Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the US has restored intelligence sharing with Ukraine, including advance warnings of Russian ballistic missile launches, following talks with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The lack of advance warnings came amid reports that the Trump administration had threatened to suspend intelligence sharing and weapons supplies unless Kyiv halted attacks on Russian oil refineries. US intelligence usually alerts Ukraine to ballistic missile launches before air raid sirens sound, giving the country time to warn civilians and prepare its air defenses. Russian ballistic missiles can reach Kyiv within minutes, making early notice critical to protecting lives.
Zelenskyy made the announcement on 20 October during a press conference broadcast by Suspilne. He said he had spoken with Rubio earlier that morning while traveling to Oslo, discussing intelligence, Starlink satellite communications, missile interceptors, and Patriot air defense systems.
“We discussed sensitive issues, including Starlink, interceptors, which are very important, and intelligence. We were very specific; the conversation was very positive,” Zelenskyy said.
He added that he plans to speak with Rubio again within the next 48 hours.
On 18 October, Zelenskyy also said that US warnings had returned, which turned out not to be true as Russian ballistic missiles hit Kyiv that evening before air raid sirens sounded.
The warning gaps began with Russian ballistic missile attacks on Kyiv on 12 October and continued through 19 October. During the attacks on 12 and 13 October, Ukraine received no advance warning from its partners, with air raid alerts sounding only after the attacks had begun.
The problem persisted during subsequent attacks. Overnight on 18–19 October, Russia attacked Kyiv in two waves. Ukrainian Air Force spokesperson Yurii Ihnat said no warning arrived before the first wave, around 23:00. Information arrived before the second wave, around 03:00, but left little time to respond.
Advance intelligence on ballistic missile launches is particularly important because these missiles can reach their targets within minutes, leaving little time for civilians to seek shelter.
US President Donald Trump previously denied that Washington had stopped sharing intelligence with Ukraine, despite the missing warnings. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also rejected claims of a suspension, pointing to a software problem in Ukraine's early-warning system.
However, the disruptions came amid reports that the Trump administration had threatened to suspend intelligence sharing and weapons supplies unless Kyiv halted attacks on Russian oil refineries. The Financial Times reported that Washington was pressuring Ukraine to stop the strikes as part of efforts to secure an energy truce with Russia.
Ukraine temporarily paused attacks on Russian refineries but said Moscow continued striking Ukrainian energy infrastructure.
Zelenskyy's latest statement indicates that advance ballistic missile warnings are reaching Ukraine again, although the recent gaps have raised questions about the reliability of a capability critical to protecting civilians.
Bloomberg/Getty Images
AI is changing how Google employees work — and how Google hires them.
The company has been testing several AI-related changes to its hiring process for software engineers, according to documents reviewed by Business Insider. These changes, which Google has been rolling out in phases throughout this year, include allowing the use of AI in coding interviews and permitting interviewers to use Gemini to give candidates feedback.
Many engineers are also now expected to show some degree of AI fluency as a bare minimum, the documents show.
In May, Business Insider reported that Google was piloting ways to integrate AI into the interview process with a small handful of orgs. This included a new "code comprehension" interview in which candidates are assessed on AI fluency and prompt engineering. Candidates can also use Google's Gemini AI as an assistant during the interview.
The new formats have since been rolled out more broadly across the company, according to the internal documents. However, a spokesperson said they were still considered to be in the pilot phase for now.
"We're piloting updates to our interview process for software engineers, including evaluating for AI fluency, to be more reflective of how our teams are operating," Brian Ong, vice president of recruiting at Google, told Business Insider in a statement.
Like other companies, Google is adapting its hiring process to keep pace with the huge transformation AI is having on software engineering. As developers increasingly rely on AI coding assistants, hiring companies want to know how competent they are with these tools.
In April, Google said that three-quarters of new code created at the company is generated by AI and reviewed by humans, a trend that has since continued across the tech industry. Google has said that its employees are increasingly using the company's own Gemini models to both improve other Google products and to build the next generation of Gemini.
The documents say that for some roles, including software engineering, AI fluency and AI product integration are now used as measures of a candidate's abilities. A Google spokesperson said that AI fluency is a requirement for all software engineering jobs, while AI product integration is required for most roles outside entry-level positions.
Google is also piloting the use of Gemini for interview transcription and note-taking in some job interviews conducted via the company's videoconferencing platform, Google Meet, one document shows.
Google wants to speed up the feedback process using AI, too. The same document states that Google is working to enable interviewers to use Gemini to draft role-tailored feedback.
As Google builds out this new interview system, employees were told they may be asked to participate in some of the pilots — but were warned against using AI tools to generate their own interviewing "solutions."
"Do not use GenAI or LLMs to create your own standalone solutions or agents for hiring or interviewing use cases," the document states, referring to large language models.
Have something to share? Contact this reporter via email at hlangley@businessinsider.com or Signal at hughlangley.01. Use a personal email address and a non-work device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.
© Arlette Bashizi for The New York Times
FIRST ON FOX: The U.S. Navy is quadrupling the ceiling on a contract for AI-powered robots used to inspect warships to $300 million.
Just six months after initially tapping the technology to help get ships through maintenance and back to sea faster, the expanded agreement with Pittsburgh-based Gecko Robotics underscores the importance the U.S. military is putting on tech-based solutions. The initial ceiling for the deal was $71 million, but the Navy is pushing to improve fleet readiness amid a widening shipbuilding gap with China.
"While the U.S. may not be able to out-manufacture faster than China, we can outsmart the ways that we maintain, operate and are ready with our vessels," Gecko Robotics CEO Jake Loosararian told Fox News Digital.
Gecko says its technology can save the Navy up to $8 million in repair costs on a single ship and identify some structural issues up to 50 times faster than traditional inspection methods.
INSIDE TRUMP’S DEAL TO GIVE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS A MASSIVE STAKE IN NEW $6.6B SUBMARINE DEAL
The company is also unveiling a new robot developed specifically for the Navy that can inspect the steel beneath thick coatings on warship decks without first stripping them away.
Dubbed Komodo, the robot scans a ship's deck to map corrosion and material thickness, giving maintenance crews a picture of what needs to be repaired before more invasive work begins.
"It's essentially a CAT scan," Loosararian said. "You're basically understanding exactly what's going on."
Traditionally, determining the condition of steel beneath a ship's non-skid deck coating can require removing material before crews know the extent of the problem. Komodo is designed to gather that information without first taking the surface apart.
"The robots are able to actually understand what's wrong without having to take apart the ship to figure out what to fix," Loosararian said.
In another example cited by Loosararian, an assessment that initially called for roughly 1,200 square feet of repair work was narrowed to about 300 square feet after robotic inspections provided a more precise picture of the damage.
"You reduce and focus the kinds of repairs that you need," Loosararian said. "You're repairing less."
CHINA’S LONG-TERM FINANCES ARE ALL WET AS BILL TO MAINTAIN HUGE NAVY COMES DUE IN 2031
The increased ceiling comes just six months after the Navy awarded Gecko a five-year, $71 million contract vehicle to expand the use of its robotic inspection technology across the fleet.
Under the initial agreement announced in March, Gecko was set to begin work on 18 ships in the U.S. Pacific Fleet, including destroyers, amphibious warships and littoral combat ships.
The company's wall-climbing robots crawl across hulls, flight decks, ballast tanks and other difficult-to-access areas, scanning for corrosion, metal loss and other structural problems. The data is fed into Gecko's AI-powered Cantilever platform to help maintenance planners determine where repairs are needed.
The goal is to find those problems earlier, before a ship enters a major maintenance period and crews discover additional work that can extend its stay in the shipyard.
"The biggest savings are just in speed," Loosararian said. "Speed — you can't put a price tag on it, especially if you're in the U.S. Navy right now."
The expansion comes as Navy leaders seek to push fleet readiness toward 80% while maintenance delays continue to sideline ships that would otherwise be available for deployment.
China already fields a larger battle force than the U.S. Navy and can produce vessels at a pace American shipyards cannot easily match. That has put additional pressure on the Pentagon to keep more of the ships already in the American fleet available for operations.
For Gecko, the longer-term goal is to move beyond finding existing damage and use years of inspection data to anticipate problems before they force ships into longer repair periods.
"You are able to predict exactly what's going to break before it does," Loosararian said, allowing maintenance planners to have workers, materials and repair plans ready when a ship reaches the pier or enters a shipyard.
The technology could also reduce the amount of dangerous and labor-intensive inspection work performed by shipyard workers as the industrial base struggles with shortages of skilled labor.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Loosararian said the combination of robotics and AI is ultimately aimed at allowing a limited workforce to spend more time fixing ships and less time determining what needs to be fixed.
For a Navy racing to keep pace with a rapidly expanding Chinese fleet, he argued, getting more out of the ships already in the water could prove just as important as building new ones.
"While the U.S. may not be able to out-manufacture faster than China," Loosararian said, "we can outsmart the ways that we maintain, operate and are ready with our vessels."
America seems to be on the precipice of a future technological golden age. Whether we take steps toward that future could depend on which political vision prevails over the next few election cycles.
Speaking alongside President Donald Trump at the White House in September, Elon Musk predicted a world where artificial intelligence and advanced robotics create an "age of abundance." Musk suggests these technologies could eventually provide your average person with better medical care than what today’s wealthiest individuals enjoy.
TRUMP TO USHER IN ‘GOLDEN AGE’ OF AMERICAN TECH WITH DC BASH SHOWCASING POWERFUL NEW TOOL
This optimistic vision aligns well with Trump’s repeated promises of a new American golden age. Yet, as his administration works to accelerate technological advancement, an increasingly influential wing on the far left appears determined to slam on the brakes.
The Trump administration has made American leadership in artificial intelligence a cornerstone of its economic agenda. Through its AI Action Plan and executive orders, the administration has prioritized eliminating regulatory barriers, constructing data centers and expanding energy infrastructure necessary to power the AI revolution.
TRUMP ANNOUNCES NEW 'AI FORCE,' VOWS TO PROTECT INDUSTRY AS AI CZAR ANNOUNCEMENT NEARS
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has argued that AI and automation could help create a new era of American manufacturing. In an interview from 2025, Bessent suggested that the advanced "smart factories" of tomorrow could overcome labor-cost issues, making manufacturing in the United States far more economically feasible.
Imagine a future in America where advanced robotics makes domestic manufacturing globally competitive, where AI leads to major medical breakthroughs and where technological innovation produces unprecedented economic prosperity.
THE NEXT AMERICAN BOOM COULD BE HERE — UNLESS WASHINGTON REGULATES IT TO DEATH
Of course, there are legitimate questions about how this societal transformation will unfold, but the potential benefits are incredible.
While many in the Trump administration plan for a golden age, Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders and his fellow democratic socialists are promoting an entirely different future.
In March, Sanders and New York Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez proposed a nationwide moratorium on new data center construction until Congress establishes a sufficient regulatory system for the industry.
These positions have quickly become commonplace for Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) activists and candidates. Many of these DSA-endorsed candidates support data center moratoriums and push these sorts of proposals at the state and local level.
But Sanders’ anti-AI sentiment goes way further. His American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act would effectively nationalize 50% of the AI industry, converting those stakes into a government-controlled fund. The plan would also include stacking the boards of these companies with federally picked appointees to influence corporate decisions.
More recently, Sanders introduced legislation that would permanently prohibit the development of artificial superintelligence. This plan would establish a new federal AI agency and halt other advanced AI development until regulators approve continued efforts. Under this proposal, individuals who violate the research bans could face up to 20 years in federal prison.
Think about that. At a time when America is competing with China for technological supremacy, one of the country’s most prominent socialist politicians wants federal bureaucrats to target AI scientists with potential prison time for developing AI research it deems too advanced.
WINNING THE AI RACE MEANS BEATING CHINA ON INNOVATION, COST AND TRUST
To be sure, the AI revolution comes with many legitimate concerns that deserve conversation. Potential job displacement, privacy violations, algorithmic manipulation and the possible misuse of advanced AI are issues that will likely need to be addressed.
However, the consequences of deliberately suppressing technological innovation are rarely given equal attention.
Consider the potential benefits of AI-assisted drug discovery, which could lead to better treatments for cancer, Alzheimer’s and many other conditions. AI-enhanced robotics and logistics could transform manufacturing, increase agricultural output and help elderly and disabled Americans maintain their independence.
Imagine the lives and the industries that could be saved and the economic opportunities that could spring up from these technologies that we have only now begun to understand.
Under the far left’s proposals, we may never see these benefits materialize. Sanders says he is concerned that average Americans will be left behind in the AI revolution, but his proposed restrictions threaten to undermine the very innovations that could cause growth in societal prosperity.
Perhaps the most concerning consequence of the far left’s vision is America’s geopolitical future.
Like America, China is also pursuing AI at breakneck speeds. While America has enjoyed a substantial lead in this race, the recent Stanford University 2026 AI Index showed the performance gap between American and Chinese models has effectively disappeared.
The proposals from Sanders and the far left to stall AI research and data center construction give the Chinese Communist Party opportunity to pull ahead in the AI race. If China were to take the lead in the AI race, America’s global status economically and geopolitically could be severely diminished.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
At the same White House meeting where Musk outlined his optimistic vision of the future, Trump warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping "will take every data center that we don’t want."
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The AI revolution carries great potential for increased prosperity unlike anything we have seen in our lifetime. It would be a historic tragedy if America surrendered that opportunity because our politicians were more afraid of technological progress than our geopolitical rivals.
© Finnbarr Webster/Getty Images
Beijing has proposed banning exports of the technology used to make next-generation solar cells, a move that could complicate United States technology guru Elon Musk’s plan to expand into space solar power. The ban, which covers production technology for perovskite and tandem solar cell modules, is part of a proposal by China’s Ministry of Commerce […]
The post China next-gen solar tech curb to impact SpaceX AI computing plan appeared first on Asia Times.
© Aaron Wojack for The New York Times
On Monday, the Brazilian Superior Electoral Tribunal gave the technology company Meta a 24-hour deadline to demonstrate that the campaigns of the two presidential candidates, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Flavio Bolsonaro, are receiving equal treatment on Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.
RELATED:
Brazilian Police Investigate Flavio Bolsonaro Over Money Laundering
Magistrate Marco Aurelio Bellizze warned that if Meta does not demonstrate that it has complied with the equity measures previously ordered, the court will double the planned daily fine to about US$185,000 until the end of the runoff that will take place on Oct. 25.
His decision comes after both campaigns went to court to denounce that their political content is being harmed by Meta’s platforms and to accuse the company of favoring its rival.
This discriminatory treatment has been particularly notable against the campaign of President Lula da Silva, according to denunciations by militants of the Workers’ Party.
More generally, Brazilians have confirmed that Meta-controlled social networks have imposed limitations on the advertising boost of the leftist candidacy and have selectively restricted the dissemination of posts linked to Lula and his supporters.
Esto es un escándalo por el que tendría que responder Zuckerberg
— Julián Macías Tovar (@JulianMaciasT) October 14, 2026
La periodista Daniela Lima muestra en directo como la IA de Meta favorece la campaña de Bolsonaro creando imágenes de "Flavio 22", y con las mismas instrucciones se niega a hacerlas de "Lula 13". pic.twitter.com/SGb5NjStcR
The text reads, “This is a scandal for which Zuckerberg would have to answer. Journalist Daniela Lima shows live how Meta’s AI favors Bolsonaro’s campaign by creating images of ‘Flavio 22,’ and with the same instructions refuses to make images of ‘Lula 13’.”
Last week, Judge Bellizze determined that Meta offer equal treatment to both candidates in a decision that was endorsed on Friday by the entire electoral tribunal.
In Monday’s decision, the magistrate stated that there are still not enough elements to conclude that Meta deliberately manipulated the distribution of content, but he considered that the multinational has not satisfactorily demonstrated compliance with all previous orders.
Bellizze also questioned that Meta has assumed the authority to modify the deadlines set by the Court, since it requested more time to comply.
Among the court’s demands on Meta are explanations about recommendation systems, the review of ads from both candidacies, the identification of those responsible for political advertising and the measures adopted against possible networks of inauthentic profiles.
The new decision comes after Meta last week denied any interference in the Brazilian elections and rejected accusations of favoring a candidate. The company attributed the problems denounced by the Lula campaign to technical incidents and assured that its systems do not classify or distribute content based on political ideology.
teleSUR/ JF
Source: EFE
Ehsan MOVAHEDIAN
Únete a nosotros en Telegram , X y VK .
Escríbenos: info@strategic-culture.su
La advertencia de Aliyev contra la influencia extranjera llega en medio de una disputa con los círculos políticos turcos sobre la religión, Karabaj y las relaciones de Azerbaiyán con Israel.
En el octavo congreso del Partido del Nuevo Azerbaiyán, celebrado en Bakú el 2 de octubre, el presidente Ilham Aliyev ofreció una descripción inusualmente directa de lo que denominó la «seguridad ideológica» de Azerbaiyán. Era tan importante como la seguridad física, afirmó, ya que las amenazas ideológicas podían traspasar las fronteras a través de Internet, los ciberataques y la inteligencia artificial (IA).
Hizo un llamamiento a la educación y al patriotismo para defender el espacio político del país, al tiempo que insistió en que Azerbaiyán no necesitaba «ayuda ni patrocinio» extranjeros. Añadió que otros Estados no debían interferir en sus asuntos ni decirle cómo vivir.
Estas declaraciones las realizó el presidente y líder del partido gobernante en un congreso en el que se definió su rumbo político. Aliyev situó el control de la esfera ideológica de Azerbaiyán al mismo nivel que el poder militar, la independencia económica y la toma de decisiones soberana.
No mencionó a Turquía como fuente de ninguna amenaza. Sin embargo, sus palabras se produjeron en medio de críticas en los círculos políticos y mediáticos turcos hacia las políticas internas de Azerbaiyán, especialmente su trato a las estudiantes que llevan hiyab. El 26 de septiembre, el Consejo de Medios de Comunicación y Radiodifusión de Azerbaiyán acusó a círculos no identificados de llevar a cabo una campaña contra el país en los medios turcos y en las redes sociales.
Ese enfrentamiento agudiza aún más la fórmula «una nación, dos Estados». La proximidad política nunca ha eliminado las diferencias en los intereses nacionales. A medida que Ankara y Bakú se han ido acercando, la cuestión de quién define su identidad común —y qué influencia permite— se ha vuelto más difícil de eludir.
Los analistas que hablaron con The Cradle consideran que el discurso de Aliyev es un intento de renegociar la relación, más que de romperla. Azerbaiyán no tiene ninguna intención aparente de renunciar a su asociación militar, económica y cultural con Turquía. Sin embargo, Bakú quiere dejar claro que el parentesco no otorga a Ankara ninguna autoridad sobre la política interna azerbaiyana.
Una advertencia que se ha escuchado en Ankara
Hazel Yalin, investigadora especializada en las relaciones turco-rusas, interpreta que el discurso estaba dirigido, en gran medida, al Gobierno del presidente Recep Tayyip Erdogan. El analista turco Aydin Sezer también percibe un mensaje diplomático indirecto. Según Sezer, Aliyev se dirigió a varios públicos, entre ellos Occidente, Armenia, Rusia e Irán, pero es posible que Ankara se encontrara entre sus principales destinatarios.
El contexto inmediato es la controversia sobre la religión en las escuelas de Azerbaiyán. Una enmienda de septiembre a las normas de vestimenta de las escuelas públicas prohíbe prendas adicionales consideradas incompatibles con la educación laica. La decisión no menciona el hiyab por su nombre, pero las noticias de que se ha impedido a algunas niñas asistir a clase por llevar pañuelo en la cabeza han suscitado objeciones por parte de críticos turcos.
Ankara no ha abordado públicamente el tema con Bakú. Sezer interpreta la exhortación de Aliyev a que otros países se ocupen de sus propios asuntos como una advertencia contra convertir el lenguaje de la hermandad en un derecho a supervisar a Azerbaiyán.
La propia alianza reconoce este límite. La Declaración de Shusha de 2021 celebra «una nación, dos Estados» y formaliza una amplia cooperación, pero también compromete a Ankara y Bakú a respetar la soberanía y la no injerencia en los asuntos internos de la otra parte. La disputa actual ha puesto en contacto esas dos partes de la declaración.
Si los actores políticos turcos reclaman voz en la política religiosa y educativa de Azerbaiyán alegando una nacionalidad compartida, el margen de soberanía ideológica de Bakú se reduce. Si esas cuestiones pertenecen exclusivamente a Azerbaiyán, el lema sigue siendo una expresión de afinidad cultural y solidaridad política, sin otorgar a ninguna de las dos capitales un mandato sobre la otra.
¿A quién pertenece la victoria en Karabaj?
Yalin afirma que los canales de noticias y las cuentas en redes sociales pro-Erdogan han acusado a Bakú de presionar a los musulmanes en materia de prácticas y organización religiosas. Algunos también han presentado la victoria de Azerbaiyán en la Segunda Guerra de Karabaj como algo que debía a Turquía, calificando las políticas laicas de Aliyev de ingratas y exigiendo respeto por las sensibilidades religiosas turcas.
«Este argumento también se ha esgrimido basándose en el lema “dos Estados, una nación”: si los turcos y los azerbaiyanos son miembros de la misma nación, entonces, según este razonamiento, el Gobierno azerbaiyano también debería tener en cuenta la voz de esa nación».
El discurso de Aliyev en el congreso apuntaba en la dirección opuesta. Afirmó en repetidas ocasiones que Azerbaiyán había actuado por su cuenta, había pagado sus armas y se había impuesto sin ningún patrocinador externo. Esta fue su interpretación política de la guerra; no debe interpretarse como una conclusión de que el apoyo turco no desempeñó ningún papel.
De hecho, la Declaración de Shusha recoge explícitamente el agradecimiento de Bakú por el apoyo moral y político de Turquía. La controversia gira en torno a quién puede atribuirse el mérito político del resultado y qué derechos podría otorgarles ese mérito para exigir algo posteriormente.
Para Aliyev, la victoria militar forma parte de un proyecto más amplio de construcción del Estado. Describió la independencia, la fortaleza económica, el poderío militar y la confianza en las capacidades azerbaiyanas como la línea de actuación duradera de su Gobierno. Cuanto más se convierte esa narrativa en el eje central de su legitimidad, menos margen queda para que otra capital se presente como la artífice del éxito de Azerbaiyán.
La implicación es significativa: no se puede permitir fácilmente que un actor externo —ni siquiera uno amigo— se convierta en el artífice político del éxito de Azerbaiyán.
Jafar Haghpanah, profesor de la Universidad de Teherán, sostiene que Bakú ya no quiere ser tratado como un socio subordinado de Turquía. Yalin identifica tres elementos en la postura de Aliyev.
El primero es la preocupación por la presión ideológica: según la interpretación de Yalin, el intento de golpe de Estado de 1995 contra el padre de Aliyev, Heydar Aliyev, dejó una advertencia duradera sobre las posibles consecuencias de la actividad política vinculada a Turquía.
El segundo es la resistencia a las descripciones nacionalistas turcas de Azerbaiyán como un «hermano pequeño». El tercero es la creciente confianza de Aliyev en que Azerbaiyán puede ejercer su propia influencia política en toda la región. Las acusaciones relativas a figuras turcas en el episodio de 1995 no deben confundirse con la responsabilidad por parte del actual Gobierno turco.
Bakú tiene ahora un mayor peso militar y económico que a principios de la década de 2000. La Compañía Estatal de Petróleo de la República de Azerbaiyán (SOCAR) ha ampliado el alcance energético de Azerbaiyán; el país ha establecido profundos lazos con Israel, relaciones estratégicas con China y Estados Unidos, y ocupa un lugar destacado en la Organización de Estados Turcos (OTC). Esas conexiones le dan más margen para rechazar una jerarquía dentro de su alianza más estrecha.
Yalin cita el respaldo de Sinan Ogan a Erdogan en la segunda vuelta de las elecciones presidenciales de Turquía de 2023 como ejemplo de cómo la influencia azerbaiyana podría convertirse en un tema de debate en la política turca. A Ogan se le preguntó si Aliyev había influido en su decisión y lo negó explícitamente, afirmando que Aliyev no le había llamado. La acusación no puede demostrar que Bakú dirigiera su elección. No obstante, su difusión muestra la rapidez con la que la cuestión de la influencia funciona en ambos sentidos.
El alcance de la seguridad ideológica
La advertencia de Aliyev fue más allá de la controversia sobre los uniformes escolares. Su respuesta consistió en reforzar la educación y el patriotismo y, con ellos, el control del Estado sobre cómo se interpretan su historia y sus victorias.
Turquía dispone de medios inusualmente potentes para llegar a ese público: la televisión, las redes sociales, las universidades, las redes religiosas, la cultura popular, las empresas y las instituciones del mundo turco en general. Esas conexiones han ayudado a mantener la alianza. También pueden inquietar a Bakú cuando los debates políticos turcos comienzan a moldear las expectativas sobre el orden interno de Azerbaiyán.
El problema para Aliyev no es que la influencia turca sea uniformemente hostil. Es que incluso una influencia amistosa puede seguir desafiando la autoridad de un Gobierno para definir la identidad y la política nacionales. Su énfasis en la seguridad ideológica sugiere que pretende proteger esa autoridad incluso dentro de la asociación más estrecha de Azerbaiyán.
El lugar de Israel entre los aliados
La relación de Azerbaiyán con Israel añade otra fuente de tensión. Ankara ha condenado la guerra de Israel contra Gaza, mientras que Bakú ha mantenido estrechos vínculos en materia de seguridad y energía con Tel Aviv. Las armas israelíes han constituido una parte importante del arsenal de Azerbaiyán, y el crudo azerbaiyano ha seguido llegando a Israel a través del puerto de Ceyhan, en Turquía, a pesar de las restricciones comerciales declaradas por Ankara. The Cradle ha informado sobre la relación en materia de armas y petróleo y sobre los continuos flujos de petróleo.
El analista del Cáucaso Ahmad Kazemi no considera que las diferencias entre Ankara y Bakú sean lo suficientemente profundas como para amenazar su alianza. No obstante, cree que la confianza de Aliyev se basa en parte en el apoyo israelí.
Según la valoración de Kazemi, «si Bakú se viera obligada a elegir entre Ankara y Tel Aviv, elegiría a Israel». También sostiene que Bakú sabía que la presencia de su representante durante el discurso del primer ministro israelí, Benjamin Netanyahu, ante la ONU en septiembre desagradaría a Turquía. Un análisis de la Agencia Anadolu reveló que Turquía se sumó a la protesta contra el discurso, mientras que Azerbaiyán siguió estando representado.
Kazemi ve otra consecuencia para el Cáucaso. Sostiene que la preocupación compartida por Turquía e Irán respecto a la posición de Israel en Azerbaiyán podría acercar a Ankara y Teherán en algunas cuestiones, incluidos los corredores de transporte regionales. Dicha convergencia tendría que lidiar con la amplia cooperación estratégica y de defensa de Turquía con Bakú.
Haghpanah ofrece una interpretación más contundente del discurso pronunciado en el congreso:
«Aliyev pretendía con su discurso indicar a Turquía que Azerbaiyán es el principal aliado de Israel y que Ankara debería moderar su tono hacia Tel Aviv y evitar adoptar una postura dura contra este país. Predice que Turquía e Israel entrarán en conflicto por los recursos energéticos del mar Mediterráneo, así como por sus intereses geoeconómicos y geopolíticos».
Yalin interpreta de manera similar las referencias de Aliyev a la producción y venta de petróleo de Azerbaiyán como una respuesta a las críticas a su comercio con Israel. Esas observaciones por sí solas no permiten determinar las intenciones de Bakú. Por su parte, Dariush Safarnejad, un destacado experto en el Cáucaso, señala la relación «petróleo por armas», pero espera que la influencia israelí en Azerbaiyán se reduzca en cierta medida si la cooperación directa de Bakú con Washington se intensifica tras la iniciativa de paz con Armenia. También hace referencia al debate sobre unos lazos más estrechos con la OTAN.
Los demás socios de Bakú
Aliyev aprovechó el congreso para describir a China y a EE. UU. como las dos superpotencias mundiales y para destacar las alianzas estratégicas de Azerbaiyán con ambas. El esfuerzo de Bakú por establecer vínculos con centros de poder rivales le proporciona alternativas a la dependencia de un único socio, ya sea turco, ruso, chino u occidental.
Sus comentarios sobre Armenia y Rusia encajan en ese contexto. Yalin llama la atención sobre la afirmación de Aliyev de que Armenia reconoció la integridad territorial de Azerbaiyán en octubre de 2022, con el consiguiente reconocimiento de la soberanía azerbaiyana sobre Karabaj.
Aliyev presentó el restablecimiento del control azerbaiyano como un logro conseguido frente a la presión de las grandes potencias. Yalin considera que esto forma parte del intento de Bakú de reposicionarse tras la guerra.
Azerbaiyán y Armenia rubricaron un borrador de acuerdo de paz en Washington en agosto de 2025, aunque aún no se ha firmado el tratado definitivo. Safarnejad sostiene que unos lazos más estrechos con Washington podrían dar a Bakú más margen para tratar directamente con EE. UU. y, con el tiempo, reducir su dependencia de Israel.
Hermandad sin un socio dominante
Ninguno de los cinco analistas sugiere que sea inminente una ruptura entre Ankara y Bakú. Safarnejad destaca la profundidad de su interdependencia: la cooperación militar, las infraestructuras energéticas, los corredores de transporte, la inversión, las industrias de defensa y las instituciones culturales confieren a la alianza una base sólida.
La OTS refuerza esos lazos. En septiembre, funcionarios turcos y azerbaiyanos seguían debatiendo una cooperación más profunda en materia de defensa y seguridad.
Azerbaiyán sigue queriendo a Turquía a su lado en materia de seguridad, comercio y diplomacia regional. Aliyev marca el límite en lo que respecta a la influencia de Ankara sobre la política religiosa de Bakú, sus vínculos con Israel y sus relaciones exteriores en general. Para él, el lema «una nación, dos Estados» otorga a Azerbaiyán la última palabra sobre sus propios asuntos.
Hasta qué punto Bakú podrá hacer valer esa reivindicación dependerá, en parte, de la política interna de Turquía tras Erdogan, de la durabilidad de la relación de Azerbaiyán con Israel y de su capacidad para gestionar las relaciones con Washington, Moscú, Pekín y Teherán sin perder el apoyo de Ankara.
Para Irán, un Bakú más seguro de su independencia pero más dependiente de Israel difícilmente resultaría tranquilizador. La alianza puede perdurar; la discusión sobre quién establece sus límites ya está en marcha.
Two hundred years ago, the invention of Braille allowed blind people to read and write. By the 1930s, recorded sound made "talking books" possible. Developments in text-to-speech technology in the 1980s made reading more accessible and widespread. Then came personal computers, screen readers, smartphones, cameras, GPS, voice assistants, and myriad other technological advancements that gave blind people more independence.
Now a pair of sunglasses can read your mail, describe the person in front of you, tell you what is on a restaurant menu, and help you find your way home. Meta, the parent company of Facebook, is using artificial intelligence to turn glasses into a hands-free companion. For any person, this technology is impressive. For the approximately 700,000 Americans who are blind, it is potentially life-changing.
In June, Meta announced that every single blind veteran in the United States could receive its AI glasses free of charge. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (V.A.), approximately 130,000 American veterans are legally blind, and over 1 million veterans have vision impairment that makes performing daily activities difficult. Don Overton, a blind veteran and former executive director of the Blinded Veterans Association, told Meta that he had "lost [his] independence" after losing his eyesight in a bunker explosion. "The moment I put on my Ray-Ban Meta glasses," he said, "I got my independence back."
The V.A. has a history of failing to fully support blind veterans. In 2022, the V.A.'s Office of Inspector General found that claims processors were instructed to contact visually impaired veterans by telephone, but 87 percent of claims showed no evidence of these calls ever happening. A 2022 investigation by the Senate's Special Committee on Aging found that "roughly 90 percent" of V.A. websites were not compliant with federal accessibility requirements. "We feel we've been abandoned by the agency that is tasked with providing our care and services for us," Overton told The Washington Post in 2022.
Meta's AI glasses have come under fire due to their privacy risks. The company was sued in March after Swedish publications Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten reportedly found that Meta's contractors in Kenya were accessing videos by users of their AI glasses. "We see everything, from living rooms to naked bodies," one worker noted.
Users should be aware of those risks. Still, for blind veterans, companies such as Meta have stepped up to fill a gap that the government has failed to address.
The post Meta Is Gifting AI Glasses to Blind Veterans: 'I Got My Independence Back' appeared first on Reason Magazine.
Alex Cristi /Getty Images | Chris Williams
Practically every company is making AI tools available to their employees. As the former VP of HR at Microsoft and a leadership advisor with over 50 years of business experience, I'm amazed at how quickly this rollout has progressed.
Some people are all in, using the tools for nearly everything they do. Others have barely stuck their toes in the AI waters. I've been using a broad range of AI tools and encourage my clients to do the same.
AI isn't without controversy, and if someone is strongly against using it — for whatever reason — I'm not going to convince them otherwise.
But if you're wondering how and why you should use these tools, I'm here for you. Let's talk about three ways I advise all my executive clients to use AI effectively in the workplace.
Use AI as a way to see things you might not have seen. Ask it, "What am I missing?"
I agree with many that AI is lousy at most creative efforts. Whether written or visual, AI results can be generic, mediocre, and often embarrassing. The output usually deserves the "AI Slop" label it gets. But to dismiss it entirely misses a core value.
AI is useful with, perhaps even because of, that generic, often obvious other perspective.
It can be amazingly helpful to simply ask: what am I missing? Since AI has a tendency to agree with me, I explicitly ask for pushback: "review this and tell me what I'm missing, tell me where I'm wrong." The fact that AI is so obvious, so average, is actually a core value here. I'm often surprised at the points I missed and the viewpoints I overlooked.
Even if AI doesn't find things you missed, a contrarian angle can be very helpful to shore up your own case. You'll be able to say, "Yes, I considered those things, and here's why my take on this issue is better."
In that way, AI can also help you prepare for your discussions with colleagues. With so many letting AI draft their arguments, it's very valuable to see their perspective in advance.
So no, I don't let AI make my case, but I always look for another perspective in what I do — wherever it comes from. Having a tool that can give me that on a moment's notice is incredibly useful.
Long before AI, we all had that colleague who always told you far more than you needed to know. With some now using AI heavily, it can frankly be overwhelming.
You ask a simple question and get a blizzard of AI-generated noise in response. AI can be the worst over-explainer when simply left to run. You see the results in a seven-page response.
When I'm faced with one of these walls of text, I've learned there are really only two ways to respond. I can, and often do, ask the person to try again. What does this all really mean? Can you summarize your point in a couple of sentences? I occasionally get snarky and ask for the "non-AI slop" version.
Another way to deal with this is to ask AI to summarize it, whether AI tools or a wordy colleague wrote it. Importantly, I don't trust the AI summary to be the full explanation, but it helps me understand the key points. Which I then work to find in the original blizzard response.
Yes, this is a little circular. After all, why not just have the two AI systems have the discussion? Leave me out of it. But in a world where it seems everyone has a hard time getting to the point, any tool to cut through the noise is welcome. And AI is very good at that.
In a similar vein, one thing AI does incredibly well is organize. This kind of rote task of sorting, filtering, and filing is right in the sweet spot for most AI systems.
I'm wary of letting AI systems automate tasks like filtering or filing things without my supervision. I'd never let an AI system automatically send emails, texts, or documents without my careful review. But I often have AI systems help me sort through mountains of accumulated debris.
I recently moved to a new computer system and had AI review what I was planning to move over. I discovered decades of accumulated cruft. Simply from a comprehensive list, I found gigabytes of programs, files, and settings, 90% of which I just left behind.
So if you have 8,000 emails in your inbox, or a documents folder that has grown a second life, let an AI system take a look for you. Don't just tell it to "deal with it." Your judgment is needed.
Rather, have it give you a review of it and another perspective. And once you've reviewed it, perhaps you'll find, as I did: AI can be better at deletion than creation.
So when your company rolls out the next new AI, use those tools to your advantage. AI can help you see another perspective, find the important points in the blizzard, and cut through the mess. I've embraced AI, use it with great care, and encourage everyone to do the same.
BASTIEN INZAURRALDE/AFP via Getty Images
At an internal staff meeting in September, AWS CFO John Felton had a joke for Prasad Kalyanaraman, the executive overseeing much of Amazon's AI infrastructure expansion.
"You've taken us free cash flow negative as a company, so congratulations," Felton said, according to a recording of the meeting obtained by Business Insider.
The remark was lighthearted. But it captured a stunning reversal.
Just two years ago, Wall Street was debating what Amazon would do with its growing cash hoard. Now, cash flow has evaporated as Amazon embarks on its biggest bet ever, spending $220 billion this year alone to build the physical backbone for AI.
At the meeting, Kalyanaraman did not dispute Felton's premise. Amazon's machine-learning and AI business is "hugely free cash flow negative," he said, adding that he expects the company's free cash flow to remain negative for "the next couple of years or so."
Amazon has made big bets before. It spent heavily on cloud computing, fulfillment centers, and its delivery network long before they became some of the company's most valuable assets. Investors questioned those investments at the time, but Amazon ultimately built enormous, profitable businesses from them.
AI is testing this playbook at a far larger scale. Amazon is committing hundreds of billions of dollars to data centers, servers, and power before investors know how quickly those investments will generate revenue.
The company is the best, or among the best, at building data centers, with decades of experience. But the size and complexity of these projects, and the bottlenecks holding progress back, are challenging — even for such a respected cloud pioneer.
Internal documents reviewed by Business Insider and people familiar with the matter show the company trying to coordinate a sprawling industrial system whose parts move on different schedules. A delay in power, equipment, or construction can leave billions of dollars in hardware waiting — and Amazon's cash tied up — while forecasts and costs keep shifting.
Amazon says it has strong evidence that the capacity will be needed. AWS revenue grew 37% in the second quarter, its fastest pace in 18 quarters, while its backlog reached $496 billion.
CEO Andy Jassy thinks the company has a "clear line of sight" to strong financial returns from this record investment cycle. In his latest annual shareholder letter, he called AI a "once in a lifetime opportunity" and said Amazon would not be conservative in its investments.
"We've been through this cycle with the first big AWS growth wave, and liked the results," Jassy wrote. "We expect to feel similarly about this next wave."
Investors are concerned by the scale of the industry's expansion, especially as AI data centers are costing more to build and taking longer to complete.
The market is "repricing anything that funds multi-year builds against revenue that arrives later," Dan Ives, an analyst at Yorkville Ives, wrote in a recent report. Growing uncertainty around data center permitting and the political fight over electricity prices have given investors another reason to question how quickly these investments will pay off, he added.
One major industry challenge is securing enough power to run the equipment that goes inside data centers. This includes expensive racks of servers that contain GPUs and other chips that train and run AI models and services such as ChatGPT.
Internal emails from August show Amazon preparing a new "Early Rack Receipt" process for an expected wave of server racks carrying Nvidia's GB300 chips at US facilities before final deployment.
One Amazon email projected the company would take delivery of about $5 billion of Nvidia GB300 racks in August, followed by another roughly $3 billion each month "for the foreseeable future."
Some AWS data center sites had room for more racks but not enough available power to turn them on, people familiar with the effort said, leaving the equipment to be staged at intermediary warehouses until the facilities were ready. These people asked not to be identified discussing sensitive matters.
Usually, Amazon doesn't pay for racks until the gear is put into a data center, leaving suppliers to carry the cost of the equipment in transit, according to the internal documents obtained by Business Insider. This helps the company conserve cash.
However, the intensity of the AI data center building boom has made this type of coordination harder. Amazon has to compete more for scarce resources as it jockeys with rivals for access to Nvidia GPUs and other AI components.
Under the new "Early Rack Receipt" process, Amazon now takes ownership of these racks earlier in the supply chain, rather than waiting until the equipment reaches a data center.
The means spending cash sooner. And any delays getting the racks installed and plugged into a reliable power source potentially pushes back the moment when revenue starts flowing from these assets.
At least one AWS supply chain team did not have "a clear forecasted path" for getting racks into data centers, according to one of the emails reviewed by Business Insider.
An Amazon spokesperson said the company routinely stages finished hardware near deployment sites so it can be installed once power capacity is available, calling that approach "best business practice."
The spokesperson added that AWS has "long-established systems" to track infrastructure assets and disputed that the broader company lacks a forecasted path for getting racks into data centers.
This problem is not unique to Amazon.
Bernstein analysts wrote in a recent note that power permits, cooling systems, electrical equipment, construction, and hardware all move on separate schedules.
"Timing is imperfect," the analysts said.
Chris Jung/NurPhoto via Getty Images
During the internal staff meeting in September, Felton, the AWS CFO, described the broader problem eloquently: "How do you work in the future when the future is inherently uncertain?"
Kalyanaraman, the AI infrastructure leader, said Amazon's internal outlook for the return on its AI investments had improved. But the assumptions behind those returns keep shifting.
"The forecast is changing on a daily basis," Kalyanaraman said. "The world that we live in is extremely dynamic."
Those shifting assumptions include when data centers will be ready and how much equipment AWS needs to keep on hand, he explained.
An eight-week supply buffer might be routine for a smaller company. But at Amazon's scale, Kalyanaraman said, this could mean holding "billions and billions of dollars" worth of additional equipment inventory — tying up precious cash.
Such tensions are especially striking for Kalyanaraman, a 21-year Amazon veteran who earlier this year was promoted to the elite S-team that reports directly to Jassy.
Amazon's founding story is defined by frugality. It famously used cheap doors as desks when founder Jeff Bezos started in Seattle in the mid-90s.
Kalyanaraman has absorbed this lore into bones. In late 2023, as AWS faced slower growth and layoffs, he urged employees to do more with less. "Frugality breeds innovation," he said back then.
That instinct still shapes his approach. In the September meeting this year, Kalyanaraman told Felton that AWS tries to make major investments at the "last responsible moment," when it has the clearest possible view of demand.
"If we can wait to spend the capital as late as possible, it's better for us," he said.
Bloomberg/Getty Images
But the frenetic pace of the AI boom makes this principle difficult to follow. By the time demand is fully visible, the servers, power, and construction capabilities that AWS needs may no longer be available. That puts pressure on the company to commit more money sooner to secure supply and meet its data center capacity goals.
Kalyanaraman recalled telling Jassy in 2023 that AWS would "surely" be out of its capacity crunch by 2027. Instead, Amazon still expects demand to exceed its available capacity in 2027, the AI infrastructure chief said during the meeting this September.
Getting enough electricity may be the biggest challenge for an industry leader like Amazon.
The company has 44 gigawatts of data center capacity under development across 16 states, more than double Google, Meta, and Microsoft, according to Cleanview Research estimates.
An internal AWS dashboard called "Secured Power at Risk" tracks utility and regulatory constraints affecting electricity capacity AWS has lined up for its data centers.
The risks include transmission bottlenecks, requirements to reduce use during grid stress, and "use it or lose it" provisions that can jeopardize capacity if a data center project misses usage or construction milestones.
In other words, AWS is not simply waiting for electricity to arrive. It is managing a portfolio of commitments that can become more costly if a data center project is delayed.
A submission to Maryland's utility regulator last year, obtained through a public records request, illustrates the kind of exposure that can accompany massive data center buildouts.
Amazon told the Maryland Public Service Commission that large data center customers could help pay for grid upgrades or bring new power capacity to market without burdening other electricity ratepayers.
The company also proposed setting aside collateral to help utilities get more comfortable with the large investments needed to generate more electricity for data centers. Amazon proposed three years of collateral so that if a large electricity customer abandoned unused capacity, the utility would have time to re-sell the power.
The proposal is not evidence that AWS has made such a payment or posted collateral. It does, however, show that large data centers can face extra financial obligations, beyond their own electricity bills, if projects are delayed or cancelled.
The Amazon spokesperson said such utility rules are not unique to AWS. The company has not disclosed how much cash it has paid upfront to secure power.
The AI buildout also incurs expenses that are harder to model than a conventional capex plan.
In the September meeting this year, Kalyanaraman said that while reviewing plans for gigawatts of capacity in West Texas, AWS confronted a labor problem: There weren't enough nearby pipefitters, electricians, and other skilled workers to build the facilities.
The company's response, he said, was to pay to construct housing complexes near its data centers so workers could live there for the two or three years needed to complete the projects.
Even the crates used to ship servers have become a planning issue. It may seem absurd to worry about the price of a container when servers cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, Kalyanaraman said. But at AWS's scale, where the company needs so many crates, even trivial items can become a material expense.
"We have new constraints that keep popping up," Kalyanaraman said.
Have a tip? Contact this reporter via email at ekim@businessinsider.com or Signal, Telegram, or WhatsApp at 650-942-3061. Use a personal email address, a nonwork WiFi network, and a nonwork device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.
Login