Samsung Nears Wide-Ranging Deal With Perplexity for AI Features
(Bloomberg) -- Samsung Electronics Co. is nearing a wide-ranging deal to invest in Perplexity AI Inc. and put search technology from the artificial intelligence startup at the forefront of the South Korean company's devices.
Billionaire Steve Cohen Wants NY to Expand Taxpayer-Backed Ferry
Where the Wild Children's Museums Are
Now With Colorful Blocks, Tirana's Pyramid Represents a Changing Albania
The Economic Benefits of Paying Workers to Move
NYC Congestion Toll Brings In $216 Million in First Four Months
The two companies are in talks to preload Perplexity's app and assistant on upcoming Samsung devices and integrate the startup's search features into the Samsung web browser, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The firms have also discussed weaving Perplexity's technology into Samsung's Bixby virtual assistant, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the talks are private.
Samsung is planning to announce the Perplexity integrations as early as this year, the people said, with the goal of including the service as a default assistant option in the Galaxy S26 phone line that's slated to launch in the first half of 2026. However, the specific details haven't been finalized and could still change.
The tech giant is also expected to be one of the biggest investors in a new round of funding for Perplexity, the people said. The startup is in advanced discussions to raise $500 million at a $14 billion valuation, Bloomberg News has reported.
The broad tie-up may help Samsung reduce its reliance on Alphabet Inc.'s Google and pave the way for it to work with a mix of AI developers, similar to Apple Inc.'s strategy for its devices and services. For Perplexity, the arrangement would mark its biggest mobile partnership to date and follows a recent integration deal with Motorola.
Representatives for Samsung and Perplexity declined to comment.
The two companies entered discussions about a partnership earlier this year, Bloomberg News reported in April. In recent weeks, the two sides met in South Korea, leading to them closing in on an agreement, the people said.
Samsung and Perplexity have also discussed building an AI-infused operating system and an AI agents app that can tap into functionality from Perplexity and a range of other AI assistants, the people said.
Apple has also shown interest in working with Perplexity. The iPhone maker has discussed using Perplexity as an alternative to Google Search as well as a substitute for ChatGPT integration in the Siri voice assistant, Bloomberg News has reported.
'We've been pretty impressed with what Perplexity has done, so we've started some discussions with them about what they're doing,' Eddy Cue, Apple's senior vice president of services, said during recent testimony at a Google antitrust trial.
It's unclear how Perplexity's relationship with Samsung, one of Apple's fiercest rivals, would affect that.
--With assistance from Shirin Ghaffary and Yoolim Lee.
YouTube Is Swallowing TV Whole, and It's Coming for the Sitcom
Millions of Americans Are Obsessed With This Japanese Barbecue Sauce
Mark Zuckerberg Loves MAGA Now. Will MAGA Ever Love Him Back?
Will Small Business Owners Knock Down Trump's Mighty Tariffs?
Trump Considers Deporting Migrants to Rwanda After the UK Decides Not To
©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Verge
34 minutes ago
- The Verge
Apple keeps pulling its own ads
Apple has taken down a new ad just one day after posting it, making it the fourth one removed in just over a year, as spotted earlier by MacRumors. The nearly eight-minute-long ad, titled 'The Parent Presentation,' featured comedian Martin Herlihy giving students advice on how to convince their parents to buy them a Mac. Apple posted the ad on Friday, but it disappeared from YouTube and the company's webpage for college students on Saturday. The iPhone maker also released an accompanying 81-slide presentation template that's supposed to give parents '45 undeniable reasons why a Mac is essential to college,' which still remains available for download on its site. Last May, Apple apologized for its 'Crush!' commercial, which showed a hydraulic press flattening a piano, record player, paint, and other creative tools, only to lift and show its new iPad Pro at the end. It was meant to demonstrate how many creative tasks can be completed with the device, but it sparked widespread backlash instead. Apple pulled the commercial from TV before removing it from YouTube. Months later, Apple pulled a 10-minute ad, called 'Out of Office OOO,' which showed a group of coworkers using Apple products on a business trip in Thailand, after receiving criticism from Thai citizens and lawmakers for portraying the country in a stereotypical and outdated way. Then, in March of this year, Apple took down an iPhone 16 ad with Last of Us star Bella Ramsey. Apple used the ad to show off an AI-upgraded Siri with features that aren't available yet, like recalling the name of someone they met months ago. Unlike the other ads pulled by Apple over the past year, there's no clear reason why 'The Parent Presentation' was taken down — other than some users on social media calling it 'cringe,' or raising questions about who the commercial's target audience was. The Verge reached out to Apple with a request for comment but didn't immediately hear back.
Forbes
44 minutes ago
- Forbes
The AI Hype Trap: Why Most CEOs Struggle To Unlock Real Business Value
Diganta Sengupta is a seasoned technology leader with deep expertise in artificial intelligence, Gen AI, Cloud computing, and blockchain. While collaborating with clients on cutting-edge AI initiatives, I've had a front-row seat to the rapidly evolving landscape of generative AI (GenAI). There's no doubt that it's a transformative force, and the excitement is palpable. Leaders see GenAI as a powerful enabler of innovation, efficiency and even cultural change within their organizations. But beneath the surface of this enthusiasm, a more sobering reality has started to emerge. I observed leadership become enthusiastic about leveraging AI to unlock insights from massive operational datasets, but the reality quickly became evident. Despite deploying advanced models, the organization lacked the foundational elements for scalable impact. In other words, data was siloed, inconsistent and often not AI-ready. Teams were stretched thin across too many pilot projects without clear alignment to business workflows. Flashy prototypes drew attention but failed to deliver lasting value without reengineering the underlying processes. This mirrors a broader trend. Seventy percent of CEOs fear that flawed AI strategies could lead to their removal, while 54% fear that competitors may already have more advanced AI implementations. AI systems learn from historical data. If that data encodes human biases against certain demographics, regions or business units, the AI will reproduce and even amplify those biases. While developing a prototype using certain datasets for a utility company, for example, I grappled with significant challenges around bias and fairness. These issues persisted despite the presence of seemingly robust governance frameworks. As we trained our AI models on historical operational and customer data, I noticed embedded biases tied to region, demographics and internal processes. These biases not only surfaced in the model outputs but were, in some cases, amplified. My two cents: CEOs must invest in bias-detection tools, diverse development teams and transparency mechanisms long before deploying AI at scale. Without these guardrails, AI initiatives stall as risk-averse stakeholders balk at unverified "black-box" systems. In another project integrating a large language model (LLM)-powered chatbot with an enterprise ERP system, I encountered AI hallucinations as the model confidently generated inaccurate and misleading information about customer orders. Despite rigorous prompt engineering and system tuning, we noticed that the LLM occasionally fabricated responses about inventory levels or order status. This experience echoed findings from a 2024 Boston Consulting Group survey, which revealed that while 75% of executives ranked AI among their top priorities, only 25% reported realizing substantial benefits from their AI initiatives. Tackle hallucinations with robust validation pipelines, keep human-in-the-loop review for critical outputs and ongoing monitoring of model performance. This is where the challenge becomes even more complex. In many of my AI pilots in the oil and gas sector, I've repeatedly seen issues like inconsistent formats, missing metadata and a lack of standardized governance across departments severely impact model performance. Despite having large volumes of rich data, much of it couldn't be used without extensive manual cleanup. Efforts to unify data governance were often sidelined in favor of launching high-profile AI initiatives. A Harvard Business Review Analytic Services survey similarly found that most companies' data is largely not ready for enterprise-wide AI, citing poor data quality as a key barrier. Without strong cross-functional data stewardship and quality assurance, even the most advanced AI models fall short. Before spending on fancy models, CEOs must champion cross-functional data governance, setting up practices on creating common taxonomies, automated data-quality checks and centralized platforms. Only then can AI be relied upon to deliver accurate, actionable insights. Working on the previously mentioned utility AI project also brought light to another critical and often underestimated concern—security and governance challenges that surround enterprise AI deployments. As we integrated sensitive operational and customer data into AI workflows, it became clear how vulnerable these systems can become without rigorous controls. Inadequate access management, insufficient encryption and lack of monitoring can create openings for potential ransomware attacks and unauthorized data exposure. In one survey, 35% of respondents cited mistakes or errors with real-world consequences and 34% pointed to not achieving expected value as top barriers. Both are rooted in security vulnerabilities and governance shortcomings. CEOs must elevate AI risk management to the same level as financial or operational risk. This includes rigorous model-risk frameworks, data-privacy impact assessments and alignment with evolving regulations such as the EU's AI Act. To harness the full potential of AI, I recommend applying practical, accountable strategies that organizations can adopt to drive real, scalable impact. • Establish cross-functional data governance. Form a governance council with IT, compliance and operations to ensure data ownership, accountability and consistent standards. • Implement data quality controls. Deploy automated checks for outliers, schema validation and data freshness to improve input reliability and mitigate bias. • Address LLM hallucinations with RAG. Use retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), prompt chaining and fallback mechanisms to reduce hallucinations. • Align AI projects with business goals. Prioritize initiatives tied directly to key KPIs (for example, safety, cost reduction, etc.), which can improve adoption and leadership support. • Pivot away from noncritical use cases. Reallocate resources from low-impact projects to high-impact workflows like downtime alerts for field engineers. • Focus on responsible AI deployment. Emphasize transparency, accountability and strategic value delivery to build trust and ensure scalability. CEOs who view AI adoption as a multidimensional transformation rather than a plug-and-play technology will be the ones ready to move beyond the hype and truly harness the AI power. The future of competitive advantage lies not just in having AI, but in embedding it thoughtfully and responsibly into the fabric of the enterprise. This will help transform AI from a conceptual promise to a tangible asset and help drive innovation and growth for the organizations. Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
The Financial Frontier of Climate Risk and Resilience
Pedestrians walk past a stock indicator showing share prices of the Tokyo Stock Exchange (top-C) and ... More other overseas stock markets in Tokyo. (Photo by Kazuhiro NOGI / AFP) (Photo credit should read KAZUHIRO NOGI/AFP via Getty Images) As climate impacts intensify and financial markets adapt, two new reports —Howden's Insurability Imperative and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development's 2025 Business Breakthrough Barometer— reveal a reality that diverges sharply from the prevailing narrative. Despite headlines about ESG backlash and net-zero retreats, companies are not abandoning climate goals. They are embedding them into core strategy, shifting from compliance to competitiveness. At the same time, insurers are redrawing the boundaries of investability, making insurability a frontline filter for capital allocation. These trends mark a profound shift in how risk is understood, priced, and managed. Climate change is not tied to political cycles or market sentiment. Its impacts are structural and cumulative, reshaping both the physical world and global finance. As the Barometer notes, 'where governments lead with clarity, business capital follows'. In the absence of coherent policy, insurers are stepping in to decide what can and cannot be financed. With governments falling short, markets are beginning to price in climate resilience —and for many sectors, it's no longer optional. Climate Risk Is Market Risk The Business Breakthrough Barometer underscores this shift. Despite public skepticism and ESG backlash, most companies are not abandoning their goals. Instead, they are reallocating capital based on a more immediate truth, that climate risk has become business risk According to the Copernicus Climate Change Service, we are on track to breach the 1.5 °C warming threshold within six years or less. This is not a future concern but a present financial reality. Record heatwaves, vanishing ice and billion-dollar disasters are reshaping how risk is modeled and priced. As WBCSD president and chief executive Peter Bakker said in an interview: 'The climate won't wait for the market to find consensus. It won't adjust itself to quarterly earnings. What it demands is system change, in how we price risk, share it, and design markets around physical realities.' The economic transition is unfolding in ways that traditional business systems cannot manage. Companies still rely on linear models — forecasts, fixed returns, long timelines — while the net-zero shift is volatile, uneven and often misaligned with policy and consumer behavior. This misalignment plays out across sectors. EV production is accelerating while charging infrastructure lags. Carbon capture projects are stalling amid weak demand signals, while the decarbonisation of buildings is slowed by outdated codes and permitting bottlenecks. In each case, technological readiness is colliding with systems that are not fit for transition. As Bakker argues, sustainability must move from reporting to real governance, from targets to embedded decision-making. That means adopting robust frameworks like the ISSB's S1 and S2, aligning climate strategy with operational and financial reality. The Barometer reveals a decisive shift: 91% of companies surveyed have either maintained or increased their climate-related investments over the past year (as of May 2025). Crucially, 56% cited long-term competitiveness, not compliance, as the main driver. While high-profile exits from alliances like the Net-Zero Banking Alliance or corporate withdrawal and redesign of net zero targets dominate headlines, many firms are shifting focus. They are beginning to embed climate resilience into core business functions such as capital planning, supply chains and governance. 'We've got sufficient data to act,' said Bakker. 'The perfect mustn't delay progress.' Nowhere is this financial recalibration more visible than in insurance markets. Howden's new Insurability Imperative report warns that insurability is becoming a prerequisite for investability. As climate risks escalate, insurers are withdrawing from high-risk zones and redlining regions. What cannot be insured cannot be financed, and what cannot be financed cannot scale. Historical shocks have prompted similar responses: the Great Fire of London led to fire codes and insurance pools, while 19th-century boiler explosions catalyzed modern engineering standards. Today's escalating climate risks are driving a comparable redesign in how markets address risk particularly in infrastructure, agriculture, and real estate. Insurability now operates as an early indicator of systemic viability, determining which assets, sectors, and geographies remain viable. To secure capital companies must increasingly demonstrate resilience through adaptation planning, risk mitigation and long-term feasibility. 'Resilience is investable,' Bakker says. 'But only if we build the conditions to make it so, together.' This marks a deeper shift in how risk is understood and priced. Unlike weather patterns, climate change isn't cyclical—it brings long-term, structural disruption that's redefining business models and investment priorities. As the Barometer notes, where governments lead with clarity, capital follows. In the absence of coherent policy, insurers are stepping in to decide what can and cannot be financed. With governments falling short, markets are beginning to price in climate resilience and for many sectors, it is no longer optional. When Policy Stalls, Capital Retreats Bakker argues that the climate transition depends on aligning three forces: policy, business, and finance. Policy sets direction, business delivers scale, and finance provides capital. When these pillars are aligned, markets function but when they are not, the system stalls. This disconnect plays out across sectors and is creating tangible capital bottlenecks, with the misalignment especially visible in energy markets. While capital still flows disproportionately to low-risk, mature technologies like solar and wind, funding for capital intensive decarbonisation solutions like hydrogen and carbon capture are falling. In 2024, global investment in clean energy reached a record $2 trillion yet hydrogen investment declined by 42%, and carbon capture by 56%. These bottlenecks are not down to a lack of ambition but rather structural weaknesses, including lack of regulatory certainty, underdeveloped infrastructure, and crucially a lack of offtake agreements to guarantee long-term market demand. 'There must be offtake,' said Bakker. 'There must be market creation.' Policy must now evolve to enable markets, not just regulate them. Ninety-four percent of Barometer respondents said clear, consistent policy is essential to unlock climate investment but 54% no longer trust governments to deliver them. That credibility gap is already reshaping capital flows and creating geographic winners and losers. According to the Barometer, Asia and Europe are increasingly viewed as more attractive for investment than the United States. In the U.S., political volatility has undermined confidence in the Inflation Reduction Act contributing to nearly $15.5 billion in abandoned or scaled-back projects. 'Markets need frameworks that translate ambition into investable pathways and real-world price signals,' Bakker said. Insurability, investability, and effective regulation are now interdependent. Unless policy reflects the full scope of physical and financial risk, not just short-term political cycles, systems that look solid on paper may collapse under pressure. The growing pressure in insurance markets underscores the urgency as attention turns to COP30 in Brazil. 'We don't need another moment of intent' warns Bakker. 'We need a moment of delivery.' Two structural shifts are defining this new phase: implementation is moving from public to private actors, those who control supply chains, capital, and operations; meanwhile momentum is shifting from the Global North to the Global South, where climate vulnerability, economic growth, and industrial opportunity increasingly converge. The climate transition can be profitable, resilient, and equitable if businesses, policymakers, and financial institutions can co-create markets grounded in both physical and financial realities. The markets that align around this are likely to shape the next era of economic leadership.
