You're listening to the Global News Podcast from the BBC World Service.
Hello, I'm Oliver Conway.
We're recording this at 16 hours GMT on Tuesday 9th December.
Australia becomes the first nation in the world to ban under 16s from social media.
The Sudanese army is accused of killing nearly 1,700 civilians in airstrikes.
The aftermath footage of hits in markets is often quite hard to watch because there's often also children among the victims as well.
And the EU investigates Google over the use of creative content to train AI.
Also in the podcast... Looking out for things like frostbite or hypothermia.
There's so much that has never been done by somebody with a spinal injury, so we're kind of leading the way.
The challenges of a world record attempt in Antarctica...
Thank you.
For me, it's a mix of emotions.
Obviously, I'm quite frustrated.
I do see a bit of light at the end of the tunnel in this decision.
I understand that it will probably have a positive impact in the future.
It will definitely adapt the way our brains think.
So yes, I'm a little bit annoyed, but we'll get over it.
There are much worse things in life than being locked out of Snapchat.
Australia's Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, says the ban gives youngsters a chance to spend time doing other things.
Start a new sport, learn a new instrument or read that book that has been sitting there on your shelf for some time.
And importantly, spend quality time with your friends and your family, face to face.
So how does it all work?
I heard from our technology correspondent Chris Vallance.
From the point of view of the government, this is a delay rather than a ban.
Most of these platforms that fall under this require their users to have a minimum age of 13.
Now this goes up under this law to 16.
So essentially what this applies to is a list of 10 platforms at the moment.
Those are eight of the usual suspects, if you like, meta apps.
YouTube, Threads, Reddit, X, and so on, and two streaming platforms, Kik and Twitch.
And essentially they have to take reasonable steps to check that their users aren't under 16.
And if they don't do that, there's the prospect of big fines.
50 million Australian dollars, that's around 33 million US dollars.
Although some critics have said, for these companies, which make billions of dollars in revenue every year, that's a bit of a parking fine.
For the younger teenagers who've used these apps to talk to each other.
Are there other ways they can still keep in touch?
Well again, this is an interesting facet of what's proposed that has certainly attracted a fair bit of criticism and scrutiny, because there are no restrictions other than the usual terms of service on using messaging platforms like WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger.
There aren't restrictions on gaming platforms like Roblox and on services like Discord.
So there are certainly ways in which they can continue to keep in touch.
Now this ban is being closely watched elsewhere in the world amid worries about the damage being done by social media to younger minds.
Will any other countries follow suit?
Well, I think there are a lot of countries that have, if you like, taken the first steps down this path.
There was a vote in the European Parliament endorsing a sort of similar kind of measure.
We've seen countries like Denmark France Germany, Spain again with similar proposals, with some sort of tweaks in terms of parental consent, perhaps enabling people over 13 but under 16 to access these platforms.
So a lot of interest there.
A lot of countries watching this.
Some, though, have said for now it's not the way forward.
I mean, the UK would fall into one of those categories of a country that's got a lot of online safety regulation but isn't at the moment moving towards increasing the minimum age.
Although there are also, I say, some children's groups who have expressed concern at this kind of approach saying really, the platforms just need to make their products safe for children rather than keeping children off them.
Our technology correspondent Chris Vallance.
So, how are Australian teenagers reacting to life without social media?
Our Australia correspondent Katie Watson has been finding out.
School's done for the year, but the summer holidays are no break for 15-year-old Brianna.
She's hard at work on the family's cattle station.
It's hot right now.
The temperature's rising to the mid-40s, but as it starts to cool in the late afternoon Brianna loads the pickup truck with feed and heads out to the food troughs with sister Liv and mum Megan.
Standing here, you get a sense of the size of this country.
You know, it took hours to drive to this farm.
The driveway itself just to get to the farmhouse was about 20 kilometres.
And from as far as I can see, there is nothing in the distance.
It's completely flat land, low scrub land, a few bushes, a few trees, but it's pretty barren.
And the earth underfoot is very dry and the rains aren't expected to come in for at least another month or so.
This isn't your typical teenage upbringing, cleaning out cattle troughs.
But in so many ways, life in Australia's vast outback is surprisingly normal.
On the back of her buggy.
Brianna's got an internet extender giving her much-needed connections far from her friends.
Connections that might now look a little shakier than before with the new van in place.
I use Snapchat, Instagram, TikTok, and basically to just...
Keep up with my friends, share what I'm doing in my day-to-day life, especially on the holidays.
My closest friend is 30km away, but all my other friends would be over 100km away.
It's very important for me to keep up with them, stay in contact with them.
Taking away our socials is just taking away how we talk to each other.
Remember when I sent you that little video of Truffle helping me muster and it was just really funny.
You know, you can just share.
While mum Megan is glad social media companies are being forced to be more responsible, she's not sure how much it will achieve.
I do think that it is a bit of government overstepping.
We might be incredibly geographically isolated but we're definitely not digitally illiterate.
I think they'll still find apps and avenues to talk.
I do get concerned though, that if they think they're not supposed to be there, will they still report if they come across an online predator or they do experience bullying when they know they probably shouldn't be there?
What just happened, Grace?
I just got banned off Instagram.
Meta though, has been getting ahead of the curve, booting off some young Australian teens before the restrictions officially started.
Grace, who's heading off on a summer road trip with her family, is not happy.
I was just angry for about 10 minutes.
And now, yeah, just denial and grief has set in.
But it's fine because Snapchat and TikTok have not been banned yet.
Sorry.
We spend a lot of time dealing with the fallout.
Iris Nastassi is the principal at Rosebank College in Sydney.
It's two in the morning.
He or she does something that they wouldn't normally do and the fallout happens here.
Relationships are damaged and we have to look into it.
So we're really, really pleased that we might be able to reduce that.
Video snippets are all Emma Mason has left to remember her daughter Tilly.
It began as things like messaging text messages, but then moved on to things like TikTok and Snapchat and Instagram.
Tilly killed herself after being cyberbullied, and Emma has made it her mission to campaign for this law.
Whilst the technology was developing, she was developing and becoming more and more engaged in that digital world.
Why do you think this ban is so important?
Because children across our world are enduring this.
Because these are methods of harm, these are agents of harm that are unregulated, and I think our children have been the social experiment.
The world's watching how teens like Brianna fare.
No country has done this before.
Others are keen to see if it's worth copying.
Tens of thousands of people have fled their homes in border areas of Cambodia and Thailand following a resumption of fighting.
The Thai military said clashes had expanded to six border provinces and five of its soldiers had been killed since hostilities resumed on Monday.
Cambodia says Thai attacks have killed seven civilians.
The two nations are blaming each other for breaking a truce brokered by the US and Malaysia.
Here's Sorosan Kongsiri from the Thai Ministry of Defence.
The Cambodian troops continuously fired weapons into Thai territory and reports indicated that Cambodia had moved long-range weapons and heavy weapons into the border with Thailand and, of course, with the intent to use those weapons to fire at the Thai installations and, of course, other civilian facilities and homes.
The former Cambodian leader, who remains hugely influential, Hun Sen, said his country had tried to honour the ceasefire but was forced to retaliate against Thailand.
The newsroom's Mickey Bristow told my colleague Sean Lay about the background to the dispute.
Well, it goes a long way back, right to the beginning of the last century really, when France, which controlled Cambodia at the time, tried to form a border with Siam, which was what Thailand was known as at that time.
And the mapmakers.
They travelled the area, they decided where the border should be and they decided it should be on a watershed, right near a contentious temple called Preva here.
And unfortunately, a couple of years later, when the mapmakers got down to writing this map, they did it in the wrong place.
So initially they placed this temple on the Thai side of the border.
Then when they made the map, it came onto the Cambodian side of the border.
So it all stems from a mistake in the map.
And from then, for the first few decades after that, Thailand didn't complain.
It was only subsequently it did.
But by that time the International Court of Justice had said no, actually this temple is on the side of Cambodia.
And from there we've had arguments ever since then, essentially about not just this temple but about other bits of the border between these two nations.
Is there a sense that this is a kind of a useful dispute when either something else is causing tension between the two countries separately?
The governments are having problems at home and it's quite useful to have an enemy to kind of reunite people domestically.
I think that's exactly the case.
This is, as I said, a debate, an argument which goes back a century.
So why does it break out?
Why does it happen?
At certain points 2008, for example, it broke out because Cambodia applied successfully for this temple to become a UNESCO World Heritage Site, so that angered the Thais.
That led to a flare-up of the tension, and just This year it flared up again in July.
There was some tension before then, but essentially there's a lot of argument between the two major political families in Cambodia and Thailand.
I don't want to get too closely into that, but a conversation they had was leaked.
It made the Thai prime minister look weak.
She was forced to resign.
Also, there's domestic politics.
At the moment in Thailand, you've got a very weak government, weak in terms of parliamentary majority.
In Cambodia as well.
You have a government which has come under increasing pressure recently because a lot of scam centres, fraud centres, have been identified as operating from their territory.
So both governments have reasons to to sound tough and to continue the fighting.
President Trump was supervised the signing of some kind of ceasefire stroke, peace agreement, in his natural way.
He was very enthusiastic about. and even bombastic about what had been achieved.
I mean, did the US take its eye off the ball?
Do you think, in sort of ensuring that the two sides continue to honour the commitments?
As you mentioned President Trump there yeah, he said that he had no doubt that peace would prevail.
Those were the words he used.
Well, it hasn't lasted for two months.
Perhaps they've taken their eye off the ball, but if you look at President Trump and the kind of diplomacy he engages in he likes to do deals and then move away.
And in any case, this deal was always going to be very, very fragile.
Mickey Bristow there.
For more than two and a half years, the armed forces of Sudan have been fighting a civil war against the paramilitary rapid support forces.
Both have powerful weapons, but while the RSF uses drones to carry out airstrikes, the regular army, or SAF, has warplanes.
Now an investigation has looked at the impact of SAF air attacks.
Well, that was a video posted about a year ago of an airstrike hitting a marketplace.
A report by the Sudan Witness Project says that during the civil war, the army has killed at least 1700 civilians in air attacks.
Mark Snook carried out the investigation.
The aftermath footage of hits in markets is often quite hard to watch because there's often also children among the victims as well.
Our investigation and the data set we have indicates that the SAF have used unguided munitions in populated areas.
Our data highlights ongoing risks and impact on civilians who live in areas that have already been severely affected by the conflict.
The RSF, they are being held responsible for a lot of damage and violations, and I think rightly so.
But I think the SAF should also be held accountable for their actions.
I heard more about the findings from our Africa correspondent, Barbara Platascha.
The main patterns that emerged from the investigation were repeated hits on residential neighbourhoods.
Repeated hits on markets, often during crowded market days.
Also, a large number of alleged strikes on humanitarian and medical facilities.
And, as you were hearing from Mark Snook, there are evidence that the Air Force had used unguided bombs in populated areas.
And their strongest case for that was verified images of an unexploded, unguided aerial bomb in a camp for displaced people in And they had quite a close picture of it and said this is the kind of bomb produced by Sudanese arms manufacturers.
They also did case studies on quite a few strikes on markets, as well as a particular strike on a hospital in Darfur and many on residential neighbourhoods.
For example, a series of airstrikes in early February in the city centre of Nyala, which is a main base for the RSF.
And has the army said anything about its airstrikes?
Well, it hasn't said anything to us.
We asked for a response and they didn't reply.
But it has previously denied allegations of targeting civilians.
What it says is that its airstrikes are directed solely at RSF sites recognized as legitimate military targets.
It accuses the RSF of seeking refuge within residential neighborhoods.
It insists it is strictly observing. international humanitarian laws.
And the Sudan Witness Project was quite careful about its data.
It says that its research is incomplete because the results reflect access to available material rather than the total number of strikes.
And available material is quite limited in a war zone, sat images, videos, credible sources.
So it says military strikes are probably underreported.
And that's why they analyzed hundreds of reports of airstrikes, so they were able to paint a wider picture and observe these wider patterns.
Now, of course, Sudan has seen conflict over many years and a Sudanese militia leader has now been sentenced to 20 years for crimes committed in Darfur two decades ago.
That's by the International Criminal Court.
Tell us more about that.
This is Ali Mohamed Ali Abderrahman, also known as Ali Khushaib.
This is the first ever conviction by the International Criminal Court for crimes committed in Darfur.
Not in this war, as you said, but more than 20 years ago when you had the Darfur genocide.
So this was carried out in part by a militia made up of Arab tribesmen known as the Janjuweed.
They were armed and basically put into action by the military ruler at the time, Omar al-Bashir, and they carried out mass killings and atrocities.
That was more than 20 years ago.
This is the first time there's been a conviction.
But it does have resonance today because the rapid support forces, which is the paramilitary force involved in the civil war, evolved out of the Janjaweed.
And the kind of atrocities allegedly carried out by some of its fighters in the past two years seem to be following the same playbook as the Janjaweed mass killings on ethnic grounds rape, burning of villages and so on.
Barbara Platt Usher on connections between wars both past and present in Sudan.
And still to come on the Global News Podcast.
If we do not show this, the whole world will lose faith and stop helping the Ukrainian people.
That is why we are doing this, to prove we're still strong.
The Ukrainian troops still defending Pokrovsk, despite Russian claims to have captured the city.
The European Union has launched an investigation into whether Google is misusing people's creative content to train its artificial intelligence service.
Google's parent company Alphabet, is accused of profiting from material uploaded to YouTube and its other websites without giving users the chance to opt out.
It could face a huge fine.
I heard the details from our global affairs reporter, Paul Moss.
If you ask a question in Google, it used to refer you to online articles which would answer your question.
But these days, often the first answer you get is generated by artificial intelligence, what Google calls its Gemini assistance.
Thank you very much.
But what really adds insult to injury is not only are they losing all that, those viewers, the AI that Google is using learned everything it knows by reading those online articles.
And, as the publishers see it, from stealing that information.
I mean it's a bit like a pop star being told sorry, we're not going to pay you for performing anymore.
But thanks very much for teaching our computer how to sing your songs.
Now Google's parent company is also accused of harvesting material that people upload to YouTube, which they also own.
And in all of these cases they say people don't have the chance to opt out of having their material exploited.
So the EU is investigating this.
What does Google say about it?
We've had a statement from their parent company, Alphabet.
They say Europeans deserve to benefit from the latest technologies and the EU's investigation risks stifling innovation.
Effectively.
What it seems to be saying is that the current system benefits consumers of information.
The allegation is they're less concerned with the people who produce it.
And this is just the latest in a series of EU cases involving US tech companies.
Indeed.
I mean.
Only a few days ago, the platform X was fined 140 million by the European Union because of its blue tick system.
You can pay X to get a blue tick on your account, which shows that it's genuine.
What the EU said is actually these accounts aren't properly verified and the blue tick gives a false sense of safety.
But yes, this is just one of many investigations and legal cases.
And I should say this is becoming very political.
I mean the current administration in Washington is no great fan of the European Union generally, but it particularly dislikes any attempt to regulate and to fine America's tech giants.
Speaking about the fine on X, the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, said this was foreign governments attacking American companies.
In fact, he said it was an attack on the American people.
I mean, it does seem that the rhetoric in these disputes can only get more colourful, the temperature ever higher.
Our global affairs reporter, Paul Moss.
Ukraine's armed forces insist they are still holding out in Pokrovsk, despite Russian claims to have taken the city.
Russia has been advancing on Pokrovsk for more than a year as part of its campaign to seize the whole of the eastern region of Donetsk.
Our defence correspondent, Jonathan Beale, has been talking to Ukrainian troops still fighting to hold back the invaders.
This is what it's like fighting in Pokrovsk, what the men of Ukraine's Skala assault regiment are facing.
Hiding from the constant menace of Russian drones.
The threat that 48-year-old Hotabich had to endure for nearly 30 days.
It is scary when the drones spot you.
There are a lot of drones there.
They fly around the clock.
We always wished for good weather, meaning fog or some rain, a grey sky, because at such times we could resupply and reinforce our positions.
His units coordinating the fight from a command centre well behind the front line.
Ukrainian drones flying above Pokrovsk show a city in ruins, but they want to prove Pokrovsk has not fallen, despite Russian claims to have taken the city.
They've been talking to their men on the ground in Pokrovsk to show us they are there still fighting.
He's just giving orders for them to show their flag.
And there it is.
You can see it now.
The commander of the Skala regiment Yuri, tells me it exposes another Kremlin lie that Ukraine's lost Pokrovsk.
You've seen it with your own eyes.
If we do not show this, the whole world will lose faith and stop helping the Ukrainian people.
The Ukrainian army.
That is why we are doing this, to prove we're still strong.
A staff officer callsign Potapich shows me where Ukrainian forces are still defending in the north of the city.
So there's a map here, a digital map, which has Ukrainian positions around Bukrovsk.
And there are a few red spots, targets that they're going to hit here, where Russian forces are present.
But you can still clearly see from this map that Ukrainian troops are still in the city in numbers.
We're told hundreds.
Eleven.
The focus here is on the fight, not peace talks.
But a Latvian volunteer, the unit's deputy commander, is willing to vent some frustration.
His call sign is the Godfather and he has a message for Europe and America be together with president trump with a strong leader and showed america is number one in military, and showing weakness to russians is a showing weakness of america and trump.
So i hope trump is siding with the democratic countries and with nato countries.
Europe is a lot of talking, a lot of bureaucracy and a lot of empty, empty talks and not enough doing.
The battle for Pokrovsk has been going on for more than a year now.
How much longer can Ukraine hold on?
It is losing ground.
The city is in ruins.
But Ukraine needs proof of its resolve at this critical time.
Jonathan Bale reporting from eastern Ukraine.
Coupang is South Korea's most popular online shopping platform with millions of customers.
Now its headquarters in the capital Seoul, has been raided as part of a police investigation into a recent data breach believed to have affected almost two-thirds of the population.
Jake Kwon in Seoul told us more about the raid and the data leak.
This is the largest data breach in South Korean history.
This is Coupang, South Korea's version of Amazon.
This is where most South Korean people do their online shopping.
I mean, I use them almost weekly.
And we all got a text one day saying that I'm sorry there has been a data breach and they're investigating what's going on.
And since then the police and the authorities have formed a team trying to get to the bottom of what had happened here.
And what we learned today is that around 17 officers had raided the Seoul office of Kupang, searching and seizing evidence.
So this may be hardware servers, et cetera to see how a hacker was able to access these very sensitive customer data, which includes names, phone numbers, home addresses, as well as shopping history.
Many people also have put their home doorpad code, so that was also exposed.
Now, the president has called for swift action to punish those responsible.
Do we know who might be behind it?
According to local media, Kupang has told the police and the authorities that They suspect a former employee, a Chinese national, who had since quit the company and has left the country as well, that this person was still holding on to what is essentially a key that could still access Coupang servers.
And that this person has been accessing Coupang servers since June this year and Coupang had only learned about it last month.
And this is why the leak is so large.
We're understanding about 33.7%. million customer IDs.
It really feels like every few days there has been a hack of South Korean companies.
Just this year, South Korea's biggest mobile operator was fined 100 million when a hacker compromised very sensitive data on around 20 million users.
And a lot of this is pointed towards global hacking groups.
Some of these hacks are pointed at North Koreans.
And another aspect here is that Coupang, although it makes most of its money in South Korea, it is registered in the US and they're listed in New York City.
And a lot of South Korean people, media especially, has been very critical of that.
Coupang has been making a lot of money and perhaps they did not put enough effort and care to protect data.
And this is why the president, he asked the government to look into raising the fine against companies that had mishandled data.
Jake Kwan in South Korea.
Antarctica is a difficult place for anyone to cross, let alone someone with a high-level spinal cord injury.
But a British man who was paralysed permanently nine years ago is attempting a new world record of sit skiing to the South Pole.
After training for more than two years, Darren Edwards has now arrived in Antarctica.
Skiing through the day and camping at night.
He and his team will be unsupported, facing the risk of extreme temperatures altitude, sickness and exhaustion.
Tanya Sanger reports.
Training in Arctic conditions in Norway, as Darren who, in his own words, is redefining the impossible.
He's aiming to travel 222 kilometres in 20 days to double the current world record of sit skiing to the South Pole.
We've dedicated two and a half years of our lives to do it and for me there's pressure of how's it going to go.
Are we going to succeed?
We've promised a lot of people we're going to do it.
Darren became permanently paralysed from the chest down after a climbing accident in 2016, but turned his misfortune into his superpower by taking on a number of record-breaking challenges over the years.
But this one will be his toughest yet.
After my accident, I can't feel below my chest.
So when we're looking out for things like frostbite or hypothermia, there's so much that has never been done by somebody with a spinal injury, so we're kind of leading the way.
He's designed a bespoke sit ski to help keep his lower half warm, with the help of his teammate Matthew, who's been inspired by Darren's story after suffering his own sports injury.
I met Darren in a gym.
We got chatting.
And he kind of helped me through, guided me through that process of refinding myself, getting myself back on my feet.
And it's a great example of that there is hope after the adversity.
Matthew Bigger, ending that report by Tanya Sanker.
I'm Oliver Conway.
Until next time, goodbye.
