The post Biden signs bill to reauthorize FISA warrantless surveillance program for two more years appeared first on Best News.
]]>The Senate vote on reauthorizing Section 702 came down to the wire. It was set to expire on Friday at midnight, but was recently given an extension until April 2025, according to The New York Times, lest it lapse while disagreements over proposed amendments dragged on. Section 702’s extension period was also shortened, cutting it down to two years instead of the previous five. Congress did ultimately miss the deadline on Friday, but it passed with a 60-34 vote, CBS News reported. The White House issued a statement not long after saying the president “will swiftly sign the bill into law.”
Section 702 was first signed into law in 2008 and has been renewed twice already, allowing US intelligence agencies to use data from internet and cell phone providers without a warrant to keep tabs on foreign targets’ communications. It’s faced strong opposition from both sides over its implications for Americans’ privacy. Kia Hamadanchy, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), called the passage of the bill “profoundly disappointing” in a statement released over the weekend, going on to say that it “gives the government more ways to secretly surveil us — with little power to hold spy agencies accountable.”
“Senators were aware of the threat this surveillance bill posed to our civil liberties and pushed it through anyway, promising they would attempt to address some of the most heinous expansions in the near future,” Hamadanchy said. “We plan to make sure these promises are kept.”
Update, April 21 2024, 1:21PM ET: This story has been updated to include a statement from the ACLU.
The post Biden signs bill to reauthorize FISA warrantless surveillance program for two more years appeared first on Best News.
]]>The post US bill proposes AI companies list what copyrighted materials they use appeared first on Best News.
]]>“AI has the disruptive potential of changing our economy, our political system, and our day-to-day lives. We must balance the immense potential of AI with the crucial need for ethical guidelines and protections.” said Congressman Schiff in a statement. He added that the bill “champions innovation while safeguarding the rights and contributions of creators, ensuring they are aware when their work contributes to AI training datasets. This is about respecting creativity in the age of AI and marrying technological progress with fairness.” Organizations such as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), SAG-AFTRA and WGA have shown support for the bill.
If the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act passes, companies would need to file all relevant data use to the Register of Copyrights at least 30 days before introducing the AI tool to the public. They would also have to provide the same information retroactively for any existing tools and make updates if they considerably altered datasets. Failure to do so would result in the Copyright Office issuing a fine — the exact number would depend on a company’s size and past infractions. To be clear, this wouldn’t do anything to prevent AI creators from using copyrighted work, but it would provide transparency on which materials they’ve taken from. The ambiguity over use was on full display in a March Bloomberg interview with OpenAI CTO Mira Murati, who claimed she was unsure if the tool Sora took data from YouTube, Facebook or Instagram posts.
The bill could even give companies and artists a clearer picture when speaking out against or suing for copyright infringement — a fairly common occurrence. Take the New York Times, which sued OpenAI and Microsoft for using its articles to train chatbots without an agreement or compensation, or Sarah Silverman, who sued OpenAI (a frequent defendant) and Meta for using her books and other works to train their AI models.
The entertainment industry has also been leading calls for AI protections. AI regulation was a big sticking point in the SAG-AFTRA and WGA strikes last year, ending only when detailed policies around AI went into their contracts. SAG-AFTRA has recently voiced its support for California bills requiring consent from actors to use their avatars and from heirs to make AI versions of deceased individuals. It’s no surprise that Congressman Schiff represents California’s 30th district, which includes Hollywood, Burbank and Universal City.
Musicians are echoing their fellow creatives, with over 200 artists signing an open letter in April that calls for AI protections, the Guardian reported. “This assault on human creativity must be stopped,” the letter, issued by the Artist Rights Alliance, states. “We must protect against the predatory use of AI to steal professional artists’ voices and likenesses, violate creators’ rights, and destroy the music ecosystem.” Billie Eilish, Jon Bon Jovi and Pearm Jam were among the signatories.
The post US bill proposes AI companies list what copyrighted materials they use appeared first on Best News.
]]>The post Attorneys General from all 50 states urge Congress to help fight AI-generated CSAM appeared first on Best News.
]]>The letter sent to Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate also urges politicians to expand existing restrictions on child sexual abuse materials to specifically cover AI-generated images and videos. This technology is extremely new and, as such, there’s nothing on the books yet that explicitly places AI-generated images in the same category as other types of child sexual abuse materials.
“We are engaged in a race against time to protect the children of our country from the dangers of AI,” the prosecutors wrote in the letter. “Indeed, the proverbial walls of the city have already been breached. Now is the time to act.”
Using image generators like Dall-E and Midjourney to create child sexual abuse materials isn’t a problem, yet, as the software has guardrails in place that disallows that kind of thing. However, these prosecutors are looking to the future when open-source versions of the software begin popping up everywhere, each with its own guardrails, or lack thereof. Even OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has stated that AI tools would benefit from government intervention to mitigate risk, though he didn’t mention child abuse as a potential downside to the technology.
The government tends to move slowly when it comes to technology, for a number of reasons, as it took Congress several years before taking the threat of online child abusers seriously back in the days of AOL chat rooms and the like. To that end, there’s no immediate sign that Congress is looking to craft AI legislation that absolutely prohibits generators from creating this kind of foul imagery. Even the European Union’s sweeping Artificial Intelligence Act doesn’t specifically mention any risk to children.
South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson organized the letter-writing campaign and has encouraged colleagues to scour state statutes to find out if “the laws kept up with the novelty of this new technology.”
Wilson warns of deepfake content that features an actual child sourced from a photograph or video. This wouldn’t be child abuse in the conventional sense, Wilson says, but would depict abuse and would “defame” and “exploit” the child from the original image. He goes on to say that “our laws may not address the virtual nature” of this kind of situation.
The technology could also be used to make up fictitious children, culling from a library of data, to produce sexual abuse materials. Wilson says this would create a “demand for the industry that exploits children” as an argument against the idea that it wouldn't actually be hurting anyone.
Though the idea of deepfake child sexual abuse is a rather new one, the tech industry has been keenly aware of deepfake pornographic content, taking steps to prevent it. Back in February, Meta, OnlyFans and Pornhub began using an online tool called Take It Down that allows teens to report explicit images and videos of themselves from the Internet. This tool is used for regular images and AI-generated content.
The post Attorneys General from all 50 states urge Congress to help fight AI-generated CSAM appeared first on Best News.
]]>The post Revised Protect Musicians Act could empower artists against streaming platforms appeared first on Best News.
]]>“This legislation will help give small, independent music creators a level playing field, empowering them to stand together for fairer compensation and giving them a voice in important negotiations that will determine the future of the music industry,” Ross said.
As it stands, current laws leave many artists, whether signed to a major label or independently working, unprotected and at the mercy of major streaming platforms like Spotify, Apple Music and YouTube. And these companies don’t always provide fair compensation to artists when their music is uploaded and streamed on the platforms. Independent artists are often forced to accept whenever rates are being offered without being able to collectively negotiate for better terms. Additionally, there is no real protection for artists against having their voice or music manipulated by AI without consent.
If passed, the Protect Working Musicians Act would allow working artists and independent musicians to come together and negotiate with dominant streaming platforms and artificial intelligence developers. It would also grant working artists and independent musicians the ability to collectively refuse to license their music to online music distribution platforms that refuse to pay fair market value.
It could be argued that many artists have always gotten a raw deal for decades when it comes to the sales and distribution of their music. Back in the day of album downloads and CD purchases, this money was usually split in many ways, leaving only a small amount for the artist. Unfortunately, unfair compensation being offered by streaming platforms is just a modern spin on a longstanding problem. And it’s not just musicians that are being affected. For years, streaming giants like Netflix have been offering low wages to its writers, which has contributed to the strike of members of the Writers Guild of America.
The post Revised Protect Musicians Act could empower artists against streaming platforms appeared first on Best News.
]]>The post Meta calls for legislation to require parental approval for teens' app downloads appeared first on Best News.
]]>“Parents should approve their teen’s app downloads, and we support federal legislation that requires app stores to get parents’ approval whenever their teens under 16 download apps,” Antigone Davis, Meta’s global head of safety, wrote. The company is proposing a plan that would see app stores notifying parents when their teen wants to download an app, in a similar way to how they are alerted when a kid wants to make an in-app purchase. The parent would then approve or deny the request.
Meta says its approach would let parents verify their teen’s age when they set up a phone, rather than requiring everyone to verify their age multiple times across various apps. The company suggests legislation is needed to make sure all apps that teens use are held to the same standard.
It notes that states are enacting “a patchwork of different laws,” some requiring teens to get parental approval for different apps and others mandating age verification. However, “teens move interchangeably between many websites and apps, and social media laws that hold different platforms to different standards in different states will mean teens are inconsistently protected,” Davis wrote.
Under current proposals, Meta argues that parents would need to navigate different signup methods and provide “potentially sensitive identification information” for themselves and their teens “to apps with inconsistent security and privacy practices.” Indeed, experts say that such age verification practices threaten the privacy of all users.
Utah is enacting legislation that will require social media apps to obtain parental content before a teen can use them. That state and Arkansas both passed social media age verification laws. Following a lawsuit from tech companies, a federal judge struck down the Arkansas legislation a day before it was set to take effect in September. The Utah laws are scheduled to come into force in March.
In its call for federal legislation, this could be seen as a case of Meta trying to pass the buck to parents and app stores. A judge this week rejected attempts by Meta, YouTube parent Google and TikTok owner ByteDance to dismiss lawsuits blaming them for teens’ social media addiction. In October, 41 states and the District of Columbia sued Meta for allegedly releasing “harmful features on Instagram and Facebook that addict children and teens to their mental and physical detriment,” among other things.
The post Meta calls for legislation to require parental approval for teens' app downloads appeared first on Best News.
]]>The post Tesla paid no federal income taxes while paying executives $2.5 billion over five years appeared first on Best News.
]]>Elon Musk's company earned $4.4 billion during those five years and gave its executives $2.5 billion. Despite that, Tesla not only didn't pay any federal taxes, but it received $1 million in refunds from the government. Musk himself is the second richest person in the world, with Forbes reporting he had a net worth of $207.9 billion at the start of March.
Tesla is one of 35 companies that paid less federal income tax than they paid their top five executives during that period. In total, the well-deserving and not-at-all greedy execs of these companies raked in $9.5 billion over these years, while cumulatively those same companies received $1.8 billion back from the government. Eighteen of these businesses reported net profits over the five years but didn't pay a cent of federal income tax. (All but one got refunds).
The study lists other notable companies like T-Mobile, Netflix, Ford Motor alongside Tesla. T-Mobile made $17.9 billion, paid executives $675 million and received $80 million in refunds. The mobile provider has spent an incredible amount of money on lobbying Congress for tax breaks, spending $9 million in 2022 alone. Netflix actually did pay some taxes, but the $236 million was just 1.6 percent of its $15.1 billion in earnings — and just over a third of what it paid those top five executives. The statutory rate for federal income tax is 21 percent, so yeah, feel free to scream.
Update, March 14 2024, 6:23AM ET: An earlier version of this report cited Match Group, which was cited in a separate report on corporate taxation.
The post Tesla paid no federal income taxes while paying executives $2.5 billion over five years appeared first on Best News.
]]>The post Engadget Podcast: Why is the US trying to ban TikTok again? appeared first on Best News.
]]>Is this a justified fight against the Chinese-owned social media company, or is it the sum of our political fears against all things China? (Maybe it’s a bit of both?) We discuss why this potential ban could be a huge civil rights violation, as well as the need for true data privacy laws in the US, which would apply to all social networks.
Listen below or subscribe on your podcast app of choice. If you’ve got suggestions or topics you’d like covered on the show, be sure to email us or drop a note in the comments! And be sure to check out our other podcast, Engadget News!
U.S. House passes bill that would give Bytedance 6 months to sell TikTok – 0:47
Microsoft’s Surface and AI event preview – 17:04
Apple will allow EU users to download some apps from websites – 27:38
Five Tesla execs earned $2.5B over the last five years while the company paid no income tax – 34:53
Around Engadget – 44:57
Working on – 48:31
Pop culture picks – 50:17
Hosts: Cherlynn Low and Devindra Hardawar Guest: Karissa Bell Producer: Ben Ellman Music: Dale North and Terrence O’Brien
This article contains affiliate links; if you click such a link and make a purchase, we may earn a commission.
The post Engadget Podcast: Why is the US trying to ban TikTok again? appeared first on Best News.
]]>The post Microsoft Copilot has reportedly been blocked on all Congress-owned devices appeared first on Best News.
]]>Almost a year ago, the Congress also set a strict limit on the use of ChatGPT, which is powered by OpenAI's large language models, just like Copilot. It banned staffers from using the chatbot's free version on House computers, but it allowed them to continue using the paid (ChatGPT Plus) version for research and evaluation due to its tighter privacy controls. More recently, the White House revealed rules federal agencies have to follow when it comes to generative AI, which would ensure that any tool they use "do not endanger the rights and safety" of Americans.
Microsoft told Axios that it does recognize government users' need for higher security requirements. Last year, it announced a roadmap of tools and services meant for government use, including an Azure OpenAI service for classified workloads and a new version of Microsoft 365's Copilot assistant. The company said that all those tools and services will feature higher levels of security that would make it more suitable for handling sensitive data. Szpindor's office, according to Axios, will evaluate the government version Copilot when it becomes available before deciding if it can be used on House devices.
The post Microsoft Copilot has reportedly been blocked on all Congress-owned devices appeared first on Best News.
]]>