least 13 Palestinians on Aug 16 as they were waiting to collect food aid near distribution sites. Hamas's October 2023 attack on Israel resulted in the deaths of 1,219 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally based on official figures. Israel's offensive has killed more than 61,897 Palestinians, most of them civilians, according to figures from the health ministry in Hamas-run Gaza which the UN considers reliable. AFP
Straits Times
2 days ago
- Business
- Straits Times
Companies are pouring billions into AI. It has yet to pay off.
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox Corporate spending on artificial intelligence is surging as executives bank on major efficiency gains. So far, they report little effect to the bottom line. Nearly four decades ago, when the personal computer boom was in full swing, a phenomenon known as the 'productivity paradox' emerged. It was a reference to how, despite companies' huge investments in new technology, there was scant evidence of a corresponding gain in workers' efficiency. Today, the same paradox is appearing, but with generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI). According to recent research by McKinsey & Co, nearly eight in 10 companies have reported using Gen AI, but just as many have reported 'no significant bottom-line impact'. AI technology has been racing ahead with chatbots such as ChatGPT, fuelled by a high-stakes arms race among tech giants and super-rich startups, and prompting an expectation that everything from back-office accounting to customer service will be revolutionised. But the payoff for businesses outside the tech sector is lagging behind, plagued by issues including an irritating tendency by chatbots to make stuff up. That means that businesses will have to continue to invest billions to avoid falling behind – but it could be years before the technology delivers an economy-wide payoff, as companies gradually figure out what works best. Call it the 'gen AI paradox,' as McKinsey did in its research report. Investments in Gen AI by businesses are expected to increase 94 per cent in 2025 to US$61.9 billion (S$79.5 billion), according to IDC, a technology research firm. But the percentage of companies abandoning most of their AI pilot projects soared to 42 per cent by the end of 2024, up from 17 per cent the previous year, according to a survey of more than 1,000 technology and business managers by S&P Global, a data and analytics firm. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore I want to divorce my husband and be a single mother: More victims speaking up on emotional abuse World Trump drops Ukraine ceasefire demand after Putin summit Singapore Buying hope: Inside S'pore's love affair with the lottery Singapore She won big in Genting, but getting $240k winnings back to Singapore was dicey Opinion Confessions of a born-again Singaporean Business Manage your household finances like a business for clarity, say entrepreneurs Business Silence does not work when dealing with job loss blues Singapore Singapore congratulates Indonesia on 80th Independence Day Projects failed not only because of technical hurdles, but often also because of 'human factors' like employee and customer resistance or lack of skills, said S&P Global senior analyst Alexander Johnston. Gartner, a research and advisory firm that charts technological 'hype cycles', predicts that AI is sliding towards a stage it calls 'the trough of disillusionment'. The low point is expected next year, before the technology eventually becomes a proven productivity tool, said Gartner chief forecaster John-David Lovelock. That was the pattern with past technologies such as personal computers and the internet – early exuberance, the hard slog of mastering a technology, followed by a transformation of industries and work. The winners so far have been the suppliers of AI technology and advice. They include Microsoft, Amazon and Google, which offer AI software, while Nvidia is the runaway leader in AI chips. Executives at those companies have bragged how AI is reshaping their own workforces, eliminating the need for some entry-level coding work and making other workers more efficient. AI will eventually replace entire swaths of human employees, many predict, a perspective that is being widely embraced and echoed in the corporate mainstream. At the Aspen Ideas Festival in June, Mr Jim Farley, chief executive of Ford Motor, said: 'Artificial intelligence is going to replace literally half of all white-collar workers in the US.' Whether that type of revolutionary change occurs, and how soon, depends on the real-world testing ground of many businesses. 'The raw technological horsepower is terrific, but it's not going to determine how quickly AI transforms the economy,' said Mr Andrew McAfee, a principal research scientist and co-director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT) Initiative on the Digital Economy. Still, some businesses are finding ways to incorporate AI – although in most cases the technology is still a long way from replacing workers. One company where AI's promise and flaws are playing out is USAA, which provides insurance and banking services to members of the military and their families. After several pilot projects, some of which it closed down, the company introduced an AI assistant to help its 16,000 customer service workers provide correct answers to specific questions. USAA is tracking its AI investments, but does not yet have a calculation of the financial payoff, if any, for the call centre software. But the response from its workers, the company said, has been overwhelmingly positive. While it has software apps for answering customer questions online, its call centres field an average of 200,000 calls a day. 'Those are moments that matter,' said Mr Ramnik Bajaj, the company's chief data analytics and AI officer. 'They want a human voice at the other end of the phone.' That's similar to an AI app developed more than a year ago for fieldworkers at Johnson Controls, a large supplier of building equipment, software and services. The company fed its operating and service manuals for its machines into an AI program that has been trained to generate a problem summary, suggest repairs and deliver it all to the technician's tablet computer. In testing, the app has trimmed 10 to 15 minutes off a repair call of an hour or more – a useful efficiency gain, but hardly a workplace transformation on its own. Fewer than 2,000 of the company's 25,000 field service workers have access to the AI helper, although the company is planning an expansion. 'It's still pretty early days, but the idea is that over time, everyone will use it,' said Mr Vijay Sankaran, the chief digital and information officer at Johnson Controls. The long-term vision is that companies will use AI to improve multiple systems, including sales, procurement, manufacturing, customer service and finance, he said. 'That's the game changer,' said Mr Sankaran, who predicts that shift will take at least five years. Two years ago, JPMorgan Chase, the nation's largest bank, blocked access to ChatGPT from its computers because of potential security risks. Only a few hundred data scientists and engineers were allowed to experiment with AI. Today, about 200,000 of the bank's employees have access to a general-purpose AI assistant – essentially a business chatbot – from their work computers for tasks such as retrieving data, answering business questions and writing reports. The assistant, tailored for JPMorgan's use, taps into ChatGPT and other AI tools, while ensuring data security for confidential bank and customer information. Roughly half of the workers use it regularly and report spending up to four hours less a week on basic office tasks, the company said. The bank's wealth advisers are also employing a more specialised AI assistant, which uses bank, market and customer data to provide wealthy clients with investment research and advice. The bank says it retrieves information and helps advisers make investment recommendations nearly twice as fast as they could before, increasing sales. Ms Lori Beer, the global chief information officer at JPMorgan, oversees a worldwide technology staff of 60,000. Has she shut down AI projects? Probably hundreds in total, she said. But many of the shelved prototypes, she said, developed concepts and code that were folded into other, continuing projects. 'We're absolutely shutting things down,' Ms Beer said. 'We're not afraid to shut things down. We don't think it's a bad thing. I think it's a smart thing.' Mr McAfee, the MIT research scientist, agreed. 'It's not surprising that early AI efforts are falling short,' said Mr McAfee, who is a founder of Workhelix, an AI consulting firm. 'Innovation is a process of failing fairly regularly.' NYTIMES
Straits Times
7 days ago
- Automotive
- Straits Times
China's automakers are taking a shortcut to European markets
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox In July, at least 14 car-carrier ships travelled from Chinese ports to Europe through the Red Sea and Suez Canal. BEIJING – Chinese automakers are shipping cars to Europe through the Red Sea and Suez Canal, nearly two years after the Iran-backed Houthi militia in Yemen started attacking vessels in the critical Middle East transit route. Other automakers are still shipping cars from Asia by way of a much longer, and expensive, trip around Africa. In July, at least 14 car-carrier ships travelled from Chinese ports to Europe through the Red Sea and Suez Canal, according to a new analysis by Lloyd's List Intelligence, a British maritime information service. About the same number made the voyage in June. The trips have continued even after the Houthis used drones, grenades and gunfire to sink two other cargo ships early in July. The militia group says the attacks are in solidarity with Palestinians living through Israel's war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Most shipping analysts assume that the Chinese government has reached an understanding with Iran or the Houthis not to harm car-carrier ships from China. It seems that 'China has found a way to deal with the Iran-backed Houthi rebels, and they have been told that their ships will not be targeted', said Mr Daniel Nash, associate director of valuation and analytics at Veson Nautical. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Business Singapore raises 2025 economic growth forecast but warns of uncertainty from US tariffs World Trump signs order extending China tariff truce by 90 days, White House says Opinion For Singapore, the AI revolution is coming just in time Asia Death of student in Sabah raises hurdle for Malaysian PM Anwar as he faces tough state polls soon Opinion Sumiko at 61: Hearing loss is linked to dementia risk. Here's what you risk by ignoring it Business S'pore start-up among 5 global picks for Japan construction group Kajima's mentorship and funding World Trump seizes control of Washington police, deploys National Guard Business Lower-wage retail workers to receive up to 6% pay bump from Sept 1 Traveling through the Red Sea and Suez Canal saves 14 to 18 days on each round trip between Asia and Europe, compared with going around Africa. The savings help Chinese automakers compete in Europe with Japanese, Korean and European automakers, which rely on European and Japanese shipping lines that are not using Red Sea routes. Most other commercial vessels have been avoiding the Red Sea and Suez Canal since the Houthi militia began sinking or hijacking ships near Yemen in November 2023. Shipowners in Europe and Asia mostly refuse to allow companies to charter their vessels for such trips. Commercial insurers in London have become wary of insuring such voyages, charging higher rates when they do. The state-owned SAIC Motor, previously known as the Shanghai Automotive Industry, and BYD did not respond to requests for comment. In a written reply to questions, China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not mention car-carrier ships but said that 'China has been playing an active role in easing tensions since the situation in the Red Sea escalated, and will continue to contribute to the early restoration of peace and tranquillity in the Red Sea'. NYTIMES
Straits Times
7 days ago
- Business
- Straits Times
StarHub buys rest of MyRepublic's broadband business in $105m deal; comes after Simba buys M1
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox StarHub will acquire the remaining 49.9 per cent share in its smaller rival as well as MyRepublic Broadband's key operational assets and brand in Singapore. SINGAPORE – StarHub announced on Aug 12 that it has taken full ownership of MyRepublic's broadband business, in the second act of a milestone telco consolidation here over just two days. StarHub acquired the remaining 49.9 per cent share of MyRepublic Broadband, as well as its key operational assets and brand in Singapore. With the sale of its remaining stake in the broadband business, MyRepublic retains a virtual mobile business which StarHub does not have a stake in. StarHub, which is listed on the Singapore Exchange mainboard, already held a controlling stake of 50.1 per cent in MyRepublic's broadband business since 2022. The latest purchase comprises about $94.3 million for the 49.9 per cent equity stake and over $10.8 million for the assets and brand. However, the $94.3 million will be set off against an existing $74.2 million loan from StarHub to MyRepublic, with the balance of $31 million to be paid in tranches. The deal announcement comes a day after the surprise purchase of M1's telco business by Simba Telecom, which market watchers had expected StarHub to make. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Business Singapore raises 2025 economic growth forecast but warns of uncertainty from US tariffs World Trump signs order extending China tariff truce by 90 days, White House says Opinion For Singapore, the AI revolution is coming just in time Asia Death of student in Sabah raises hurdle for Malaysian PM Anwar as he faces tough state polls soon Opinion Sumiko at 61: Hearing loss is linked to dementia risk. Here's what you risk by ignoring it Business S'pore start-up among 5 global picks for Japan construction group Kajima's mentorship and funding World Trump seizes control of Washington police, deploys National Guard Business Lower-wage retail workers to receive up to 6% pay bump from Sept 1 On the MyRepublic purchase, StarHub said in an Aug 12 statement: 'This move strengthens StarHub's multi-brand, multi-segment strategy in the Singapore broadband market and enables greater value creation through service differentiation and cross-product bundling.' In the statement, StarHub chief executive Nikhil Eapen said: 'We're in a phase of consolidation and we're not just watching it unfold, we're shaping it. He added: 'As the market shifts, scale, quality, and resilience matter more than ever. Smaller players may find it harder to sustain, especially without robust platforms. 'Our role is to step up to provide the reliability, performance, and consistency that customers deserve at a time when they need it most.' As at the first quarter of 2025, StarHub had 577,000 broadband subscribers.
Straits Times
7 days ago
- Business
- Straits Times
Harvard and White House move towards potential US$500 million landmark settlement
WASHINGTON - Harvard University and the Trump administration are nearing a potentially landmark legal settlement that would see Harvard agree to spend U$500 million (S$643 million) in exchange for the restoration of billions of dollars in federal research funding, according to four people familiar with the deliberations. Negotiators for the White House and the university have made significant progress in their closed-door discussions over the past week, developing a framework for a settlement to end their months-long battle. The talks could still collapse, as US President Donald Trump and senior Harvard officials need to sign off on the terms of the deal. The sides are still going back and forth over important wording in for a potential agreement. But under the framework coming together, Harvard would agree to spend US$500 million on vocational and educational programmes, three of the people said. That figure, currently pencilled in to be paid out over years, would meet a demand from Mr Trump that Harvard spend more than double what Columbia University agreed last month to pay. It would also satisfy Harvard's wish that it not pay the government directly, as Columbia is doing. Harvard would also make commitments to continue its efforts to combat anti-semitism on campus, two of the people said. In return, Harvard – one of the largest recipients in higher education of federal research money – would see its research funding restored and avoid the appointment of a monitor, a condition the school has demanded as a way to preserve its academic independence, according to two of the people. The Trump administration would also end its widening number of investigations into the university, including ones conducted by the Justice Department and another inquiry that the Commerce Department announced on Aug 8. The deal would also stop attempts by the Trump administration to block Harvard from enrolling thousands of international students, according to three of the people. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Business Singapore raises 2025 economic growth forecast but warns of uncertainty from US tariffs World Trump signs order extending China tariff truce by 90 days, White House says Opinion For Singapore, the AI revolution is coming just in time Asia Death of student in Sabah raises hurdle for Malaysian PM Anwar as he faces tough state polls soon Opinion Sumiko at 61: Hearing loss is linked to dementia risk. Here's what you risk by ignoring it Business S'pore start-up among 5 global picks for Japan construction group Kajima's mentorship and funding World Trump seizes control of Washington police, deploys National Guard Business Lower-wage retail workers to receive up to 6% pay bump from Sept 1 The stakes for reaching a deal are high for both Harvard and the administration. A deal would allow Mr Trump to claim that Harvard forked out over US$500 million amid pressure from him. For Harvard, the deal would allow the school to remain one of the most robust higher education institutions in the country. Harvard has insisted that any settlement must not jeopardise its academic freedom, and Mr Trump has taken a keen interest in the details. The people with knowledge of the deliberations spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing talks that are supposed to remain confidential. Harvard declined to comment. Harvard has spent the last four months at the forefront of the opposition to the Trump administration's pressure campaign against higher education. It is the only school that has sued after the administration targeted it with explicitly punitive funding cuts. A settlement between the White House and the nation's oldest and wealthiest university would reverberate throughout academia and could shape how other schools respond to Mr Trump's tactics. Last week, the administration proposed that the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) pay more than US$1 billion to reach a settlement with the government. Some terms in an agreement with Harvard are expected to be similar to ones included in a deal Brown University struck with the White House in late July, such as a provision intended to guard academic independence. Brown's deal included language that barred the government from dictating curriculum or the content of academic speech. It also touched on several other issues central to the administration's attacks on higher education, including transgender athletes who play on women's teams and the treatment of Jewish students in the wake of the protests against the war in the Gaza Strip. Brown will have to ensure locker rooms and bathrooms are reserved for female athletes, perform outreach to Jewish groups and hire an external group to conduct campus climate surveys, for example. Although Harvard officials welcomed many of the Brown deal's non-financial conditions, they were stunned that the university agreed to pay only US$50 million over a decade as they were being pressed to cough up 10 times that sum. But with the beginning of the school year approaching, negotiators have accepted that they will have to pay US$500 million to strike a deal, and instead focused on how payments would be structured. One potential sticking point could be the government's access to admissions data, especially numbers involving applicants' race. The administration was seeking a stipulation in the deal that would require Harvard to release detailed admissions data, including on race and gender as well as grade-point averages and standardised test scores. That would be consistent with an executive action that Mr Trump signed last week, forcing schools nationwide to give the government similarly detailed data. Brown and Columbia, as part of their deals, both agreed to supply the administration with that information, something conservatives have sought in an effort to prove that elite schools have disregarded a recent Supreme Court decision banning affirmative action. May Mailman, a White House adviser driving the negotiations with top universities, suggested in a recent interview that Harvard's inclination to provide data surrounding its consideration of race in admissions would be a factor in the government's willingness to sign off on a deal. On Aug 11, it was not clear how any agreement between the government and Harvard would resolve that demand, which the university has viewed as overly invasive. It was also not clear when Mr Trump would be briefed on the potential agreement. The White House and the university opened negotiations in June, each seeking an off-ramp from a clash that began with accusations of anti-semitism and became a battle over academic independence and the spectre of federal over-reach. The dispute between Harvard and the White House erupted in the spring after the Trump administration inadvertently sent the university a list of demands that would reshape student and academic life, including surveys of the student body's political ideology, audits of the curriculum and a reduction in the influence of untenured faculty. The university quickly refused them, and the administration responded hours later by starting to freeze billions of dollars in research funding. Harvard, like other top schools, depends on that funding and has done so for decades. The university took the administration to court in April, arguing that assorted government demands threatened Harvard's constitutional rights. The school also asserted that the government had violated its own procedures when it hastily cut off research funding. A federal judge in Boston appeared sceptical of the government's efforts when she heard arguments in the lawsuit in July. Both the administration and Harvard have asked the judge to rule in their favour without a trial, but she has not yet issued a ruling. Harvard officials have been combative, depicting their fight against the Trump administration as a vital crusade. But behind closed doors, they have been wary of a sustained war with the White House. Even if Harvard prevailed in court, some inside the university have argued, the administration could continue to pelt the school with investigations and subpoenas while, over time, bleeding it of research funding through more standard protocols. To them, a settlement was an unappealing but essential outcome. Although Harvard has an endowment valued at roughly US$53 billion, much of it is restricted, meaning that university officials are limited in how they may use it. And the school has shown signs of financial strain as federal research funding has evaporated. University leaders warned last month that the blitz of actions from Washington, including an increase in the excise tax on endowments, could blow a nearly US$1 billion annual hole in Harvard's budget. Still, proponents of a possible deal have faced fierce resistance on Harvard's campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts. There, faculty members and students have warned that an agreement with the White House would amount to capitulation and that Mr Trump could not be trusted to honour any arrangement over the long term. Given those concerns, Harvard's negotiators have pressed the administration in recent weeks, insisting that any resolution of their fight be structured as a legal settlement. A legal settlement would make it more difficult for the administration and Mr Trump to change the terms after the fact. Oliver Hart, an economics professor at Harvard who won a Nobel Prize for his work on contract theory, said in an interview last month that the university should ensure there is a clear process for resolving disputes. 'I would spell out what happens if a party feels the agreement is not being honoured,' Prof Hart said. Referring to the government, he added: 'If they have so many things up their sleeve, they're going to have those things up their sleeve once you've agreed on a deal.' NYTIMES
