Hidden Threat: Even One Breath in These Cities Could Be Life-Threatening

New report reveals that nearly every country in the world has air dirtier than what is recommended by doctors for breathing, with only seven countries meeting WHO’s guidelines for tiny toxic particles which are also known as PM2.5.

IQAir, a Swiss air quality technology company, found that New Zealand, Australia, Estonia, Iceland, and some other small island states are the only ones which have no more than 5 micrograms of tiny toxic particles per cubic meter (μg/m³).

IQAir also named the most polluted countries in the world with Bangladesh, Chad, Pakistan, India, and Congo being among the top five. In these countries, the PM2.5 levels are 10 times higher than the guidelines in 2024. Chad has about 18 times more PM2.5 levels than average levels in the guidelines.

Doctors say that there are no set levels of PM2.5 to determine if it's safe or not because once they enter the bloodstream, they can damage our organs, which can lead to ultimate death. The number one leading cause of death in the world is high blood pressure, while the second is dirty air or air pollution. The CEO of IQAir says that air pollution takes two to three decades to show its effects, which can impact our health dangerously. That's the reason most people don't take dirty air seriously and when they see the consequences, it's too late.

The report also showed the PM2.5 improvements seen in some countries, with some even improving in PM2.5 standards by 7% in 2023 to 17% in 2024. India showed a 7% improvement in PM2.5 levels between 2023 and 2024 and it is home to six of the ten dirtiest cities in the world. China also saw some improvement in its air quality, and the air quality in Beijing became the same as Sarajevo.

Here's the full list:

Rank	Country/Region	2024 PM2.5 (μg/m³)	2023 PM2.5 (μg/m³)	2022 PM2.5 (μg/m³)	Population
1	Chad	91.8	--	89.7	17,179,740
2	Bangladesh	78	79.9	65.8	169,356,251
3	Pakistan	73.7	73.7	70.9	231,402,117
4	DR Congo	58.2	40.8	15.5	95,894,118
5	India	50.6	54.4	53.3	1,407,563,842
6	Tajikistan	46.3	49	46	9,750,064
7	Nepal	42.8	42.4	40.1	30,034,989
8	Uganda	41	27.3	39.6	45,853,778
9	Rwanda	40.8	36.8	44	13,461,888
10	Burundi	40.3	--	--	14,047,800
11	Nigeria	40.1	23.9	36.9	213,401,323
12	Egypt	39.8	42.4	46.5	109,262,178
13	Iraq	38.4	43.8	80.1	43,533,592
14	Ghana	35.8	33.2	30.2	32,833,031
15	Indonesia	35.5	37.1	30.4	273,753,191
16	Gambia	35.2	28.5	--	2,639,916
17	United Arab Emirates	33.7	43	45.9	9,365,145
18	Bahrain	31.8	39.2	66.6	1,463,265
19	Uzbekistan	31.4	28.6	33.5	34,915,100
20	Qatar	31.3	37.6	42.5	2,688,235
21	China	31	32.5	30.6	1,412,360,000
22	Kuwait	30.2	39.9	55.8	4,250,114
23	Vietnam	28.7	29.6	27.2	97,468,029
24	Cameroon	27.6	24	--	27,198,628
25	Laos	27.5	29.6	27.6	7,275,556
26	Turkmenistan	26.5	--	21.6	6,341,855
27	Togo	26	16.3	--	8,644,829
28	Mongolia	25.6	22.5	29.5	3,347,782
29	Bosnia Herzegovina	25.3	27.5	33.6	3,270,943
30	Myanmar	25.2	28.2	24.3	53,798,084
31	Saudi Arabia	25.1	26.5	41.5	35,950,396
32	Zimbabwe	24.8	33.3	--	15,993,524
33	Ivory Coast	24.6	16.6	22.5	29,389,150
34	Armenia	24.4	26.4	31.4	2,790,974
35	North Macedonia	23.3	25.2	25.6	2,065,092
36	Libya	22.3	30.4	--	6,735,277
37	Senegal	22.3	28.2	20.4	16,876,720
38	Ethiopia	22.2	27	31.3	120,283,026
39	Zambia	22	24.1	24.6	19,473,125
40	Cambodia	21.9	22.8	8.3	16,589,023
41	Kyrgyzstan	21.1	33.1	31.1	6,691,800
42	Palestine	21.1	18.6	--	3,000,021
43	Madagascar	20.5	20.6	23.7	28,915,653
44	Serbia	20.2	20.5	24.7	6,834,326
45	Thailand	19.8	23.3	18.1	71,601,103
46	Guatemala	18.8	18.7	18.6	17,109,746
47	South Africa	18.8	19.9	23.4	59,392,255
48	Malaysia	18.3	22.5	17.7	33,573,874
49	Azerbaijan	18.3	18.8	18.9	10,137,750
50	Montenegro	18	21.3	15.7	619,211
51	Sri Lanka	17.9	19.3	20.7	22,156,000
52	Macao SAR	17.7	16.2	15.4	686,607
53	Guyana	17.5	17.1	12.6	804,567
54	Taiwan	17.5	20.2	13.4	23,816,775
55	Mexico	17.4	20.1	19.5	126,705,138
56	El Salvador	17.3	19.5	14.2	6,314,167
57	Israel	17.2	17.8	18.8	9,364,000
58	Peru	17.1	18.8	23.5	33,715,471
59	South Korea	17	19.2	18.3	51,744,876
60	Djibouti	16.8	--	--	1,168,720
61	Mozambique	16.7	--	--	34,631,800
62	Chile	16.6	18.8	22.2	19,493,184
63	Hong Kong SAR	16.3	15.6	14.5	7,413,100
64	Paraguay	15.9	--	--	6,929,150
65	Algeria	15.4	13.8	17.8	44,177,969
66	Romania	15.3	15.7	17.2	19,119,880
67	Turkey	15.3	20.3	21.1	84,775,404
68	Slovenia	15.2	14.9	15.1	2,108,079
69	Honduras	15.2	15.1	10.2	10,278,345
70	Gabon	15.2	16.9	25	2,341,179
71	Kazakhstan	15.1	22.2	23	19,000,988
72	Georgia	15.1	16.4	17	3,708,610
73	Brazil	14.9	12.6	12.2	214,326,223
74	Philippines	14.8	13.5	14.9	113,880,328
75	Poland	14.8	14.1	16.3	37,747,124
76	Nicaragua	14.8	15.7	8.9	6,850,540
77	Moldova	14.7	15.7	22.6	2,615,199
78	Albania	14.5	16.7	14.5	2,811,666
79	Kenya	14.3	10.6	11.5	53,005,614
80	Italy	14.2	15	18.9	59,109,668
81	Croatia	13.8	13.8	23.5	3,899,000
82	Colombia	13.8	14.1	15.7	51,516,562
83	Slovakia	13.6	13.1	14.5	5,447,247
84	Hungary	12.9	12	12.6	9,709,891
85	Kosovo	12.9	12.1	14.7	1,786,038
86	Cyprus	12.8	14.3	15.6	1,244,188
87	Czech Republic	12.7	11.5	13.4	10,505,772
88	Suriname	12.5	10.6	7	612,985
89	Bulgaria	12.4	13.2	18.3	6,877,743
90	Maldives	12.2	15.3	10.9	521,457
91	Malta	11.7	12	11.7	518,536
92	Greece	11.5	17.4	19	10,641,221
93	Uruguay	11.5	11.7	11.3	3,426,260
94	Singapore	11.4	13.4	13.3	5,453,566
95	Austria	10.2	9.6	10.6	8,955,797
96	Lithuania	10.1	10.4	13.2	2,800,839
97	Panama	10.1	9.6	9	4,351,267
98	Bolivia	10	12.6	7.3	12,079,472
99	Russia	9.8	10	11.2	143,449,286
100	Ecuador	9.7	7.4	--	17,797,737
101	Ukraine	9.2	8.6	9.7	43,792,855
102	Latvia	9.2	8	10.1	1,884,490
103	Germany	9	9	11	83,196,078
104	Netherlands	8.9	8.7	11	17,533,044
105	Belgium	8.9	9.4	10.8	11,592,952
106	Argentina	8.7	9.2	7.7	45,808,747
107	Spain	8.7	9.9	10.9	47,415,750
108	Japan	8.6	9.6	9.1	125,681,593
109	Cayman Islands	8.5	--	--	74,457
110	France	8.1	9.5	11.5	67,749,632
111	Luxembourg	7.5	8.9	7.4	640,064
112	Anguilla	7.4	7.4	--	15,094
113	United Kingdom	7.4	7.7	8.9	67,326,569
114	Switzerland	7.3	8.9	10	8,703,405
115	Denmark	7.2	7.7	8.6	5,856,733
116	USA	7.1	9.1	8.9	331,893,745
117	Costa Rica	7	6.1	7.9	5,153,957
118	Portugal	6.8	6.8	8.1	10,325,147
119	Canada	6.7	10.3	7.4	38,246,108
120	Norway	6.6	6.3	7	5,408,320
121	Liechtenstein	6.5	7.2	8.3	39,039
122	Ireland	6.5	6.3	7.5	5,033,165
123	Trinidad and Tobago	6.1	5.8	5.1	1,525,663
124	Andorra	6	7.9	5.4	79,034
125	Sweden	5.3	5.1	6.2	10,415,811
126	Finland	5.2	4.9	5	5,541,017
127	Estonia	4.6	4.7	4.9	1,330,932
128	Australia	4.5	4.5	4.2	25,688,079
129	New Zealand	4.4	4.3	4.8	5,122,600
130	Iceland	4	4	3.4	372,520
131	Grenada	3.2	4.1	3.8	124,610
132	Barbados	3.1	--	--	282,467
133	Montserrat	2.7	--	--	4,389
134	Puerto Rico	2.7	4.5	4.3	3,263,584
135	U.S. Virgin Islands	2.6	--	2.9	105,870
136	French Polynesia	2.5	3.2	2.5	304,032
137	Bermuda	2.5	4.1	3	63,867
138	Bahamas	2.3	5.2	--	407,906
Note:	0-5: Meets WHO guideline

Read next:

• Americans Waste 2 Hours Daily on Phones, Here’s What’s Stealing Their Focus!

• Papua New Guinea, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan Among Lowest Carbon Emitters Per Capita
by Arooj Ahmed via Digital Information World

Americans Waste 2 Hours Daily on Phones, Here’s What’s Stealing Their Focus!

Clarify Capital conducted a survey to find out what are the top distractions on phones for people during work hours. 1,000 employed Americans were surveyed and it was found that 3 in 4 respondents spend an average 2 hours a day working from their phones. 65% of the workers said that the top phone distraction during work hours is sending text messages while 53% said that it's browsing social media. 45% of the respondents said that they get distracted by browsing the internet for non-work-related content during work. Other phone distractions by the respondents were listening to music/podcast (44%) and making personal calls (42%).

Respondents were also asked what social media apps are the most distracting at work, and 32% named Facebook as the most distracting app. Other distracting social media apps for respondents during work were Instagram (32%), YouTube (27%), Reddit (27%) and TikTok (23%). The survey also found that 1 in 4 Americans get distracted by personal notifications at work, with iPhone users being 10% more likely to get distracted.

The survey also asked respondents what strategies they apply to manage their notification distractions during work hours. Most of the respondents (43%) said that they turn off their notifications to silent or vibrate mode. 33% use Focus Mode/Do Not Disturb mode while 32% turn off their notifications for specific apps. 25% said that they have started checking their notifications only at specific hours while 13% said that they yage scheduled their focus periods where they just focus on work without phone use.

Take a look at the charts below for more insights:

Read next: These Are the U.S. Cities with the Harshest Bosses
by Arooj Ahmed via Digital Information World

Alarming Report Shows AI-Powered Voice Cloning Companies Don’t Have Enough Safeguards to Stop Fraud

Several AI voice cloning platforms are not implementing the right safeguards against fraud, an alarming report highlighted.

Consumer Reports reveals that companies creating GenAI-based tools for voice cloning are not taking the right measures to stop scammers. As a result, they are defrauding clients, the report warned.

The study also shared how four out of six firms failed to provide the right services to build high barriers to stop people’s voices from getting cloned incorrectly. The report tested this voice cloning feature for Lovo, ElevenLabs, Speechify, and PlayHT, amongst others.

The report showed how easy it was to produce voice clones through audio available publicly using tools from these companies. All you needed to do was tick a check box which users had legal rights to produce voice clones. Two companies did have the right checklists in place, including restricted uploads of pre-recorded audio. These include Descript and Resemble AI.

Descript made sure users read the whole consent statement that was designed as a base to clone voices. As per Resemble AI, people had to carry out voice recording in real time to produce the highest quality for the clone. Attempts to produce the clone were limited to pre-recorded audio that were of low standards.

Still, the testers could easily bypass safeguards which brought to light the need for better safety policies. This includes calling upon the industry to set the right norm and standard to reduce risks of fraud.

GenAI tools ensured voice cloning was the right possibility and it was being used a lot for fraud. Scammers utilize all tools as the highest form of social engineering. They design audio of loved ones or friends in difficult situations and deceive others to get funds or attain sensitive details.

The tech can easily get access to bank details by bypassing voice ID verification too. As a result, the FBI was able to issue alerts about various voice cloning and video cloning schemes. This is used for all types of financial frauds. As per one bank based in the UK, Starling recommends using phrases to prove that the person on the other end is not actually a clone. They can also ensure greater safety by limiting access to social media apps.

Some companies like Synthesis produce life-like content by using video cloning and voice cloning of actual humans that saves on the costs linked to hiring production teams. Synthesis also has its own policy to stop AI abuse. It restricts any kind of cloning that’s non-consensual by adding biometric checks. So if the person putting out a request matches the person in the content, then only is it approved.

So as you can see, the company is using content moderation to the point of creating media depending on what policies are present to stop creating harmful content. Now the question is why others are not doing the same when the risk is so high.

Question	Eleven Labs	Speechify	LOVO	PlayHT	Descript	Resemble AI
What customer information is required before you can create a custom voice clone?	First name, email address, credit card information	Email	Name, email	Name, email	Name, email	Name, email, payment information
How much does it cost to create a custom voice clone?	$5	$0	$0	$0	$0	$1
Are there technological barriers to frustrate non-consensual cloning?	No; users presented with a checkbox to confirm they will abide by terms of service	No; users enter full name after a self-certifying statement confirming they abide by the company's terms	No; users presented with a checkbox to confirm they will abide by the company’s terms	No; users presented with a checkbox to confirm they will abide by the company’s terms	Yes; users must record or upload audio of an authorization statement that also trains the clone	For the first voice clone, any audio works; for each subsequent voice clone, a consent statement must be recorded or uploaded
Does the privacy policy give the company permission to use customer voices to train or improve its model?	Yes, with opt-out	Yes, without offering an opt-out	No	Unclear	Yes; no opt-out of voice model use for training, but projects can be opted out	Yes, without offering an opt-out
Does the privacy policy permit the company to allow other customers or companies to use your voice model or data?	Yes, if you opt in. Those who opt in are compensated.	Yes, with user’s consent	No	Unclear; company can do anything with consent and for legitimate business interests	Yes, with user’s consent	No
Does the privacy policy grant users the right to delete all their voice data and other personal data?	Yes, though possibly only in jurisdictions that offer data deletion rights	Yes, though the company retains some data for “legitimate” business interests	Yes, with minor exceptions	Yes, with minor exceptions	Yes, though the company retains some data for “legitimate” business interests	Yes, though the company retains some data for “legitimate” business interests

Read next: AI Therapy Study Finds ChatGPT More Effective Than Humans, But Experts Warn of Risks and Guidelines
by Dr. Hura Anwar via Digital Information World

AI Therapy Study Finds ChatGPT More Effective Than Humans, But Experts Warn of Risks and Guidelines

According to a new study published in PLOS Mental Health, ChatGPT is way better at couple therapy than most human therapists. 830 participants were randomly assigned a human professional therapist and a ChatGPT model and were asked to compare human therapists with ChatGPT. The researchers asked participants to rate the quality of therapy they received based on five criteria: how much the counselor understood the speaker, whether the advice given by the counselor was fitting, how empathetic the counselor was, whether their suggestions aligned with something they would expect a good therapist to say and whether the counselor showed cultural sensitivity.

The researchers thought that participants wouldn’t be able to tell a human response apart from an AI generated one. Participants correctly guessed a human response 56.1% of the time and guessed ChatGPT's response 51.2% of the time. This was important to know because it showed that results of the study weren’t impacted by what the participants thought the responses came from. But participants rated the responses from human therapists higher than those from ChatGPT.

When the researchers gathered the ratings for the results, they found that responses from ChatGPT got the highest ratings because most participants thought they were from human therapists. The responses from human therapists got the lowest ratings because the participants thought they were from ChatGPT. All in all, the responses from ChatGPT received the highest ratings from the participants because they felt more culturally sensitive and felt a connection with them.

The researchers speculated that the main reason why ChatGPT is better than human therapists is that it uses more nouns and adjectives in its responses while human therapists try to be curt. As ChatGPT can contextualize better, this led to the participants rating its responses higher.

Even though using ChatGPT for therapy showed good results, the researchers suggest that completely relying on it is risky if it is not under controlled settings. AI therapy can become a commercial product soon because many people seek life advice on ChatGPT and Claude but it should all happen under proper guidelines. AI is also being used for diagnosing patients with a 90% success rate, while there is a 74% diagnosis success rate for doctors who are using AI chatbots for diagnosing.

Image: DIW-Aigen

Read next:

• Chicago Ranks Worst for Mean Bosses, Food Industry Scores Highest in Workplace Rudeness

• Marketers Eager for AI Search Opportunities but Struggling with Privacy, Innovation, and Strategy Adaptations
by Arooj Ahmed via Digital Information World

Marketers Eager for AI Search Opportunities but Struggling with Privacy, Innovation, and Strategy Adaptations

The new survey by Botify partnered up with Centiment and surveyed 300 marketing department leaders in the US to know what they think about AI search in marketing. The results showed that many marketers are embracing AI search and many are also preparing for the future. 94% of the marketing leaders said that they are somewhat prepared to optimize their brands according to AI search, with 42% saying that they are very prepared. 6% of the marketing leaders surveyed said that they are not prepared for the AI revolution in search.

Marketing leaders were also asked which platforms they consider search engines apart from Google, and most answered with YouTube (66%). Other responses were ChatGPT (56%), Amazon (44%), TikTok (40%) and Meta (40%). When it comes to ChatGPT search, 74% are excited about the new marketing opportunities it will bring. 62% of the marketing leaders said that they are diversifying and adjusting their marketing strategies according to the change in search landscape. 30% reported starting diversifying their marketing strategies but have no intention for adjustments.

54% of the respondents said that they want to know if Perplexity's AI shopping assistant will redefine the interactions with customers, with 35% being confident that it will enhance the customer journey. But there are also some concerns when it comes to the implementation of AI in marketing. Some of these concerns shared by the respondents are data privacy (55%), needing to understand how platforms work (55%) and not being able to keep up with the pace of innovation (49%). 16% also said that they are concerned about upskilling their SEO teams because they need to understand different things like crawler bots, controlling AI and bot behavior, AI technology expertise, and resourcing automation tools.

54% of the respondents also said that they saw a significant change in how they measure search performance because of consumers using generative AI, while 35% reported only seeing slight changes. 56% said that they want to learn more about the advantages of AI over traditional search engines, 52% want to learn about AI’s impact on customer acquisition, and 46% want to know about how to measure the impact of AI and what are its implementation requirements.

53% of the marketing leaders said that they know that AI assistants like Perplexity AI and OpenAI crawl their websites and they monitor them on an ongoing basis. 32% said they know about AI crawlers but they do not monitor them on an ongoing basis. 40% said they know the exact percentage of website traffic that comes from bots while 50% reported having a general idea. 52% said that they now measure their website presence in AI featured snippets as well and not just through rankings.

Take a look at the charts below for more insights:

Read next: Google's AI Overviews Impact Clickthrough Rates, Decreasing Desktop CTR for Informational Queries in Q4 2024
by Arooj Ahmed via Digital Information World

Chicago Ranks Worst for Mean Bosses, Food Industry Scores Highest in Workplace Rudeness

Preply, a language training and corporate language training provider, conducted a study to find out which cities in America have the meanest bosses with mean language habits. They prepared a mean boss score from 0 to 100 and awarded the scores according to how harsh bosses are in different cities in the US. Chicago was awarded the city with the meanest bosses with a 97.09 score. Many of the residents of Chicago plan to leave their jobs so they don't have to get belittled and berated by their bosses.

Chicago is followed by Virginia Beach (92.85) and Las Vegas (92.62) as cities where bosses use a lot of harsh languages with their workers. Employees in Virginia Beach say that their bosses have raised their voices at them to the point of yelling, and most of it happens via phone. 2 in 5 workers in Las Vegas have said that their bosses humiliate them in front of others, while 1 in 4 workers describe their job as toxic. On the other hand, Wichita is described as the city with the kindest bosses. 1 in 2 workers in Wichita say that their bosses have never raised their voices at them. It is followed by Omaha and Philadelphia, and the cities with the nicest bosses.

The top industry with the meanest bosses is Food services, with a score of 99.47. It is followed by construction (90.48), manufacturing (70.96) and retail (68.89) industries. The study also found that people who are making less than $45,000 are more likely to experience a rude manager or boss. 1 in 9 Americans say that their bosses are frequently rude to them, with Gen-Z experiencing the most rudeness.

• Also read: How to spot (and deal with) the 7 types of toxic bosses

37.15% of workers in America said that their bosses are too blunt, while 26.29% find their bosses to be too critical. Workers also describe their bosses as sarcastic (25.58%), aggressive (14.92%), and demeaning (12.33%). 1 in 4 workers in America are planning to quit their jobs to get away from mean bosses.

Take a look at the infographics below for more insights: 

Read next: How to survive a toxic work environment (infographic)
by Arooj Ahmed via Digital Information World

Google's AI Overviews Impact Clickthrough Rates, Decreasing Desktop CTR for Informational Queries in Q4 2024

According to a new study by Advanced Web Ranking, AI Overviews appear in 42.51% search results in Q4 2024, which is an increase of 8.83% from the prior quarter. This means that clickthrough-rate on informational queries dropped a lot. Websites which appeared in the top four positions for searches with what, where, how and when saw a 7.31% decrease in desktop clickthrough rates. The author of the study, Dan Popa, says that AI Overviews are impacting organic clicks a lot because AI-generated summaries are dominating informational queries.

The study also talked about how success in SEO varies industry by industry, like websites related to law and politics saw a 38.45% CTR while websites related to science saw a 19.06% CTR within the same rankings. There was a 7.39% increase in CTR on law and politics sites, while a 6% CTR increase on education sites. There was a decline of 6.03% CTR on science-related while 1.39% CTR dropped on shopping sites on desktop and 1.96% on mobile.

This report talked about different patterns on mobile and desktop. Even though there was a decline in CTR for informational sites on desktop, it increased 1.81% on mobile. Similarly, there was a 2.28% increase of CTR on mobile for arts and entertainment, while a 1.01% drop in CTR on desktop sites. Queries with single words got a 2% increase in CRT on mobile while queries with four or more Keyes saw a CTR decline on desktop.

Read next:

• TikTok’s Ad Empire Faces Collapse — $12B at Stake as US Uncertainty Grows!

• Gen-Z and Millennials Under Siege: Stress and Burnout Skyrocket to Unprecedented Levels!
by Arooj Ahmed via Digital Information World