Inside-the-race-to-cut-Russia-off-from-the-global.jpeg

Inside the race to cut Russia off from the global internet

Anton, a 44-year-old Russian soldier who heads a workshop responsible for repairing and supplying drones, was at his kitchen table when he learned last month that Elon Musk’s SpaceX had cut off access to Starlink terminals used by Russian forces. He scrambled for alternatives, but none offered unlimited internet, data plans were restrictive, and coverage did not extend to the areas of Ukraine where his unit operated.

It’s not only American tech executives who are narrowing communications options for Russians. Days later, Russian authorities began slowing down access nationwide to the messaging app Telegram, the service that frontline troops use to coordinate directly with one another and bypass slower chains of command.

“All military work goes through Telegram — all communication,” Anton, whose name has been changed because he fears government reprisal, told POLITICO in voice messages sent via the app. “That would be like shooting the entire Russian army in the head.”

Telegram would be joining a home screen’s worth of apps that have become useless to Russians. Kremlin policymakers have already blocked or limited access to WhatsApp, along with parent company Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, Microsoft’s LinkedIn, Google’s YouTube, Apple’s FaceTime, Snapchat and X, which like SpaceX is owned by Musk. Encrypted messaging apps Signal and Discord, as well as Japanese-owned Viber, have been inaccessible since 2024.

Last month, President Vladimir Putin signed a law requiring telecom operators to block cellular and fixed internet access at the request of the Federal Security Service. Shortly after it took effect on March 3, Moscow residents reported widespread problems with mobile internet, calls and text messages across all major operators for several days, with outages affecting mobile service and Wi-Fi even inside the State Duma.

Those decisions have left Russians increasingly cut off from both the outside world and one another, complicating battlefield coordination and disrupting online communities that organize volunteer aid, fundraising and discussion of the war effort. Deepening digital isolation could turn Russia into something akin to “a large, nuclear-armed North Korea and a junior partner to China,” according to Alexander Gabuev, the Berlin-based director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center.

In April, the Kremlin is expected to escalate its campaign against Telegram — already one of Russia’s most popular messaging platforms, but now in the absence of other social-media options, a central hub for news, business and entertainment. It may block the platform altogether. That is likely to fuel an escalating struggle between state censorship and the tools people use to evade it, with Russia’s place in the world hanging in the balance.

“It’s turned into a war,” said Mikhail Klimarev, executive director of the internet Protection Society, a digital rights group that monitors Russia’s censorship infrastructure. “A guerrilla war. They hunt down the VPNs they can see, they block them — and the ‘partisans’ run, build new bunkers, and come back.”


Telegram messaging app CEO and co-founder Pavel Durov

Telegram messaging app CEO and co-founder Pavel Durov 

GIUSEPPE CACACE/AFP via Getty Images



The app that runs the war

On Feb. 4, SpaceX tightened the authentication system that Starlink terminals use to connect to its satellite network, introducing stricter verification for registered devices. The change effectively blocked many terminals operated by Russian units relying on unauthorized connections, cutting Starlink traffic inside Ukraine by roughly 75 percent, according to internet traffic analysis by Doug Madory, an analyst at the U.S. network monitoring firm Kentik.

The move threw Russian operations into disarray, allowing Ukraine to make battlefield gains. Russia has turned to a workaround widely used before satellite internet was an option: laying fiber-optic lines, from rear areas toward frontline battlefield positions.

Until then, Starlink terminals had allowed drone operators to stream live video through platforms such as Discord, which is officially blocked in Russia but still sometimes used by the Russian military via VPNs, to commanders at multiple levels. A battalion commander could watch an assault unfold in real time and issue corrections — “enemy ahead” or “turn left” — via radio or Telegram. What once required layers of approval could now happen in minutes. Satellite-connected messaging apps became the fastest way to transmit coordinates, imagery and targeting data.

But on Feb. 10, Roskomnadzor, the Russian communications regulator, began slowing down Telegram for users across Russia, citing alleged violations of Russian law. Russian news outlet RBC reported, citing two sources, that authorities plan to shut down Telegram in early April — though not on the front line.

In mid-February, Digital Development Minister Maksut Shadayev said the government did not yet intend to restrict Telegram at the front but hoped servicemen would gradually transition to other platforms. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said this week the company could avoid a full ban by complying with Russian legislation and maintaining what he described as “flexible contact” with authorities.

Roskomnadzor has accused Telegram of failing to protect personal data, combat fraud and prevent its use by terrorists and criminals. Similar accusations have been directed at other foreign tech platforms. In 2022, a Russian court designated Meta an “extremist organization” after the company said it would temporarily allow posts calling for violence against Russian soldiers in the context of the Ukraine war — a decision authorities used to justify blocking Facebook and Instagram in Russia and increasing pressure on the company’s other services, including WhatsApp.

Telegram founder Pavel Durov, a Russian-born entrepreneur now based in the United Arab Emirates, says the throttling is being used as a pretext to push Russians toward a government-controlled messaging app designed for surveillance and political censorship.


Illustration of the MAX app, Oct. 16, 2025

Illustration of the MAX app 

RICCARDO MILANI/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images



That app is MAX, which was launched in March 2025 and has been compared to China’s WeChat in its ambition to anchor a domestic digital ecosystem. Authorities are increasingly steering Russians toward MAX through employers, neighborhood chats and the government services portal Gosuslugi — where citizens retrieve documents, pay fines and book appointments — as well as through banks and retailers. The app’s developer, VK, reports rapid user growth, though those figures are difficult to independently verify.

“They didn’t just leave people to fend for themselves — you could say they led them by the hand through that adaptation by offering alternatives,” said Levada Center pollster Denis Volkov, who has studied Russian attitudes toward technology use. The strategy, he said, has been to provide a Russian or state-backed alternative for the majority, while stopping short of fully criminalizing workarounds for more technologically savvy users who do not want to switch.

Elena, a 38-year-old Yekaterinburg resident whose surname has been withheld because she fears government reprisal, said her daughter’s primary school moved official communication from WhatsApp to MAX without consulting parents. She keeps MAX installed on a separate tablet that remains mostly in a drawer — a version of what some Russians call a “MAXophone,” gadgets solely for that app, without any other data being left on those phones for the (very real) fear the government could access it.

“It works badly. Messages are delayed. Notifications don’t come,” she said. “I don’t trust it … And this whole situation just makes people angry.”

The VPN arms race

Unlike China’s centralized “Great Firewall,” which filters traffic at the country’s digital borders, Russia’s system operates internally. Internet providers are required to route traffic through state-installed deep packet inspection equipment capable of controlling and analyzing data flows in real time.

“It’s not one wall,” Klimarev said. “It’s thousands of fences. You climb one, then there’s another.”

The architecture allows authorities to slow services without formally banning them — a tactic used against YouTube before its web address was removed from government-run domain-name servers last month. Russian law explicitly provides government authority for blocking websites on grounds such as extremism, terrorism, illegal content or violations of data regulations, but it does not clearly define throttling — slowing traffic rather than blocking it outright — as a formal enforcement mechanism. “The slowdown isn’t described anywhere in legislation,” Klimarev said. “It’s pressure without procedure.”

In September, Russia banned advertising for virtual private network services that citizens use to bypass government-imposed restrictions on certain apps or sites. By Klimarev’s estimate, roughly half of Russian internet users now know what a VPN is, and millions pay for one. Polling last year by the Levada Center, Russia’s only major independent pollster, suggests regular use is lower, finding about one-quarter of Russians said they have used VPN services.

Russian courts can treat the use of anonymization tools as an aggravating factor in certain crimes — steps that signal growing pressure on circumvention technologies without formally outlawing them. In February, the Federal Antimonopoly Service opened what appears to be the first case against a media outlet for promoting a VPN after the regional publication Serditaya Chuvashiya advertised such a service on its Telegram channel.

Surveys in recent years have shown that many Russians, particularly older citizens, support tighter internet regulation, often citing fraud, extremism and online safety. That sentiment gives authorities political space to tighten controls even when the restrictions are unpopular among more technologically savvy users.

Even so, the slowdown of Telegram drew criticism from unlikely quarters, including Sergei Mironov, a longtime Kremlin ally and leader of the Just Russia party. In a statement posted on his Telegram channel on Feb. 11, he blasted the regulators behind the move as “idiots,” accusing them of undermining soldiers at the front. He said troops rely on the app to communicate with relatives and organize fundraising for the war effort, warning that restricting it could cost lives. While praising the state-backed messaging app MAX, he argued that Russians should be free to choose which platforms they use.

Pro-war Telegram channels frame the government’s blocking techniques as sabotage of the war effort. Ivan Philippov, who tracks Russia’s influential military bloggers, said the reaction inside that ecosystem to news about Telegram has been visceral “rage.”

Unlike Starlink, whose cutoff could be blamed on a foreign company, restrictions on Telegram are viewed as self-inflicted. Bloggers accuse regulators of undermining the war effort. Telegram is used not only for battlefield coordination but also for volunteer fundraising networks that provide basic logistics the state does not reliably cover — from transport vehicles and fuel to body armor, trench materials and even evacuation equipment. Telegram serves as the primary hub for donations and reporting back to supporters.

“If you break Telegram inside Russia, you break fundraising,” Philippov said. “And without fundraising, a lot of units simply don’t function.”

Few in that community trust MAX, citing technical flaws and privacy concerns. Because MAX operates under Russian data-retention laws and is integrated with state services, many assume their communications would be accessible to authorities.

Philippov said the app’s prominent defenders are largely figures tied to state media or the presidential administration. “Among independent military bloggers, I haven’t seen a single person who supports it,” he said.

Small groups of activists attempted to organize rallies in at least 11 Russian cities, including Moscow, Irkutsk and Novosibirsk, in defense of Telegram. Authorities rejected or obstructed most of the proposed demonstrations — in some cases citing pandemic-era restrictions, weather conditions or vague security concerns — and in several cases revoked previously issued permits. In Novosibirsk, police detained around 15 people ahead of a planned rally. Although a small number of protests were formally approved, no large-scale demonstrations ultimately took place.

The power to pull the plug

The new law signed last month allows Russia’s Federal Security Service to order telecom operators to block cellular and fixed internet access. Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, said subsequent shutdowns of service in Moscow were linked to security measures aimed at protecting critical infrastructure and countering drone threats, adding that such limitations would remain in place “for as long as necessary.”

In practice, the disruptions rarely amount to a total communications blackout. Most target mobile internet rather than all services, while voice calls and SMS often continue to function. Some domestic websites and apps — including government portals or banking services — may remain accessible through “whitelists,” meaning authorities allow certain services to keep operating even while broader internet access is restricted. The restrictions are typically localized and temporary, affecting specific regions or parts of cities rather than the entire country.

Internet disruptions have increasingly become a tool of control beyond individual platforms. Research by the independent outlet Meduza and the monitoring project Na Svyazi has documented dozens of regional internet shutdowns and mobile network restrictions across Russia, with disruptions occurring regularly since May 2025.

The communications shutdown, and uncertainty around where it will go next, is affecting life for citizens of all kinds, from the elderly struggling to contact family members abroad to tech-savvy users who juggle SIM cards and secondary phones to stay connected. Demand has risen for dated communication devices — including walkie-talkies, pagers and landline phones — along with paper maps as mobile networks become less reliable, according to retailers interviewed by RBC.

“It feels like we’re isolating ourselves,” said Dmitry, 35, who splits his time between Moscow and Dubai and whose surname has been withheld to protect his identity under fear of governmental reprisal. “Like building a sovereign grave.”

Those who track Russian public opinion say the pattern is consistent: irritation followed by adaptation. When Instagram and YouTube were blocked or slowed in recent years, their audiences shrank rapidly as users migrated to alternative services rather than mobilizing against the restrictions.

For now, Russia’s digital tightening resembles managed escalation rather than total isolation. Officials deny plans for a full shutdown, and even critics say a complete severing would cripple banking, logistics and foreign trade.

“It’s possible,” Klimarev said. “But if they do that, the internet won’t be the main problem anymore.”

This story originally ran in POLITICO and appears on Business Insider through the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network. The network publishes major stories from the Axel Springer network of publications, a worldwide group of news outlets that includes Business Insider.




Source link

Anthropic-is-dropping-its-signature-safety-pledge-amid-a-heated.jpeg

Anthropic is dropping its signature safety pledge amid a heated AI race

Anthropic is no longer daring to be quite so different.

The AI startup founded by former OpenAI employees, laser-focused on the proper development of the technology, is weakening its foundational safety principle.

In a statement on Tuesday, Anthropic said that amid heightened competition and a lack of government regulation, it will no longer abide by its commitment “to pause the scaling and/or delay the deployment of new models” when such advancements would have outpaced its own safety measures.

The new policy means Anthropic is far less constrained by safety concerns at a moment when its flagship chatbot, Claude, is upending financial markets and sparking concerns about the death of software.

As part of the changes, Anthropic now has separate safety recommendations, called its Responsible Scaling Policy, for itself and the AI industry as a whole. The policy was loosely modeled after the US government’s biosafety level (BSL) standards

Anthropic’s chief science officer, Jared Kaplan, told Time Magazine that the responsible scaling policy was not in keeping with the current state of the AI race.

“We felt that it wouldn’t actually help anyone for us to stop training AI models,” Kaplan told Time. “We didn’t really feel, with the rapid advance of AI, that it made sense for us to make unilateral commitments … if competitors are blazing ahead.”

The new policy still includes a commitment to delay the development or release of “a highly capable” AI model, but only in more limited circumstances.

In a lengthy blog post, Anthropic cited “an anti-regulatory political climate” as part of the reason for its decision. The company and its CEO, Dario Amodei, have pushed for AI regulations with some success on the state level, but without any major steps at the federal level.

“We remain convinced that effective government engagement on AI safety is both necessary and achievable, and we aim to continue advancing a conversation grounded in evidence, national security interests, economic competitiveness, and public trust,” the company wrote. “But this is proving to be a long-term project—not something that is happening organically as AI becomes more capable or crosses certain thresholds.”

The company said the scaling policy was always intended to be “a living document,” which was outlined in the first version in 2023. That said, Amodei has previously said the safety policy was meant to mitigate the risks AI could unleash — even quoting Uncle Ben’s famous admonition to Peter Parker, aka Spider-Man.

“The power of the models and their ability to solve all these problems in biology, neuroscience, economic development, governance, and peace, large parts of the economy, those come with risks as well, right?” Amodei told podcaster Lex Fridman in November 2024. “With great power comes great responsibility.”

Anthropic said another reason for changing the standards is that higher theoretical levels of risk, ASL-4 and beyond, in their framework, cannot be contained by any one company alone. (In the biosecurity world, BSL-4 refers to the highest level of protection that an extremely small number of labs implement to handle pathogens like the Ebola virus.)

Safety is the core of Anthropic’s soul

Amodei has repeatedly said his company’s commitment to safety is evident in one of its first major decisions: holding back on releasing Claude in the summer of 2022.

Looking back on the move, Amodei has said that Anthropic was worried that it could not develop safeguards quickly enough for the public release of a breakthrough technology. OpenAI released ChatGPT in November 2022, kick-starting the AI race. Months later, Anthropic finally released Claude.

“Now, that was very commercially expensive,” Amodei said during a recent interview with billionaire and investor Nikhil Kamath. “We probably seeded the lead on consumer AI because of that.”

One of Claude’s previous training documents is internally referred to as the “Soul doc,” an example of rhetoric that would be out of place at most other AI companies.

Kamath pressed Amodei on how he responds to critics who say Anthropic is just pushing regulation to stop the growth of future competitors. Amodei said the 2022 decision was an example of how is company backs up its talk on safety. He also pointed to advocating for US export controls on advanced chips to China, a position that Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has criticized.

“Anyone who thinks we benefit from being the only ones to do that, it’s really hard to come up with a picture where that’s the case,” Amodei said. “You look at any one of these and, ‘okay, fine,’ but you put enough of them together, and I don’t know, I ask you to judge us by our actions.”




Source link

Alice Tecotzky

Visa is winning the AI race in payments, but the question is whether it will pay off

Visa is winning the AI race in the payments industry, according to a brand new ranking — but no company is revealing quite how much the technology is paying off.

A brand-new index from Evident, a company that tracks AI in finance, lists Visa as no. 1 among 12 global payments companies. Mastercard and PayPal follow in second and third place. Fintech giants like Stripe and Block rank fifth and sixth on the index, demonstrating how quickly newer players have built serious AI firepower.

“With relatively nascent industry players like Stripe and Block performing well — and showing their AI potential reflected in their valuations — the Index leaders cannot afford to drop off the pace,” Alexandra Mousavizadeh, co-founder and co-CEO, said in a press release.

Payment companies — which move money around between banks, businesses, and consumers — run on technology. Evident’s new industry ranking, released Wednesday exclusively to Business Insider, reveals how the companies we interact with every day are using AI, from deciding whether a transaction goes through to detecting fraud.

Whether ranked No. 1 or dead last, all of the companies have at least one thing in common: none have published their achieved or projected ROI across all their AI efforts. By comparison, 10 of the 50 banks that Evident tracks already share those figures.

“The absence of ROI disclosure — or any group targets for AI ROI — is increasingly conspicuous,” Annabel Ayles, co-founder and co-CEO of Evident, said. To justify their expenses, the market will “sooner or later demand clearer evidence of value.”

Together, the dozen companies documented almost 100 AI use cases over the past two years, but the top three punch above their weight — they were responsible for more than half of the use cases recorded in the index. Visa and Mastercard are particularly advanced in using AI for fraud detection and cybersecurity.

Visa, in its 2025 annual report, acknowledged AI competition, noting that some competitors will beef up their products and others will offer employees AI tools.

“If we do not continue to invest in developing and supporting our AI-based initiatives, we may fall behind technological developments,” the report said.

Visa has invested more than $3.5 billion in AI and data over the past decade and employs more than 2,500 technologists working on innovations, including over 300 AI models in production, chief data officer Andres Vives told Business Insider in a statement.

Top firms staffing up aggressively

The index doesn’t focus on specific use cases; instead, it evaluates companies on four criteria: talent, innovation, leadership, and transparency.

Talent has the biggest impact on each company’s ranking, and the report found that the payments industry overall is investing heavily in AI and data hiring. Compared to other financial institutions, the index found that they have 30% more AI-focused workers, even though they generally have smaller workforces. Among the 12 ranked companies and their more than 335,000 employees, an average 6.5% are focused on AI, Mousavizadeh told Business Insider. That 6.5% figure, she added, is the highest concentration of AI talent Evident has found across the sectors it tracks.

PayPal alone accounts for 18% of the AI talent among the indexed companies and employs more than 4,000 AI workers. Stripe and Block also stand out for their density of AI employees, who make up more than 10% of their total workforce.

Payments companies aren’t alone, of course, in focusing on AI talent — technologists specializing in AI are among the most in-demand jobs in the broader financial sector.

The gap in ROI transparency

Leaders at bulge-bracket banks are already facing questions about when they will see AI investments pay off—analysts, for example, pressed JPMorgan leaders on the merits of the bank’s massive technology spending during a recent earnings call. Jamie Dimon, the bank’s CEO, acknowledged tech competition from fintechs on that call, and again from payments companies during the investor conference in February, name-dropping Stripe and PayPal.

For now, AI’s benefits at payments companies are often baked into existing performance measures, such as lower transaction costs, according to the index.

But there are still demands to stay competitive. Evident found that agentic capabilities will likely play a bigger role as companies move from using AI for “defensive necessity to strategic advantage.” (Both PayPal and Mastercard teased AI agents in recent earnings calls, and Visa mentioned the potential of agentic commerce during its fourth-quarter earnings call.)

Overall, Evident found that the payments companies that moved fastest on AI are furthest along in their journeys, and the next competitive milestone may be in financial transparency: the first one to publish comprehensive ROI measures will become another type of “first-mover.”

Here’s the full ranking:




Source link

Lucia Moses

Disney-backed DramaBox is seeking new funding as it tries to win the micro drama race in the US

The battle to become the top micro-drama app in the US is heating up.

DramaBox, one of the leading producers of the short-video format filled with soapy tropes, has been seeking fresh funding from US backers, according to two people with direct knowledge of its efforts.

One said DramaBox’s fundraising goal was $100 million with a $500 million valuation.

DramaBox is part of Singapore-based StoryMatrix, and is behind titles like “A Deal with the Hockey Captain” and “The Lost Heir: A Christmas Reckoning” that it monetizes through one-off payments, subscriptions (usually $20 a week), and ads.

DramaBox did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Executives at DramaBox told Business Insider in September that the company was profitable and that their ambition was to become the most popular micro-drama platform for Americans. They aimed to do so by working with Hollywood filmmakers and diversifying into new storytelling styles and genres, such as series for families and choose-your-own-adventure-style dramas.

Industry reports regularly list DramaBox as one of the top two micro-drama apps, alongside fellow Asian import ReelShort. Analytics firm Sensor Tower estimated that DramaBox generated $120 million in global in-app revenue in the first quarter of 2025, just behind ReelShort’s $130 million. DramaBox countered in the September interview that its numbers were higher, without sharing specifics.

The streaming consulting firm Owl & Co. estimated that the format had generated $1.3 billion in the US in 2025, mostly from direct payments from viewers.

DramaBox already has a connection to Hollywood’s most blue-chip company, Disney, which has invested in DramaBox through its selective accelerator program. Disney said in late 2025 that it was in talks with DramaBox to adapt young adult fantasy novels into original micro dramas and was exploring adapting music albums into vertical short videos.

Investors have been placing bets elsewhere in the space as well:

  • This past fall, Bill Block, the former CEO of Miramax, raised $14 million from investors including Alexis Ohanian, Kris Jenner, and Kim Kardashian, among others, to launch GammaTime. He called it the first “premium micro drama streaming platform.”
  • Fox invested in Holywater, a Ukrainian company behind the micro drama app My Drama.
  • LA-based Bitz Films, which says it’s focused on creating elevated micro dramas in genres like comedy and horror, has raised $1.2 million in pre-seed funding.

Big Tech has also dived in.

Meta’s Instagram is testing the micro drama format in India with a series. TikTok, which is already widely used by short dramas for marketing, added a section called TikTok Minis where you can binge on bite-sized series without leaving the app.

Despite the format’s burgeoning popularity, there are those who question its long-term viability. Some investors told Business Insider they had held back from the space because of concerns that the format wouldn’t succeed in areas beyond its core of female-targeted romances.




Source link