DD
MM
YYYY

CATEGORIES

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

CATEGORIES

PAGES

Home Blog Page 33

Meta’s Muse AI App Tops the Charts as Ex-Anthropic Staffers Pursue Self-Improving AI

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

The artificial intelligence industry is entering a new phase in which the contest is no longer simply about building larger models. It is increasingly about creating AI systems that can act independently, learn from experience and potentially contribute to the development of their successors.

Two recent developments capture this transition: Meta’s rapid consumer success with Muse and the emergence of Mirendil, a startup founded by former Anthropic researchers that is pursuing self-improving AI.

Meta introduced Muse on September 8 as a personal AI agent designed to do more than answer questions. Running through a dedicated secure virtual machine, Muse can perform tasks on a user’s behalf, including researching and booking travel, sending emails and organizing projects.

Meta describes the system as an agent capable of learning from conversations and becoming more useful over time. Its early adoption has been striking. By September 25, Sensor Tower estimated that Muse had surpassed 3.4 million downloads.

While other analytics companies reported figures ranging from roughly 2.3 million to 4.3 million. Muse also reached the top position on both the U.S. App Store and Google Play Store during the month. The significance extends beyond download numbers.

Muse represents Meta’s attempt to turn artificial intelligence into a consumer interface for action. Instead of opening separate applications, searching websites and completing individual tasks, users can increasingly delegate portions of that process to an AI agent.

Goldman Sachs analysts have described this movement as a shift from AI as backend infrastructure toward AI as a consumer-facing platform. That transition creates an enormous commercial opportunity, but also introduces a different category of risk.

An AI that merely generates text can be checked before its output is used. An agent that can browse, communicate, purchase, schedule or manipulate digital environments has greater operational consequences when it makes a mistake.

Muse’s rapid expansion therefore makes questions around permissions, privacy, cybersecurity and human oversight increasingly important. At the same time, the frontier is moving toward AI systems that participate in their own development.

Mirendil, founded by former Anthropic researchers, is reportedly in discussions to raise as much as $1 billion at a potential $5 billion valuation. The company previously raised a $200 million seed round at a $1 billion valuation, according to Bloomberg.

The idea of self-improving AI is no longer purely theoretical. Anthropic recently disclosed that Claude is involved in approximately 90% of its research and development work, with the model leading about 26% of that work.

Anthropic says these activities remain under human supervision, meaning the company has not handed over autonomous control of model development. Nevertheless, the trajectory matters.

If AI can increasingly write code, conduct experiments, evaluate results and contribute to the design of subsequent models, the economics of AI research could change dramatically. Development cycles could accelerate while the distinction between the tool and the researcher becomes increasingly blurred.

The combination of Muse’s consumer momentum and investment in self-improving AI illustrates the industry’s broader transformation. The next competitive advantage may not simply belong to whoever has the biggest model, but to whoever builds the most capable agentic system—and establishes the strongest mechanisms for controlling what that system can do.

Europe Raises €1.6B in New VC Funds as Defence Tech Leads Startup Investment Boom

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

Europe’s venture capital market is entering a new phase, marked by a surge of fresh capital, a growing number of specialized funds and an increasingly important role for defence technology.

More than €1.6 billion has been raised through 11 new European venture funds, while companies across the continent have secured roughly €5 billion through 58 funding rounds.

Those figures point to a European startup ecosystem that is becoming deeper, more specialized and increasingly connected to strategic industries. The most notable feature of the new funding landscape is its range.

New funds stretch from approximately €10 million vehicles designed to back pre-seed startups to growth-stage funds approaching €575 million. That spectrum matters because Europe’s technology economy requires capital at every stage of development.

A promising founder may need a relatively small initial cheque to build a prototype, while an established company entering international markets may require hundreds of millions of euros to scale manufacturing, research and distribution.

Defence technology is emerging as one of the strongest magnets for this capital. Europe’s changing security environment has encouraged governments, investors and entrepreneurs to reconsider the economic importance of technologies such as drones, autonomous systems, cybersecurity, satellite infrastructure and artificial intelligence.

Venture capital is increasingly moving toward companies whose products can serve both commercial and defence applications, creating a broader investment thesis around technological sovereignty and strategic resilience.

The €5 billion raised across 58 European rounds also illustrates how capital is being distributed among different stages and sectors.

Funding rounds can range from early investments in young technology companies to much larger transactions involving businesses that have already demonstrated commercial traction.

For founders, this creates more potential routes to financing, but it also means that investors are becoming more selective about technology, market size, revenue potential and the ability of management teams to execute.

The geography of European venture capital is equally important. While established hubs such as London, Paris, Berlin and Amsterdam continue to attract substantial investment, capital is increasingly looking beyond traditional centres.

Emerging ecosystems across Southern, Northern and Eastern Europe are building specialized expertise in areas including fintech, artificial intelligence, climate technology, defence and industrial software.

For entrepreneurs, the growing number of funds creates an opportunity to approach investors according to the company’s stage rather than simply its location. A pre-seed founder might target a specialist €10 million fund, while a rapidly expanding technology company may need a growth investor capable of deploying substantially larger amounts.

Understanding the mandate, geography and preferred investment stage of each fund can therefore be as important as preparing the pitch itself. For investors, Europe’s expanding fund ecosystem offers greater specialization but also introduces new questions about competition and valuations.

More capital can accelerate innovation, yet companies receiving funding must ultimately translate investment into sustainable businesses. The European venture capital story is therefore no longer simply about raising more money.

It is increasingly about where that money is going, which technologies investors consider strategically important and how startups move from small experimental teams into globally competitive companies.

With more than €1.6 billion entering new funds and €5 billion flowing through 58 rounds, Europe’s next technology cycle is being shaped not only by the amount of capital available, but by the sectors and stages that capital is prepared to support.

Bitget’s $380 Million Security Breach Tests the Resilience of Centralized Crypto Exchanges

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

The latest security incident at Bitget has once again exposed one of the cryptocurrency industry’s most persistent challenges: even sophisticated exchanges can become vulnerable when weaknesses emerge somewhere in the technology stack.

Attackers exploited a vulnerability in a third-party security product, according to Bitget CEO Gracy Chen, allowing them to obtain internal network credentials, forge withdrawal instructions and bypass risk controls. The resulting loss has been estimated at roughly $387.5 million, up from an initial estimate of $351.6 million.

The incident was detected on September 24, when Bitget identified unauthorized transfers involving parts of its hot and warm wallet infrastructure. The exchange says its cold wallets were not affected and that customer account balances remained intact.

Bitget also says the incident was contained, with no further unauthorized transfers identified after the attack path was addressed. The significance of the breach extends beyond the amount stolen.

The reported attack demonstrates how crypto security increasingly depends on interconnected systems rather than simply protecting private keys. In this case, Bitget says the attackers exploited a third-party vulnerability to compromise internal credentials and manipulate the withdrawal authorization process.

That distinction matters because it shows how an exchange can face systemic risk even when its core cold-storage infrastructure remains secure. Bitget has since identified and remediated the underlying vulnerability.

The exchange has brought in cybersecurity specialists Mandiant and SlowMist to assist with forensic investigation, fund tracing and additional security checks. Trading and deposits have continued, while withdrawals were temporarily suspended as the company reviewed the withdrawal infrastructure.

The restoration of withdrawals is being handled in stages rather than through an immediate reopening. Bitcoin withdrawals are scheduled to resume on September 28 at 08:00 UTC. Ethereum follows on September 29 across Ethereum, BNB Chain, Arbitrum, Base and Optimism.

USDT withdrawals are scheduled for September 30 across Ethereum, Solana, TRON and other supported networks, while other tokens, fiat and P2P services are scheduled to return on October 2. The phased approach reflects the security priorities following a major breach.

Reopening withdrawals too quickly could create additional vulnerabilities if the underlying systems had not been fully validated. By restoring assets and networks progressively, Bitget can conduct further checks while monitoring the system for abnormal activity.

At the same time, the exchange has shifted attention toward recovering the stolen assets. Bitget launched a Recovery Bounty Program offering eligible participants a bounty equivalent to 5% of funds successfully frozen through their voluntary efforts and another 5% of funds successfully recovered.

The programme is designed to encourage exchanges, blockchain projects, security researchers and on-chain investigators to cooperate in tracing the stolen assets. The incident therefore illustrates both the vulnerability and resilience of modern crypto infrastructure.

Blockchain transactions may be transparent and traceable, but the surrounding systems that authorize transactions, manage credentials and connect multiple networks remain critical attack surfaces.

For Bitget, the immediate priorities are restoring withdrawals safely, recovering assets and demonstrating that the vulnerability has been permanently addressed. For the wider industry, the episode reinforces a broader lesson.

Exchange security is no longer only about protecting wallets. It is about securing every layer of the infrastructure that connects users, software, custodians, networks and financial assets.

New U.S. SEC Crypto FAQs Bring Clarity to Staking, Token Buybacks and Blockchain Networks

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is offering the crypto industry a more detailed map of where certain digital-asset activities may sit outside federal securities laws.

SEC staff in the Division of Corporation Finance published a new set of frequently asked questions addressing crypto assets, functional blockchain networks, staking receipt tokens, token buybacks, network development and secondary-market activity.

The guidance is significant because the central question for crypto businesses is often not simply whether a token itself is a security, but whether the way it is offered, marketed or used creates an investment contract.

The SEC’s framework continues to draw on the Howey test, which considers factors including an investment of money, a common enterprise, an expectation of profits and profits derived from the essential managerial efforts of others.

One of the clearest areas addressed by the new FAQs is functionality. SEC staff says that once a crypto system is functional, activities designed to secure, maintain, improve or enhance the network.

Including funding development projects and facilitating network effects, would generally not constitute the essential managerial efforts relevant to the Howey analysis.

That distinction matters because blockchain networks frequently continue evolving after launch. Developers may release upgrades, improve security, fund ecosystem projects or encourage broader adoption.

Treating every continuing development effort as evidence of managerial dependence could potentially keep a functioning network within an investment-contract analysis indefinitely. The staff’s explanation provides a clearer distinction between building a network toward functionality and maintaining an already functional system.

The FAQs also address token buybacks, an increasingly common mechanism for crypto projects managing treasury assets, reducing supply or supporting token economics.

According to the SEC staff, an issuer’s announcement of a buyback for a non-security crypto asset on a functional network would not, by itself, represent a promise of essential managerial efforts.

However, the analysis can change when the network is not functional and the issuer presents the buyback as a means of generating yield or returns for token holders.

Staking-related assets are another important part of the clarification. The SEC’s explanation distinguishes staking receipt tokens that merely evidence ownership of an underlying digital commodity and associated rewards from arrangements that provide additional rights or obligations.

The staff’s interpretation therefore focuses on the economic characteristics of the particular token rather than applying a blanket classification to every staking-related product. The guidance also addresses secondary markets.

A trading platform offering a secondary market for a crypto asset would not automatically become a promoter simply because it facilitates trading. The staff says the platform would need to satisfy the applicable definition of promoter under Securities Act Rule 405.

For the broader crypto market, the significance of the FAQs lies in the attempt to separate technological activity from investment-contract activity. Developers, exchanges, staking providers and token issuers can use the framework to evaluate specific structures, marketing language and network conditions.

But the document does not represent a new SEC rule. The agency explicitly states that the FAQs reflect the views of Corporation Finance staff, have no legal force or effect, do not amend existing law and have not been approved or disapproved by the Commission itself.

That limitation is important. The FAQs provide interpretive clarity, but they do not eliminate the need for legal analysis. The boundary between a functional crypto network and an investment contract can still depend on facts, representations and economic substance.

The September guidance represents another step in the SEC’s broader 2026 effort to establish clearer categories for digital assets. For an industry that has long operated amid uncertainty over securities classification.

The practical impact may come less from declaring crypto universally outside securities regulation and more from defining the circumstances in which particular activities can operate beyond that regulatory perimeter.

Nigeria’s Economy Grows 4.43% in Q2 2026 as Oil and Non-Oil Sectors Drive Expansion

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

Nigeria’s economy expanded by 4.43% year-on-year in the second quarter of 2026, marking a stronger performance than the 3.89% recorded in the first quarter. The latest figures from the National Bureau of Statistics point to an economy gaining momentum, supported by improvements in both the oil and non-oil sectors.

The Q2 performance is significant because it comes at a time when Nigerian households and businesses continue to contend with high living costs, elevated financing expenses and the broader effects of economic reforms.

The acceleration therefore provides evidence that economic activity has remained resilient despite these pressures. One of the clearest drivers of the improvement was the oil industry.

Nigeria’s oil production increased to about 1.72 million barrels per day in the second quarter, compared with approximately 1.55 million barrels per day in the preceding quarter. Higher production provided additional support to government revenues, exports and foreign-exchange earnings.

However, the Nigerian economy cannot rely on crude oil alone. The non-oil economy remains particularly important because it encompasses the businesses and services that employ a large proportion of the population.

Manufacturing, telecommunications, financial services, trade, construction and other activities therefore remain critical to determining whether headline GDP growth can translate into broader economic opportunities.

The latest growth figure also needs to be interpreted alongside inflation. A larger economy does not automatically mean that households are experiencing an equivalent improvement in purchasing power.

Nigeria’s inflation rate remains elevated, meaning that consumers can continue to face significant pressure even as real GDP expands. The NBS currently reports headline inflation at 15.39%, with food inflation at 19.57%.

This creates an important distinction between economic growth and economic welfare. GDP measures the production of goods and services, while household welfare also depends on wages, employment, food prices, access to credit and the purchasing power of income.

For Nigeria, sustaining growth while bringing inflation lower will therefore remain an important part of the economic story. The 4.43% expansion also places renewed attention on investment.

Faster growth can create stronger incentives for domestic and foreign investors when accompanied by improvements in infrastructure, energy supply, policy certainty and access to finance.

Capital directed toward manufacturing, agriculture, technology, logistics and energy could help broaden the foundations of growth beyond commodities. Nigeria’s recent GDP trajectory suggests that the economy has continued to recover gradually.

Reuters reported that real GDP grew by 3.87% in 2025, compared with 3.38% in 2024, before accelerating further in Q2 2026. The progression indicates improving momentum, although maintaining that momentum will require productivity gains rather than relying primarily on higher oil production.

For policymakers, the challenge is now to convert quarterly growth into a more durable expansion. That means encouraging productive investment, improving electricity and transport infrastructure, supporting businesses, strengthening agricultural productivity and creating conditions in which private-sector employment can grow.

The 4.43% Q2 growth rate is therefore an important economic signal, but not the entire story. Nigeria is expanding faster, yet the quality and distribution of that expansion will matter just as much as the headline percentage.

The next test will be whether stronger GDP growth can coexist with falling inflation, rising investment, expanding employment and improved household purchasing power.

1...323334...9,431Page 33 of 9,431

© Tekedia. All rights reserved.

Term & Privacy

© Tekedia. All rights reserved.

Term & Privacy