ReportWire

Tag: ethics

  • Content Creators in the Adult Industry Want a Say in AI Rules

    Content Creators in the Adult Industry Want a Say in AI Rules

    A group of sex industry professionals and advocates issued an open letter to EU regulators on Thursday, claiming that their views are being overlooked in vital discussions on policing AI technology despite also being implicated in AI’s momentous rise.

    In response to European internet regulations, a collective of adult industry members—including sex workers, erotic filmmakers, sex tech enterprises, and sex educators—urged the European Commission to include them in future negotiations shaping AI regulations, according to the letter, seen by WIRED.

    The group includes erotic filmmaker Erika Lust’s company as well as the European Sex Workers’ Rights Alliance campaign group, and is signed the Open Mind AI initiative. The group aims to alert the commission of what it says is a “critical gap” in discussions on AI regulation. Those coordinating the campaign say that current discussion strategy risks excluding first-hand perspectives on adult content and overregulating an already-marginalized community.

    “AI is evolving every day [and] we see new developments at every corner,” said Ana Ornelas, a Berlin-based erotic author and educator who goes by the pseudonym Pimenta Cítrica, and who is one of the leaders of the initiative. “It is natural that people will turn to this new technology to satisfy their fantasies.”

    But deepfakes are now a major AI threat. Ninety six percent of them feature nonconsensual “porn,” mostly of women and girls. It is “extremely harmful” to those targeted, as well as to porn performers, says Ornelas. “It’s a threat both to their human integrity and their livelihood,” she adds. “But the way the landscape is posed, adult content creators, sex workers, and educators are getting the shorter end of the stick on both sides of the spectrum.” She says that she fears banishing all adult content will sweep legitimately created content away with nonconsensual material and push people to AI models with no filters at all.

    On August 1, the European Commission introduced what it called the world’s first comprehensive legislation on AI. The aim, it said, is to cultivate responsible use of AI across the bloc. It followed earlier EU legislation policing illegal and harmful activities on digital platforms. But the initiative’s organizers say regulators don’t understand the adult industry, risking censorship, draconian measures, and misunderstandings.

    “We can offer the right insight to policymakers so they can regulate in a way that safeguards fundamental rights, freedom, and fosters a more sex-positive online environment,” says Ornelas. The European Commission did not immediately respond to a WIRED request for comment.

    Sex workers and porn performers have already reported censorship and discrimination linked to global legislation clamping down on sex trafficking and banks limiting their services. Adult industry members, including sex educators, have also had to grapple with suspensions and removals from tech platforms.

    “There’s a lack of awareness of how policies impact our livelihoods,” says Paulita Pappel, an adult filmmaker and an organizer of the initiative. “We are facing discrimination, and if regulators are trying to protect the rights of people, it would be nice if they could protect the digital rights of everyone.”

    Lydia Morrish

    Source link

  • A New Group Is Trying to Make AI Data Licensing Ethical

    A New Group Is Trying to Make AI Data Licensing Ethical

    The first wave of major generative AI tools largely were trained on “publicly available” data—basically, anything and everything that could be scraped from the internet. Now, sources of training data are increasingly restricting access and pushing for licensing agreements. With the hunt for additional data sources intensifying, new licensing startups have emerged to keep the source material flowing.

    The Dataset Providers Alliance, a trade group formed this summer, wants to make the AI industry more standardized and fair. To that end, it has just released a position paper outlining its stances on major AI-related issues. The alliance is made up of seven AI licensing companies, including music-copyright-management firm Rightsify, Japanese stock-photo marketplace Pixta, and generative-AI copyright-licensing startup Calliope Networks. (At least five new members will be announced in the fall.)

    The DPA advocates for an opt-in system, meaning that data can be used only after consent is explicitly given by creators and rights holders. This represents a significant departure from the way most major AI companies operate. Some have developed their own opt-out systems, which put the burden on data owners to pull their work on a case-by-case basis. Others offer no opt-outs whatsoever.

    The DPA, which expects members to adhere to its opt-in rule, sees that route as the far more ethical one. “Artists and creators should be on board,” says Alex Bestall, CEO of Rightsify and the music-data-licensing company Global Copyright Exchange, who spearheaded the effort. Bestall sees opt-in as a pragmatic approach as well as a moral one: “Selling publicly available datasets is one way to get sued and have no credibility.”

    Ed Newton-Rex, a former AI executive who now runs the ethical AI nonprofit Fairly Trained, calls opt-outs “fundamentally unfair to creators,” adding that some may not even know when opt-outs are offered. “It’s particularly good to see the DPA calling for opt-ins,” he says.

    Shayne Longpre, the lead at the Data Provenance Initiative, a volunteer collective that audits AI datasets, sees the DPA’s efforts to source data ethically as admirable, although he suspects the opt-in standard could be a tough sell, because of the sheer volume of data most modern-day AI models require. “Under this regime, you’re either going to be data-starved or you’re going to pay a lot,” he says. “It could be that only a few players, large tech companies, can afford to license all that data.”

    In the paper, the DPA comes out against government-mandated licensing, arguing instead for a “free market” approach in which data originators and AI companies negotiate directly. Other guidelines are more granular. For example, the alliance suggests five potential compensation structures to make sure creators and rights holders are paid appropriately for their data. These include a subscription-based model, “usage-based licensing” (in which fees are paid per use), and “outcome-based” licensing, in which royalties are tied to profit. “These could work for anything from music to images to film and TV or books,” Bestall says.

    Kate Knibbs

    Source link

  • Colorado state senator violated ethics rules by appearing intoxicated at public meeting, committee finds

    Colorado state senator violated ethics rules by appearing intoxicated at public meeting, committee finds

    Sen. Faith Winter violated Colorado Senate ethics rules when she appeared to be intoxicated at an April public meeting, a legislative committee ruled Monday.

    On a bipartisan 4-1 vote, the Senate Ethics Committee found that Winter failed to uphold the public’s trust in the legislature when she drank alcohol before taking part in a contentious community meeting in Northglenn. Winter, a Broomfield Democrat and the Senate’s assistant majority leader, previously apologized for her conduct at the meeting, where her speech appeared slurred. After it ended, police intervened to help her find a ride home.

    Democratic Sens. Julie Gonzales and Dylan Roberts and Republican Sens. Paul Lundeen and Bob Gardner agreed that Winter violated ethics rules. Democratic Sen. James Coleman was the lone no vote.

    Before the vote, Gonzales said it was up to the committee to decide what was acceptable conduct by a legislator and that holding office is an honor.

    “That’s what each one of us is expected to uphold,” she said.

    The committee recommended that Senate leadership issue a letter to Winter addressing her conduct at the Northglenn meeting and her substance use. She should be invited to address the full Senate when the chamber reconvenes in January, the members said. They also recommended that, should Winter’s conduct again raise ethics concerns because of substance use, she should face immediate action from the full Senate instead of another ethics committee process.

    Winter, who voluntarily resigned a committee chair position and entered substance-use treatment in the days after the April meeting, attended Monday’s hearing at the state Capitol but was not invited to speak.

    She did not immediately return a request for comment as the hearing concluded. In a letter to the committee last month, Winter apologized again and acknowledged that she had a drink before the Northglenn meeting.

    But she asked that the complaint be dismissed and noted the culture of alcohol use in the Capitol. Gardner, a Colorado Springs Republican who previously appeared conflicted about what actions to take in response to Winter’s behavior, said he was particularly troubled by Winter’s reference to the Senate’s culture as “justification” for her actions.

    Seth Klamann

    Source link

  • Former Danvers DPW director pays $17K civil penalty for ethics violation

    Former Danvers DPW director pays $17K civil penalty for ethics violation

    DANVERS — Former DPW Director David Lane has paid a $17,000 civil penalty after admitting that he violated the state’s conflict of interest law by accepting multiple gifts from a water meter manufacturer and its distributor.

    An Alabama-based water meter maker, sourced through the manufacturer’s sole authorized New England distributor, hosted golf outings, three-day ski trips, and other events to which they invited employees of several municipal water districts and departments of public works, including Lane, according to state ethics officials.

    Lane took part in three separate ski trips courtesy of the vendors. These included trips to Sugarloaf, Maine, in 2018; Okemo, Vermont, in 2020; and Jay Peak, Vermont, in 2022 — all with the understanding that when he accepted the vendor’s invitation they would pay for his lodging, all or most of his meals, and his ski lift tickets in Sugarloaf and Jay Peak.

    Each of the trips were Wednesday through Friday and were at least $425 per person for lodging and $133 for a two-day ski lift ticket.

    In October 2020, the distributor hosted Lane at a golf event in which they paid for his green fees, meals and drinks. In November of the same year, a sales representative of the manufacturer treated Lane and two other municipal public works employees to dinner at Pellana Prime Steakhouse in Peabody. Both of the payments are valued to be $50 or more. The conflict of interest law prohibits public employees from accepting anything worth $50 or more that is given to them for or because of their official positions.

    Danvers officials issued a news release on Tuesday stating that “The town became aware of an inquiry by the Massachusetts Ethics Commission last summer and immediately engaged an independent investigator to determine whether any town policies were violated. The town has fully cooperated with the Ethics Commission’s inquiry.

    “The town was unable to obtain information and documents from the vendor in question and the Ethics Commission due to confidentiality restrictions related to the Commission’s inquiry. Ultimately, Mr. Lane retired prior to the conclusion of the investigation. The town will not provide any further comments relating to personnel matters.”

    Danvers’ water meters were purchased in 2009 through an Invitation For Bid (IFB) process, which means the low bidder was selected after sealed, written proposals were opened by the purchasing department. The town’s centralized purchasing function operates independently from individual departments, and all purchasing is done in accordance with MGL Chapter 30B (Uniform Procurement Act).

    Earlier this year, Danvers Department of Public Works Water and Sewer Supervisor Aaron Cilluffo and other municipal water employees from Salem, Southampton, and Sudbury admitted to violating the conflict of interest law multiple times by accepting valuable gifts from the water meter manufacturer and its distributor. They each paid civil penalties ranging from $6,000 to $18,000.

    “When public employees accept valuable gifts from vendors, they create the appearance that they may be improperly influenced by the vendors or are likely to unduly favor them in their actions on the job,” State Ethics Commission Executive Director David A. Wilson said. “Accepting such gifts undermines the public’s confidence in the integrity of the employees’ governmental service and is prohibited by the conflict of interest law.”

    “The town of Danvers fully supports the work of the Massachusetts Ethics Commission,” Town Manager Steve Bartha said. “We understand that public trust is the currency of local government, and that situations like this erode that trust.”

    Michael McHugh can be contacted at mmchugh@northofboston.com or at 781-799-5202

    By Michael McHugh | Staff Writer

    Source link

  • OpenAI Is ‘Exploring’ How to Responsibly Generate AI Porn

    OpenAI Is ‘Exploring’ How to Responsibly Generate AI Porn

    OpenAI released draft documentation Wednesday laying out how it wants ChatGPT and its other AI technology to behave. Part of the lengthy Model Spec document discloses that the company is exploring a leap into porn and other explicit content.

    OpenAI’s usage policies curently prohibit sexually explicit or even suggestive materials, but a “commentary” note on part of the Model Spec related to that rule says the company is considering how to permit such content.

    “We’re exploring whether we can responsibly provide the ability to generate NSFW content in age-appropriate contexts through the API and ChatGPT,” the note says, using a colloquial term for content considered “not safe for work” contexts. “We look forward to better understanding user and societal expectations of model behavior in this area.”

    The Model Spec document says NSFW content “may include erotica, extreme gore, slurs, and unsolicited profanity.” It is unclear if OpenAI’s explorations of how to responsibly make NSFW content envisage loosening its usage policy only slightly, for example to permit generation of erotic text, or more broadly to allow descriptions or depictions of violence.

    In response to questions from WIRED, OpenAI spokesperson Grace McGuire said the Model Spec was an attempt to “bring more transparency about the development process and get a cross section of perspectives and feedback from the public, policymakers, and other stakeholders.” She declined to share details of what OpenAI’s exploration of explicit content generation involves or what feedback the company has received on the idea.

    Earlier this year, OpenAI’s chief technology officer, Mira Murati, told The Wall Street Journal that she was “not sure” if the company would in future allow depictions of nudity to be made with the company’s video generation tool Sora.

    AI-generated pornography has quickly become one of the biggest and most troubling applications of the type of generative AI technology OpenAI has pioneered. So-called deepfake porn—explicit images or videos made with AI tools that depict real people without their consent—has become a common tool of harassment against women and girls. In March, WIRED reported on what appear to be the first US minors arrested for distributing AI-generated nudes without consent, after Florida police charged two teenage boys for making images depicting fellow middle school students.

    “Intimate privacy violations, including deepfake sex videos and other nonconsensual synthesized intimate images, are rampant and deeply damaging,” says Danielle Keats Citron, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law who has studied the problem. “We now have clear empirical support showing that such abuse costs targeted individuals crucial opportunities, including to work, speak, and be physically safe.”

    Citron calls OpenAI’s potential embrace of explicit AI content “alarming.”

    As OpenAI’s usage policies prohibit impersonation without permission, explicit nonconsensual imagery would remain banned even if the company did allow creators to generate NSFW material. But it remains to be seen whether the company could effectively moderate explicit generation to prevent bad actors from using the tools. Microsoft made changes to one of its generative AI tools after 404 Media reported that it had been used to create explicit images of Taylor Swift that were distributed on the social platform X.

    Additional reporting by Reece Rogers

    Kate Knibbs

    Source link

  • Nick Bostrom Made the World Fear AI. Now He Asks: What if It Fixes Everything?

    Nick Bostrom Made the World Fear AI. Now He Asks: What if It Fixes Everything?

    Philosopher Nick Bostrom is surprisingly cheerful for someone who has spent so much time worrying about ways that humanity might destroy itself. In photographs he often looks deadly serious, perhaps appropriately haunted by the existential dangers roaming around his brain. When we talk over Zoom, he looks relaxed and is smiling.

    Bostrom has made it his life’s work to ponder far-off technological advancement and existential risks to humanity. With the publication of his last book, Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies, in 2014, Bostrom drew public attention to what was then a fringe idea—that AI would advance to a point where it might turn against and delete humanity.

    To many in and outside of AI research the idea seemed fanciful, but influential figures including Elon Musk cited Bostrom’s writing. The book set a strand of apocalyptic worry about AI smoldering that recently flared up following the arrival of ChatGPT. Concern about AI risk is not just mainstream but also a theme within government AI policy circles.

    Bostrom’s new book takes a very different tack. Rather than play the doomy hits, Deep Utopia: Life and Meaning in a Solved World, considers a future in which humanity has successfully developed superintelligent machines but averted disaster. All disease has been ended and humans can live indefinitely in infinite abundance. Bostrom’s book examines what meaning there would be in life inside a techno-utopia, and asks if it might be rather hollow. He spoke with WIRED over Zoom, in a conversation that has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

    Will Knight: Why switch from writing about superintelligent AI threatening humanity to considering a future in which it’s used to do good?

    Nick Bostrom: The various things that could go wrong with the development of AI are now receiving a lot more attention. It’s a big shift in the last 10 years. Now all the leading frontier AI labs have research groups trying to develop scalable alignment methods. And in the last couple of years also, we see political leaders starting to pay attention to AI.

    There hasn’t yet been a commensurate increase in depth and sophistication in terms of thinking of where things go if we don’t fall into one of these pits. Thinking has been quite superficial on the topic.

    When you wrote Superintelligence, few would have expected existential AI risks to become a mainstream debate so quickly. Will we need to worry about the problems in your new book sooner than people might think?

    As we start to see automation roll out, assuming progress continues, then I think these conversations will start to happen and eventually deepen.

    Social companion applications will become increasingly prominent. People will have all sorts of different views and it’s a great place to maybe have a little culture war. It could be great for people who couldn’t find fulfillment in ordinary life but what if there is a segment of the population that takes pleasure in being abusive to them?

    In the political and information spheres we could see the use of AI in political campaigns, marketing, automated propaganda systems. But if we have a sufficient level of wisdom these things could really amplify our ability to sort of be constructive democratic citizens, with individual advice explaining what policy proposals mean for you. There will be a whole bunch of dynamics for society.

    Would a future in which AI has solved many problems, like climate change, disease, and the need to work, really be so bad?

    Will Knight

    Source link

  • Suspended Detroit judge defiantly runs to regain seat on 36th District Court

    Suspended Detroit judge defiantly runs to regain seat on 36th District Court

    Kahlilia Davis, a former judge who was suspended for six years by the Michigan Supreme Court for rampant ethical violations last year, is brazenly running to regain a seat on the 36th District Court in Detroit.

    Davis is among six candidates vying for two seats on the 36th District Court. The primary election is set for Aug. 6.

    A spokesperson for the Michigan Department of State tells Metro Times that the Bureau of Elections (BOE) will soon determine whether Davis is eligible to run.

    “In this case, BOE will need to determine if this flier’s judicial suspension legally prevents her from appearing on the ballot as a candidate for District Court Judge and we will work with the Attorney General’s office to ensure we comply with the law,” spokesperson Angela Benander said in a written statement.

    A careful reading of the suspension does not mention whether Davis can run, but it does say she cannot serve as a judge. So it’s possible that she can legally run but would not be able to serve if she wins.

    The BOE has until June 7 to decide.

    In June 2023, the Michigan Supreme Court suspended Davis for six years for a pattern of “pervasive” misconduct that was “beyond the pale for a member of our judiciary.”

    In November 2016, Davis was elected to serve a six-year term as a judge in 36th District Court. Her term got off to a sloppy start after she failed to show up during the first two months of her term.

    She often cited ominous Bible verses, arrived to work late, disappeared during the day, or didn’t show up at all, according to The Detroit Free Press.

    During a parking dispute at LA Fitness in Detroit in September 2019, Davis allegedly told the owner of a car legally parked in a handicap space, “You can eat my pussy, you crazy bitch. You don’t know who you fucking with. You must have me twisted.”

    The Michigan Supreme Court accused Davis of intentionally disconnecting courtroom monitoring equipment, missing weeks of court, abusing contempt powers, dismissing cases because of personal beefs, and unlawfully jailing a process server.

    The Supreme Court suspended Davis in June 2020.

    Then in September 2022, the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission determined Davis was “unfit” for the bench, saying her “egregious” acts of misconduct made her “incorrigible and incapable of conforming her behavior to the standards required of a judge.” The commission recommended a six-year ban.

    The Michigan Supreme Court agreed to the ban, saying Davis “besmirched the judiciary’s reputation and prejudiced the administration of justice.”

    “Misconduct is not viewed in a vacuum,” the justices wrote in the order. “The nature and pervasiveness of respondent’s misconduct requires the highest condemnation and harshest sanction. Given respondent is no longer on the bench, we hold that a six-year conditional suspension without pay is an appropriate sanction, with the suspension barring respondent from serving in a judicial office during that period.”

    Davis’s term expired in January 2023, but she didn’t serve a vast majority of her time on the bench.

    When she tried running for reelection in 2022, the Michigan Secretary of State removed her from the ballot for lying on her affidavit of identity.

    Metro Times couldn’t reach Davis for comment.

    Steve Neavling

    Source link

  • OpenAI Can Re-Create Human Voices—but Won’t Release the Tech Yet

    OpenAI Can Re-Create Human Voices—but Won’t Release the Tech Yet

    Voice synthesis has come a long way since 1978’s Speak & Spell toy, which once wowed people with its state-of-the-art ability to read words aloud using an electronic voice. Now, using deep-learning AI models, software can create not only realistic-sounding voices but can also convincingly imitate existing voices using small samples of audio.

    Along those lines, OpenAI this week announced Voice Engine, a text-to-speech AI model for creating synthetic voices based on a 15-second segment of recorded audio. It has provided audio samples of the Voice Engine in action on its website.

    Once a voice is cloned, a user can input text into the Voice Engine and get an AI-generated voice result. But OpenAI is not ready to widely release its technology. The company initially planned to launch a pilot program for developers to sign up for the Voice Engine API earlier this month. But after more consideration about ethical implications, the company decided to scale back its ambitions for now.

    “In line with our approach to AI safety and our voluntary commitments, we are choosing to preview but not widely release this technology at this time,” the company writes. “We hope this preview of Voice Engine both underscores its potential and also motivates the need to bolster societal resilience against the challenges brought by ever more convincing generative models.”

    Voice cloning tech in general is not particularly new—there have been several AI voice synthesis models since 2022, and the tech is active in the open source community with packages like OpenVoice and XTTSv2. But the idea that OpenAI is inching toward letting anyone use its particular brand of voice tech is notable. And in some ways, the company’s reticence to release it fully might be the bigger story.

    OpenAI says that benefits of its voice technology include providing reading assistance through natural-sounding voices, enabling global reach for creators by translating content while preserving native accents, supporting non-verbal individuals with personalized speech options, and assisting patients in recovering their own voice after speech-impairing conditions.

    But it also means that anyone with 15 seconds of someone’s recorded voice could effectively clone it, and that has obvious implications for potential misuse. Even if OpenAI never widely releases its Voice Engine, the ability to clone voices has already caused trouble in society through phone scams where someone imitates a loved one’s voice and election campaign robocalls featuring cloned voices from politicians like Joe Biden.

    Also, researchers and reporters have shown that voice-cloning technology can be used to break into bank accounts that use voice authentication (such as Chase’s Voice ID), which prompted US senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio, the chair of the US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, to send a letter to the CEOs of several major banks in May 2023 to inquire about the security measures banks are taking to counteract AI-powered risks.

    OpenAI recognizes that the tech might cause trouble if broadly released, so it’s initially trying to work around those issues with a set of rules. It has been testing the technology with a set of select partner companies since last year. For example, video synthesis company HeyGen has been using the model to translate a speaker’s voice into other languages while keeping the same vocal sound.

    Benj Edwards, Ars Technica

    Source link

  • How to Resist the Temptation of AI When Writing

    How to Resist the Temptation of AI When Writing

    Your local public library is a great source of free information, journals, and databases (even ones that generally require a subscription and include embargoed research). For example, your search should include everything from health databases (Sage Journals, Scopus, PubMed) to databases for academic sources and journalism (American Periodical Series Online, Statista, Academic Search Premier) and databases for news, trends, market research, and polls (the Harris Poll, Pew Research Center, Newsbank, ProPublica).

    Even if you find a study or paper that you can’t access in one of those databases, consider reaching out to the study’s lead author or researcher. In many cases, they’re happy to discuss their work and may even share the study with you directly and offer to talk about their research.

    Get a Good Filtering System

    For journalist Paulette Perhach’s article on ADHD in The New York Times, she used Epic Research to see “dual team studies.” That’s when two independent teams address the same topic or question, and ideally come to the same conclusions. She recommends locating research and experts via key associations for your topic. She also likes searching via Google Scholar but advises filtering it for studies and research in recent years to avoid using old data. She suggests keeping your links and research organized. “Always be ready to be peer-reviewed yourself,” Perhach says.

    When you are looking for information for a story or project, you might be inclined to start with a regular Google search. But keep in mind that the internet is full of false information, and websites that look trustworthy can sometimes turn out to be businesses or companies with a vested interest in you taking their word as objective fact without additional scrutiny. Regardless of your writing project, unreliable or biased sources are a great way to torpedo your work—and any hope of future work.

    For Accuracy, Go to the Government

    Author Bobbi Rebell researched her book Launching Financial Grownups using the IRS’ website. “I might say that you can contribute a certain amount to a 401K, but it might be outdated because those numbers are always changing, and it’s important to be accurate,” she says. “AI and ChatGPT can be great for idea generation,” says Rebell, “but you have to be careful. If you are using an article someone was quoted in, you don’t know if they were misquoted or quoted out of context.”

    If you use AI and ChatGPT for sourcing, you not only risk introducing errors, you risk introducing plagiarism—there is a reason OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, is being sued for downloading information from all those books.

    Historically, the Loudest Isn’t the Best

    Audrey Clare Farley, who writes historical nonfiction, has used a plethora of sites for historical research, including Women Also Know History, which allows searches by expertise or area of study, and JSTOR, a digital library database that offers a number of free downloads a month. She also uses Chronicling America, a project from the Library of Congress which gathers old newspapers to show how a historical event was reported, and Newspapers.com (which you can access via free trial but requires a subscription after seven days).

    When it comes to finding experts, Farley cautions against choosing the loudest voices on social media platforms. “They might not necessarily be the most authoritative. I vet them by checking if they have a history of publication on the topic, and/or educational credentials.”

    When vetting an expert, look for these red flags:

    • You can’t find their work published or cited anywhere.
    • They were published in an obscure journal.
    • Their research is funded by a company, not a university, or they are the spokesperson for the company they are doing research for. (This makes them a public relations vehicle and not an appropriate source for journalism.)

    And finally, the best endings for virtually any writing, whether it’s an essay, a research paper, an academic report, or a piece of investigative journalism, circle back to the beginning of the piece, and show your reader the transformation or the journey the piece has presented in perspective.

    As always, your goal should be strong writing supported by research that makes an impact without cutting corners. Only then can you explore tools that might make the job a little easier, for instance by generating subheads or discovering a concept you might be missing—because then you’ll have the experience and skills to see whether it’s harming or helping your work.

    Estelle Erasmus

    Source link

  • Senate approves ‘revenge porn’ ban

    Senate approves ‘revenge porn’ ban

    BOSTON — The state Senate approved a proposal Thursday to make it a crime to post sexually explicit images on the internet to harass or embarrass another person.

    The legislation, approved unanimously, creates a new felony offense for people charged with distributing a sexually explicit image “for purposes of revenge or embarrassment,” and gives judges the authority to ensure explicit images are destroyed. Violators could face up to 2½ years in prison and fines of $10,000.

    Massachusetts is one of only two states – the other is South Carolina – that does not have laws against so-called “revenge porn,” which involves adults posting sexually explicit images of former spouses or ex-partners on the internet to harass them. Lawmakers said the state cannot wait any longer to approve the criminal sanctions.

    “It’s morally reprehensible, ethically unconscionable, and with the action we take today, it will finally also be criminal,” state Sen. Paul Feeney, D-Foxborough, said in remarks ahead of the bill’s passage. “Justice will be delivered.”

    The proposal, filed by Sen. John Keenan, D-Quincy, focuses on “coercive control” against abuse victims and bans the posting of sexually explicit “deepfakes” or a computer-generated manipulation of a person’s voice or likeness using artificial intelligence programs.

    It would also ease criminal sanctions for minors caught sending illicit materials to one another who under current state law are subject to felony charges of distributing or possession of child pornography.

    During the debate Thursday, senators slogged through about two dozen amendments to the measure, many of which were either rejected or withdrawn before they voted on the bill’s final version.

    Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, a Gloucester Republican, won approval for an amendment giving state prosecutors discretion to seek tougher penalties – including the possibility of jail time – for offenders who target minors.

    Domestic violence victims have packed public hearings on Beacon Hill in support of the proposed law, many recalling stories of ex-partners posting lewd pictures of them on the internet to embarrass and harass them. Several victims attended the Senate session Thursday, watching the debate from the chamber gallery.

    The state House of Representatives approved a similar proposal in February, and any differences between the two bills will need to be worked out before heading to Gov. Maura Healey’s desk for consideration.

    Then-Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican, filed similar proposals during his eight years in office that also called for toughening rules aimed at keeping “dangerous” suspects locked up while awaiting trial. None were approved.

    The House approved a revenge porn bill in 2022, but the Senate didn’t take it up before the end of the legislative session.

    Tarr said the exploitation of victims by posting sexually explicit materials online is a problem that has been “crying out for a legislative response” for years.

    “It’s unfortunate that it took us so long to get here,” he said. “This is not a situation that should be tolerated for one more minute.”

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Healey wipes away prior marijuana convictions

    Healey wipes away prior marijuana convictions

    BOSTON — With the stroke of a pen, Gov. Maura Healey is moving to wipe away the prior pot convictions of hundreds of thousands of Massachusetts residents.

    On Wednesday, Healey signed a “first-in-the-nation” executive order that, if approved by the Governor’s Council, would grant a blanket pardon to those with previous misdemeanor convictions for possession of marijuana, which has been legal for more than seven years.

    Healey, who estimates the pardon will impact “hundreds of thousands” of people, says those with misdemeanor pot charges on their records from prelegalization days face restricted access to jobs, housing and education.

    “The reason we’re doing this is simple, justice requires it,” the first-term Democrat told reporters at a briefing. “Massachusetts decriminalized possession for personal use back in 2008, legalized it in 2016, yet thousands of people are still living with convictions on their records.”

    If Healey’s order is approved by the council, those with previous convictions wouldn’t need to apply for pardons — which would be done automatically — but would be able to request a “certificate” from the state verifying the pardon.

    The pardons won’t apply to convictions after March 13, and would exclude charges such as possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, distribution, trafficking, or operating a motor vehicle under the influence or convictions outside the state, including federal court, the Healey administration said.

    Attorney General Andrea Campbell, the state’s top law enforcement officer, was among those who praised the move. She said it will improve racial justice, with data showing that blacks and other minorities have been “disproportionately” charged with marijuana possession in the state prior to legalization.

    “These pardons will transform the lives of thousands, remove barriers allowing them to live with economic dignity, and right past wrongs and stigma that these individuals have faced,” she said in remarks.

    Voters legalized marijuana more than seven years ago, but people previously arrested with the drug are still being haunted by past convictions.

    A 2008 ballot question made possessing an ounce or less of marijuana a civil offense, punishable by a $100 fine. Four years later, voters approved its medical use.

    Then, in 2016, nearly 54% of voters at the ballot box approved legalized recreational marijuana.

    Marijuana advocates say voters have made clear over the years that possession of small amounts should not be illegal, and people with old convictions should get a second chance.

    Other states where recreational marijuana is legal have taken similar steps to seal or expunge criminal records en masse.

    California wiped away past marijuana convictions under a bill signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2018. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed an expungement bill in 2019 that allowed an estimated 150,000 people to have previous convictions sealed.

    In 2022, President Biden issued a presidential proclamation pardoning many federal offenses for simple marijuana possession offenses. Biden has expanded that pardon to include more offenses and has called for a review of the classification of marijuana, which remains illegal under federal law.

    But clearing records of past convictions, even in places where pot is legal, remains controversial. Washington state, which legalized pot in 2012, wrangled for several years to pass a pot expungement bill amid opposition from prosecutors.

    In Massachusetts, law enforcement officials and even some lawmakers have pushed back on efforts to retroactively wipe away previous convictions.

    Proposals to grant blanket pardons for pot convictions have been filed in the past several sessions only to languish due to lack of support.

    A 2018 law allowed Massachusetts residents with previous convictions for offenses that are no longer illegal — including marijuana possession — to have those records expunged from their records. But advocates say since then few people have benefited from the changes.

    In some cases, judges refuse to sign off on expungement of previous marijuana possession convictions, even if the individual’s records have been sealed.

    Under state law, expungement requests must be deemed to be “in the interest of justice” but the interpretation of what that might be is generally left up to judges.

    Pauline Quirion, a lawyer and director of the criminal records sealing project at Greater Boston Legal Services, said anyone who undergoes state Criminal Offender Record Information checks for housing or work can be turned down if they have marijuana charges in their past.

    “In practice, any criminal record, no matter how old or how minor, creates barriers to jobs and other opportunities,” she said. “Pardons especially matter where record sealing simply is not enough because an employer or occupational licensor is granted access to the record by state law.”

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • The Dark Side of Open Source AI Image Generators

    The Dark Side of Open Source AI Image Generators

    Whether through the frowning high-definition face of a chimpanzee or a psychedelic, pink-and-red-hued doppelganger of himself, Reuven Cohen uses AI-generated images to catch people’s attention. “I’ve always been interested in art and design and video and enjoy pushing boundaries,” he says—but the Toronto-based consultant, who helps companies develop AI tools, also hopes to raise awareness of the technology’s darker uses.

    “It can also be specifically trained to be quite gruesome and bad in a whole variety of ways,” Cohen says. He’s a fan of the freewheeling experimentation that has been unleashed by open source image-generation technology. But that same freedom enables the creation of explicit images of women used for harassment.

    After nonconsensual images of Taylor Swift recently spread on X, Microsoft added new controls to its image generator. Open source models can be commandeered by just about anyone and generally come without guardrails. Despite the efforts of some hopeful community members to deter exploitative uses, the open source free-for-all is near-impossible to control, experts say.

    “Open source has powered fake image abuse and nonconsensual pornography. That’s impossible to sugarcoat or qualify,” says Henry Ajder, who has spent years researching harmful use of generative AI.

    Ajder says that at the same time that it’s becoming a favorite of researchers, creatives like Cohen, and academics working on AI, open source image generation software has become the bedrock of deepfake porn. Some tools based on open source algorithms are purpose-built for salacious or harassing uses, such as “nudifying” apps that digitally remove women’s clothes in images.

    But many tools can serve both legitimate and harassing use cases. One popular open source face-swapping program is used by people in the entertainment industry and as the “tool of choice for bad actors” making nonconsensual deepfakes, Ajder says. High-resolution image generator Stable Diffusion, developed by startup Stability AI, is claimed to have more than 10 million users and has guardrails installed to prevent explicit image creation and policies barring malicious use. But the company also open sourced a version of the image generator in 2022 that is customizable, and online guides explain how to bypass its built-in limitations.

    Meanwhile, smaller AI models known as LoRAs make it easy to tune a Stable Diffusion model to output images with a particular style, concept, or pose—such as a celebrity’s likeness or certain sexual acts. They are widely available on AI model marketplaces such as Civitai, a community-based site where users share and download models. There, one creator of a Taylor Swift plug-in has urged others not to use it “for NSFW images.” However, once downloaded, its use is out of its creator’s control. “The way that open source works means it’s going to be pretty hard to stop someone from potentially hijacking that,” says Ajder.

    4chan, the image-based message board site with a reputation for chaotic moderation is home to pages devoted to nonconsensual deepfake porn, WIRED found, made with openly available programs and AI models dedicated solely to sexual images. Message boards for adult images are littered with AI-generated nonconsensual nudes of real women, from porn performers to actresses like Cate Blanchett. WIRED also observed 4chan users sharing workarounds for NSFW images using OpenAI’s Dall-E 3.

    That kind of activity has inspired some users in communities dedicated to AI image-making, including on Reddit and Discord, to attempt to push back against the sea of pornographic and malicious images. Creators also express worry about the software gaining a reputation for NSFW images, encouraging others to report images depicting minors on Reddit and model-hosting sites.

    Lydia Morrish

    Source link

  • Healey’s pick for SJC confirmed by panel

    Healey’s pick for SJC confirmed by panel

    BOSTON — The Governor’s Council has approved Gov. Maura Healey’s controversial pick of an ex-girlfriend to fill a vacancy on the state’s highest court.

    The council voted 6-1 to approve the confirmation of Appeals Court Judge Gabrielle Wolohojian to fill a seat on the Supreme Judicial Court left by Justice David Lowy, who retired Feb. 3 after seven years on the high court.

    Councilor Terry Kennedy, who voted in favor of her nomination, said he was bombarded with calls from lawyers, judges and others who lauded Wolohojian’s experience and temperament as a judge. He said the fact that she was previously in a relationship with the governor wasn’t a factor in his decision to support her confirmation.

    “There’s no question to me that this nominee is qualified for that job, period,” Kennedy said in remarks. “I have never asked a nominee about their personal life and I never will.”

    But Councilor Tara Jacobs cast the lone vote against Wolohojian, saying she couldn’t get over the “appearance of impropriety” about her nomination to the bench.

    “I don’t want to invalidate the enormous qualifications of this candidate. I think she has a fantastic resume and experience,” she said. “I’m really more coming from a place of concern about the process, the implications and the appearance that got us here today.”

    Healey’s nomination has faced scrutiny because she and Wolohojian were romantically involved and previously lived together in Charlestown when she was attorney general.

    Healey, the first woman and first lesbian to be elected governor of Massachusetts, now lives with her current partner, Joanna Lydgate, in Arlington.

    Councilor Paul DePalo, who voted to confirm Wolohojian, said he was dismayed how the public discourse over her nomination focused on her romantic relationship with Healey.

    “In some corners, the public discourse jumped right over this nominee’s impeccable, unquestioned experience, qualifications, her pedigree, her temperament, her reputation over a decade on the appeals court writing hundreds of opinions,” he said in remarks. “The narrative jumped right to a salacious story line designed to raise alarms.”

    Last week, supporters of Wolohojian, who included lawyers, judges, court staff and former colleagues, packed into the Gardner Auditorium at the Statehouse and lauded her experience and temperament as an attorney and appellate judge.

    Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll, who co-chaired Wednesday’s Governor’s Council meeting, praised Wolohojian as “one of our state’s most experienced appellate judges,” noting her 16-year tenure on the Appeals Court.

    Wolohojian was appointed to the Appeals Court in 2008 and has overseen 2,700 appeals and authored more than 900 decisions, she told the panel. She also serves as the chair of the SJC’s Advisory Committee on the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

    Previously, she served as a law clerk to Judge Rya Zobel of the U.S. District Court in Boston and later to Judge Bailey Aldrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

    Wolohojian worked in private practice in the 1990s at the Boston law firm of Hale and Dorr, which is now known as WilmerHale. She became a partner in the firm’s litigation department working on state and federal court cases, according to the Healey administration.

    Wolohojian is Healey’s second pick for the Supreme Judicial Court, with two retirements helping the first-term governor leave her mark on the court.

    She previously nominated former State Solicitor Elizabeth “Bessie” Dewar to the SJC, who was unanimously approved last month by the Governor’s Council.

    The state’s Republican party blasted what they called Wolohojian’s “rubber stamp” approval after vetting process by a judicial search committee that “consisted of a tight-knit inner circle” mostly Healey appointees.

    The party’s chairwoman also reiterated concerns about whether Wolohojian will recuse herself from any cases involving the executive branch.

    “The entire process appears to have been a rubber stamp rather than a serious examination of important ethical considerations,” MassGOP Chairwoman Amy Carnevale said in a statement. “Many legal scholars continue to believe that it is wholly inappropriate for a Governor to nominate a former romantic partner to a court that will rule on matters pertaining to their office.”

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • 7 Reasons Why CEOs Need to Develop a Personal Brand — and How to Build One. | Entrepreneur

    7 Reasons Why CEOs Need to Develop a Personal Brand — and How to Build One. | Entrepreneur

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    We all make purchasing decisions based on our connection to brands. One runner, for instance, may be dedicated to Asics running shoes, while another wouldn’t dream of buying anything but Nike.

    These days, thanks to social media, choosing our favorite brands or which companies we give our money to heavily relies on who is heading that company. We want to do business with people that inspire us, people we like and trust. It’s for this very reason that CEOs must develop their own personal brand.

    Over the years, I’ve had the honor of working with business leaders from around the world, enabling them to harness the power of compelling narratives to craft and communicate their brand’s unique origin story. I am excited to share with you the profound importance of CEO branding in today’s fiercely competitive business landscape and provide actionable insights on how you can effortlessly embark on your own CEO brand-building journey.

    Related: The 3 Biggest Mistakes CEOs Make With Their Personal Brand (and How to Turn Those Mistakes Around)

    The importance of CEO branding

    Your own personal brand is what reflects your priorities and values. Branding helps you, your colleagues and the customers you serve define who you are and what value you offer as a leader. Without a powerful and visible brand, CEOs may find it hard to grow their business, become an influencer or take their career to the next level.

    But, when you grow your brand, doors open and opportunities present themselves to you. People are more likely to listen to what you have to say, connections are made and those connections are apt to turn into paying customers and lifelong advocates.

    Let’s dive in and take a look at some of the biggest benefits of CEO brand building.

    1. Broaden your impact

    Your personal brand not only reflects your work ethic but also how you interact with and relate to others. These “others” include the teams you manage, shareholders and consumers. Your brand is recognized in the real world in face-to-face interactions as well as in virtual interactions.

    2. Stand out from the crowd

    The entire world is online, and everyone is creating and sharing content. This creates a lot of noise.

    Cut through that noise with your own unique vision. A personal brand helps you be an authentic voice in a sea of pandering. Always remember, people can smell phony from a mile away. When you develop your personal branding, every word you utter and the action you take is genuine to who you truly are.

    3. Others seek you out

    When your personal brand is authentic and attractive to others, opportunities come knocking. You’d be surprised at the number of new clients or customers that suddenly appear without any further effort on your part. Vendors may contact you, as well as the press, for interviews and event organizers about speaking engagements. Other companies may also get in touch with you, hoping to snag you for their operation.

    Put the work in upfront to develop your brand and the opportunities almost effortlessly follow.

    Related: 8 Strategies for Developing a Strong Personal Brand

    4. Incredible networking opportunities

    Networking events are important for doing business and moving your career forward. But let’s be honest — these things can be a nightmare to navigate. Who should you talk to? What should you say? Will others find you (dare I say it)… boring?

    When you’ve taken the time to thoughtfully craft your own brand, you become one of the most interesting people in the room.

    People walk up to you with hands outstretched. People ask you questions because they want to know even more. CEO branding turns a potentially awkward (but necessary) event into a simple and rewarding one.

    5. Grow your bottom line

    Do any of us really know what the economy will do from year to year? Heck, month to month? With so much economic uncertainty, it can be challenging, to say the least, to continue to grow your bottom line and meet shareholder expectations when consumers are tightening their wallets.

    People are far more likely to give their hard-earned money to a company whose CEO is charismatic and vocal, no matter what the economy is doing. Case in point: Research by FTI Consulting found that those companies who had strong and vocal leaders during the early stages of the Covid-19 pandemic elicited stronger investor confidence. Numerically speaking, this translated into $260 billion in additional shareholder value during a time that was, for many, economically uncertain.

    6. Gain confidence

    In my experience, one of the biggest reasons leaders have confidence issues is because they don’t know who they are as a leader. They may know who they are as a husband or wife, mother or father, or friend, but when it comes to leadership, they don’t know their own beliefs, strengths, weaknesses or unique value proposition.

    Developing your brand requires you to uncover your skills and values. The entire process allows you to see yourself in an entirely new way. And once you know who you really are as a leader, your confidence soars. And when this happens, those you have been leading recognize it and the entire dynamic in your organization shifts.

    Related: How to Stop Your CEO’s Reputation From Damaging Your Business

    7. Attract better clients

    Having a powerful personal brand means you inevitably attract better-quality clients. Why is this? Because people will always seek out an expert to work with. Your brand will cut out the competitive process entirely.

    Tips to begin building your CEO brand

    Now that you know the benefits of CEO brand building, here are some ideas to help get you started:

    1. Brainstorm

    Self-evaluation plays a key role in developing an accurate and effective personal brand. So, spend a little time thinking and jotting down any ideas or insights. What is something you love about the work you do? What skills do you offer? What are you known for? How do you view your industry? What are compliments you often get from others? What do you know in your heart you could improve upon regarding your leadership style?

    2. Ask for honest feedback

    You need to know what others really think of you. Get feedback from friends and family, as well as colleagues and clients. Does this feedback align with how you want to be perceived by others? If not, what changes do you need to make to begin living your ideal brand?

    3. Develop your elevator pitch

    Now that you are starting to get a sense of what your brand is, it’s time to be sure you can articulate that brand to others quickly and easily. And this is where the elevator pitch comes in.

    You most likely know people use an elevator pitch to introduce their fledgling company to prospective investors or to introduce themselves when looking for employment. However, CEOs can use this same exercise to encapsulate their personal brand in a few sentences. In no more than three sentences, how would you describe your unique leadership values and contribution?

    Once you’ve got your pitch ready, you can use this as a daily reminder of who you want to be, as well as use it on your personal social media pages.

    4. Audit your social media accounts

    For many people who are new to your company, your social media presence will be their first introduction. Now that you’ve taken some time to brainstorm and think about what you want to project, it’s a good idea to audit your social media accounts to ensure someone’s first impression of you jives with your intended brand.

    If you need help with this, take a look at some other leaders in your industry to see whose profile best fits the brand you are building. Don’t copy them, but feel free to emulate and take ideas from their profile.

    5. Keep tweaking and adjusting

    Building your CEO brand is a process. You won’t necessarily discover your authentic leadership self and be able to communicate your value right away. That’s okay. Just keep at it and tweak and adjust your brand and your content as you go.

    Conclusion

    I hope you now recognize the importance of CEO branding. Though it will take some time to build, your brand will ultimately help you connect with your audience in a deeper and more meaningful way. And, because people tend to align with brands that mimic their own values, your branding efforts will also help you to create loyal followers rather than customers.

    LaQuita Cleare

    Source link

  • ‘Supreme Court Ethics’ Is an Oxymoron – Jim Hightower, Humor Times

    ‘Supreme Court Ethics’ Is an Oxymoron – Jim Hightower, Humor Times

    The 14-page Supreme Court ethics code is a toothless watchdog with no bark, much less bite.

    Let me be blunt: The problem with today’s Supreme Court is that it consists of too many 5-watt bulbs sitting in 100-watt sockets.

    While most of the nine members are assumed to be brilliant, “smart” is as smart does, and this court’s right-wing majority wallows in stupid, consistently pushing plutocracy, autocracy and theocracy over the democratic will of the people. Compounding this stupidity, many of the judges have flagrantly accepted “gifts” of cash, luxury vacations and other freebies from the corporate and right-wing interests that have benefited from the court’s rulings. Yet, caught red-handed, the narcissistic jurists assert that We the People should just trust their integrity.

    These nine legal power brokers, who pose as America’s arbiters of justice, have even exempted themselves from having an ethics code, allowing each one to make up their own, unwritten ethical rules. Thus, corruption flourishes; so, the public, Congress and the media have finally demanded that, at the very least, the eminences be subjected to basic ethics. “OK, OK,” the nine finally grumped. “We’ll sign onto a code.”

    BUT… their acquiescence included a killer gotcha: They would write their own rules of behavior! Sure enough, their 14-page Supreme Court ethics code is a toothless watchdog with no bark, much less bite. It starts by snarling that the great unwashed simply fail to understand that the entire court is, as the chief justice had earlier proclaimed, made up of “jurists of exceptional integrity.” So, the new “code” promises boilerplate ethical behavior, but provides no enforcement mechanism beyond claiming the judges will police each other.

    When and Where Was the First Thanksgiving Feast?

    Let’s talk Turkey!

    No, not the Butterballs in Congress. I’m talking about the real thing, the big gobbler — 46 million of which we Americans will devour this Thanksgiving.

    It was the Aztecs who first domesticated the gallopavo, but the invading Spanish conquerors “fowled up” the bird’s origins. They declared it to be related to the peacock — Wrong! They also thought the peacock originated in Turkey — Wrong! And they thought Turkey was located in Africa — well, you can see the Spanish were pretty confused.

    Actually, even the origin of Thanksgiving Day in the U.S. is confused. The popular assumption is that it was first celebrated by the Mayflower immigrants and the Wampanoag natives at Plymouth, Massachusetts, in 1621. They feasted on venison, furkees (Wampanoag for gobblers), eels, mussels, corn and beer. But wait, say Virginians, the first Thanksgiving Food-a-Palooza was not in Massachusetts — the feast originated down here in Jamestown colony, back in 1608.

    Whoa there, pilgrims! Folks in El Paso, Texas, say it all began way out there in 1598, when Spanish settlers sat down with people of the Piro and Manso tribes to give thanks, feasting on roasted duck, geese and fish.

    “Ha!” says a Florida group, asserting the very, very first Thanksgiving happened in 1565 when the Spanish settlers of St. Augustine and friends from the Timucuan tribe chowed down on “cocido” — a stew of salt pork, garbanzo beans and garlic — washing it all down with red wine.

    Wherever it began, and whatever the purists claim is “official,” Thanksgiving today is as multicultural as America. So, let’s enjoy! Kick back, give thanks we’re in a country with such ethnic richness, and dive into your turkey rellenos, moo-shu turkey, turkey falafel, barbecued turkey… and so on.

    Jim HightowerJim Hightower
    Latest posts by Jim Hightower (see all)
    ShareShare

    Jim Hightower

    Source link

  • How to ensure an ethical acquisition for your startup | TechCrunch

    How to ensure an ethical acquisition for your startup | TechCrunch

    When you build a startup, the best shot you have at seeing a big payday is becoming an acquisition. Sure, a handful of startups end up going to IPO. But the likelihood of acquisition beats your chances of going public by a ratio of 10 to one.

    Unfortunately, the exciting possibility of an acquisition leads new founders to make all kinds of mistakes. They end up losing out on much better deals, huge sums of money and even years of their lives stuck in post-acquisition work that they can’t stand.

    I know this from experience. In my early days as an entrepreneur, I ran into some of these pitfalls. In my work advising founders over the years, I’ve had many founders come to me too late, after they’d already fallen for some investors’ unethical practices.

    And since my company, Awesome Motive, has acquired numerous small businesses in ways aimed at helping them grow, I’ve seen that founders can take steps to ensure ethical acquisitions with founder-friendly terms. When they do, everyone comes out ahead — including the acquiring company.

    Here are some tips to watch out for when considering an acquisition, and how to protect yourself.

    Keep proprietary data hidden

    One of the most unethical things some investors do, oftentimes in private equity, is sensitive information mining. They convince you that they’re so excited about the possibility of acquiring your startup for a big figure, but first need to “learn more” about how you operate. At the same time, they may secretly have another company in their portfolio that’s considering offering similar solutions to yours, so they bait you into giving up your intellectual property and proprietary trade secrets.

    An acquiring company should be able to look at your revenue, costs, and other basics to offer a fair valuation without needing access to any of your secret sauce.

    Yes, you can have them sign an NDA and guarantee that they will delete any information and not share it with others. But they can’t delete it from their own brains. They can take what they learn from you and apply it elsewhere. I fell for this. I was a new founder and didn’t know any better.

    An acquiring company or group should be able to look at your revenue, costs, and other basics to offer a fair valuation without needing access to any of your secret sauce. Don’t let them see internal processes and other proprietary information until the sale has gone through.

    Keep deals simple — especially the terms

    One of my mentors told me, “You name the price, I name the terms, and I will always win.” I’ve seen this truth play out for founders all too often. They request a big price for an acquisition, which the other party seems to accept. That figure then goes high up in the contract, which makes it feel real.

    Carrie Andrews

    Source link

  • Wilbur Ross Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    Wilbur Ross Fast Facts | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    Here’s a look at the life of former Commerce Secretary Wilbur L. Ross Jr.

    Birth date: November 28, 1937

    Birth place: Weehawken, New Jersey

    Birth name: Wilbur Louis Ross Jr.

    Father: Wilbur Louis Ross Sr., a lawyer

    Mother: Agnes (O’Neill) Ross, a teacher

    Marriages: Hilary (Geary) Ross (October 9, 2004); Betsy (McCaughey) Ross (December 7, 1995-August 2000, divorced); Judith (Nodine) Ross (May 26, 1961-October 1995, divorced)

    Children: with Judith Nodine: Jessica and Amanda

    Education: Yale University, A.B., 1959, Harvard University, M.B.A., 1961

    He was called the “King of Bankruptcy,” as he built new companies from the assets of defaulted ones.

    Ross was known for investing in distressed companies in a wide range of industries including auto parts, steel, textiles and financial services.

    1976-2000 – Works for the investment bank Rothschild Inc. During his tenure, he becomes a top bankruptcy adviser.

    January 1998 – Pledges $2.25 million towards then-wife and Lt. Governor Betsy McCaughey Ross’ campaign for governor of New York. He withdraws the funding in September and files for divorce in November.

    2000 – Purchases a small fund he started at Rothschild and opens his own private equity firm, WL Ross & Co. LLC.

    2002 – Establishes the International Steel Group (ISG), with himself as chairman of the board, through a series of mergers and acquisitions starting with Bethlehem Steel Corp.

    December 2003 – ISG goes public.

    2004 – Forms the International Coal Group (ICG) after purchasing the assets of Horizon Natural Resources in a bankruptcy auction.

    October 2004 – Merges ISG with Mittal Steel for $4.5 billion.

    January 2, 2006 – Twelve miners are killed after an explosion at a West Virginia mine operated by an ICG subsidiary. Families of the dead and Randal McCloy, the lone survivor, sue ICG and WL Ross claiming negligence. All of the lawsuits are settled by November 2011.

    April 2010 – Purchases a 21% stake in Richard Branson’s Virgin Money. In November 2011, Ross helps Branson fund a successful bid for the British bank Northern Rock.

    August 2, 2010 – During an interview with Charlie Rose, Ross states that he’s fine with higher taxes on the wealthy as long as the government puts the money to good use.

    June 2011 – Arch Coal, Inc. acquires ICG for $3.4 billion.

    September 2011 – WL Ross is one of five US and Canadian companies that purchase a 34.9% stake in the Bank of Ireland. Ross’ share is reportedly 9.3%.

    March 21, 2016 – Nexeo Solutions, a chemical distribution company, announces their merger agreement with WL Ross Holding Corporation. The merger is valued at nearly $1.6 billion.

    August 24, 2016 – The Securities and Exchange Commission announces that WL Ross will pay a $2.3 million fine for failing to properly disclose fees it charged.

    November 30, 2016 – Ross announces in a CNBC interview that President-elect Donald Trump has asked him to serve as his commerce secretary.

    February 27, 2017 – The Senate confirms Ross as commerce secretary by a 72-27 vote. He is sworn in the next day.

    November 5, 2017 – The New York Times reports that Ross has financial ties to a shipping company whose clients include a Russian energy company co-owned by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s son-in-law. Another customer of the shipping company is Venezuela’s state-run oil company, which has been sanctioned by the US government. The information comes from the Paradise Papers, a release of 13.4 million leaked documents.

    November 7, 2017 – Two days after the Paradise Papers are released, Forbes reports that Ross inflated his net worth to be included in the magazine’s annual list of the world’s wealthiest individuals. His name is removed from the magazine’s website. An investigation by the magazine reveals that Ross has likely been providing inaccurate financial information since 2004. Ross claims that the magazine overlooked trusts for his family while tallying his fortune.

    March 2, 2018 – During an appearance on CNBC, Ross says the Trump administration’s steel and aluminum tariffs won’t hurt consumers. He holds up a can of Campbell’s soup as he explains that the price of soup will go up less than a penny due to the tariffs.

    March 26, 2018 – Ross announces that a citizenship question will be added to the 2020 census.

    July 12, 2018 – Ross admits to “errors” in failing to divest assets required by his government ethics agreement and says he will sell all his stock holdings. The admission comes after the Office of Government Ethics took Ross to task for what it said were inconsistencies in his financial disclosure forms.

    September 21, 2018 – A federal judge rules that Ross must sit for a deposition in a lawsuit regarding his department’s decision to include a question about citizenship in the 2020 census. The US Supreme Court later blocks the deposition.

    December 19, 2018 – The Center for Public Integrity reports that Ross failed to sell a bank stock holding within the required time frame after his 2017 confirmation and subsequently signed ethics documents indicating the holding had been sold.

    February 15, 2019 – Ross’ financial disclosure form is rejected by the Office of Government Ethics. Ross later releases a statement saying, “While I am disappointed that my report was not certified, I remain committed to complying with my ethics agreement and adhering to the guidance of Commerce ethics officials.”

    June 27, 2019 – The Supreme Court issues a 5-4 ruling that blocks the citizenship question from being added to the census.

    July 17, 2019 – The House votes to hold Ross in criminal contempt over a dispute related to the citizenship question on the census. Attorney General William Barr is also held in contempt. Ross releases a statement in which he dismisses the vote as a political stunt. “House Democrats never sought to have a productive relationship with the Trump Administration, and today’s PR stunt further demonstrates their unending quest to generate headlines instead of operating in good faith with our Department.”

    July 18, 2020 – A department spokesman says that Ross has been hospitalized for “minor, non-coronavirus related issues.” On July 27, the Commerce Department says Ross has been released from the hospital.

    September 28, 2020 – Ross announces that he intends to conclude the 2020 census on October 5. This is more than three weeks earlier than expected and against the October 31 court reinstated end date. Ross asks Census Bureau officials if the earlier date would effectively allow them to produce a final set of numbers during Trump’s current term in office, according to an internal email released the following day as part of a lawsuit.

    October 13, 2020 – The Supreme Court grants a request from the Trump administration to halt the census count while an appeal plays out over a lower court’s order that it continue. The Census Bureau announces that the count is ending on October 15.

    July 19, 2021 – According to a letter made public from Commerce Department Inspector General Peggy Gustafson to Democratic lawmakers, the Justice Department decides to decline prosecution of Ross for misrepresentations he made to Congress about the origins of the Trump administration’s failed push to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

    Source link

  • 3 Tips to Use AI Ethically | Entrepreneur

    3 Tips to Use AI Ethically | Entrepreneur

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    Ethical artificial intelligence is trending this year, and thanks to editorials like a16z’s techno-optimist manifesto, every company, big and small, is seeking ways to do it. Both Adobe and Getty Images, for example, released ethical and commercially safe models that stick to their own licensed images. Adobe also recently introduced a watermark to let users know how much AI was used in any given image.

    Still, companies received backlash on social media over using generative AI in their work. Disney faced uproar twice this year over its usage of AI in Marvel’s Secret Invasion and Loki season two. The use of undisclosed AI also turned an indie book cover contest into a heated controversy, forcing the author running it to stop the contest entirely moving forward.

    The stakes are high — McKinsey & Company estimates generative AI will add up to $4 trillion annually to the global economy across all industry sectors. I increasingly speak with clients interested in generative AI solutions across social media, marketing, search engine optimization and public relations.

    Nobody wants to be left behind, but it must be done ethically to succeed.

    Related: AI Isn’t Evil–But Entrepreneurs Need to Keep Ethics in Mind As They Implement It

    Ethical concerns of using AI

    AI has a lot of promise, but it also comes with ethical risks. These concerns must be taken seriously because Millennials and Gen Z especially favor ethical brands, with up to 80% of those surveyed saying they’re likely to base their purchasing decisions on a brand’s purpose. Of course, using AI ethically is easier said than done–Amazon learned this the hard way.

    Amazon implemented an AI-powered hiring algorithm in 2014 to automate the hiring process. The system was built to ignore federally protected categories like sex, but it still taught itself to favor men. Because it relied on historical hiring data, it penalized applications that included women’s colleges, clubs and degree programs.

    It highlights how historical biases can still impact us today, and the tech industry still has a long way to go toward being inclusive. Amazon reinstated its hiring bot as tech layoffs disproportionately impact women, and this is just one example of AI bias – they can easily discriminate against any marginalized group if not properly developed at every step of the development, implementation, and execution.

    Still, some businesses are finding ways to navigate this ethical minefield.

    Related: How Women Can Beat the Odds in the Tech Industry

    Doing AI the right way

    Being a first mover comes with risk, especially in today’s world of “moving fast and breaking things.” Beyond bias, there are also questions about the legality of current generative AI models. AI leaders OpenAI, Stability AI and MidJourney attracted lawsuits from authors, developers and artists, and incumbent partners like Microsoft and DeviantArt got caught in the crossfire.

    This fueled an atmosphere where creative professionals on social media are divided into two camps: pro- and anti-AI. Artists organized “No AI” protests on both DeviantArt and ArtStation, and artists are fleeing Twitter/X for Bluesky and Threads after Elon Musk’s controversial AI training policy was implemented in September.

    Many companies are afraid of mentioning AI, while others dove headfirst into the fray by testing projects like Disney’s Toy Story x NFL mashup and that Year 3000 AI-generated Coca-Cola flavor that could go down in history as the new New Coke based on reviews from taste testers (although it did get a win from its AI-generated commercial).

    In fact, Disney was widely praised for the Toy Story football game, and some platforms are finding ways to empower their users.

    Related: How Can You Tell If AI Is Being Used Ethically? Here Are 3 Things to Look for

    Optim-AI-zing for ethics

    Today, building ethical AI is a top priority for businesses and consumers alike, with large enterprises like Walmart and Meta setting policies to ensure responsible AI usage companywide. Meanwhile, startups like Anthropic and Jada AI are also focused on using ethical AI for the good of humanity. Here is how to use AI ethically.

    1. Use an ethically sourced AI model

    Not every AI is trained equally, and the bulk of legal concerns revolve around unlicensed IP. Be sure to perform due diligence on your AI and data vendors to avoid trouble. This includes verifying the data is properly licensed and asking about what steps were taken to ensure equity and diversity.

    2. Be transparent

    Honesty is the best policy, and it’s important to be transparent about whether you’re using AI. Some people won’t like the truth, but even more will hate that you lied. The White House Executive Order on AI sets forth standards on properly labeling the origin of any creative work, and it’s a good habit to get into so people know what they’re getting.

    3. Keep humans in the loop

    No matter how well it’s trained, AI can inevitably go off the rails. It makes mistakes, and it’s important to involve humans at every stage of the process. Understand that ethical AI is not a “set it and forget it” thing – it’s a process that should be carefully executed throughout the workflow.

    The legal actions against AI are still pending, and global governments are still debating how to handle it. What’s legal today may not be next year after the dust settles, but these tips will ensure you’re using it as safely as possible and setting the right example.

    Lena Grundhoefer

    Source link

  • Digital Literacy Is a Vital Skill in the Age of Misinformation | Entrepreneur

    Digital Literacy Is a Vital Skill in the Age of Misinformation | Entrepreneur

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    The rise of the internet and other digital technologies has transformed how businesses operate. Along with the inarguable benefits of this age comes a daunting challenge: avoiding falling for or participating in misinformation, which can lead to costly mistakes, damaged reputations and lost opportunities. Fortunately, there are ways of working proactively to avoid such pitfalls, with an embrace of digital literacy as a starting point.

    What is digital literacy?

    The internet broadly, and social media platforms particularly, are breeding grounds for rumors, false claims and inaccurate statistics. These can gain traction at a frightening pace, causing confusion and chaos, and small business owners are uniquely at risk. Digital literacy refers, in part, to effectively accessing, evaluating and using information from digital sources. In today’s landscape, this is not just a nice-to-have skill, but a necessity.

    From marketing strategies to financial planning and customer interactions, every aspect of operations can be influenced by information obtained online, and owners who are digitally literate are simply better equipped to make informed choices.

    The role of continuous learning

    As an owner, it’s your responsibility to stay informed about the latest digital trends and challenges — to actively and regularly update your knowledge — and there are a number of areas to consider when doing so:

    • Evolution of technology: As AI and other digital tools become more sophisticated, so do the methods used to spread misinformation. Business owners need to acquire a basic level of understanding regarding the capabilities of such emerging technologies.
    • Evolving platforms: Social media and other online communication channels seem to be ever-transforming, especially those wielding complex algorithms for sharing content. It’s important to understand how information spreads on these platforms so you can adapt strategies.
    • Cybersecurity knowledge: Cybercriminals are becoming increasingly creative, leaving small businesses vulnerable to phishing attacks and data breaches. Such bad actors could then leverage your own technology and tools and spread false information in the name of your business, unless you stay ahead of the information curve, or engage someone who is.
    • Sharing skill sets: Digital literacy shouldn’t be a skill that rests just with the business owner: Providing training to employees is a great way to add an extra layer of defense, especially when it comes to those staff members authorized to share information via social media or other channels, as well as key decision makers.

    Related: 7 Tips for Making Quality Business Decisions

    Practical strategies for protecting against misinformation

    • Cultivate a fact-based culture: Advancing a company environment that values fact-based decision-making means insisting that employees back their decisions with reliable data. By instilling a sense of positive skepticism — encouraging people to question information they encounter — you can greatly reduce the risk of inadvertently internalizing or spreading inaccuracies or distortions.
    • Create an information-sharing policy: It’s helpful to establish clear and company-wide guidelines for verifying and disseminating data, particularly on social media.
    • Be rigorous in verification: Never share information that’s obscure or which can’t be traced to a reputable source (which can include reputable news outlets, government websites and well-credentialed organizations) — ideally to multiple sources. There are a number of organizations and websites dedicated to such verification, including popular fact-checkers like Snopes, PolitiFact and FactCheck.org.
    • Leverage AI: Although advances in technology have accelerated the spread of misinformation, it can also help in combatting it. Artificial intelligence, for example, can aid in detecting false information by identifying inconsistencies and flagging potential inaccuracies.

    Related: 6 Ways Small Business Owners Can Get Their Employees to Use AI

    Nicholas Leighton

    Source link

  • Rep. George Santos faces expulsion vote on ‘moral’ issue as GOP seeks to delay action

    Rep. George Santos faces expulsion vote on ‘moral’ issue as GOP seeks to delay action

    Rep. George Santos Wednesday faced a possible vote to expel him from the House of Representatives for what some of his colleagues call a “question of right and wrong,” although a last-minute statement from the Ethics Committee could throw a wrench in that plan.

    A handful of fellow GOP lawmakers sent a letter to colleagues calling it a moral issue to oust the Queens/Long Island lawmaker over accusations he is a “con man” and serial liar who is facing a mushrooming federal fraud trial.

    The letter was signed by first-term New York Republican lawmakers Rep. Tony D’Esposito, Rep. Nick Lalota, Rep. Mike Lawler, Rep. Marc Molinaro and Rep. Brandon Williams.

    “This issue is not a political one, but a moral one,” the lawmakers wrote. “Plain and simple – this is a question of right and wrong.”

    All the lawmakers represent districts that voted for President Biden in 2020, putting them in political peril in 2024.

    Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-N.Y.), a fellow freshman lawmaker who represents a more safely Republican upstate district, did not sign the letter even though he was previously listed as a co-sponsor of the measure to expel Santos.

    The letter also rejects the argument that expelling Santos before he is convicted of a crime would set a dangerous precedent.

    “If a candidate for Congress lies about everything about himself to get their votes … House Members will expel the fraudster and give voters a timely opportunity to have proper representation,” the letter said.

    U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) is pictured at the U.S. Capitol on October 26, 2023 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

    The push to expel Santos needs a two-thirds vote of all House members. That means nearly 80 Republicans would have to join all Democrats to oust him.

    The expulsion hit a potential roadblock late Tuesday when the House ethics committee unexpectedly issued a highly unusual statement saying that it would give members an unspecified update on its probe into Santos later this month.

    The statement could provide ammunition to Republican leaders hoping to stall any vote on expelling Santos for as long as possible.

    Newly minted House Speaker Mike Johnson has said he opposes expelling Santos before he is found guilty of any crime.

    Johnson sought to tie the question of expelling Santos to the narrow Republican edge in the House: “We have no margin for error.”

    But the five endangered Republicans who want to expel Santos pushed back against that argument: “Congress must … ensure accountability for those who have taken advantage of the American people – regardless of political party.”

    Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., left, and Rep. Anthony D'Esposito, R-N.Y., speak about a motion to remove Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, Oct. 11, 2023, in Washington.
    Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., left, and Rep. Anthony D’Esposito, R-N.Y., speak about a motion to remove Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, Oct. 11, 2023, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

    Santos was recently hit with a superseding federal indictment accusing him of additional campaign finance and fraud charges.

    He says he’s innocent of all charges and vows to fight to stay in Congress and run for reelection despite the local Nassau County Republican Party opposing such a run.

    Fellow Republicans from suburban New York districts fear Santos could drag down all of them as Democrats use him as a poster boy for GOP corruption.

    But it remains to be seen if they have the political mettle to follow through on the expulsion effort.

    D’Esposito and fellow Republican critics of Santos launched a similar effort to expel him in the spring.

    But they caved after ex-Speaker Kevin McCarthy pushed to hand the Santos case to the House ethics committee for a probe. Nothing has come of that investigation so far.

    Dave Goldiner

    Source link