Ericsson's Q2 adjusted operating profit beats expectations
Operating profit excluding restructuring charges was 7.0 billion crowns ($728.5 million) against a year-earlier loss of 11.9 billion and a mean forecast of 6.1 billion in an LSEG poll of analysts.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
24 minutes ago
- CNA
Commentary: Lecturers need to give students clearer instructions about AI use
SINGAPORE: Imagine you are a lecturer grading students' essays about their research methods for the term project. You notice that three students mentioned using artificial intelligence in different ways. Jane used an AI tool to help format citations in APA style. Don discussed topic ideas with ChatGPT to help narrow down his research focus. Beatrice ran her draft through an AI writing assistant to catch grammatical errors before final submission. You realise that you did not explicitly address AI use in your course syllabus, and your university's policy broadly states that students must not use such tools without permission from the instructor. The three students made good-faith attempts at disclosure, but you are uncertain whether their uses violate the spirit of academic integrity. How do you proceed? This is a hypothetical scenario, but it is happening across universities. Students routinely use programmes like Grammarly without considering them AI, while lecturers may permit some tools such as citation assistance. The recent incident at Nanyang Technological University illustrates how students and lecturers can have different interpretations of what's acceptable. FAIR AND UNFAIR AI USE In recent years, artificial intelligence has advanced more rapidly than policies can keep up with, resulting in a grey area between AI use and abuse. Most universities have broad definitions on the acceptable use of AI. The University of Pennsylvania gives a simple analogy: 'In the absence of other guidance, treat the use of AI as you would treat assistance from another person. For example, this means if it is unacceptable to have another person substantially complete a task like writing an essay, it is also unacceptable to have AI to complete the task. ' Generally, the use of AI for brainstorming, drafting and idea generation is permitted, and where permitted, the explicit declaration or acknowledgement of the use of AI in assignments is also required. Unfair AI use then entails passing off AI-generated work as one's own without proper attribution, or employing it when it was explicitly prohibited to gain an unfair advantage. TASK-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES FOR AI Given the wide scope of universities' academic policies, it is up to lecturers to give instructions regarding AI use, specific to each assignment. For essays and written tasks, instructors should ensure students understand the distinction between research and writing assistance. Students should be required to disclose AI usage and show documentation to verify authentic thinking. Problem sets and technical work such as coding require a different approach. Instructors must distinguish between when AI assistance is educational and when it becomes academic dependency. In mathematics courses, for instance, AI might be permitted for checking calculations but prohibited for generating solution methods. Students can also be told to show all work steps manually and to be prepared to explain their solution process to the class. For creative and analytical assessments, instructors can tell students that AI may be used for initial inspiration and research, but that all content must be produced by students. Students in fine arts, for instance, may be allowed to utilise AI for brainstorming sessions, but must develop original pieces. Meanwhile, business students may utilise market analysis tools powered by AI, but must produce unique strategy recommendations. Lecturers can also require students to document any AI-generated ideas that influenced their work. These guidelines seek to develop each student's capability not only in critical thinking but also develop capabilities in the area of human-AI collaboration. PREVENTION OVER PUNISHMENT However, even with clear AI guidelines, there will be students tempted to use tools and software to circumvent the rules. For example, students may use 'humanising' software to disguise an AI-generated assignment to bypass detection software. Students may also use AI tools in oral exams, as current technologies allow for such apps to reside on mobile phones and communicate wirelessly to the students via discreet earpieces. Rather than play detective, institutions should focus on prevention through clear communication. This means writing unambiguous AI policies with concrete examples. Other prevention strategies include AI literacy training for faculty and students, redesigning assessments that are more focused on processes rather than answers, and verifying students' understanding through conversational assessments and in-class discussions. Universities can also consider "AI-transparent" approaches where students document their use of AI tools throughout the assignment, similar to how they cite traditional sources. This creates accountability on the students' part while avoiding the adversarial effects of detection-based enforcement. Clear AI guidelines protect the value of university degrees and prepare students for an AI-driven future. They help students develop ethical instinct, emotional intelligence and creative thinking – human skills that AI cannot replace. University graduates will likely work alongside AI tools and apps throughout their careers. The problem for universities is not about addressing the over-reliance on AI or banning it outright, but teaching students how to collaborate with AI responsibly. With clear and transparent guidelines, universities can uphold educational integrity while preparing students for an AI-enhanced world.
CNA
24 minutes ago
- CNA
TSMC quarterly profit seen hitting record but Trump tariffs, forex a concern
TAIPEI :TSMC, the world's main producer of advanced AI chips, is expected to post a 52 per cent jump in second-quarter profit to record levels on Thursday, though U.S. tariffs and a strong Taiwan dollar could weigh on its outlook. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co, the world's largest contract chipmaker and a key supplier to Nvidia and Apple, is forecast to report net profit of T$377.4 billion ($12.9 billion) for the three months through June 30, according to an LSEG SmartEstimate compiled from 21 analysts. SmartEstimates place greater weight on forecasts from analysts who are more consistently accurate. The company will report the headline profit figure at 0530 GMT which will be followed by an earnings call from 0600 GMT that will include third-quarter guidance. TSMC has already flagged a rise in second-quarter revenue of 38.6 per cent. Any profit result above T$374.68 billion would mark the company's highest-ever quarterly net income and its sixth consecutive quarter of profit growth. It remains unclear just how much U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs will affect TSMC. Taiwan was threatened with a 32 per cent reciprocal tariff rate in April but has yet to be notified of an updated figure that some countries have received. Trump also said this month that tariffs on semiconductors are likely to come soon. The company said in June that U.S. tariffs were having some indirect impact, noting they can lead to slightly higher prices, which may in turn weigh on demand. In March, TSMC announced a $100 billion investment in the U.S. alongside Trump at the White House, on top of $65 billion pledged for three Arizona plants - two of which have been built. Another key issue is the Taiwan dollar's 12 per cent appreciation against the greenback so far this year. TSMC has said a 1 per cent appreciation in the Taiwan dollar typically reduces its gross margin by 0.4 per centage points. In June, the company said that strengthening in the Taiwan dollar had shaved more than 3 per centage points off its gross margin. Shares in TSMC surged some 80 per cent last year but have climbed just 5 per cent for the year to date on worries about tariffs and unfavourable currency exchange rates.
CNA
5 hours ago
- CNA
EU unveils €2-trillion budget plan amid defence, Ukraine and farming tensions
BRUSSELS: The European Commission on Wednesday (Jul 16) unveiled a blueprint for its most ambitious long-term budget yet, a €2 trillion (US$2.3 trillion) package for 2028 to 2034 aimed at strengthening Europe's security, competitiveness and climate transition while supporting Ukraine. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the new framework would be 'more strategic, more flexible, more transparent' as the bloc faces rising trade tensions with the United States, geopolitical threats from Russia and internal pressure over farming and debt. MASSIVE BOOST FOR DEFENCE, UKRAINE AND INDUSTRY A €451-billion competitiveness fund was proposed to drive investment in clean tech, digitalisation, defence, food security and innovation. Defence and space spending would jump fivefold to €131 billion, reflecting Europe's ramp-up in military readiness. The plan also earmarks up to €100 billion to help rebuild Ukraine. 'This is a long-term commitment to Ukraine's recovery and reconstruction,' EU budget chief Piotr Serafin said. But Hungary, Russia's closest ally in the bloc, slammed the allocation. 'Ukraine would get a massive funding boost, while European farmers lose out,' said Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. FARMERS FEAR CUTS DESPITE €300B PROMISE The budget proposes €300 billion to support farmers under the common agricultural policy (CAP), sparking concerns of a drop from the current allocation of €387 billion. Of that amount, €270 billion is directly paid to farmers. Serafin defended the plan, saying farming remained a priority. But that did not appease protesters. Hundreds of farmers gathered outside EU headquarters in Brussels during the announcement, waving banners and demanding fairer treatment. 'This proposal is a provocation,' said Arnaud Rousseau, head of France's main farmers' union, FNSEA. 'If (our) message is not heard, we will return.' FRAUGHT TALKS AHEAD The announcement kicks off what is expected to be two years of difficult negotiations between the European Parliament and the EU's 27 member states. The wealthier countries are reluctant to contribute more. Adding pressure is the need to repay joint EU debts incurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. The bloc borrowed €800 billion to fund recovery and now faces annual repayments of €25 to €30 billion starting in 2028. Under the proposal, member states' contributions would rise modestly from 1.13% to 1.15% of gross national income, plus an extra 0.11% for loan repayments. The EU also hopes to generate €58 billion annually through new revenue streams such as a carbon border tax and an electronic waste levy. LAWMAKERS CRITICISE STATUS QUO Despite its size, the budget drew criticism from key members of the European Parliament. 'However you try to package this, what we have is a real-terms investment and spending freeze,' said lawmakers including Siegfried Muresan of the EPP, von der Leyen's own political group. 'It is the status quo, which the commission has always insisted is not an option,' they added.
