ReportWire

Tag: iab-computing

  • Anita Dunn, Biden’s brawler-in-chief, looks to 2024 | CNN Politics

    Anita Dunn, Biden’s brawler-in-chief, looks to 2024 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Anita Dunn saw an opportunity with “Dark Brandon.”

    The liberal meme, created by Joe Biden’s most online fans as a play on the right-wing “Let’s Go Brandon” code bashing the president, depicts a grinning Biden with red lasers shooting out of his eyes. After Dunn, Biden’s top messaging and communications adviser, became aware of the meme, she brought it to the president – and they jumped on an opportunity to go on the offensive in the never-ending social media meme wars.

    He’s nodded to Dark Brandon in official speeches, aides have shared the image on social media, and his 2024 campaign is selling $32 T-shirts emblazoned with his online alter-ego. While it’s a minor part of his repertoire, it shows how Dunn – a longtime Democratic operative and Biden confidante – has used her influence to engage in the kind of street brawling needed to combat perceptions of the aging president and the challenge ahead as he seeks a second term.

    “It fits well with who she is, which is a f**k-sh*t-up-brawler. It’s not a coincidence that the stuff that came behind Dark Brandon was very much in line with Anita’s way of seeing the world,” Rob Flaherty, the White House’s director of digital strategy, told CNN.

    CNN spoke to more than a dozen current and former White House and administration officials, lawmakers and Democratic strategists – many of whom requested anonymity to speak freely – who paint a picture of Dunn as a deeply loyal aide with a big-picture view of Biden’s strategy – with a hand in nearly all aspects of his political life.

    Her instincts for brawling are now directly intertwined with the president’s political fortunes, as she bolsters an already expansive role as a presidential adviser with steering 2024 messaging from the White House. For a president who relies on a very tight circle of trusted advisers, sources say Dunn has emerged as a powerful chief political communicator, a key strategist and someone who will fight on his behalf. She takes these responsibilities on with a combination of deep experience and Biden’s trust.

    While sources both inside and outside the White House say no communicator is better prepared for the moment than Dunn, her messaging task ahead is massive: A high-profile candidate of Biden’s age has never run before, and the president is facing low approval ratings after two years in the White House, which could be a drag on his reelection campaign. With Biden widely expected to face a familiar, but powerful, foe in former President Donald Trump, the mission facing Biden’s advisers is to find a message that can resonate enough with voters to beat Trump again.

    Just a third of Americans (33%) say that Biden winning in 2024 would be a step forward or a triumph for the country, per a May CNN poll conducted by SSRS. Voters also have serious questions about Biden’s age – he’s 80 now, and would be 86 at the end of a potential second term. Recent Washington Post/ABC News polling indicates that nearly two-thirds of respondents feel that Biden lacks the mental sharpness (63%) or is not in good enough physical health (62%) to serve effectively as president.

    Those poll numbers mean that Dunn’s most important task ahead is to help the president communicate to an unconvinced American public why he deserves a second term. And that has given her a White House portfolio that is virtually unparalleled.

    “The circle is small and isn’t exactly expanding anytime soon. That makes voices like Anita’s carry a significant amount of weight,” a Biden adviser said.

    Ostensibly, Dunn’s White House role centers around messaging, political strategy, oversight and crisis communication on the key issues facing the White House.

    “Like the rest of the senior staff, Anita works to act on the strategies and agenda President Biden assigns for her portfolio,” White House spokesman Andrew Bates said.

    She’s in close touch with Cabinet secretaries, members of Congress, outside groups and prospective candidates. A former Hill aide, Dunn is keenly aware of congressional dynamics, but her work inside the Obama White House has shaped her views on how to approach the daily challenges confronting the president.

    “She has this perch where she spans the overall strategic plan for (Biden) and for the White House, and also communicates outward with the political apparatus of the (Democratic National Committee) and the campaign and tries to keep the entire Joe Biden enterprise swimming in the same direction,” a White House aide said.

    She’s also playing an active role in Biden’s reelection campaign strategy, with multiple sources familiar with the dynamic indicating she is spearheading 2024 political messaging from the White House and coordinating with senior campaign staff.

    A former White House senior adviser put it more bluntly: When it comes to 2024, “she’s running everything.”

    Pressed in an interview with CBS News on how she will balance those two roles, Dunn declined to comment, citing the Hatch Act.

    “I’m going to be here at the White House serving the people,” she said. “I’m a White House employee, and I have a government job, and I will continue to do my government job.”

    For an incumbent president running for reelection, there is no commodity more valuable than time, especially time spent in front of the cameras, with an audience of critics looking for signs of fatigue. And with Biden officially jumping into the 2024 race, it’s expected that his current pace of activity will continue for the foreseeable future – using the bully pulpit to highlight key policies at the White House, visiting battleground states to showcase his accomplishments and traveling abroad to meet world leaders. That makes everything he says – and how and where he says it – part of an implicit reelection campaign.

    Dunn – in concert with a tight circle of aides, including White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, deputy chiefs of staff Jen O’Malley Dillon and Bruce Reed, senior adviser Mike Donilon, and counselor to the president Steve Ricchetti – is key to making those decisions and how to communicate them.

    For instance, Dunn was central to a recent decision to frame the president’s age as a sign of wisdom and experience.

    “It’s a legitimate thing to raise the question of age,” Biden told donors at a recent campaign fundraiser. “I hope what I’ve been able to bring to this job, and will continue to bring, is a little bit of wisdom.”

    His explicit use of that framing had Dunn’s fingerprints all over it – part of Bidenworld’s effort to mitigate a weakness by tying it to legislative accomplishments that supporters believe have little precedent over the past several decades.

    Multiple sources told CNN that Dunn has been a decision-maker for campaign issues such as staffing, announcement timing, headquarters location and selecting campaign leadership.

    She’s also recently been involved in strategically elevating the profile of Vice President Kamala Harris, making it clear internally that the West Wing needs to do a better job at bolstering Harris heading into the campaign, a source familiar with the dynamic said.

    Dunn is expected to remain in her White House role but continue to advise Biden on 2024 matters, multiple sources said, with campaign manager and former White House staffer Julie Chavez Rodriguez leading the charge from the campaign side.

    It’s a similar model to how former President Barack Obama’s top advisers coordinated between the West Wing and the campaign, and not unusual.

    “You want a strategist like Anita at the White House. Reelects are about organizing, ground game, targeting digital and ads and messages to particular audiences. It is a game of execution,” said Jennifer Palmieri, a longtime Democratic strategist who served as communications director during the Obama administration after Dunn.

    “The most important messaging that people will judge the president on is the job he is doing at the White House,” Palmieri said.

    Dunn’s deep loyalty and instinct to fight has also raised eyebrows outside the White House. TJ Ducklo, a 2020 Biden campaign aide who resigned from his White House role after privately threatening a reporter weeks into the administration, is expected to play a role in the 2024 campaign, a decision that has been publicly defended in a rare on-the-record statement from Dunn. (That reporter later called for Ducklo’s redemption.)

    “TJ made a mistake, took responsibility for it, and paid a price,” Dunn said in her statement – in her personal capacity – to Politico’s “West Wing Playbook” last month.

    One former senior White House adviser, however, called that an “unforced error” by Dunn. The former adviser asked for anonymity to speak freely without retribution.

    Her allegiance to Ducklo, the adviser said, “leaves the president vulnerable and exposed to unnecessary criticism and charges of hypocrisy.”

    “It’s in direct contradiction to the president’s own values and integrity and the standards that he himself demanded of everybody in the White House,” the former adviser said.

    A current White House aide fired back.

    “The president has values. Taking responsibility when you have done wrong means a lot. So does forgiveness,” that aide said.

    Dunn, 65, is one-half of a Washington power couple at the epicenter of Bidenworld – husband Bob Bauer is the president’s personal attorney and the lead attorney handling the special counsel investigation into classified documents found at Biden’s private office and residence. Yet she has risen from roles in the Jimmy Carter White House to the Senate to building public affairs powerhouse SKDK to the 2008 Obama campaign entirely on her own, sparked by her intense preparation.

    “She made preparation her friend,” said veteran Democratic operative Minyon Moore, who has known Dunn for decades.

    “Every time she walks in a room, she’s probably more prepared than most of her counterparts. And I think that’s how she was able to tackle the business very early, because they knew she had done her homework. They knew she could think through many layers. She was smart as heck. And so, you want a person like Anita in the room,” Moore said.

    Dunn operates largely behind the scenes – actively eschewing Washington’s social scene, social media and most television appearances.

    Her loyalty to Biden was cemented when she was among a small group of advisers working toward a potential 2016 presidential run, Biden wrote in his 2017 memoir, “Promise Me, Dad.” Though he ultimately decided against running, Dunn’s encouragement solidified a strong level of trust, multiple people close to her say.

    Dunn joined Biden’s 2020 campaign as a senior adviser and is widely credited for helping turn the tide of Biden’s political fortunes in that campaign’s Democratic primary after she was tapped to lead the operation following a fourth-place showing in the Iowa caucuses.

    She encouraged a sharper messaging posture from her desk in the center of the campaign “bullpen” workspace.

    When Biden arrived in the White House, Dunn briefly joined the administration as a senior adviser before returning to SKDK in August 2021, the temporary nature of her service allowing her to skirt disclosure of a cadre of investments and high-profile clients.

    She continued to advise Biden informally and rejoined the White House in May 2022 in a permanent capacity, a move requiring multimillion-dollar financial disclosures.

    Dunn’s omnipresence in Biden’s orbit has been just as clear in the period when she was out of the White House as when she’s been in. She was a constant presence on conference calls or in visits to the White House.

    “The president trusts her counsel – and there’s good evidence as to why,” one adviser said, pointing to her central role in his path to the presidency, loyalty during Biden’s 2016 deliberations and her work inside the West Wing.

    Over her career, Dunn has developed a reputation as an aggressive messaging tactician with strict discipline.

    She’s led White House messaging efforts on legislative accomplishments, seeking to highlight the legislation’s tangible impacts on real Americans, though some Democrats argue the White House has not done enough to sell those measures to the public.

    “What she tries to do is find the connective tissue,” said a senior administration official, who talks to Dunn regularly. “There’s nobody in government that has a better big picture perspective of what’s going on.”

    Multiple colleagues suggested Dunn can inspire a certain level of anxiety in her subordinates – demanding a high level of results and keeping the receipts – while also being seen as a supportive mentor. At the White House, Dunn is known for leading a weekly meeting known as “Fridays at 5,” a 5 p.m. in-person convening that is met with both eye-rolling (given its timing) and appreciation. It includes the entire communications staff, from interns to press assistants to the highest levels. Dunn will lead shout-outs at the beginning of each meeting, identifying achievements and often spotlighting junior staff.

    “It’s really emblematic of Anita,” the White House aide said. “The fact that she took it upon herself to establish this very expansive view of who’s on the communications team across the entire White House and set a weekly meeting where those people get direct exposure to her, as the senior adviser to the president, is really neat.”

    Dunn’s counsel isn’t only valued inside the White House walls – Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who ran against Biden for president in 2020, regularly seeks her advice.

    “She’s someone that you feel like you can trust and she’s going to have your back. And I think that’s why she’s been such a trusted adviser to President Biden,” the Minnesota senator told CNN, saying that Dunn has been a key messaging coordinator for her Senate colleagues in advancing Biden’s policies.

    That intense loyalty to the president is ultimately why Dunn has been given such a powerful role inside Biden’s political operation.

    “The people that were there and believed in him when he was counted out hold a unique bond and trust with the president. That relationship, with her obvious expertise, means she’s empowered to do what she needs to do,” a former colleague said.

    “Few people have the experience and discipline to keep their eye on the ball like she does. She’s not distracted, and she knows what messages are going to land, even if the pundits disagree,” the former colleague added.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The largest newspaper publisher in the US sues Google, alleging online ad monopoly | CNN Business

    The largest newspaper publisher in the US sues Google, alleging online ad monopoly | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Gannett, the largest newspaper publisher in the United States, is suing Google, alleging the tech giant holds a monopoly over the digital ad market.

    The publisher of USA Today and more than 200 local publications filed the lawsuit in a New York federal court on Tuesday, and is seeking unspecified damages. Gannett argues in court documents that Google and its parent company, Alphabet, controls how publishers buy and sell ads online.

    “The result is dramatically less revenue for publishers and Google’s ad-tech rivals, while Google enjoys exorbitant monopoly profits,” the lawsuit states.

    Google controls about a quarter of the US digital advertising market, with Meta, Amazon and TikTok combining for another third, according to eMarketer. News publishers and other websites combine for the other roughly 40%. Big Tech’s share of the market is beginning to erode slightly, but Google remains by far the largest individual player.

    That means publishers often rely at least in part on Google’s advertising technology to support their operations: Gannett says Google controls 90% of the ad market for publishers.

    Michael Reed, Gannett’s chairman and CEO, said in a statement Tuesday that Google’s dominance in the online advertising industry has come “at the expense of publishers, readers and everyone else.”

    “Digital advertising is the lifeblood of the online economy,” Reed added. “Without free and fair competition for digital ad space, publishers cannot invest in their newsrooms.”

    Dan Taylor, Google’s vice president of global ads, told CNN that the claims in the suit “are simply wrong.”

    “Publishers have many options to choose from when it comes to using advertising technology to monetize – in fact, Gannett uses dozens of competing ad services, including Google Ad Manager,” Taylor said in a statement Tuesday. “And when publishers choose to use Google tools, they keep the vast majority of revenue.”

    He continued: “We’ll show the court how our advertising products benefit publishers and help them fund their content online.”

    The legal action from Gannett comes as Google faces a growing number of antitrust complaints in the United States and the European Union over its advertising business, which remains its central moneymaker.

    EU officials said last week that Google’s advertising business should be broken up, alleging that the tech giant’s involvement in multiple parts of the digital advertising supply chain creates “inherent conflicts of interest” that risk harming competition.

    Earlier this year, the Justice Department and eight states sued Google, accusing the company of harming competition with its dominance in the online advertising market and similarly calling for it to be broken up.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Dylan Mulvaney says Bud Light’s backlash response was ‘worse than not hiring a trans person at all’ | CNN Business

    Dylan Mulvaney says Bud Light’s backlash response was ‘worse than not hiring a trans person at all’ | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Dylan Mulvaney on Thursday broke her silence about the fallout that occurred after the trans influencer made two Instagram posts sponsored by Bud Light earlier this year.

    Bud Light’s sponsorship of an April 1 Instagram post by Mulvaney set off a firestorm of anti-trans backlash and calls for a boycott. Mulvaney herself also faced a wave of hate and violent threats.

    Now, in a video posted to Instagram Thursday, Mulvaney is calling on Bud Light and other companies not only to work with trans and other queer influencers, but to support them through the process, even as trans rights are under fire across the country and corporations face anti-LGBTQ+ campaigns.

    Mulvaney said she has “been scared to leave my house, and I have been ridiculed in public, I have been followed,” and she criticized Bud Light for not standing by her and the partnership. She said the company never reached out to her in the wake of the backlash.

    “For a company to hire a trans person and then not publicly stand by them is worse in my opinion than not hiring a trans person at all because it gives customers permission to be as transphobic and hateful as they want,” Mulvaney said. “And the hate doesn’t end with me, it has serious and grave consequences for the rest of our community.”

    When the backlash ignited in April, Bud Light first responded with a straightforward explanation of its relationship with social media influencers like Mulvaney. But later it released a vague statement from the CEO that failed to offer support for Mulvaney or the trans community. Bud Light sales dropped in the ensuing weeks, the company lost its top rating from a major LGBTQ+ nonprofit and it placed two marketing executives on leave.

    The controversy over the sponsored posts came as trans rights are under attack. Over 400 anti-LGBTQ+ bills were introduced in state legislatures this year through April 3, according to American Civil Liberties Union, including ones restricting access to gender-affirming care for trans youth. Generally, transgender people are more than four times as likely to be victims of violent crime than cisgender people, according to a study from the UCLA School of Law.

    The Bud Light backlash also coincided with anti-LGBTQ+ campaigns against other big brands, including Target.

    Mulvaney’s statement followed a Wednesday appearance by Brendan Whitworth, CEO of Bud Light owner Anheuser-Busch, on CBS Mornings, in which he repeated the company’s recent statements about wanting to “focus on what we do best, which is brewing great beer for everyone,” and did not directly answer a question about whether the campaign was a mistake.

    “I think the conversation surrounding Bud Light has moved away from beer, and the conversation has become divisive, and Bud Light really does not belong there, Bud Light should be about bringing people together,” Whitworth said.

    In her video, Mulvaney appeared to address that sentiment, saying, “supporting trans people, it shouldn’t be political.”

    “There should be nothing controversial or divisive about working with us, and I know it’s possible because I’ve worked with some fantastic companies who care,” Mulvaney said. “But caring about the LGBTQ+ community requires a lot more than just a donation somewhere during Pride month.”

    She added: “We’re customers, too, I know a lot of trans and queer people who love beer.”

    In a statement responding to Mulvaney’s video, an Anheuser-Busch spokesperson told CNN on Thursday that, “we remain committed to the programs and partnerships we have forged over decades with organizations across a number of communities, including those in the LGBTQ+ community. The privacy and safety of our employees and our partners is always our top priority. As we move forward, we will focus on what we do best — brewing great beer for everyone and earning our place in moments that matter to our consumers.”

    –CNN’s Danielle Wiener-Bronner contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Australian firm sues Twitter for $665,000 for not paying bills | CNN Business

    Australian firm sues Twitter for $665,000 for not paying bills | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Sydney
    Reuters
     — 

    An Australian project management firm has filed a lawsuit against Twitter in a US court seeking cumulative payments of about A$1 million ($665,000) over alleged non-payment of bills for work done in four countries, court filings showed.

    Sydney-based private company Facilitate Corp on June 29 filed the suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District Of California claiming breach of contract over Twitter’s failure to pay its invoices.

    The Australian firm’s lawsuit is the latest alleging non-payment of bills and rent against Twitter

    (TWTR)     since Elon Musk bought the social media platform for $44 billion last year.

    Facilitate said from 2022 through early 2023, it installed sensors in Twitter’s offices in London and Dublin, completed an office fit-out in Singapore and cleared an office in Sydney.

    For those works, Twitter owed the company about 203,000 pounds ($257,000), S$546,600 ($404,000) and A$61,300 ($40,700), respectively, Facilitate said.

    Twitter, also known as X Corp, no longer has a media relations office. Reuters could not immediately reach Twitter’s Australia office.

    Facilitate said it was seeking compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial, legal costs and interest at the maximum legal rate.

    In May, a former public relations firm filed a suit in a New York court saying Twitter had not paid its bills, while early this year, US-based advisory firm Innisfree M&A sued it, seeking about $1.9 million for what it said were unpaid bills after it advised Twitter on its acquisition by Musk.

    Britain’s Crown Estate, an independent commercial business that manages the property portfolio belonging to the monarchy, in January began court proceedings over alleged unpaid rent on Twitter’s London headquarters.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tax prep companies shared private taxpayer data with Google and Meta for years, congressional probe finds | CNN Business

    Tax prep companies shared private taxpayer data with Google and Meta for years, congressional probe finds | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Some of America’s largest tax-prep companies have spent years sharing Americans’ sensitive financial data with tech titans including Meta and Google in a potential violation of federal law — data that in some cases was misused for targeted advertising, according to a seven-month congressional investigation.

    The report highlights what legal experts described to CNN as a “five-alarm fire” for taxpayer privacy that could lead to government and private lawsuits, criminal penalties or perhaps even a “mortal blow” for some industry giants involved in the probe including TaxSlayer, H&R Block and TaxAct.

    Using visitor tracking technology embedded on their websites, the three tax-prep companies allegedly sent tens of millions of Americans’ personal information to the tech industry without consent or appropriate disclosures, according to the congressional report reviewed by CNN.

    Beyond ordinary personal data such as people’s names, phone numbers and email addresses, the list of information shared also included taxpayer data — details about people’s filing status, adjusted gross income, the size of their tax refunds and even information about the buttons and text fields they clicked on while filling out their tax forms, which could reveal what tax breaks they may have claimed or which government programs they use, according to the report.

    The report, which drew on congressional interviews and written testimony from Meta, Google and the tax-prep companies, also found that every taxpayer who used TaxAct’s IRS Free File service while the tracking was enabled would have had their information shared with the tech companies. Some of the tax-prep companies still do not know whether the data they shared continues to be held by the tech platforms, the report said.

    “On a scale from one to 10, this is a 15,” said David Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University and a former consumer protection chief at the Federal Trade Commission, the country’s top privacy watchdog. “This is as great as any privacy breach that I’ve seen other than exploiting kids. This is a five-alarm fire, if what we know about this so far is true.”

    It is also an example, Vladeck said, of why the United States needs federal legislation guaranteeing every American a basic right to data privacy — an issue that has languished in Congress for years despite electronic data becoming an ever-larger part of the global economy.

    The congressional findings represent the latest claims of wrongdoing to hit the embattled tax-prep industry after a report last year by the investigative journalism outlet The Markup highlighted the tracking practice.

    Wednesday’s bombshell report adds to those earlier revelations by identifying a previously unreported category of data that was allegedly being collected and shared: the webpage titles in online tax software that can reveal what tax forms users have accessed, said an aide to Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who helped lead the congressional probe. For example, taxpayers who entered information about their college savings contributions or rental income may have done so on webpages bearing titles reflecting that information, which would then have been shared with the tech companies, the aide said.

    During the probe, Meta told investigators it used the taxpayer data it received to target third-party ads to users of its platform and to train its artificial intelligence algorithms, the report said. The Warren aide told CNN it was unclear whether Meta knew it was inappropriately using taxpayer data at the time. A Meta spokesperson said the company instructs its partners not to use its tools to share sensitive information and that Meta’s systems are “designed to filter out potentially sensitive data it is able to detect.”

    The technology behind the data collection, known as a tracking pixel, is commonly used across the entire internet. A small snippet of code that website owners can insert onto their sites, tracking pixels gather information that can help companies, including but not limited to Meta and Google, understand the behavior or interests of website visitors.

    Because of the tracking technology used by TaxAct, TaxSlayer and H&R Block, “every single taxpayer who used their websites to file their taxes could have had at least some of their data shared,” the report said.

    The tax-prep companies at the center of the investigation told lawmakers the collected data had been scrambled to help protect privacy, according to the report. But the report also said some of the tax-prep firms themselves were not fully aware of how much information was being exposed to the tech platforms, and the report cited past FTC research concluding that even “anonymized” data can be easily reverse-engineered to identify a person.

    The pixels’ use in a taxpayer context resulted in the “reckless” sharing of legally protected data that could put taxpayers at risk, according to the report by Warren and her Democratic colleagues Sens. Ron Wyden; Richard Blumenthal; Tammy Duckworth; and Sheldon Whitehouse; Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with Democrats; and Democratic Rep. Katie Porter.

    The FTC, the Internal Revenue Service, the Justice Department and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration “should fully investigate this matter and prosecute any company or individuals who violated the law,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter dated Tuesday to the agencies and obtained by CNN. The FTC and DOJ declined to comment; the IRS and TIGTA didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

    In a statement, H&R Block said it takes client privacy “very seriously, and we have taken steps to prevent the sharing of information via pixels.” Wednesday’s report said H&R Block had testified to using the tracking technology for “at least a couple of years.”

    TaxAct and TaxSlayer didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The report said TaxAct had been using Meta’s tools since 2018 and Google’s since about 2014, while TaxSlayer began using Meta’s tools in 2018 and Google’s in 2011. The investigation found that all three tax-prep companies had discontinued their use of Meta’s pixel after The Markup’s report last November.

    Intuit, the maker of TurboTax, received an initial inquiry letter from the lawmakers in December but was not a focus of Wednesday’s report because the company did not use tracking pixels to the same extent, the investigation found.

    Tax preparation firms have faced mounting scrutiny in recent years amid reports that many have turned to data harvesting as a business model and that the largest among them have spent millions lobbying against legislation that could make it easier for Americans to file their tax returns. An IRS report this year found that 72% of Americans would be interested in using a free, electronic tax filing service if it were provided by the agency as an alternative to private online filing services. The IRS plans to launch a pilot version of that service to a limited number of taxpayers in the 2024 tax filing season.

    Google told CNN it prohibits business customers from uploading to its platform sensitive data that could be traced back to a person.

    “We have strict policies and technical features that prohibit Google Analytics customers from collecting data that could be used to identify an individual,” a Google spokesperson said. “Site owners — not Google — are in control of what information they collect and must inform their users of how it will be used. Additionally, Google has strict policies against advertising to people based on sensitive information.”

    Wednesday’s report focuses more heavily on Meta’s use of taxpayer data, the Warren aide told CNN, because Google did not appear to have used the information for its own commercial purposes as overtly as Meta and the investigation was unable to fully determine whether Google may have used the data for other applications.

    The allegations could nevertheless create extensive legal risk for both the tech companies as well as the tax-preparation firms, according to tax and privacy legal experts.

    The tax-prep companies could face billions in fines under US tax law if the federal government decides to sue, said Steven Rosenthal, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. In addition, the US government could seek criminal penalties.

    “The scope of ‘taxpayer information’ is broad by design,” Rosenthal said, adding that tax-prep companies can be sued for “knowingly” or “recklessly” leaking that information. “The companies shouldn’t be sharing it in a way that some third party could obtain it.”

    Theoretically, he said, the tax code also affords individual taxpayers the right to file private lawsuits against the tax-prep companies. But most if not all of those firms require customers to submit to mandatory arbitration that could realistically make bringing a private claim more challenging, said the Warren aide.

    Apart from the tax code, both the tech giants as well as the tax-prep firms could also face civil liability from the FTC — which can police data breaches and hold companies accountable for their commitments to user privacy — and potentially from state governments that have their own privacy laws on the books, said Vladeck.

    Depending on the strength of the allegations, the tax-prep companies could quickly be forced into a binding settlement, said a former FTC official who requested anonymity in order to speak more freely.

    “If the facts are really strong, these companies would probably rather settle than go to court. This is very embarrassing,” the former official said. “It could be a mortal blow to the tax prep companies.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Leading AI companies commit to outside testing of AI systems and other safety commitments | CNN Politics

    Leading AI companies commit to outside testing of AI systems and other safety commitments | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Microsoft, Google and other leading artificial intelligence companies committed Friday to put new AI systems through outside testing before they are publicly released and to clearly label AI-generated content, the White House announced.

    The pledges are part of a series of voluntary commitments agreed to by the White House and seven leading AI companies – which also include Amazon, Meta, OpenAI, Anthropic and Inflection – aimed at making AI systems and products safer and more trustworthy while Congress and the White House develop more comprehensive regulations to govern the rapidly growing industry. President Joe Biden met with top executives from all seven companies at the White House on Friday.

    In a speech Friday, Biden called the companies commitments “real and concrete,” adding they will help fulfill their “fundamental obligations to Americans to develop safe, secure and trustworthy technologies that benefit society and uphold our values and our shared values.”

    “We’ll see more technology change in the next 10 years, or even in the next few years, than we’ve seen in the last 50 years. That has been an astounding revelation,” Biden said.

    White House officials acknowledge that some of the companies have already enacted some of the commitments but argue they will as a whole raise “the standards for safety, security and trust of AI” and will serve as a “bridge to regulation.”

    “It’s a first step, it’s a bridge to where we need to go,” White House deputy chief of staff Bruce Reed, who has been managing the AI policy process, said in an interview. “It will help industry and government develop the capacities to make sure that AI is safe and secure. And we pushed to move so quickly because this technology is moving farther and faster than anything we’ve seen before.”

    While most of the companies already conduct internal “red-teaming” exercises, the commitments will mark the first time they have all committed to allow outside experts to test their systems before they are released to the public. A red team exercise is designed to simulate what could go wrong with a given technology – such as a cyberattack or its potential to be used by malicious actors – and allows companies to proactively identify shortcomings and prevent negative outcomes.

    Reed said the external red-teaming “will help pave the way for government oversight and regulation,” potentially laying the groundwork for that outside testing to be carried out by a government regulator or licenser.

    The commitments could also lead to widespread watermarking of AI-generated audio and visual content with the aim of combating fraud and misinformation.

    The companies also committed to investing in cybersecurity and “insider threat safeguards,” in particular to protect AI model weights, which are essentially the knowledge base upon which AI systems rely; creating a robust mechanism for third parties to report system vulnerabilities; prioritizing research on the societal risks of AI; and developing and deploying AI systems “to help address society’s greatest challenges,” according to the White House.

    Asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper Friday about worries he has when it comes to AI, Microsoft Vice Chair and President Brad Smith pointed to “what people, bad actors, individuals or countries will do” with the technology.

    “That they’ll use it to undermine our elections, that they will use it to seek to break in to our computer networks. You know, that they’ll use it in ways that will undermine the security of our jobs,” he said.

    But, Smith argued, “the best way to solve these problems is to focus on them, to understand them, to bring people together, and to solve them. And the interesting thing about AI, in my opinion, is that when we do that, and we are determined to do that, we can use AI to defend against these problems far more effectively than we can today.”

    Pressed by Tapper about AI and compensation concerns listed in a recent letter signed by thousands of authors, Smith said: “I don’t want it to undermine anybody’s ability to make a living by creating, by writing. That is the balance that we should all want to strike.”

    All of the commitments are voluntary and White House officials acknowledged that there is no enforcement mechanism to ensure the companies stick to the commitments, some of which also lack specificity.

    Common Sense Media, a child internet-safety organization, commended the White House for taking steps to establish AI guardrails, but warned that “history would indicate that many tech companies do not actually walk the walk on a voluntary pledge to act responsibly and support strong regulations.”

    “If we’ve learned anything from the last decade and the complete mismanagement of social media governance, it’s that many companies offer a lot of lip service,” Common Sense Media CEO James Steyer said in a statement. “And then they prioritize their profits to such an extent that they will not hold themselves accountable for how their products impact the American people, particularly children and families.”

    The federal government’s failure to regulate social media companies at their inception – and the resistance from those companies – has loomed large for White House officials as they have begun crafting potential AI regulations and executive actions in recent months.

    “The main thing we stressed throughout the discussions with the companies was that we should make this as robust as possible,” Reed said. “The tech industry made a mistake in warding off any kind of oversight, legislation and regulation a decade ago and I think that AI is progressing even more rapidly than that and it’s important for this bridge to regulation to be a sturdy one.”

    The commitments were crafted during a monthslong back-and-forth between the AI companies and the White House that began in May when a group of AI executives came to the White House to meet with Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and White House officials. The White House also sought input from non-industry AI safety and ethics experts.

    White House officials are working to move beyond voluntary commitments, readying a series of executive actions, the first of which is expected to be unveiled later this summer. Officials are also working closely with lawmakers on Capitol Hill to develop more comprehensive legislation to regulate AI.

    “This is a serious responsibility. We have to get it right. There’s an enormous, enormous potential upside as well,” Biden said.

    In the meantime, White House officials say the companies will “immediately” begin implementing the voluntary commitments and hope other companies sign on in the future.

    “We expect that other companies will see how they also have an obligation to live up to the standards of safety, security and trust. And they may choose – and we would welcome them choosing – joining these commitments,” a White House official said.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • WhatsApp unveils new video messaging feature | CNN Business

    WhatsApp unveils new video messaging feature | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    WhatsApp will now let you record and send video clips directly in the messaging app, the Meta-owned platform announced this week.

    The instant video messages can be up to 60 seconds long, and are similarly protected with the app’s end-to-end encryption service.

    “We think these will be a fun way to share moments with all the emotion that comes from video, whether it’s wishing someone a happy birthday, laughing at a joke, or bringing good news,” the company said Thursday in a blog post.

    The new feature will be similar to sending a voice message on the platform, the company added, and there will also be a way to record the video hands-free.

    The company said the new update has begun rolling out on the app and will be available to everyone in the coming weeks.

    Earlier this year, WhatsApp rolled out an update that lets users edit messages in the app (as long as it’s within 15 minutes after sending).

    The latest product update for WhatsApp comes on the heels of a better-than-expected earnings report from Meta. The company said Wednesday that revenue surged 11% year-over-year to $32 billion for its quarter ending in June, as CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s “year of efficiency” appears to be paying off for the social media giant.

    After a bruising 2022, shares of Meta stock have jumped more than 150% in 2023.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk: Only paid subscribers will get recommended in Twitter ‘For You’ feed | CNN Business

    Elon Musk: Only paid subscribers will get recommended in Twitter ‘For You’ feed | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Less than a day after Elon Musk implied that Twitter users might soon only see tweets from paid subscribers in their default feed, the billionaire was forced to clarify that posts from accounts users follow will still be visible, too.

    Twitter’s “For You” tab, the first screen that users see when they open the app, curates tweets by using an algorithm. That means it can surface tweets from people you don’t follow. Late Monday, Musk said the For You tab will soon only recommend people who pay for the premium Twitter Blue service.

    “Starting April 15th, only verified accounts will be eligible to be in For You recommendations,” he announced in a tweet Monday evening. “The is the only realistic way to address advanced AI bot swarms taking over. It is otherwise a hopeless losing battle. Voting in polls will require verification for same reason.”

    But on Tuesday, Musk tweeted a clarification: “Forgot to mention that accounts you follow directly will also be in For You, since you have explicitly asked for them.” Oops.

    In the five months since Musk completed his acquisition of Twitter, he and the company have been forced to rethink, clarify, delay or walk back a number of changes to the platform, prompting some confusion and whiplash among users in the process.

    Appearing in the “For You” feed helps users build their number of followers. Voting in polls doesn’t benefit users in the same way, but blocking them from voting may prompt some to sign up for the paid service.

    Musk frequently posts his own polls on Twitter, asking users everything from whether he should give up his position as CEO of the platform to whether he should sell shares of Tesla

    (TSLA)     stock.

    Although Musk said Twitter is making the change to battle with bot accounts, he later tweeted “That said, it’s ok to have verified bot accounts if they follow terms of service & don’t impersonate a human.”

    It is part of Musk’s plans to shift Twitter away from being almost completely dependent on advertising dollars for its revenue. A significant portion of Twitter’s ad base has left the platform since Musk took over in October.

    Last week, Musk announced that users who have had a free blue checkmark – typically government officials, celebrities, members of the media and other high profile users – would lose that free verification starting in April unless they agree to pay a subscription fee – either $84 annually or $8 a month.

    Musk and actor William Shatner clashed on Twitter over the weekend, when Shatner objected to the idea of paying for the checkmark.

    “Hey @elonmusk what’s this about blue checks going away unless we pay Twitter?” Shatner tweeted. “I’ve been here for 15 years giving my time & witty thoughts all for bupkis. Now you’re telling me that I have to pay for something you gave me for free?”

    Musk responded to Shatner on Sunday in a tweet: “It’s more about treating everyone equally. There shouldn’t be a different standard for celebrities.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • First on CNN: A new group of Twitter vendors is suing the company for alleged unpaid bills | CNN Business

    First on CNN: A new group of Twitter vendors is suing the company for alleged unpaid bills | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    A group of Twitter vendors on Tuesday filed a proposed class action lawsuit alleging that the company has failed to pay tens of thousands of dollars in overdue bills.

    The four firms — captioning services company White Coat Captioning, consulting group YES Consulting and public relations firms Cancomm and Dialogue México — allege that Twitter is in breach of their contracts and has yet to pay bills ranging from around $40,000 to $140,000 for services they provided the company last year.

    Tuesday’s lawsuit, which was filed in California Northern District Court and first reported by CNN, refers to the companies suing Twitter as “small businesses without the resources, time, and money to litigate these claims on their own.”

    The lawsuit comes as new Twitter owner Elon Musk attempts to slash costs after buying the company for $44 billion, a significant amount of which came from debt financing. It also adds to the growing list of legal actions Twitter is facing from landlords, business partners and former employees claiming the company has failed to pay what they are owed since Musk’s takeover.

    Twitter is also facing lawsuits from at least one landlord claiming it has missed rent payments, a private jet company for unpaid bills for executive flights and an event production company who said Twitter failed to pay it after canceling the “Chirp Conference” it had been set to organize in November after Musk took over the company.

    The latest suit was filed by Shannon Liss-Riordan, who has also filed four proposed class action lawsuits and hundreds of arbitration demands on behalf of Twitter employees laid off following Musk’s takeover in pursuit of additional severance they allege they were promised by the company prior to Musk’s takeover. Some former workers have also alleged sex and disability discrimination and other issues, which the company has argued in court are without merit.

    Twitter has moved to dismiss many of the lawsuits in court. Twitter, which fired much of its media relations team last fall, did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the new lawsuit.

    “Elon Musk told Twitter vendors that, if they want to get paid, then sue,” Liss-Riordan said in a statement to CNN, referring to comments reportedly made by the Twitter owner. “Well, he’s now getting his wish. Businesses, like employees, should not have to sue to get paid what they are owed.”

    In the new lawsuit, White Coat Captioning said it provided real-time captioning services for events and classes for Twitter employees who were hard of hearing or spoke languages other than English. The company alleged that it began contacting Twitter in November about overdue and pending invoices for services rendered under a contract signed in March 2022.

    “Twitter reassured White Coat Captioning it had processed and would pay these invoices, but it never did,” the firm alleged in the complaint. In January, the firm claims that Twitter said it was conducting an “additional review” of the invoices. Twitter owes the captioning company around $42,000, according to the complaint.

    YES Consulting, which said it provided leadership training to Twitter employees per an agreement signed in March 2022, alleges that Twitter owes it approximately $49,000 for services provided between August and November last year.

    Latin American public relations firm Dialogue also alleges that Twitter has failed to pay approximately $140,000 for eight invoices for services provided in November and December of last year.

    The vendors are seeking damages in the amount each company is allegedly owed by Twitter, as well as interest.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s weekend antics could only further crumble Twitter’s brand value | CNN Business

    Elon Musk’s weekend antics could only further crumble Twitter’s brand value | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Under Elon Musk, Twitter has antagonized multiple major news organizations by labeling them state-funded media, appears to have eased restrictions on Russian government accounts and made crude jokes on the front of its headquarters and on Musk’s own Twitter display name.

    And that’s just this weekend.

    Musk’s antics, which only seem to have escalated this month, threaten to further erode Twitter’s brand value. For months, the company has struggled to retain advertisers and supplement its declining ad business — which previously comprised 90% of its annual revenue — by convincing users to pay up for its Twitter Blue subscription service.

    Musk, who is on the hook for large payments to lenders after buying the company for $44 billion, including with significant debt, must either coax hesitant advertisers back to the platform or boost its subscription business -— or both. But his recent erratic moves may only complicate those turnaround efforts.

    Late last week, Twitter faced backlash for labeling NPR as a “state-affiliated media” organization akin to foreign propaganda outlets such as Russia’s RT and Sputnik, in an apparent violation of its own policies. NPR CEO John Lansing called Twitter’s move “unacceptable,” and said the organization is “supported by millions of listeners.”

    Following the pushback, Twitter changed NPR’s label to “government funded media,” and applied the same designation to British broadcaster BBC over the weekend. Twitter has not given a definition for what it considers “government funded media,” but the BBC pushed back on the label, saying it is independent and “funded by the British public through the license fee.”

    The moves risk alienating some of the best-known media organizations in the world and undermining what has long been a key selling point for the platform: its role as a central hub for news. NPR, in particular, has not tweeted from its main account in nearly a week.

    While Twitter labeled some news accounts as state-funded, it also appears to have removed some restrictions on Russian government accounts that had been put in place following the outset of Russia’s war in Ukraine, again prompting outrage among some users.

    Musk commented on the decision in a tweet Sunday saying: “I’m told Putin called me a war criminal for helping Ukraine, so he’s not exactly my best friend. All news is to some degree propaganda. Let people decide for themselves.”

    Twitter, which laid off much of its media relations team last year, did not respond to a request for comment.

    The controversial moves come as Twitter continues to face significant business challenges. Analysis firm Similarweb last week reported that traffic to Twitter’s ad portal was down nearly 19% year-over-year in March. Many major advertisers have halted spending on Twitter since Musk’s takeover over concerns about increased hate speech on the platform and massive cuts to the company’s workforce.

    Musk has said Twitter is working to improve the platform’s ad targeting to increase value for advertisers. “But all the while there have been distractions,” said Scott Kessler, technology sector lead at research firm Third Bridge, adding that there are “significant questions about the direction that the company is going.” At the same time, online ad spending broadly has contracted over concerns about the economy.

    Against that backdrop, Musk’s Twitter has made several head-scratching announcements this month, some of which might only add to its challenges.

    Musk previously frustrated some of Twitter’s celebrity users, who have long been a key selling point for the platform, with a promise to remove blue checkmarks from accounts who had been verified under Twitter’s previous system. But it didn’t exactly go to plan — instead of removing checks from all previously verified users, Twitter appeared to target a single account belonging to the New York Times.

    Days later, Twitter’s home button was temporarily replaced with doge, the meme representing the cryptocurrency dogecoin, which Musk has promoted. The company also briefly restricted Twitter users from sharing links to a rival platform, upsetting users, including one who had previously reported the so-called Twitter files using documents provided by Musk.

    As if to underscore his unique and questionable impact on the brand, the “Chief Twit” has also apparently been keeping busy with changes to Twitter’s San Francisco headquarters. Last week, photos began spreading of a piece of plastic covering the “w” in the sign on the front of the company’s office.

    At nearly midnight on Sunday, Musk tweeted that the company’s landlord “says we’re legally required to keep sign as Twitter & cannot remove ‘w,’ so we painted it background color,” alongside a photo of the “w” painted white against a white background, leaving a more asinine word in its place. “Problem solved!” Musk tweeted.

    If only the same could be said for the platform’s business troubles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why the ‘Godfather of AI’ decided he had to ‘blow the whistle’ on the technology | CNN Business

    Why the ‘Godfather of AI’ decided he had to ‘blow the whistle’ on the technology | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Geoffrey Hinton, also known as the “Godfather of AI,” decided he had to “blow the whistle” on the technology he helped develop after worrying about how smart it was becoming, he told CNN on Tuesday.

    “I’m just a scientist who suddenly realized that these things are getting smarter than us,” Hinton told CNN’s Jake Tapper in an interview on Tuesday. “I want to sort of blow the whistle and say we should worry seriously about how we stop these things getting control over us.”

    Hinton’s pioneering work on neural networks shaped artificial intelligence systems powering many of today’s products. On Monday, he made headlines for leaving his role at Google, where he had worked for a decade, in order to speak openly about his growing concerns around the technology.

    In an interview Monday with the New York Times, which was first to report his move, Hinton said he was concerned about AI’s potential to eliminate jobs and create a world where many will “not be able to know what is true anymore.” He also pointed to the stunning pace of advancement, far beyond what he and others had anticipated.

    “If it gets to be much smarter than us, it will be very good at manipulation because it will have learned that from us, and there are very few examples of a more intelligent thing being controlled by a less intelligent thing,” Hinton told Tapper on Tuesday.

    “It knows how to program so it’ll figure out ways of getting around restrictions we put on it. It’ll figure out ways of manipulating people to do what it wants.”

    Hinton is not the only tech leader to speak out with concerns over AI. A number of members of the community signed a letter in March calling for artificial intelligence labs to stop the training of the most powerful AI systems for at least six months, citing “profound risks to society and humanity.”

    The letter, published by the Future of Life Institute, a nonprofit backed by Elon Musk, came just two weeks after OpenAI announced GPT-4, an even more powerful version of the technology that powers the viral chatbot ChatGPT. In early tests and a company demo, GPT-4 was used to draft lawsuits, pass standardized exams and build a working website from a hand-drawn sketch.

    Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, who was one of the signatories on the letter, appeared on “CNN This Morning” on Tuesday, echoing concerns about its potential to spread misinformation.

    “Tricking is going to be a lot easier for those who want to trick you,” Wozniak told CNN. “We’re not really making any changes in that regard – we’re just assuming that the laws we have will take care of it.”

    Wozniak also said “some type” of regulation is probably needed.

    Hinton, for his part, told CNN he did not sign the petition. “I don’t think we can stop the progress,” he said. “I didn’t sign the petition saying we should stop working on AI because if people in America stop, people in China wouldn’t.”

    But he confessed to not having a clear answer for what to do instead.

    “It’s not clear to me that we can solve this problem,” Hinton told Tapper. “I believe we should put a big effort into thinking about ways to solve the problem. I don’t have a solution at present.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A new CEO won’t fix Twitter’s biggest problem | CNN Business

    A new CEO won’t fix Twitter’s biggest problem | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    During his six months as Twitter’s CEO and owner, Elon Musk decimated its ad business, alienated some news publications and VIP users, and plunged the platform into a constant state of chaos.

    Now, a new chief executive will be tasked with trying to turn things around.

    Musk announced on Friday that he would in the coming weeks hand the CEO role over to Linda Yaccarino, a longtime media executive and former chairman of global advertising and partnerships at NBCUniversal. Yaccarino has said little publicly so far, beyond noting her excitement to “transform this business together.”

    Twitter is in desperate need of stability from a leader. And Yaccarino brings the ad industry chops that Twitter sorely needs to lure back top advertisers and boost its business after a turbulent period. But she may struggle to address Twitter’s biggest problem: Elon Musk.

    Although Musk is handing off the CEO title — and, perhaps, trying to shed some of the accountability that comes with it — the billionaire remains firmly in charge of the company as its owner and executive chair. Musk will still be in the C-Suite as Twitter’s chief technology officer. And he continues to be Twitter’s most-followed user, meaning his controversial statements to his nearly 140 million followers could still create headaches for the company.

    In tech, the CEO is often the public face of the brand. But Musk will almost certainly continue to fill that role, with or without the title, likely to Twitter’s detriment.

    Just this week, Musk drew backlash for baselessly attacking billionaire George Soros, a frequent target for antisemitic conspiracy theories, saying the financier “hates humanity.” Musk’s Twitter also faced criticism in recent days for removing some tweets and accounts at the behest of Turkey’s government amid the country’s election; the company later said it would object to the removal requests in court.

    On Tuesday, Musk said he “didn’t care” if his controversial tweets drew the ire of Twitter advertisers or Tesla shareholders. “I’ll say what I want to say, and if the consequence of that is losing money, so be it,” Musk said in an interview with CNBC.

    “The question is: can she help balance [Musk]?” said Tim Hubbard, management professor at University of Notre Dame’s Mendoza College of Business. He added that top ad buyers are more likely to take calls from Yaccarino than from Musk, who has previously said he hates advertising.

    But “the big problem with Twitter right now is, they’re on a pathway that turns advertisers off, turns users off,” Hubbard said. “Unless there are fundamental changes at Twitter, I don’t think [the leadership change] is going to have the immediate effect that Elon is hoping it will have.”

    Twitter did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

    The Musk issue was on full display at NBCU’s ad upfront this week, which was held shortly after Yaccarino resigned from the company following rumors of her appointment as Twitter’s CEO. On stage at the event, which aimed to promote NBCU’s platforms to advertisers, a talking bear sang to audience members: “Twitter may seem like the place to begin, but Twitter just let all the crazies back in.”

    Even if Musk pulls back on his tweeting, a feat he seems constitutionally incapable of achieving, it will be no easy task for Yaccarino to revive Twitter’s advertising business — let alone expand it.

    Many major advertisers left the platform following Musk’s takeover over concerns about an uptick of hate speech, frustrations over layoffs of much of the company’s ad and safety teams and general uncertainty about the platform’s future. Just 43% of Twitter’s top 1,000 advertisers as of September, the month before Musk’s takeover, were still advertising on the platform as of last month, according to data from market intelligence firm Sensor Tower.

    But for many, leaving Twitter may not have been a particularly difficult call.

    Even in the best of times, Twitter was an also-ran in the digital ad space compared to tech giants like Meta and Google, with a smaller user base and less sophisticated ad targeting technology. And Musk’s takeover came as many advertisers have pulled back their digital ad spending across the board during a precarious moment for the economy. That could only add to the difficulty Yaccarino will face in shoring up Twitter’s business.

    Musk, for his part, has been attempting to supplement, and potentially largely replace, Twitter’s ad business with subscriptions, but it appears that only a tiny fraction of Twitter users have bought in. The selection of Yaccarino suggests a recognition on his part that the company he bet $44 billion on will continue to be reliant on ad sales for the foreseeable future.

    It’s unclear how much freedom Yaccarino will have to hire additional staff to support her likely remit to revive advertising on Twitter after Musk laid off around 80% of the company’s staff last year. And even if she is able to hire, top talent may be wary of joining Twitter after Musk upended the company’s culture and reportedly rolled back benefits like work-from-home and extended parental leave.

    “Personnel is going to be a huge challenge for her … if tech workers are looking for a stable working environment, they will probably stay away from Twitter,” Hubbard said.

    But Musk’s ongoing influence remains the biggest potential hurdle.

    Musk has said he will oversee product, technology and software and systems operations, while Yaccarino will focus on business operations. The announcement has left open the question of whether Musk will remain in charge of controversial policy decisions, many of which — including allowing users to buy blue verification checks and restoring the accounts of rule violators, including white supremacists — have threatened Twitter’s popularity with users and advertisers.

    “Cleaning up Twitter requires reversing Musk’s dangerous policy decisions, reinvesting in content moderation and enforcement, and restructuring the platform’s governance,” Jessica Gonzalez, co-CEO of media watchdog Free Press who helped found the #StopToxicTwitter campaign encouraging advertisers to avoid the platform, said in a statement.

    “Musk is setting future CEO Linda Yaccarino up to fail — as long as he continues to make the platform toxic, it will be impossible to lure back advertisers and users,” she said.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Amazon looks to adapt Alexa to the rise of ChatGPT | CNN Business

    Amazon looks to adapt Alexa to the rise of ChatGPT | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    For years, Alexa has been synonymous with virtual assistants that can interact with users and do tasks on their behalf.

    Now Amazon is trying to keep pace with a new wave of conversational AI tools that have accelerated the artificial intelligence arms race in the tech industry and rapidly reshaped what consumers may expect from their tech products.

    Amazon’s goal is to use AI “to create this great personal assistant,” said Dave Limp, senior VP of devices and services, in a recent interview with CNN. “We’ve been using all forms of AI for a long time, but now that we see this emergence of generative AI, we can accelerate that vision even faster.”

    Generative AI refers to a type of AI that can create new content, such as text and images, in response to user prompts. Limp did not elaborate on how generative AI could be used in Alexa products, but there are clear possibilities.

    In theory, this technology could one day help Alexa have more natural conversations with users, answer more complex questions, and be more creative by telling stories or making up song lyrics in seconds. It could also enable more personalized interactions, allowing the assistant to learn about the device owner’s interests, preferences and better tailor its responses to each person.

    “We’re not done and won’t be done until Alexa is as good or better than the ‘Star Trek’ computer,” Limp said. “And to be able to do that, it has to be conversational. It has to know all. It has to be the true source of knowledge for everything.”

    Alexa launched nearly a decade ago and, along with Siri, Cortana and other voice assistants, seemed poised to change the way people interacted with technology. But the viral success of ChatGPT has arguably accomplished that faster and across a wider range of everyday products.

    The effort to continue updating the technology that powers Alexa comes at a difficult moment for Amazon. Like other Big Tech companies, Amazon is now slashing staff and shelving products in an urgent effort to cut costs amid broader economic uncertainty. The Alexa division has not escaped unscathed.

    Amazon confirmed plans in January to lay off more than 18,000 employees as the global economic outlook continued to worsen. In March, the company said about 9,000 more jobs would be impacted. Limp said his division lost about 2,000 people, about half of which were from the Alexa team.

    Amazon also shut down some of the products it spun up earlier in the pandemic, such as its wearable fitness brand Halo, which allowed users to ask Alexa questions about their health and wellness. Limp said the company also shelved some “more risky” projects. “I wouldn’t doubt we’ll dust them off at some point and bring them back,” he said. “We’re still taking a lot of risks in this organization.”

    But Limp said Alexa remains a “North Star” for his division. “To give you a sense, there’s still thousands and thousands of people working on Alexa,” he said.

    Amazon is indeed still investing in Alexa and its related Echo smart speaker lineup. Last week, the company unveiled several new products, including the $39.99 Echo Pop and the $89.99 Echo Show 5, its smart speaker with a screen. While the products feature incremental updates, Limp said Amazon’s current lineup contains hints of what’s to come with its AI efforts, beyond generative AI.

    For example, if Alexa is enabled on an Echo Show, where it can rotate and follow users around the room, “you’ll see glimmers of where it’s going over the next months and years,” Limp said.

    But generative AI remains a key focus for the company. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said in a letter to shareholders in April that the company is focused on “investing heavily” in the technology “across all of our consumer, seller, brand, and creator experiences.”

    The company is reportedly working on adding ChatGPT-like search capabilities for its e-commerce store. Amazon is also rumored to be planning to use generative AI to bring conversational language to a home robot.

    While Limp didn’t comment on the report, he said the end goal has long been for Alexa to communicate with users in a fluid, natural way, whether it’s through an Echo device or other products such as its robotic dog, Astro.

    The concept remains a “hard technical challenge,” he said, but one that is “more tractable” with generative AI. “There’s still some hard corner cases and things to work out,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Instagram lifts ban on anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. after launch of presidential bid | CNN Business

    Instagram lifts ban on anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. after launch of presidential bid | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Instagram announced Sunday it had lifted its ban on Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the anti-vaccine activist who has launched a presidential bid, two years after it shut down Kennedy’s account for breaking its rules related to Covid-19.

    “As he is now an active candidate for president of the United States, we have restored access to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s, Instagram account,” Andy Stone, a spokesperson for Instagram’s parent company Meta said in a statement.

    Kennedy, who has a long history of spreading vaccine misinformation, was banned from Instagram in February 2021.

    A company spokesperson at the time said Instagram had removed his account for “repeatedly sharing debunked claims about the coronavirus or vaccines.”

    While Kennedy’s Instagram account was banned, his Facebook account remained active. Both platforms are owned by Meta.

    Kennedy was a leading anti-vaccination voice during the Covid-19 pandemic, using his social media platforms to sow doubt and misinformation about the shots.

    He has promoted false claims about vaccine links to autism and in 2022 compared vaccine mandates to Nazi Germany.

    His wife, actress Cheryl Hines, publicly condemned Kennedy’s remark as “reprehensible” after he invoked Anne Frank, who was murdered by Nazis as a teenager.

    Hines distanced herself from him in January 2022, tweeting: “His opinions are not a reflection of my own.”

    Kennedy’s return to Instagram, first reported by The Washington Post, will give him access to his more than 769,000 followers.

    The decision comes as traditional media and social media companies attempt to navigate a 2024 election campaign fraught with accusations of misinformation and censorship.

    On Friday, YouTube announced it would no longer remove content featuring false claims that the 2020 US presidential election was stolen, reversing a policy instituted more than two years ago amid a wave of misinformation about the election.

    The decision to reinstate Kennedy comes amid a flurry of activity between the candidate and Silicon Valley.

    On Sunday, Twitter

    (TWTR)     founder Jack Dorsey appeared to endorse Kennedy for president, tweeting a YouTube video titled, “Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. argues he can beat Trump and DeSantis in 2024.” Dorsey added in the tweet, “He can and will.”

    On Monday, Kennedy is due to take part in a live audio chat on Twitter with the company’s owner Elon Musk.

    Meta’s decision to allow Kennedy back on Instagram came a few days after the Democratic presidential candidate publicly complained that the platform was blocking his campaign from creating a new account.

    Stone, the Meta spokesperson, told CNN on Sunday that the restriction was a mistake and that the company had resolved the issue.

    Meta executives have long maintained they believe political candidates should be able to use its platforms to reach voters, even if those candidates sometimes break rules that would get other users banned from its platforms.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘We no longer know what reality is.’ How tech companies are working to help detect AI-generated images | CNN Business

    ‘We no longer know what reality is.’ How tech companies are working to help detect AI-generated images | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    For a brief moment last month, an image purporting to show an explosion near the Pentagon spread on social media, causing panic and a market sell-off. The image, which bore all the hallmarks of being generated by AI, was later debunked by authorities.

    But according to Jeffrey McGregor, the CEO of Truepic, it is “truly the tip of the iceberg of what’s to come.” As he put it, “We’re going to see a lot more AI generated content start to surface on social media, and we’re just not prepared for it.”

    McGregor’s company is working to address this problem. Truepic offers technology that claims to authenticate media at the point of creation through its Truepic Lens. The application captures data including date, time, location and the device used to make the image, and applies a digital signature to verify if the image is organic, or if it has been manipulated or generated by AI.

    Truepic, which is backed by Microsoft, was founded in 2015, years before the launch of AI-powered image generation tools like Dall-E and Midjourney. Now McGregor says the company is seeing interest from “anyone that is making a decision based off of a photo,” from NGOs to media companies to insurance firms looking to confirm a claim is legitimate.

    “When anything can be faked, everything can be fake,” McGregor said. “Knowing that generative AI has reached this tipping point in quality and accessibility, we no longer know what reality is when we’re online.”

    Tech companies like Truepic have been working to combat online misinformation for years, but the rise of a new crop of AI tools that can quickly generate compelling images and written work in response to user prompts has added new urgency to these efforts. In recent months, an AI-generated image of Pope Francis in a puffer jacket went viral and AI-generated images of former President Donald Trump getting arrested were widely shared, shortly before he was indicted.

    Some lawmakers are now calling for tech companies to address the problem. Vera Jourova, vice president of the European Commission, on Monday called for signatories of the EU Code of Practice on Disinformation – a list that includes Google, Meta, Microsoft and TikTok – to “put in place technology to recognize such content and clearly label this to users.”

    A growing number of startups and Big Tech companies, including some that are deploying generative AI technology in their products, are trying to implement standards and solutions to help people determine whether an image or video is made with AI. Some of these companies bear names like Reality Defender, which speak to the potential stakes of the effort: protecting our very sense of what’s real and what’s not.

    But as AI technology develops faster than humans can keep up, it’s unclear whether these technical solutions will be able to fully address the problem. Even OpenAI, the company behind Dall-E and ChatGPT, admitted earlier this year that its own effort to help detect AI-generated writing, rather than images, is “imperfect,” and warned it should be “taken with a grain of salt.”

    “This is about mitigation, not elimination,” Hany Farid, a digital forensic expert and professor at the University of California, Berkeley, told CNN. “I don’t think it’s a lost cause, but I do think that there’s a lot that has to get done.”

    “The hope,” Farid said, is to get to a point where “some teenager in his parents basement can’t create an image and swing an election or move the market half a trillion dollars.”

    Companies are broadly taking two approaches to address the issue.

    One tactic relies on developing programs to identify images as AI-generated after they have been produced and shared online; the other focuses on marking an image as real or AI-generated at its conception with a kind of digital signature.

    Reality Defender and Hive Moderation are working on the former. With their platforms, users can upload existing images to be scanned and then receive an instant breakdown with a percentage indicating the likelihood for whether it’s real or AI-generated based on a large amount of data.

    Reality Defender, which launched before “generative AI” became a buzzword and was part of competitive Silicon Valley tech accelerator Y Combinator, says it uses “proprietary deepfake and generative content fingerprinting technology” to spot AI-generated video, audio and images.

    In an example provided by the company, Reality Defender highlights an image of a Tom Cruise deepfake as 53% “suspicious,” telling the user it has found evidence showing the face was warped, “a common artifact of image manipulation.”

    Defending reality could prove to be a lucrative business if the issue becomes a frequent concern for businesses and individuals. These services offer limited free demos as well as paid tiers. Hive Moderation said it charges $1.50 for every 1,000 images as well as “annual contract deals” that offer a discount. Realty Defender said its pricing may vary based on various factors, including whether the client needs “any bespoke factors requiring our team’s expertise and assistance.”

    “The risk is doubling every month,” Ben Colman, CEO of Reality Defender, told CNN. “Anybody can do this. You don’t need a PhD in computer science. You don’t need to spin up servers on Amazon. You don’t need to know how to write ransomware. Anybody can do this just by Googling ‘fake face generator.’”

    Kevin Guo, CEO of Hive Moderation, described it as “an arms race.”

    “We have to keep looking at all the new ways that people are creating this content, we have to understand it and add it to our dataset to then classify the future,” Guo told CNN. “Today it’s a small percent of content for sure that’s AI-generated, but I think that’s going to change over the next few years.”

    In a different, preventative approach, some larger tech companies are working to integrate a kind of watermark to images to certify media as real or AI-generated when they’re first created. The effort has so far largely been driven by the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity, or C2PA.

    The C2PA was founded in 2021 to create a technical standard that certifies the source and history of digital media. It combines efforts by the Adobe-led Content Authenticity Initiative (CAI) and Project Origin, a Microsoft- and BBC-spearheaded initiative that focuses on combating disinformation in digital news. Other companies involved in C2PA include Truepic, Intel and Sony.

    Based on the C2PA’s guidelines, the CAI makes open source tools for companies to create content credentials, or the metadata that contains information about the image. This “allows creators to transparently share the details of how they created an image,” according to the CAI website. “This way, an end user can access context around who, what, and how the picture was changed — then judge for themselves how authentic that image is.”

    “Adobe doesn’t have a revenue center around this. We’re doing it because we think this has to exist,” Andy Parsons, Senior Director at CAI, told CNN. “We think it’s a very important foundational countermeasure against mis- and disinformation.”

    Many companies are already integrating the C2PA standard and CAI tools into their applications. Adobe’s Firefly, an AI image generation tool recently added to Photoshop, follows the standard through the Content Credentials feature. Microsoft also announced that AI art created by Bing Image Creator and Microsoft Designer will carry a cryptographic signature in the coming months.

    Other tech companies like Google appear to be pursuing a playbook that pulls a bit from both approaches.

    In May, Google announced a tool called About this image, offering users the ability to see when images found on its site were originally indexed by Google, where images might have first appeared and where else they can be found online. The tech company also announced that every AI-generated image created by Google will carry a markup in the original file to “give context” if the image is found on another website or platform.

    While tech companies are trying to tackle concerns about Ai-generated images and the integrity of digital media, experts in the field stress that these businesses will ultimately need to work with each other and the government to address the problem.

    “We’re going to need cooperation from the Twitters of the world and the Facebooks of the world so they start taking this stuff more seriously, and stop promoting the fake stuff and start promoting the real stuff,” said Farid. “There’s a regulatory part that we haven’t talked about. There’s an education part that we haven’t talked about.”

    Parsons agreed. “This is not a single company or a single government or a single individual in academia who can make this possible,” he said. “We need everybody to participate.”

    For now, however, tech companies continue to move forward with pushing more AI tools into the world.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter accused of failing to pay millions in employee bonuses after Musk takeover | CNN Business

    Twitter accused of failing to pay millions in employee bonuses after Musk takeover | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Twitter failed to pay out annual bonuses to staff after its acquisition by billionaire Elon Musk despite repeated assurances from executives in the lead-up to the deal closing that the company would do so, according to a new lawsuit filed on behalf of employees.

    The lawsuit was filed in a San Francisco federal court on Tuesday by Mark Schobinger, who was a senior director of compensation at Twitter until he left the company late last month. The suit is seeking class action status for former and current Twitter employees who did not receive their 2022 bonus.

    “We estimate about a couple thousand employees would have been eligible for the bonuses,” Shannon Liss-Riordan, the attorney representing Schobinger, said in a statement to CNN. “While I don’t have an exact number, we expect the amount owed is in the tens of millions.”

    Twitter, which has cut much of is public relations team, did not respond to CNN’s request for comment.

    The complaint states that after it was announced that Musk was acquiring the social media company last April, “many employees raised concerns” over the fate of “their compensation and annual bonus” if and when the deal closed.

    In the months leading up to Musk completing his acquisition of Twitter, company executives repeatedly promised employees that 2022 bonuses would be paid out at 50% of the target, according to the complaint. “The promise was repeated following Musk’s acquisition,” the complaint said.

    Despite the promises, however, Twitter has yet to pay out bonuses, the lawsuit says. Schobinger left the company last month following “Twitter’s reneging on various promises it had made to employees, including its failure to pay promised bonuses,” according to the complaint.

    The lawsuit is the latest in a string of legal actions taken by former Twitter employees after Musk’s acquired the company and slashed 80% of the staff in an urgent bid to cut costs.

    Liss-Riordan previously brought multiple proposed class action suits against Twitter, including on behalf of female employees and disabled employees. Another suit was filed by a group of former employees who accused Twitter of breach of contract because it allegedly failed to follow through on promises to allow remote work and provide consistent severance benefits after the acquisition.

    Twitter has denied the breach of contract allegations in the lawsuit brought by former employees about remote work and severance. The proposed class action suits on behalf of female and disabled employees were dismissed by federal judges last month. The suits were later refiled.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Nvidia says US curbs on AI chip sales to China would cause ‘permanent loss of opportunities’ | CNN Business

    Nvidia says US curbs on AI chip sales to China would cause ‘permanent loss of opportunities’ | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    Nvidia warned Wednesday that if the United States imposes new restrictions on the export of AI chips to China, it would result in a “permanent loss of opportunities” for US industry.

    The company’s chief financial officer, Colette Kress, said she didn’t anticipate any “immediate material impact” but tighter curbs would impact earnings in the future.

    US officials plan to tighten export curbs announced in October to restrict the sale of some artificial-intelligence chips to China, according to multiple media reports, including the Wall Street Journal and Financial Times. Washington has ramped up efforts to cut China off from key technologies that can support its military.

    The US Department of Commerce has not replied to a CNN request for comment.

    The rules, as reported, could make it harder for companies like Nvidia

    (NVDA)     to sell advanced chips to China. Fueled by a boom in demand for its AI chips, the company briefly hit a market capitalization of $1 trillion in late May.

    “We are aware of reports that the US Department of Commerce is considering further controls that may restrict exports of our A800 and H800 products to China,” Kress told an investment conference.

    “Over the long-term, restrictions prohibiting the sale of our datacenter GPUs to China, if implemented, would result in a permanent loss of opportunities for US industry to compete and lead in one of the world’s largest markets and impact on our future business and financial results,” she said.

    GPUs refer to graphics processing units, which are chips or electronic circuits capable of rendering graphics for display on electronic devices.

    “Given the strength of demand for our products worldwide, we do not anticipate that such additional restrictions, if adopted, would have an immediate material impact on our financial results. We do not anticipate any immediate material impact on our financial results,” Kress added.

    Last October, the Biden administration unveiled a sweeping set of export controls that ban Chinese companies from buying advanced chips and chip-making equipment without a license.

    The new move is aimed in part at Nvidia’s A800 chip, which the US-based company created following the introduction of last year’s curbs in order to continue to sell to China, Bloomberg reported.

    China is a key market for Nvidia. Revenues from mainland China and Hong Kong accounted for 22% of the company’s revenue last year, according to its financial statements.

    On Wednesday, shares of Nvidia slumped as much as 3.2%, before recouping some of the losses. It ended down 1.8%. Chinese AI stocks suffered much heavier losses.

    Inspur Electronic Information Industry fell by 10%, the maximum allowed, on Wednesday in Shenzhen. It dropped again by 5.3% on Thursday. Chengdu Information Technology of Chinese Academy of Sciences slid 12% on Wednesday. Baidu

    (BIDU)    , which is developing a rival to ChatGPT, sank 4.4% on Thursday in Hong Kong.

    “The US could ruin China’s AI party,” Jefferies analyst said in a research note. Local chipsets do not have Nvidia’s GPU ecosystem, thus every update may require reworking, resulting in lower efficiency and higher costs.

    The Biden administration’s chip curbs would be “much more effective” in limiting China’s advances in military power driven by AI than rules restricting US investment in China’s tech sector, the analysts added.

    China has strongly criticized US restrictions on tech exports, saying earlier this year that it “firmly opposes” such measures.

    In May, Beijing banned Chinese operators of critical information infrastructure from buying products from Micron Technology

    (MU)    , in apparent retaliation against sanctions imposed by Washington and its allies on the country’s chip sector.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk is the gift that keeps on giving to Mark Zuckerberg | CNN Business

    Elon Musk is the gift that keeps on giving to Mark Zuckerberg | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    At the start of last year, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg was in the hot seat.

    Revelations from hundreds of internal company documents, known as the Facebook Papers, had drawn sharp criticism from lawmakers, users and civil society groups in late 2021 and forced company executives to appear before Congress. Zuckerberg’s plan to rebrand Facebook as Meta and pivot to the so-called metaverse was met with broad skepticism. And the company’s core ad business was under significant pressure from privacy changes made by Apple.

    But then, the attention of lawmakers, media and the tech world writ large abruptly shifted to another tech billionaire: Elon Musk.

    Musk early last year criticized Twitter, then nearly joined its board, then agreed to buy the company before launching a monthslong and ultimately unsuccessful fight to get out of the deal. The saga, which only continued after Musk completed the deal and pushed through numerous controversial changes, often dominated news cycles. In the process, it seemed to make Twitter’s rivals look better managed and draw away critical attention that might otherwise have been focused on other tech giants, including Meta, as they went through painful layoffs and suffered declines on Wall Street.

    This week, however, Zuckerberg notched his biggest win from Musk yet. After years of trying and failing to capture Twitter’s audience with copycat features, Zuckerberg is now capitalizing on Twitter’s struggles with a new app called Threads. Meta’s Twitter clone launched this week to unprecedented success, despite Meta’s history of privacy violations and enabling election meddling, not to mention longstanding concerns that the company and Zuckerberg wield too much power over the social media market.

    The app’s overnight success was a direct result of the chaos under Musk’s leadership of Twitter since last October. During that time, he has managed to anger many of the platform’s users and advertisers with his erratic statements, mass layoffs and significant changes to Twitter’s policies. While Twitter users have lamented what Musk’s ownership has meant for the platform, it may be the best thing that could have happened for Zuckerberg.

    “Musk has done one thing after another to piss off his own user base,” said Herbert Hovenkamp, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School.

    Some early Threads users even commented on the strange nature of the situation — that they would be eager to join a social network run by one billionaire whose company has faced intense public criticism simply because they were so eager to get away from another.

    “It boggles the mind,” one user posted to Threads. “I boycotted Facebook years ago and when I heard about this I joined immediately.”

    “Never used [Facebook] nor [Instagram],” another user said, adding that they had to join Instagram for the first time to gain access to Threads. “Last thing I would have EVER expected was to use any platform of Zuckerberg’s.”

    And yet, by Friday, Zuckerberg said Threads had reached 70 million user signups — amassing a user base nearly a third of the size of Twitter’s in fewer than two days for a platform that could eventually help knock out one of Facebook’s chief rivals and give a boost to Meta’s struggling ad business.

    If Musk is a boon to Zuckerberg’s fortunes, he’s an unlikely one. Zuckerberg and Musk have often been at odds over the years.

    In 2018, in the wake of Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal, Musk said he had deleted the Facebook pages for his companies Tesla and SpaceX because the platform “gives me the willies.” And later that year, he also deleted his Instagram account.

    More recently, Musk has claimed that Instagram “makes people depressed” and appeared to imply that Meta was complicit in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.

    Zuckerberg has also thrown jabs at Musk, including after a SpaceX explosion accidentally blew up a satellite that was being used by Facebook, and in a critique of his stance on artificial intelligence during a 2017 Facebook Live broadcast.

    But earlier this year, Zuckerberg also complimented Musk’s leadership of Twitter. In a podcast interview last month, Zuckerberg said that “Elon led a push early on to make Twitter a lot leaner … I think that those were generally good changes.”

    In some ways, Musk’s moves at Twitter may have given Zuckerberg and Meta — as well as other tech companies — cover to take similar actions without as much criticism. Meta announced it would eliminate more than 20,000 employees over two rounds of layoffs, marking the largest cuts in its history. But Meta came off looking responsible compared to Twitter’s mass layoffs by handling the cuts professionally and providing more robust severance.

    After Musk restored the account of former President Donald Trump following a two-year suspension that began after the January 6 attack, Twitter faced criticism from civil society civic? groups who called on advertisers to boycott the platform. But Meta, along with YouTube, followed suit several months later (although those platforms cited their own risk analyses, rather than Musk’s leadership, in explaining their decisions).

    The distraction and chaos of Musk’s Twitter takeover could hardly have come at a better time for Zuckerberg and Meta.

    The social media giant’s business had a brutal year — posting its first-ever quarterly revenue decline as a public company during the June quarter, and then again in each of the two remaining quarters of the year, as it struggled with a weak online advertising market while pouring billions into its plan for the metaverse. The company lost more than $600 billion in market value during 2022.

    Now, the launch of Threads marks a huge new opportunity for Meta and Zuckerberg. Threads could be a way of getting social media users to spend even more time on Meta’s apps, especially as Facebook increasingly struggles with the perception of being a has-been platform that’s less attractive to younger users.

    Zuckerberg said on Wednesday that he hopes to eventually have more than one billion users on Threads, far more than the 238 million active users on Twitter prior to Musk’s takeover.

    Although there are no ads on the platform yet, Threads could also ultimately supplement Meta’s core advertising business. Instagram head Adam Mosseri, who oversaw the Threads launch, told The Verge in an interview about the new platform this week that, “if we make something that lots of people love and keep using, we will, I’m sure, monetize it” through advertising.

    For Musk, losing Twitter users, or having its future growth hamstrung, thanks to Threads, could mean further harm to the $44 billion investment he made to buy the social media platform — and, perhaps more importantly, to his reputation as a genius with a knack for turning around troubled companies.

    Musk appears to be trying to push back against Zuckerberg’s turn of fortune. On Wednesday, a lawyer for Musk sent a letter to Meta threatening to sue the company over the rival app, accusing it of trade secret theft through the hiring of former Twitter employees. (Meta denied the charge.)

    The Twitter-Threads battle has raised the stakes for another fight: a cage fight that Musk and Zuckerberg have spent the past several weeks planning. Zuckerberg, a regular practitioner of Brazilian jiu jitsu, appears to have the upper hand.

    But whether or not the fight ends up going forward, Zuckerberg seems to have already won.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Call of Duty to remain on Playstation following Activision Blizzard Microsoft merger | CNN Business

    Call of Duty to remain on Playstation following Activision Blizzard Microsoft merger | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Microsoft

    (MSFT)     has signed an agreement with Sony

    (SNE)     to ensure “Call of Duty” remains available on PlayStation after Microsoft

    (MSFT)     closes its $69 billion Activision Blizzard

    (ATVI)     merger, the tech giant said Sunday.

    The agreement could resolve long-standing complaints by Sony that the merger — which aims to make Microsoft the third-largest video game publisher in the world — threatens competition. Sony didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

    “We are pleased to announce that Microsoft and @PlayStation have signed a binding agreement to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation following the acquisition of Activision Blizzard,” said Phil Spencer, Microsoft’s Xbox head, in a tweet. “We look forward to a future where players globally have more choice to play their favorite games.”

    Sony had been among the loudest critics of the acquisition. Addressing the company’s concerns about the continued availability of “Call of Duty,” one of the industry’s most popular franchises, could help Microsoft overcome any remaining opposition to the deal and usher it to a conclusion.

    In response to competition concerns from regulators around the world, Microsoft had already signed multiyear licensing agreements with rival companies including Nintendo and Nvidia, among others, to ensure Microsoft would not be able to restrict Activision titles from users of those businesses’ platforms and consoles.

    On Sunday, Microsoft did not disclose the duration of the agreement with Sony.

    “From Day One of this acquisition, we’ve been committed to addressing the concerns of regulators, platform and game developers, and consumers,” said Microsoft President Brad Smith in a tweet. “Even after we cross the finish line for this deal’s approval, we will remain focused on ensuring that Call of Duty remains available on more platforms and for more consumers than ever before.”

    During a five-day hearing last month in federal court, Microsoft executives including CEO Satya Nadella testified properties such as “Call of Duty” would not be restricted from competitors following the deal’s close.

    Last week, US District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley wrote in her opinion the US government had “not shown it is likely to succeed on its assertion the combined firm will probably pull Call of Duty from Sony PlayStation, or that its ownership of Activision content will substantially lessen competition in the video game library subscription and cloud gaming markets.”

    Microsoft faces a contractual deadline of July 18 to close the merger with Activision, though the companies could mutually seek to extend that time frame.

    Last week, Microsoft won two successive court victories when a federal district court and a US appeals court declined to temporarily block the merger from being consummated. The Federal Trade Commission had argued a preliminary injunction was necessary to prevent video game consumers from being immediately harmed by the deal, which regulators said would enable Microsoft to withhold “Call of Duty” and other popular titles from competing consoles and cloud gaming services.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘It almost doubled our workload’: AI is supposed to make jobs easier. These workers disagree | CNN Business

    ‘It almost doubled our workload’: AI is supposed to make jobs easier. These workers disagree | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A new crop of artificial intelligence tools carries the promise of streamlining tasks, improving efficiency and boosting productivity in the workplace. But that hasn’t been Neil Clarke’s experience so far.

    Clarke, an editor and publisher, said he recently had to temporarily shutter the online submission form for his science fiction and fantasy magazine, Clarkesworld, after his team was inundated with a deluge of “consistently bad” AI-generated submissions.

    “They’re some of the worst stories we’ve seen, actually,” Clarke said of the hundreds of pieces of AI-produced content he and his team of humans now must manually parse through. “But it’s more of the problem of volume, not quality. The quantity is burying us.”

    “It almost doubled our workload,” he added, describing the latest AI tools as “a thorn in our side for the last few months.” Clarke said that he anticipates his team is going to have to close submissions again. “It’s going to reach a point where we can’t handle it.”

    Since ChatGPT launched late last year, many of the tech world’s most prominent figures have waxed poetic about how AI has the potential to boost productivity, help us all work less and create new and better jobs in the future. “In the next few years, the main impact of AI on work will be to help people do their jobs more efficiently,” Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates said in a blog post recently.

    But as is often the case with tech, the long-term impact isn’t always clear or the same across industries and markets. Moreover, the road to a techno-utopia is often bumpy and plagued with unintended consequences, whether it’s lawyers fined for submitting fake court citations from ChatGPT or a small publication buried under an avalanche of computer-generated submissions.

    Big Tech companies are now rushing to jump on the AI bandwagon, pledging significant investments into new AI-powered tools that promise to streamline work. These tools can help people quickly draft emails, make presentations and summarize large datasets or texts.

    In a recent study, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that access to ChatGPT increased productivity for workers who were assigned tasks like writing cover letters, “delicate” emails and cost-benefit analyses. “I think what our study shows is that this kind of technology has important applications in white collar work. It’s a useful technology. But it’s still too early to tell if it will be good or bad, or how exactly it’s going to cause society to adjust,” Shakked Noy, a PhD student in MIT’s Department of Economics, who co-authored the paper, said in a statement.

    Mathias Cormann, the secretary-general of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development recently said the intergovernmental organization has found that AI can improve some aspects of job quality, but there are tradeoffs.

    “Workers do report, though, that the intensity of their work has increased after the adoption of AI in their workplaces,” Cormann said in public remarks, pointing to the findings of a report released by the organization. The report also found that for non-AI specialists and non-managers, the use of AI had only a “minimal impact on wages so far” – meaning that for the average employee, the work is scaling up, but the pay isn’t.

    Ivana Saula, the research director for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, said that workers in her union have said they feel like “guinea pigs” as employers rush to roll out AI-powered tools on the job.

    And it hasn’t always gone smoothly, Saula said. The implementation of these new tech tools has often led to more “residual tasks that a human still needs to do.” This can include picking up additional logistics tasks that a machine simply can’t do, Saula said, adding more time and pressure to a daily work flow.

    The union represents a broad range of workers, including in air transportation, health care, public service, manufacturing and the nuclear industry, Saula said.

    “It’s never just clean cut, where the machine can entirely replace the human,” Saula told CNN. “It can replace certain aspects of what a worker does, but there’s some tasks that are outstanding that get placed on whoever remains.”

    Workers are also “saying that my workload is heavier” after the implementation of new AI tools, Saula said, and “the intensity at which I work is much faster because now it’s being set by the machine.” She added that the feedback they are getting from workers shows how important it is to “actually involve workers in the process of implementation.”

    “Because there’s knowledge on the ground, on the frontlines, that employers need to be aware of,” she said. “And oftentimes, I think there’s disconnects between frontline workers and what happens on shop floors, and upper management, and not to mention CEOs.”

    Perhaps nowhere are the pros and cons of AI for businesses as apparent as in the media industry. These tools offer the promise of accelerating if not automating copywriting, advertising and certain editorial work, but there have already been some notable blunders.

    News outlet CNET had to issue “substantial” corrections earlier this year after experimenting with using an AI tool to write stories. And what was supposed to be a simple AI-written story on Star Wars published by Gizmodo earlier this month similarly required a correction and resulted in employee turmoil. But both outlets have signaled they will still move forward with using the technology to assist in newsrooms.

    Others like Clarke, the publisher, have tried to combat the fallout from the rise of AI by relying on more AI. Clarke said he and his team turned to AI-powered detectors of AI-generated work to deal with the deluge of submissions but found these tools weren’t helpful because of how unreliably they flag “false positives and false negatives,” especially for writers whose second language is English.

    “You listen to these AI experts, they go on about how these things are going to do amazing breakthroughs in different fields,” Clarke said. “But those aren’t the fields they’re currently working in.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link