A bug in Microsoft’s Family Safety feature has rendered Google Chrome unusable for many Windows users since early June, sparking accusations that the tech giant is once again undermining its biggest rival to boost its own struggling browser, Edge.

The issue first surfaced on June 3, with users reporting that Chrome either refused to launch or immediately crashed. The problem traced to Microsoft’s Family Safety tool — a parental control feature bundled with Windows and Microsoft 365 — appears to affect only Chrome. Competing browsers like Firefox and Opera remain unaffected, fueling speculation that the glitch may be more than a technical hiccup.

“Our team has investigated these reports and determined the cause of this behavior,” confirmed Ellen T., a Chrome support manager. “For some users, Chrome is unable to run when Microsoft Family Safety is enabled.”

Workarounds That Undermine Safety

With no formal fix from Microsoft for over two weeks, users have resorted to temporary and sometimes unsafe workarounds. These include renaming the Chrome executable file from chrome.exe to chrome1.exe, or disabling the “filter inappropriate websites” setting within Family Safety — a move that essentially turns off all content filtering and defeats the feature’s core purpose.

In a bug-tracking thread dated June 10, a Chromium engineer wrote, “We’ve not heard anything from Microsoft about a fix being rolled out. They have provided guidance to users who contact them about how to get Chrome working again, but I wouldn’t think that would have a large effect.”

Despite user frustration and public requests, Microsoft has remained silent. The company has not issued a statement, leaving many to wonder whether the bug is simply a case of negligence — or a more deliberate strategy.

A Pattern of Interference?

Microsoft’s long history of trying to steer users toward its own browser gives skeptics plenty of ammunition. While Family Safety’s Chrome-blocking bug might be accidental, it comes after years of the company aggressively nudging, prompting, and even tricking users into choosing Edge over Google Chrome.

These tactics have included:

• Injecting popups and AI-generated “warnings” into Bing results that discourage downloading Chrome
• Hijacking the Chrome download page with fake surveys or messages promoting Edge
• Defaulting to Edge in new Windows installations, requiring several steps to change
• Suggesting that Edge is “faster and safer” than Chrome when users try to switch defaults

Earlier this year, Microsoft even manipulated Bing’s search results to mimic Google’s interface, confusing users trying to download Chrome.

Edge’s Long Battle with Chrome

Microsoft has spent over a decade trying to claw back the browser market share it once dominated. Internet Explorer, once the default for billions, steadily lost relevance through the 2010s. In 2015, Microsoft replaced it with Edge, promising a sleeker, faster, more secure browser.

But users didn’t bite.

Despite being bundled with Windows 10 and 11, Edge has failed to compete with Chrome’s dominance. According to StatCounter, Chrome holds over 64% of the global desktop browser market, while Microsoft Edge trails far behind with around 12% — a figure inflated mostly by default installations rather than voluntary adoption.

Even after switching Edge’s underlying engine to Chromium (the same open-source project that powers Chrome), Microsoft has failed to reverse its browser’s image as a fallback, not a favorite.

Chrome: A Threat Microsoft Can’t Ignore

Google Chrome, launched in 2008, quickly rose to dominance with a clean interface, fast performance, and a vast extension ecosystem. It became the browser of choice not just for individuals but also for businesses, schools, and developers.

As such, any disruption to Chrome’s usability on Windows — especially one tied to Microsoft’s own software — raises alarms.

Even if unintentional, the Chrome-blocking bug in Family Safety conveniently disadvantages Microsoft’s top rival and nudges frustrated users toward Edge. And given Microsoft’s track record, critics argue the company has little benefit of the doubt left.

The lack of urgency in fixing the problem only adds to user skepticism. Without a clear timeline or public explanation, Microsoft is facing a growing backlash from users, parents, educators, and developers who rely on Chrome daily.

Whether the issue is resolved quickly or drags on, the damage is already being done — not just to Microsoft’s reputation, but to the trust consumers place in an operating system that once claimed neutrality in the browser wars.

Intel is pushing ahead with one of its most aggressive corporate overhauls in years, announcing plans to outsource a significant portion of its marketing workforce to global consulting firm Accenture.

The move, which is expected to result in significant job cuts, is part of CEO Lip-Bu Tan’s sweeping strategy to cut costs, streamline operations, and reposition the struggling chip giant as a faster, more efficient player in a market increasingly dominated by artificial intelligence.

In a notice sent to employees this week—reviewed by The Oregonian/OregonLive—Intel said it will begin notifying affected marketing staff by July 11, and warned that the transition will bring “significant changes to team structures, including potential headcount reductions.” The company did not say how many jobs would be eliminated, nor how many people currently work in its global marketing division, which includes staff in Oregon and other major Intel locations.

“As we announced earlier this year, we are taking steps to become a leaner, faster and more efficient company,” Intel said in a statement confirming its expanded partnership with Accenture. “As part of this, we are focused on modernizing our digital capabilities to serve our customers better and strengthen our brand.”

The shift is part of a broader restructuring campaign spearheaded by Tan, a veteran semiconductor executive who was appointed CEO in March. Though he is the first Intel CEO in company history who did not rise through its internal ranks, Tan has wasted no time upending legacy operations. In April, he warned employees to expect “significant job cuts,” and details are now emerging across the company’s business units.

Last weekend, Intel informed workers in its manufacturing division that up to 20% of them could be laid off starting in July. The restructuring will reportedly cut thousands of jobs as Tan moves to flatten management layers and speed up decision-making.

Deepening Crisis at Intel

The cuts come as Intel struggles with some of the worst financial and strategic setbacks in its 56-year history. Once the undisputed leader in semiconductor technology, the company has lost ground to rivals like AMD and Nvidia, whose chips now dominate in high-performance computing and AI workloads. Meanwhile, Apple’s decision to ditch Intel processors in favor of its own custom silicon dealt a serious blow to Intel’s prestige and bottom line.

Years of delays in developing advanced chips—especially in shifting from 10nm to 7nm process nodes—have hurt Intel’s standing in both the PC and data center markets. At the same time, its absence from the booming AI chip segment has left it sidelined during one of the most transformative periods in computing.

Intel’s annual revenue has dropped by more than a third since its 2021 peak, falling from $79 billion to about $52 billion in 2023. The company reported a net loss of $2.8 billion in the first quarter of 2024, marking its third consecutive quarterly loss. These setbacks have weakened investor confidence and left the company in a precarious financial position as it seeks to regain market leadership.

AI at the Center of the Overhaul

Tan’s plan to restructure Intel includes a deep reliance on artificial intelligence, both as a business opportunity and as a tool to overhaul internal processes. The outsourcing of marketing functions to Accenture is being framed as part of an AI-driven strategy to eliminate inefficiencies, personalize customer engagement, and reduce operational complexity.

“AI can help us analyze large amounts of information faster, automate routine tasks, personalize customer experiences, and make smarter business decisions,” Intel told employees in its internal memo. “Our goal is to empower teams with more time to focus on strategic, creative and high-impact work by automating repetitive or time-consuming tasks.”

The company described the current structure of its marketing team as too slow, complex, and out of sync with customer expectations. In particular, it acknowledged that its programs were cumbersome and lagged behind more nimble competitors.

“We have received feedback that our decision-making is too slow, our programs are too complex, and our competitors are moving faster,” Intel wrote to staff. “The reality is that we need to change our ‘go to market’ model to be more responsive to what customers want.”

Intel appears confident that Accenture—leveraging advanced AI tools—can execute the marketing vision more effectively. The consulting firm will reportedly manage everything from campaign strategy to customer engagement, supported by machine-learning tools that optimize messaging and automate analytics.

The partnership also suggests a likely shift in job roles: some remaining Intel employees may be asked to help train Accenture staff and AI systems during the transition.

“We may ask impacted team members to share expertise to ensure a smooth transition of work,” the company wrote, hinting at knowledge transfer expectations.

Rising Concern Over AI Replacing Jobs

Intel’s strategy is unfolding amid growing concerns that artificial intelligence is already beginning to displace traditional white-collar roles. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy echoed similar expectations earlier this week, telling staff that AI would likely reduce the company’s total workforce over time. Jassy said many corporate roles would be rendered obsolete as automation takes over internal workflows.

Analysts say Intel’s gamble reflects a broader shift in corporate priorities across the tech sector: move faster, automate what can be automated, and reduce labor costs. But in Intel’s case, it’s also a desperate push to reverse declining revenues and close the technology gap between itself and its fiercest competitors.

While Intel is still investing billions in its foundry business and next-generation chip development, the current wave of restructuring highlights just how urgent its turnaround effort has become.

Apple Inc. is facing a proposed securities fraud class action lawsuit filed Friday in a U.S. federal court, with shareholders accusing the tech giant of misleading the public about its ability to integrate advanced artificial intelligence features into its Siri voice assistant.

The complaint, lodged in the Northern District of California, claims the company’s delays in delivering AI-driven functionality contributed to slumping iPhone sales and a dramatic fall in its stock price.

According to the suit, Apple and its top executives — including CEO Tim Cook, current Chief Financial Officer Kevan Parekh, and former CFO Luca Maestri — knowingly misled investors between June 2023 and June 2024 by overstating the company’s readiness to deploy AI technologies. The plaintiffs, led by shareholder Eric Tucker, allege that Apple concealed the fact it lacked a working prototype of an AI-powered Siri, even as it promoted artificial intelligence as a driving force for its upcoming iPhone 16 lineup.

At the center of the lawsuit is Apple’s June 2024 Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC), where the company introduced its so-called “Apple Intelligence” suite. Marketed as a leap in Siri’s capability — including more contextual understanding and greater user-friendliness — the updates were portrayed as a central pillar of Apple’s next-generation software and hardware.

However, according to the complaint, Apple executives were aware that critical AI upgrades to Siri were not technically viable in time for deployment with the iPhone 16. On March 7, 2025, the company quietly delayed several of those Siri enhancements to 2026, setting off what the suit describes as a “slow drip” of bad news. Further disappointment came during Apple’s June 2025 WWDC, where its modest AI progress left analysts underwhelmed, triggering sharp market reactions.

Since reaching a record high on December 26, 2024, Apple’s shares have declined by nearly 25%, erasing an estimated $900 billion in shareholder value — one of the largest single-company drawdowns in recent Wall Street history.

The lawsuit, Tucker v. Apple Inc. et al, alleges that Apple’s misstatements violated federal securities laws by artificially inflating the company’s stock. It seeks damages on behalf of all shareholders who bought Apple stock during the one-year period ending June 9, 2025.

Neither Apple nor the named executives have responded to media inquiries about the lawsuit. The company has also not issued a formal statement to investors regarding the claims.

The case highlights the growing scrutiny facing tech companies over how they communicate their artificial intelligence strategies and readiness. With Big Tech firms increasingly positioning AI at the center of their growth narratives, investors are demanding not only innovation but transparency.

Apple’s cautious approach to AI — especially compared to peers like Microsoft and Google, who have rapidly deployed generative AI across their platforms — has been noted by analysts. While Apple has stressed user privacy and device-based AI as unique selling points, many believe that the company has fallen behind in the AI arms race.

Wedbush analyst Dan Ives, spoke last week, following Apple’s 2025 WWDC, on why investor patience may be wearing thin.

“This is not what developers or even consumers want to hear at this year’s WWDC. Apple focused on practical enhancements rather than bold new breakthroughs,” he said.

This lawsuit could test the extent to which Apple’s forward-looking AI claims will be judged as part of routine product development or as misleading conduct that materially harmed investors. If allowed to proceed, the case could unearth internal communications and timelines that provide a clearer view into how Apple developed and communicated its Siri AI roadmap.

As the global tech industry accelerates the deployment of artificial intelligence across white-collar work, Arthur Mensch, CEO and co-founder of French startup Mistral AI, is sounding the alarm—not about layoffs, but about a more subtle erosion of human intelligence.

In an interview with The Times of London during the VivaTech conference in Paris, Mensch warned that the greatest risk posed by AI may not be job losses, but “deskilling”—a phenomenon where humans grow intellectually passive by over-relying on AI systems to synthesize and evaluate information.

Mensch, a former DeepMind researcher, dismissed what he described as exaggerated fears that generative AI will wipe out millions of office jobs. He argued that the real danger lies in how people interact with the technology: if they treat AI-generated responses as truth, they may lose their ability to think critically and independently.

“You want people to continue learning,” Mensch said. “Being able to synthesize information and criticize information is a core component to learning.” He added that the risk of deskilling “can be avoided if you think of it from a design perspective,” by ensuring humans remain involved in reviewing and questioning AI output.

Mistral AI, founded in April 2023 by Mensch alongside Guillaume Lample and Timothe Lacroix, has quickly become a leader in Europe’s open-source AI ecosystem. The company, which has raised hundreds of millions of dollars in funding, is building large language models designed for openness and transparency—offering an alternative to the closed-source approach taken by U.S. leaders such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google.

Pushback Against Job Loss Narratives

Mensch’s remarks come in contrast to the warnings made by some of his peers in the AI industry. Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic—the company behind the Claude series of language models—recently said that AI could replace as many as half of all entry-level white-collar jobs within the next five years. His prediction echoes the growing anxiety across sectors where AI is quickly replacing tasks once handled by humans, from customer service and data entry to legal research and marketing.

But Mensch criticized Amodei’s projections, suggesting they may be more about building buzz than accurately forecasting AI’s role in the labor market.

“I think it’s very much of an overstatement,” Mensch said. “He likes to spread fear.”

Instead of erasing white-collar roles, Mensch believes AI will reshape them. He anticipates a growing focus on “relational tasks”—interpersonal, emotional, and contextual roles that AI struggles to perform well.

“I do expect that we’ll have more relational tasks, because that’s not something you can easily replace,” he noted.

The Broader Corporate Shift Toward AI-Led Operations

Mensch’s measured take comes amid a wave of corporate restructuring tied directly to AI implementation. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy recently told employees that AI will reduce the company’s workforce over time, as the technology automates tasks across departments. Intel, under new CEO Lip-Bu Tan, is in the process of outsourcing large parts of its global marketing division to Accenture, citing AI as a key driver of the transition. The company told employees that AI will streamline marketing functions, automate routine decisions, and deliver faster, more efficient campaigns. Thousands of jobs are expected to be cut as part of the move.

IBM has similarly slowed hiring for roles it believes will soon be handled by AI, with CEO Arvind Krishna suggesting that up to 30% of back-office jobs could be automated within a few years.

These shifts are fueling growing concern across the workforce. A recent report by Goldman Sachs estimated that AI could eventually affect 300 million jobs globally. While not all will be eliminated, many roles will be restructured, downgraded, or absorbed into new hybrid human-AI workflows. Some researchers and unions warn that this evolution is happening too fast, with little input from workers and no safeguards to protect intellectual autonomy or income security.

The Rise of Deskilling in the Age of AI

Mensch’s focus on deskilling taps into a quieter but equally urgent discussion: how constant reliance on AI tools—from auto-generated emails to algorithmic recommendations—may impair people’s ability to process information, solve problems, and learn independently. Users risk losing the very skills they need to thrive in a dynamic and complex information economy, by treating AI systems as all-knowing authorities.

This risk is amplified in education and journalism, where AI tools are already being deployed to write content, summarize sources, and generate responses. If students or professionals outsource their thinking to language models, Mensch warns, they may become less capable of making sound judgments or spotting inaccuracies—something critical in an era of misinformation and fast-moving technology.

To avoid that outcome, Mensch advocates for human-in-the-loop AI design. This approach ensures that humans remain central in evaluating and challenging machine outputs, thereby reinforcing learning and engagement rather than undermining it.

“It’s important that people don’t take AI outputs as the truth,” he said. “You want them to interrogate it.”

Mistral AI’s open-source approach also reflects a growing push for transparency in AI development. Unlike companies that guard their models and data behind corporate firewalls, Mistral has released its models openly, allowing researchers and developers to understand, audit, and adapt them. That ethos of openness, Mensch believes, is essential for fostering responsible AI usage—especially at a time when the concentration of power among a few tech firms threatens public oversight and innovation.

Ultimately, Mensch’s remarks underscore a crucial fork in the road for AI adoption. One path leads to streamlined operations, reduced labor, and increased corporate profits—but possibly at the cost of human skill and agency. The other aims to integrate AI as a collaborative tool, one that enhances human decision-making rather than replaces it.

As governments, businesses, and institutions rush to deploy AI systems, Mensch is urging them not to forget what makes the technology useful in the first place: human judgment.