6,000 coffee growers in Karnataka stand to lose plantations over unpaid loans
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
No stop the clock, no pause: EU rejects calls from Alphabet, Meta and others to stall AI regulation
The European Union has firmly rejected mounting calls from major tech companies, including Alphabet, Meta to delay the implementation of its Artificial Intelligence Act. Many big tech companies and even the several European AI firms such as ASML and Mistral asked the commission to hold on the implementation, citing high compliance costs and complex regulatory requirements. However, the EU has now made it clear that the legal timeline for rolling out the AI Act will remain seen, indeed, a lot of reporting, a lot of letters and a lot of things being said on the AI Act. Let me be as clear as possible: there is no stop the clock. There is no grace period. There is no pause,' said EU Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier at a press conference via Reuters. The Commission also emphasized the upcoming law is being adopted to ensure responsible AI development and carries legally binding deadlines which will be enforced tech companies want delay in AI ActTech and AI companies are resisting the implementation of AI rules by the EU, following concerns that the law could stifle innovation and increase costs. US-based tech giants, including Google's parent Alphabet and Facebook owner Meta, have joined European firms in urging Brussels to consider a delay. But the Commission is resolute, and has even warned the companies that delays in implementation would compromise public trust and safety. 'We have legal deadlines established in a legal text,' Regnier noted, outlining that the Act's provisions are staggered and will take effect in phases starting this EU is also planning to simplify some digital rules later in 2025, which could potentially reduce reporting obligations for smaller companies. However, the Commission has clarified that these simplifications will not affect the rollout or enforcement timeline of the AI Act itself. With the Act, the Commission wants to place guardrails around AI, which is currently a rapidly advancing technology touching nearly every sector of the is the EU AI ActThe EU Artificial Intelligence Act is described as the world's first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI. It officially entered into force on 1 August 2024. The Act includes guidelines for AI companies to follow a risk-based approach, categorising AI systems based on the level of harm they could pose. The most dangerous uses—such as manipulative behavioural prediction tools or untargeted facial recognition scraping—are outright banned under the will the AI Act be enforcedThe first set of regulations was enforced from 2 February 2025, targeting the most harmful AI practices. By 2 August 2025, obligations for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models will come into effect. For models that were already on the market before this date, providers have until August 2027 to ensure compliance. Meanwhile, rules governing high-risk AI systems—such as those used in employment, education, healthcare, or critical infrastructure—will come into force on 2 August 2026.- Ends
Economic Times
19 hours ago
- Economic Times
X withholds public access to Reuters and Reuters World accounts in India
X, formerly Twitter, withheld public access to official handles of Reuters and Reuters World in India on Sunday morning despite the ministry of electronics and information technology (MeitY) saying there's no requirement from the Government of India to withhold the two handles were withheld in India by X 'in response to a legal demand,' said a notification on the platform. On May 9, X had withheld its own Global Government Affairs (@GlobalAffairs) account within India. This occurred hours after X, through this account, had tweeted on the night of May 8 that the Indian government had directed X to block over 8,000 accounts in India. Later, X unblocked the Global Government Affairs account. 'There is no requirement from the Government of India to withhold Reuters handle. We are continuously working with X to resolve the problem,' an official spokesperson for MeitY said in a statement.X and MeitY did not respond to ET's requests for comment on the reason for withholding these accounts in the Elon Musk-owned microblogging platform has sued the Indian government in the Karnataka High Court over previous blocking orders sent by the government under a section of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 without adequate safeguards. The final hearing in the case is scheduled July 8. X has made a plea to amend its petition filed in the Karnataka High Court four months ago, making an additional demand to scrap Rule 3(1)(d) of the Information Technology Rules that empowers government agencies to order intermediaries to remove content from their platforms. The original petition, filed in March, had sought the court to declare that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, 2000 does not authorise the government to issue information blocking orders to intermediaries, or social media platforms, like X. Section 79(3)(b) provides for authorities to remove immunity from liability accorded to intermediaries if they failed to comply with orders to take down unlawful content. In conjunction with Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, it also allows them to issue takedown orders.
NDTV
a day ago
- NDTV
"Irrational": Delhi Lt Governor Slams Order On End-Of-Life Vehicles
It is irrational to imagine that a 10-year-old diesel vehicle has reached its end of life despite remaining roadworthy in Delhi, Lieutenant Governor (L-G) VK Saxena has said, as he urged Chief Minister Rekha Gupta to file a review petition in the Supreme Court against its 2018 order that banned diesel vehicles older than 10 years and petrol vehicles older than 15 years in the national capital. In a letter to Ms Gupta recently, the L-G flagged key challenges in the Commission of Air Quality Management (CAQM)'s restrictions on the movement of such vehicles on the city's roads, and raised concerns over the "inconsistencies, practical hurdles, and disproportionate socio-economic impacts" of such curbs, particularly on the middle class. He said he has received "innumerable representations, calls and messages" from citizens, public representatives and environmental experts, all of whom have questioned the feasibility and fairness of the order. The fight against air pollution is non-negotiable but its policy implementation must be "proportionate, non-arbitrary and grounded in legal and environmental rationale", he added. The Delhi government had banned fuel for end-of-life vehicles - 10 years or older for diesel vehicles and 15 years or older for petrol vehicles - that are deregistered and not allowed to ply on the roads from July 1, following a court order. On Thursday, the government requested the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to put the ban on hold with immediate effect, arguing that the fuel ban on overage vehicles is not feasible due to technological challenges. In his letter to the Chief Minister, the L-G acknowledged the efforts made by her government to ask the CAQM to pause the ban and called the order a violation of the principles of legal certainty and equal treatment. He highlighted a fundamental policy flaw in equating a vehicle's age with pollution, without accounting for its actual emission levels or mechanical fitness. Such a "blanket" approach, Mr Saxena said, may cause undue hardship to responsible vehicle owners - especially those who maintain their vehicles well or have invested in low-emission, high-end models. The L-G questioned the CAQM's directive in light of existing national laws, notably the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. He argued that the uniform application of Section 59 of the Act - which allows the central government to prescribe vehicle life - clashes with region-specific restrictions like the 10 and 15-year caps on diesel and petrol vehicles in Delhi. Besides, he underlined the economic and emotional burden the ban would place on the middle class. "For people of the middle class, buying a vehicle is an investment of hard-earned life savings," he wrote. He criticized the policy for compelling citizens to dispose of well-maintained, low-mileage vehicles at scrap value, merely because of their age and the owner's residence in the Capital. He warned that such a measure could be seen as discriminatory and regressive, with no such enforcement in other parts of the country. Mr Saxena acknowledged that vehicular pollution is indeed a contributor to Delhi's air quality crisis but argued that reforms must go beyond "rigid age-based classifications". He recommended that the policy consider factors like retrofitment, emission test outcomes, and vehicle usage patterns - particularly for newer BS-VI vehicles, which are significantly less polluting than their older counterparts. LG Saxena proposed a multi-pronged approach for the Delhi Government: File a review petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, apprising it of the range of infrastructure, transportation, and environmental initiatives taken by the city and Central governments in recent years - including metro expansion, RRTS corridors, electric vehicle policy, and massive greening efforts. Engage with the CAQM to reconsider the directive banning fuel to ELVs, and seek a temporary abeyance until the entire NCR is prepared to uniformly enforce such a policy. Request the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MORTH) to revisit the Motor Vehicles (Registration and Functions of Vehicle Scrapping Facility) Rules, 2021, in light of legal and practical concerns. Draft a comprehensive Air Pollution Mitigation Plan within months with clear timelines, investments, and sector-specific strategies - covering areas such as public transport, electric vehicle incentives, road dust mitigation, and retrofitting policies. Launch a public awareness and incentive campaign to encourage vehicle owners to convert old vehicles to cleaner fuels like CNG or electric, rather than outright scrapping. The L-G also insisted that environmental policies must be legally sound, socioeconomically sensitive, and grounded in contemporary technological realities. "It would be a travesty of justice," he concluded, "to impound and scrap vehicles that have run a few thousand kilometers and are perfectly maintained, just because of arbitrary age thresholds."
