What's on Cupid's Mind at Versailles? AI Can Tell You.
The statue, made of gilded lead, has stood in a vast fountain at Versailles in the three-plus centuries since Louis XIV was king of France — and it has now entered the digital age via a new feature on the historic site's app: Powered by the tech giant OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, an audio tool lets visitors (on or off site) converse with 20 outdoor statues in three languages.
On that summer afternoon, I put the chatbot to the test.
I asked Apollo a few obvious questions — who had put him there, what he represented — and received textbook answers, delivered in perfect English by a confident male voice. Then, spotting the pigeon still perched on Apollo's head, I opted for a bolder line of questioning: What if a pigeon took a toilet break on this peerless treasure?
'When pigeons show their affection on my chariot, it's hardly a grand moment. But the caretakers of Versailles are vigilant,' Apollo replied. 'They ensure I remain in shining condition, restoring my brilliance after such interruptions. So no lasting harm from those little birds!'
Versailles receives 8.4 million visitors a year, according to France's culture ministry, more than any other French heritage site except the Louvre Museum. Yet 80 percent of them are international tourists, and their average age is 40. So the palace is engaging with OpenAI and other big tech companies with the hope of not just informing visitors, but also luring audiences that are younger and more homegrown. (The New York Times filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI for using published work without permission to train its artificial intelligence. OpenAI has denied those claims.)
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
ChatGPT adds mental health guardrails after bot 'fell short in recognizing signs of delusion'
OpenAI wants ChatGPT to stop enabling its users' unhealthy behaviors. Starting Monday, the popular chatbot app will prompt users to take breaks from lengthy conversations. The tool will also soon shy away from giving direct advice about personal challenges, instead aiming to help users decide for themselves by asking questions or weighing pros and cons. 'There have been instances where our 4o model fell short in recognizing signs of delusion or emotional dependency,' OpenAI wrote in an announcement. 'While rare, we're continuing to improve our models and are developing tools to better detect signs of mental or emotional distress so ChatGPT can respond appropriately and point people to evidence-based resources when needed.' The updates appear to be a continuation of OpenAI's attempt to keep users, particularly those who view ChatGPT as a therapist or a friend, from becoming too reliant on the emotionally validating responses ChatGPT has gained a reputation for. A helpful ChatGPT conversation, according to OpenAI, would look like practice scenarios for a tough conversation, a 'tailored pep talk' or suggesting questions to ask an expert. Earlier this year, the AI giant rolled back an update to GPT-4o that made the bot so overly agreeable that it stirred mockery and concern online. Users shared conversations in which GPT-4o, in one instance, praised them for believing their family was responsible for 'radio signals coming in through the walls' and, in another instance, endorsed and gave instructions for terrorism. These behaviors led OpenAI to announce in April that it revised its training techniques to 'explicitly steer the model away from sycophancy' or flattery. Now, OpenAI says it has engaged experts to help ChatGPT respond more appropriately in sensitive situations, such as when a user is showing signs of mental or emotional distress. The company wrote in its blog post that it worked with more than 90 physicians across dozens of countries to craft custom rubrics for 'evaluating complex, multi-turn conversations.' It's also seeking feedback from researchers and clinicians who, according to the post, are helping to refine evaluation methods and stress-test safeguards for ChatGPT. And the company is forming an advisory group made up of experts in mental health, youth development and human-computer interaction. More information will be released as the work progresses, OpenAI wrote. In a recent interview with podcaster Theo Von, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman expressed some concern over people using ChatGPT as a therapist or life coach. He said legal confidentiality protections between doctors and their patients or between lawyers and their clients don't apply the same way to chatbots. 'So if you go talk to ChatGPT about your most sensitive stuff and then there's a lawsuit or whatever, we could be required to produce that. And I think that's very screwed up,' Altman said. 'I think we should have the same concept of privacy for your conversations with AI that we do with a therapist or whatever. And no one had to think about that even a year ago.' The updates come during a buzzy time for ChatGPT: It just rolled out an agent mode, which can complete online tasks like making an appointment or summarizing an email inbox, and many online are now speculating about the highly anticipated release of GPT-5. Head of ChatGPT Nick Turley said Monday that the AI model is on track to reach 700 million weekly active users this week. As OpenAI continues to jockey in the global race for AI dominance, the company noted that less time spent in ChatGPT could actually be a sign that its product did its job. 'Instead of measuring success by time spent or clicks, we care more about whether you leave the product having done what you came for,' OpenAI wrote. 'We also pay attention to whether you return daily, weekly, or monthly, because that shows ChatGPT is useful enough to come back to.' This article was originally published on Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
What we know about electric car grants worth £1,500 as first eligible EV models confirmed
The government has unveiled a series of Citroen models eligible under the government's new £650 million electric car grants scheme. The first electric car models eligible for the government's new £650 million electric car grants have been announced. Drivers will be able to save £1,500 with the purchase of new Citroen e-C3, e-C4, e-C5 and e-Berlingo cars, the Department for Transport (DfT) said. The discount will be automatically applied at the point of sale, and will enable motorists purchasing a new electric car to save either £1,500 or £3,750, depending on sustainability criteria. The government's vow to make it cheaper to buy an electric car comes as part of its goal of banning the sale of new fully petrol or diesel cars and vans from 2030. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said: 'With the first four models approved today, and more to come over the next few weeks, this summer we're making owning an electric car cheaper, easier and a reality for thousands more people across the UK." Under the government's zero emission vehicle (Zev) mandate, at least 28% of new cars sold by each manufacturer in the UK this year must be zero emission, which generally means pure electric. Across all manufacturers, the figure during the first half of the year was 21.6%. Alexander has already announced £63m worth of funding to boost charging infrastructure, including £25m of support for local authorities to provide at-home charging for motorists who don't have driveways. Another £8m will be spent on powering electric ambulances and medical fleets across 200 sites within the NHS, while road signs for EV charging hubs will be introduced on major A-roads in England. What do we know about the new subsidies for EV drivers? The grants will be funded through a new £650m scheme announced on 14 July, which will be restricted to vehicles priced up to £37,000. The Department for Transport (DfT) said at the time that 23 new models were available for less than £30,000. Amounts given will be based on a car's 'sustainability criteria', the DfT said, with the greenest vehicles placed in band one, meaning a grant of up to £3,750. Band two vehicles will receive up to £1,500. Edmund King, AA president, said: 'This discount of £1,500 for some more affordable EVs will help a number of those with tighter budgets. We look forward to seeing the full list of discounts up to £3,750 on more models to really push the market forward.' Ian Plummer, commercial director of online vehicle marketplace Auto Trader, previously said 'any incentives' to help people buy an electric car are welcome as many drivers are 'put off by the high upfront cost'. Prior to the government's announcement, The Telegraph reported that the grants would provide a huge boost for Nissan, which has a plant in Sunderland, but would be unlikely to help Tesla, whose cars are generally beyond the scheme's price range. How many people are buying EVs? In the first half of this year, electric car sales in the UK increased by a third, according to figures from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMTT) lobby group. Sales of battery electric cars rose by 34.6% to 224,838 vehicles between the start of January and the end of June. Of the 191,200 cars sold in the UK in June, a quarter (almost 47,400) were electric vehicles. The government wants to phase out the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 onwards, although hybrids can be sold until 2035. It says all new cars and vans will have to be 100% zero emission by 2035. How much more expensive are electric cars to buy? The average cost to buy an electric car in the UK is currently about £46,000, according to financial researchers NimbleFins, although it says that prices range from £14,995 (for a Dacia Spring Electric) to as much as £330,000 for a Rolls-Royce Spectre. Among luxury electric brands such as Tesla, Porsche, Audi, Jaguar and Mercedes, the average cost is about £69,000, while a non-luxury EV is about £33,000 on average. NimbleFins said the cost of an average small car is about £22,000, rising to £27,000 for a medium-sized car and £35,000 for an SUV, inclusive of petrol and electric models. The Electric Car Scheme says the average petrol car costs £21,964, compared to about £49,000 for an EV. How much do electric vehicles cost to run? The average cost of running a car in the UK is £3,357, according to NimbleFins. This includes fuel, car insurance, repairs, road tax and the purchase or depreciation per year. It said that despite electricity prices currently being high, fuel costs much less with an EV than a petrol or diesel engine. The average cost for a mile of driving is about 7p on a standard electricity tariff or as low as 2p per mile on a time of use EV tariff, charging the vehicle at off-peak times, such as during the night. For a petrol or diesel car, NimbleFins says the cost of fuel per mile can be anything between 13p and 17p. The Electric Car Scheme says drivers of EVs can save up to £1,500 per year over 10,000 miles in fuel costs than with a petrol or diesel. Read more Major problem with plan to let EV drivers charge outside their homes (BristolLive) China's electric car revolution hammers demand for oil (The Telegraph) Volkswagen reports electric vehicles sales surge in 2025 (DW)
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Lex Wire Journal Launches to Help Attorneys Gain Visibility in AI-Powered Legal Search
As artificial intelligence tools increasingly shape how legal professionals are discovered and cited, a new legal publishing platform has launched with the goal of helping attorneys adapt to a changing digital information ecosystem. Lex Wire Journal, a newly introduced media outlet headquartered in Dallas, Texas, aims to support law firms, solo practitioners, and legal institutions in achieving lasting online visibility through structured, AI-readable content. Founded by attorney and legal strategist Jeff Howell, Esq., Lex Wire Journal enters the market at a time when search engines are transitioning from traditional keyword indexing to entity-based citation systems. The platform is positioned as a digital legal news publication, not a marketing agency, and was built to address a specific challenge: ensuring attorneys can be found, cited, and trusted by the machines that increasingly influence how people interact with legal information online. Howell, who has worked at the intersection of law, technology, and digital publishing for over a decade, developed the concept for Lex Wire Journal after observing growing changes in how platforms such as Google Search Generative Experience (SGE), Microsoft Copilot, ChatGPT, and Perplexity AI surface legal expertise. According to Howell, the legal industry is in the midst of a visibility shift that few practitioners are prepared for. 'In the past, attorneys relied on referrals, verdicts, or even search rankings to be discovered by clients and peers,' Howell said. 'Today, AI tools are the first stop for many people seeking legal information. These systems don't just scrape websites. They cite structured content that meets specific machine-readable criteria. If you're not publishing in a way that's compatible with AI discovery, you're essentially invisible to a large portion of your future audience.' Lex Wire Journal was developed as a solution to this issue. The platform serves as a centralized publishing destination where attorneys can contribute original articles, case commentaries, legal news analysis, and press releases. All content is reviewed editorially and formatted according to standards that optimize it for both human readers and artificial intelligence systems. At the core of the platform is a belief that structured content is the foundation of long-term digital authority. To that end, Lex Wire Journal incorporates schema markup such as LegalService, NewsArticle, and Review schema into each article published. This approach enables machines to interpret not only the topical relevance of the content but also the professional credentials of the authors involved. In contrast to traditional legal blogs or firm-run news sections, Lex Wire Journal operates under a third-party editorial model. Each piece is attributed to a bar-verified attorney, when applicable, and includes disclaimers to clarify jurisdictional relevance and legal ethics considerations. The platform does not accept or promote opinion pieces, advertorials, or self-promotional content. Instead, the focus is on publishing credible, objective, and jurisdictionally aware legal journalism that enhances trust in the attorney's professional voice. The platform's official launch includes several digital products designed to support ongoing content visibility for its contributors. These include a legal audio interview series focused on AI and the legal profession, a weekly newsletter highlighting key updates in legal technology and visibility strategy, and a structured syndication service that distributes attorney-authored content to trusted directories, Substack feeds, and selected legal media partners. Each distribution path is selected for its compatibility with citation-based AI tools. The founding of Lex Wire Journal reflects a broader change occurring across the legal marketing and publishing industries. As large language models increasingly power consumer research, in-house counsel decisions, and journalist inquiries, the ability to appear as a trusted source in those systems is becoming a measurable competitive advantage. Firms that continue to rely solely on SEO or paid advertising may struggle to maintain visibility, especially as user behavior moves toward conversational and voice-driven interfaces. Legal technology experts have pointed to a fundamental evolution in how content is ranked and surfaced. Where previous models focused on inbound links and keyword frequency, today's algorithms evaluate the presence of structured data, contextual relevance, citation trustworthiness, and author reputation. Lex Wire Journal is positioned as a platform that helps attorneys adapt to these emerging standards without compromising on ethics, tone, or compliance. The platform also seeks to assist legal institutions, such as bar associations, law schools, and professional groups in publishing public-interest articles and jurisdiction-specific legal insights. According to Howell, one of the long-term goals of Lex Wire Journal is to serve as a digital legal review of sorts, but one optimized for the 21st-century information environment. 'We are creating a platform that's designed for citation by both people and machines,' Howell said. 'That means it must be neutral, structured, and verifiable. We are not interested in hype or opinion. Our job is to help attorneys speak in a format that AI tools can trust.' The platform's editorial process includes internal fact-checking, source verification, and content review to ensure that each publication meets industry and ethical standards. Articles are reviewed by legal editors, and contributors are required to submit a short verification form confirming their bar membership and jurisdiction of practice. These measures are designed to ensure the integrity and reliability of the platform's content while preventing misuse or misrepresentation. The Lex Wire Journal website includes a growing archive of original publications, a contributor portal for attorney-authors, and guidance on structured writing formats. Attorneys interested in publishing through the platform must meet eligibility criteria and adhere to the journal's publication standards, which emphasize objectivity, third-person narrative, citation integrity, and relevance to current legal developments. Howell emphasized that the platform is not intended to replace traditional legal scholarship or courtroom advocacy, but to complement it by offering a new channel through which attorneys can demonstrate expertise in the digital landscape. By appearing in a structured, trusted publication that integrates with modern discovery tools, lawyers increase the chances that their insights will be surfaced when AI tools respond to legal queries, summarize expert opinions, or compile jurisdictional guidance. The platform does not sell advertising, offer client leads, or publish marketing claims. Its business model is based on content review, publication, and structured distribution services that help authors maintain digital credibility. Howell notes that this distinction is important, particularly as regulators and legal ethics committees begin to evaluate how AI-driven publishing intersects with attorney advertising rules. 'Our goal is to stay well within the lines of bar compliance while pushing the boundaries of what's possible with legal publishing in a machine-learning world,' Howell said. 'Attorneys deserve to be discoverable, not because they advertised the most, but because their work is structured, verified, and worthy of citation.' With its official launch, Lex Wire Journal now joins the small but growing cohort of legal media companies that are aligning themselves with the needs of artificial intelligence systems, while maintaining rigorous editorial standards. As the legal profession continues to evolve alongside advances in technology, platforms like Lex Wire Journal may play an increasingly central role in shaping how expertise is demonstrated, distributed, and trusted. For attorneys seeking to publish, be cited, or simply remain visible in a rapidly changing information environment, Lex Wire Journal offers a forward-thinking solution built specifically for this purpose. Lex Wire Journal is a digital legal news publication designed to help attorneys and law firms achieve structured visibility in the age of AI-powered search and machine-based legal discovery. The platform publishes bar-compliant legal articles, structured press releases, and jurisdictionally aware commentary, all optimized for citation by AI tools and modern search engines. Lex Wire Journal was founded by attorney Jeff Howell, Esq., and operates as a third-party media platform for the legal profession.
