News of the Cyber World

[kyonides]

EV Traffic Jam

Welcome to the Future: Waymo Driverless Cars Create a Traffic Jam and Honk at Each Other in the Pre-Dawn Hours

Driverless cars stationed in a San Francisco parking lot created a traffic jam at 4:00 a.m. and began honking at each other, waking up local residents. Many report the pre-dawn traffic snarl is a regular occurrence for the driverless cars.

A resident of San Francisco, California, filmed the driverless vehicles as they honked in the middle of the night in a nearby parking lot, according to a report by BBC News.

The video shows more than 30 driverless cars — some of which were slowly moving, appearing to be stuck in traffic jams — as they began to honk.

Waymo, Google’s self-driving car project, reportedly said that the honking was the result of a feature meant to prevent the driverless vehicles from getting into crashes.

The company told CBS News that it has since updated the software that causes the vehicles to honk.

“Our electric vehicles should keep the noise down for our neighbors moving forward,” Waymo said.

This is not the first time a driverless Waymo vehicle has caused a stir.

As Breitbart News reported, a driverless Waymo vehicle in Phoenix, Arizona, was pulled over by police in June after it was seen going “haywire” in traffic. This moment was also caught on camera.

Waymo blamed the incident on construction in the city, saying the construction signage has been inconsistent, and claimed the vehicle impeded oncoming traffic because the officer had blocked the driverless car.

Former Google CEO on AI

Steal Content and Have Lawyers ‘Clean Up the Mess:’ Former Google CEO Explains AI Business Model

Former Google CEO and noted leftist Eric Schmidt’s recent comments at Stanford University have ignited a firestorm of discussion about the future of AI and the ethics of Silicon Valley entrepreneurship.

The Verge reports that during an interview with Stanford professor Erik Brynjolfsson, Schmidt made several provocative statements that have since drawn scrutiny. Most notably, he suggested that if TikTok were to be banned, aspiring Silicon Valley entrepreneurs should instruct their AI language models to “Make me a copy of TikTok, steal all the users, steal all the music, put my preferences in it, produce this program in the next 30 seconds, release it, and in one hour, if it’s not viral, do something different along the same lines.”

While Schmidt later clarified that he was not advocating for the illegal theft of content, his comments raised eyebrows among those concerned about the ethical implications of AI-powered entrepreneurship. “Silicon Valley will run these tests and clean up the mess,” Schmidt said. “And that’s typically how those things are done.”

The former Google executive also made headlines for attributing Google’s alleged slowness in responding to the rise of ChatGPT to employees prioritizing working from home over “winning.” This remark, which Schmidt has since walked back, sparked debate about the role of remote work in fostering innovation within tech giants like Google.

Schmidt’s wide-ranging conversation with Brynjolfsson touched on various other topics, including his investment in the AI startup Mistral, his role as “a licensed arms dealer” to the US military, and his recent dinner with Tesla CEO Elon Musk. The video of the interview was initially posted on Stanford’s YouTube channel but was later removed after Schmidt’s comments gained widespread attention.

The removal of the video has only heightened interest in Schmidt’s remarks, with many in the tech industry and beyond speculating about the implications of his statements for the future of AI development and regulation. Some have praised Schmidt for his candor and willingness to tackle controversial topics, while others have criticized him for appearing to endorse unethical business practices.

No More EV's in South Korea?

Carmakers Scramble to Calm Revolt Against EVs in South Korea After Battery Fires

Mercedes-Benz and BMW have reportedly disclosed the names of their electric vehicle battery suppliers in South Korea, following a recent EV explosion that triggered widespread revolt against electric vehicles.

Bloomberg reports that the South Korean units of Mercedes-Benz Group AG and BMW AG have taken a significant step towards transparency by revealing the names of their electric vehicle (EV) battery suppliers on their websites. This rare disclosure comes in the wake of an incident where an unplugged electric Mercedes-Benz sedan caught fire at an apartment complex in Incheon, South Korea, earlier this month. The explosion led to the evacuation of 200 families and sparked calls for stricter government measures on EV safety.

Typically, automakers around the world keep information about their battery suppliers confidential. However, the growing fears over EV safety in South Korea have prompted Hyundai and Kia to share the names of their battery makers in recent days. The German carmakers, Mercedes-Benz and BMW, have now followed suit as the government plans to hold a joint meeting with automakers to discuss short-term measures to prevent further EV fires.

Although Mercedes did not specify which company manufactured the battery in the car involved in the fire, local media identified it as China’s Farasis Energy. The transport ministry has advised Mercedes to conduct a special inspection of the vehicle in question. In response, Mercedes-Benz Korea announced that it will offer free inspections for all of its EV models starting from Wednesday. Additionally, the company plans to donate approximately 4.5 billion won ($3.3 million) to help residents affected by the explosion, even as the investigation into the fire continues.

Farasis Energy, ranked 15th among global battery makers according to a BloombergNEF estimate of manufacturing capacity between 2023-2025, began supplying batteries to Mercedes-Benz in 2018 as part of an eight-year contract. In 2020, the German carmaker became a strategic investor in the company. However, Farasis did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding the recent incident.

SAG-AFTRA, Games & AI

SAG-Aftra Union Performers Call for AI Protections in Video Games, Picket Disney

Actors and performers in the SAG-AFTRA union have been calling for AI protections in the video game industry.

Over the past 20 years, video games have become an increasingly lucrative industry for actors, with voice work often going to high-level stars in mega-blockbuster video game series. With the advancement of AI, actors who have found steady work in that industry fear the work will soon dry up and have called for protections. Per The Hollywood Reporter (THR):

Thursday’s event was the second picket organized by SAG-AFTRA after the union called a strike against video game companies on July 25. Performers first demonstrated outside of Warner Bros. Games on August 1 before setting up shop a little over a mile away in front of the Disney building two weeks later. (Beyond Disney Character Voices and Warner Bros. Games, the union is also currently striking Activision Blizzard, Electronic Arts and Insomniac Games, among others.)

According to SAG-AFTRA’s negotiators, video game companies only would agree to partial but “dangerously incomplete” AI proposals in the parties’ last formal bargaining session, which would have left stunt and movement performers particularly vulnerable if they had been enacted. A spokesperson for the video game companies has countered that their offer was “directly responsive to SAG-AFTRA’s concerns” and would offer “meaningful AI protections that include requiring consent and fair compensation to all performers working under the IMA,” the Interactive Media Agreement. The spokesperson called this contract language “among the strongest in the entertainment industry.”

Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, the union’s national executive director and chief negotiator, said that actors fear they will not be able to make a living if they do not fight AI protections.

AI-Generated Reviews

FTC Cracks Down on Fake, AI-Generated Online Reviews

The FTC has taken a significant step towards combating fake reviews and deceptive marketing practices with the announcement of a new rule targeting bogus online reviews designed to trick consumers.

TechCrunch reports that in a unanimous 5-to-0 vote, the FTC has finalized a rule that aims to address various types of fake reviews and prohibits marketers from engaging in deceptive practices. The new rule, set to be enforced 60 days after its publication in the Federal Register, targets practices such as AI-generated reviews, censorship of honest negative reviews, and compensating third parties for positive reviews.

The decision comes as a response to the long-standing issue of unreliable online reviews, particularly on platforms like Amazon, where merchants have been using fake and paid reviews extensively. In 2020 alone, Amazon claimed to have shut down more than 200 million fake reviews. Yelp, another popular review platform, reported over 950 instances of “deceptive review practices” on other online platforms in 2021.

The rise of generative AI has further exacerbated the problem, making it easier for bad actors to create fake reviews. The FTC’s new rule aims to address this growing concern and improve the trustworthiness of online reviews.

Under the new rule, businesses are prohibited from using fake or disingenuous reviews, including AI-generated reviews and reviews from individuals who lack experience with the actual product. The rule also bans the buying or selling of reviews, whether negative or positive. Company insiders writing reviews must clearly disclose their connection to the business, and officers or managers are not allowed to give testimonials or ask employees to solicit reviews from relatives.

Furthermore, the rule prohibits company-controlled review websites that claim to be independent and bans the use of legal threats, physical threats, or intimidation to forcefully delete or prevent negative reviews. Businesses are also prohibited from misrepresenting that the review portion of their website comprises all or most of the reviews when they are suppressing negative ones.

Texas VS GM

Texas Sues GM, Claiming It Secretly Collected Driver Data to Share with Insurers

The state of Texas has filed a lawsuit against General Motors, accusing the automaker of installing technology in over 14 million vehicles to collect driver data it could then sell to insurers and other companies without consent.

CNBC reports that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced this week that the lawsuit stemmed from an investigation initiated in June, which examined whether several automakers were collecting and selling vast amounts of data without the knowledge of drivers. The probe revealed that GM had allegedly installed data-collecting technology in most of its vehicles starting from the 2015 model year.

According to Paxton, the data collected by GM was used to create “Driving Scores” that assessed the driving habits of more than 1.8 million Texas drivers. These scores took into account factors such as speeding, hard braking, sharp steering, seatbelt usage, and late-night driving. The concern is that insurers could then use this data to make decisions about raising premiums, canceling policies, or denying coverage altogether.

The lawsuit alleges that GM’s practice involved dealers subjecting unsuspecting consumers to the belief that enrolling in OnStar diagnostic products, which collected the data, was mandatory. This often occurred immediately after the stressful buying and leasing process when consumers were more vulnerable.

Paxton expressed his outrage at the situation, stating, “Companies are using invasive technology to violate the rights of our citizens in unthinkable ways. Our investigation revealed that General Motors has engaged in egregious business practices that violated Texans’ privacy and broke the law. We will hold them accountable.”

In response to the lawsuit, GM stated that they have been in discussions with the Attorney General’s office and are currently reviewing the complaint. The automaker added, “We share the desire to protect consumers’ privacy.”

Texas VS SpaceX

Texas Accuses Elon Musk’s SpaceX of Violating Environmental Regulations at Launch Facility

Elon Musk’s SpaceX has been charged with repeatedly releasing pollutants into or near bodies of water in Texas, according to a notice of violation from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ).

CNBC reports that the notice, which was issued last week, focuses on SpaceX’s water deluge system at its Starbase launch facility in Boca Chica, Texas. This comes five months after the EPA Region 6 office had also informed SpaceX of violating the Clean Water Act with the same type of activity.

TCEQ stated that its office in Harlingen, near the SpaceX Starbase, received a total of 14 complaints alleging environmental impacts from the facility’s deluge system. The first complaint, received on August 6, 2023, alleged that SpaceX “was discharging deluge water without TCEQ authorization.”

An environmental investigator with TCEQ conducted a compliance record review on July 25, 2024, and found that SpaceX had discharged industrial wastewater without a permit four times between March and July of this year.

SpaceX is developing its Starship spacecraft to transport people and equipment to low Earth orbit, the Moon, and perhaps even further destinations like Mars. However, during the first test flight of Starship in April 2023, the rocket caused the concrete launchpad to explode, and the spacecraft also blew up in mid-air. In response, SpaceX rushed to rebuild the launchpad and installed a new water deluge system without going through the proper permitting process.

The company ran its first full-pressure test of the water deluge system in July 2023. Despite receiving a formal notice of violation from the EPA on March 13, SpaceX proceeded with its third test flight of Starship on March 14, using the unauthorized water deluge system.

Facebook Censored Reagan The Movie

Facebook Admits to ‘Incorrectly’ Rejecting Ads for ‘Reagan’ Movie

After actor Dennis Quaid accused Facebook of censoring promotional content for his upcoming movie Reagan, the social media giant has admitted to “incorrectly” rejecting ads for the movie.

Facebook made the admission in a statement to Newsweek, which first reported on Dennis Quaid’s accusations earlier this week.

“While there are no restrictions on this page that would prevent the admins from posting, we did identify a handful of ads from this account that were incorrectly rejected,” a Facebook spokesperson told the outlet.

“This happened because our automated systems mistakenly determined that content about President Reagan required prior authorization in accordance with our policies for ads about Social Issues, Elections or Politics. This was a mistake and the restriction on the ads has been lifted.”

Earlier this week, Dennis Quaid accused Facebook of censoring Reagan marketing content as well as twice suspending the movie’s official Facebook page.

The apparent efforts to censor Reagan come during a presidential election year — a time when left-wing Silicon Valley giants have censored content that they believe will hurt Democrats.

Meta on Politics

Study: Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta Diminishes Engagement on Political Instagram Accounts by Up to 65%

A recent study conducted by Accountable Tech, a social media integrity nonprofit, has shed light on the impact of Mark Zuckerberg’s decision to reduce the spread of political content on Instagram.

Bloomberg reports that the study, which spanned a period of approximately three months following the implementation of the new policy in early March, focused on five prominent Instagram accounts with a combined following of 13.5 million users. These accounts, including those of Hillary Clinton and LGBT activist group GLAAD, frequently share leftist political content. Although the study focused on five large leftist accounts, the same rules are dampening conservatives on Instagram, which already have been the target of Zuckerberg’s censorship for years.

Researchers at Accountable Tech gathered viewership data from the Instagram Insights pages of the participating accounts throughout the study period. The findings revealed a staggering 65 percent drop in the average weekly reach per post across the five accounts over the 10-week duration.

Meta’s decision to limit the reach of political content through its recommendation algorithms has drawn criticism from various quarters. While Meta executives maintain that users will still see political posts from accounts they follow, critics argue that the company’s definition of “political” lacks clarity and may stifle important information from activists, news organizations, and individual creators during a crucial global election year.

Zach Praiss, Accountable Tech’s campaigns director who spearheaded the research, emphasized the importance of Instagram as a platform for people to engage in meaningful discussions about issues that matter to them. “Millions of people are using it on a daily basis for many, many hours,” Praiss stated. “It’s a place where I think it’s important for people to have the ability to talk about what matters to them in a safe, productive manner.”

Meta has increasingly distanced itself from politics in recent years, following accusations of amplifying misinformation and partisan bias. In a February blog post, the company announced updates to Instagram and Threads, describing political content as “potentially related to things like laws, elections, or social topics.”

The End of Google?

DOJ Considers Breaking Up Google Following Landmark Antitrust Ruling

In the wake of a recent court decision that found Google guilty of illegally monopolizing the online search market, the DOJ is weighing options to restore competition, including a potential breakup of the tech giant.

Bloomberg reports that the DOJ is deliberating on the possibility of breaking up Google following a landmark court ruling that found the company guilty of illegally monopolizing the online search and search text advertising markets. This marks the first time since the unsuccessful efforts to break up Microsoft two decades ago that Washington has considered dismantling a company for illegal monopolization.

According to people with knowledge of the deliberations, the Justice Department is also exploring less severe options, such as requiring Google to share more data with competitors and implementing measures to prevent the company from gaining an unfair advantage in AI products. However, the government is likely to seek a ban on the type of exclusive contracts that were central to its case against Google, regardless of the chosen course of action.

If the DOJ decides to pursue a breakup plan, the Android operating system and Google’s web browser, Chrome, are the most likely candidates for divestment. Officials are also considering the possibility of forcing a sale of AdWords, the platform used by the company to sell text advertising.

The Justice Department’s discussions have intensified following Judge Amit Mehta’s August 5 ruling, which found that Google illegally monopolized the markets of online search and search text ads. Google has stated its intention to appeal the decision, but Mehta has ordered both parties to begin planning for the second phase of the case, which will involve the government’s proposals for restoring competition, potentially including a breakup request.

The government’s plan will need to be accepted by Mehta, who would then direct the company to comply. A forced breakup of Google would be the most significant dismantling of a U.S. company since the breakup of AT&T in the 1980s.

UK: Online Anti-Establishment Rhetoric

BBC: Court Hears Man Arrested for ‘Anti-Establishment Rhetoric’ on Social Media

The new UK government’s dragnet continues to dredge the internet, with the state broadcaster noting the arrest of an internet user for “anti-Muslim and anti-establishment rhetoric” going to court this week.

The BBC states a 40-year-old man was arrested on Sunday in Lincolnshire over the use of social media. Wayne O’Rourke appeared in Magistrate’s court on Tuesday, did not enter a plea, and will appear at Lincoln Crown Court on Friday.

The UK state broadcaster, which is funded by a mandatory tax levied on all households that operate a television set, or which receive live television or BBC content by internet data, states:

Nottingham Magistrates’ Court heard the posts were alleged to contain anti-Muslim and anti-establishment rhetoric.
The court heard Mr O’Rourke had allegedly expressed support for the recent riots and offered advice on how to remain anonymous to his 90,000 followers.

German Paper on Censorship

Top German Paper Blasts EU’s Censorious Attempt to Save Freedom by Killing Freedom

The “primal fear” among the European left of dissent has driven them to believe Elon Musk and X are actually a greater threat to democracy than the “totalitarian censorship” being enacted in the name of freedom, the lead reporter in a top European newspaper writes.

The European Union is developing a pretty taste for paradox in its quest to save freedom by killing freedom, so says the leader editorial in Germany’s newspaper of record Die Welt in response to the Commission’s petulant letter addressed to Elon Musk on Monday night.

Published shortly before Musk’s big interview with President Trump on Monday night, the letter from European Commissioner Thierry Breton, the bloc’s would-be censor-in-chief demanded X/Twitter deploy “mitigation measures” against “harmful content” that could “generate detrimental effects on civic discourse and public security” in Europe.

Breton warned of repercussions if Elon Musk didn’t fall into line with his demands.

Mr Musk responded with characteristic disdain, and enjoying his American freedom of expression to its fullest limits, telling Commissioner Breton — in meme form — to go fuck himself.

Anna Schneider, the chief reporter for Die Welt had Breton’s “totalitarian” bid in her sights on Tuesday with a sardonic take, noting that “despite the fact that the European Union wants to stand for values such as democracy, the rule of law, human rights and, last but not least, freedom” it somehow ends up treating a law ” to abolish freedom of expression… as a masterpiece”.

The Union finds itself in the position of being “against freedom for freedom or something like that,”  she quipped. The paradoxical logic of Breton as illustrated by Schneider is immediately redolent of the Colonel Blimp character created by cartoonist David Low, who satirised the attitudes of the British ruling class of the time, noting the attitude that colonised people needed the British Empire to protect them from massacres, and if they didn’t like it, they’d have to be shot to teach them a lesson.

EU Backtracks Censorship Demands

EU Backtracks Censorship Demands of Musk-Trump Interview Amid Election Interference Accusations

Facing accusations of election interference, the European Union on Tuesday tried to walk back censorship threats made by Brussels’ speech code arbiter, Thierry Breton, over Elon Musk’s interview with former President Donald Trump.

Breton appears to have been thrown under the bus as panic broke out after he allegedly acted unilaterally to publish a letter to X owner Elon Musk ahead of his uncensored, live conversation with Donald Trump on Monday evening.

In his letter, the French business executive-turned politician threatened to use all powers in his “toolbox” under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) if the interview broke the EU’s speech restrictions on hate speech, disinformation, or anything deemed harmful to “civic discourse and public security” in Europe.

However, according to a report from POLITICO on Tuesday, a European Commission spokesman said that the threats made in the letter were made without the knowledge of EU chief Ursula von der Leyen.

The website then cited “four separate EU officials” speaking on condition of anonymity to condemn the censorship czar’s threats to Musk amid accusations that they had represented “election interference” in the United States.

“The EU is not in the business of electoral interference,” one EU official told POLITICO. “DSA implementation is too important to be misused by an attention-seeking politician in search of his next big job.”
...
X CEO Linda Yaccarino accused Breton of “an unprecedented attempt to stretch a law intended to apply in Europe to political activities in the US.”

Eurosceptic politicians have also expressed support for Musk in the face of EU censorship demands, including Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, who described the letter from Breton as a “surreal and venomous threat” and noted that his League party had voted against the EU’s DSA speech restrictions.

Babies in Danger

Report: China’s Temu and Shein Selling Dangerous Baby Products Banned in U.S.

The tech industry publication the Information revealed on Tuesday that it had discovered a wide variety of baby and toddler products on the Chinese e-commerce applications Temu and Shein that pose a danger to their intended users, including padded crib bumpers that the U.S. government has banned from sale.

Temu and Shein are both China-based consumer applications. Shein specializes in “fast fashion” items marketed to young women, though it also sells clothing for men and children. Temu sells clothing as well as household goods, art supplies, health-related products, and more. Both sell products widely considered to be very low quality at cheap prices.

The companies are massive international operations that rake in billions of dollars for their Chinese owners, particularly in the United States. Shein reached record-high profits of $2 billion in 2023, up from $700 million in 2022, lagging only behind Amazon and Walmart in online fast fashion sales in America. Temu’s parent company, Pinduoduo, which operates a parallel cheap goods retailer in China, saw a 246-percent increase in net profits in the first quarter of 2024; 60 percent of Temu’s transactions in 2023 were in America.

The success of both companies is largely based on being able to dramatically undercut the prices of their competitors and ship their products directly to American consumers from their Chinese suppliers, cutting shipping middlemen. Their trade practices have fallen under intense criticism in the United States, as evidence suggests they both have ties to China’s sprawling Uyghur slave trade, the backbone of the ongoing genocide against the Uyghur people in occupied East Turkistan. Shein has also been accused of stealing copyrighted designs to rapidly manufacture clothing items, while Temu is facing legal action in Arkansas for essentially running a customer “data-theft business.”

The Information added to concerns about Americans using Temu and Shein on Tuesday, as its reporters found items for sale on the apps intended for children that could present a significant danger. A top concern for the outlet was the availability of padded crib bumpers, which are intended to soften the sides of a crib for babies. Congress passed the Safe Sleep for Babies Act in 2021, banning crib bumpers as a result of significant evidence that they pose a threat of suffocating babies if they fall on their faces during sleep.

On Shein, the Information found drawstring hoodies for sale in sizes for very small children. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission explains on its website that “drawstrings at the hood and neck area of children’s upper outerwear in sizes 2T to 12 (or the equivalent) are prohibited” because they could become entangled in a child’s neck and asphyxiate them.

“The Commission has determined that hood and neck drawstrings on children’s upper outerwear in sizes 2T to 12 or the equivalent present a strangulation hazard that is a substantial product hazard,” the commission explains. “In addition, the Commission has determined that waist and bottom drawstrings on children’s upper outerwear not meeting certain requirements also present a substantial product hazard.”