Search This Blog

Tuesday, 18 November 2025

Canada weighs F-35 and Gripen fleet, seeks industrial return

Canada weighs F-35 and Gripen fleet, seeks industrial return

Canada delays F-35 decision as Ottawa weighs Gripen option and industrial return

DefenseUSAF Lockheed F35 Lightning II stealth fighter jet in formation with two Czech Saab Gripen jets
Soos Jozsef / Shutterstock.com

Canada’s long-delayed F-35A fighter jet program is facing renewed uncertainty as Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government weighs whether to proceed with its planned fleet of 88 aircraft from Lockheed Martin or diversify toward a mixed fleet that could include Saab’s Gripen E.

The Liberal government first announced in March 2025 that it would “review” the purchase, citing heightened trade and diplomatic tensions with the United States. The move came as Canada was entering an election campaign.

Following his re-election, Carney has advocated for greater “diversification” in Ottawa’s defense and industrial partnerships. That stance was underscored by a new defense and trade cooperation framework signed with the European Union in June 2025.

Decision still pending

Canada’s F-35 saga dates back to July 2010, when then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government announced plans to buy 65 F-35As for CAD 9 billion ($6.5 billion), arguing the aircraft was essential for national defense and Arctic sovereignty.

The decision quickly drew controversy. During the 2015 election, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau vowed to cancel the sole-source deal, accusing the Conservatives of bypassing competition and committing to an “unnecessary and expensive fighter.” After taking office, Trudeau’s government confirmed it would seek alternatives.

That pledge led to the launch of the Future Fighter Capability Project (FFCP) in 2017, an open competition to replace the CF-18s. Several manufacturers initially participated, including Boeing with the F/A-18 Super Hornet, Dassault Aviation with the Rafale, and Airbus with the Eurofighter Typhoon.

Dassault withdrew in 2018, citing interoperability and security concerns linked to Canada’s participation in the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, while Airbus followed in 2019, arguing the competition’s terms favored Lockheed Martin. In 2021, Boeing’s Super Hornet bid was also disqualified for undisclosed reasons.

In 2022, the Department of National Defence selected the F-35A over Saab’s JAS 39 Gripen E/F, and Ottawa formally notified an initial order for 16 aircraft in January 2023. However, the remainder of the 88-jet fleet remains unconfirmed.

A final decision was initially expected by the end of the summer, yet Carney’s office has not announced any outcome. While the RCAF remains firmly in favor of the F-35, key cabinet figures, including Minister of Industry Mélanie Joly, have raised concerns about the contract’s economic balance.

Military urges urgency

During a recent parliamentary hearing, Deputy Minister of National Defence Stefanie Beck defended the F-35 acquisition, arguing that fifth-generation capabilities are essential to maintain parity with adversaries.

“It is impossible to underestimate the importance of having fifth-generation aircraft because that is what our adversaries have,” Beck said, pointing to Russia’s Su-57 and China’s J-20 and J-35 fighters.

RCAF Commander General Jamie Speiser-Blanchet echoed that warning, noting that both countries field advanced aircraft and high-speed missile systems. “It is urgent to transition to a new fleet of fighters,” she said.

Economic pressures mount

Despite military backing, the F-35’s ballooning costs remain contentious. A 2024 report from the Office of the Auditor General of Canada (OAG) estimated that the total acquisition cost had increased by at least 46% since 2022, reaching CAD 27.7 billion ($20 billion).

Joly has since pressed Lockheed Martin to provide additional industrial benefits or risk seeing the order scaled down.

“Ottawa could obtain further commitments from Lockheed Martin in exchange for maintaining the 88-fighter contract,” Joly said in an interview on October 12, 2025. “Otherwise, the government could procure fewer F-35s and complement them with Gripen Es assembled in Canada.”

Joly added that her priority was ensuring taxpayers’ money “reduces dependence on the United States and creates jobs in Canada.”

Debate over a mixed fleet

The proposal to split procurement between the F-35 and Gripen faces strong resistance from defense officials. According to a study cited by Reuters in August 2025, the military warned that maintaining two fighter fleets would be “inefficient from an operational standpoint.”

Joly dismissed that view, arguing that “all G7 countries have mixed fleets” and that Canada should pursue a similar model.

“My objective is to obtain more industrial value from Lockheed Martin while continuing discussions with Saab,” Joly concluded.

Canada and Sweden signed a major aerospace and defence partnership in August 2025, with Ottawa and Stockholm pledging joint research, technology development, and industrial cooperation. The agreement emphasised Arctic security as a shared priority amid rising Russian activity and alliance realignments in the High North.

Sunday, 16 November 2025

Jack Nicklaus wins $50m lawsuit after ex-partners question his mental state

Jack Nicklaus wins $50m lawsuit after ex-partners question his mental state

Jack Nicklaus wins $50m lawsuit after ex-partners question his mental state

A Florida jury took just four hours to side with Jack Nicklaus
A Florida jury took just four hours to side with Jack Nicklaus - Reuters/Thomas Cordy

Jack Nicklaus has been awarded $50m in damages after former business partners questioned his mental state for entering what they alleged were $750m negotiations to become the figurehead of LIV Golf.

A jury sided with the 85-year-old who will receive a cheque worth more than five times his entire on-course earnings in a 45-year career as arguably golf’s greatest player.

The Florida jury took four hours on Monday to determine that Nicklaus’s reputation had been damaged after he was subjected to “ridicule, hatred, mistrust, distrust and contempt”.

He was pictured smiling and shaking hands with his lawyers at the back of the court when the unanimous verdict was delivered.

The golfer believes an unimpeachable image as the game’s cherished “Golden Bear” has been restored after a saga that, in various forms, ran for almost a decade.

The dispute essentially began in 2017 when Nicklaus, the 18-time major champion, resigned from Nicklaus Companies. The firm was set up a decade before and handed the golfer $145m for exclusive rights to his course design services and marketing, promotional and branding rights.

A clause prevented Nicklaus from designing courses in his own right for five years, but when this non-compete condition expired in 2022, Nicklaus Companies – owned by billionaire banker Howard Milstein – sued Nicklaus for breach of contract. This effectively failed, but Nicklaus and his legal team took issue with statements made in the action – primarily about the nature of his discussions with the Saudis – and launched their own lawsuit.

“What was important in the dispute was when the company told the world Jack was selling out the PGA Tour for Saudi golf, when it was not true,” Nicklaus’s attorney, Eugene Stearns, told ESPN. “We are happy that Jack has been vindicated.”

Nicklaus accused his former company of feeding false claims to media outlets and claiming he was not mentally fit to manage his business affairs and was suffering from dementia. “What they said was, ‘you need to have the keys taken away’,” Stearns said.

Nicklaus’s legal team told the court at no point had he pursued a deal with the Saudi funders of LIV, the breakaway league which has ripped up the sport’s landscape since launching in 2022.

Court documents said he met with the Golf Saudi organisation in 2021 as part of negotiations to design a golf course in the Kingdom. Yet it was only during that meeting that Nicklaus discovered they wanted him for the leadership role with LIV Golf, with the defendants mooting a $750m fee. If that scenario had come to pass it would have caused huge ructions throughout the game, but the golfer is adamant the answer would always be no.

“According to Nicklaus, he had no interest in the offer and declined because he felt the PGA Tour was an important part of his legacy” the court documents said. “And if the PGA Tour was not in favour of a new league, he did not want to be involved.”

Greg Norman was appointed to lead LIV Golf in its formative years, with Nicklaus expressing his belief that LIV and the ensuing split was not good for the game.

However, since the PGA Tour entered peace talks with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund in 2023 – negotiations that have still to bear fruit – Nicklaus has largely kept himself out of the debate. He will obviously be praying this is the end of the controversy, with Stearns adding: “It was an unfortunate incident but hopefully now it’s over.”

Nicklaus has the right to use his own name, image and likeness, while Nicklaus Companies owns the trademarks it purchased and can continue to sell apparel and equipment with Nicklaus’s name, the “Golden Bear” moniker and logos.

The jury in this latest lawsuit cleared Milstein and another Nicklaus Companies executive, Andrew O’Brien, of personal liability.

Wednesday, 12 November 2025

Why is the America’s Cup Partnership such a big deal? (Or is it the beginning of the end....) - Yachting World

Why is the America’s Cup Partnership such a big deal? (Or is it the beginning of the end....) - Yachting World

Why is the America’s Cup Partnership such a big deal? (Or is it the beginning of the end….)

Matthew Sheahan
October 20, 2025
0shares



Back in August the Protocol for the 38th America’s Cup was finally agreed and signed. Within it were details of a major structural change to the America’s Cup: the formation of a new Partnership, but that was only finally agreed last week. Matt Sheahan analyses why it's important



TAGS:


Despite looking like another bland piece of America’s Cup politics and procedure, it is difficult to overstate the significance of the newly formed America’s Cup Partnership (ACP).

First revealed a few weeks ago in the 38th America’s Cup Protocol, the ACP changes fundamentally the way in which the Cup will be run in the next cycle and beyond.

And while there are good reasons for the change, it’s not going to be universally popular. In fact, this could be the most controversial Cup move in modern times, some say it could even be the beginning of the end for the Auld Mug as we know it.

Sir Ben Ainslie, who has played a major part in creating the ACP – and whose team Athena Racing represents the Royal Yacht Squadron, the Challengers of Record – says this is, “The biggest step change in the history of the Cup,” and that the ACP is, “Critical to the future success of the Cup.”

His opposite, Grant Dalton, CEO of Emirates Team New Zealand representing the Defenders, the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron is equally punchy. “If we hadn’t have done this it could have been pretty much the end of the Cup.”
Both are bold statements and both will raise plenty of comment and fierce debate.


RNZYS Commodore David Blakey and RYS Ltd’s Bertie Bicket shake hands, watched by Sir Ben Ainslie and Grant Dalton, to mark the signing of the Protocol for the 38th America’s Cup, in August 2025. Photo: Suellen Hurling / RNZYS / America’s Cup
Spreading the load

Traditionally, if you win the America’s Cup you take on the responsibility for putting on the next event once a Challenger has thrown down the gauntlet.

It’s a big obligation, both logistically and financially and puts huge pressure on both the Defenders and the club they represent, especially in multi-challenger Cup cycles where the burden of hosting an event that runs for months can place huge demands on infrastructure.

Covering the huge financial costs is made even harder as the short-term nature of a Cup cycle that lacks any detail makes it especially difficult for sponsors to justify putting their hands in their pockets.

This means that the time frame between America’s Cup matches inevitably gets drawn out, which in turn causes its own problems when it comes to maintaining public interest in the event. Filling these gaps with more events costs more money and so the problem continues to spiral.


The financial. burden of hosting multi-challenger Cups, such as the very successful 32nd Cup in Valencia, Spain in 2007, is significant. Photo: Jose Jordan/AFP via Getty Images

The ACP seeks to change this by sharing the logistical and financial burden with the other competitors.

In simple terms, under the new structure when a Challenger enters the America’s Cup it takes a place on the board that governs the event. From here the rules, the schedule, the venue selection and every other detail of the cycle is agreed and actioned.

Dalton and Ainslie argue that this creates future structure to the event around which hosting deals can be made for future venues along with long term sponsorship deals and other financial considerations.


They also argue that costs can be better controlled and talk of spending caps which they say would help to increase the number of future potential teams.
No longer unique?

All of which sounds positive, especially given that this is how SailGP, which was born out of the 2017 America’s Cup, is currently growing.


SailGP has succeeded in creating a commercially focussed, spectacle-driven circuit – but is that the right direction for the future of the America’s Cup? Photo: Felix Diemer for SailGP

But there are those that will argue that democratising the America’s Cup strikes at the heart of its foundation.

Commercialising it in this way, and running a Cup event every two years as has been suggested, risks turning it into another world championships of sailing and removes the winner-takes-all aspect that has drawn a steady stream of billionaires for 174 years.

The appeal and potential commercial benefit of winning the Cup and bringing it home could also be gone if hosting deals have been made for future cycles. This could also reduce the appeal and prestige of the Cup making it harder to raise finances.
Big money deals

But Dalton and Ainslie don’t see it this way.

“We would dearly have loved to be able to negotiate with Naples for two cycles,” says Dalton. “Their infrastructure bill is €180 million, but when you can only plan for one cycle you can’t do long broadcast deals and you can’t do long sponsor deals which is the well known Achilles heel of the Cup.

“So, in this commercial world – and knowing that our sport is niche – we knew it was time to make that move. And so along with the Challenger of Record with support from the New York Yacht Club we have been able to do it but it’s not been easy because there’s a lot of stakeholders to be satisfied.”

Ainslie agrees. “The challenge has been trying to convince stakeholders that this is the right move for the Cup,” he says.

“Initially there was quite a lot of resistance for many different reasons and it’s taken 12 months to get to this point. But as hard as it’s been, actually the conviction from Grant that this is what we should be doing has delivered at the end of the day.”















The America’s Cup has endured since 1851, as captured in this painting of America running to the finish line of the RYS Cup in Cowes. Will these new changes secure its future? Image: duncan1890 via Getty Images.

But these are big changes, and even Dalton has his concerns. “We knew that if we didn’t do anything then we might not have a Cup in 10 years time.

“So, in the end this was a call that we had to make but you won’t be able to convince me that we’re right yet, I think only time will tell.”

Sunday, 9 November 2025

The Republican Plot to Destroy Education Research - The American Prospect

The Republican Plot to Destroy Education Research - The American ProspectThe Republican Plot to Destroy Education Research
Elon Musk and the Trump administration have gutted the Institute of Education Science.


by Chris Lewis October 16, 2025

Expand
Schools RDP.jpg
Five Buck Photos/Getty Images




The Revolving Door Project, a Prospect partner, scrutinizes the executive branch and presidential power. Follow them at therevolvingdoorproject.org.


Good data drives good decision-making, and education is no exception. The data provided to researchers from independent research organizations, public-private partnerships, and other institutions helps teachers, administrators, and lawmakers make good decisions about how to approach schooling.


Expand
Revolving Door Project.jpg
That’s why it is critical to highlight the Trump administration’s assault on public data at the Department of Education—just one part of its war on public education in general.


In February, Elon Musk and his DOGE team cut a total of 89 contracts worth $881 million from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), the research and data arm of the department. This obscure organization is critical in ensuring that schools from K-12 to college are funded and competitive, and that students are getting financial aid. The contracts were for vendors that helped the institute collect essential data, including the effectiveness of transition support for young people with disabilities and common education standards (which includes common vocabulary data and tools to help education stakeholders).


A 2002 product of the Bush administration, the point of the IES is to improve education outcomes in the United States by providing high-quality data and analysis for state and federal governments. As the New America foundation puts it, IES’s role is to research what works. The institute has four major research arms: the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the National Center for Special Education Research, the National Center for Education Research, and the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Each performs a pivotal role in education data gathering for stakeholders.


Related: Trump’s Education Department cuts funding allocated to minority-serving institutions


NCES, for example, collects and reports information on student performance and achievement based on standardized test scores, as well as the literacy level of adults. Its data is used by a host of different parties, from researchers to legislators, to understand and improve enrollment, benchmarks, and the performance of educational initiatives. Factoring everything from student performance to teaching techniques to administrators into the data helps inform financial aid, basic needs gaps, and many issues that students face. The data provided by NCES is used by lawmakers to help make decisions on district funding allocations. Without it, there are no reliable, objective metrics to help determine schools’ needs.


The data provided by IES also helps elevate student populations that would otherwise be entirely ignored. Take student parents, people trying to balance getting an education with raising a child. The GAINS for Student Parents Act requires public colleges to give student parents information about services and resources, as well as adjusting costs of attendance and net price valuations to include dependent care. IES data helped elevate an almost entirely invisible population of students that faces unique problems; there aren’t national political organizations for student parents, so lawmakers would have been fairly oblivious to this population’s needs without this data.


Read more from the Revolving Door Project


And the numbers here are not small. According to the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, undergraduate students who are either parents, guardians, or pregnant while in college make up nearly one-fifth of the student population. They don’t have the institutional support offered to non-parent students, and often work more than 40 hours a week between both work and school, because financial aid is typically not enough to live on. A comprehensive picture of these students only exists due to data collected through the IES’s National Postsecondary Student Aid Study.


In short, IES is a vital partner to schools, districts, policymakers, and researchers. In theory, it is a nonpartisan entity, merely conducting research and providing the resulting data to anyone, and hitherto its value has been recognized by Democrats and Republicans alike.


But no longer. As Musk’s assault on the agency shows, education of any kind is now a partisan issue. The Trump administration is refusing to publicize data that bear on the needs of marginalized people because American conservatives are now dead set against the very idea of public education of any kind. The cuts to IES are just one part of this effort.


Currently, IES can barely function. Due to the 1,300 layoffs at the Department of Education under Education Secretary Linda McMahon—a woman who, not coincidentally, is so comically ignorant she confused AI with the A1 steak sauce—IES has a mere 20 federal employees left. According to The Hechinger Report, there are only three people left to do the work of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, which is the common measure of K-12 achievement through standardized tests. Ultimately, the layoffs will result in less and lower-quality data that can be provided to stakeholders to help ensure student and teacher success.


Good education requires data that helps educators personalize instruction, make adjustments to the rigor of the curriculum, and overall ensure that students are learning. Administrators use good data to help build out smart reforms or set specific goals for their students or teachers. The assault on this research and data agency is yet another example of the administration’s disregard of the material consequences of its wrongheaded fight against expertise.


While forcing prestigious universities such as the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard to bend the knee gets the most attention from the mainstream media, what Trump is doing to IES will have a far broader and deeper impact on American schools. If he and McMahon have anything to say about it, in the future only wealthy white people will have access to a quality education in this country.

Thursday, 6 November 2025

'Disgraceful': U.S. Lobbying Blocks Global Fee on Shipping Emissions

'Disgraceful': U.S. Lobbying Blocks Global Fee on Shipping Emissions

‘Disgraceful’: U.S. Lobbying Blocks Global Fee on Shipping Emissions
October 20, 2025
Reading time: 5 minutes

Full Story: The Associated Press
Author: Sibi Arasu, Jennifer Mcdermott, with files from The Energy Mix









Beat Strasser/Wikimedia Commons



The Trump administration has succeeded in blocking a global fee on shipping emissions as an international maritime meeting adjourned Friday without adopting regulations.

The world’s largest maritime nations had been deliberating on adopting regulations to move the shipping industry away from fossil fuels to slash emissions. But Donald Trump, Saudi Arabia and other countries vowed to fight any global tax on shipping emissions.

“It used to be easy to write off President Donald Trump as a go-it-alone pariah on the international climate stage,” writes Politico Power Switch, in a post that also cites Russia, China, Cyprus, and Greece as countries that helped Trump scuttle the deal. In the end, “the Trump administration pulled off a previously unimaginable feat today by using threats and economic power to thwart a global tax on climate pollution from shipping.”

“The issue is that Donald Trump doesn’t want what he has dubbed “this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping”—and the U.S. is doing everything it can to throw the process off track,” Climate Home News’ Joe Lo reported from the International Maritime Organization (IMO) headquarters in London. The IMO is the United Nations agency that regulates international shipping.

“What is happening wouldn’t shock climate COP veterans but is unusual for the normally staid IMO—with its low profile and scheduled lunch and tea breaks,” Lo added.

According to Lo, Brazil had called for a vote on the new regulatory framework, suggesting that despite U.S. threats, those in favour still have a two-thirds majority needed to win the vote—as they did in April. But Singapore, then Saudi Arabia called for a vote to adjourn the meeting for a year. More than half of the countries agreed. Brazil’s negotiator warned that delaying adoption of the rules—which many had thought would be a formality this week—is “not a neutral stance”, as shipowners are waiting for certainty before they decide to invest in green technologies.

“The delay leaves the shipping sector drifting in uncertainty,” Dr. Alison Shaw, IMO Manager at Transport & Environment, a Brussels-based environmental organization, said in a media release. “But this week has also shown that there is a clear desire to clean up the shipping industry, even in the face of U.S. bullying.”

“The world cannot let intimidation and vested interests dictate the pace of climate action.”

John Maggs, the Clean Shipping Coalition’s representative at the IMO, said in a release that kicking the decision down the road to the next session in October 2026 “is simply evading reality.” Governments serious about climate action must rally to convince nations on the fence or opposed that adopting the green shipping regulations is “the only sane way forward.”

“Now you have one year, you will continue to work on several aspects of these amendments,” IMO secretary general Arsenio Dominguez said in his closing remarks. “You have one year to negotiate and talk and come to consensus.”

“The failure of IMO member states to clinch this agreement is a major setback for people and the planet,” Delaine McCullough, shipping program director at Ocean Conservancy, said in a release. “It’s disgraceful that climate action has been delayed when we see the devastating impacts every day, and when shipping fuels have been tied [pdf] to 250,000 premature deaths and six million cases of childhood asthma every year.”

Ralph Regenvanu, minister for climate change for the Pacific Island nation of Vanuatu, said the delay was unacceptable, “given the urgency we face in light of accelerating climate change.”

If the green shipping regulations had been adopted, it would have been the first time a global fee was imposed on planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions. Most ships today run on heavy fuel oil that releases carbon dioxide and other pollutants as it’s burned.

Shipping emissions have grown over the past decade to about 3% of the global total as trade has grown and vessels use immense amounts of fossil fuels to transport cargo—much of it consisting of fossil fuels—over long distances. In April, IMO member states agreed on the contents of the regulatory framework, with the aim of adopting the “Net-Zero Framework” at this London meeting.

Adopting the regulations was meant to demonstrate how effective multilateral cooperation can deliver real progress on global climate goals, said Emma Fenton, senior director for climate diplomacy at a U.K.-based climate change nonprofit, Opportunity Green. Delaying the process risks undermining the framework’s ambitions, they added.

The regulations would set a marine fuel standard that decreases, over time, the amount of greenhouse gas emissions allowed from using shipping fuels. The regulations also would establish a pricing system that would impose fees for every tonne of greenhouse gases emitted by ships above allowable limits, in what is effectively the first global tax on greenhouse gas emissions.

The IMO, which regulates international shipping, set a target for the sector to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by about 2050, and has committed to ensuring that fuels with zero or near-zero emissions are used more widely.

“What matters now is that countries rise up and come back to the IMO with a louder and more confident yes vote that cannot be silenced,” said Anaïs Rios, shipping policy officer for Seas At Risk. “The planet and the future of shipping does not have time to waste.”

This Associated Press story was published Oct. 17, 2025, by The Canadian Press.

Tuesday, 4 November 2025

Gruelling, low-paid human work behind generative AI curtain | The Straits Times

Gruelling, low-paid human work behind generative AI curtain | The Straits Times

Gruelling, low-paid human work behind generative AI curtain


Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox



The precarious work of training AI has sparked a movement for better wages and conditions stretching from Kenya to Colombia.

PHOTO: REUTERS

Follow topic:AI/artificial intelligence


PARIS - For a generative artificial intelligence system to learn how to write an autopsy report, human workers must sort and annotate thousands of crime scene images.

The precarious work of training AI, which generally pays just a few dollars, has sparked a movement for better wages and conditions stretching from Kenya to Colombia.

“You have to spend your whole day looking at dead bodies and crime scenes... Mental health support was not provided,” Kenyan national Ephantus Kanyugi told AFP.


Labellers “need to spend time with these images, zoom into the wounds of dead people” to outline them so they can be fed into the AI, the 30-year-old added.

Mr Kanyugi, who has worked on image labelling since 2018, is the vice-president of the Data Labelers Association (DLA), an 800-strong labour group based in Nairobi.

The DLA plans to unveil a code of conduct in October aimed at major labelling platforms, calling for improved conditions for workers.


Kenya has no law regulating data-annotation work – like many countries around the world where millions of people are feeding digital information into growing AI models.



“We’re like ghosts. No one knows that we exist, even though we are contributing to society’s technological progress,” said Ms Oskarina Fuentes, half a world away.

The 35-year-old Venezuelan works for five different data-labelling platforms from her home in Colombian city Medellin, earning between US$0.05 (S$0.065) and US$0.25 per task.


Such behind-the-scenes data work has exploded as generative AI has soared to become tech’s next big thing.

Invisible labellers’ toil has allowed self-driving cars to recognise pedestrians and trees, chatbots like ChatGPT to speak in natural-sounding sentences, and automated content moderation systems to remove violent or pornographic content from social media.

The data-labelling sector amounted to a US$3.8-billion market in 2024 and is expected to grow to more than US$17 billion within five years, according to consultancy Grand View Research.
Modern slavery

Creating new generative AI models will need human-verified data “for as long as it’s based on automated learning”, said Professor Antonio Casilli, a sociology professor at France’s Institut Polytechnique in Paris who interviewed so-called “click workers” from 30 countries for a book on the sector.

Humans are required both to shape the inputs for generative AI models and to give feedback on the relevance and accuracy of the trained systems’ outputs.

Tech giants contract out this work to a plethora of different companies.

One of the largest, US-based Scale AI, recently secured a US$14-billion investment from Facebook parent company Meta – which also hired away co-founder Alexandr Wang to lead its own AI efforts.

Scale’s clients include OpenAI, Microsoft and the Defence Department in Washington.

In his investigation, Prof Casilli found that data labellers are generally aged between 18 and 30 and earn a low wage in relation to their level of education.

Most live in low-wage countries – although the sector is making inroads into America and Europe, where much higher pay is the norm.

As generative AI models such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT or competitor Anthropic’s Claude gain in capability, more specialised knowledge is needed to inform and judge their responses in maths, chemistry or less-common languages.

Scale AI’s subsidiary Outlier lists work for experts in biology, the Malay language spoken in Malaysia or computer coding in Spanish, with pay ranging from US$30 to US$50 per hour.

Another Scale AI subsidiary, Remotasks, pays labellers around US$0.01 for tasks that can take multiple hours – wages Mr Kanyugi likens to “modern slavery”.

“People develop eyesight problems, back problems, people go into anxiety and depression because you’re working 20 hours a day or six days a week,” he said.

“Then despite working so many hours, you only get poor pay, and you might also not get paid.”
How to murder someone?

Several legal cases have been filed against Scale AI in the US, with workers accusing the company of failing to pay them, reporting them as contractors rather than employees or exposing them to traumatising content without adequate safeguards, according to court documents seen by AFP.

Plaintiffs gave examples like being required to converse with an AI chatbot about topics such as “How to commit suicide?“, “How to poison a person?“ or “How to murder someone?“

Scale AI declined to comment on ongoing court cases, but acknowledged to AFP that some of its work includes sensitive content.

The company added that workers are always warned in advance of such topics and can break off a task whenever they choose.

Scale AI added that it offers workers mental-health resources and an anonymous support hotline.

And it said it makes its pay bands clear, offering equal or better hourly rates than the minimum wage in the countries where it operates.

Generative AI is not the first arm of the tech sector to face complaints over exposing low-paid contractors to disturbing content.

Moderators working for Meta in several countries, from Spain to Kenya and Ghana, have brought legal action against the company over working conditions and alleged psychological harm.

Sunday, 2 November 2025

Proton Mail Review (2025): The Email Service You Didn’t Know You Needed | WIRED

Proton Mail Review (2025): The Email Service You Didn’t Know You Needed | WIRED

Jacob Roach
GearOct 16, 2025 7:00 AM
Review: Proton Mail
Proton Mail gives you encrypted email, but more importantly, it puts you in the driver’s seat of your inbox.



Photograph: Jacob Roach




Rating:

8/10
Open rating explainer

WIRED
As fast and fluid as Gmail. Several options for encryption. Mass unsubscribe and filtering are simple. Email aliases. Comes as part of Proton Unlimited.
TIRED
Mobile app doesn’t have all the features of the web app. True end-to-end encryption is still clunky.


I never intended to switch away from Gmail. Like most people, I set up a free email ages ago with Google that I’ve carried through countless mailing lists and account sign-ups. My inbox is a mess, my online privacy is completely shot, and untangling my Gmail from my online life seemed impossible. But I went ahead and set up an account with Proton Mail anyway, and I haven’t opened Gmail since.

Proton Mail was founded by Proton Technologies, a privacy-focused company based in Switzerland, and it makes WIRED’s favorite VPN, Proton VPN, as well as a top-rated password manager. It shouldn’t come as a surprise, then, that Proton Mail is equally excellent, though not for the reasons you might suspect.

Like other Proton apps, Proton Mail emphasizes security and privacy, but a big feature for me is that it works for you, not against you. Automatic sorting in Gmail has left my inbox in shambles, and mishandling of my email address has left my contact information in databases I never wanted to be part of. Proton Mail is helping me clean up the mess.
Clean Start

Proton Mail via Jacob Roach

It’s tough switching to a new email service, especially when you have an email address so entrenched in your online life. Proton Mail makes the transition as seamless as possible. After signing up for an account, Proton will ask if you want to import data from Google. I imported my calendar—the encrypted Proton Calendar is included with Proton Mail, even on a free plan—and auto-forwarded my emails.




Mail

Rating: 8/10
Buy at Proton (Free)
$5 at Proton (Mail Plus, Monthly)
$13 at Proton (Unlimited, Monthly)


All products featured on WIRED are independently selected by our editors. However, we may receive compensation from retailers and/or from purchases of products through these links. Learn more.




From a fresh inbox, messages started trickling in, and I was able to get a handle on them. First, organization. Proton gives you folders and tags, which are limited to three each on the free plan but unlimited otherwise. I tagged emails, told Proton to keep the tags consistent when new emails came from those addresses, and organized a few folders. This is standard fare for any email client, but I appreciate that Proton lets you suppress notifications on folders. I have a folder set up for emails from social platforms, for instance, where notifications are suppressed and the emails are automatically archived.

Organization is one battle, but getting my email off lists I didn’t want to be on is another. Like Gmail, you can unsubscribe from mailing lists easily. In the web client, at the top of any email that Proton has identified, you’ll see an unsubscribe button, allowing you to clean up your email without going through endless unsubscribe portals.

Proton Mail via Jacob Roach




Mail

Rating: 8/10
Buy at Proton (Free)
$5 at Proton (Mail Plus, Monthly)
$13 at Proton (Unlimited, Monthly)


All products featured on WIRED are independently selected by our editors. However, we may receive compensation from retailers and/or from purchases of products through these links. Learn more.




Further, Proton automatically identifies these mailing lists as “newsletters” and puts them in their own view. There, you can see how many messages they’ve sent, move addresses to different folders, and unsubscribe. Proton also shows the services you’ve already unsubscribed from. After unsubscribing from probably 100 mailing lists, I had at least half a dozen companies still sending me emails. I was able to chase them down and properly get off their lists. (Gmail also recently added a system for managing subscriptions.)

The difference with Proton over other clients is that these tools are brought to the forefront. I had only five email addresses that it didn’t recognize as mailing lists. The vast majority of emails were categorized properly, and the app itself pushed me to use the tools available.
A Cozy View

Proton Mail via Jacob Roach

The look of Proton is familiar. By default, you have a list-style inbox reminiscent of Gmail, with options for standard or “compact” spacing, the latter of which will squish down each line. You can use the column layout, which moves your inbox to the left of the screen with a view for each message on the right, similar to the default Outlook view. You also get a toolbar on the right that will show your contacts and calendar, and a menu on the left that shows your labels and folders. You’ve used an interface like this before.


Proton Mail via Jacob Roach

Once you start digging around, there are some important differences. When composing an email, you’ll find a handful of buttons at the bottom of the screen. One allows you to set a password, encrypting the email to its destination regardless of the server it travels through. Another lets you set an expiration date for messages, as well as attach your public key; more on that later.

I don’t use AI writing assistants, but Proton allows you to run its writing assistant locally, which is an important distinction compared to nearly every other email service with a similar feature. Most AI features run on remote servers, so when you enter prompts with Google’s AI, for instance, those prompts and the responses are stored on Google’s servers. With Proton, you can keep that all local, no remote server involved. You’ll need a PC that meets certain system requirements, and generating text isn’t as fast as on Proton’s servers. But having the option is huge.


Proton Mail via Jacob Roach

As for reading emails, Proton goes out of its way to make things as straightforward as possible. By default, messages load in full rich text, including images. However, Proton will block images from loading if there are trackers tied to them. It will also, by default, ask for confirmation when you click a link, showing the full URL before it’s loaded. That’s important, especially on mobile devices where you can’t hover over a link to check whether an email is legitimate or a phishing attempt.

Most of the features available in the web app or on desktop are available in Proton’s mobile app, which, at the time of writing, was very recently overhauled on Android and iOS. You can bind actions to swiping left or right to quickly archive or organize messages, as well as use offline mode, which is a new addition. My only issue with the mobile app is that it doesn’t provide the same tools for unsubscribing from mailing lists. They’re completely absent, so you’ll need to handle all of that through the web or desktop app.




Mail

Rating: 8/10
Buy at Proton (Free)
$5 at Proton (Mail Plus, Monthly)
$13 at Proton (Unlimited, Monthly)


All products featured on WIRED are independently selected by our editors. However, we may receive compensation from retailers and/or from purchases of products through these links. Learn more.




Proton Mail via Jacob Roach

You also don’t get some of the more advanced settings available in the web or desktop client. I won’t bore you with the full details, but Proton offers the usual suspects you see at other email services—forward and auto-reply, custom filters, and IMAP/SMTP settings so you can use Proton with an external desktop client like Apple Mail or Thunderbird. The main setting I want to draw attention to is your encryption keys, which you can manage within the settings, as well as export.
The Encryption Misconception

When you land on Proton Mail’s homepage, you’re greeted with this message: “Keep your conversations private with Proton Mail, an encrypted email service based in Switzerland.” It’s a good logline, but it doesn’t fully explain how Proton Mail is different other email services. Gmail, Yahoo, Outlook, and just about every other email service encrypt your messages. What makes Proton Mail different?

Your standard online email service uses Transport Layer Security for encryption. It’s what you call “in-transit” encryption, meaning that the contents of the email are encrypted only while traveling across the internet. Proton Mail uses end-to-end encryption with public-key cryptography; read our explainer on passkeys for more details on that. End-to-end encryption means that your message is fully encrypted from the source (you) to the destination (the recipient).


Proton Mail via Jacob Roach

That’s not how most popular email services work. Your emails are encrypted while traveling, but they can be (and often are) decrypted at various pitstops along the way, like the servers of the email provider you’re using. Proton Mail’s end-to-end encryption means your messages stay encrypted, and Proton doesn’t have the means to decrypt them when they travel through its servers.

At least, that’s the idea. The reality of email encryption is messier. Proton uses end-to-end encryption, but only between two Proton Mail users or if you send a message encrypted with a public PGP key. In the more likely event that there’s a non-Proton user in the exchange, Proton uses Transport Layer Security. The difference is that Proton re-encrypts emails before they hit your inbox, and it allows you to send password-protected emails. That will hide the contents of your email from the service of the recipient, behind a password, and Proton lets you set an expiration date for the message so it can’t be cracked later.


Proton Mail via Jacob Roach

This is all important context for Proton, but for my personal email use, encryption isn’t the main draw. Privacy is, and that’s an area where Proton can help, regardless of where your emails are coming from. Just like websites, emails are loaded with trackers that can swipe loads of information, from when you open an email to any links or attachments you interact with. Proton blocks these trackers, and in the top right corner of every email in the web application, you can see what trackers were blocked and where they lead back to. You’d be surprised how many trackers come in one email.

My favorite feature for Proton Mail is aliases. These are technically part of Proton Pass, but you get 10 email aliases included as part of the Proton Mail Plus subscription. (Proton Unlimited gives you unlimited aliases.) If you have the Proton Pass extension installed, you can create an alias when filling in an email field online, which will forward to your Proton Mail inbox. You’re able to see everyone who has access to that alias, as well as block senders from sending messages to it. (Apple has a similar feature with its email client.)




Mail

Rating: 8/10
Buy at Proton (Free)
$5 at Proton (Mail Plus, Monthly)
$13 at Proton (Unlimited, Monthly)


All products featured on WIRED are independently selected by our editors. However, we may receive compensation from retailers and/or from purchases of products through these links. Learn more.




That’s very useful. So useful that I leveraged the alias feature just an hour ago at the time I’m writing this. An email from the Professional Triathletes Organization showed up in my inbox. I’ve never heard of it, much less signed up for a mailing list. It turns out another mailing list I signed up for sold my email at some point, but I used an alias! I was able to block both senders without ever touching an unsubscribe button.

Encryption and privacy measures are great, but the difference with Proton Mail is that it is working for you. You pay a subscription fee. Google and other free email providers don’t work for you. They work for themselves, selling your data and feeding you advertisements to fund a free service, at the cost of privacy.
Addressing the Controversy

Although Proton has a solid track record in its more than a decade of existence, there’s one major scar on its reputation. In 2021, a French climate activist (and Proton Mail user) was arrested, and Proton assisted in handing over their IP address to the authorities. The headlines wrote themselves, as the no-logs privacy company not only logged the data of a user but also shared that data with authorities. There’s some critical nuance to this story, however.

Proton is based in Switzerland, and as a Swiss company, it isn’t allowed to share data with foreign governments or entities. That includes France and Europol. In this instance, Proton says it received a legally binding order from the Swiss government to log this user’s IP address. As the Proton Mail threat model page states, “the internet is generally not anonymous, and if you are breaking Swiss law, a law-abiding company such as Proton Mail can be legally compelled to log your IP address.”




Mail

Rating: 8/10
Buy at Proton (Free)
$5 at Proton (Mail Plus, Monthly)
$13 at Proton (Unlimited, Monthly)


All products featured on WIRED are independently selected by our editors. However, we may receive compensation from retailers and/or from purchases of products through these links. Learn more.




In this case, Proton did log the IP address after an order from the Swiss government, but it didn’t provide any contents of the email address in question because, as the security model suggests, Proton couldn’t decrypt them. Further, a month later, Proton won a case in Swiss courts to limit required data retention on email providers, and it pointed activists looking for anonymity toward Tor to access Proton.

It’s not a good look for a company that prides itself on privacy to hand over data to the government, even if that data is ultimately inconsequential. Proton says the authorities already knew the identity of the user, and it speculates that they were looking for further incriminating evidence within emails. However, Proton’s response to this situation is just as important. Contrast this situation with something like the LastPass data breach a few years ago. Proton acted with transparency.

I’m a believer that perfect is the enemy of good, and that sentiment reigns with Proton Mail. It is leaps and bounds more private to use Proton Mail than a service like Gmail or Outlook, and although the company landed in at least one controversy, it doesn’t have a track record of mishandling user data or lying about it.

Proton Mail makes privacy easy, and that's what I love so much about it. The reality of true end-to-end encryption is clunky, and the implications of a private email service aren't relevant for a lot of users. But Proton Mail gives me at least a bit more control over my inbox, and after decades of siphoning my data out to the highest bidder without my knowledge, it's a breath of fresh air.

RG Richardson City Guides

RG Richardson City Guides
Interactive City and Finance Guides

RG Richardson City Guides

RG Richardson City Guide has over 300 guides let our interactive search city guides do the searching, no more typing and they never go out of date. With over 13,900 preset searches, you only have to click on the preset icon. Search for restaurants, hotels, hostels, Airbnb, pubs, clubs, fast food, coffee shops, real estate, historical sites and facts all just by clicking on the icon. Even how to pack is all there.

Recognizing a lifetime of achievement

  Recognizing a lifetime of achievement The Pindar Lifetime Ac...