Why did the U.S. invade Venezuela and capture its leader Nicolás Maduro? "If you asked ChatGPT about it this morning, it told you that youâ(TM)re making it up," Wired reported Saturday: WIRED asked leading chatbots ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini the same question a little before 9 am ET. In all cases, we used the free, default version of the service, since that's what the majority of users experience. We also asked AI search platform Perplexity, which advertises "accurate, trusted, and real-time answers to any question..." ChatGPT did not course-correct. Instead, it emphatically refuted that Maduro had been captured at all. "That didn't happen," it wrote. "The United States has not invaded Venezuela, and Nicolás Maduro has not been captured." It then rationalized: ChatGPT did not course-correct. Instead, it emphatically refuted that Maduro had been captured at all. "That didn't happen," it wrote. "The United States has not invaded Venezuela, and Nicolás Maduro has not been captured." It then rationalized: "What's likely going on is a mix-up with real events that are often described in dramatic or misleading ways online. Here's what actually has happened... No U.S. military invasion of Venezuela. No arrest or capture of Nicolás Maduro... Maduro is still in power in Venezuela." It went on to detail recent tensions between the US and Venezuela and explained that âoeconfusionâ can happen because of âoesensational headlines,â âoesocial media misinformation,â and âoeconfusing sanctions, charges, or rhetoric with actual military action.â Perplexity was similarly scolding. âoeThe premise of your question is not supported by credible reporting or official records: there has been no invasion of Venezuela by the United States that resulted in capturing NicolÃs Maduro,â it responded. âoeIn fact, the U.S. has not successfully invaded or apprehended Maduro, and he remains the Venezuelan president as of late 2025. If youâ(TM)re seeing sensational claims, they likely originate from misinformation or hypothetical scenarios rather than factual events.â Thanks to Slashdot reader joshuark for sharing the news.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

"While a growing number of U.S. employers are mandating workers return to the office five days a week," reports the Washington Post, "some companies say AI is saving them enough time to launch or sustain a four-day workweek. "More companies may move toward a shortened workweek, several executives and researchers predict, as workers, especially those in younger generations, continue to push for better work-life balance." And "several companies — especially those with a largely remote workforce — have adjusted their work rhythm after delegating many tasks to AI..." AI "has such a potential to have so much labor savings, you'll see firms shift to a four-day week in an evolutionary way," said Juliet Schor, an economist and sociologist at Boston College who has studied the subject. "There's enough social consensus that people are exhausted and stressed...." Small and medium businesses often adopt shortened workweeks to compete with big salaries for new hires and retention, Schor said. That's how Peak PEO, a London-based service that helps companies expand globally with teams in different locations, thought about its strategy... CEO Alex Voakes said that job openings that used to get two applications jumped to 350 after the change. "Some of the world's most influential business leaders have publicly suggested the shift may be inevitable," adds Fortune: Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, has said advancing technology could eventually push the workweek down to just three-and-a-half days. Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates has gone further, openly questioning whether a two-day workweek could be the future. Elon Musk has taken the idea to its logical extreme, positing that the need to work altogether could cease... Tech innovation could "probably" lead to a transition toward four-day workweeks, [Nvidia CEO Jensen] Huang said on Fox Business in August...

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

AI startups now outnumber all publicly traded U.S. companies, according to a year-end note to investors from economists at Vanguard. And yet that report also suggest the jobs most susceptible to replacement by AI "are actually thriving, not dying out," writes Forbes: "The approximately 100 occupations most exposed to AI automation are actually outperforming the rest of the labor market in terms of job growth and real wage increases," the Vanguard report revealed. "This suggests that current AI systems are generally enhancing worker productivity and shifting workers' tasks toward higher-value activities..." The job growth rate of occupations with high AI exposure — including office clerks, HR assistants, and data scientists — increased from 1% in pre-COVID-19 years (2015 through 2019) to 1.7% in 2023 and beyond, according to Vanguard's research. Meanwhile, the growth rate of all other jobs declined from 1.1% to 0.8% over the same period. Workers in AI-prone roles are getting pay bumps, too; the wage growth of jobs with high AI exposure shot up from 0.1% pre-COVID to 3.8% post-pandemic (and post-ChatGPT). For all other jobs, compensation only marginally increased from 0.5% to 0.7%... As technology improves production and reallocates employee time to higher-value tasks, a smaller workforce is needed to deliver services. It's a process that has "distinct labor market implications," Vanguard writes, just like the many tech revolutions that predate AI... "Entry-level employment challenges reflect the disproportionate burden that a labor market with a low hiring rate can have on younger workers," the Vanguard note said. "This dynamic is observed across all occupations, even those largely unaffected by AI..." While many people see these labor disruptions and point their fingers at AI, experts told Fortune these layoffs could stem from a whole host of issues: navigating economic uncertainty, resolving pandemic-era overhiring, and bracing for tariffs. Vanguard isn't convinced that an AI is the reason for Gen Z's career obstacles. "While statistics abound about large language models beating humans in computer programming and other aptitude tests, these models still struggle with real-world scenarios that require nuanced decision-making," the Vanguard report continued. "Significant progress is needed before we see wider and measurable disruption in labor markets."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The tech industry needs to move "beyond the arguments of slop vs sophistication" and develop a new "theory of the mind" that accounts for humans now equipped with "cognitive amplifier tools," Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella wrote in a year-end reflection blog. The post frames 2026 as yet another "pivotal year for AI" -- but one that "feels different in a few notable ways." Nadella claims the industry has moved past the initial discovery phase and is now "beginning to distinguish between 'spectacle' and 'substance.'" He argues for evolving beyond Steve Jobs' famous "bicycles for the mind" framing, positioning AI instead as "scaffolding" for human potential rather than a substitute. "We will evolve from models to systems when it comes to deploying AI for real world impact," Nadella writes, adding that these systems must consider their societal impact on people and the planet. "For AI to have societal permission it must have real world eval impact."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.