Aaron Gilbert, Auckland University of Technology; Ayesha Scott, Griffith University; Qian Wang, Auckland University of Technology, and Sommer Kapitan, Auckland University of TechnologyThe way a product is labelled can change how consumers think about it. “No added sugar” or “99% fat free” can make food sound healthier than it really is. The same might apply to buy now, pay later schemes. Marketed as a convenient way to pay for purchases over time, they are fundamentally still a form of debt. Products such as Afterpay, Klarna and Zip (which recently exited the New Zealand market) offer consumers access to items they may not be able to immediately afford. Speedy approval and an easy checkout add to the appeal, but can also encourage overspending, while missed payments can bring late fees and mounting debt. Part of the product’s attraction, particularly among younger consumers wary of credit cards, has been the idea that it is different from conventional borrowing. Our new research set out to interrogate this further: if it feels more like a normal payment, does that affect how people use buy now, pay later? And might better financial literacy protect them? Debt by another nameBuy now, pay later emerged in the early 2010s and quickly became commonplace in New Zealand. It can now be used for everything from fast fashion and takeaway food to dental treatment. Typically, consumers borrow relatively small amounts and repay them over four fortnightly instalments, without interest or establishment fees. Providers charge vendors a small percentage (2% to 8%) on each sale, but also earn substantial revenue from late fees charged to consumers. Approval has traditionally been fast and easy, making these services accessible to people who might struggle to obtain conventional credit. For years, the law treated this form of borrowing differently, too. Because providers generally charged no interest or credit fees, their products fell outside New Zealand’s main consumer credit law. That changed in September 2024 when buy now, pay later was brought under the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act. Users gained many protections applying to other borrowers, although providers remain exempt from some requirements applying to conventional credit. A recent review by Consumer NZ and FinCap concluded those reforms have not reduced financial harm among users. It called for further protections, including mandatory affordability assessments and tighter controls on late fees. The product indeed still carries risks. Its use has been linked with overspending, financial hardship and using other debt to meet repayments. Regulation may have changed how this form of credit is legally treated. But that doesn’t necessarily mean consumers have changed how they think about it. When perceptions guide behaviourWe surveyed young New Zealand adults to investigate how they perceive buy now, pay later, and whether those perceptions were related to how they used it. The results suggest the marketing message is working. Four in ten respondents didn’t see it as debt, while nearly half thought it carried fewer consequences than other forms of borrowing. Among users, 43% had used other forms of credit, including credit cards, to meet repayments. Just over half (55%) had incurred late penalties, and nearly one in eight had done so three or more times. Those who failed to recognise the product as debt were more likely to borrow elsewhere to meet repayments, while those who thought it was cheaper or carried fewer consequences used it more frequently. The most surprising findings concerned financial literacy. Those who reported receiving financial education were less likely to recognise buy now, pay later as debt, while those with higher financial capability were more likely to use other forms of debt to meet repayments. Interestingly, those who borrowed elsewhere to make repayments were less likely to incur late fees. This could suggest some consumers recognise the immediate cost of missing a payment, but manage that risk by shifting the debt elsewhere. Greater debt-related knowledge, however, was associated with better use of the product. Why might financial education and capability fail to protect consumers in the ways we might expect? One possibility is that people struggle to apply their knowledge in unfamiliar financial contexts. Learning to look through the labelOur findings point to a larger challenge for financial educators: teaching people to apply what they know about existing financial products to new forms of financial technology. That’s becoming harder as financial products evolve faster than financial education. Twenty years ago, understanding savings accounts, credit cards, mortgages and managed funds covered much of the financial landscape consumers were likely to encounter. Today they face buy now, pay later products, cryptocurrencies, non-fungible tokens – digital assets whose ownership is recorded on a blockchain – and exchange-traded funds that allow investors to buy into collections of assets through a single investment. Educators cannot realistically explain every new product before consumers encounter it. Financial education therefore needs to do something more fundamental: teach people how to look through the label. Consumers should ask: What obligation am I taking on? What can I lose? What happens if things go wrong? And who benefits if I misunderstand the product? Financial literacy is still vital. Our findings show debt knowledge and practical money-management skills were associated with better outcomes, including fewer late fees and less reliance on other credit to meet repayments. But knowing how traditional financial products work is only useful if consumers recognise when those lessons apply to something new. That becomes harder when a product is marketed to feel simpler, safer and different from conventional borrowing. Financial education therefore needs to equip consumers to recognise the underlying financial relationship, whatever name or technology is attached to it. Sometimes debt by another name is still debt. Aaron Gilbert, Professor of Finance, Auckland University of Technology; Ayesha Scott, Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Business School, Auckland University of Technology and Senior Lecturer in Finance & Financial Planning, Griffith University; Qian Wang, PhD Candidate in Economics and Finance, Auckland University of Technology, and Sommer Kapitan, Associate Professor of Marketing, Auckland University of Technology This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. |
‘Buy now, pay later’ doesn’t feel like debt. For young people, that can be a big problem (2026-09-23T13:10:00+05:30)
Gwyneth Paltrow, Chris Martin were determined to "stay a family" after divorce (2026-09-22T12:57:00+05:30)
 (Photo : IANS/Gwyneth Paltrow/insta) Los Angeles, September 20 (IANS) Hollywood actress Gwyneth Paltrow has shared that she and Chris Martin were determined to "stay a family" after they parted ways. The actress and the Coldplay frontman, who share Apple, 22, and 20-year-old Moses together, grabbed headlines when they used the phrase "conscious uncoupling". The couple announced their marriage was over in 2014. The 53-year-old actress has now explained the origins of the viral term and how she and the Yellow hitmaker had sought expert help on how to make the transition as smooth as possible for their kids. She appeared on the ‘Friends Keep Secrets’ podcast, and said, “We really sat down and thought, like, is there a way that we could do this? I talked to all my friends who came from a divorced household and I said, ‘Tell me what was the worst thing? Like, what do you feel you have scars from to this day?’”. She went on, “They said the worst part was like my parents, you know, my dad used to drop me off at the end of the driveway. Like it was so tense at my birthday parties, you know, they never ate dinner in the same room until my college graduation, and it caused me so much pain. So I was like, how could we not do that?”. The actress further mentioned that she wanted her kids to grow up in a situation where “you’re all having dinner at the same table” after a graduation, and so she and Chris consulted a therapist. She continued, “So Chris and I had this therapist that was really brilliant, and he sort of introduced us to the concept and we just made a commitment to really put the kids first and so what that meant was to stay a family even though we weren’t a couple”. However, she said that things weren't always easy and while they committed to have brunch as a family of four every Sunday when they left London for Los Angeles, there was one particular occasion Gwyneth felt “might go really off the rails”. “It was getting tense and we looked at each other and we went outside on the front porch and we’re like, ‘Let’s just not. Let’s just, you know, let’s just not’, and we just hugged and we were like, ‘Okay, fist bumped and then we went to brunch”, she added. The actress is now married to Brad Falchuk. She earlier told Amy Poehler on her ‘Good Hang’ podcast earlier this year, “I was supposed to do a movie at one point and it was like right after the conscious uncoupling thing with Chris, and there was a lot of harsh stuff in the press”.“I think the distributor was like, this might be too hot to touch. So that was great because I was getting a divorce and then I got fired. So it was so awesome”, she added. Gwyneth Paltrow, Chris Martin were determined to "stay a family" after divorce | MorungExpress | morungexpress.com: |
How to protect yourself from misinformation in the digital world (2026-09-15T10:34:00+05:30)
 UW Professor Cindy Aden greets attendees. With the exponential growth of social media, online news sources (credible and otherwise), chat groups, and artificial intelligence (AI), more and more people are using the internet as their primary source of news and information. While much of this information is credible, much is not. And emerging tools like AI are making it increasingly difficult to separate the accurate from the harmful. In an effort to help local consumers of information sort through this, the Friends of the Edmonds Library offered a Tuesday afternoon program aimed at helping us become more savvy in identifying and acting on misinformation. Led by Jason Young and Cindy Aden, both representatives from the University of Washington’s Information School, the session focused on the important role that emotion plays in misinformation, and how to improve and build your personal digital acumen so you are better prepared to explore online. “One distinction I want to make right off the bat is the difference between misinformation and disinformation,” began Aden. “It comes down to where the information comes from and why. Misinformation is inaccurate information that may be unintentional. Disinformation on the other hand is formulated to intentionally deceive and manipulate. Sometimes it’s difficult to tell these apart. Knowing the source can help, but it’s not foolproof. But one thing is for certain: with the growth in social media, it is much easier to spread misinformation. “The concept of alternative facts is almost mind-boggling,” she continued. “Folks can say whatever they want, regardless of whether it has any basis in fact. It allows them to stay within their own realm of what they think should be true. This leads to an effect we call conformation bias where you only look for information that supports your chosen beliefs and at the same time you ignore information that doesn’t support your point of view.” She went on to explain that part of confirmation bias is that our brains are always looking for a more efficient way to interpret information and have a natural bias to maintaining what we already believe. It’s simply easier for the brain to say, “oh yeah, this fits with what I already believe” than to say, “oh wait, this fact doesn’t fit so I need to re-examine and perhaps change my core beliefs.” In the latter case, your brain is forced to either reinterpret the new information to fit its chosen beliefs, ignore the new information, or – most difficult of all – change its core beliefs. “Our brain looks for familiar patterns, and it’s truly frightening to give these up,” she explained. “We want to find something safe and familiar. It’s extremely difficult for folks with deeply entrenched beliefs to change their minds.” Advertiser Content  And social media feeds this. One way is by using algorithms that in effect curate your information by looking for things similar to what you’ve looked for before and then presenting them to you. And the advent of new and more sophisticated techniques using AI and deep fakes adds to the problem of differentiating between what is real and what is not. “And for increasing numbers of folks, social media is their only source of information,” she added.  “So there’s the problem,” said Jason Young as he took over the session. “For the rest of today, we’ll be looking at what we can do about it.” He went on to explain that the two major drivers of the misinformation problem are changes in technology and a social shift that has resulted in many folks simply not wanting the truth anymore. They want to embrace false things because they’re more comfortable that way – that’s classic confirmation bias. “First technology,” he continued. “Today anyone with a cell phone and an internet connection can say anything they want and people on the other side of the world hear it instantly. AI can produce fake photos (remember when we used to say pictures don’t lie – we can’t say that anymore), and fake videos, where a misinformation purveyor can make politicians and officials – anyone really – look like and say whatever they want.”  Professor Jason Young explains how to sift through online information to separate the real from misinformation.He pointed out that this kind of misinformation targets not just your mind, but your emotions as well. By playing on emotions the misinformation purveyor hopes to get you to react more quickly than you should by confusing you and getting you to take action without thinking. “The classic example is getting a call from a grandchild in trouble who needs money right away,” he said. “The voice sounds right, and the kid knows your name, so you rush to the 7-Eleven, buy a cash card and give the number to the scammer without taking time to think it through. Only later you learn that the child’s voice was faked and your money is gone.” Young then presented a simple technique to raise media literacy and help you see through misinformation. It’s called SIFT – the S stands for stop; the I for investigate; the F for find other coverage; and the T for trace the information to the original source.  “Stop is the vital first step,” he explained. “When you find potentially suspicious information, don’t immediately act on it, share it or anything else. Next check out the source – ask yourself is there is a reason you should believe it, is it credible, is it something you’ve heard of before? If it smells funny, do a Google search on the source’s name. Then check the subject matter – Google is great for this too. Has anyone else reported on this? Can you find where the story originated? If an image is involved do a Google image search to see where else it’s been published.” He then provided an example from a real post on X (formerly Twitter):  “You see this, and it’s emotional, it’s scary,” he explained. “A zombie virus that poses a threat to humans, comes from Russia, and will be unleashed by climate change. Pushes lots of buttons, right?” But go back to SIFT. First check out the source, Buzzing Pop – is it credible, has any other news organization reported this? Check for other information about zombie viruses. Check the photo to see if it’s real, created, or from somewhere unrelated. “This will take you less than five minutes with Google,” he added. Young then took up how to detect false images and videos generated or altered by AI. “AI is getting better all the time,” he explained, “and it’s getting harder to see through it. At this time, deep fakes still have trouble with image backgrounds, eyeglasses, teeth and hair, so if these don’t look quite right, you’re likely dealing with a fake, but newer AI techniques are making it harder to tell.”  In the two images above, the girl on the left is real. But look at the man on the right. The hair doesn’t look natural, and the background is mottled. He’s a fake. “But our old SIFT technique still applies,” he concluded. “When you encounter something that seems odd, stop and take a moment to look closely. Is it asking you to do something weird? Is it trying to make you click on a link?” If you do a Google image search on a person’s face, it will give info on where that face has appeared before – if there’s no backstory, you’re likely dealing with an AI-generated fake. “The bottom line is to be careful. Remember that people have lied and hidden truths forever, but technology is making it so much easier and widespread.” he added. “Don’t share something (especially if it’s sensational and you just feel drawn to click it) on social media until you check the sources and do the research. Try to be aware of your own confirmation biases, avoid following clickbait, and don’t get pulled in by buzzwords and emotional content. The purveyors of misinformation are getting better all the time, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a lot of good information out there, and little bit of thought and fact-checking will go a long way to helping you separate the good from the bad.”— Story and photos by Larry Vogel How to protect yourself from misinformation in the digital world |
India needs secure, interoperable, and technology-neutral critical communications architecture: Experts (2026-09-07T11:19:00+05:30)
 (File Photo/IANS) New Delhi, (IANS) Government, industry and global experts called for a secure, interoperable, and technology-neutral critical communications architecture at the Critical Communications India Conference that concluded on Thursday. Harinder Kumar, Secretary, TRAI, urged a coordinated push to ensure that interoperable critical communications capability reaches every intended user. Broadband India Forum (BIF), in association with the Critical Communications Association (TCCA) held the conference. “Critical communications is a complex ecosystem and the requirements differ for different kinds of disasters. India has made significant progress in strengthening public warning systems but the focus must now shift towards ensuring that these capabilities reach every intended user and continue evolving with technology," Kumar said. "We also need to understand why captive private networks have not yet scaled in the country and address the barriers to their adoption," he added. Kumar urged DoT, the Ministry of Home Affairs, disaster management agencies and telecom service providers to collaborate to build hardened telecom infrastructure in disaster-prone areas. The Conference brought together senior representatives from government, regulators, public safety and disaster management agencies, standards organisations and the global mission-critical communications industry. The conference focused on aspects of proof of concept, interoperability of networks and devices along with the evolution of the next generation of device ecosystems. It also focused on control centers and aspects related to backward compatibility with legacy devices along with the interoperability and implementation pathways for next-generation critical communications networks. Experts discussed whether India should have a dedicated BB-PPDR Network or should utilise the capacity of the existing operators’ commercial network. Participants stressed the importance of seamless interoperability, priority communications for first responders, operational resilience and extensive field testing to ensure that systems perform reliably in the worst of times. Participants deliberated the successful Proof of Concept undertaken by the state level police and public safety agencies in coordination with Directorate of Coordination Police Wireless (DCPW) at 6 different locations spread across different geographies and terrains and climatic conditions.An expert session emphasised the valuable operational learnings from extensive user trials, and the importance of continued stakeholder engagement to support future deployment. India needs secure, interoperable, and technology-neutral critical communications architecture: Experts | MorungExpress | morungexpress.com |
Counting on Fingers Really Helps Kids Improve Their Math Skills–By 40% New Study Shows (2026-09-07T11:16:00+05:30)
 By Yan Krukau via Public Domain on Pexels22-08-2025, Some teachers consider finger counting a signal that youngsters are struggling with math, while others associate its use as advanced numerical knowledge. Now, new research is the first to show that children’s performance in arithmetic can show a “huge” improvement through the teaching of a finger-counting method. Swiss and French teams explored whether finger counting can help primary-school-aged children to solve math problems. They said adults rarely use their fingers to calculate a small sum, because such behavior could be attributed to cognitive impairments or “pathological difficulties” in math. But young children under age 8 who use their fingers to solve such problems may be seen as intelligent, probably because they have already reached a level that allows them to understand that a quantity can be represented by different means. The research aimed to determine whether children who don’t count on their fingers can be trained to do so, and whether such training would result in enhanced arithmetic performance. The study, published in the journal Child Development, focused on 328 five- and six-year-old children at kindergarten, mainly living in France, and tested their abilities to solve simple addition problems. The kindergarteners were recruited through their teachers, who voluntarily took part in the experiment, which included a pre-test, training held over two weeks, a post-test closely after the training’s end, and a delayed post-test. The results showed an “important increase” in performance between pre- and post-test for the trained children who did not count on their fingers originally—from 37% to 77% of correct responses—compared to non-finger users in the control group. Whether children who use finger counting are using it as an arithmetic procedure or understand something deeper about numbers will still need to be determined with future research. “Our findings are highly valuable because, for the first time, we provide a concrete answer to the long-standing question of whether teachers should explicitly teach children to use their fingers for solving addition problems,” said study leader Dr. Catherine Thevenot. “Finger calculation training is effective for over 75% of kindergartners,” she added. “The next step is to explore how we can support the remaining 25% of children who didn’t respond as well to the intervention.” Dr. Thevenot, of the Institute of Psychology at the University of Lausanne, Switzerland, says the study came about as a result of conversations with primary school teachers. “They often asked me whether they should encourage or discourage children from using their fingers to solve calculations. “Surprisingly, the existing research didn’t offer a clear answer, which left teachers understandably frustrated with my frequent response of ‘I don’t know.’ “This recurring question, coupled with the lack of concrete evidence, inspired me to investigate the issue myself. “When I first saw the results, I was amazed by the huge improvement in performance among children who didn’t initially use their fingers to solve the problems. “Before our intervention, these children were only able to solve about one-third of the addition problems during a pre-test. After training, however, they were solving over three-quarters of them. “This improvement truly exceeded my expectations,” said Dr. Thevenot. “The difference was striking, especially compared to the control groups, where gains were insignificant. “An important question now is to determine whether what we taught to children goes beyond a mere procedure to solve the problems. “In other words, we want to know whether our intervention led to a deeper conceptual understanding of numbers, specifically whether children better grasp how to manipulate the quantities represented by their fingers. “In fact, we have already started addressing this question and the initial results are very promising. However, we still need to carry out additional experiments to confirm that these improvements are indeed a direct result of our training program.” Counting on Fingers Really Helps Kids Improve Their Math Skills–By 40% New Study Shows |
Drew Barrymore reveals ‘50 First Dates’ was originally a ‘hardcore drama’ with different ending (2026-09-06T12:00:00+05:30)
 Mumbai, August 25 (IANS) Hollywood star Drew Barrymore has revealed that the iconic film “50 First Dates” originally had a far more dramatic ending than the romantic conclusion and that it was supposed to be a “hardcore drama”. Speaking to Brett Goldstein on her show The Drew Barrymore Show, the actress shared details about the film’s original script, which would have ended with her character Lucy and Henry going their separate ways before reconnecting years later. The conversation started with Goldstein telling the actress that 50 First Dates is one of his favourite films. Barrymore shared that Adam Sandler was present in the show the other night. Goldstein replied: “I love him. I think it is so beautiful, that film. You two are so wonderful together. But it's also like, as a concept, I think it's the most romantic idea. And I love that at the end, she isn't cured. There's no, every day they have to start again and show why they love each other.” Calling it a beautiful film, Goldstein shared: “It's the most romantic idea in the world.” To which Barrymore replied: “It's funny, you know, there was a different ending originally.” Goldstein asked: “Did she get cured?” Barrymore replied: “No. Well, we found this script. It was called Fifty First Kisses. But then they changed that because they thought that was too girly. So we went with dates. Gold: It worked because I watched it.” She added: “And kisses may have been a turnoff to males. And we didn't want to do that. And the script we originally had was a hardcore drama. And at the end, it originally ended where they broke up. And a long time later, he realized he didn't want to live without her.” “So he walks into the diner. And he just walks in and he goes, Hi, I'm Henry. And she looks at him. She goes, Hi, I'm Lucy. And that's it.” Barrymore said that she mourns that ending.“I know, it's pretty good, right? I will always mourn that ending because I think it still is hopeful without the bow at the end. But I think the film is perfect the way it is. And that's what Ted Lasso does to me, too, is it's like heart and humor are at the cornerstone.” Drew Barrymore reveals ‘50 First Dates’ was originally a ‘hardcore drama’ with different ending | MorungExpress | morungexpress.com |
Shell’s New Concept EV Designed to Charge in Under 10 Minutes and Run at 6 miles per kWh (2026-08-27T12:25:00+05:30)
 The Triple 10 Concept Car – credit, Shell, released Shell have unveiled an all-electric concept car to inspire the next generation of European-made mass-market EVs by focusing on lighter weights and better charging technology. Known as the “Triple 10 Challenge Car,” its design is centered around a simplified, single-circuit cooling architecture to efficiently manage the thermal load of charging, even with the 175 kilowatt-hour fast chargers installed on the continent today. Triple 10 refers to a car with a charge time of 10 minutes or less, that drives with a 10 kilometer (6 miles) per kilowatt-hour efficiency, and which generates 10 tons of CO2 across its whole lifecycle. Ask any motor head (or petrol head, if you’re in the UK) how many concept cars they’ve seen make it no further than a prototype, and you’d do well to find a seat as you listen to all the examples they’re likely to list. Shell make no bones about the Triple 10 car, which has no estimated list price, being a “proof-of-concept vehicle designed to inspire a new design philosophy for the next generation of battery electric vehicles,” but the accomplishments and technology they were able to pack into a compact-size vehicle are nevertheless impressive. Europe is facing an unprecedented challenge to its automotive industry as the EVs the continent’s governments have long incentivized and championed—to the point of banning internal combustion engines at future dates—are suddenly coming not from northern Italy or southern Germany, but from China. With price inflation in the Eurozone for automobiles rising between 20% and 25% between 2020 and 2025, the advent of a sub-20 grand electric vehicle has been a welcome relief for European consumers, who are choosing models like Leapmotor, BYD, and Geely at higher and higher rates than comparable models made by continental badges Volkswagen or Renault. Shell’s Triple 10 concept closely models these Chinese brands that are rapidly gaining in popularity among the bloc, namely something well-made and compact that charges quickly, in contrast to “the current reliance on ever-larger batteries.” “With the Triple 10 Challenge concept car, we have unlocked the potential for faster charging, lighter systems and improved lifecycle efficiency by using our advanced thermal fluids,” said Cara Tredget, VP for Mobility & Lubricants Technology at Shell. “Together with our co-engineering partners, we are proud to develop alternative options for sustainable EV development leveraging technologies that are available today and are scalable to support customers into the future.” Shell’s concept has been designed to achieve 10 km/kWh in driving economy with a smaller, more efficient battery system, adding over 30% improvement in overall energy efficiency compared to many current-generation EVs. For example, the extended range model of one of the best-selling Chinese EVs in Europe, the BYD Dolphin, comes with a 43 kilowatt battery pack giving it just over 300 kilometers of range, or an efficiency of around 13.3 km/kWh. The Triple 10 vehicle is also able to charge the battery from 10% to 80% in 9 minutes 54 seconds, without compromise to thermal stability or lifespan. While some EVs in the market today can charge in under 10 minutes, this requires using an ultra-fast charger in excess of 300kW, which is uncommon on the public charging network. Triple 10 Challenge vehicle is able to attain this on the existing charging network infrastructure using a standard 175kW charger, adding an equivalent to almost 90% more range added per minute of charge.The key to these performance metrics is Shell Recharge thermal fluid. Unlike traditional cooling systems that use water-glycol, Shell’s dielectric fluid allows for direct immersion cooling of the battery and indirect cooling of the powertrain components including the motor and power electronics. Shell’s New Concept EV Designed to Charge in Under 10 Minutes and Run at 6 miles per kWh |
‘Vibe coding’ is fun and easy, but there’s a major catch (2026-08-17T11:53:00+05:30)
|
Imagine you’ve always wanted your own app. Perhaps one that tracks your household budget, organises the family shopping list or reminds you when to water your plants. Until recently, turning that idea into reality would have meant learning to code or paying a software developer. Now you can simply tell an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot about your idea. Within minutes, it can write the code, fix errors and help you build a working app. This approach is known as vibe coding. It’s fast, exciting and is making it possible for millions of people to create software for the first time. It’s easy to see why vibe coding has become so popular. Yet researchers have already found thousands of security flaws and exposed secrets in publicly available AI-generated applications. Software that appears to work isn’t always software you can trust. What is vibe coding?The term “vibe coding” was coined by AI researcher Andrej Karpathy. Rather than writing the software yourself, you describe the outcome you want – or the “vibe” – in plain, everyday language and let AI generate most or all of the software. If something doesn’t work, you ask the AI tool to fix it. You don’t necessarily need to understand how the code works – you just keep prompting until you get the result you’re after. Tools such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and specialised generative AI based coding assistants have made this possible. In fact, the most recent survey by major coding platform Stack Overflow revealed that 84% of developers globally used or planned to use AI coding tools in 2025. And it’s not just developers using them: recent stats indicate about 63% of users of vibe coding platforms are people without a programming background, building products and tools of their own. People with little or no programming experience can now build websites, apps and automated workflows (such as compiling documents or doing other complex tasks) in a fraction of the time it once took. Building reliable softwareMost people imagine software developers spend their days writing code. In reality, coding is only one part of a much bigger process. Before software is released, developers ask important questions. Does it work reliably? Is it secure? Can someone else maintain it? What happens if something goes wrong? They test different situations, review each other’s work and fix problems before anyone else uses the software. These steps aren’t there to slow developers down. They’re there because even software that seems to work for its purpose can still expose sensitive data or disrupt critical systems. Vibe coding can make it tempting to skip much of this process. If the app appears to work, it’s easy to assume the job is finished. The risks of vibe codingNow, suppose you ask AI to build an app to manage your household expenses. The app opens, records your purchases and calculates your spending. Everything seems fine. But is it calculating correctly in every situation? Is your financial information stored securely? What happens if the app crashes halfway through entering your monthly expenses? Or perhaps it stores your financial data in a way that’s easy for others to access. The app does exactly what you asked – but your personal information may not be properly protected. These aren’t questions most beginners think to ask, yet they’re exactly the kinds of questions professional developers routinely consider. Fixing problems can also become frustrating. You ask the AI to solve one issue, only to discover it has introduced another somewhere else. Without understanding what the AI has changed, you’re left relying on it to solve problems it may have created. When is vibe coding enough?None of this means vibe coding should be avoided entirely. It’s an excellent way to experiment with ideas, learn programming concepts or quickly build personal tools. Entrepreneurs can create prototypes, hobbyists can automate repetitive tasks, and small organisations can explore ideas that might otherwise never get built. The risks increase when AI-generated software is treated as ready for real-world use simply because it works. Apps that handle personal information, financial transactions or business operations still need careful testing and human oversight, regardless of who – or what – wrote the code. In one security study, about 45% of AI-generated code samples failed standard security tests. The broader issue goes beyond coding. Researchers have long warned about “automation bias” – the tendency to accept recommendations from automated systems without adequately checking them. As AI becomes better at solving complex tasks, it’s becoming easier to accept its answers without questioning them. Software is just one area where this can have serious consequences, because mistakes may remain hidden until something goes wrong. AI can write code, but it can’t take responsibilityVibe coding is opening software development to people with great ideas but little programming experience. But making software easier to create doesn’t make it easier to judge whether it’s secure, reliable and ready for others to use. No matter how good AI becomes at generating code, people – not AI – must remain responsible for what that code does. Salahuddin Azad, Lecturer, School of Engineering and Technology, CQUniversity Australia and Ritesh Chugh, Professor, Information and Communications Technology, CQUniversity Australia This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. |
Your questions answered on donor conception and IVF (2026-06-17T12:06:00+05:30)
 The highest IVF success rates are reported in women under 30 who have an around a 26% chance of having a baby. Philippe Put/Flickr, CC BY Thanks to IVF and donor conception, infertile couples, single women and lesbian couples now have a better chance of starting families. But while you might know someone who has gone through the process, it’s rarely openly discussed. Last month, you submitted your questions about donor conception and IVF and we put them – and some of our own – to The Conversation’s experts in law, embryology, sociology, psychology and donor conception. Here are your questions answered (scroll down ): 1. How much are men compensated for donating sperm and women for donating eggs? 2. Where do donors come from? 3. What sort of identifying information is filed about open donors on the information register? 4. When and how should you tell children they’re donor-conceived? 5. What kind of contact can donors expect when their offspring are adults? 6. What are the options for gay men to start a family? 7. What logistical barriers do lesbian couples face when starting a family? 8. Who goes on the birth certificate when using a sperm or egg donor? And what about if the couple is same-sex? 9. How much does IVF cost? 10. What are the success rates for IVF? 11. Is sex selection legal in Australia? Should it be? 12. How long can donor eggs and sperm stay in the freezer? 13. How difficult is it to obtain information about overseas donors/surrogates? 14. How are donor eggs and sperm transported interstate and overseas? 15. What barriers do donor-conceived people face in obtaining information about their biological mother or father? 16. Can donor-conceived people access information about their donor if they were conceived before anonymity was abolished? 17. Will using donor eggs from a younger woman increase my chances? 18. What motivates men to donate sperm, and women to donate eggs? 19. Why do I need ICSI (sperm injections) if I use donor sperm? Q1. How much are men compensated for donating sperm and women for donating eggs?A. Deborah Dempsey, sociologist: In Australia, human eggs and sperm cannot be treated as goods that are bought or sold. It’s permissible to pay egg and sperm donors “reasonable expenses” (such as travel and parking) and medical costs incurred in the process of making their donation. Although the actual sum paid varies, for sperm donors it is generally around A$250 per donation. For egg donors, it is substantially more as it’s a much more invasive medical procedure. Women are required to self-inject drugs for several days to hyper-stimulate their ovaries and need to be monitored to ensure there are no serious side effects. Eggs must be extracted by a medical practitioner, and this usually requires an anaesthetic and a half-day stay in hospital. If there is too great a financial gain attached to providing eggs and sperm, one concern is that people will be motivated by money rather than a desire to help infertile men or women, and this could cause harm. Potential donors, for instance, may be more likely to conceal a health condition that could be passed on to intended parents or children because they wanted to receive the fee. The issue of compensation is currently a hot topic due to a national shortage of both egg and sperm donors in Australia. In April, one group of fertility clinics made headlines for offering A$5,000 payments to cover egg donors’ expenses. Debate centred around whether this flat fee could be considered an “inducement” to participate, just as it did several years ago when a different clinic offered A$7,000 to Canadian students willing to come to Australia for a working holiday and to donate sperm. I agree with a number of other scholars who argue it’s time we looked seriously at whether the principle of “reasonable expenses” is useful in taking into account the actual risks, costs and inconveniences incurred by egg and sperm donors, and the interests of children born from such donation. Q2. Where do donors come from?A. Loretta Houlahan, embryology lecturer: Clinic-recruited donation is probably the most well-known method of donation. Because of the critical shortage of donor eggs and sperm in Australia, some clinics are now recruiting from overseas. This is generally permitted if it complies with local laws. Patients can also ask someone they know to donate to them. This is commonly a friend or family member, however, some people may find their donor through online forums as well. Advertising online is subject to many legal restrictions, so be careful if you go down this route. Sperm donation can also occur outside the clinic environment. Private insemination with donor sperm is not necessarily illegal, but potential medical and legal issues can arise from these arrangements. Unlike clinic-recruited donors, private donors are not screened for infectious diseases and donors often advertise online without their true identities being confirmed. There are pros and cons to both clinic and private donation, however, patients should seek medical and legal advice if they choose the latter. Q3. What sort of identifying information is filed about open donors on the information register?A. Fiona Kelly, legal scholar: Under Australian guidelines, all donors in Australia are required to be “open donors”. Anonymous donors ceased to be available across the country in 2005, though some states abolished anonymity earlier. The guidelines require fertility clinics in Australia to collect the following information from sperm and egg donors:
Clinics are also obliged to tell egg and sperm donors that it is their ethical responsibility to keep the clinic informed about any changes to their health that may be relevant to the persons born or the recipients of their donation, and about changes to their contact details. Clinics are not required to proactively gather additional health information or change of address details. So it’s possible that the information a donor-conceived person receives when they turn 18 is not up to date. In some states and territories, such as Victoria and New South Wales, donor information is held in a central register, while other states and territories require the clinics to maintain the data. Q4. When and how should you tell children they’re donor-conceived?A. Damian Adams, donor conception researcher: Discovering you’re donor-conceived later in life can potentially lead to confusion, anger and distrust of the family members who kept the secret from you. Some researchers argue that telling children earlier in life causes less harm. Associate Professor Ken Daniels, a sociological researcher into donor conception, writes that “a child should never be able to remember a time when he/she did not know”. Others suggest it should at least occur before the identity construct window of adolescence occurs. As there is currently no evidence that more problems arise by telling early, doing so while young has the least potential to create problems. There are numerous books on the market that can assist parents in how to tell, as well as numerous online resources. One of the better ones is run by the Victorian Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority (VARTA) which has been running very successful “Time to Tell” campaigns for many years and has numerous informative pages on their website dealing with this. Q5. What kind of contact can donors expect when their offspring are adults?A. Roger Cook, psychology scholar: When offspring reach adulthood it’s possible for them to initiate contact with their donor, the outcome of which is varied. Some offspring reach strong relationships with their donor parent and some do not. There are, of course, some offspring who do not want to make contact. Typically, however, if both the donor and the offspring are enthusiastic and prepared for contact, an on-going relationship can emerge but it’s not usually a parenting relationship. Often, the young adult can develop and maintain positive relationships with his or her biological father or mother but retain affection for the parents who raised them. Q6. What are the options for gay men to start a family?A. Deborah Dempsey, sociologist: Australian gay men’s pathways to creating families with children are diverse, although relatively limited compared to men in the United States. Australian gay men’s history of involvement in known sperm donation for lesbian and single heterosexual friends and acquaintances dates from at least the 1980s. Some men are able to negotiate “donor dad” or parental relationships with children conceived in this way. For gay men who are US residents, adoption is a well-documented path to parenthood. Though laws in some Australian states do not permit gay men or lesbians to adopt. And relatively few children are available for adoption in Australia. La Trobe University researcher Jennifer Power and her colleagues investigated family make up in the 2012 Work, Love and Play study. Of the 88 gay and bisexual men who described themselves as “actively involved” in parenting a child:
Q7. What logistical barriers do lesbian couples face when starting a family?A. Deborah Dempsey, sociologist: Lesbian couples using clinical donor insemination, known donor insemination or IVF to form families with children must navigate a complex range of logistical, social and emotional issues. Finding a suitable known donor can be difficult because of the need for compatible expectations about parenthood. Men may want more or less involvement than the lesbian parents feel comfortable with; they may feel awkward or uncertain about the responsibilities attached to giving sperm; or their partners may not approve of the idea. For some lesbian couples, deciding who will become pregnant and whose eggs will be used will be straightforward and for others, it will be emotionally difficult. It really depends on how the women view the issue of being genetically related to the child, and their feelings about how important it is to become pregnant and give birth.  Reciprocal IVF is not available in Australia unless the couple has fertility problems. Danny Hammontree/Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND
In some US states, a procedure called “reciprocal IVF” is offered so both women can have a biological relationship to the child. One woman provides the egg, while the other becomes pregnant and gives birth. However this procedure is currently only possible in Australia if the couple has fertility problems. Q8. Who goes on the birth certificate when using a sperm or egg donor? And what about if the couple is same-sex?A. Fiona Kelly, legal scholar: Where a couple or single woman has used assisted reproduction (ART) to conceive, the donor is not named on the birth certificate. Rather, the recipient parent(s), who are the legal parents of the child, are named, provided they were married or in a de facto relationship at the time of conception. In all states and territories, the woman who gives birth to a child born as a result of ART is the “mother” of that child. When a married woman or a woman in a de facto relationship with a man becomes pregnant as a result of assisted reproduction her partner is presumed to be the father, provided he consented to the procedure. All Australian jurisdictions also presume the same-sex partner of a birth mother who has used ART to conceive is a legal parent of a child born. In other words, same sex couples and opposite sex couples are treated identically. The language that is used on birth certificates may vary. For example, in Western Australia, the partners may register as “mother” and “parent”; “mother” and “mother”; or “parent” and “parent”. In the ACT, a person may be registered as “mother”, “father” or “parent”. Several states make a notation on the child’s birth certificate, indicating that further information is available about the child’s birth. The notation ensures the child can determine that he or she is donor conceived, particularly in the event of the child not having been informed by their parents of the nature of their conception. Q9. How much does IVF cost?A. Loretta Houlahan, embryology lecturer: Back in 1987, the cost of IVF treatment was about A$3,500 to A$4,500 and the pregnancy rate was around 40-50% after three attempts. At the time, Professor Carl Wood, one of the pioneers of Australian fertility treatment, said:
Arguably, the reverse has occurred with live birth rates reported to be as low as 4% at one IVF clinic. Further, despite a large proportion of IVF now being subsided by Medicare, the going rate for a fresh IVF cycle is around A$10,000, with out-of-pocket expenses commonly over A$4,000 before private health insurance rebates. Using donor sperm or eggs costs more again, with clinic-recruited donor sperm usually costing around A$1,000 per treatment. Although, actually paying a donor for their eggs or sperm remains illegal. Q10. What are the success rates for IVF?A. Loretta Houlahan, embryology lecturer: Fitness guru Michelle Bridges recently caused a stir when she suggested her ability to conceive naturally at 44 was because of her and her partner’s healthy lifestyle. While lifestyle factors such a smoking and weight will play a role, the biggest contributing factor to infertility is the woman’s age. So while Michelle Bridges’ 12-week body challenge may reduce your body mass index, drinking protein shakes and running on the treadmill cannot turn back the clock. The highest success rates are reported in women under 30 who have around a 26% chance of having a baby with IVF. Women over 40 have around a 6% chance, and as for women 44 or older such as Michelle, the chance of going home with a baby is less than 1%. Michelle was lucky. Most women her age would need donor eggs. There is also a wide discrepancy between the success rates of IVF providers. The last report showed overall results ranged from 4% at one clinic to 30.9% at another. There is also evidence to suggest having a younger male partner may improve IVF outcomes in women. This doesn’t necessarily mean women should go out looking for a young male sperm donor, it just shows there are many factors at play, many of which are out of patients’ control. Q11. Is sex selection legal in Australia? Should it be?A. Deborah Dempsey, sociologist: Sex selection using assisted reproductive technology is only legal in Australia to reduce the risk of transmission of a serious genetic conditions, such as duchenne muscular dystrophy. Sex selection of embryos created through IVF is done using a technique called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). This technique enables the removal of one or more cells from an embryo so it can be tested for genetic abnormalities prior to implantation. Clinics providing PGD must be accredited by the Fertility Society of Australia, which requires them to comply with National Health and Medical Research Council ethical guidelines. Some Australians would like to use PGD for “family balancing” reasons. Australians often consider it ideal to have at least “one of each” in their family, although in many parts of the world there is a cultural preference for sons. Australians are known to travel overseas to obtain sex selection services in countries where clinicians will perform PGD for non-medical reasons. While I understand that some parents have a very strong desire to have children of both sexes, my personal view is the practice is undesirable and discriminatory. If we take the “family balancing” idea seriously enough to legally facilitate it, we are perpetuating the view that boys and girls are so different from each other that families with children of one sex are “unbalanced” and somehow deficient. There would also be no impediment to using the procedure to support more extreme forms of gender discrimination, for example, in cases where families favour having sons. Q12. How long can donor eggs and sperm stay in the freezer?A. Loretta Houlahan, embryology lecturer: Donor eggs and sperm are often frozen before they’re given to recipients. This allows donors to be tested for infectious diseases and genetic abnormalities, transported interstate or overseas, if needed, and to be readily available for patients who need them. Some people express concerns about the survival rates of donor eggs or sperm that were frozen many years ago. But as long as they’re stored correctly, there is no biological limit on the amount of time eggs or sperm can remain in frozen. Just like Elsa in the movie Frozen, the cold never bothered them anyway, and staying frozen doesn’t reduce their thaw survival rates. There is also limited information about the success of egg freezing in general. So while we know eggs can survive the thaw process, we don’t know the how many babies are being born from this process. Sperm isn’t usually vitrified like eggs are, but advances in sperm freezing technology have also improved success rates over time. So, to sum it up, donor eggs and sperm can theoretically remain frozen indefinitely – although there are legal restrictions on this. Q13. How difficult is it to obtain information about overseas donors/surrogates?A. Damian Adams, donor conception researcher: Australian clinics are mandated to follow National Health and Medical Research Council’s guidelines which stipulate that all donor-conceived people (since the guidelines came into effect in 2005) are entitled to know identifying information on the donor once they reach 18 years of age. Subsequently, if clinics are sourcing eggs or sperm from overseas, the information available must meet our guidelines. We are yet to see whether any donor-conceived people have trouble accessing this information as those conceived under these guidelines as they’re yet to turn 18. Those conceived prior to this will be at the mercy of whatever agreement the Australian clinic and the overseas clinic had in the supply of those gametes and associated information. The donor-conceived are then also reliant on a foreign business maintaining and looking after those records. Anecdotal evidence from older donor-conceived people overseas does not paint a rosy picture of possible outcomes from seeking information, although it is hoped that their practices have also changed for the better as has been the case in Australia. Q14. How are donor eggs and sperm transported interstate and overseas?A. Loretta Houlahan, embryology lecturer: After eggs and sperm are frozen, they need to be kept in liquid nitrogen, which is about minus 196 degrees Celsius. This can make transportation tricky, as liquid nitrogen is really dangerous, and if it was to leak it could easily kill the courier or the any one else around at the time. Luckily, scientists have come up with a special device called a “dry shipper” which allows frozen embryos, eggs and sperm to be transported safely while keeping everyone safe. Dry shippers absorb the liquid nitrogen in the walls so it doesn’t leak, but it still keeps everything cold. Very occasionally, this process can fail, but most transportation occurs successfully without any damage to patient material. Q15. What barriers do donor-conceived people face in obtaining information about their biological mother or father?A. Damian Adams, donor conception researcher: This is highly dependent on when the person was born and which state they were born in. Those conceived from 2005 onwards around Australia, and 1998 onwards in Victoria, are entitled to access identifying information. Prior to those dates, donations were primarily anonymous. Research my colleagues and I published in 2012 on accessing information in Australia showed some people found dealing with the clinics quite difficult (others have found them helpful), and if information was available that there was no national consistency on what information was recorded. In some instances, records had been destroyed or redacted. We have also seen instances of registers failing to match people who were later matched through DNA testing. So, some younger offspring may find it easy, while older offspring may find it difficult or even impossible. Q16. Can donor-conceived people access information about their donor if they were conceived before anonymity was abolished?A. Fiona Kelly, legal scholar: The only state in which donor records have been opened retrospectively is Victoria. As of June 2015, all donor-conceived people who were conceived in Victoria may apply for access to their donor’s identifying information, with the donor’s consent. In other states, there is no right of retrospective access. However, in a number of states, such as NSW and WA, donor-conceived people may place their names on a voluntary registry. If both the donor-conceived person and the donor register, access is permitted by mutual consent. Q17. Will using donor eggs from a younger woman increase my chances?A. Loretta Houlahan, embryology lecturer: Women over 40 are the main recipients of donor eggs. Using donor eggs from a younger woman significantly increases the chances of success. However, using donor eggs doesn’t eliminate all complications. Women who use donated eggs have a higher risk of developing serious complications, specifically high blood pressure and pre-eclampsia. Although it was thought these dangers may have been linked to the age of the birth mother and not the egg donor, the real reason remains unknown. There is also a difference between fresh and frozen eggs to consider. Fresh is best because the success rate with thawed eggs remains unclear. However, this option is not always available where donor eggs are involved. Until only recently, egg freezing was considered experimental so we are still learning a lot about this process. Q18. What motivates men to donate sperm, and women to donate eggs?A. Roger Cook, psychology scholar: Both sexes are motivated, at least in part, by a sense of altruism. In the past, some men were enticed to donate by payments, albeit very low amounts. This became less common through the 1980s and now some clinics provide some reimbursement but no inducement payments. The Human Tissue Act of 1982 prohibits commercial profiting from semen donation. Financial reward is not a current motivation.  Some donors are unlikely to have children of their own and want to be fathers. Dave Lawler/Flickr, CC BY-NC-NDThe motivation for men to donate sperm changed somewhat after laws were introduced prohibiting anonymous donation. Donors must now be prepared to be identified and allow contact with their donor children. This has reduced the number of men donating, as the necessity of identification is incompatible with their sense of privacy. Another motivation for some men is a desire to be biological fathers, particularly when they’re unlikely to form a parenting relationship with a woman. Women are usually more reluctant than men to give away their DNA, except when they have had their own experience of IVF. This is likely related to the significance of pregnancy and child birth experience, which men experience in a different way. Women who donate their eggs are have been through infertility treatments such as IVF, and therefore have some understanding of the distress that follows such circumstances. Their motivation is to help other women who are not able to produce their own viable eggs. Q19. Why do I need ICSI (sperm injections) if I use donor sperm?A. Loretta Houlahan, embryology lecturer: A common source of confusion for patients is why they need to use intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) when using donor sperm. ICSI is usually preserved for treatment where the male partner has a low sperm count and costs a lot more than a standard IVF treatment. The main reason ICSI is used is because of the critical shortage of donor sperm. To enable supply to meet demand, the donor sperm sample may be diluted. This way it can be used in more patient treatments. The downside to this is that because diluted samples contain such a low volume of sperm, ICSI is required for the insemination procedure. ICSI is also required to inseminate frozen-thawed eggs. In order to freeze eggs, the “cumulus cells” that surround them need to be removed. In natural conception, as well as standard IVF, the cumulus cells act like a maze and the sperm are required find their way through these cells to get to the egg. It also acts like a barrier to limit the number of sperm that reach the end point. Without the cumulus cells in-tact, the risk of more than one sperm fertilising the egg is too high, so ICSI is used to avoid an abnormal fertilisation. With ICSI, the embryologist can ensure only one sperm enters the egg. Damian Adams, PhD candidate, Flinders University; Deborah Dempsey, Senior Lecturer - Sociology, Swinburne University of Technology; Fiona Kelly, Senior Lecturer in Law, La Trobe University; Loretta Houlahan, Casual Lecturer, Master of Clinical Embryology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, and Roger Cook, Associate Professor; Director, Psychology Clinic, Swinburne University of Technology This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. |
Telling children early seems to work best. 