Funding & Investment in Travel
Weaving reality or warping it? The personalization trap in AI systems
Want smarter insights in your inbox? Sign up for our weekly newsletters to get only what matters to enterprise AI, data, and security leaders. Subscribe Now
AI represents the greatest cognitive offloading in the history of humanity. We once offloaded memory to writing, arithmetic to calculators and navigation to GPS. Now we are beginning to offload judgment, synthesis and even meaning-making to systems that speak our language, learn our habits and tailor our truths.
AI systems are growing increasingly adept at recognizing our preferences, our biases, even our peccadillos. Like attentive servants in one instance or subtle manipulators in another, they tailor their responses to please, to persuade, to assist or simply to hold our attention.
While the immediate effects may seem benign, in this quiet and invisible tuning lies a profound shift: The version of reality each of us receives becomes progressively more uniquely tailored. Through this process, over time, each person becomes increasingly their own island. This divergence could threaten the coherence and stability of society itself, eroding our ability to agree on basic facts or navigate shared challenges.
AI personalization does not merely serve our needs; it begins to reshape them. The result of this reshaping is a kind of epistemic drift. Each person starts to move, inch by inch, away from the common ground of shared knowledge, shared stories and shared facts, and further into their own reality.
The AI Impact Series Returns to San Francisco – August 5
The next phase of AI is here – are you ready? Join leaders from Block, GSK, and SAP for an exclusive look at how autonomous agents are reshaping enterprise workflows – from real-time decision-making to end-to-end automation.
Secure your spot now – space is limited: https://bit.ly/3GuuPLF
This is not simply a matter of different news feeds. It is the slow divergence of moral, political and interpersonal realities. In this way, we may be witnessing the unweaving of collective understanding. It is an unintended consequence, yet deeply significant precisely because it is unforeseen. But this fragmentation, while now accelerated by AI, began long before algorithms shaped our feeds.
The unweaving
This unweaving did not begin with AI. As David Brooks reflected in The Atlantic, drawing on the work of philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre, our society has been drifting away from shared moral and epistemic frameworks for centuries. Since the Enlightenment, we have gradually replaced inherited roles, communal narratives and shared ethical traditions with individual autonomy and personal preference.
What began as liberation from imposed belief systems has, over time, eroded the very structures that once tethered us to common purpose and personal meaning. AI did not create this fragmentation. But it is giving new form and speed to it, customizing not only what we see but how we interpret and believe.
It is not unlike the biblical story of Babel. A unified humanity once shared a single language, only to be fractured, confused and scattered by an act that made mutual understanding all but impossible. Today, we are not building a tower made of stone. We are building a tower of language itself. Once again, we risk the fall.
Human-machine bond
At first, personalization was a way to improve “stickiness” by keeping users engaged longer, returning more often and interacting more deeply with a site or service. Recommendation engines, tailored ads and curated feeds were all designed to keep our attention just a little longer, perhaps to entertain but often to move us to purchase a product. But over time, the goal has expanded. Personalization is no longer just about what holds us. It is what it knows about each of us, the dynamic graph of our preferences, beliefs and behaviors that becomes more refined with every interaction.
Today’s AI systems do not merely predict our preferences. They aim to create a bond through highly personalized interactions and responses, creating a sense that the AI system understands and cares about the user and supports their uniqueness. The tone of a chatbot, the pacing of a reply and the emotional valence of a suggestion are calibrated not only for efficiency but for resonance, pointing toward a more helpful era of technology. It should not be surprising that some people have even fallen in love and married their bots.
The machine adapts not just to what we click on, but to who we appear to be. It reflects us back to ourselves in ways that feel intimate, even empathic. A recent research paper cited in Nature refers to this as “socioaffective alignment,” the process by which an AI system participates in a co-created social and psychological ecosystem, where preferences and perceptions evolve through mutual influence.
This is not a neutral development. When every interaction is tuned to flatter or affirm, when systems mirror us too well, they blur the line between what resonates and what is real. We are not just staying longer on the platform; we are forming a relationship. We are slowly and perhaps inexorably merging with an AI-mediated version of reality, one that is increasingly shaped by invisible decisions about what we are meant to believe, want or trust.
This process is not science fiction; its architecture is built on attention, reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) and personalization engines. It is also happening without many of us — likely most of us — even knowing. In the process, we gain AI “friends,” but at what cost? What do we lose, especially in terms of free will and agency?
Author and financial commentator Kyla Scanlon spoke on the Ezra Klein podcast about how the frictionless ease of the digital world may come at the cost of meaning. As she put it: “When things are a little too easy, it’s tough to find meaning in it… If you’re able to lay back, watch a screen in your little chair and have smoothies delivered to you — it’s tough to find meaning within that kind of WALL-E lifestyle because everything is just a bit too simple.”
The personalization of truth
As AI systems respond to us with ever greater fluency, they also move toward increasing selectivity. Two users asking the same question today might receive similar answers, differentiated mostly by the probabilistic nature of generative AI. Yet this is merely the beginning. Emerging AI systems are explicitly designed to adapt their responses to individual patterns, gradually tailoring answers, tone and even conclusions to resonate most strongly with each user.
Personalization is not inherently manipulative. But it becomes risky when it is invisible, unaccountable or engineered more to persuade than to inform. In such cases, it does not just reflect who we are; it steers how we interpret the world around us.
As the Stanford Center for Research on Foundation Models notes in its 2024 transparency index, few leading models disclose whether their outputs vary by user identity, history or demographics, although the technical scaffolding for such personalization is increasingly in place and only beginning to be examined. While not yet fully realized across public platforms, this potential to shape responses based on inferred user profiles, resulting in increasingly tailored informational worlds, represents a profound shift that is already being prototyped and actively pursued by leading companies.
This personalization can be beneficial, and certainly that is the hope of those building these systems. Personalized tutoring shows promise in helping learners progress at their own pace. Mental health apps increasingly tailor responses to support individual needs, and accessibility tools adjust content to meet a range of cognitive and sensory differences. These are real gains.
But if similar adaptive methods become widespread across information, entertainment and communication platforms, a deeper, more troubling shift looms ahead: A transformation from shared understanding toward tailored, individual realities. When truth itself begins to adapt to the observer, it becomes fragile and increasingly fungible. Instead of disagreements based primarily on differing values or interpretations, we could soon find ourselves struggling simply to inhabit the same factual world.
Of course, truth has always been mediated. In earlier eras, it passed through the hands of clergy, academics, publishers and evening news anchors who served as gatekeepers, shaping public understanding through institutional lenses. These figures were certainly not free from bias or agenda, yet they operated within broadly shared frameworks.
Today’s emerging paradigm promises something qualitatively different: AI-mediated truth through personalized inference that frames, filters and presents information, shaping what users come to believe. But unlike past mediators who, despite flaws, operated within publicly visible institutions, these new arbiters are commercially opaque, unelected and constantly adapting, often without disclosure. Their biases are not doctrinal but encoded through training data, architecture and unexamined developer incentives.
The shift is profound, from a common narrative filtered through authoritative institutions to potentially fractured narratives that reflect a new infrastructure of understanding, tailored by algorithms to the preferences, habits and inferred beliefs of each user. If Babel represented the collapse of a shared language, we may now stand at the threshold of the collapse of shared mediation.
If personalization is the new epistemic substrate, what might truth infrastructure look like in a world without fixed mediators? One possibility is the creation of AI public trusts, inspired by a proposal from legal scholar Jack Balkin, who argued that entities handling user data and shaping perception should be held to fiduciary standards of loyalty, care and transparency.
AI models could be governed by transparency boards, trained on publicly funded data sets and required to show reasoning steps, alternate perspectives or confidence levels. These “information fiduciaries” would not eliminate bias, but they could anchor trust in process rather than purely in personalization. Builders can begin by adopting transparent “constitutions” that clearly define model behavior, and by offering chain-of-reasoning explanations that let users see how conclusions are shaped. These are not silver bullets, but they are tools that help keep epistemic authority accountable and traceable.
AI builders face a strategic and civic inflection point. They are not just optimizing performance; they are also confronting the risk that personalized optimization may fragment shared reality. This demands a new kind of responsibility to users: Designing systems that respect not only their preferences, but their role as learners and believers.
Unraveling and reweaving
What we may be losing is not simply the concept of truth, but the path through which we once recognized it. In the past, mediated truth — although imperfect and biased — was still anchored in human judgment and, often, only a layer or two removed from the lived experience of other humans whom you knew or could at least relate to.
Today, that mediation is opaque and driven by algorithmic logic. And, while human agency has long been slipping, we now risk something deeper, the loss of the compass that once told us when we were off course. The danger is not only that we will believe what the machine tells us. It is that we will forget how we once discovered the truth for ourselves. What we risk losing is not just coherence, but the will to seek it. And with that, a deeper loss: The habits of discernment, disagreement and deliberation that once held pluralistic societies together.
If Babel marked the shattering of a common tongue, our moment risks the quiet fading of shared reality. However, there are ways to slow or even to counter the drift. A model that explains its reasoning or reveals the boundaries of its design may do more than clarify output. It may help restore the conditions for shared inquiry. This is not a technical fix; it is a cultural stance. Truth, after all, has always depended not just on answers, but on how we arrive at them together.
Source link
JORDAN’S tourism revenues rose 11.9 per cent year on year in the first half of 2025 to reach $3.67 billion, underscoring the sector’s resilience amid geopolitical tensions in the region.
According to data from the Central Bank of Jordan, the growth came despite a slight setback in June, when monthly revenues fell 3.7pc to $619.2 million, state-run Petra news agency reported.
Despite this, Jordan’s performance reflects a broader tourism surge across the Middle East, with a May release by the World Travel and Tourism Council showing the sector added $341.9bn to gross domestic product and 7.3m jobs in 2024, with projections of $367.3bn and 7.7m jobs in 2025.
Saudi Arabia led the region with a 148pc rise in international tourism revenue in 2024, according to its Ministry of Tourism, while Oman, the UAE, and Qatar continued to attract strong visitor flows through investment, connectivity, and major events.
Citing the central bank data, Petra said: “Tourism revenues from Asian visitors surged by 42.9pc during the first half of the year, while revenues from European tourists increased by 35.6pc, Americans by 25.8pc, Arabs by 11.5pc, and other nationalities by 43.0pc.”
It added: “Conversely, revenues from Jordanian expatriates visiting the kingdom registered a modest decline of 0.8pc over the same period.”
Spending by Jordanians on outbound tourism rose 3.3pc year on year in the first half of 2025, reaching $999.7m, despite a 22.7pc decline in June alone, when spending fell to $195.6m.
This comes on the back of a strong start to 2025, with Jordan welcoming 1.51m visitors in the first quarter – a 13pc increase from the same period last year – while receipts rose 8.85pc to 1.22bn Jordanian dinars ( $1.72bn), according to the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities’ first-quarter report.
The recovery was further supported by the return of air connectivity, which had nearly disappeared in 2024. New agreements with European carriers expanded the number of low-cost direct routes to 25 this year, including 20 to Amman for the summer and five to Aqaba in the winter. These routes are expected to bring in around 270,000 travellers, the report added.
Looking ahead, the ministry said it is developing a new National Tourism Strategy for 2025–2028, building on the previous plan and aligning with the country’s Economic Modernisation Vision.
The updated roadmap aims to diversify source markets, including China, India, Russia, Africa, and Southeast Asia, and promote high-potential segments such as medical, wellness, faith-based, adventure, and meetings, incentives, conferences, and exhibitions, or MICE, tourism.
Funding & Investment in Travel
Hoe Ping Lo Named Finalist in Five Categories at the 2025 AusMumpreneur Awards – Travel Industry Today
Trusted News Since 1995
A service for travel industry professionals
·
Sunday, July 20, 2025
·
832,465,114
Articles
·
3+ Million Readers
Funding & Investment in Travel
EU visa waiver explained: When must I apply for an Etias and how will travel from the UK work?
When will British travellers to the European Union and wider Schengen Area need to apply in advance for an online permit? The short answer is: not before 2027.
EU officials had originally confirmed that the much delayed “entry-exit system” would take effect on 10 November 2024.
From that date, it was thought that every UK traveller entering the Schengen Area would need to be fingerprinted and provide a facial biometric. (The requirement will not apply to British visitors to Ireland, in the European Union but outside Schengen.)
But the deadline was missed. Now the European Union says EES will start to be rolled out from 12 October 2025 with completion by 9 April 2026.
The European Travel Information and Authorisation System (Etias) can only function once the Entry/Exit System is fully working.
It is due to launch six months after that. The EU says Etias will launch in the final quarter of 2026 – some time from October to December.
But for at least another six months the Etias will be optional. So you will not need one before April 2027 at the earliest.
What is Etias?
British travellers and those from all other “third-country visa-free nationals” (as the UK chose to become after Brexit) will need provide information in advance so that frontier officials know more about them on arrival – and to identify people who the EU wants to keep out.
Etias, the next step in tightening frontier controls, is a online permit system that is similar to the US Esta scheme. It will cost €20 (£17) and is valid for three years, or until the passport reaches three months to expiry, whichever comes first.
“UK nationals are required to have a valid Etias travel authorisation if they travel to any of the European countries requiring Etias for a short-term stay (90 days in any 180-day period),” says the EU.
“Its key function is to verify if a third-country national meets entry requirements before travelling to the Schengen Area.”
The zone covers almost all of the EU (apart from Ireland) plus Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.
When will I need one?
Here is the timeline of the essential roll-out:
- 12 October 2025: EU Entry/Exit System starts across at least 10 per cent of frontier posts, with central registration of people crossing the border in or out of the Schengen Area. But the biometric elements – face and fingerprints – will not be mandatory for the first 60 days; it may be that some states do this anyway. Passports continue to be stamped.
- December 2025: Biometrics become mandatory at frontier posts operating the EES.
- January 2026: By now, “member states should operate the Entry/Exit System – with biometric functionalities – at a minimum of half of their border crossing points”. In other words, a majority of visitors are likely to experience “double red tape”: providing EES biometrics but continuing to have passports stamped as well.
- 9 April 2026: Roll-out of Entry/Exit System should be complete. Only when the EES is running flawlessly across Europe will passports stop being stamped.
- October 2026 (or later): Etias may finally come into play.
The EU says: “Starting six months after EES, some 1.4 billion people from 59 visa-exempt countries and territories are required to have a travel authorisation to enter most European countries.”
But “required” is not exactly correct. It will be only on a voluntary basis initially. The European Union says the launch of Etias will be followed by “a transitional period of at least six months”.
The EU says: “For travel during this time, travellers should already apply for their Etias travel authorisation, but those without one will not be refused entry as long as they fulfil all remaining entry conditions.”
Those conditions are basically the existing requirements for passport validity:
- Issued no more than 10 years earlier on the day of entry to the European Union.
- Valid for at least three months on the intended day of departure from the EU.
The earliest, therefore, that any British traveller or other “third-country national” will need an Etias is April 2027.
Once the “transitional period” is over, a further “grace period” of at least six months will apply on a one-time only basis to British travellers who turn up without an Etias.
The European Union says: “There is an exception: only those coming to Europe for the first time since the end of the transitional period will be allowed to enter without an Etias provided they fulfil all remaining entry conditions.
“All other travellers will be refused entry if they do not hold an Etias travel authorisation.”
The grace period will last at least six months.
How will I apply for an Etias?
At the heart of the system is an Etias website. An app will follow (any apps that currently purport to be official EU Etias apps are imposters).
Travellers will be required to submit personal information including name, address, contact details in Europe and passport data. They must also state an occupation (with job title and employer). Students must give the name of their educational establishment.
The applicant must give details of any serious convictions in the past 20 years.
Travellers must also provide the reason for their journey (holiday, business, visiting family, etc), specify the Schengen Area country they will first arrive in, and provide the address of their first night’s stay – which will pose a problem for tourists who like to make plans as they go along.
It is likely that for subsequent journeys the traveller will not be expected to update the information. My understanding is that information on where you are going and staying, and the reason for your trip. is needed only at the application stage. The form should be completed with reference to your first journey.
As with the US Esta, after you have been admitted once and returned home you should be able to enter again without updating such information online.
The fee is €20 (£17) for all applicants aged 18 to 70. While those under 18 or over 70 will still need to apply for and hold an Etias, they need not pay.
What happens to the information?
Every application will be checked against EU and relevant Interpol databases, as well as “a dedicated Etias watch-list”.
The system will be tuned to pick out individuals suspected of being involved in terrorism, armed robbery, child pornography, fraud, money laundering, cybercrime, people smuggling, trafficking in endangered animal species, counterfeiting and industrial espionage.
In a case of mistaken identity, will I be able to appeal?
Yes. If you are suspected of one or more of the above offences, but in fact have led a blameless life, you will be allowed to argue your case. Details of how to appeal will be included with the notice of rejection.
How far in advance must I apply?
The aim is for an Etias to be granted in most circumstances within minutes, though even a straightforward application could take up to four days.
If an application is flagged (ie there is a “hit” with one of the databases) the prospective visitor may be asked to provide additional information. Alternatively, says the EU, the applicant may be asked “to participate in an interview with national authorities, which may take up to additional 30 days”.
The European Union says: “We strongly advise you to obtain the Etias travel authorisation before you buy your tickets and book your hotels.”
If I get an Etias, must I print anything out?
No. The frontier guard will get all the information they need from the passport you used to apply for your Etias.
Will my Etias be checked before departure to the EU?
Yes. Most British travellers to Europe will have their Etias status checked by the airline, as currently happens with travel to the US (Esta), Canada (eTA) and many other countries.
Airlines are obliged to ensure passenger comply with the immigration rules of the destination. A couple of them made a complete mess of it when the post-Brexit passport regime took effect, and invented their own rules.
To try to avoid a repeat, I have written to the airlines’ representative body to try to ensure that they are fully aware of the “optional” nature of Etias during the transitional and grace periods before it becomes mandatory.
Is Etias a visa?
This answer to this common question depends on your interpretation of semantics. Officially, it is exactly the opposite of a visa. Europe says that Etias is “a pre-travel authorisation system for visa-exempt travellers”. It is a similar concept to the UK ETA, the US Esta and Canadian eTA, which are not technically visas.
But Etias requires visitors to:
- Apply in advance
- Provide substantial personal information
- Pay money
- Be issued with a permit to cross a border.
So I contend it amounts to a normal person’s understanding of a visa.
Once I have an Etias, am I guaranteed admission to the Schengen Area?
No. “Mere possession of a travel authorisation does not confer an automatic right of entry,” says the EU.
“All travellers arriving at the border are still subject to border checks and border guards will refuse entry to those who do not meet the entry conditions.”
As with the US, travellers can be turned away for any reason, with the Etias permission rescinded.
Must I apply for an Etias every time I travel to Europe?
No. The permit will be valid for three years, or until your passport reaches three months before expiry, whichever is the earlier. (Note also that British passports must not be over 10 years old on the day of entry to the European Union.)
Will I need an Etias to travel to Ireland?
No. Ireland is not in the Schengen Area, and the Common Travel Area – incorporating the UK, Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands – transcends European Union rules.
If I have a visa for study or work, or a long-stay permit from one of the EU nations, must I obtain an Etias?
No.
How are people without internet access supposed to apply?
They will be expected to get a friend, a family member or a travel agent to make the application for them, in the same way as the US Esta and similar schemes.
Just remind us about the 90/180 day rule?
This rule, to which the UK asked to be subject after leaving the European Union, means that British travellers cannot stay more than 90 days in any stretch of 180 days.
As an example of what it means: if you were to spend the first 90 days of 2025 (January, February and almost all of March) in the Schengen area, you would not be able to return until late June.
Is the UK being punished because of Brexit?
No. Work on strengthening the European Union’s external border was already under way before the UK referendum on membership in June 2016. Initially British officials participated in plans for the entry-exit system.
Neither the EES nor Etias would be relevant if the UK was still in the EU. But the nation voted to leave the European Union and the UK government negotiated for British travellers to be classified as third-country nationals – triggering extra red tape.
Will Etias be the next online scam?
Yes. As with other online travel permits, commercial intermediaries are allowed.
But according to Frontex – the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, which is implementing Etias – there are many scam sites out there that are likely to apply fees way above the basic €20 (£17).
Any site other than europa.eu/etias is unofficial and should not be trusted. One “imposter” site claims to have processed 671 applications already; this is impossible since no applications have been processed anywhere.
Another site offers a 40 per cent discount for early applications. Some use the EU logo, which is illegal.
Frontex also warns about the risk of identity theft if personal information is provided to imposter sites.
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week agoAmazon weighs further investment in Anthropic to deepen AI alliance
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week agoHow Elon Musk’s rogue Grok chatbot became a cautionary AI tale
-
Asia Travel Pulse2 weeks agoLooking For Adventure In Asia? Here Are 7 Epic Destinations You Need To Experience At Least Once – Zee News
-
Brand Stories2 weeks agoVoice AI Startup ElevenLabs Plans to Add Hubs Around the World
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week agoUK crime agency arrests 4 people over cyber attacks on retailers
-
AI in Travel2 weeks ago‘Will AI take my job?’ A trip to a Beijing fortune-telling bar to see what lies ahead | China
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week agoEU pushes ahead with AI code of practice
-
Mergers & Acquisitions2 weeks agoChatGPT — the last of the great romantics
-
The Travel Revolution of Our Era1 month agoCheQin.ai Redefines Hotel Booking with Zero-Commission Model
-
Mergers & Acquisitions1 week agoHumans must remain at the heart of the AI story
You must be logged in to post a comment Login