Policy

elon-musk-is-responsible-for-“killing-the-world’s-poorest-children,”-says-bill-gates

Elon Musk is responsible for “killing the world’s poorest children,” says Bill Gates

Billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates ratcheted up his feud with Elon Musk, accusing the world’s richest man of “killing the world’s poorest children” through what he said were misguided cuts to US development assistance.

Gates, who is announcing a plan to accelerate his philanthropic giving over the next 20 years and close down the Gates Foundation altogether in 2045, said in an interview that the Tesla chief had acted through ignorance.

In February, Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) in effect shut down the US Agency for International Development, the main conduit for US aid, saying it was “time for it to die.”

The co-founder of Microsoft, and once the world’s richest man himself, said the abruptness of the cuts had left life-saving food and medicines expiring in warehouses and could cause the resurgence of diseases such as measles, HIV, and polio.

“The picture of the world’s richest man killing the world’s poorest children is not a pretty one,” he told the Financial Times.

Gates said Musk had canceled grants to a hospital in Gaza Province, Mozambique, that prevents women transmitting HIV to their babies, in the mistaken belief that the US was supplying condoms to Hamas in Gaza in the Middle East. “I’d love for him to go in and meet the children that have now been infected with HIV because he cut that money,” he said.

Gates, 69, on Thursday announced plans to spend virtually his entire fortune over the next 20 years, during which time he estimates his foundation will spend more than $200 billion on global health, development, and education against $100 billion over the previous 25 years. The Gates Foundation will close its doors in 2045, decades earlier than previously envisaged.

Elon Musk is responsible for “killing the world’s poorest children,” says Bill Gates Read More »

trump-tariffs-could-make-americans-pay-$123b-more-annually-for-10-common-gadgets

Trump tariffs could make Americans pay $123B more annually for 10 common gadgets


Average US price of smartphones, game consoles, and laptops may soon exceed $1,000.

China has finally agreed to open negotiations with the Trump administration as the tech industry warns that tariffs could soon spike Americans’ costs for the 10 most popular consumer technology products by more than $123 billion annually.

On Wednesday, the Chinese Embassy in the US announced on X (formerly Twitter) that “China’s lead on China-US economic and trade affairs,” He Lifeng, will meet with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent from May 9 to 12 to open talks. For those talks to go smoothly, China’s Ministry of Commerce told reporters Wednesday, the US must “demonstrate sincerity” and come ready to “correct its wrongdoings,” including facing “the severe negative impacts of its unilateral tariff measures on itself and the world.”

Previously, China had demanded that President Trump drop all tariffs to begin negotiations, which Trump refused while seemingly holding out on making a deal on TikTok to keep the potential bargaining chip.

While tensions don’t exactly appear to be dissipating, these talks are the first sign that the trade rivals could reach a resolution after Trump raised tariffs on some Chinese imports as high as 145 percent. And they come just as Americans expect to soon feel the sting from tariffs in their wallets.

According to the Consumer Technology Association’s most recent estimates released Tuesday, Americans risk paying much higher prices for any Chinese imports that are not exempted from those 145 percent tariffs. They also face potentially higher prices from other tariffs the Trump administration imposed, including a baseline 10 percent tariff on all imports from all countries and reciprocal tariffs that kick in July, which would add an additional 11 to 50 percent tax on all imports from 57 countries.

For example, non-exempted video game consoles—perhaps less than 1 percent of which are produced in the US, industry analysts estimate—could soon cost more than $1,000 on average, up by about 69 percent. And as the price goes up, the CTA warned that supply chain disruptions could cause shortages since “shifting the large quantities of Chinese production to other suppliers would be very difficult given the volumes involved.”

Even some of the seemingly less painful smaller price hikes could “rob” the US economy, the CTA warned. For example, headphones costing Americans up to $5 more or speakers costing up to $60 more could drain wallets nationwide by more than $2.5 billion, the CTA estimated. And an estimated 11 percent increase on imports of non-exempt China-made TVs—which only account for a small share of total US TV imports—could significantly hurt the US economy by “forcing consumers to pay $1.9 billion more than they otherwise would for the televisions they continue to buy,” the CTA forecasted.

Meanwhile, “buyers of smartphones, laptops and tablets, and connected devices would likely feel the greatest impact,” the CTA said. In 2023, China accounted for 87 percent of video game consoles, 78 percent of smartphones, 79 percent of laptops and tablets, and 67 percent of monitors imported into the US, and there is still very little US production of those goods. On average, laptops could soon cost more than $1,000, tablets nearly $600, and smartphones nearly $1,100, while connected devices could cost up to 22 percent more, the CTA estimated.

Overall, Trump’s tariff regime threatens to “shrink the US economy by $69 billion annually” from price shifts of just 10 popular tech products, the CTA warned.

To prevent this, the CTA has been advocating on Capitol Hill for more exemptions while urging the Trump administration to stop using tariffs to force production into the US, echoing other analysts who have long warned Trump that shifting supply chains into the US cannot be done immediately.

“The effort to reshore manufacturing through higher tariff rates on imported goods comes at a cost: the research shows that consumers would lose about $16 in spending power for every $1 gained by domestic producers,” the CTA reported. And that loss of spending power, the CTA noted, means Americans have less money to spend on things like groceries or other essential goods that are also impacted by tariffs.

Ahead of talks, China signals the fight isn’t over

Although the US-China talks likely won’t trigger changes on Trump’s tariffs impacting other parts of the world, China’s role as a hard-to-replace global production hub has left many tech companies eager to see trade talks resume.

As consumers brace for sticker shock, tech companies’ revenues could be hit hard if sales significantly decrease. That seems likely, as the CTA is already forecasting drastic drops in consumption of video game consoles (down by up to 73 percent), laptops and tablets (45 percent), and smartphones (nearly 50 percent). For low-income families, the smartphone price hikes could hit the hardest, the CTA warned, which would be especially burdensome since imports triggering price drops only recently were credited with making smartphones more accessible in the US.

China still appears to potentially have the upper hand in negotiations. Trump apparently had been pushing to meet with China’s president Xi Jinping, seemingly wanting to be viewed as the sole dealmaker on tariffs, the South China Morning Post reported. But China refused, insisting on each country appointing special envoys, a concession that Trump appears to have granted in directing Bessent to meet with Xi’s trade chief instead of leading the talks himself.

For China, refusing to deal directly with Trump is depicted as necessary to preserve mutual respect in negotiations. After Trump claimed China was engaged in talks that China denied and suggested that China was “doing very poorly” due to his tariffs, the president suddenly pivoted to promising to “play nice” with China.

Now China seems to be holding Trump to his word. Ahead of trade talks this weekend, China’s Ministry of Commerce warned the US that China wouldn’t resolve trade tensions without safeguarding its own interests, promising to keep fighting “if provoked.”

“If the US says one thing but does another, or even attempts to use negotiations as a pretext to continue coercive and blackmailing tactics, China will never agree, nor will it sacrifice its principles or international fairness and justice to seek any agreement,” the Ministry said.

For US chipmakers who are still waiting for Trump to release his semiconductor tariff plan, the trade talks will likely be watched closely. Ahead of talks, Nvidia, AMD, Super Micro, and Marvell have warned investors of potentially billions in lost revenue, with some postponing further investor guidance until after the tariff plan is revealed, CNBC reported.

Other tech giants both inside and outside the US are also reportedly scrambling, even if they aren’t completely reliant on China-based production.

Despite exemptions on smartphones and a plan to shift production of US-destined products into India, Apple recently estimated that tariffs could add $900 million in costs in this quarter alone, the BBC reported.

So far, there are no clear winners in Trump’s trade war. South Korea-based Samsung—which has a Vietnamese production hub subject to 46 percent tariffs—was expected to potentially gain from any Apple losses. But an executive on a recent earnings call warned investors that “there are a lot of uncertainties ahead of us,” CNBC reported.

“Due to the rapid changes in policies and geopolitical tensions among major countries, it’s difficult to accurately predict the business impact of tariffs and countermeasures,” the Samsung executive said.

And although trade talks could dramatically shift global markets again, the CTA warned that “ongoing reviews of semiconductors and downstream products in the electronics supply chain, copper, lumber, critical minerals, and other materials” could potentially add to cost pressures and trigger even more price hikes for Americans.

Photo of Ashley Belanger

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Trump tariffs could make Americans pay $123B more annually for 10 common gadgets Read More »

jury-orders-nso-to-pay-$167-million-for-hacking-whatsapp-users

Jury orders NSO to pay $167 million for hacking WhatsApp users

A jury has awarded WhatsApp $167 million in punitive damages in a case the company brought against Israel-based NSO Group for exploiting a software vulnerability that hijacked the phones of thousands of users.

The verdict, reached Tuesday, comes as a major victory not just for Meta-owned WhatsApp but also for privacy- and security-rights advocates who have long criticized the practices of NSO and other exploit sellers. The jury also awarded WhatsApp $444 million in compensatory damages.

Clickless exploit

WhatsApp sued NSO in 2019 for an attack that targeted roughly 1,400 mobile phones belonging to attorneys, journalists, human-rights activists, political dissidents, diplomats, and senior foreign government officials. NSO, which works on behalf of governments and law enforcement authorities in various countries, exploited a critical WhatsApp vulnerability that allowed it to install NSO’s proprietary spyware Pegasus on iOS and Android devices. The clickless exploit worked by placing a call to a target’s app. A target did not have to answer the call to be infected.

“Today’s verdict in WhatsApp’s case is an important step forward for privacy and security as the first victory against the development and use of illegal spyware that threatens the safety and privacy of everyone,” WhatsApp said in a statement. “Today, the jury’s decision to force NSO, a notorious foreign spyware merchant, to pay damages is a critical deterrent to this malicious industry against their illegal acts aimed at American companies and the privacy and security of the people we serve.”

NSO created WhatsApp accounts in 2018 and used them a year later to initiate calls that exploited the critical vulnerability on phones, which, among others, included 100 members of “civil society” from 20 countries, according to an investigation research group Citizen Lab performed on behalf of WhatsApp. The calls passed through WhatsApp servers and injected malicious code into the memory of targeted devices. The targeted phones would then use WhatsApp servers to connect to malicious servers maintained by NSO.

Jury orders NSO to pay $167 million for hacking WhatsApp users Read More »

trump-and-doj-try-to-spring-former-county-clerk-tina-peters-from-prison

Trump and DOJ try to spring former county clerk Tina Peters from prison

President Donald Trump is demanding the release of Tina Peters, a former election official who parroted Trump’s 2020 election conspiracy theories and is serving nine years in prison for compromising the security of election equipment.

In a post on Truth Social last night, Trump wrote that “Radical Left Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser ignores Illegals committing Violent Crimes like Rape and Murder in his State and, instead, jailed Tina Peters, a 69-year-old Gold Star mother who worked to expose and document Democrat Election Fraud. Tina is an innocent Political Prisoner being horribly and unjustly punished in the form of Cruel and Unusual Punishment.”

Trump said he is “directing the Department of Justice to take all necessary action to help secure the release of this ‘hostage’ being held in a Colorado prison by the Democrats, for political reasons.”

The former Mesa County clerk was indicted in March 2022 on charges related to the leak of voting-system BIOS passwords and other confidential information. Peters was convicted in August 2024 and later sentenced in a Colorado state court.

“Your lies are well-documented and these convictions are serious,” 21st Judicial District Judge Matthew Barrett told Peters at her October 2024 sentencing. “I am convinced you would do it all over again. You are as defiant a defendant as this court has ever seen.”

DOJ reviews case for “abuse” of process

After Peters’ August 2024 conviction, Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold said that “Tina Peters willfully compromised her own election equipment trying to prove Trump’s big lie.”

Peters appealed her conviction in a Colorado appeals court and separately sought relief in US District Court for the District of Colorado. She asked the federal court to order her release on bond while the state court system handles her appeal and said her health has deteriorated while being incarcerated.

Trump’s Justice Department submitted a filing on Peters’ behalf in March, saying the US has concerns about “the exceptionally lengthy sentence imposed relative to the conduct at issue, the First Amendment implications of the trial court’s October 2024 assertions relating to Ms. Peters, and whether Colorado’s denial of bail pending appeal was arbitrary or unreasonable under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.”

Trump and DOJ try to spring former county clerk Tina Peters from prison Read More »

after-two-court-losses,-doge-asks-supreme-court-for-social-security-data-access

After two court losses, DOGE asks Supreme Court for Social Security data access

The Trump administration filed an emergency application on Friday asking the Supreme Court to restore DOGE’s access to Social Security Administration records. A lower-court order that prohibited DOGE’s access is causing “irreparable harm to the executive branch” and thwarting DOGE’s attempts to “eliminate waste and fraud,” US Solicitor General John Sauer wrote in the appeal.

“The government cannot eliminate waste and fraud if district courts bar the very agency personnel with expertise and the designated mission of curtailing such waste and fraud from performing their jobs,” Sauer told the Supreme Court. The preliminary injunction that is currently in place halted “the Executive Branch’s critically important efforts to improve its information-technology infrastructure and eliminate waste,” the brief said.

The appeal was lodged in a case filed by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; the Alliance for Retired Americans; and American Federation of Teachers. Chief Justice John Roberts asked them to file a response to the US by May 12.

In March, the plaintiffs obtained an order that required the Social Security Administration (SSA) to block DOGE’s access to records. US District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander’s order said the DOGE entity created by President Donald Trump “is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion.”

Trump admin lost at appeals court

Hollander ordered the SSA to cut off DOGE’s access and ruled that Elon Musk and other DOGE members must “disgorge and delete all non-anonymized PII [personally identifiable information] data in their possession or under their control.” The District of Maryland judge found that Social Security officials “provided members of the SSA DOGE Team with unbridled access to the personal and private data of millions of Americans, including but not limited to Social Security numbers, medical records, mental health records, hospitalization records, drivers’ license numbers, bank and credit card information, tax information, income history, work history, birth and marriage certificates, and home and work addresses.”

After two court losses, DOGE asks Supreme Court for Social Security data access Read More »

largest-deepfake-porn-site-shuts-down-forever

Largest deepfake porn site shuts down forever

The shuttering of Mr. Deepfakes won’t solve the problem of deepfakes, though. In 2022, the number of deepfakes skyrocketed as AI technology made the synthetic NCII appear more realistic than ever, prompting an FBI warning in 2023 to alert the public that the fake content was being increasingly used in sextortion schemes. But the immediate solutions society used to stop the spread had little impact. For example, in response to pressure to make the fake NCII harder to find, Google started downranking explicit deepfakes in search results but refused to demote platforms like Mr. Deepfakes unless Google received an unspecified “high volume of removals for fake explicit imagery.”

According to researchers, Mr. Deepfakes—a real person who remains anonymous but reportedly is a 36-year-old hospital worker in Toronto—created the engine driving this spike. His DeepFaceLab quickly became “the leading deepfake software, estimated to be the software behind 95 percent of all deepfake videos and has been replicated over 8,000 times on GitHub,” researchers found. For casual users, his platform hosted videos that could be purchased, usually priced above $50 if it was deemed realistic, while more motivated users relied on forums to make requests or enhance their own deepfake skills to become creators.

Mr. Deepfakes’ illegal trade began on Reddit but migrated to its own platform after a ban in 2018. There, thousands of deepfake creators shared technical knowledge, with the Mr. Deepfakes site forums eventually becoming “the only viable source of technical support for creating sexual deepfakes,” researchers noted last year.

Having migrated once before, it seems unlikely that this community won’t find a new platform to continue generating the illicit content, possibly rearing up under a new name since Mr. Deepfakes seemingly wants out of the spotlight. Back in 2023, researchers estimated that the platform had more than 250,000 members, many of whom may quickly seek a replacement or even try to build a replacement.

Further increasing the likelihood that Mr. Deepfakes’ reign of terror isn’t over, the DeepFaceLab GitHub repository—which was archived in November and can no longer be edited—remains available for anyone to copy and use.

404 Media reported that many Mr. Deepfakes members have already connected on Telegram, where synthetic NCII is also reportedly frequently traded. Hany Farid, a professor at UC Berkeley who is a leading expert on digitally manipulated images, told 404 Media that “while this takedown is a good start, there are many more just like this one, so let’s not stop here.”

Largest deepfake porn site shuts down forever Read More »

a-doge-recruiter-is-staffing-a-project-to-deploy-ai-agents-across-the-us-government

A DOGE recruiter is staffing a project to deploy AI agents across the US government


“does it still require Kremlin oversight?

A startup founder said that AI agents could do the work of tens of thousands of government employees.

An aide sets up a poster depicting the logo for the DOGE Caucus before a news conference in Washington, DC. Credit: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

A young entrepreneur who was among the earliest known recruiters for Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has a new, related gig—and he’s hiring. Anthony Jancso, cofounder of AcclerateX, a government tech startup, is looking for technologists to work on a project that aims to have artificial intelligence perform tasks that are currently the responsibility of tens of thousands of federal workers.

Jancso, a former Palantir employee, wrote in a Slack with about 2000 Palantir alumni in it that he’s hiring for a “DOGE orthogonal project to design benchmarks and deploy AI agents across live workflows in federal agencies,” according to an April 21 post reviewed by WIRED. Agents are programs that can perform work autonomously.

We’ve identified over 300 roles with almost full-process standardization, freeing up at least 70k FTEs for higher-impact work over the next year,” he continued, essentially claiming that tens of thousands of federal employees could see many aspects of their job automated and replaced by these AI agents. Workers for the project, he wrote, would be based on site in Washington, DC, and would not require a security clearance; it isn’t clear for whom they would work. Palantir did not respond to requests for comment.

The post was not well received. Eight people reacted with clown face emojis, three reacted with a custom emoji of a man licking a boot, two reacted with custom emoji of Joaquin Phoenix giving a thumbs down in the movie Gladiator, and three reacted with a custom emoji with the word “Fascist.” Three responded with a heart emoji.

“DOGE does not seem interested in finding ‘higher impact work’ for federal employees,” one person said in a comment that received 11 heart reactions. “You’re complicit in firing 70k federal employees and replacing them with shitty autocorrect.”

“Tbf we’re all going to be replaced with shitty autocorrect (written by chatgpt),” another person commented, which received one “+1” reaction.

“How ‘DOGE orthogonal’ is it? Like, does it still require Kremlin oversight?” another person said in a comment that received five reactions with a fire emoji. “Or do they just use your credentials to log in later?”

AccelerateX was originally called AccelerateSF, which VentureBeat reported in 2023 had received support from OpenAI and Anthropic. In its earliest incarnation, AccelerateSF hosted a hackathon for AI developers aimed at using the technology to solve San Francisco’s social problems. According to a 2023 Mission Local story, for instance, Jancso proposed that using large language models to help businesses fill out permit forms to streamline the construction paperwork process might help drive down housing prices. (OpenAI did not respond to a request for comment. Anthropic spokesperson Danielle Ghiglieri tells WIRED that the company “never invested in AccelerateX/SF,” but did sponsor a hackathon AccelerateSF hosted in 2023 by providing free access to its API usage at a time when its Claude API “was still in beta.”)

In 2024, the mission pivoted, with the venture becoming known as AccelerateX. In a post on X announcing the change, the company posted, “Outdated tech is dragging down the US Government. Legacy vendors sell broken systems at increasingly steep prices. This hurts every American citizen.” AccelerateX did not respond to a request for comment.

According to sources with direct knowledge, Jancso disclosed that AccelerateX had signed a partnership agreement with Palantir in 2024. According to the LinkedIn of someone described as one of AccelerateX’s cofounders, Rachel Yee, the company looks to have received funding from OpenAI’s Converge 2 Accelerator. Another of AccelerateSF’s cofounders, Kay Sorin, now works for OpenAI, having joined the company several months after that hackathon. Sorin and Yee did not respond to requests for comment.

Jancso’s cofounder, Jordan Wick, a former Waymo engineer, has been an active member of DOGE, appearing at several agencies over the past few months, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, National Labor Relations Board, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Education. In 2023, Jancso attended a hackathon hosted by ScaleAI; WIRED found that another DOGE member, Ethan Shaotran, also attended the same hackathon.

Since its creation in the first days of the second Trump administration, DOGE has pushed the use of AI across agencies, even as it has sought to cut tens of thousands of federal jobs. At the Department of Veterans Affairs, a DOGE associate suggested using AI to write code for the agency’s website; at the General Services Administration, DOGE has rolled out the GSAi chatbot; the group has sought to automate the process of firing government employees with a tool called AutoRIF; and a DOGE operative at the Department of Housing and Urban Development is using AI tools to examine and propose changes to regulations. But experts say that deploying AI agents to do the work of 70,000 people would be tricky if not impossible.

A federal employee with knowledge of government contracting, who spoke to WIRED on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the press, says, “A lot of agencies have procedures that can differ widely based on their own rules and regulations, and so deploying AI agents across agencies at scale would likely be very difficult.”

Oren Etzioni, cofounder of the AI startup Vercept, says that while AI agents can be good at doing some things—like using an internet browser to conduct research—their outputs can still vary widely and be highly unreliable. For instance, customer service AI agents have invented nonexistent policies when trying to address user concerns. Even research, he says, requires a human to actually make sure what the AI is spitting out is correct.

“We want our government to be something that we can rely on, as opposed to something that is on the absolute bleeding edge,” says Etzioni. “We don’t need it to be bureaucratic and slow, but if corporations haven’t adopted this yet, is the government really where we want to be experimenting with the cutting edge AI?”

Etzioni says that AI agents are also not great 1-1 fits for job replacements. Rather, AI is able to do certain tasks or make others more efficient, but the idea that the technology could do the jobs of 70,000 employees would not be possible. “Unless you’re using funny math,” he says, “no way.”

Jancso, first identified by WIRED in February, was one of the earliest recruiters for DOGE in the months before Donald Trump was inaugurated. In December, Jancso, who sources told WIRED said he had been recruited by Steve Davis, president of the Musk-founded Boring Company and a current member of DOGE, used the Palantir alumni group to recruit DOGE members. On December 2nd, 2024, he wrote, “I’m helping Elon’s team find tech talent for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in the new admin. This is a historic opportunity to build an efficient government, and to cut the federal budget by 1/3. If you’re interested in playing a role in this mission, please reach out in the next few days.”

According to one source at SpaceX, who asked to remain anonymous as they are not authorized to speak to the press, Jancso appeared to be one of the DOGE members who worked out of the company’s DC office in the days before inauguration along with several other people who would constitute some of DOGE’s earliest members. SpaceX did not respond to a request for comment.

Palantir was cofounded by Peter Thiel, a billionaire and longtime Trump supporter with close ties to Musk. Palantir, which provides data analytics tools to several government agencies including the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, has received billions of dollars in government contracts. During the second Trump administration, the company has been involved in helping to build a “mega API” to connect data from the Internal Revenue Service to other government agencies, and is working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to create a massive surveillance platform to identify immigrants to target for deportation.

This story originally appeared at WIRED.com.

Photo of WIRED

Wired.com is your essential daily guide to what’s next, delivering the most original and complete take you’ll find anywhere on innovation’s impact on technology, science, business and culture.

A DOGE recruiter is staffing a project to deploy AI agents across the US government Read More »

doj-confirms-it-wants-to-break-up-google’s-ad-business

DOJ confirms it wants to break up Google’s ad business

In the trial, Google will paint this demand as a severe overreach, claiming that few, if any, companies would have the resources to purchase and run the products. Last year, an ad consultant estimated Google’s ad empire could be worth up to $95 billion, quite possibly too big to sell. However, Google was similarly skeptical about Chrome, and representatives from other companies have said throughout the search remedy trial that they would love to buy Google’s browser.

An uphill battle

After losing three antitrust cases in just a couple of years, Google will have a hard time convincing the judge it is capable of turning over a new leaf with light remedies. A DOJ lawyer told the court Google is a “recidivist monopolist” that has a pattern of skirting its legal obligations. Still, Google is looking for mercy in the case. We expect to get more details on Google’s proposed remedies as the next trial nears, but it already offered a preview in today’s hearing.

Google suggests making a smaller subset of ad data available and ending the use of some pricing schemes, including unified pricing, that the court has found to be anticompetitive. Google also promised not to re-implement discontinued practices like “last look,” which gave the company a chance to outbid rivals at the last moment. This was featured prominently in the DOJ’s case, although Google ended the practice several years ago.

To ensure it adheres to the remedies, Google suggested a court-appointed monitor would audit the process. However, Brinkema seemed unimpressed with this proposal.

As in its other cases, Google says it plans to appeal the verdict, but before it can do that, the remedies phase has to be completed. Even if it can get the remedies paused for appeal, the decision could be a blow to investor confidence. So, Google will do whatever it can to avoid the worst-case scenario, leaning on the existence of competing advertisers like Meta and TikTok to show that the market is still competitive.

Like the search case, Google won’t be facing any big developments over the summer, but this fall could be rough. Judge Amit Mehta will most likely rule on the search remedies in August, and the ad tech remedies case will begin the following month. Google also has the Play Store case hanging over its head. It lost the first round, but the company hopes to prevail on appeal when the case gets underway again, probably in late 2025.

DOJ confirms it wants to break up Google’s ad business Read More »

judge-on-meta’s-ai-training:-“i-just-don’t-understand-how-that-can-be-fair-use”

Judge on Meta’s AI training: “I just don’t understand how that can be fair use”


Judge downplayed Meta’s “messed up” torrenting in lawsuit over AI training.

A judge who may be the first to rule on whether AI training data is fair use appeared skeptical Thursday at a hearing where Meta faced off with book authors over the social media company’s alleged copyright infringement.

Meta, like most AI companies, holds that training must be deemed fair use, or else the entire AI industry could face immense setbacks, wasting precious time negotiating data contracts while falling behind global rivals. Meta urged the court to rule that AI training is a transformative use that only references books to create an entirely new work that doesn’t replicate authors’ ideas or replace books in their markets.

At the hearing that followed after both sides requested summary judgment, however, Judge Vince Chhabria pushed back on Meta attorneys arguing that the company’s Llama AI models posed no threat to authors in their markets, Reuters reported.

“You have companies using copyright-protected material to create a product that is capable of producing an infinite number of competing products,” Chhabria said. “You are dramatically changing, you might even say obliterating, the market for that person’s work, and you’re saying that you don’t even have to pay a license to that person.”

Declaring, “I just don’t understand how that can be fair use,” the shrewd judge apparently stoked little response from Meta’s attorney, Kannon Shanmugam, apart from a suggestion that any alleged threat to authors’ livelihoods was “just speculation,” Wired reported.

Authors may need to sharpen their case, which Chhabria warned could be “taken away by fair use” if none of the authors suing, including Sarah Silverman, Ta-Nehisi Coates, and Richard Kadrey, can show “that the market for their actual copyrighted work is going to be dramatically affected.”

Determined to probe this key question, Chhabria pushed authors’ attorney, David Boies, to point to specific evidence of market harms that seemed noticeably missing from the record.

“It seems like you’re asking me to speculate that the market for Sarah Silverman’s memoir will be affected by the billions of things that Llama will ultimately be capable of producing,” Chhabria said. “And it’s just not obvious to me that that’s the case.”

But if authors can prove fears of market harms are real, Meta might struggle to win over Chhabria, and that could set a precedent impacting copyright cases challenging AI training on other kinds of content.

The judge repeatedly appeared to be sympathetic to authors, suggesting that Meta’s AI training may be a “highly unusual case” where even though “the copying is for a highly transformative purpose, the copying has the high likelihood of leading to the flooding of the markets for the copyrighted works.”

And when Shanmugam argued that copyright law doesn’t shield authors from “protection from competition in the marketplace of ideas,” Chhabria resisted the framing that authors weren’t potentially being robbed, Reuters reported.

“But if I’m going to steal things from the marketplace of ideas in order to develop my own ideas, that’s copyright infringement, right?” Chhabria responded.

Wired noted that he asked Meta’s lawyers, “What about the next Taylor Swift?” If AI made it easy to knock off a young singer’s sound, how could she ever compete if AI produced “a billion pop songs” in her style?

In a statement, Meta’s spokesperson reiterated the company’s defense that AI training is fair use.

“Meta has developed transformational open source AI models that are powering incredible innovation, productivity, and creativity for individuals and companies,” Meta’s spokesperson said. “Fair use of copyrighted materials is vital to this. We disagree with Plaintiffs’ assertions, and the full record tells a different story. We will continue to vigorously defend ourselves and to protect the development of GenAI for the benefit of all.”

Meta’s torrenting seems “messed up”

Some have pondered why Chhabria appeared so focused on market harms, instead of hammering Meta for admittedly illegally pirating books that it used for its AI training, which seems to be obvious copyright infringement. According to Wired, “Chhabria spoke emphatically about his belief that the big question is whether Meta’s AI tools will hurt book sales and otherwise cause the authors to lose money,” not whether Meta’s torrenting of books was illegal.

The torrenting “seems kind of messed up,” Chhabria said, but “the question, as the courts tell us over and over again, is not whether something is messed up but whether it’s copyright infringement.”

It’s possible that Chhabria dodged the question for procedural reasons. In a court filing, Meta argued that authors had moved for summary judgment on Meta’s alleged copying of their works, not on “unsubstantiated allegations that Meta distributed Plaintiffs’ works via torrent.”

In the court filing, Meta alleged that even if Chhabria agreed that the authors’ request for “summary judgment is warranted on the basis of Meta’s distribution, as well as Meta’s copying,” that the authors “lack evidence to show that Meta distributed any of their works.”

According to Meta, authors abandoned any claims that Meta’s seeding of the torrented files served to distribute works, leaving only claims about Meta’s leeching. Meta argued that the authors “admittedly lack evidence that Meta ever uploaded any of their works, or any identifiable part of those works, during the so-called ‘leeching’ phase,” relying instead on expert estimates based on how torrenting works.

It’s also possible that for Chhabria, the torrenting question seemed like an unnecessary distraction. Former Meta attorney Mark Lumley, who quit the case earlier this year, told Vanity Fair that the torrenting was “one of those things that sounds bad but actually shouldn’t matter at all in the law. Fair use is always about uses the plaintiff doesn’t approve of; that’s why there is a lawsuit.”

Lumley suggested that court cases mulling fair use at this current moment should focus on the outputs, rather than the training. Citing the ruling in a case where Google Books scanning books to share excerpts was deemed fair use, Lumley argued that “all search engines crawl the full Internet, including plenty of pirated content,” so there’s seemingly no reason to stop AI crawling.

But the Copyright Alliance, a nonprofit, non-partisan group supporting the authors in the case, in a court filing alleged that Meta, in its bid to get AI products viewed as transformative, is aiming to do the opposite. “When describing the purpose of generative AI,” Meta allegedly strives to convince the court to “isolate the ‘training’ process and ignore the output of generative AI,” because that’s seemingly the only way that Meta can convince the court that AI outputs serve “a manifestly different purpose from Plaintiffs’ books,” the Copyright Alliance argued.

“Meta’s motion ignores what comes after the initial ‘training’—most notably the generation of output that serves the same purpose of the ingested works,” the Copyright Alliance argued. And the torrenting question should matter, the group argued, because unlike in Google Books, Meta’s AI models are apparently training on pirated works, not “legitimate copies of books.”

Chhabria will not be making a snap decision in the case, planning to take his time and likely stressing not just Meta, but every AI company defending training as fair use the longer he delays. Understanding that the entire AI industry potentially has a stake in the ruling, Chhabria apparently sought to relieve some tension at the end of the hearing with a joke, Wired reported.

 “I will issue a ruling later today,” Chhabria said. “Just kidding! I will take a lot longer to think about it.”

Photo of Ashley Belanger

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Judge on Meta’s AI training: “I just don’t understand how that can be fair use” Read More »

“blatantly-unlawful”:-trump-slammed-for-trying-to-defund-pbs,-npr

“Blatantly unlawful”: Trump slammed for trying to defund PBS, NPR

CPB President Patricia Harrison suggested in a statement provided to Ars that these moves to block networks’ funding exceed Trump’s authority.

“CPB is not a federal executive agency subject to the president’s authority,” Harrison said. “Congress directly authorized and funded CPB to be a private nonprofit corporation wholly independent of the federal government,” statutorily forbidding “any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over educational television or radio broadcasting, or over [CPB] or any of its grantees or contractors.”

PBS President and CEO Paula Kerger went further, calling the order “blatantly unlawful” in a statement provided to Ars.

“Issued in the middle of the night,” Trump’s order “threatens our ability to serve the American public with educational programming, as we have for the past 50-plus years,” Kerger said. “We are currently exploring all options to allow PBS to continue to serve our member stations and all Americans.”

Rural communities need public media, orgs say

While Trump opposes NPR and PBS for promoting content that he disagrees with—criticizing segments on white privilege, gender identity, reparations, “fat phobia,” and abortion—the networks have defended their programming as unbiased and falling in line with Federal Communications Commission guidelines. Further, NPR reported that the networks’ “locally grounded content” currently reaches “more than 99 percent of the population at no cost,” providing not just educational fare and entertainment but also critical updates tied to local emergency and disaster response systems.

Cutting off funding, Kreger said last month, would have a “devastating impact” on rural communities, especially in parts of the country where NPR and PBS still serve as “the only source of news and emergency broadcasts,” NPR reported.

For example, Ed Ulman, CEO of Alaska Public Media, testified to Congress last month that his stations “provide potentially life-saving warnings and alerts that are crucial for Alaskans who face threats ranging from extreme weather to earthquakes, landslides, and even volcanoes.” Some of the smallest rural stations sometimes rely on CPB for about 50 percent of their funding, NPR reported.

“Blatantly unlawful”: Trump slammed for trying to defund PBS, NPR Read More »

tesla-denies-trying-to-replace-elon-musk-as-ceo

Tesla denies trying to replace Elon Musk as CEO

Tensions had been mounting at the company. Sales and profits were deteriorating rapidly. Musk was spending much of his time in Washington.

Around that time, Tesla’s board met with Musk for an update. Board members told him he needed to spend more time on Tesla, according to people familiar with the meeting. And he needed to say so publicly.

Musk didn’t push back.

Musk subsequently said in an April 22 call with investors that “starting next month, I’ll be allocating far more of my time to Tesla now that the major work of establishing the Department of Government Efficiency is done.”

The Journal report said that after Musk’s public statement, the Tesla “board narrowed its focus to a major search firm, according to the people familiar with the discussions. The current status of the succession planning couldn’t be determined. It is also unclear if Musk, himself a Tesla board member, was aware of the effort, or if his pledge to spend more time at Tesla has affected succession planning.”

Tesla’s eight-member board has been criticized for having members with close ties to Musk. Last year, a Delaware judge who invalidated a $55.8 billion pay package awarded to Musk said that most of the board members “were beholden to Musk or had compromising conflicts.”

That includes Musk’s brother, Kimbal, and longtime Musk friend James Murdoch, said the ruling from Delaware Court of Chancery Judge Kathaleen McCormick. The judge also wrote that Denholm “derived the vast majority of her wealth from her compensation as a Tesla director” and took a “lackadaisical approach to her oversight obligations.” Denholm later defended Musk’s pay, telling shareholders that the large sum was needed to keep the CEO motivated.

Tesla denies trying to replace Elon Musk as CEO Read More »

fortnite-will-return-to-ios-as-court-slams-apple’s-“interference“-and-”cover-up“

Fortnite will return to iOS as court slams Apple’s “interference“ and ”cover-up“

In a statement provided to Ars Technica, an Apple spokesperson said, “We strongly disagree with the decision. We will comply with the court’s order and we will appeal.”

An Epic return

With the new court order in place, Epic says it will once again submit a version of Fortnite to the iOS App Store in the US in the next week or so. That new version will offer players the option to use standard Apple App Store payments or its own, cheaper “Epic Direct Payment” system to purchase in-game currency and items.

That would mirror the system that was briefly in place for iOS players in August 2020, when Epic added alternate payment options to iOS Fortnite in intentional violation of what were then Apple’s store policies. Apple removed Fortnite from the iOS App Store hours later, setting off a legal battle that seems to finally be reaching its conclusion.

For those few hours when Epic Direct Payments were available on iOS Fortnite in 2020, Sweeney said that about 50 percent of customers “decided to give Epic a shot,” going through an additional step to register and pay through an Epic account on a webpage outside the app itself (and saving 20 percent on their purchase in the process). The other roughly 50 percent of customers decided to pay a higher price in exchange for the convenience of paying directly in the app through the iOS account they already had set up, Sweeney said. “Consumers were making the choice… and it was a wonderful thing to see,” he said.

Speaking to the press Wednesday night, Sweeney said the new court order was a “huge victory for developers” looking to offer their own payment service alongside Apple’s on iOS devices. “This is what we’ve wanted all along,” he said. “We think that this achieves the goal that we’ve been aiming for in the US, while there are still some challenges elsewhere in the world.”

While Sweeney said the specific iOS developer account Epic used to publish Fortnite in 2020 is still banned, he added that the company has several other developer accounts that could be used for the new submission, including one it has used to support Unreal Engine on Apple devices. And while Sweeney allowed that Apple could still “arbitrarily reject Epic from the App Store despite Epic following all the rules,” he added that, in light of this latest court ruling, Apple would now “have to deal with various consequences of that if they did.”

Fortnite will return to iOS as court slams Apple’s “interference“ and ”cover-up“ Read More »