Artificial intelligence or AI is already reshaping parts of the commercial aviation industry, and in the coming years, airlines are expected to expand AI systems across operations, pricing, customer service, and flight management as they look to cut costs, increase margins, and improve reliability, efficiency, and performance.

First, modern commercial aircraft generate enormous amounts of operational data through onboard sensors that monitor critical systems. Already, airlines are increasingly using AI systems to analyze that data and identify patterns associated with wear and tear or mechanical failure.

AI could help airlines shift maintenance away from reactive repairs—which usually cause ground delays because they are discovered too late—and toward predictive maintenance. We’ve all been there: Everyone boards the flight and things seem all set to go, only to have the captain come over the intercom and announce that there’s maintenance that needs to be done.

Though maintenance will still need to occur, being able to predict it better in advance could help reduce last-minute delays, which tend to be the most frustrating.

Also, many AI-driven changes on this list could benefit the passenger. However, the outlook remains uncertain when it comes to airlines using AI in its ticket pricing methods.

Airline ticket pricing has long relied on algorithms that result in different prices at different times. But, AI is expected to make pricing systems substantially more individualized, incorporating factors such as booking history, travel timing, route demand, loyalty status, and purchasing behavior to tailor fares to specific travelers.

That could mean two passengers searching for the same flight and the same time receive different ticket prices based on what the airline thinks each will pay, based on the aforementioned criteria, as well as the likelihood of purchasing upgrades, checked bags, or premium seating.

While it is easy to see how such a pricing model could benefit the airlines and their profit margins, the concept of personalized pricing raises concerns about transparency and fairness, particularly if airlines don’t reveal the exact data they are collecting and using to determine prices.

For example, if flight purchase history shows you travel at the end of every month to the same place for work (American Airlines, for example, now makes you select Business or Personal travel when booking), can they increase the price, knowing you have to go?

Lastly, Flight cancellations, weather delays, missed connections, and maintenance disruptions generate enormous customer-service demand, and we all know how that can go: Long lines at customer service desks and tortuous time listening to on-hold music on the phone.

AI might be able to help in some cases. Instead of waiting on hold for a call center representative, passengers may increasingly interact with AI assistants capable of automatically rebooking itineraries, issuing hotel or meal vouchers, translating requests across multiple languages, providing real-time updates during irregular hours, etc. The technology could prove particularly valuable during severe weather events, when airline support systems often become overwhelmed.

Faster rebooking and more proactive communication may help reduce some of the frustration traditionally associated with large-scale travel disruptions, although the reduction in human-to-human contact could create its own frustrations, as anyone who has ever called a 1-800 number and had trouble getting through to a human can understand.

Fuel remains one of the airline industry’s largest operating expenses, often accounting for roughly a quarter or more of total costs. That financial pressure, combined with growing scrutiny over aviation emissions, has made fuel efficiency a major area of AI investment.

Airlines are increasingly using AI to optimize flight routing, cruising altitudes, taxi operations, descent procedures, and aircraft loading to make small efficiency gains that could have significant effects across large fleets operating thousands of flights daily.

In theory, that could save the airlines money and perhaps reduce ticket prices, though it’s fair for consumers to be skeptical of the latter.

Read More ...

The economics of space operations are unforgiving, and Canadian startup Orbit Robotics just unveiled HELIOS — a four-armed humanoid robot that ditches legs entirely for microgravity operations. This isn’t your typical terrestrial humanoid; it’s purpose-built for environments where walking becomes irrelevant, and efficiency matters most.

Cable-driven architecture prioritizes dexterity over terrestrial walking capabilities.

While Earth-bound humanoids like Boston Dynamics’ Atlas perfect their parkour routines, HELIOS takes a fundamentally different approach. You won’t find heavy torque motors or rigid actuators here. Instead, Orbit reportedly built a lightweight skeletal chassis powered by tendon-driven cables and pulleys—like a marionette designed by aerospace engineers.

The four-arm configuration isn’t just showing off. In microgravity, movement relies on grabbing handholds and surfaces rather than walking. Those extra limbs theoretically mean HELIOS can anchor itself with two arms while manipulating cargo or equipment with the other two. Motors supposedly sit near the shoulders to reduce moving mass in the limbs, while rolling-contact elbow joints promise smooth motion without the backlash that plagues traditional hinged systems.

This design philosophy directly challenges the terrestrial humanoid playbook. Companies like Agility Robotics and Sanctuary AI optimize for warehouse floors and factory lines. HELIOS optimizes for floating through space stations, where your greatest asset isn’t balance—it’s the ability to multitask while staying put.

Maintenance duties and cargo handling represent immediate deployment opportunities.

Orbit isn’t building a robot astronaut — they’re building a robotic assistant targeting specific operational inefficiencies. The company claims current crews spend significant time on maintenance tasks that could potentially be automated.

The company’s IKARUS testbed allegedly demonstrates teleoperation and imitation learning capabilities, suggesting HELIOS might learn tasks by watching human operators rather than requiring complex programming. Think of it as motion capture for space work—astronauts demonstrate procedures once, and the robot handles routine repetitions.

Industry observers suggest that humanoid platforms make sense for human-designed environments. When your workplace has racks, handrails, and hatches built for human bodies, a human-shaped robot offers more flexibility than specialized arms like the ISS’s Canadarm2 or Dextre.

The real test isn’t whether four arms work better than two — it’s whether this approach can deliver meaningful cost savings before the next generation of space stations comes online. If orbital operations become as routine as promised, even modest automation could pay for itself quickly in space’s unforgiving economics with significant benefits for workplace safety.

Read More ...

AI-powered consumer agents that can independently research, compare and order products on behalf of customers are raising serious legal and privacy questions.

While AI-assisted chat advice is already relatively common in online shopping, providers are steadily expanding their agents to cover the shopping itself — all based on customer specifications, but ultimately carried out autonomously.

Amazon, for example, is moving in this direction with Alexa for Shopping (formerly Rufus). And Google recently announced at its I/O developer conference an AI agent that can not only place products from multiple platforms into a single shopping basket, but also make payments on the user's behalf.

When AI-controlled software agents act independently on behalf of individuals or companies — making decisions and even processing purchases and payments — it raises a host of questions. Chief among them: is it actually legal?

Even though the first pilot schemes for fully autonomous AI shopping, including payment, are currently limited to the US, so-called agentic commerce is likely already legally permissible in many countries. However legal experts say there are many unresolved and legally complex questions around liability, contract law, consumer protection and payments.

One thing is clear: the more rights and autonomy AI assistants are given when shopping, the more problematic their use becomes. Critics are therefore calling for decisions to always remain with the human.

Experts at German tech magazine C't experts identify three risk areas around AI shopping agents:

1. Unresolved legal questions
   Who is liable if the AI orders the wrong product or falls for a fraudulent shop?
2. Technology vulnerable to manipulation
   Particularly problematic are the extensive permissions that agents require — such as access to emails, payment systems, calendars or online storage. If those permissions are too broad, a compromised agent could cause significant harm through unwanted purchases, or follow hidden buying instructions on manipulated websites such as fake shops.
3. Data protection problems
   To function effectively, AI agents require extensive information about preferences, context and purchase history.
   This is difficult to reconcile with GDPR principles such as data minimisation, transparency and purpose limitation. Retailers could also use the data to build psychological user profiles and exploit them for price discrimination.
   Consumers should remain sceptical of AI shopping assistants and follow these principles, c't advises:
   • Always confirm purchases manually.
   • Never grant full access to bank accounts.
   • Set spending limits.

Read More ...

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 ...