CAIT, Meta to train 25k women traders with digital skills
The initiative aims to help women entrepreneurs build a credible online presence, showcase products, set up automated messages, and run ads on WhatsApp.The women's wing of CAIT will lead the training, according to a release.'India is home to millions of women-led businesses, and empowering them is not just the right thing to do; it is critical to unleashing our country's vast entrepreneurial potential.
'We believe that giving women across India, especially in tier 2 and tier 3 towns, the right digital skills and knowledge to fully unlock the potential of WhatsApp will not only help them grow their businesses but it will also enable them to better support and benefit their communities,' Shivanth Thukral, Vice President and Head - Public Policy at Meta in India, said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
35 minutes ago
- Mint
Short-seller Viceroy accuses Vedanta promoters of hidden stake via welfare trust
The entity under scrutiny is PTC Cables Pvt. Ltd (PTCC), which holds a 1.91% stake in Vedanta Ltd, a company with a market capitalization of ₹ 1.75 trillion, according to BSE data. PTCC is owned by Bhadram Janhit Shalika Trust (BJST), which Viceroy alleges is controlled by the Agarwal family, founders of the Vedanta Group. According to Viceroy, PTCC received ₹ 1,500 crore in dividend income from Vedanta over the past five years, and the capital was "upcycled" to promoter-linked entities. 'PTCC exists for one purpose: to quietly recycle Vedanta's cash into promoter-controlled vehicles while maintaining the illusion of independence," the Viceroy report said. Vedanta denied the allegations. 'These assertions are baseless," a spokesperson for the company said, adding that the company was compliant with the disclosure norms as stipulated by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) and the Companies Act, 2013. 'Neither BJST nor PTCC are part of the promoter group as defined under applicable regulations, and their shareholding has been transparently disclosed in public filings," the spokesperson added. A day after Viceroy released its report, JP Morgan had issued a note, telling investors not to get distracted by the allegations on corporate governance and financial management, and that the global brokerage had an Overweight rating on both Vedanta Resources Ltd and Vedanta Ltd. Viceroy's claims are based on publicly available records. In a 2009 income-tax case, BJST's correspondence address was listed as Anil Agarwal's personal residence in Mumbai. In another case, the trust's address was that of Todarwal & Todarwal, a firm linked to Arun Todarwal, who currently serves as a director on the board of Sterlite Power Grid Ventures, a Vedanta subsidiary. Todarwal has also previously served as a director on the boards of Hindustan Zinc Ltd, Sterlite Technologies, MALCO, and BALCO. The report acknowledged that no conclusive documentation of current control was available, noting that Indian trusts are subject to less stringent disclosure obligations compared to companies. Viceroy also cited unnamed former Vedanta employees who claimed that the Agarwal family's control over PTCC was an "open secret" within the company. In addition to alleging hidden promoter ownership, the report flagged governance concerns at PTCC. The company was incorporated in 1993 with the Agarwal family as shareholders and was transferred to BJST in 2017. Its current directors are Todarwal and Kannan Ramamirthan. Ramamirthan is an independent director of Hindustan Zinc, Vedanta's most profitable subsidiary. He has also previously served on the boards of other Vedanta group firms, including Talwandi Sabo Power Plant, BALCO, Sterlite Energy, and Sterlite Interlinks. Vedanta has not disclosed in its filings that PTCC—classified as a public shareholder—has directors with long-standing associations with the group. The company did not respond to a specific query on this issue. Calls and emails to Todarwal for a comment did not elicit a response. Mint could not reach Ramamirthan for a comment. Concerns about the independence of BJST and PTCC are not new. In a 2020 note, proxy advisory firm Stakeholder Empowerment Services (SES) had said that BJST was previously known as the SIL Employee Welfare Trust and was linked to Sterlite Industries Ltd, which was later merged into Vedanta. The trust was subsequently renamed as BJST. 'It is not clear as to who presently controls the BJST," SES had written. However, if the firm was under the control of Vedanta, then PTCC should be classified as a promoter shareholder, it said. Viceroy's first report on the Vedanta Group was published on 10 July, a day before Vedanta Ltd's annual general meeting (AGM). The initial report triggered a drop in the company's stock, though shares later recovered. At the AGM, shareholders reposed their faith in the company. Since the report's release, Vedanta shares have gained 2% to close at ₹ 449.75 on Tuesday. Also Read | Vedanta shareholders back firm after Viceroy report Viceroy has disclosed a short position in the bonds of Vedanta Resources, the unlisted holding company of the group, but said it has no exposure to Vedanta Ltd or any other listed Vedanta entities in India.
Economic Times
39 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Rogue bots? AI firms must pay up
When Elon Musk's xAI was forced to apologise this week after its Grok chatbot spewed antisemitic content and white nationalist talking points, the response felt depressingly familiar: suspend the service, issue an apology and promise to do better. Rinse and isn't the first time we've seen this playbook. Microsoft's Tay chatbot disaster in 2016 followed a similar pattern. The fact that we're here again, nearly a decade later, suggests the AI industry has learnt remarkably little from its mistakes. But the world is no longer willing to accept 'sorry' as sufficient. This is because AI has become a force multiplier for content generation and dissemination, and the time-to-impact has shrunk. Thus, liability and punitive actions are being discussed. The Grok incident revealed a troubling aspect of how AI companies approach accountability. According to xAI, the problematic behaviour emerged after they tweaked their system to allow more 'politically incorrect' responses - a decision that seems reckless. When the inevitable happened, they blamed deprecated code that should have been removed. If you're building systems capable of reaching millions of users, shouldn't you know what code is running in production?The real problem isn't technical - it's philosophical. Too many AI companies treat bias and harmful content as unfortunate side effects to be addressed after deployment, rather than fundamental risks to be prevented beforehand. This reactive approach worked when the stakes were lower, but AI systems now operate at unprecedented scale and influence. When a chatbot generates hate speech, it's not embarrassing - it's dangerous, legitimising and amplifying extremist ideologies to vast legal landscape is shifting rapidly, and AI companies ignoring these changes do so at their peril. The EU's AI Act, which came into force in February, represents a shift from reactive regulation to proactive governance. Companies can no longer apologise their way out of AI failures - they must demonstrate they've implemented robust safeguards before AB 316, introduced last January, takes an even more direct approach by prohibiting the 'the AI did it' defence in civil cases. This legislation recognises what should be obvious: companies that develop and deploy AI systems bear responsibility for their outputs, regardless of whether those outputs were 'intended'.India's approach may prove more punitive than the EU's regulatory framework and more immediate than the US litigation-based system, focusing on swift enforcement of existing criminal laws rather than waiting for new AI-specific legislation. India doesn't yet have AI-specific legislation, but if Grok's antisemitic incident had occurred with Indian users, then steps like immediate blocking of the AI service, a criminal case against xAI under IPC 153A, and a demand for content removal from the X platform would have been Grok incident may mark a turning point. Regulators worldwide are demanding proactive measures rather than reactive damage control, and courts are increasingly willing to hold companies directly liable for their systems' shift is long overdue. AI systems aren't just software - they're powerful tools that shape public discourse, influence decision-making and can cause real-world harm. The companies that build these systems must be held to higher standards than traditional software developers, with corresponding legal and ethical question facing the AI industry isn't whether to embrace this new reality - it's whether to do so voluntarily or have it imposed by regulators and courts. Companies that continue to rely on the old playbook of post-incident apologies will find themselves increasingly isolated in a world demanding AI industry's true maturity will show not in flashy demos or sky-high valuations, but in its commitment to safety over speed, rigour over shortcuts, and real accountability over empty apologies. In this game, 'sorry' won't cut it - only responsibility writer is a commentator ondigital policy issues (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Rumblings at the top of Ola Electric The hybrid vs. EV rivalry: Why Maruti and Mahindra pull in different directions. What's best? How Safexpress bootstrapped its way to build India's largest PTL Express business Zee promoters have a new challenge to navigate. And it's not about funding or Sebi probe. Newton vs. industry: Inside new norms that want your car to be more fuel-efficient Stock Radar: UltraTech Cements hit a fresh record high in July; what should investors do – book profits or buy the dip? F&O Radar | Deploy Bear Put Spread in Nifty to gain from index correction Weekly Top Picks: These stocks scored 10 on 10 on Stock Reports Plus
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Mixed trajectory: India's June exports shrink but shipments to US zoom
Merchandise exports to the US jumped 23.5 per cent year-on-year (Y-o-Y) to $8.3 billion in June, even as India's overall outbound shipments witnessed contraction during the month, according to the data released by the commerce department on Tuesday. The increase in outbound shipments to the US was largely driven by the rush among exporters to utilise America's pause on its plans to impose country-specific reciprocal tariffs. A 90-day window before July 9 created an opportunity for Indian sellers to accelerate shipments to the US. Outbound shipments to the US have been over $8 billion since the beginning of 2025, as compared to $6 billion-$7 billion in 2024. Indian exporters currently bear a 10 per cent baseline tariff after the US administration temporarily paused the 26 per cent reciprocal tariff on India. Commerce department Special Secretary Rajesh Agrawal said at a briefing that India is in 'wait and watch' mode amid uncertainty surrounding the US' proposed rollout of reciprocal tariffs. The lack of clarity regarding the tariffs makes it difficult to assess potential tariff differentials or determine any competitive advantage compared to other countries. 'We are not in a position to estimate the differential tariff that will play out from August 1... While letters have been sent to 25 countries, the US has also spoken about finalising some trade deals. The full spectrum of tariff rollout is still unclear,' said Agrawal, who is also the chief negotiator of the proposed India, US trade deal. Data further showed that trade deficit contracted to a four-month low of $18.78 billion as exports and imports contracted during June. Trade deficit stood at $20.84 billion in June 2024 and $21.88 in June this year. Exports contracted 0.06 per cent Y-o-Y during June to $35.14 billion, mainly due to fall in global crude oil prices as well as a strain in global supply chain because of the ongoing tariff war triggered by the policies being implemented by the Donald Trump-led administration in the US. In June, exports not only slipped to a seven-month low but were also 9.2 per cent lower as compared to a month earlier. Imports saw 3.7 per cent fall to $53.92 billion in June due to decline in shipments of petroleum products, gold, and iron and steel. Commerce Secretary Sunil Barthwal said exports and imports were impacted by a fall in crude oil prices and that the Department of Commerce stepped up monitoring of 'import surges'. 'We are sending surge reports to different ministries, so that they can also monitor at their level.' 'Whenever we come across any unusual surge, we are examining it and in case of any malpractice, we are also imposing restrictions on imports of certain commodities,' Barthwal told reporters at the same briefing. Non-petroleum and non-gems & jewellery exports, an indication of exports' health, saw a growth of 4.7 per cent at $30.53 billion. The drivers of the growth among non-petroleum sectors were electronic goods (46.9 per cent), engineering goods (1.35 per cent), drugs and pharmaceuticals (5.9 per cent), and readymade garments (1.23 per cent). Aditi Nayar, chief economist, Icra, said that although weakness in India's headline merchandise exports persisted in June, a relatively sharper dip in non-oil imports led to the trade deficit compressing considerably to $18.78 billion in the month from an average of $24 billion in April and May 2025, and $20.84 billion in June 2024. 'Given this, and the robust growth in net services earnings, we now expect India's current account deficit (CAD) to print at a comfortable around 0.7 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) in the first quarter of 2025-26 (Q1FY26), a tad lower than the 0.9 per cent seen in Q1FY2025,' Nayar said. Non-oil imports contracted 2 per cent to $40.1 billion in June. During Q1FY26, India's merchandise exports rose 1.9 per cent to $112.2 billion while merchandise imports increased 4.2 per cent to $179.4 billion, leading to a trade deficit of $67.2 billion. Services exports saw 14.5 per cent growth at $32.84 billion in June while services imports witnessed 16.1 per cent rise to $17.58 billion, resulting in a surplus of $15.26 billion. Services trade data for May, however, is an 'estimate', which will be revised based on the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI's) subsequent release.
