An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: The US supreme court grappled on Wednesday with a bid by Meta's Facebook to scuttle a federal securities fraud lawsuit brought by shareholders who accused the social media platform of misleading them about the misuse of user data. The justices heard arguments in Facebook's appeal of a lower court's decision allowing the 2018 class action suit led by Amalgamated Bank to proceed. The suit seeks unspecified monetary damages in part to recoup the lost value of the Facebook stock held by the investors. It is one of two cases coming before them this month -- the other one involving artificial intelligence chipmaker Nvidia on 13 November -- that could lead to rulings making it harder for private litigants to hold companies to account for alleged securities fraud.

At issue is whether Facebook broke the law when it failed to detail the prior data breach in subsequent business-risk disclosures, and instead portrayed the risk of such incidents as purely hypothetical. Facebook argued in a supreme court brief that it was not required to reveal that its warned-of risk had already materialized because "a reasonable investor" would understand risk disclosures to be forward-looking statements. "When we think about these questions, we're not looking only to lies or complete false statements," the liberal justice Elena Kagan told Kannon Shanmugam, the lawyer for Facebook. "We're also looking to misleading statements or misleading omissions." The conservative justice Samuel Alito asked Shanmugam: "Isn't it the case that an evaluation of risks is always forward-looking?" "It is. And that is essentially what underlies our argument here," Shanmugam responded.

The plaintiffs accused Facebook of misleading investors in violation of the Securities Exchange Act, a 1934 federal law that requires publicly traded companies to disclose their business risks. They claimed the company unlawfully withheld information from investors about a 2015 data breach involving British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica that affected more than 30 million Facebook users. Edward Davila, a US district judge, dismissed the lawsuit but the San Francisco-based ninth US circuit court of appeals revived it. The supreme court's ruling is expected by the end of June.

Workers at AI companies want Congress to grant them specific whistleblower protection, arguing that advancements in the technology pose threats that they can't legally expose under current law. From a report: "What people should be thinking about is the 100 ways in which these companies can lose control of these technologies," said Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard law professor who represented OpenAI employees and former employees raising issues about the company. Current dangers range from deepfake videos to algorithms that discriminate, and the technology is quickly becoming more sophisticated. Lessig called the argument that big tech companies and AI startups can police themselves naive. "If there's a risk, which there is, they're not going to take care of it," he said. "We need regulation."

A federal judge in California has dismissed most claims in a class-action lawsuit against Google over its handling of gift card scams, ruling the tech giant is not liable for millions in consumer losses. U.S. District Judge Beth Freeman found Google bears no responsibility for scam victims' losses since third-party fraudsters, not Google, induced the purchases.

The ruling came in a suit filed by Judy May, who lost $1,000 to scammers demanding Google Play gift cards for a fake government grant. The lawsuit cited Federal Trade Commission data showing Google Play gift card scams comprised 20% of reported gift card fraud between 2018-2021, totaling over $17 million in losses. Google earns 15-30% commission on gift card purchases but denies refunds, citing industry-standard policies. Freeman ruled Google had no duty to investigate reported scams or refund victims.

Surging AI demand could push major oil companies to reinvest in renewable energy [non-paywalled link], Abu Dhabi National Oil Company CEO Sultan al-Jaber said this week. Al-Jaber's comments came as oil executives from Shell, BP and TotalEnergies met with Microsoft and other tech leaders in Abu Dhabi to discuss AI's growing energy needs and its applications across the sector.

ADNOC announced plans to deploy autonomous AI agents across its operations through EnergyAI, developed with Microsoft and UAE's G42. The system will analyze seismic data and model underground carbon storage potential. The state oil giant committed $23 billion to low-carbon technology development using AI. Tech companies have pledged to power their AI data centers with renewable energy to meet climate targets. "We need a model that integrates all forms of energy," said al-Jaber, citing needs for renewable power, battery storage, natural gas, and nuclear energy in some locations.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Fortune: Google CEO Sundar Pichai has weighed in on the debate over the relative values of political expression and workplace coexistence by ordering employees to leave their political opinions at home. A day after firing 28 workers for participating in a sit-in protest of the tech giant's cloud contract with Israel, Pichai warned staff that the office is not a place "to fight over disruptive issues or debate politics" in a company blog post.

Although Pichai didn't specifically mention the protests or the Israel-Hamas war, he concluded that the $1.92 trillion company "is a business, and not a place to act in a way that disrupts coworkers or makes them feel unsafe, to attempt to use the company as a personal platform." "We have a duty to be an objective and trusted provider of information that serves all of our users globally," Pichai continued. "When we come to work, our goal is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful. That supersedes everything else and I expect us to act with a focus that reflects that." The sit-in protest was staged against Google's involvement in Project Nimbus, a $1.2 billion cloud contract with the Israeli government. During the nearly 10-hour protest, employees wore "Googler against genocide" T-shirts and occupied the office of Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian.

The report notes how tech companies, "previously famed for their progressive culture where nap pods and abortion benefits were welcome," are increasingly restricting political discussions to avoid internal conflict. Pichai notes in his memo that Google has previously enjoyed "a culture of vibrant, open discussion that enables us to create amazing products and turn great ideas into action."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: Rightsholders have asked Google to remove more than 10 billion 'copyright infringing' URLs from its search results. The search engine doesn't celebrate the milestone in any way, but the takedown notices document intriguing shifts in volume over time, as well as shifting takedown interests. [...] The path to 10 billion was turbulent. When Google first made DMCA details public it was processing a few million DMCA takedown requests in a year. That number swiftly increased to hundreds of millions and eventually reached a billion DMCA requests in 2016.

The exponential growth curve eventually flattened out and around 2017, the takedown volume started to decline. The decrease was in part due to various anti-piracy algorithms making pirated content less visible in search results. By downranking pirate sites, infringing content became harder to find. As a result, Google processed fewer takedown notices, a welcome change for both rightsholders and the search engine. Today, Google continues to make pirate sites less visible in search, but the reduction in takedown notices didn't last. On the contrary, over the past several months, Google search processed a record number of DMCA notices.

Last summer, the search giant recorded the 7 billionth takedown request and after that the numbers shot up, adding billions more in the year that followed. The company is now handling removal requests at a rate of roughly 2.5 billion per year; a new record. This represents more than 50 million takedown requests per week and roughly 5,000 every minute. [...] While the 10 billionth reported URL is undoubtedly a milestone, this number is largely driven by a few rightsholders, reporting outfits, and domain names. The aforementioned takedown outfit Link-Busters, for example, accounts for roughly 15% of all reported links, nearly 1.5 billion. Similarly, the ten most prolific rightsholders, including the BPI, HarperCollins, and VIZ Media, are responsible for 40% of all reported links. These ten companies are only a tiny fraction of the 600,000 rightsholders that reported pirated links, however. A small group of domains also receives a disproportionate amount of attention. In total, 5,400,061 domains have been reported, with the top domains having dozens of millions of flagged URLs each. However, most domains have only a few flagged links, some of which are erroneous.

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said at an all-hands meeting on Tuesday that the plan to require employees to be in-office five days per week is not meant to force attrition or satisfy city leaders, as many employees have suggested. Reuters: The controversial plan mandating workers come to Amazon offices every day starting next year, up from three days now, has caused consternation among employees who say it is stricter than other tech companies and will hinder efficiency because of commuting times. Workers who are consistently not in compliance have been told they will be "voluntarily resigning" and locked out of company computers.

"A number of people I've seen theorized that the reason we were doing this is, it's a backdoor layoff, or we made some sort of deal with city or cities," said Jassy, according to a transcript of the meeting reviewed by Reuters. "I can tell you both of those are not true. You know, this was not a cost play for us. This is very much about our culture and strengthening our culture," he said.

Apple has warned investors that future products may never be as profitable as its iPhone business, as it pushes into unproven new markets such as artificial intelligence and virtual reality headsets. From a report: The iPhone maker added the new warning on growth and profit margins to its latest annual report, in the list of "risk factors" facing the tech group's business.

"New products, services and technologies may replace or supersede existing offerings and may produce lower revenues and lower profit margins," Apple said, "which can materially adversely impact the company's business, results of operations and financial condition." Apple routinely warns investors in its annual reports that competition, foreign exchange, supply chain issues and other factors can put "volatility and downward pressure" on its margins. The same 10-K regulatory filing in previous years suggested that new product introductions could have "higher cost structures." But until now, Apple has not been so direct in addressing the financial profile of its future products.

India's government challenged Wikipedia's legal immunity as a tech platform on Tuesday, issuing a notice questioning whether the online encyclopedia should be reclassified as a publisher. The move follows Delhi High Court warnings to suspend Wikipedia's India operations over a defamation case filed by Asian News International. The news agency seeks to unmask contributors who labeled it a "government propaganda tool." Justice Navin Chawla threatened contempt proceedings after Wikipedia cited its lack of physical presence in India to request more time for disclosing user information. The court deemed the site's open editing feature "dangerous."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the New York Times: Meta will allow U.S. government agencies and contractors working on national security to use its artificial intelligence models for military purposes, the company said on Monday, in a shift from its policy that prohibited the use of its technology for such efforts. Meta said that it would make its A.I. models, called Llama, available to federal agencies and that it was working with defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin and Booz Allen as well as defense-focused tech companies including Palantir and Anduril. The Llama models are "open source," which means the technology can be freely copied and distributed by other developers, companies and governments.

Meta's move is an exception to its "acceptable use policy," which forbade the use of the company's A.I. software for "military, warfare, nuclear industries," among other purposes. In a blog post on Monday, Nick Clegg, Meta's president of global affairs, said the company now backed "responsible and ethical uses" of the technology that supported the United States and "democratic values" in a global race for A.I. supremacy. "Meta wants to play its part to support the safety, security and economic prosperity of America -- and of its closest allies too," Mr. Clegg wrote. He added that "widespread adoption of American open source A.I. models serves both economic and security interests." The company said it would also share its technology with members of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance: Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand in addition to the United States.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: The CEO of AI search company Perplexity, Aravind Srinivas, has offered to cross picket lines and provide services to mitigate the effect of a strike by New York Times tech workers. The NYT Tech Guild announced its strike Monday, after setting November 4 as its deadline months earlier. The workers represented provide software support and data analysis for the Times, on the business side of the outlet. They have been asking for an annual 2.5% wage increase and to cement a current two days per week in-office expectation, among other things. [...] Picketers demonstrated in front of the NYT building in New York as negotiations continued. Meanwhile, on X, formerly known as Twitter, Perplexity's CEO offered to step in for the striking workers.

Replying to Semafor media editor Max Tani quoting the publisher, Srinivas wrote: "Hey AG Sulzberger @nytimes sorry to see this. Perplexity is on standby to help ensure your essential coverage is available to all through the election. DM me anytime here." Many on X immediately castigated Srinivas for acting as a scab -- a derogatory term for people willing to perform the jobs of striking workers. It is widely considered a disreputable behavior in matters of labor and equity. By undercutting collective action, scabs limit the ability of workers to bargain with those in positions of power. Srinivas may simply be trying to make sure people have the information they need on election day. The company has lately unveiled its own elections info hub and map. But to offer its services explicitly as a replacement for striking workers was bound to be an unpopular move.

Though TechCrunch asked Perplexity for comment, Srinivas responded to TechCrunch's post on X saying that "the offer was *not* to 'replace' journalists or engineers with AI but to provide technical infra support on a high-traffic day." The striking workers in question, however, are the ones who provide that service to the NYT. It's not really clear what services other than AI tools Perplexity could offer, or why they would not amount to replacing the workers in question.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: On Friday, Perplexity launched an election information hub that relies on data from The Associated Press and Democracy Works to provide live updates and information about the 2024 US general election, which takes place on Tuesday, November 5. "Starting Tuesday, we'll be offering live updates on elections using data from The Associated Press so you can stay informed on presidential, senate, and house races at both a state and national level," Perplexity wrote in a blog post. The site will pull data from special data sources (called APIs) hosted by the two organizations. As of Monday, Perplexity's hub currently provides interactive information on voting requirements, poll times, and summaries about ballot measures, candidates, policy positions, and endorsements. Users can ask questions about the information similar to using a chatbot like ChatGPT.

Perplexity's embrace of providing election information is an exception in the AI field. Wary about accidentally providing misinformation, competitor AI assistants from OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic currently direct users elsewhere or decline to answer election questions. OpenAI's ChatGPT Search directs election result queries to The Associated Press and Reuters. Perplexity describes its new elections hub as "an entry point for understanding key issues." But like other AI models, Perplexity can produce confabulations (plausible incorrect information) when generating responses. That could present an accuracy problem because the site's Voter Guide service uses AI language models to summarize and interpret information pulled from the web. Here's what Ars Technica advises: "Take what you see on Perplexity's site with a huge grain of salt -- do not rely on it without verifying the information with a trustworthy external source."

App developers Musi and Sarafan Mobile have sued Apple and Google in California federal court over app removals they claim were unjustified, highlighting tensions over the tech giants' intellectual property enforcement policies. Musi's music-streaming app was removed after YouTube complained about interface infringement, while Sarafan's "Reely" app was taken down following Instagram's claims about logo similarity.

Both developers say the platforms breached their agreements by removing apps without sufficient evidence. The lawsuits underscore broader concerns about Apple and Google's dominance in app distribution. Their private IP dispute systems operate outside traditional legal frameworks, with platforms making unilateral decisions that can effectively shut down businesses, according to University of New Hampshire law professor Peter Karol. [...]

"In a court proceeding, you can see here's a complaint with the allegations, and then we have the defendant respond, and then we have a judge come out with an opinion saying, 'Is the mark valid? Is the mark infringed?'" said Lisa Ramsey, law professor at University of San Diego. Google and Apple's systems, meanwhile, are "a black box."

An anonymous reader shares a report: Plans by Mark Zuckerberg's Meta to build an AI data centre in the US that runs on nuclear power were thwarted in part because a rare species of bee was discovered on land earmarked for the project, according to people familiar with the matter.

Zuckerberg had planned to strike a deal with an existing nuclear power plant operator to provide emissions-free electricity for a new data centre supporting his artificial intelligence ambitions. However, the potential deal faced multiple complications including environmental and regulatory challenges, these people said.

The discovery of the rare bee species on a location next to the plant where the data centre was to be built would have complicated the project, Zuckerberg told a Meta all-hands meeting last week, according to two people familiar with the meeting.

Millions of U.S. cellphone users could be vulnerable to Chinese government surveillance, warns a Washington Post columnist, "on the networks of at least three major U.S. carriers."

They cite six current or former senior U.S. officials, all of whom were briefed about the attack by the U.S. intelligence community. The Chinese hackers, who the United States believes are linked to Beijing's Ministry of State Security, have burrowed inside the private wiretapping and surveillance system that American telecom companies built for the exclusive use of U.S. federal law enforcement agencies — and the U.S. government believes they likely continue to have access to the system.... The U.S. government and the telecom companies that are dealing with the breach have said very little publicly about it since it was first detected in August, leaving the public to rely on details trickling out through leaks...

The so-called lawful-access system breached by the Salt Typhoon hackers was established by telecom carriers after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to allow federal law enforcement officials to execute legal warrants for records of Americans' phone activity or to wiretap them in real time, depending on the warrant. Many of these cases are authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which is used to investigate foreign spying that involves contact with U.S. citizens. The system is also used for legal wiretaps related to domestic crimes.

It is unknown whether hackers were able to access records about classified wiretapping operations, which could compromise federal criminal investigations and U.S. intelligence operations around the world, multiple officials told me. But they confirmed the previous reporting that hackers were able to both listen in on phone calls and monitor text messages. "Right now, China has the ability to listen to any phone call in the United States, whether you are the president or a regular Joe, it makes no difference," one of the hack victims briefed by the FBI told me. "This has compromised the entire telecommunications infrastructure of this country."

The Wall Street Journal first reported on Oct. 5 that China-based hackers had penetrated the networks of U.S. telecom providers and might have penetrated the system that telecom companies operate to allow lawful access to wiretapping capabilities by federal agencies... [After releasing a short statement], the FBI notified 40 victims of Salt Typhoon, according to multiple officials. The FBI informed one person who had been compromised that the initial group of identified targets included six affiliated with the Trump campaign, this person said, and that the hackers had been monitoring them as recently as last week... "They had live audio from the president, from JD, from Jared," the person told me. "There were no device compromises, these were all real-time interceptions...." [T]he duration of the surveillance is believed to date back to last year.
Several officials told the columnist that the cyberattack also targetted senior U.S. government officials and top business leaders — and that even more compromised targets are being discovered. At this point, "Multiple officials briefed by the investigators told me the U.S. government does not know how many people were targeted, how many were actively surveilled, how long the Chinese hackers have been in the system, or how to get them out."

But the article does include this quote from U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Mark Warner. "It is much more serious and much worse than even what you all presume at this point."

One U.S. representative suggested Americans rely more on encrypted apps. The U.S. is already investigating — but while researching the article, the columnist writes, "The National Security Council declined to comment, and the FBI did not respond to a request for comment..." They end with this recommendation.

"If millions of Americans are vulnerable to Chinese surveillance, they have a right to know now."