A new study from Monash Business School has revealed that professional advisors feel offended when clients use AI to get a second opinion on their recommendations.

The research, published in Computers in Human Behaviour, found professionals become less motivated to work with clients who consult AI tools. This effect persists even when the client only uses AI for background information, or as a complementary resource rather than a replacement.

"Advisors view AI as substantially inferior to themselves; thus, being placed in the same category as an AI system feels insulting and signals disrespect, undermining advisors' willingness to engage," Associate Professor Gerri Spassova, the lead author, said.

Imagine spending an hour helping a client plan a complex trip, carefully mapping out flights, hotels, and itineraries — only for that client to take your recommendations and book everything through an AI chatbot instead.

Researchers found professionals who lost business to an AI were far less willing to work with that client again in the future.

Clients who consult AI may be seen as less competent and less warm by the advisors they approach for help.

When clients defer to AI, it prompts advisors to question the value of their own human contribution, and this may get worse as AI gets better.

Many advisors take offense at this, and it is the major reason why they pull back from clients who consult AI.

"One can only speculate," Associate Professor Spassova said. "My intuition is that the situation will not get much better. Firstly, because professional advisors’ jobs are on the line.

"Also, as AI gets better, it may threaten our sense of worth and self-regard, and so when clients defer to AI, it would prompt advisors to question the value of their human contribution."

The study suggests for new client advisor relationships, people should not disclose that they consulted AI before the meeting.

A long history of working together might weaken the negative reaction, but even then, the advisor may still feel cheated.

This applies to doctors, lawyers, and other professionals whose expertise clients might fact-check with AI tools.

A doctor who spent years training does not want to be second-guessed by a patient who spent five minutes on ChatGPT.

AI tools usually give a general overview of a situation and are very likely to make mistakes.

Its judgment is highly dependent on the amount of information you supply, and if you are not detailed enough, its response can be misleading.

Also, AI gives responses to questions based on the way it is asked, and users can easily influence an AI tool to tell them what they want to hear.

Considering these nuances, it would be unfair to judge a professional with years of study and experience based on an uncertain tool.

There is absolutely no need to throw it in the face of a professional that you have consulted AI because it creates a sense of "lack of trust".

Until professional norms adjust to the presence of AI, clients would be wise to keep their fact checking private or risk damaging professional relationships.

Read More ...

AI has arrived, and writing lyrics and composing music will never be the same.

Countless generations of musicians who created things manually would roll over in their graves at the idea of conjuring strings, piano, woodwinds, brass and percussion out of thin air, not to mention the human voice as a timeless vehicle of inspired sound. Music has been a human endeavor – until now.

New tools are blowing older ones out of the water. One such catalyst is called Suno – and it is, frankly, amazing.

Plug in your written lyrics. Write a quick prompt: minor or major key, rhythm, vocal techniques, and press "Create" and a fully formed song springs instantly out of the ether, with the voice of a singer who never lived. Or, don’t write your own lyrics, just tell Suno what you want the song to be about, and the lyrics will just appear, cadenced and scanned perfectly, in verse/chorus form, like the work of an impassioned genie from Tin Pan Alley.

It’s almost, some would say, too easy, but it’s inspired by a real vision of a new world that works differently than what we had in the first quarter of the twenty-first century.

"Some of the most fun I’ve ever had was making music with my friends," Michael Shulman, the creator of Suno, said, detailing how an early version of the app on Discord came out of his realization of how universal music is as a human language.

"Every single person in the world is creative," he said. "Every single person finds enjoyment and fulfillment from making things, and being creative. Everybody loves music."

Suno, he said, is about playing with music, not just playing music. He mentioned early jam sessions in a co-founder’s basement as another part of the impetus for the model that eventually got made.

"They were bad at the beginning," he said, of Suno’s fledgling compositions. "You needed really forgiving ears to really call it music."

But, he noted, people were willing to pay for it, and the thing took off.

Ultimately, Shulman said, most users are just regular people, although the pros are also paying attention.

"We increasingly find that huge numbers of professionals also use the product," he said, citing buy-in from producers as well as songwriters.

Read More ...

Apple’s AI plan may soon put a little money back into customers’ pockets. Some iPhone owners in the United States could receive payouts of up to US$ 95 after Apple agreed to settle a US$ 250 million class-action lawsuit tied to its heavily promoted Siri AI features.

The lawsuit accused Apple of advertising advanced artificial intelligence capabilities that were not available when certain iPhones reached consumers. Plaintiffs argued the company sold buyers on a smarter Siri experience that remained delayed long after launch.

The proposed settlement still requires approval from a federal judge before payments can go out.

Apple unveiled its Apple Intelligence platform during the iPhone 16 launch cycle in 2024. The company promoted a new generation of Siri features alongside the iPhone 16 lineup and select iPhone 15 Pro models.

Apple positioned the AI upgrades as a major selling point. The company promised a more personalized Siri assistant with stronger contextual awareness and deeper app integration. But consumers alleged those features failed to appear when the devices launched.

The lawsuit, initially filed by California resident Peter Landsheft in March 2025, claimed Apple misled buyers through aggressive AI-focused marketing campaigns. Additional plaintiffs later joined the case in federal court in San Francisco. According to court filings, the complaint said Apple "deceived millions of consumers into spending hundreds of dollars on a phone they did not need, based on features that do not exist."

The filing also stated Apple was caught off-guard by consumer demand for the Siri AI tools. Buyers reportedly became frustrated after learning the features would arrive later than expected. Apple still has not fully delivered the Siri overhaul nearly two years after first promoting the upgrades.

Apple denied the allegations in the lawsuit and maintained it acted properly. In a statement reported by USA TODAY, Apple said it resolved the case in an effort to continue "delivering the most innovative products and services to our users."

The company also issued another statement cited by the Associated Press. Apple said, "Apple has reached a settlement to resolve claims related to the availability of two additional features." The statement continued, "We resolved this matter to stay focused on doing what we do best, delivering the most innovative products and services to our users."

Court documents showed Apple defended its broader AI rollout during settlement discussions. The company said it already launched more than 20 Apple Intelligence features and plans to release more Siri-related AI tools through future software updates. Both parties filed the proposed settlement agreement on May 5. A federal judge will review the deal during a hearing scheduled for June.

If approved, the settlement will cover consumers in the United States who purchased eligible devices between 10 June 2024, and 29 March 2025. Eligible devices include the iPhone 16, iPhone 16e, iPhone 16 Plus, iPhone 16 Pro, iPhone 16 Pro Max, iPhone 15 Pro, and iPhone 15 Pro Max.

Consumers could receive at least US$ 25 for each eligible device. The payout may increase to as much as US$ 95 depending on the number of approved claims and other factors. Court filings said eligible customers will receive notifications by email or standard mail with instructions for filing claims through a settlement website.

Read More ...

Over the past month, A.I. detection has been at the center of a series of controversies: Hachette pulled the horror novel "Shy Girl" by Mia Ballard after detectors flagged it as substantially A.I.-generated.

The New York Times cut ties with a freelance book critic who admitted that an A.I. editing tool had regurgitated passages from a Guardian article into his draft. The Atlantic reported that a "Modern Love" column had been flagged as more than 60 percent A.I.-generated.

In certain corners of social media, A.I.-detector screenshots are shared like mug shots, and pile-ons have the grim energy of public stonings.

This may all seem understandable—people want to know if what they’re reading was generated by a bot, and some argue they deserve to know. However, such controversy narrows the issue of A.I.’s steady encroachment to one of process, rather than impact.

Drawing a red line around using chatbots to generate prose may make it easier to ignore the way that the technology may be shaping writing before one even types a single word. And a culture of callouts, scandals, and fear may prevent media and publishing from wrestling with much thornier questions of authorship.

At the center of many of these controversies is a company called Pangram, whose CEO, Max Spero, has become the go-to authority when A.I. authorship disputes erupt. On Twitter/X, where Spero calls himself a "slop janitor," a user flagged a Guardian sports journalist’s writing as A.I.-generated. The publication responded that this was "the same style he’s used for 11 years writing for the Guardian, long before LLMs existed. The allegation is preposterous."

Spero quote-tweeted the exchange with a Pangram time-series analysis of 871 articles by the journalist: "It’s clear that he is increasingly relying on AI. In two weeks in February he churned out nine articles classified by Pangram as fully AI-generated. Receipts below."

Or take Pangram’s appearance in the Shy Girl cancellation. Readers on Reddit and YouTube had been flagging the horror novel as suspiciously A.I. for months, but then Spero ran the full manuscript and posted the result (78 percent A.I.-generated). Hachette pulled the book the day the Times piece ran. A story in the Atlantic soon followed. Spero was on LinkedIn, urging publishers to "strictly moderat[e] AI generated content" and "draft and enforce robust AI-use policy."

A pattern emerges: The crowd suspects a problem, then Pangram validates the suspicion, stokes the mob, and sells the solution. The impulse to dismiss all this as a detector company drumming up business runs into an issue—Pangram actually works way better than you might think. Brian Jabarian, a University of Chicago economist who conducted a rigorous independent evaluation of A.I. detectors, told me flatly, "This narrative that we shouldn’t use A.I. detection doesn’t seem to hold anymore."

Jabarian’s preprint, co-authored with Alex Imas and with no disclosed financial ties to the company, tested the tool across nearly 2,000 passages and found near-zero false-positive and false-negative rates on medium-to-long texts, the length of a typical op-ed or a verbose Amazon review.

Independent benchmarks confirm that Pangram outperforms every other detector tested and is robust against "humanizers," or software designed to smuggle A.I. text past detectors. So when Spero posts a time-series chart of hundreds of articles showing when a journalist’s output started sounding fishily like ChatGPT, I am inclined to believe it. That A.I. detection is finally catching up is, on balance, a Good Thing. A.I.-generated articles already far outnumber human ones. Social media is flooded with low-effort slop. According to Pangram’s own research, a fifth of peer reviews submitted to the A.I. research conference ICLR are fully A.I.-generated, and 9 percent of American newspapers contain undisclosed bot use. In this A.I.-powered asphyxiation of the information ecosystem, Spero has positioned himself on social media as a folk hero hauling in the oxygen tanks. You can tag his company’s bot on Twitter/X, and it will tell you whether a post is A.I. On Spero’s social media to-do list: a "slop hunter of the week leaderboard."

Read More ...

Apple may be joining the smart glasses market a little bit late, but it could be covering all its bases with up to four potential styles for its upcoming product. According to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman, Apple could launch some or all of the four styles it's currently testing for its smart glasses.

Gurman reported Apple is testing out a large rectangular frame that's comparable to Ray-Ban Wayfarers, a slimmer rectangular design like the glasses that Apple CEO Tim Cook wears, a larger oval or circular frame and a smaller oval or circle option. Apple is also working on a range of colors, including black, ocean blue and light brown, according to Bloomberg.

Internally code-named N50 for now, Apple's upcoming smart glasses will compete directly with the second-gen Ray-Ban Meta model. While similar, Apple might be differentiating its design with "vertically oriented oval lenses with surrounding lights," according to the report.

Like Meta's smart glasses, Apple's upcoming product will capture photos and videos, but is meant to better sync with an iPhone, allowing users to take advantage of Apple's ecosystem for editing, sharing, phone calls, notifications, music and even its voice assistant, according to Gurman. The release of Apple's smart glasses could even coincide with the upcoming improved Siri that should arrive with iOS 27.

Gurman reported that Apple could reveal its smart glasses as soon as the end of 2026 or early 2027, followed by an official release sometime in 2027. As for the competition, Meta released its latest model that's better suited for prescription lenses and offers a more customizable fit.

Read More ...

A couple of weeks after Apple released iOS 26.4 to iPhone users, the company is now making iOS 26.4.1 available. With this version, Apple is fixing an annoying bug that was preventing users from syncing iCloud data, including apps like Apple Passwords.

While Apple has been vague about this software update, 9to5Mac discovered a thread on the Apple Developer Forums that reveals iOS 26.4.1 fixes the iCloud Sync issue.

This thread was created after iOS 26.4 was released. One developer said that making changes to a document on a Mac didn't trigger the same file on the iPhone to be updated. After this complaint, one Apple Worldwide Developer Relations suggested fixing the issue through macOS, as the app might have failed to export data to CloudKit. However, as more users reported the same issue, Apple started taking the reports very seriously, which led to this update.

With iOS 26.4.1, the same Apple employee posted in the threads asking whether these users could update to iOS 26.4.1 to see if the problem was resolved. Replies from users report that everything works perfectly now.

If you're running iOS 26.5 beta 1, you don't need to worry about this iCloud Sync bug as long as you've installed the latest revised version. While Apple is still in the early days of the new iOS 26.5 beta cycle, it has seeded a new version of the first beta to address the iCloud app sync issue.

While we wait for Apple to announce the new Siri powered by a Google Gemini model, iOS 26.5 looks like a small update. So far, it's adding end-to-end encryption for RCS and setting up ads on Apple Maps in the U.S. and Canada, allowing businesses to place ads in search results and a new "Suggested Places" section in the app.

Last but not least, Apple is working to offer forward notifications on third-party smartwatches in Europe in accordance with the Digital Markets Act legislation. With this update, Apple will also expand answering notifications, Live Activities, and AirPods-like pairing to third-party smartwatches and headphones.

Read More ...