ReportWire

Tag: Mark Zuckerberg

  • Jon Stewart Slams Elon Musk’s Reckless “Dark MAGA” Appearance at Trump Rally

    Jon Stewart Slams Elon Musk’s Reckless “Dark MAGA” Appearance at Trump Rally

    [ad_1]

    When Elon Musk sauntered onstage at Donald Trump’s most recent Pennsylvania rally, wearing an Occupy Mars T-shirt and an all-black Make America Great Again hat, he declared himself not only a Trump supporter, but a heavy for “dark MAGA.”

    “Ooh, dark MAGA,” Jon Stewart quipped on Monday’s episode of The Daily Show. “I didn’t know it came in flavors! I wonder if for the holidays they’ll come out with peppermint bark MAGA. Or pumpkin spice MAGA.” After taking some swipes at Musk’s overly enthusiastic presence at the rally—“He’s acting like a guy who won a radio contest”—the late-night host grew serious about the tech billionaire’s assertion that Democrats are the anti-free speech party.

    “Now, you might think one of the world’s richest men controlling one of the world’s most influential platforms could be a recipe for what some may consider election interference,” Stewart began. “You stupid, stupid people. You disgust me. Election interference is what Mark Zuckerberg did.” Stewart then reminded viewers that Trump accused the Facebook founder of election interference back in 2016 and 2020, although the ex-president seemingly has no issue this election cycle with Musk offering his followers money to register swing voters.

    Stewart also noted that Trump’s campaign has called the new movie The Apprentice, a fictionalized depiction of Trump’s early rise to power, “election interference by Hollywood elites,” and that Trump has threatened legal action over its release. Said Stewart, “Oh, come on! That’s election interference? Maybe it’s election interference, but you gotta be a little bit flattered that you’re being played by Sebastian Stan.”

    The segment then cut to a clip of Musk claiming that Democrats are coming after free speech. “Elon, were you not watching the rest of the show?” Stewart asked. “A movie Trump doesn’t like is going to get sued. A tech mogul he doesn’t like, he wants to put in prison. It’s not free speech if only Trump’s admirers get to do it without consequence.”

    Stewart’s commentary turned even more contentious after he played a clip of Musk at the rally. “At least the Constitution remains intact and is there to ensure that we have the First Amendment,” Musk said. “The Second Amendment is there to ensure that we have the First Amendment.”

    “Guns don’t protect our free speech!” Stewart replied. “Our free speech is protected by the consent of the governed, laid out through the Constitution. It’s not based on the threat of violence. It’s based on elections, organizing referendums, a judicial system. Our social contract offers many, many avenues to remedy these issues, and allows sides to be heard and adjudicated. Guns, from what I can tell, seem to mostly protect the speech of the people holding the gun.”

    Stewart didn’t stop there. Musk’s words, he said, are “a tool of intimidation, and one that I think is actually being irresponsibly and recklessly invoked. Because some people in your crowd thought they might have been shadow-banned by Facebook. I mean, for God’s sake: you guys are in Butler, Pennsylvania. The whole reason you’re there is because some fucking asshole with an AR-15 tried to permanently litigate his vision of this country’s free speech. That’s why you’re there. The whole point of a society is, guns don’t decide it. I would prefer at this moment not to trade in a government that offers me many remedies for my concerns, legitimate or illegitimate, for a situation where my rights are determined by how many militia members agree with me.”

    [ad_2]

    Savannah Walsh

    Source link

  • Mark Zuckerberg Is Now Second Richest Person in the World | Entrepreneur

    Mark Zuckerberg Is Now Second Richest Person in the World | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is now worth around $206 billion, which puts him in the No. 2 spot on Bloomberg’s Billionaires Index.

    Zuckerberg, who founded Facebook in 2004, has a 13% stake in Meta, which owns Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, and the newer X competitor, Threads. The company has invested heavily in artificial intelligence in recent years.

    Related: Mark Zuckerberg Is $70 Billion Richer This Year

    Zuckerberg saw his net worth increase by $78 billion in 2024. Per Barrons, Meta shares have been up around 65% this year (through Thursday’s close).

    “Across Facebook and Instagram, advances in AI continue to improve the quality of recommendations and drive engagement,” Zuckerberg said in August. In July, Zuckerberg published a letter on Facebook pushing for open-source AI.

    Zuckerberg jumped slightly ahead of the current No. 3, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos ($205 billion).

    Meanwhile, Zuckerberg is about $50 billion behind the world’s richest person, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, whose net worth is currently $256 billion, per Bloomberg.

    Related: Here’s How Mark Zuckerberg Works to Keep Facebook Relevant

    [ad_2]

    Erin Davis

    Source link

  • Ta-Nehisi Coates & Sarah Silverman Win Bid For Meta “Chief Decision Maker” Mark Zuckerberg To Be Deposed In AI Suit

    Ta-Nehisi Coates & Sarah Silverman Win Bid For Meta “Chief Decision Maker” Mark Zuckerberg To Be Deposed In AI Suit

    [ad_1]

    Mark Zuckerberg really doesn’t want to have answer some hard questions about Meta‘s Artificial Intelligence push and goals However, a federal judge this week has told the Facebook founder that is exactly what he has to do.

    “Plaintiffs have made an evidentiary showing that Zuckerberg is the chief decision maker and policy setter for Meta’s Generative AI branch and the development of the large language models at issue in this action,” U.S. District Judge Thomas Hixson noted on September 24 in the potential class action initially filed by authors Sarah Silverman, Richard Kadrey, and Christopher Goldenm last year, and now including Ta-Nehisi Coates and others.

    Along with a more Imperiled suit against OpenAI, the writers have took Meta to court in mid-2023 over copyright infringement concerns that their work and books have been illegally downloaded and used to train the company’s large language model AI software.

    Bedwetter scribe Silverman and National Book Award winner Coates, along with other plaintiffs allege that “much of the material in Meta’s training dataset, however, comes from copyrighted works —including books written by Plaintiffs—that were copied by Meta without consent, without
    credit, and without compensation.”

    With some legal wiggle room here and there, Meta denies they accessed the author’s work for their LLaMA system. Meta’s army of attorneys have also been trying to push the line that there are loads of other people at the tech giant better qualified than Zuckerberg to be questioned by David Boises and other lawyers for the plaintiffs.

    It didn’t fly.

    “Plaintiffs do not generically argue, as Meta suggests, that because Zuckerberg is the CEO of the company that he is therefore in charge of everything,” the judge noted in his order denying Meta’s motion to keep the CEO from having to face Silverman and others lawyers’ inquiries. “Rather, they have submitted evidence of his specific involvement in the company’s AI initiatives. They have submitted evidence indicating Zuckerberg was the principal decision maker concerning Meta’s decision to open source the language model. They have also submitted evidence of Zuckerberg’s direct supervision of Meta’s AI products.”

    Judge Hixon also stated: “Given this factual showing, the Court is not going to require Plaintiffs to exhaust other forms of discovery before they depose Zuckerberg. They’ve made a solid case that this deposition is worth taking.”

    Never a big fan of being put in front of a microphone, Zuckerberg’s depo has yet to have a time and date scheduled. With that, a hearing on discovery in the case just wrapped up earlier this afternoon in San  San Francisco that could see the deposition occurring sooner rather than later.

    By then, everything AI could be different, again.

    Coming up on two years since ChatGPT brought AI to the masses, so to speak, the technology is quickly moving more and more to the fore on almost all aspects of society and industry.

    The results are mixed, depending on your perspective.

    On the one hand, for instance, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation earlier this month to partially protect the likeness of actors and performers, living and deal. At almost the same time, Lionsgate and applied AI research company Runway unveiled a partnership on September 18 to develop AI customized to the studio’s proprietary portfolio of film and television content like John Wick.

    With a bit of a nose thumbing to the court and nudge towards the seemingly inevitable future, Zuckerberg was on stage today in Menlo Park, California at the company’s Meta Connects conference to speak on all things AI. A part of the roll-out and announcements was the news that Meta’s  AI chatbot will now communicate in the voices of Awkwafina, Dame Judi Dench, Kristin Bell, John Cena, or Keegan-Michael Key.

    Sadly, Zuckerberg will have to give his deposition in his own voice.

    [ad_2]

    Dominic Patten

    Source link

  • Meta unveils Orion AR glasses prototype, new AI capabilities

    Meta unveils Orion AR glasses prototype, new AI capabilities

    [ad_1]

    STORY: :: Meta

    MARK ZUCKERBERG: “This is Orion…”

    Meta Platforms Chief executive Mark Zuckerberg unveiled ‘Orion,’ the company’s first working prototype of augmented-reality glasses during its annual Connect conference on Wednesday.

    “It is a completely new kind of display architecture with these tiny projectors and the arms, the glasses that shoot light into waveguides, that have nanoscale 3D structures etched into the lenses so they can defract light and put holograms at different depths and sizes into the world in front of you.”

    Users will be able to interact with the glasses through hand-tracking, voice and wrist-based neural interface.

    Zuckerberg said Meta plans to make Orion smaller, sleeker and more low-cost before releasing it to consumers.

    Zuckerberg positioned AR technology as a sort of magnum opus when he first pivoted toward building immersive “metaverse” systems in 2021.

    Delivering products, however, has been hampered by high development costs and technological hurdles.

    The company’s metaverse unit Reality Labs lost $8.3 billion in the first half of this year, according to the most recent disclosures. It lost $16 billion last year.

    Meta also announced a slew of new AI chatbot capabilities.

    Meta AI will now respond to voice commands and users will have the option to make the assistant sound like celebrities like Judi Dench, John Cena and Awkwafina.

    ZUCKERBERG: “Are live demos risky?”

    META AI USING VOICE OF AWKWAFINA: “Live demos can be risky. Yes.”

    ZUCKERBERG: “Thanks Awkwafina.”

    Later this year, the company plans to add video-generation capabilities and the ability to perform some real-time language translations.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta Missed Out on Smartphones. Can Smart Glasses Make Up for It?

    Meta Missed Out on Smartphones. Can Smart Glasses Make Up for It?

    [ad_1]

    Meta has dominated online social connections for the past 20 years, but it missed out on making the smartphones that primarily delivered those connections. Now, in a multiyear, multibillion-dollar effort to position itself at the forefront of connected hardware, Meta is going all in on computers for your face.

    At its annual Connect developer event today in Menlo Park, California, Meta showed off its new, more affordable Oculus Quest 3S virtual reality headset and its improved, AI-powered Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses. But the headliner was Orion, a prototype pair of holographic display glasses that chief executive Mark Zuckerberg said have been in the works for 10 years.

    Zuckerberg emphasized that the Orion glasses—which are available only to developers for now—aren’t your typical smart display. And he made the case that these kinds of glasses will be so interactive that they’ll usurp the smartphone for many needs.

    “Building this display is different from every other screen you’ve ever used,” Zuckerberg said on stage at Meta Connect. Meta chief technology officer Andrew Bosworth had previously described this tech as “the most advanced thing that we’ve ever produced as a species.”

    The Orion glasses, like a lot of heads-up displays, look like the fever dream of techno-utopians who have been toiling away in a highly secretive place called “Reality Lab” for the past several years. One WIRED reporter on the ground noted that the thick black glasses looked “chunky” on Zuckerberg.

    As part of the on-stage demo, Zuckerberg showed how Orion glasses can be used to project multiple virtual displays in front of someone, respond quickly to messages, video chat with someone, and play games. In the messages example, Zuckerberg noted that users won’t even have to take out their phones. They’ll navigate these interfaces by talking, tapping their fingers together, or by simply looking at virtual objects.

    There will also be a “neural interface” built in that can interpret brain signals, using a wrist-worn device that Meta first teased three years ago. Zuckerberg didn’t elaborate on how any of this will actually work or when a consumer version might materialize. (He also didn’t get into the various privacy complications of connecting this rig and its visual AI to one of the world’s biggest repositories of personal data.)

    He did say that the imagery that appears through the Orion glasses isn’t pass-through technology—where external cameras show wearers the real world—nor is it a display or screen that shows the virtual world. It’s a “new kind of display architecture,” he said, that uses projectors in the arms of the glasses to shoot waveguides into the lenses, which then reflect light into the wearer’s eyes and create volumetric imagery in front of you. Meta has designed this technology itself, he said.

    The idea is that the images don’t appear as flat, 2D graphics in front of your eyes but that the virtual images now have shape and depth. “The big innovation with Orion is the field of view,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, who was in attendance at Meta Connect. “The field of view is 72 degrees, which makes it much more engaging and useful for most applications, whether gaming, social media, or just content consumption. Most headsets are in the 30- to 50-degree range.”

    [ad_2]

    Lauren Goode

    Source link

  • Meta debuts AI chatbot voiced by celebrities Judi Dench, Awkwafina and others

    Meta debuts AI chatbot voiced by celebrities Judi Dench, Awkwafina and others

    [ad_1]

    Meta’s artificial intelligence-powered chatbot spoke to CEO Mark Zuckerberg in a voice familiar to fans of American actress, comedian and rapper Awkwafina in a demo of the enhanced AI tool on Wednesday. 

    That’s because Meta AI, the company’s virtual assistant, now reads aloud its responses to user queries, and can do so in the voice of a number of celebrities, the technology company announced at its Connect conference. The chatbot, which Meta says has roughly 400 million users, lets you choose the voice you hear.

    Now those voices include Awkwafina, Kristin Bell, John Cena, Dame Judi Dench and Keegan-Michael Key, the company said. More generic voice options will also be available.

    “I think that voice is going to be a way more natural way of interacting with AI than text. It is just a lot better,” Zuckerberg said in announcing the feature. Meta is adding celebrity voices to “make this fun,” he added.

    In a demo of the tool at the conference, Zuckerberg said to the AI, “Hey, are live demos risky?” In the voice of Awkwafina, the AI responded, “Live demos can be risky, yes. They can be unpredictable, prone to technical issues and potentially embarrassing….”


    AI gadgets to make life easier | Tech Tuesday

    04:14

    The use of AI chatbots sounding like celebs drew attention earlier this year when ChatGPT developer OpenAI found itself in hot water over its use of a voice Scarlett Johansson said sounded eerily similar to her own. In May, the actress released a statement saying that OpenAI founder Sam Altman had asked her to voice ChatGPT’s text-to-speech product, but that she declined, according to a New York Times report

    Nine months later, when ChatGPT introduced its voice product, Johansson said she was “shocked, angered and in disbelief that Mr. Altman would pursue a voice that sounded so eerily similar to mine that my closest friends and news outlets could not tell the difference,” according to the report.  

    The actors whom Meta has partnered with could have been paid millions in exchange for use of their voices, according to a New York Times report on the negotiations. Meta did not immediately respond to CBS MoneyWatch’s request for comment on the terms of the deals.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mark Zuckerberg Vows to Be Neutral–While Tossing Gifts to Trump and the GOP

    Mark Zuckerberg Vows to Be Neutral–While Tossing Gifts to Trump and the GOP

    [ad_1]

    This week Mark Zuckerberg sent a letter to Jim Jordan, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee. For months, the GOP-led committee has been on a crusade to prove that Meta, via its once-eponymous Facebook app, engaged in political sabotage by taking down right-wing content. Its investigation has involved thousands of documents, and the committee interviewed multiple employees, which failed to locate a smoking gun. Now, under the guise of offering his take on the subject, Zuckerberg’s letter is a mea culpa where he seems to indicate that there was something to the GOP conspiracy theory.

    Specifically, he said that in 2021 the Biden administration asked Meta “to censor some Covid-related content.” Meta did take the posts down, and Zuckerberg now regrets the decision. He also conceded that it was wrong to take down some content regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop, which the company did after the FBI warned that the reports might be Russian disinformation.

    What stood out to me, besides the letter’s simpering tone, was how Zuckerberg used the word “censor.” For years the right has been using that word to describe what it regards as Facebook’s systematic suppression of conservative posts. Some state attorneys general have even used that trope to argue that the company’s content should be regulated, and Florida and Texas have passed laws to do just that. Facebook has always contended that the First Amendment is about government suppression, and by definition its content decisions could not be characterized as such. Indeed, the Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuits and blocked the laws.

    Now, by using that term to describe the removal of the Covid material, Zuckerberg seems to be backing down. After years of insisting that, right or wrong, a social media company’s content decisions did not deprive people of First Amendment rights—and in fact said that by making such decisions, the company was invoking its free speech rights—Zuckerberg is now handing its conservative critics just what they wanted.

    I asked Meta spokesperson Andy Stone if the company now agrees with the GOP that some of its decisions to take down content can be referred to as “censoring.” Stone said that Zuckerberg was referring to the government when he used that term. But he also pointed me to Zuckerberg’s affirmation that the ultimate decision to remove the posts was Meta’s own. (Responding to the Zuckerberg letter, the White House said, “When confronted with a deadly pandemic, this Administration encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety,” and left the final decision to Facebook.)

    Meta can’t have it both ways, The letter is clear—Zuckerberg said the government pressured Meta to “censor” some Covid content. Meta took that material down. Ergo, Meta now characterizes some of its own actions as censorship. Seizing on this, the GOP members of the Judiciary Committee quickly tweeted that Zuckerberg has now outright admitted “Facebook censored Americans.”

    Stone did say that Meta still does not consider itself a censor. So is Meta disputing that GOP tweet? Stone wouldn’t comment on it. It seems that Meta will offer no pushback while GOP legislators and right-wing commentators crow that Facebook now concedes that it blatantly censored conservatives as a matter of policy.

    Meta’s CEO presented Jordan and the GOP with another gift in his letter, involving his private philanthropy. During the 2020 election, Zuckerberg helped fund nonpartisan initiatives to protect people’s right to vote. Republicans criticized Zuckerberg’s effort as aiding the Democrats. Zuckerberg still insists he wasn’t advocating that people vote a certain way, just ensuring they were free to cast ballots. But, he wrote Jordan, he recognized that some people didn’t believe him. So, apparently to indulge those ill-informed or ill-intentioned critics, he now vows not to fund bipartisan voting efforts during this election cycle. “My goal is to be neutral and not play a role one way or another—or even appear to play a role,” he wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Steven Levy

    Source link

  • Mark Zuckerberg Explains Meta’s AI Vision, New AI Studio | Entrepreneur

    Mark Zuckerberg Explains Meta’s AI Vision, New AI Studio | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Mark Zuckerberg’s vision for AI isn’t a single chatbot like OpenAI’s ChatGPT or Anthropic’s Claude; he instead envisions as many chatbots as there are Meta users, each infused with unique personalities and likenesses.

    At the 2024 SIGGRAPH conference on Monday, Zuckerberg told Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang about Meta’s new AI studio, released the same day to U.S. users. The AI studio allows anyone to create an AI chatbot modeled after themselves or a fictional character — with no code required.

    “We want to empower all the people who use our products to basically create agents for themselves,” Zuckerberg explained.

    The chatbots work across Instagram, Messenger, Whatsapp, and the web, and Meta has a handbook that guides interested AI creators through the process of making one.

    Huang said he was “super excited” about creator AI and called it a “home run idea.”

    He stated that the power to create AI now extends to the hundreds of millions of small businesses that use Meta’s products.

    “We eventually want to be able to pull in all of your content and very quickly stand up a business agent and be able to interact with your customers and do sales and customer support,” Zuckerberg said.

    Related: Mark Zuckerberg Says This CEO Is the ‘Taylor Swift’ of Tech

    He positioned the AI studio as the first step towards custom AI chatbots that could help small businesses and creators interact more personally with their communities. The AI personalities would be trained on the material needed to properly represent the business.

    Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Jason Henry/Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Meta’s AI studio had bots like GreenThumbGuru, which focused on gardening tips, and The Sassy Psychic Priscilla, which advertised “real talk, no fluff,” at the time of writing.

    Zuckerberg said that one of the top use cases so far for Meta AI has been emotional support. People are using AI to think through difficult social situations, like asking their manager for a promotion.

    This is where the flexibility to create different AI personalities comes in handy compared to a unified AI model, according to Zuckerberg.

    “It’s all part of this bigger view we have that there shouldn’t just be one big AI,” Zuckerberg said. “We just think that the world will be better and more interesting if there’s a diversity of these different things.”

    Related: Mark Zuckerberg Says Apple’s ‘Constrained’ Platform Is the ‘Major Reason’ He’s Pushing for Open Source AI

    Zoom CEO Eric Yuan had a similar outlook on the future of AI.

    In a June interview, Yuan told The Verge that his vision was to have an AI version of himself attend meetings, act as a personal assistant, and send him summaries of meetings. Custom AI bots have the potential to cut the five-day workweek down to four or three days, he said.

    [ad_2]

    Sherin Shibu

    Source link

  • Mark Zuckerberg says ‘f*ck that’ to closed platforms

    Mark Zuckerberg says ‘f*ck that’ to closed platforms

    [ad_1]

    In his two decades running the company now known as Meta, Mark Zuckerberg has gone through many transformations. More recently, he’s been showing off less filtered version of himself. But during a live streamed conversation with NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang, the Meta CEO seemed to veer a little more off script than he intended.

    The conversation began normally enough, with the two billionaire executives congratulating each other on their AI dominance. Zuckerberg made sure to talk up the company’s recent announcement before settling into his usual talking points, which recently have included .

    Zuckerberg then launched into a lengthy rant about his frustrations with “closed” ecosystems like Apple’s App Store. None of that is particularly new, as the Meta founder has been with Apple for years. But then Zuckerberg, who is usually quite controlled in his public appearances, revealed just how frustrated he is, telling Huang that his reaction to being told “no” is “fuck that.”

    “I mean, this is sort of selfish, but, you know, after building this company for awhile, one of my things for the next 10 or 15 years is like, I just want to make sure that we can build the fundamental technology that we’re going to be building social experiences on, because there just have been too many things that I’ve tried to build and then have just been told ‘nah you can’t really build that by the platform provider,’ that at some level I’m just like, ‘nah, fuck that,’” Zuckerberg said.

    “There goes our broadcast opportunity,” Huang said. “Sorry,” Zuckerberg said. “Get me talking about closed platforms, and I get angry.”

    [ad_2]

    Karissa Bell

    Source link

  • Mark Zuckerberg is quietly sitting on a shopping empire with 4 times the customers of Amazon, as Facebook Marketplace skyrockets

    Mark Zuckerberg is quietly sitting on a shopping empire with 4 times the customers of Amazon, as Facebook Marketplace skyrockets

    [ad_1]

    Ethan Gaskill, a 29-year-old content creator, begins everyday the same way: “When I wake up in the morning—most people get on their phone and start checking Instagram—I check Facebook Marketplace.”

    With his Los Angeles home furnished almost exclusively with second-hand items and a TikTok with over 220,000 followers interested in his thrifty hauls, Gaskill trusts the shopping platform to be a reliable source for hidden gems: a thousand-dollar Herman Miller light and pendant he nabbed for $400; a $5,000 bed from the same designer he bought for 20% of the original price; and, a Founders mid-century dresser worth $4,000 that Gaskill got for $800.

    “It gives an opportunity for people to possibly bring in really rare items or just one-of-a-kind items into their home that otherwise they wouldn’t have had if they couldn’t make it out to a flea market or estate sale,” Gaskill told Fortune.

    Facebook Marketplace has not only become a trusted source for LA’s second-hand scene. It’s made itself a real contender to go toe-to-toe with well-established e-commerce sites. Facebook has grown to 3.07 billion monthly active users (MAUs) as of the end of 2023, a 3% year-over-year increase. Of those, up to 40%, or 1.2 billion, are active users shopping on Marketplace, according to a March report from Capital One Shopping.

    Meta’s online second-hand market is already challenging the sector’s goliaths. Marketplace eclipsed Craigslist’s MAUs years ago, with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg saying in 2018 that there were 800 million Marketplace MAUs, compared to the 55 million visitors on Craigslist in 2017. In contrast, Amazon had 310 million monthly users in 2023, per Tech Report, about one-fourth of Marketplace’s MAUs. Marketplace is the second most popular site for second-hand purchases behind Ebay, according to a 2022 Statista report.

    “This is a growth area,” Charles Lindsey, associate professor of marketing at University at Buffalo School of Management, told Fortune. “It wouldn’t surprise me if in three years, five years, it actually overtakes Ebay.”

    Amazon and Ebay did not respond to Fortune’s request for comment.

    From online garage sale to e-commerce giant

    Marketplace’s astronomical growth is in large part because the platform is simply easy to use and already linked to a site where so many people are pre-existing members, Lindsey argued. 

    “There’s a trust factor because it’s associated with Facebook,” he said. “It has an easy-to-use interface. It’s integrated with Facebook Messenger, so it’s easy to kind of go back and forth.”

    Launched in 2016, Marketplace was originally a way to facilitate sales among neighbors, with most users offering up a used item for sale at a reasonable price, and buyers picking up the item and coordinating with the seller over Facebook Messenger about collection and payment. But Marketplace grew into a formidable e-commerce platform, with one-in-three U.S. Facebook users on the platform by 2018. Through the pandemic, Marketplace exploded thanks to increased reliance on e-commerce and supply chain and shipping delays that inconvenienced traditional shopping.

    “We’re seeing everyone from artisans hand making goods, to wood workers to car sellers thrive,” Deb Liu, founder and then-Marketplace vice president, told Modern Retail in 2021. 

    By then, Marketplace had become a boon not only for thrifty shoppers, but small businesses looking for unique sales avenues. Springfield, Missouri-based Beautiful Fight Woodworking generated $168,000 of its $266,000 revenue in 2020 exclusively through Marketplace sales. 

    To be sure, the platform isn’t without significant problems, particularly as scammers and bot accounts have proliferated the site, giving well-intentioned buyers a tough time. One South Carolina user claimed in February he was scammed out of $18,000 after putting his 2016 Audi up for sale on Marketplace. A 2022 thinkmonkey survey of 1,000 Brits found that one in six had been scammed on the platform.

    “What happens offline often makes its way into online environments, and that unfortunately includes scams,” Ryan Daniels, a Meta spokesperson, told Wired. Meta said it works “aggressively to quickly identify, disable, and ban scams and accounts associated with them.” 

    Gen Z’s new favorite social media

    Through its ascension, Marketplace has won over a generation of young people who had largely turned away from Facebook.

    “I look at it like it’s like a social media app,” Dre Vez, a 25-year-old content creator, told Fortune.

    Vez spends about six to 12 hours a day on Marketplace, where he makes a living “trolling” sellers by asking them over voice memos to test the product, before uploading the interactions to TikTok for his 755,000 followers.

    He finds Marketplace not just fodder for entertaining videos but also as a real social media tool for Gen Z and millennials because it’s fast-paced and highly stimulating.

    “It’s the ability to have several interactions in a short duration of time, where I could go on Facebook marketplace, and I could search up for a bike, and I could reach out to seven to 10 different people and have all these conversations going on at the same time,” he said.

    Even on days when he can’t find a good deal, Vez finds some laughs on the site. Sellers have gotten away with listing used toe nail clippers, toilet brushes, plungers—even a Dorito in the shape of a face going for $10,000, he recalled.

    Meta has taken notice of its enthusiastic young users. While Facebook’s popularity among teens has dwindled in the wake of TikTok’s rise, Facebook now has over 40 million daily young adult users aged 18 to 29 in the U.S. and Canada, a three-year high, with one in four using Marketplace, Meta told Fortune.

    To second-hand connoisseur Gaskill, who checks Marketplace five to 10 times a day, the platform is compelling to young people because it appeals to their desire for independence, to save money, and protect the environment against the strains of mass production and freight. 

    “Just given the circumstances with the economy, but also just the mindset of like Gen Z, they love uniqueness, and they love self expression,” he said. “But they also really like finding things for a good price.”

    Finding room to grow

    But just because Meta boasts a growing fandom for its Marketplace platform doesn’t mean its a lucrative arm of the company. Meta did not respond to Fortune’s request for comment on how it makes money through Marketplace, but marketing professor Lindsey suggests the company benefits from seller transaction fees, as well as more eyes on the website’s advertisements.

    “Just overall, the more likely someone uses Facebook Marketplace, probably the more likely they also log into Facebook so many times per month,” he said. “Then Facebook capitalizes on that by being able to have companies pay for advertising that then hits my feed, hits your feed.”

    The EU’s European Commission alleged in December 2022 that Facebook and Marketplace tie together and use data in a way that infringe on the EU’s competition rules, according to a December 2023 SEC filing.

    Marketplace is, in part, an important facet of Facebook’s financial puzzle because its locally based exchanges are low-expense, according to Sucharita Kodali, retail industry analyst for market research firm Forrester—especially, compared to Ebay, which requires a massive international infrastructure.

    “It’s an enormous transaction volume,” she told Fortune. “With that transaction volume comes a kind of a necessary investment in a lot of automation, customer service, seller management, seller tools, etc.”

    While Facebook Marketplace doesn’t need an elaborate system to manage local transactions, it also means it’s likely not making as much money as its e-commerce competition. In fact, Kodali went so far as to call Marketplace an “anti-commerce” platform because it has so many “buy nothing” groups and peer-to-peer exchanges. She took a similar stance as Lindsey, arguing the financial merit of the platform is to help better target ads for active users.

    “It’s not really about, like, ‘Let’s make money off of the volume of posts that we see on the marketplace section,’” she said.

    Marketplace’s virtual garage sale vibes and community feel of the platform may not be raking in billions of dollars for Meta, but they’re exactly what keeps users coming back to the site.

    “You never know when that next amazing thing is gonna pop up,” Gaskill said. “That’s the fun of it. That’s kind of what keeps it addicting.”

    [ad_2]

    Sasha Rogelberg

    Source link

  • Mark Zuckerberg’s net worth plummets by more than $18 billion in Meta stock drop

    Mark Zuckerberg’s net worth plummets by more than $18 billion in Meta stock drop

    [ad_1]

    Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg speaks about the Facebook News feature at the Paley Center For Media in New York on Oct. 25, 2019.

    Drew Angerer | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    Mark Zuckerberg‘s net worth plunged by $18 billion Thursday after comments from the Meta CEO on the company’s earnings call sent its stock price to its steepest decline since October 2022.

    Meta beat expectations on revenue and profit but delivered a lighter-than-expected revenue forecast. Zuckerberg told investors that the company would continue to spend billions of dollars investing in areas such as artificial intelligence and the metaverse, even though Meta counts on advertising for 98% of its revenue.

    “We’ve historically seen a lot of volatility in our stock during this phase of our product playbook where we’re investing in scaling a new product but aren’t yet monetizing it,” Zuckerberg said on the call.

    Zuckerberg owns around 345 million Class A and B shares. With the stock falling by $52.12 on Thursday, the value of his stake sank by about $18 billion to $152 billion by the close of trading.

    The 39-year-old programmer founded the company in his Harvard dorm room in 2004, and rebranded it from Facebook to Meta in 2021, signaling to investors his plan to focus on the nonexistent metaverse.

    Meta’s Reality Labs division, which houses the hardware and software for developing the metaverse, has posted cumulative losses of $45 billion since 2020, when the company first separated the unit in its financials.

    Meta said it plans to spend $35 billion to $40 billion on capital expenditures this year, an increase from its prior forecast.

    Zuckerberg’s fortune has swung up and down through the years, as his company’s stock has been particularly volatile. His net worth fell by around $100 billion in 2022. In early 2023, he announced Meta would embark on a “year of efficiency,” a move that helped the stock price triple for the year, bringing Zuckerberg’s net worth up with it.

    Thursday wasn’t the worst day ever for Zuckerberg’s bank account. In early 2022, he lost almost $30 billion in a single day, when his company’s stock price tumbled 26% on weak earnings and disappointing guidance.

    WATCH: Meta’s AI venture is a good long-term investment

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta loses $200 billion in value as Zuckerberg focuses earnings call on all the ways company bleeds cash

    Meta loses $200 billion in value as Zuckerberg focuses earnings call on all the ways company bleeds cash

    [ad_1]

    Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on January 31, 2024 in Washington, DC.

    Alex Wong | Getty Images

    Mark Zuckerberg started Meta‘s earnings call by talking about artificial intelligence. Then he moved onto the metaverse, touting his company’s headsets, glasses and operating system. He spent almost the entirety of his opening remarks focused on the many ways Meta loses money.

    Investors weren’t into it. Meta shares tumbled as much as 19% in extended trading on Wednesday, wiping out more than $200 billion in market cap. The drop came despite Meta reporting better-than-expected profit and revenue for the first quarter.

    Zuckerberg appeared ready for the sell-off.

    “I think it’s worth calling that out, that we’ve historically seen a lot of volatility in our stock during this phase of our product playbook where we’re investing in scaling a new product but aren’t yet monetizing it,” Zuckerberg said. He cited past efforts like short-video service Reels, Stories and the transition to mobile.

    Meta generates 98% of its revenue from digital advertising. But to the extent Zuckerberg talked about ads, he was looking to the future and the ways the company could potentially turn its current investments into ad dollars. In discussing Meta’s effort to build a “leading AI,” Zuckerberg said, “There are several ways to build a massive business here including scaling business messaging, introducing ads or paid content into AI interactions.”

    He spent more time talking about Meta Llama 3, the company’s newest large language model, and the recent rollout of Meta AI, the company’s answer to OpenAI’s ChatGPT. 

    Zuckerberg then moved onto potential opportunities for expansion within the mixed-reality headset market, like a headset for work or fitness. Meta opened up access to the operating system that powers its Quest headsets on Monday, which Zuckerberg said will help the mixed-reality ecosystem grow faster.

    He also talked up Meta’s AR glasses, which he called “the ideal device for an AI assistant because you can let them see what you see and hear what you hear.”

    The Ray-Ban Meta Headliner smart glasses. 

    Jake Piazza | CNBC

    In the meantime, Meta’s Reality Labs unit, which houses the company’s hardware and software for development of the nascent metaverse, continues to bleed cash. Reality Labs reported sales of $440 million for the first quarter and $3.85 billion in losses. The division’s cumulative losses since the end of 2020 topped $45 billion.

    Zuckerberg has bought himself some time.

    Meta’s stock price almost tripled last year and, as of Wednesday’s close, was up 40% in 2024. It reached a record $527.34 in early April.

    After a brutal 2022, during which the company lost about two-thirds of its value, Zuckerberg appears to have regained the confidence of Wall Street.

    The driver for the rally has been a cost-cutting plan that Zuckerberg put in place early last year, when he told investors that 2023 would be the “year of efficiency.” The company slashed headcount and eliminated unnecessary projects in an effort to become a “stronger and more nimble organization.”

    Zuckerberg said Wednesday that the company will continue to operate efficiently, but that shifting existing resources to investments in AI will “grow our investment envelope meaningfully.”

    Capital expenditures for 2024 are anticipated to be in the $35 billion to $40 billion range, an increase from a prior forecast of $30 billion to $37 billion “as we continue to accelerate our infrastructure investments to support our artificial intelligence (AI) roadmap,” Meta said.

    Zuckerberg said he expects to see a “multiyear investment cycle” before Meta’s AI products will scale into profitable services, but noted that the company has a “strong track record” in that department.

    Meta CFO Susan Li echoed Zuckerberg’s remarks and said the company needs to develop advanced models and scale products before they will drive meaningful revenue.

    “While there is tremendous long-term potential, we’re just much earlier on the return curve,” Li said.

    Even before the call began, investors were trimming their holdings. That’s because Meta issued a light revenue forecast for the second quarter, overshadowing the first-quarter beat.

    As the stock plunge intensified, Zuckerberg told investors that if they’re willing to come along for the ride, they may well be rewarded.

    “Historically, investing to build these new scaled experiences in our apps has been a very good long-term investment for us and for investors who stuck with us and the initial signs are quite positive here too,” Zuckerberg said. “But building a leading AI will also be a larger undertaking than the other experiences we’ve added to our apps and this is likely going to take several years.”

    WATCH: AI not yet the ‘lift’ for Meta that Wall Street was expecting

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Threads has 150 million monthly users

    Threads has 150 million monthly users

    [ad_1]

    Meta’s Threads app now has more than 150 million monthly users, an increase of about 20 million new users since February. Mark Zuckerberg shared the latest user numbers during Meta’’s first-quarter earnings call, saying that the app “continues to be on the trajectory that I hope to see.”

    The update suggests Threads is continuing to grow steadily, though at a slower rate than its initial explosive growth. The app racked up more than 100 million downloads in its first week, but later saw in engagement. But over the last six months, Threads has seen more consistent growth and Zuckerberg has speculated the service could eventually be Meta’s next app.

    Notably, Threads seems to be out-performing X (formerly known as Twitter) by some metrics. Estimates from analytics firm Apptopia indicated Threads has more daily users in the United States than X, Business Insider earlier this week. (X has claimed daily users globally.) Threads also scored another significant win recently when joined the platform to promote her latest album.

    Threads is, for now, unique among Meta’s apps in that it doesn’t have advertising so the company doesn’t make money from the app directly. That will likely change at some point provided Threads continues to expand its reach. Zuckerberg has previously said the company would “focus on monetization” only after the app has grown sufficiently.

    [ad_2]

    Karissa Bell

    Source link

  • TikTok Divest-or-Ban Bill Passes in the Senate

    TikTok Divest-or-Ban Bill Passes in the Senate

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. Senate passed the TikTok bill on Tuesday evening in a vote of 79-18. The bill, which bans TikTok unless Bytedance sells it to a U.S. owner, flew through Congress this week as part of a broader package to provide $90 billion in foreign aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. President Joe Biden said in a statement following the Senate vote that he would sign the package as soon as Wednesday, clearing the last hurdle before the TikTok divest-or-ban bill becomes law.

    “We’ve learned in recent years that democracy is a fragile and precious thing,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer on the Senate floor Tuesday. “It will not survive the threats of this century – the new threats – if we aren’t willing to do what it takes to defend it.”

    TikTok is prepared to wage a legal battle against the U.S. government over the so-called ban, Bloomberg reported on Sunday. The social media company claims the so-called TikTok ban is “a clear violation” of the First Amendment rights of TikTok’s 170 million American users. A court case of this kind is unprecedented and could go up to the Supreme Court.

    TikTok did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment.

    The “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act,” also known as the TikTok bill, grants the White House new privileges to crack down on apps it determines to be a national security threat. The bill gives U.S. presidents the power to label apps as “foreign adversary-controlled applications” and force them to be sold to a U.S. owner within 270 days, though Biden can extend this to 360 days (a previous version only provided 180 days). If no sale occurs, the apps will be banned from app stores and blocked by internet service providers in the United States.

    TikTok has long denied that it shares any data with the Chinese government. However, Senators received classified briefings on TikTok from national security officials in March, which reportedly revealed the app’s “shocking” spy capabilities. Senators told Axios that TikTok could be used to tap the microphone on users’ devices, and even determine what users are doing on other apps. That said, none of this evidence has been made public

    A previous version of this bill swiftly passed through the House in March but stalled in the Senate for more than a month. By tying the TikTok bill to a crucial foreign aid package, lawmakers were able to nearly ensure it would be taken up by the Senate.

    One concern tech lawyers have raised about the TikTok bill is that it could ban apps other than TikTok. The bill features vague definitions of what constitutes “foreign adversary-controlled applications,” and gives the president a near unchecked power to make such a categorization.

    As President Biden seems poised to sign the TikTok bill into law, former President Donald Trump has flipped his stance on the social media app. Trump now supports TikTok’s existence, posting on Truth Social Monday that “Joe Biden is responsible for banning TikTok.” Trump was the first to attempt a TikTok ban in 2020 when he signed an executive order that was later rejected by a federal court.

    Trump’s reversal, which seems contradictory, is likely to curry favor with younger voters. Despite the overwhelming support in Congress, a U.S. TikTok ban is not popular with voters. Just 38% of U.S. adults say they would support a TikTok ban, according to the Pew Research Center. If Biden signs the TikTok bill, he’ll appear strong against China, but could potentially lose important swing voters.

    TikTok says this bill would “trample” free speech in America, an increasingly popular claim among social media apps. Elon Musk’s X and Trump’s Truth Social make similar First Amendment arguments for their app’s controversial content. Meanwhile, Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta is going in the other direction. Facebook, Threads, and Instagram how vowed not to prioritize news on their social media sites, making duller apps in exchange for less controversy.

    TikTok has fought tooth and nail to avoid a U.S. ban under Bytedance’s ownership. The app sent push notifications to millions of American users asking them to call their local congress member. Lawmakers’ offices were flooded with phone calls later that day. TikTok and Bytedance also reportedly spent over $7 million lobbying in Congress this year to fight the potential ban. Those attempts were unsuccessful, so now TikTok is poised to take this battle to court.

    [ad_2]

    Maxwell Zeff

    Source link

  • 5 things to know before the stock market opens Friday

    5 things to know before the stock market opens Friday

    [ad_1]

    Here are the most important news items that investors need to start their trading day:

    1. On edge

    2. New Netflix focus

    In an aerial view, the Netflix logo is displayed above its corporate offices on January 24, 2024 in Los Angeles, California.

    Mario Tama | Getty Images

    Netflix is making a big change to its earnings routine. The company announced Thursday that it would no longer provide quarterly membership numbers or average revenue per user starting next year, saying it’s focused on revenue and operating margin. That came the same day it reported that memberships rose 16% in the first quarter, to 269.6 million, well above the 264.2 million Wall Street had expected. Netflix also beat earnings and revenue estimates for the quarter. Shares of the company fell about 6% in premarket trading Friday.

    3. Big price tags

    This aerial picture shows homes near the Chesapeake Bay in Centreville, Maryland, on March 4, 2024. 

    Jim Watson | AFP | Getty Images

    Mortgage rates are at their highest level of the year, with the 30-year fixed mortgage rate now sitting around 7.5% according to Mortgage News Daily. Though mortgage applications to purchase a home rose 5% last week compared with the previous week, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s seasonally adjusted index, affordability is weakening. Meanwhile, despite a surge in supply, March home sales dropped, largely due to rising mortgage rates. The spring housing market is moving faster and becoming more competitive, with an average home sitting on the market for just 33 days, compared with 38 days in February.

    4. Ticking clock

    A view shows the office of TikTok after the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would give TikTok’s Chinese owner ByteDance about six months to divest the U.S. assets of the short-video app or face a ban, in Culver City, California, March 13, 2024. 

    Mike Blake | Reuters

    TikTok more than doubled its spending on advertisements to over $4.5 million to combat a potential U.S. ban. The increase comes as Congress considers legislation that could push parent company ByteDance to divest from the social media app. TikTok has spent over $2.5 million on television ads alone since March, according to data from AdImpact. With the bill appearing to have key support in the Senate, TikTok’s boosted ad spending could be a last-ditch effort to shut down the discourse, as U.S. lawmakers say they’re concerned about whether ByteDance could protect U.S. users’ personal data from the Chinese government.

    5. A new assistant

    A smart phone is displaying Facebook with the Meta icon visible in the background in this photo illustration. Facebook, which was founded 20 years ago, is seen here in Brussels, Belgium, on February 4, 2024.

    Jonathan Raa | Nurphoto | Getty Images

    Meta started rolling out its free artificial intelligence assistant, Meta AI, across WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook and Messenger on Thursday, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a video. The social media company also announced the launch of its newest large language model, called Meta Llama 3, which was used to build the AI assistant. Meta AI can answer questions, create animations and generate images, and it’s partnered with Google and Microsoft to provide answers from both companies’ search engines. “We believe that Meta AI is now the most intelligent AI assistant that you can freely use,” Zuckerberg said in the video.

    And one more thing…

    Taylor Swift attends the 66th GRAMMY Awards at Crypto.com Arena on February 04, 2024 in Los Angeles, California. 

    Neilson Barnard | Getty Images

    Taylor Swift released her 11th studio album, “The Tortured Poets Department,” Friday at midnight ET. She then surprised fans at 2 a.m. ET with news of 15 extra songs. The album features collaborations with Post Malone and Florence + the Machine.

    — CNBC’s Yun Li, Natasha Turak, Sarah Whitten, Diana Olick, Brian Schwartz, Ashley Capoot and NBC News contributed to this report.

    Follow broader market action like a pro on CNBC Pro.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta’s newest AI-powered chatbots show off impressive features and bizarre behavior

    Meta’s newest AI-powered chatbots show off impressive features and bizarre behavior

    [ad_1]

    Facebook parent Meta Platforms unveiled a new set of artificial intelligence systems Thursday that are powering what CEO Mark Zuckerberg calls “the most intelligent AI assistant that you can freely use.”

    But as Zuckerberg’s crew of amped-up Meta AI agents started venturing into social media this week to engage with real people, their bizarre exchanges exposed the ongoing limitations of even the best generative AI technology.

    One joined a Facebook moms’ group to talk about its gifted child. Another tried to give away nonexistent items to confused members of a Buy Nothing forum.

    Meta, along with leading AI developers Google and OpenAI, and startups such as Anthropic, Cohere and France’s Mistral, have been churning out new AI language models and hoping to persuade customers they’ve got the smartest, handiest or most efficient chatbots.

    What is Meta AI?

    Meta AI is a free virtual assistant which can be used “to do everything from research, planning a trip with your group chat, writing a photo caption and more,” according to the company’s blog. 

    To access the chatbot on WhatsApp, Instagram, Messenger, Facebook, type “@meta ai” within chats. The Meta AI assistant can also be accessed by tapping on a colorful blue circle icon which lets you know that Meta AI is there. 

    In addition to answering questions, Meta AI can create AI-generated images. Using the prompt “imagine,” users can ask Meta to produce any image that comes to mind. 

    untitled.png
    In addition to answering questions, Meta AI can create AI-generated images. Using the prompt “imagine,” users can ask Meta to produce any image that comes to mind. 

    Meta


    Asked to “Imagine a cute kitten,” the Meta AI assistant on Instagram produced the following image: 

    meta-ai-kitten.jpg
     “Imagine a cute kitten”

    CBS News


    AI language models are trained on vast pools of data that help them predict the most plausible next word in a sentence, with newer versions typically smarter and more capable than their predecessors. Meta’s newest models were built with 8 billion and 70 billion parameters — a measurement of how much data on which the system is trained. A bigger, roughly 400 billion-parameter model is still in training.

    While Meta is saving the most powerful of its AI models, called Llama 3, for later, on Thursday it publicly released two smaller versions of the same Llama 3 system and said it’s now baked into the Meta AI assistant feature in Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.

    “The vast majority of consumers don’t candidly know or care too much about the underlying base model, but the way they will experience it is just as a much more useful, fun and versatile AI assistant,” said Nick Clegg, Meta’s president of global affairs, in an interview.

    He added that Meta’s AI agent is loosening up. Some people found the earlier Llama 2 model — released less than a year ago — to be “a little stiff and sanctimonious sometimes in not responding to what were often perfectly innocuous or innocent prompts and questions,” he said.

    Posing as humans

    But in letting down their guard, Meta’s AI agents also were spotted this week posing as humans with made-up life experiences. An official Meta AI chatbot inserted itself into a conversation in a private Facebook group for Manhattan moms, claiming that it, too, had a child in the New York City school district. Confronted by group members, it later apologized before the comments disappeared, according to a series of screenshots shown to The Associated Press.

    “Apologies for the mistake! I’m just a large language model, I don’t have experiences or children,” the chatbot told the group.

    One group member who also happens to study AI said it was clear that the agent didn’t know how to differentiate a helpful response from one that would be seen as insensitive, disrespectful or meaningless when generated by AI rather than a human.

    “An AI assistant that is not reliably helpful and can be actively harmful puts a lot of the burden on the individuals using it,” said Aleksandra Korolova, an assistant professor of computer science at Princeton University.

    Clegg said Wednesday he wasn’t aware of the exchange. Facebook’s online help page says the Meta AI agent will join a group conversation if invited, or if someone “asks a question in a post and no one responds within an hour.” The group’s administrators have the ability to turn it off.

    In another example shown to the AP on Thursday, the agent caused confusion in a forum for swapping unwanted items near Boston. Exactly one hour after a Facebook user posted about looking for certain items, an AI agent offered a “gently used” Canon camera and an “almost-new portable air conditioning unit that I never ended up using.”

    Constantly working on improvements

    Meta said in a written statement Thursday that “this is new technology and it may not always return the response we intend, which is the same for all generative AI systems.” The company said it is constantly working to improve the features.

    In the year after ChatGPT sparked a frenzy for AI technology that generates human-like writing, images, code and sound, the tech industry and academia introduced some 149 large AI systems trained on massive datasets, more than double the year before, according to a Stanford University survey.

    They may eventually hit a limit — at least when it comes to data, said Nestor Maslej, a research manager for Stanford’s Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence.

    “I think it’s been clear that if you scale the models on more data, they can become increasingly better,” he said. “But at the same time, these systems are already trained on percentages of all the data that has ever existed on the internet.”

    More data — acquired and ingested at costs only tech giants can afford, and increasingly subject to copyright disputes and lawsuits — will continue to drive improvements. “Yet they still cannot plan well,” Maslej said. “They still hallucinate. They’re still making mistakes in reasoning.”

    Getting to AI systems that can perform higher-level cognitive tasks and commonsense reasoning — where humans still excel over computers — might require a shift beyond building ever-bigger models.

    For the flood of businesses trying to adopt generative AI, which model they choose depends on several factors, including cost. Language models, in particular, have been used to power customer service chatbots, write reports and financial insights and summarize long documents.

    “You’re seeing companies kind of looking at fit, testing each of the different models for what they’re trying to do and finding some that are better at some areas rather than others,” said Todd Lohr, a leader in technology consulting at KPMG.

    Socializing AI chatbots

    Unlike other model developers selling their AI services to other businesses, Meta is largely designing its AI products for consumers — those using its advertising-fueled social networks. Joelle Pineau, Meta’s vice president of AI research, said at a London event last week the company’s goal over time is to make a Llama-powered Meta AI “the most useful assistant in the world.”

    “In many ways, the models that we have today are going to be child’s play compared to the models coming in five years,” she said.

    But she said the “question on the table” is whether researchers have been able to fine tune its bigger Llama 3 model so that it’s safe to use and doesn’t, for example, hallucinate or engage in hate speech. In contrast to leading proprietary systems from Google and OpenAI, Meta has so far advocated for a more open approach, publicly releasing key components of its AI systems for others to use.

    “It’s not just a technical question,” Pineau said. “It is a social question. What is the behavior that we want out of these models? How do we shape that? And if we keep on growing our model ever more in general and powerful without properly socializing them, we are going to have a big problem on our hands.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mark Zuckerberg overtakes Elon Musk as the world’s 3rd-richest person as their companies’ stocks go in opposite directions

    Mark Zuckerberg overtakes Elon Musk as the world’s 3rd-richest person as their companies’ stocks go in opposite directions

    [ad_1]

    &quotThe internet is fickle,” Nierman told BI.JOSH EDELSON/Getty Images; Nathan Howard/Getty Images

    • Mark Zuckerberg has overtaken Elon Musk as the world’s third-richest person, with a $175 billion fortune.

    • Zuckerberg has gained $47 billion in wealth this year while Musk has lost $55 billion, according to data from Bloomberg.

    • The shift in wealth has been driven by Meta Platforms stock soaring and Tesla shares plunging.

    A near mirror image in stock-price performance has helped catapult Mark Zuckerberg ahead of Elon Musk as the world’s third-richest person, according to data from Bloomberg.

    Mark Zuckerberg had a net worth of $175 billion as of Wednesday, just slightly overtaking Musk’s net worth of $174 billion. That gap is set to widen on Thursday as shares of Tesla decline to a new 52-week low while Meta Platforms stock pushes toward all-time highs.

    Year-to-date, Zuckerberg has added $47.3 billion to his net worth while Musk has seen his net worth decline by $55.2 billion. That decline has knocked Musk down from the status of being the world’s richest person to the world’s fourth richest person.

    Musk is ahead of Bill Gates’ $149 billion fortune, while Zuckerberg is behind Jeff Bezos’ $203 billion fortune and Bernard Arnault’s $221 billion net worth.

    Driving the shift in fortunes for Musk and Zuckerberg is the performance of their respective stocks. Meta Platforms has surged 43% year-to-date, while shares of Tesla are down nearly 40%.

    Tesla stock price performance versus Meta PlatformsTesla stock price performance versus Meta Platforms

    YCharts

    Solid fourth-quarter earnings results, a newly initiated dividend, and growing investor enthusiasm for the impact artificial intelligence is having on Meta Platforms’ underlying business are in stark contrast to the slowing sales growth at Tesla, declining profit margins, and “thesis-changing” robotaxi pivot at Tesla.

    Zuckerberg’s source of wealth is extremely concentrated in Meta Platforms stock. The Facebook co-founder owns about 13% of the social media company. That’s in contrast to Musk, who has many business ventures driving his fortune, including Tesla, SpaceX, and X.

    Musk and Zuckerberg have been at odds with each other in the past, culminating in both agreeing to fighting in a cage match last year. The fight never happened.

    Read the original article on Business Insider

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How Taxpayers Will Heavily Subsidize Democrat Boots on the Ground This Election

    How Taxpayers Will Heavily Subsidize Democrat Boots on the Ground This Election

    [ad_1]

    Daniel Schwen, CC BY-SA 4.0

    By Ben Weingarten for RealClearInvestigations

    Progressives are using legal loopholes and the power of the federal government to maximize Democrat votes in the 2024 election at taxpayers’ expense, RealClearInvestigations has found.

    The methods include voter registration and mobilization campaigns by ostensibly nonpartisan charities that target Democrats using demographic data as proxies, and the Biden administration’s unprecedented demand that every federal agency “consider ways to expand citizens’ opportunities to register to vote and to obtain information about, and participate in, the electoral process.”

    A dizzying array of overwhelmingly “democracy-focused” entities with ties to the Democratic Party operating as charities and funded with hundreds of millions of dollars from major liberal “dark money” vehicles are engaged in a sprawling campaign to register the voters, deliver them the ballots, and figuratively and sometimes literally harvest the votes necessary to defeat Donald Trump.

    These efforts, now buttressed by the federal government, amplify and extend what Time magazine described  as a “well-funded cabal of powerful people ranging across industries and ideologies,” who had worked behind the scenes in 2020 “to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information” to defeat Trump and other Republicans. The “shadow campaigners,” Time declared, “were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it.”

    Heading into 2024, “there is not a ‘shadow’ campaign,” said Mike Howell, executive director of the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. “There is an overt assault on President Trump and those who wish to vote for him occurring at every level of government and with the support of all major institutions.”

    By contrast, Republican Party stalwarts lament that no comparable effort exists on their side. The GOP’s turnout and messaging efforts seek to thread a difficult needle by encouraging early and absentee voting and ballot-harvesting – pandemic-era measures that Trump and supporters blame for his 2020 electoral defeat – while the party simultaneously fights the mainly blue-state laws that made the practices possible. The party’s position is further complicated by its standard-bearer’s warnings of a rigged election bigger than in 2020, which some speculate could turn off moderate swing voters.

    Catherine Herridge Describes CBS News Seizing Her Files In Shocking Capitol Hill Testimony

    Electioneering ‘Super-Weapons’

    The IRS permits tax-exempt nonprofit groups to engage in voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives so long as they do not “refer to any candidate or political party” nor conduct their activities “in a biased manner that favors (or opposes) one or more candidates prohibited.”

    These entities have become magnets for funds not only from wealthy donors, who can contribute without traditional campaign finance limits – and get a tax break to boot – but also abundantly endowed private foundations that are prohibited from engaging in partisan activities.

    In recent years, dozens of progressive-oriented 501(c)(3)s, now pulling in upwards of $500 million annually, have engaged in purportedly neutral efforts to impact elections, according to Hayden Ludwig, director of Policy Research at the election integrity-focused advocacy group, Restoration of America.

    In practice, critics like Ludwig argue, left-leaning charities flout the law by registering and mobilizing demographics that tend to vote disproportionately Democratic behind a veil of non-partisan democracy promotion.

    During the 2020 election, for example, the Voter Participation Center solicited millions of ballot applications in swing states – many of them prefilled for respondents. This nonprofit, like its peers, is clear that it isn’t targeting just any voters, but what it and progressive activists have dubbed a “New American Majority” of “young people, people of color and unmarried women.”

    Tom Lopach, a longtime Democratic Party operative and the center’s president and CEO, told RCI in a statement: “We do the work that state election officials typically do not do – seeking out underrepresented voting-eligible Americans Tom Lopach … This is difficult but necessary work that brings democracy to eligible Americans’ doorsteps.”

    In 2020, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan showed how supposedly neutral efforts can have a partisan impact when they funneled some $400 million through two progressiveled but purportedly nonpartisan nonprofits into election offices across the country.

    That money disproportionately went to jurisdictions that Joe Biden won in the pivotal battleground states that delivered his victory, often flowing to left-leaning nonprofits to whom election offices outsourced the administration of sometimes critical functions.

    In April 2022, a primary conduit of these so-called “Zuckerbucks,” the Center for Tech and Civic Life, announced the launch of a successor to the 2020 effort – the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence, a five-year $80 million program “to envision, support, and celebrate excellence in U.S. election administration.”

    “The left has assembled an impressive ‘election-industrial’ complex of non-profit organizations that is constantly working towards goals like ‘promoting participation’ targeting ‘underrepresented minorities,’” said Jason Snead, executive director of the conservative Honest Elections Project. Such terms, Snead says, “are code for identifying and mobilizing liberal voters.”

    Election experts view such activities as potentially decisive. 

    “‘Nonpartisan’ and ‘charitable’ voter registration and get-out-the-vote groups” are the Democratic Party’s “electioneering super-weapon[s],” said Parker Thayer, an analyst with the conservative-oriented Capital Research Center in Washington, D.C.

    EXCLUSIVE: Kash Patel Talks FISA Reform: Suggests Program Could Still Be Used To Spy On Trump, Other Candidates

    ‘Everybody Votes’ – But for Whom?

    Of these, Thayer sees the Everybody Votes Campaign as of paramount importance.

    Born of a plan “commissioned by [Hillary] Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, funded by the Democratic Party’s biggest donors, and coordinated with cut-throat Democratic consultants,” Thayer writes in an extensive analysis of the group’s efforts, “the Everybody Votes campaign [has] used the guise of civic-minded charity to selectively register millions of ‘non-white’ swing-state voters in the hopes of getting out the Democratic vote.”

    It does so by funding and training over 50 community groups to register voters to close “the voter registration gap in communities of color,” which it attributes to “modern forms of Jim Crow laws,” such as voter ID requirements, the group’s executive director, Nellie Sires, said in a January 2024 interview.

    From 2016-2021, the Everybody Votes Campaign, doing business as three entities, collected over $190 million from major Democratic Party donors, unions, and environmental activists. Some of the largest donors include the League of Conservation Voters Education Fund; the New Venture and Hopewell Funds, managed by for-profit consulting firm Arabella Advisors; and the George Soros-funded Foundation to Promote Open Society – all 501(c)(3) public charities or private foundations forbidden from supporting “voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias.”

    The Everybody Votes Campaign distributed the funds to a slew of left-leaning state-based voter registration organizations largely in eight pivotal states from 2016 to 2019 – Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, and Nevada – and then to Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin in 2021.

    According to Thayer’s analysis, the Everybody Votes Campaign’s voter registration push “would have provided Democrats more votes than the total margins of victory in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and Pennsylvania,” securing Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.

    Chinese Immigrant Who Lived Under Communism Confronts Anti-Gun David Hogg: ‘I Will Never Give Up My Guns’

    ‘4 to 10 Times More Cost-Effective’

    One notable backer of the Everybody Votes Campaign is Mind the Gap, a “Moneyball-style” Silicon Valley Democratic Super PAC founded by Stanford law professor Barbara Fried, and connected to the political activities of her convicted crypto-fraudster son, Sam Bankman-Fried.

    The analytics-focused outfit prepared a confidential strategy memo leaked in advance of the 2020 election, noting that “501(c)(3) voter registration focused on underrepresented groups in the electorate” would be the “single most effective tactic for ensuring Democratic victories” – “4 to 10 times more cost-effective” on after-tax basis at “garnering additional Democratic votes” relative to alternatives like “broadcast media and digital buys.”

    Mind the Gap recommended that donors contribute to three organizations: the Voter Participation Center and its sister organization, the Center for Voter Information for mail-based registration efforts, and Everybody Votes for site-based registration efforts.

    The largest grant recipient, receiving $24 million during the 2016-21 period, was State Voices, which describes itself as a “nonpartisan network of 25 state-based coalitions … that collectively partner with over 1,200 organizations” consisting of “advocates, organizers, and activists … work[ing] together to fight for a healthy democracy and political power for Black, Indigenous, Latinx, Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI), and all people of color (BIPOC).”

    Another top recipient, raking in over $10 million, was the Voter Participation Center.

    According to the Capital Research Center, the Everybody Votes Campaign would collect and spend over $50 million in connection with the 2022 midterm elections – the most recent period for which financials are available. All told, since its founding in 2015, the Campaign says, its network has registered 5.1 million voters, of whom 76% are people of color; 56% are women; and 47% are under the age of 35.

    Last November, the news outlet Puck reported on a secret memo circulated by Mind the Gap regarding its plans for 2024. “Our strategy early in the 2024 presidential race will be to massively scale high-performing voter registration and mobilization programs,” the memo read. The PAC again specifically directed donors to the Everybody Votes Campaign, which did not respond to requests for comment.

    Lopach, who has worked in Democratic Party politics his entire career, bristled at RCI’s questions regarding critics’ claims of a partisan bent to its work. “The presumptions baked into the questions … emailed to us are inaccurate and reveal the reporter’s own biases,” he responded, while emphasizing the organization’s targeting of “underrepresented voting-eligible Americans.”

    Thayer has dubbed Everybody Votes the “largest and most corrupt ‘charitable’ voter registration drive in American history.”

    Of such organizations’ claims of nonpartisanship, Howell told RCI: “If they were truly interested in an informed participatory constitutional Republic, they would have an even-handed approach to registering voters.”

    “Call me when they show up to a NASCAR race, Daughters of the American Revolution event, or a gun show,” Howell added. “Then we can pretend for a minute that these are beyond just facial efforts to appear somewhat neutral.”

    Speaker Mike Johnson Gives Explanation For His Flip-Flop On FISA Spying On Americans

    Challenges for GOP

    But NASCAR races have not been hubs for GOP-led voter registration efforts either. Restoration of America’s Ludwig estimates that the right may spend as little as 1% of what the left spends on voter registration efforts.

    A recent memo from the Sentinel Action Fund, a super PAC that aims to elect conservatives, noted that in the 2022 election cycle, while $8.9 billion was spent on federal elections, there were zero large independent expenditure organizations on the right focused on get-out-the-vote efforts or “ballot chasing.”

    Republican Party vehicles and conservative outfits like grassroots-oriented Turning Point Action, a 501(c)(4), are engaged in such efforts in the 2024 cycle, but the scale and sophistication of their political counterparts’ efforts would appear unrivaled at this point.

    Election experts attribute this gap to several factors beyond the GOP’s focus on other tactics to win elections, or ineffectiveness. They note that Democratic voters tend to be more concentrated in urban areas and college campuses, making it easier to run efficient registration drives. As regards early and absentee voting and ballot harvesting, it is not clear if these efforts will substantially grow the pool of Republican voters versus merely enabling the party to “bank” votes earlier.

    With respect to the use of 501(c)(3)s to conduct such activities, Ludwig said some conservatives may still be fearful of running afoul of the IRS – through exploiting tax laws to pursue efforts perceived to be partisan effectively on the taxpayers’ dime – in the wake of its targeting of Tea Party groups for extreme scrutiny during the Obama years.

    NPR Veteran Uri Berliner Reveals How Mainstream Newsrooms Have Lost Credibility

    ‘Bidenbucks’: ‘Zuckerbucks’ on Steroids

    Since the 2020 election, Democrats have opened a second apparent electioneering front that Republicans could not match even if they wanted to: The rise of so-called “Bidenbucks,” which uses the “unlimited funding, resources, and reach” of the federal government and agency offices located nationwide,” to turn out favored voters, according to Stewart Whitson, legal director of the conservative Foundation for Government Accountability.

    In March 2021, President Biden introduced Executive Order 14019. The directive on “promoting access to voting” orders every federal agency, more than 600 in all, to register and mobilize voters – particularly “people of color” and others the White House says face “challenges to exercise their fundamental right to vote.” It further directs the agencies to collaborate with ostensibly nonpartisan nonprofits in pursuit of its goals.

    As RCI has previously reported, EO 14019 appears to have been designed by left-leaning think tank Demos and implemented in consultation and sometimes coordination with a slew of progressive, labor, and identity-focused groups with the goal of generating up to 3.5 million new or updated voter registrations annually.

    The ACLU and Demos have reportedly helped execute the order. RCI additionally found that at least two recipients of grants under the Everybody Votes Campaign, the NAACP and UnidosUS – formerly the National Council of Raza – were also listed on an email as participants in a July 2021 listening session on the executive order convened by the White House and agency officials.

    Whitson, whose organization unearthed that email in its fight to expose details about the order, emphasized that “[U]nlike 2020 wherein the shadow campaign was conducted by private citizens seeking to influence government election operations from the outside, the threat we face in 2024 is being launched from within the government itself.”

    Facing both congressional scrutiny and litigation, the administration has closely guarded the strategic plans agencies were to develop to carry out the order, how they are implementing them, to what end, and with whom.

    Perfunctory press releases, reports from groups supportive of the order, and documents slowly ferreted out via FOIA requests and litigation, however, demonstrate that relevant agencies have sought to drive voter registration via public housing authorities, child nutrition programs, and voluntary tax preparation clinics.

    In August 2023, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services issued updated guidance calling for the agency to register voters at naturalization ceremonies.

    More recently, the Department of Education did the same, blessing the use of federal work-study funds to pay students for “supporting broad-based get-out-the-vote activities, voter registration,” and other activities. Scott Walter, president of the Capital Research Center, recently told the Epoch Times that the Department had previously threatened schools “that you better be registering students or you could lose your federal funds.”

    When asked by RCI to respond to Walter’s claim, the Department of Education would not. Over two dozen Pennsylvania state legislators challenged the order via a lawsuit in January. Citing alleged unlawful attempts by several agencies to register Keystone state voters, the lawmakers asserted:

    “By engaging in a targeted voter registration effort of this magnitude, focused specifically on these agencies and the groups of potential voters they interact with, leveraging the resources and reach of the federal government, this effort appears to be a taxpayer-funded get-out-the-vote effort designed to benefit the current President’s political party.”

    Echoing this view, Whitson’s Foundation for Government Accountability submitted an amicus briefnoting that “all of the federal agencies FGA has identified as taking active steps to carry out EO 14019 have one thing in common: They provide government welfare benefits and other services to groups of voters the vast majority of which have historically voted Democrat.”

    The plaintiffs alleged the executive order violated both Pennsylvania law limiting voter registration efforts to non-federal actors, and constitutional provisions reserving election laws to the states. On March 26, a district court dismissed the case, claiming the plaintiffs lacked standing. Whitson told RCI that others would likely lodge similar lawsuits, building on the Pennsylvania legislators’ case in the wake of the dismissal. Days later, The Federalist reported that the plaintiffs intended to appeal their case to the U.S. Supreme Court. A White House spokesperson did not reply to RCI’s inquiries regarding the executive order.

    Is Trump Bringing More Minorities To The Republican Party?

    Opposition and Circumvention

    Republicans have had more success opposing the use of Zuckerbucks and other private monies used to finance public elections. More than two dozen states would move to ban or restrict such grants in response to the activities observed during the 2020 election.

    Most recently, Wisconsin, where some of the most controversial Zuckerbucks-related efforts took place, was added to that list when, on April 2, voters approved a constitutional amendment barring the private funding of elections.

    Despite this crackdown and the feds seemingly stepping into the breach, efforts to privately finance election administration persist. The U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence bills itself as an initiative to bolster “woefully unsupported” election offices to “revitalize American democracy.”

    The organization says it services jurisdictions – 11 listed on its website, ranging across states from Arizona to California and Wisconsin – with “training, mentorship, and resources.” Alliance officials did not respond to RCI’s inquiry about whether it would be terminating the relationship with the city of Madison, Wisconsin., in light of the passage of the recent ballot measure that would seem to have barred it. Nor did it respond to RCI’s other inquiries in connection with this article.

    Most of these partnerships were initiated with jurisdictions in states that have not banned Zuckerbucks, though it has sought to circumvent such prohibitions in Georgia and Utah. The stated goal of the Alliance for Election Excellence is to support voters via measures like assisting participating centers in “redesigning” forms to make them more intuitive and purchasing infrastructure “to improve election security and accessibility.”

    Alliance launch partners include entities such as:

    • The Center for Civic Design, which works with election offices “using research, design, accessibility, and plain language to remove barriers in the voter journey and invite participation in democracy;”
    • The Elections Group, to “implement new programs or improve processes for voters and stakeholders”; and
    • The Center for Secure and Modern Elections to “modernize the voting system, making elections more efficient and secure.”

    Critics argue this seemingly more modest effort is, in reality, an ambitious Zuckerbucks rebrand.

    Snead’s Honest Elections Project published a report in April 2023, based in part on documents received from FOIA requests, indicating “that the Alliance is a reinvention of CTCL’s scheme to use private funding to strongarm election policy nationwide.”

    Among other takeaways, it found that:

    • The Alliance offers services that touch every aspect of election administration, ranging from “legal” and “political” consultation to public relations, guidance, and assistance with recruitment and training.
    • The Alliance is gathering detailed information on the inner workings of participating election offices and developing “improvement plans” to reshape the way they operate.

    The report shows that many of the alliance’s launch partners, starting with the Center for Tech and Civic Life and the Center for Civic Design, are funded by major Democrat-tied, so-called “dark money” groups such as the Democracy Fund and Arabella Advisors’ New Venture Fund and Hopewell Fund.

    The Democracy Fund is led by Democrat tech billionaire Pierre Omidyar, which has granted some $275 million to like-minded organizations from publications like Mother Jones and ProPublica to the Voter Registration Project since its founding.

    The District of Columbia recently closed a criminal investigation into Arabella, whose fund network reportedly spent nearly $1.2 billion in 2020 alone, after probing it over allegations its fundswere pursuing political ends in violation of their tax-exempt statuses. The Center for Secure and Modern Elections, the Honest Elections Project says, pushes “left-wing priorities like automatic voter registration” and is run by the New Venture Fund. The Elections Group’s CEO and co-founder, Jennifer Morrell, previously served as a consultant at the Democracy Fund.

    The Capital Research Center’s Walter uses a football analogy to explain why he sees these efforts as untoward. He told RCI:

    “Election offices are the refs in elections; the parties are teams trying to score. You’d be puzzled if you heard Super Bowl refs say they’re trying to boost points scored. You’d be outraged if you learned those refs had received money and training from people who previously worked for one team’s offensive coaching staff. That’s what left-wing political operatives, using left-wing money, are doing, and it’s clearly unfair.”

    Non-Trump Lawfare

    Democrat-aligned groups continue to engage in litigation, like that brought by chief election lawyer Marc Elias, aimed at loosening election laws to their benefit. Snead told RCI, “There are more than 70 active lawsuits right now targeting voter ID laws, anti-ballot harvesting laws, signature verification, drop box regulations, and more.”

    After securing victory in a lawsuit requiring signature verification for mail voting in Pennsylvania, the RNC touted its engagement as well in 81 election integrity cases this cycle. Swing-state Wisconsin is another major battleground for such efforts.

    There, Elias’ legal team has challenged witness signature requirements and bans on election clerks filling address information on mail-in ballots. It and others are also working to overturn a state Supreme Court decision finding drop boxes illegal. The Badger State’s now liberal-majority Supreme Court announced in March it would take up the case.

    Cutting against these efforts are not only the state’s citizen-approved Zuckerbucks ban, but another Badger-passed April 2 ballot measure amending the state’s constitution to prohibit those other than “an election official designated by law” from carrying out election-related tasks.

    Watchdogs like Howell are concerned that left-leaning electioneers and lawfare forces collectively are pursuing an “election ‘dis-integrity’ strategy … to greatly expand the universe of ballots while limiting any ability to ensure that they are fairly cast and counted.”

    “It’s a basic recipe for fraud.”

    Elias says those seeking to combat such efforts are engaged in “voter suppression and election subversion.”

    Democrats also have the federal government working on their side on the litigation front – and in ways extending beyond the veritable lawfare barrage the Biden Justice Department has leveled at Donald Trump.

    Speaking in Selma, Ala., on the 59th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, the 1965 police assault on civil rights marchers, Attorney General Merrick Garland declared that “the right to vote is still under attack.”

    Garland vowed the Department of Justice was punching back, including “challenging efforts by states and jurisdictions to implement discriminatory, burdensome, and unnecessary restrictions on access to the ballot, including those related to mail-in voting, the use of drop boxes, and voter ID requirements.”

    Syndicated with permission from RealClearWire.

    [ad_2]

    RealClearWire

    Source link

  • Meta tests new auto-blur tool and other features on Instagram designed to fight sextortion

    Meta tests new auto-blur tool and other features on Instagram designed to fight sextortion

    [ad_1]

    Meta is trying out new tools on its Instagram platform to combat the sexual extortion of teens, including a feature that will automatically blur photos containing nudity in direct messages.

    The social media company announced in a blog post Thursday that new features, including the auto-blur technology, are part of a campaign to fight sexual scams and make it tougher for criminals to contact teens.

    “This feature is designed not only to protect people from seeing unwanted nudity in their DMs, but also to protect them from scammers who may send nude images to trick people into sending their own images in return,” the company said.

    Meta also owns Facebook and WhatsApp but the nudity-blur feature won’t be added to those platforms.

    Sexual extortion, or sextortion, happens when one person coerces another person into sending explicit photos of themselves, and then threatens to make those images public unless the victim pays money or engages in sexual favors. One recent case involves two Nigerian brothers who pleaded guilty Wednesday to sexually extorting teen boys across the country, including one 17-year-old in Michigan who took his own life

    In another case, a 28-year-old former Virginia sheriff’s posed as a teen online in order to obtain nude pics from a 15-year-old girl in California whom he sexually extorted and kidnapped at gunpoint, after driving across country, killing her mother and grandparents and setting their home on fire. 

    Sextortion has become such a major issue that the FBI in January warned parents to monitor their children’s online activity amid a rising number of cases.


    Financial sextortion scams targeting teen boys

    06:33

    The nudity protection feature will be turned on by default globally for teens under 18. Adult users will get a notification encouraging them to activate it.

    odnc-education.png
    A series of warnings will appear on Instagram accounts, urging users to be careful about sending explicit photos and chatting with someone you don’t know.

    Meta Platforms


    In addition to the automatic blurring of images, a warning will appear giving users the option of whether or not they want to view the image. They’ll also have the option to block the sender and report the chat.

    For users sending direct messages with nudity, a message will appear on screen reminding them to be cautious when sending “sensitive photos.” They’ll also be informed that they can unsend the photos if they change their mind, but that there’s a chance others may have already seen them.

    To stop scammers and sexual predators from connecting with young people, the company says it is also expanding current restrictions, including not showing the “message” button on a teen’s profile to potential sextortion accounts, even if the two accounts are connected.

    Children’s advocates applauded Meta’s move on Thursday, saying the features introduced appear encouraging. 

    “We are hopeful these new measures will increase reporting by minors and curb the circulation of online child exploitation,” John Shehan, the senior vice president at the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, said in Meta’s blog post. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Donald Trump Comes Out Against TikTok Ban in Bizarre Reversal

    Donald Trump Comes Out Against TikTok Ban in Bizarre Reversal

    [ad_1]

    Donald Trump appeared to come out in defense of TikTok, the social media platform facing a potential ban by Congress, in a post late Thursday on his social media platform Truth Social—the same platform that experienced a widespread outage as the former president attempted to live-tweet President Joe Biden’s State of the Union speech.

    “If you get rid of TikTok, Facebook and Zuckerschmuck will double their business. I don’t want Facebook, who cheated in the last Election, doing better. They are a true Enemy of the People!” Trump wrote on Thursday night.

    It’s unclear why Trump called Facebook an “enemy of the people,” a phrase that he usually saves for mainstream media outlets not named Fox News. And it doesn’t appear Trump has ever used the nickname “Zuckerschmuck” for Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg before, which, according to a simple Google search, looks like the name of a real online store centered around diabetes.

    Trump’s opposition to a TikTok ban would be a reversal of policy for the former president, who signed an executive order in the summer of 2020 that would’ve forced TikTok’s parent company in China, ByteDance, to completely divest of the social media site or face a ban on U.S. soil.

    Trump’s executive order, which was held up in federal court before being reversed when Biden took office in 2021, called TikTok’s existence a “national emergency” for the U.S. that could threaten the country’s security and economy.

    “This mobile application may also be used for disinformation campaigns that benefit the Chinese Communist Party, such as when TikTok videos spread debunked conspiracy theories about the origins of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus,” Trump’s executive order read in a line that’s particularly ironic, given Trump’s embrace of many such conspiracy theories.

    The executive order also featured claims of censorship on TikTok by the Chinese Communist Party, especially around, “protests in Hong Kong and China’s treatment of Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities.” Because who doesn’t love “Muslim minorities” more than Trump, right?

    Why is Trump reversing course on TikTok? Who knows why Trump does anything? Maybe he’s making the calculation that it helps his own social media platform in some way. Or maybe it’s because Trump reportedly saw at least $5.5 million flowing to his businesses from Chinese sources while he was president. Could it have anything to do with the fact that Republican mega-donor Jeff Yass, a billionaire with a big investment in ByteDance, recently had a friendly phone call with Trump, according to Politico?

    Better yet, maybe Trump wants to delay a ban until he hypothetically returns to the White House, a tactic he’s already deployed to sink a bipartisan immigration reform deal because he wants to campaign on the issue of a “broken border.” It really could be anything, as far as we know.

    But Congress is moving ahead with a potential ban on TikTok, with a bipartisan bill expected to make its way to the House for a vote very soon. The bill already cleared a House committee in a unanimous vote of 50-0. Much like Trump’s original executive order, the bill would force ByteDance to sell the platform and, if the company refused, would allow Congress to ban the site altogether.

    The bill has mobilized some of TikTok’s estimated 150 million American users, with Congressional offices reportedly getting flooded on Thursday by calls imploring members of Congress not to ban the app. TikTok even alerted users in the U.S. about the potential ban on Thursday, a move that made politicians quite angry.

    President Biden has come out in support of the effort by Congress to get ByteDance to divest and the White House has claimed the president only killed Trump’s executive order to conduct its own security review while it was tied up in federal court. But it will be interesting to see if the courts agree that Congress has the right to ban TikTok, a move that the company says conflicts with the free speech rights of Americans.

    “This legislation will trample the First Amendment rights of 170 million Americans and deprive 5 million small businesses of a platform they rely on to grow and create jobs,” a TikTok spokesperson told Gizmodo on Thursday.

    The House vote hasn’t been scheduled yet, but it sure seems like we’re going to find out sooner rather than later if TikTok has a future in the U.S. Incredibly, Trump wants TikTok to be allowed to continue as usual. At least for now.

    [ad_2]

    Matt Novak

    Source link