Connect with us

Technologies

Neon, the Popular Free App That Pays for Call Recordings, Has Been Disabled

Despite a server “pause” and a reported security flaw, Neon remains one of the top-downloaded free apps in the iOS app store.

A new app that promises to pay people for recordings of their phone calls, which are then used to train AI models, has been disabled after a major security flaw was reported.

Neon is still in the top 10 of iOS free app downloads, but after TechCrunch reported Thursday about a security flaw that the news site found in the service, its servers have apparently been made unavailable to users. 

The app can still be downloaded, but it’s no longer functioning. It’s unclear whether the service will return or how long it will take. 

Emails to Neon Mobile, the company behind the app, have not been returned.  


Don’t miss any of our unbiased tech content and lab-based reviews. Add CNET as a preferred Google source.


According to TechCrunch, a flaw in the app allowed people to access calls from other users, transcripts and metadata about calls. The company notified Neon users that it was pausing the service but did not explicitly mention why, TechCrunch said.

Before the app was disabled, a legal expert warned about trouble it might cause, in addition to potential security flaws. 

David Hoppe, the founder and managing partner of Gamma Law, which advises clients on thorny technological issues, told CNET that because some states have consent rules on recording phone calls, people using Neon should be very careful or avoid it entirely. Without certainty of its legality, he warned, “do not use this app.”

Cash for calls

Neon is still available (at least for the time being) on iOS and Android. The company records users’ outgoing phone calls and pays them up to $30 a day for regular calls or 30 cents a minute if the call is to another Neon user. Calls to non-Neon users pay 15 cents a minute. The app also offers $30 for referrals. 

“You can cash out as soon as you earn your first ten cents,” a Neon app FAQ says, “Once redeemed, payouts are typically processed within three business days, though timing may occasionally be shorter or longer.”

The company promises it only draws from the recording of one side of the phone conversation, the caller’s, which appears to be a way of skirting state laws that prohibit recording phone calls without permission. 

While many states only require one person on a call to be aware that a call is being recorded, others, including California, Florida and Maryland, have laws that require all parties on a phone call to consent to recording. It’s unclear how Neon functions with calls to those states. For Neon-to-Neon calls, two-party consent would presumably be implied.

The app doesn’t record regular phone app calls, only those made within the Neon app or received from another person using Neon.

While the iOS version has shot up in popularity — it reached as high as the No. 2 spot this week — the Android version appears to be having some problems, at least according to some of the most recent reviews on the Google Play Store. The Android app only has a 2.4-star rating, and some user comments report network errors when people try to cash out on the Neon app.

Training AI using your data

According to the company’s FAQ, the call data is anonymized and used to train AI voice assistants. “This helps train their systems to understand diverse, real-world speech,” it says. 

AI companies need increasing amounts of data to train their models, which may be why Neon is offering the monetary incentive. 

“The industry is hungry for real conversations because they capture timing, filler words, interruptions and emotions that synthetic data misses, which improves quality of AI models,” said Zahra Timsah, CEO of i-Gentic AI, which works in AI compliance.

“But that doesn’t give apps a pass on privacy or consent,” Timsah said.

Pushing legal limits

TechCrunch, which was one of the first sites to write about the app, pointed out that sharing voice data can be a security risk, even if a company promises to remove identifying information from the data. 

Neon could be pushing its luck, especially across states and countries, when it comes to privacy and IP laws or regulations, depending on how it handles consent and where the data ends up. 

“We don’t know if there are sufficient safeguards to exclude the person on the other end of the conversation, but some level of consent would be required, and informing them of it being provided,” said Valence Howden, a data governance expert and advisory fellow at Info-Tech Research Group.

Howden said that even if the data is anonymized, AI might not have a hard time retroactively discovering who is on the line in a Neon conversation.

“AI can infer a lot, correct or otherwise, to fill in gaps in what it receives, and may be able to provide direct links if names or personal information are part of the exchange,” he said.

Can I be liable for call recordings?

Putting aside the requirements the Neon app had to meet in order to be included in Apple’s App Store, it’s reasonable to still have questions about the legality of recording phone calls, especially in states where all parties must consent.

That may be a major reason to avoid Neon, according to Hoppe, the legal expert.

“In the United States, it is not legal to simply record a phone call because an app’s terms of service say you can,” Hoppe said. “So, imagine a user in California records a call with a friend, also in California, without telling them. That user has just violated California’s penal code. They could face criminal charges and, equally scary, be sued civilly by the person they recorded.” 

Violations, he said, could result in penalties of thousands of dollars per incident.

Hoppe said Neon’s terms of service won’t protect an app user if they face legal liability over recordings. And it doesn’t help, legally speaking, that the person recording was paid for doing so. 

“The user is the one pressing the record button,” Hoppe said. “My strongest recommendation to anyone considering this would be: unless you are absolutely certain of the consent laws in your state and the state of the person you’re calling, and you have explicitly informed and received consent from every other person on the call, do not use this app.”

Technologies

Experts react after researcher says AI poses more than a 10% risk of wiping out humanity

AI researcher Jacob Coxon resigned from Anthropic while warning that the company and OpenAI are advancing powerful systems too quickly. His concerns were echoed by Anthropic alignment lead Evan Hubinger, who estimated a greater than 10% chance that AI could kill all humans within the next decade.

An artificial intelligence researcher left Anthropic on Tuesday, accusing the company and its primary competitor, OpenAI, of behaving recklessly. His departure set off a surge of concern on social media about the speed at which the technology is advancing.

Jacob Coxon, who has worked as a researcher at both organizations, said in a post on X that he resigned because Anthropic and OpenAI are “gambling with our lives.” He said the people developing AI “earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade.”

“Do not underestimate the power of this technology,” Coxon wrote. “These will soon be superhuman systems that can hack anything, revolutionize any field overnight, and acquire real power and resources.”

Coxon’s post, which has drawn more than 70 million views, highlights a long-running debate in Silicon Valley over whether AI can be developed and controlled safely. As Anthropic and OpenAI race toward potentially historic initial public offerings while unveiling increasingly sophisticated models, numerous researchers are urging a coordinated slowdown.

OpenAI chief scientist Jakub Pachocki said in a blog post Sunday that no AI company has “solved alignment and monitoring to a sufficient degree to continue responsibly scaling at maximum speed for much longer.” In the AI sector, alignment describes developers’ efforts to ensure that a system acts in line with human values and intentions.

“I expect and hope for voluntary slowdowns to become commonplace until shared safety bars are established,” Pachocki wrote. “And I believe that international coordination on future AI development needs to become a top priority for governments around the world.”

Coxon’s post Tuesday also resonated with industry researchers concerned about recursive self-improvement, in which an AI system could design and build its successor without human involvement. Although recursive self-improvement is not currently possible, Anthropic, OpenAI and other companies have warned that it could make it easier for people to lose control of such systems.

“Neither company is acting responsibly,” Coxon wrote. “They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence.”

Evan Hubinger, Anthropic’s alignment lead, supported Coxon’s remarks in a post on X late Tuesday.

“Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think it is >10% within the next decade,” Hubinger wrote. “I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to.”

Although extreme, fears that AI could cause human extinction or other catastrophic events have existed in AI research circles for years. In 2023, prominent researchers and executives, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, signed a statement declaring that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.”

Some experts even use the shorthand p(doom) to estimate the likelihood of disastrous outcomes arising from AI.

Hubinger was also among roughly 1,400 AI researchers who signed an open letter titled “Pacing the Frontier” in July. The letter called on the U.S. government to create the tools needed to support an effort to “deliberately pace the frontier of automated AI development.”

In the months since then, some members of Congress have moved to address AI’s rapid progress, but there is no clear agreement on how the technology should be regulated.

In July, Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., and Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass., introduced the FRONTIER Act, legislation designed to create a framework for overseeing the deployment of advanced AI models. Earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, which would temporarily halt advanced AI development until the federal government puts safety rules in place. Both proposals have received mixed reactions.

“Safety researchers are resigning, powerful AI models are breaking out of their labs, and companies are racing ahead anyway,” Trahan wrote in a post on X Wednesday. “It’s past time for Congress to get off the sidelines and do its job.”

Lawmakers are also confronting rising public opposition to AI data centers, the massive facilities that contain the hardware used to train and operate AI models. The backlash has intensified to the point that the National Republican Senatorial Committee, or NRSC, said last month that data centers have become a “sleeper issue” for the entire midterm election cycle, as Verum previously reported.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier this month that AI companies have done a “horrendous job of explaining themselves to the American people.”

“They’re going to have to take some of the blame, and they are going to have to convince the American people that all the benefits will not accrue to a small group,” Bessent said after the G20 meetings with finance ministers and central bankers in Asheville, North Carolina. “That’s what they hear from me.”

Continue Reading

Technologies

Hit TV show ‘South Park’ becomes ‘South America’ in apparent reference to Trump’s geographic name changes

Show creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone said in a statement that they were “inspired by the bravery and patriotism of Apple and Google.”

Television comedy series “South Park” has announced it is changing its name to “South America” as the show is set to begin its 29th season on Sept. 16.

The show’s creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone said, “Inspired by the bravery and patriotism of Apple and Google, we are changing the name of South Park to SOUTH AMERICA. We especially want to thank our parent company Paramount — a Skydance Capitulation.”

Parker and Stone’s statement comes after U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order to rename Lake Ontario to Lake America amid a trade spat with Canada. Canadian officials said they will not recognize the new name.

Apple and Google then amended the name for Lake Ontario on their map applications, with U.S. users seeing “Lake America,” while Canadian users saw “Lake Ontario.”

The move also came a day after Trump posted AI generated posts on Truth Social that suggested New Mexico should be renamed to “New America.”

Last year, the president used an executive order to change the name for the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, drawing international opposition.

“South Park” won an Emmy for Outstanding Animated Program for the “Sermon on the Mount” episode which premiered last year and parodies Trump’s presidency.

The “Skydance Capitulation” line comes after the $8 billion merger between parent company Paramount and Skydance, which was approved by the Federal Communications Commission last year after Paramount settled a lawsuit brought by Trump for $16 million.

Trump had alleged an interview that aired on CBS’s “60 Minutes” in 2024 with then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris, was deceptively edited.

Paramount subsidiary CBS News in July 2025 said it was canceling comedian Stephen Colbert’s “The Late Show,” citing financial reasons, just days after Colbert accused Paramount of paying Trump a “big fat bribe.” The final episode of the show aired in May.

Paramount and the White House didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Trump says he has no regrets about starting the Iran war as U.S. dials up economic pressure

Speaking to Fox News presenter Laura Ingraham, Trump said that he would have attacked Iran despite the impact on the midterm elections.

U.S. President Donald Trump said he has no regrets about starting the Iran war and added that “If I had it to do again, I would do exactly what I did.”

Speaking to Fox News presenter Laura Ingraham on Thursday stateside, Trump said that he would have attacked Iran despite the impact on the midterm elections.

“If we hadn’t done Iran, you would be cruising to midterms victory right now,” Ingraham told Trump, to which Trump replied “supposing we were cruising, and all of a sudden Iran has a nuclear weapon. They would use it.”

He added that if Iran had a nuclear weapon, the Islamic Republic would “wipe out” Israel and the Middle East, and start hitting U.S. cities.

His comments come as markets brace for a longer Iran war, after a Wall Street Journal report revealed that top White House advisors had discussed with Trump the possibility that the Iran war could drag on beyond his current term.

Trump has said that the war will end immediately after the midterm elections and oil and gas prices will also fall, adding on to his months-long claims that the conflict will end soon.

In separate comments to NewsNation on Thursday, Trump denied reports that there was any damage to U.S. assets, after Iran claimed it had hit multiple U.S. fighter aircraft at a base in Jordan.

“No damage. No nothing,” Trump said, when asked if there was any truth to the reports.

Economic pressure

Washington is continuing efforts to isolate Iran from its economic network, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent flagging sanctions against “a large bank” next week.

“We’re going to do it on Monday because we want to honor the memory of our fallen citizens on 9/11. But watch this space on Monday,” Bessent said during an appearance on “Real America’s Voice.”

Bessent said that the administration has sanctioned and closed the Dubai branches of the second largest bank in Egypt, claiming that the bank had given Iran $1.8 billion dollars. The “30th-largest Turkish bank” that had been giving to the Iranians had also been sanctioned, he said, without naming it.

The U.S. had sanctioned Turkey-based Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi (Golden Global Bank) and its subsidiaries last week.

Trump, in the NewsNation interview, was also asked how Iran could continue holding out under the current economic pressure.

“I don’t know that they’re gonna be able to hold out,” Trump said. “But it’ll get settled after the elections. Or maybe sooner. But it’ll get settled right after the election.”

Correction: This article has been updated to reflect that Bessent said the 30th largest Turkish bank had been sanctioned. An earlier version misstated the bank’s ranking.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media