Tag Archives: president

President Trump’s Attempts to Cut Scientific Research Funding: How Courts and Congress Stopped Him

Posted on by
Reply

The Landscape of American Scientific Research: A Year in Review

Approximately a year ago, optimism surrounded the realm of American scientific research. However, in February, the Trump administration executed significant staff reductions within federal science agencies, limiting grant access for universities and undermining funding for research overhead. Targeting prestigious universities for accusations of anti-Semitism, the administration retracted grants on matters deemed relevant to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Proposed budgets for key agencies, including NASA and the National Science Foundation (NSF), indicated sweeping financial cuts.

This turmoil led many to believe that the scientific community was under siege. Post-World War II, the federal model of outsourcing research to academic institutions seemed to be unraveling.

Holden Thorpe, editor of Science Journal, noted, “That partnership is now breaking down,” calling some of these cuts “an unexpected and immediate blow” and a “betrayal of the partnerships that have enabled American innovation and progress.”

Yet, as we reflect on the past year, those dire predictions have not materialized. Legal challenges and a recent Congressional rejection of many proposed cuts have preserved essential funding.

A coalition of scientific, educational, and civil liberties organizations, including the ACLU, APHA, and AAU, successfully contested some of the Trump administration’s pivotal policy shifts, safeguarding billions in scientific funding. As a result, funding packages negotiated in Congress over the past few weeks have largely maintained federal funding for scientific agencies similar to last year.

The House echoed the Senate’s decision on Tuesday, passing a funding package that included modest increases for National Institutes of Health (NIH) research while rejecting Trump’s proposal for a more than 40% funding cut. Trump signed the bill that evening.

Joan Padron Carney, chief government relations officer at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, stated, “Congress has effectively rejected the president’s very deep cuts.” Given recent trends, she added, “While flat funding may not have seemed like a victory before, considering the circumstances of the past year, we are quite satisfied.”

It’s crucial to acknowledge that the scientific sector hasn’t completely evaded the adverse impacts of the administration. Both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and NASA have experienced substantial job losses, NIH leadership underwent significant changes, and there have been reductions in essential climate reports and weather services.

The National Weather Service releases weather balloons on a routine basis above Gaylord, Michigan.
Marvin Joseph/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Padron-Carney acknowledged that the Trump administration would likely persist in its initiatives to defund science on topics it disapproves of. She noted that a presidential order mandates many grants to obtain approval from senior political appointees.

Despite these challenges, Padron-Carney remarked, “Science is holding up as best it can,” particularly after a year that felt precarious.

The White House did not respond to inquiries regarding Congressional decisions on science funding, although it commended the bill prior to its passage.

“The Administration appreciates that Congress is proceeding with the spending process in a manner that avoids an extensive omnibus package while adhering to a fiscally responsible agreement that prioritizes essential investments,” stated the White House Office of Management and Budget.

A significant concern within the scientific community revolves around disrupting grant flows to universities and research institutes, especially from the NIH, the primary agency responsible for biomedical and life sciences research funding.

The Trump administration’s attempts to assert control over government agencies led to substantial delays, cancellations, and a halt in thousands of grants. Additionally, the administration’s move to limit indirect costs universities could charge to NIH created uproar, with a proposed 15% cap estimated to save the government $4 billion annually. Universities and states contested this cap, claiming it violated Congressional guidelines and NIH policies.

Substantial legal victories eventually facilitated the reinstated flow of funds.

Last month, an appeals court upheld a ruling that the Trump administration couldn’t impose caps on indirect research spending. Furthermore, in December, the ACLU reached a partial settlement when it filed a lawsuit challenging the NIH’s alleged “ideological purge” on research grants. This settlement mandated the NIH to resume reviewing specific stalled grants, while other aspects related to the diversity, equity, and inclusion lawsuit are still pending.

Olga Axelrod, ACLU attorney involved in subsidy litigation, described the lawsuit as an essential check, affirming, “However, public health research remains under threat.”

The NIH opted not to comment on the lawsuit proceedings.

Headquarters of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, captured in May.
Wesley Lapointe/Washington Post, from Getty Images File

A surge in lawsuits contesting the Trump administration’s restrictions on grant funding continues, with appeals pending. The Georgetown University’s Health Policy and Law Initiative has tracked 39 related funding complaints this past year, a significant increase from zero last year.

Katie Keith, the initiative’s director, expressed that “It’s exploded,” noting mixed results thus far.

In one instance, a judge ruled against the Trump administration after it cut Harvard University’s funding by $2.2 million. Conversely, another case saw a judge dismiss a lawsuit where faculty aimed to restore nearly $400 million in grants to Columbia University. Notably, Columbia had to pay the government a $200 million settlement after allegations of anti-discrimination violations.

Harvard University’s campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in June.
Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images

By the end of the fiscal year 2025, NIH expenditures reached typical levels. This marked a substantial shift from earlier in the year, when it seemed improbable NIH would fully utilize the $36 billion allocated by Congress for external grants.

“NIH was significantly lagging,” remarked Jeremy Berg, a professor of computational and systems biology at the University of Pittsburgh who monitors NIH spending.

However, after Congress urged NIH to expedite spending, the funds began to flow, mitigating risks to vital research.

Preserved brain samples at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle, where research focuses on Alzheimer’s and other neurodegenerative diseases.
Evan Bush/NBC News

To adapt, the NIH has adjusted its usual practice of funding projects annually, now distributing funds across the entire grant period (typically 4-5 years).

“This essentially serves as an accounting measure,” stated Berg, adding that the number of new projects funded in 2025 had dwindled by about 5% to 10%.

Nonetheless, financial resources continued to flow into research institutions nationwide.

The scientific community has increasingly turned to Congress as an ally amid funding disputes.

In its budget proposal last spring, the Trump administration expressed strong opposition to scientific funding, suggesting significant cuts to various agencies. Proposals indicated the NSF would face a reduction of nearly 57%, NASA around 24%, and the NIH exceeding 40%. Overall, the proposal outlined almost a 36% cut in non-defense scientific research and development funding, as noted by AAAS.

Nevertheless, Congress largely opposed President Trump’s recommendations, maintaining scientific funding within negotiated spending bills. The NIH’s budget was established at $48.7 billion, reflecting a $415 million increase over 2025. According to Senate Vice Chairman Patty Murray, approximately 75% of this allocation supports external research grants. Moreover, NASA’s budget faced only a 1.6% reduction, and NSF experienced a 3.4% cut.

A meteorologist observes weather patterns at the NOAA Weather and Climate Prediction Center in Maryland, captured in 2024.
Michael A. McCoy/Bloomberg/Getty Images File

Congress also enhanced NIH funding for cancer research by $128 million, Alzheimer’s research by $100 million, and added $15 million to ALS research initiatives.

Additionally, legislative measures were introduced to prevent future attempts to limit indirect research spending.

The law mandates NIH to provide monthly reports to Congress on grant awards, terminations, and cancellations, allowing for better tracking of expenditures.

“This illustrates continued bipartisan support for the federal government’s crucial role in bolstering research,” noted Toby Smith, senior vice president for government relations and public policy at the Association of American Universities.

Nonetheless, questions linger about the NIH’s functionality with a reduced workforce and the extent of political influence from the Trump administration. Approximately half of the directorships at the NIH’s 27 institutes and centers remain unfilled.

“We’ve secured Congress’s support for funding. However, can they effectively execute it? Will adequate staffing be available?” queried Smith.

Even if major funding disruptions are averted this year, the uncertainties stemming from the first year of the second Trump administration could resonate throughout the scientific community for years to come.

A recent report in Science Magazine revealed that over 10,000 professionals holding Ph.D.s have departed from the federal government. Moreover, a study published in JAMA Internal Medicine indicated that funding interruptions affected clinical trials involving 74,000 participants. Additionally, the influx of young scientists training at U.S. universities is dwindling.

A sign from the March 7 Stand Up for Science march in Seattle Center, urging for continued support of scientific funding.
Stephanie Ryder

At the University of Washington, a leading public institution for biomedical research that heavily relies on NIH funding, there have been hiring freezes, travel restrictions, and furloughs implemented. The influx of new doctoral students entering the medical school has decreased by one-third, primarily due to uncertainty regarding continued funding for principal investigators.

Shelly Sakiyama Elbert, associate dean for research and graduate education at the University of California School of Medicine, expressed, “Some nights, I find it hard to sleep, pondering how to secure funding for my lab.”

The only constant in 2025, she emphasized, has been the feeling of “whiplash.”

Elbert also highlighted a decline in faculty positions and a 5% drop in doctoral student applications at universities.

“This uncertainty only hampers scientific progress,” she concluded.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Despite President Trump’s Claims, a U.S. Nuclear Weapons Test Remains Unlikely

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump made this announcement prior to his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in South Korea.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

US President Donald Trump has announced his intention to recommence nuclear weapons testing after a ban lasting decades. However, researchers from New Scientist contend that these tests bear no scientific relevance, are largely symbolic, pose a threat to global tranquility, and are likely to provoke public backlash in America. Ultimately, while the chances of these tests occurring seem slim, the announcement itself carries potential risks.

In a recent statement, President Trump revealed a new policy, stating in a post on Truth Social, “It’s in response to actions by other nations.” [sic] He further directed the War Department to initiate nuclear weapon tests on an equivalent basis, set to commence immediately.

The announcement lacked clarity, leaving experts puzzled as no other nation has conducted nuclear bomb tests recently. While Russia has experimented with nuclear underwater drones and nuclear-capable missiles, none of these actions involved actual nuclear detonations.

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, indications have surfaced that several nations are preparing their historic nuclear testing sites, whether genuinely intending to test again or merely using it as a political display. Significant upgrades are underway at a Chinese testing site in Xinjiang, a Russian site in the Arctic, and a US site in Nevada.

However, restarting nuclear tests would contravene decades of effective yet uneasy bans. The Limited Test Ban Treaty, signed in 1963 by the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Soviet Union, prohibits testing these weapons in the atmosphere, on water, or in space, yet allows for underground tests. Subsequently, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) was drafted in 1996, effectively halting underground nuclear tests, albeit without formal ratification.

[Since the first Trinity explosion in 1945 in the United States, over 2000 tests have been conducted until the CTBT’s drafting. India and Pakistan conducted several nuclear tests in 1998, while North Korea remains the sole nation to have tested nuclear weapons in the 21st century, with its last test occurring in 2017. The United States has refrained from nuclear testing since 1992.]

Considering this context, many experts express skepticism towards President Trump’s remarks. There is speculation regarding a desire to win the Nobel Peace Prize, as the United States would be the first global superpower to restart nuclear testing.

John Preston, a researcher at the University of Essex, suggests the president’s declaration may merely be “Trump rhetoric,” lacking any genuine intention of conducting a nuclear test, though warns that even such statements can have perilous implications. Historically, the Soviet Union and Russia have aimed to exert pressure that compels their adversaries to de-escalate activities.

Preston notes that during the Cold War, nuclear powers invested considerable time and resources in bringing in diverse experts to thoroughly comprehend how nuclear testing and proliferation could heighten conflict. Recently, however, this issue has drawn less attention and has become increasingly secretive.

“I’m concerned that the escalation ladder may not be fully understood within the policy and nuclear strategy communities,” Preston commented. “Science has already grasped the effects of nuclear weapons; there’s nothing new to discover. Thus, these tests are strictly symbolic and could lead us into an escalation we no longer effectively understand.”

Indeed, the likelihood of generating significant scientific findings from such tests seems remote. Current nuclear testing relies on highly accurate physical simulations conducted via massive supercomputers. The two most powerful public supercomputers globally are operated by the US government and are utilized to affirm the effectiveness of the US nuclear deterrent without actual testing.

Christoph Laucht, a professor at Swansea University in the UK, asserts that restarting tests would signify a regressive step at a precarious juncture in history. The New START Treaty is set to lapse on February 4, 2026. The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty puts the US and Russia in a situation where a formal nuclear treaty remains months away, with minimal prospects for a new agreement amidst the current tense global climate.

“There are genuine concerns that this could trigger a new form of nuclear arms race,” Laucht remarked. “We already possess a vast inventory of nuclear warheads, but we are reverting to a treaty environment reminiscent of the early Cold War, a time without arms limitation treaties.”

Laucht further warned that if one nation resumes testing, others may feel pressured to follow suit. Such testing could prompt protests from environmental activists, peace advocates, and communities near the Nevada test site, further straining an already divided United States.

Sarah Pozzi, a professor at the University of Michigan, argues that restarting nuclear testing would be illogical for the US. “Such actions would destabilize global affairs, incentivize other nations to resume their nuclear testing programs, and jeopardize decades of progress in nuclear arms control,” she stated. “Instead, the US should aspire to lead by example and bolster international efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation.”

Of course, there are various perspectives on the matter. In his typical style, President Trump has become fixated on cryptic, ambiguous social media posts that fail to convey the entire narrative.

Nick Ritchie, a researcher at the University of York in the UK, suggests that President Trump might merely be referring to testing nuclear delivery systems, such as missiles, rather than nuclear warheads themselves. Resuming warhead testing would likely necessitate years of planning, engineering, and political maneuvering beyond a single presidential term. However, if that is the case, it raises confusion because these delivery technologies are routinely tested alongside NATO allies.

“This is a quintessentially Trumpian method of discussing a variety of political matters, including potentially destabilizing and perilous issues like US nuclear weapons policy,” Ritchie observes. “While there remains a small chance of resuming actual testing preparations, I certainly have not seen any indications that this is on the horizon.”

Topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

How President Trump’s White House is Leveraging Video Game Memes for ICE Recruitment

Posted on by
Reply

JJust days after Microsoft unveiled Halo: Campaign Evolved, the anticipated installment in the renowned sci-fi franchise “White House” I posted an intriguing photo on X. The image, which seemingly originated from AI, depicts President Donald Trump clad in the armor of Halo’s legendary hero Master Chief, saluting in front of an American flag that has several stars missing. In his left hand, he holds an energy sword, a weapon associated with Halo’s alien adversaries. This was shared in response to a tweet from U.S. gaming retailer GameStop, with accompanying text reading “Power to the Players,” referencing the store’s slogan.

GameStop and the White House exchanged a few more Halo memes, and on October 27, the official Department of Homeland Security X account got involved as well. They utilized visuals from Halo showcasing soldiers from a futuristic realm to encourage enlistment in the increasingly militarized Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency. The accompanying message, “Stop the Flood,” suggests a troubling analogy between America’s immigrant community and the parasitic aliens that Master Chief battles.

When I sought an official comment on this post, White House Deputy Press Secretary Khush Desai stated in an email: “Another war has concluded on President Trump’s watch. There’s only one leader who is dedicated to empowering his players, and that leader is Donald J. Trump.” “That’s why he enjoys significant support from the American public and gamers alike.” (Microsoft did not respond to requests for comment.)




The White House has shared an image of Donald Trump as Master Chief from the game Halo. Photo: @WhiteHouse on X

Though this string of video game imagery may seem bizarre, Trump and his associates have been integrating gamer culture for almost a decade. Since his initial election, Trump has been appealing to gamers, a constituency that includes a significant segment of disenchanted youth. Media executive Steve Bannon joined the campaign in August 2016, acting as chief strategist and senior advisor, bringing extensive insight into video game culture and the online behavior of its most ardent enthusiasts.

Bannon had previously collaborated with the Hong Kong firm Internet Gaming Entertainment to secure funding. This firm paid low wages to Chinese laborers to collect gold in the multiplayer game World of Warcraft. According to Joshua Greene’s book on Bannon: (The Devil’s Deal: Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and the Assault on the Presidency), Bannon recognized, “These rootless white men wield immense influence.” In 2014, Bannon observed GamerGate, a murky online force in the dark recesses of the web, consistently targeting women and other marginalized individuals in the gaming industry. He noted that the movement’s actions prompted tangible events such as sustained harassment and doxxing (the public release of personal data).

Upon joining the Trump campaign, Bannon utilized his grasp of gamer culture to propel Trump into new political realms. “You can mobilize that force. They are engaging via platforms like Gamergate and transitioning into politics and Trump,” Bannon informed Greene.

Their ranks were primed for meme warfare at a moment’s notice, and indeed, they were. Throughout the campaign, Trump’s meme battalion monitored and disseminated every move of then-candidate Hillary Clinton. They circulated fabricated health-related claims using the hashtag #HillaryHealth. Pro-Trump memes were frequently produced based on internet humor and niche pop culture references. It was perhaps owing to this brigade that Trump secured victory over Clinton in the 2016 presidential election.

Following his defeat to Joe Biden in the 2020 election, Trump turned to his social media platform, Truth Social, where he persistently critiqued Biden and the Democratic Party throughout Biden’s four-year tenure. He continued to attract gamers and the online reactionary right until he regained the presidency. The second Trump administration remains reliant on the strategies and framework established by online agitators (or trolls), but this time, there is one crucial difference: Elon Musk.




The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s X post features Halo visuals as part of an ICE recruitment campaign. Photo: @DHSgov on X

The South African entrepreneur acquired Twitter in October 2022 and swiftly reinstated Trump’s banned account alongside many others. Musk, who frequently engages with gamer culture and shares memes on his platform, has further facilitated this trend.

Since President Trump assumed office in January, the White House and various federal agencies have begun disseminating memes. Last month, both the official Department of Homeland Security X account and the official White House TikTok account released a video of an ICE raid set to Pokémon theme music, interspersed with arcs from the animated series and clips of agents making arrests, accompanied by the slogan, “We’ve got to catch them all.” Following this, The Pokémon Company International informed the BBC that “permission was not granted to use our intellectual property.” Nonetheless, the video remains available as of this writing.

The video game industry has often remained silent about the reactionary politics and ideology that are prevalent in its community. For the millions of Americans engaged in gaming, who are disheartened by an administration that discourages pregnant individuals from taking Tylenol and promotes the narrative that immigrants are parasites while suggesting that the diversity, equity, and inclusion movement produces incompetent workers, it is deeply frustrating to witness these events. As the administration increasingly embraces video game iconography and internet memes, video game companies will inevitably find themselves, whether they like it or not, linked to the polarizing and reactionary politics of the right.

Source: www.theguardian.com

White House Effectiveness Review: An Eye-Opening Documentary on President Bush’s Inaction Against Climate Change

Posted on by
Reply

President George H.W. Bush (left) and environmental protection advisor Bill Riley

Netflix

white house effect
Directed by Boni Cohen, Pedro Cos, and John Schenck, available on Netflix starting October 31st

The opening scene of white house effect transports viewers to the devastating Great Drought of 1988. The backdrop is a scorching summer in North America, presenting the USA with its worst drought since the Dust Bowl. Relief is nowhere in sight; the heat is relentless.

This climate crisis defined the presidential election that year, pitting Democrat Michael Dukakis against Republican George H.W. Bush, who triumphed with a landslide victory on a pledge for enhanced environmental protection.

“Some may argue these challenges are insurmountable,” President Bush remarked during a campaign stop in Michigan, addressing climate change. “My belief is clear: it is achievable, and we must act. These matters transcend ideology and politics.” Such a sentiment from a prominent Republican seems unimaginable today.

In 1988, the U.S. was a nation where addressing environmental issues garnered votes, and where the connection between fossil fuels and climate change was discussed with a mix of urgency and skepticism.

Predominantly narrated through archival footage, white house effect serves as a window into a hopeful future that never came to fruition. It tells the tale of a populace ready to acknowledge climate change as a bipartisan issue, only to be steered away from that consensus.

The film centers on a struggle between two advisors to President Bush. In the blue corner, Bill Riley, former president of the World Wildlife Fund and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrator starting in 1989. In the red corner stands John H. Sununu, the chief of staff known for his climate skepticism. These two figures will shape the environmental policies of the Bush administration and face off for years, with dire consequences for our planet.

“
George H.W. Bush stated that climate change knows no political boundaries.
“

With hindsight, one could easily predict the outcome. Yet, what’s intriguing about white house effect is that it refrains from presenting this as inevitable. It explores a gradual march towards a destiny. The archival footage is always engaging, often shifting timelines to reinforce the film’s message, keeping the audience aware and engaged despite the grim reality on display.

Consider the 1979 energy crisis, during which Exxon experienced a staggering 119% profit increase while countless drivers waited hours to refuel due to plummeting oil production. One driver at a gas station remarked that everyone should just return home and await the gas shortage. When asked why he wasn’t turning back, he responded: “I’m not going back because no one else is.”

This documentary features numerous climate scientists, but none resonate more than Steven Schneider, a pioneer advocating for climate action. His journey forms the film’s emotional core, from his Senate testimony in 1988 to his final interview before his passing in 2010.

“Looking back at our early efforts, many of our immediate goals fell short. But here we are, making gradual progress,” he reflects. “The problem of global warming has been recognized, and we’re pushing for a cultural shift—something that will take a generation.”

It’s heart-wrenching to ponder how Mr. Schneider would view the last 15 years of fruitless attempts and the current direction of America.

Viewing white house effect can feel suffocating. It stirs frustration, particularly for those, like me, born too late to witness these events firsthand. While the film is polemical, it serves a vital purpose—shaking us out of apathy and urging action, no matter the cost.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Salesforce CEO Clarifies Remarks on President Trump’s Suggestion to Deploy Troops to San Francisco

Posted on by
Reply

Greetings! Welcome to TechScape. I’m your host and editor, Blake Montgomery. Here’s what we’re focusing on this week: South Park’s caricatures of Peter Thiel and his fascination with the Antichrist. Check out our report on Thiel’s odd off-the-record lecture that inspired the show. Now, let’s get started.

Marc Benioff Catches President Trump’s Attention

Last week, the co-founder and CEO of Salesforce suggested that Donald Trump should go ahead with his threat to deploy the National Guard to San Francisco, even amidst local opposition. Even Benioff’s public relations manager was reportedly shocked by his remarks, as per a New York Times article.

Benioff is a well-regarded figure in San Francisco, being the city’s largest private employer. His comments coincided with Salesforce’s flagship conference, Dreamforce, which was set to take over the streets of the city. With a net worth of around $9 billion, according to Forbes, he plays a significant role in the political landscape, particularly within Democratic circles, though his wealth is dwarfed by that of Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk.

His statements contradicted his liberal persona and previous declarations, as well as Salesforce’s operational philosophy. The remarks have divided opinions among tech leaders; in fact, one of Salesforce’s board members resigned in protest, while Musk reportedly supported him. My colleague, Dani Anguiano, noted, “Trump megadonor David Sachs, appointed by the president as AI and cryptocurrency czar, remarked that San Francisco could be swiftly eliminated with a ‘targeted operation,’ while Benioff suggested the military could aid police efforts.”

Mr. Benioff issued an apology on Friday, stating, “I have heard the voices of my fellow San Franciscans and local officials…I do not think the National Guard is needed to address security in San Francisco.” He mentioned that security concerns for Dreamforce fueled his comments.

It seems Mr. Benioff managed to provoke discussion without burning too much political capital, having shown a degree of empathy toward the Trump administration. On Monday, President Trump seemed to affirm his “unquestionable authority” to deploy federal troops to San Francisco.

“We’re going to San Francisco. The difference is, they want us in San Francisco,” Trump remarked in an interview.

Read more: President Trump vows to send troops to San Francisco, asserting ‘unquestionable authority’

Amazon Web Services Outage Highlights the Dangers of Centralization

Photo: Anushree Fadnavis/Reuters

My colleagues Dan Milmo and Graeme Wearden report on a significant outage that occurred yesterday in Amazon Web Services, Amazon’s cloud division:

A technical glitch in Amazon’s cloud service resulted in the disruption of applications and websites globally on Monday.

Platforms impacted included Snapchat, Roblox, Signal, Duolingo, and several Amazon-owned businesses, among others.

According to internet outage monitoring site Downdetector, over 1,000 companies were affected around the world, with users reporting 6.5 million issues, including more than 1 million in the U.S., 400,000 in the U.K., and 200,000 in Australia.

Experts have raised concerns regarding the risks of depending on a small cohort of companies to manage the global internet. This failure underscored the inherent dangers of the internet’s reliance on a limited number of tech firms, with Amazon, Microsoft, and Google being pivotal players in the cloud sector.

Dr. Colin Cass Speth, the head of digital at the human rights organization Article 19, remarked, “We urgently need to diversify cloud computing. The infrastructure that supports democratic discourse, independent journalism, and secure communications cannot rely solely on a handful of companies.”

OpenAI’s Sora Creates Dolls of Historical Figures

Photo: Argi February Sugita/ZUMA Press Wire/Shutterstock

OpenAI’s Sora, an AI-driven video generation app, has been thriving since its release, primarily due to its capability to create videos featuring your or your friends’ faces. For instance, I made a jogging-themed version of Ratatouille starring a friend preparing for the New York City Marathon.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Sora also enables users to create videos featuring the faces of late celebrities. A significant and controversial case was Martin Luther King Jr., whose likeness appeared in many AI-generated videos since Sora’s launch, until the company decided to cease using it following complaints from his estate.

As Niamh Rowe noted, “Videos circulating in my feed show Dr. King making monkey noises during his ‘I Have a Dream’ speech. Other clips depict Bryant reenacting the helicopter crash that tragically claimed his life and that of his daughter.”

Other celebrity estates have echoed similar grievances. Malcolm X’s daughter stated that a video involving her father was “extremely disrespectful and hurtful.” Moreover, the daughter of comedian George Carlin described his AI-generated clip as “overwhelming and depressing” in a Blue Sky post, while Robin Williams’ daughter shared on Instagram that the AI-generated video of her father was “not what he wanted.”

Zelda Williams articulated, “Witnessing real people’s legacies reduced to this… is both horrifying and infuriating, especially with TikTok’s careless puppeteering.”

This trend has repeatedly surfaced with OpenAI. The company tends to be less cautious about reputational risks compared to rivals like Meta, which rolled out an AI-powered video app lacking the ability to deepfake friends concurrently with Sora. Google also withheld its version of ChatGPT for similar reasons; meanwhile, OpenAI’s audacity has allowed it to eclipse Google in this race. They even had to temporarily shut down their image-generating app when it was used to create diverse representations of Vikings. It’s alarming to consider the implications had they let MLK Jr.’s likeness run rampant.

Read more: ‘A legacy of AI missteps’: Video of OpenAI Sora’s death alarms legal experts

Wider TechScape

Source: www.theguardian.com

China to release US tariff and Google survey findings in line with Trump’s tax policies

Posted on by
Reply

Salvo was fired by Donald Trump at the start of his trade war, imposing tariffs on China on Tuesday, prompting immediate retaliation from Beijing due to concerns about the global economic impact.

10% tariffs have been implemented currently, prompting China to release an anti-trade survey on Google swiftly. The Ministry of Finance has announced tariffs of 10% on items such as coal, liquefied natural gas, crude oil, agricultural equipment, large distributed vehicles, and pickup trucks from the United States.

The Chinese Ministry of Commerce and Customs Bureau took actions on Tuesday to protect national security interests by imposing export controls on important minerals such as tungsten, terrillium, lutenium, molybdenum, and rutenium-related items.

Furthermore, the Ministry of Commerce indicated that US PvH Group and Illumina would be added to the list of unreliable entities, subjecting them to restrictions or penalties without specifying the accusations against the companies.

In response to tightened US exports of high-tech products to China, Beijing is considering adding Intel to a list of companies under investigation for antitrust law violations. Financial Times reported this on Tuesday.

Despite Google services being blocked in China, the company continues to earn revenue from Chinese companies advertising overseas and using Android operating systems.

The Chinese Ministry of Finance stated that the unilateral imposition of tariffs by the United States violates World Trade Organization rules and could harm economic and trade cooperation between the two countries.

After initially threatening economic disputes with Canada and Mexico, President Trump decided to postpone tariffs following discussions with their leaders.

The US has removed exemptions for Chinese exports, imposing tariffs on most goods. Some Chinese retailers, like SHEIN and TEMU, relied on exemptions to sell affordable products in the US.

Trump agreed to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico after speaking with President Claudia Sheinbaum.

Discussions with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau led Trump to delay 25% tariffs on Canada. Trudeau announced a $1.3 billion border security plan in response to the decision.

The White House announced a meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping later in the week to address escalating trade tensions.

Economists warn that Trump’s tariff plan could raise prices for millions of Americans.

Trump believes tariffs will strengthen the US financially and lead to beneficial trade agreements with other countries.

The global financial markets reacted cautiously to Trump’s tariff actions, with mixed results.

Various stock indexes fluctuated following the tariff announcements, with currencies like the Canadian dollar experiencing volatility.

The Chinese market was closed for the Lunar New Year holiday and is set to reopen on Wednesday.

Additional reports by Graeme Wearden

Source: www.theguardian.com

Big Tech Companies Dispute President Trump’s $500 Billion AI Investment Announcement, Involving Elon Musk

Posted on by
Reply

Major technology giants criticized their competitors following Donald Trump’s announcement of significant investments in AI the day before.

President Trump revealed Stargate, a $500 billion initiative funded by OpenAI, Oracle, and SoftBank. The announcement featured leaders from both companies: Sam Altman, Larry Ellison, and Masayoshi Son, with Son as the project chairman. A representative from Abu Dhabi’s state-run AI fund MGX, another major investor, was notably absent.

The partnership aims to establish data centers and computing infrastructure crucial for AI development. While the initial investment amount is substantial, estimates suggest that developing AI will require as much funding.

Notably missing from the event was Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI, who is also the wealthiest person globally. Despite Musk’s close ties to Trump and rumored office in the White House, he dismissed Stargate as a financial sham the following night.

When OpenAI announced on X (Musk’s social network) that they would immediately deploy $100 billion, Musk countered, stating that they lacked the funds and criticizing SoftBank’s funding of less than $10 billion. Musk, with a net worth of about $430 billion, tweets prolifically on a variety of subjects.

President Trump has yet to respond to Musk’s comments, focusing instead on Melania’s anniversary on his social network, Truth Social.

Musk continued his criticism on Twitter, sharing a leaked image of a research tool supposedly used to calculate Stargate’s $500 billion cost. He spent much of Wednesday afternoon attacking the project.

Sam Altman initially praised Musk’s work but later questioned his motives for criticizing SoftBank. Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, responded diplomatically when asked about the situation, emphasizing Microsoft’s plans to invest in Azure.

Skip past newsletter promotions

The tension between Musk and Altman dates back to their history at OpenAI, where Musk eventually parted ways with Altman. The heads of Oracle and SoftBank involved in Stargate have not yet spoken on the matter.

Source: www.theguardian.com

President Trump signs executive order lifting ban on TikTok in the US | Trump administration

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order suspending sales of Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok, as mandated by a law passed in the United States last year.

Trump’s order was part of a series of actions he took on his first day back in the White House. The order instructed President Trump’s attorney general to hold off on enforcing a law that would require the sale or closure of major social media apps in the U.S. for 75 days.

The moratorium allows for a careful consideration of the next steps in a way that protects national security and avoids an abrupt shutdown of platforms used by millions of Americans.

Additionally, the order directs the Department of Justice to inform other tech giants like Apple, Google, and Oracle, who have ties to TikTok, that they will not be penalized for any actions during this period.

When asked about the purpose of the TikTok executive order, President Trump stated that it gives the government the option to sell or shut down the platform, but a decision on the course of action has not been made yet.

Critics of the video-sharing platform argue that it poses a security threat because it is owned by ByteDance, a company with ties to the Chinese government. They fear that the personal information of U.S. users could be used for malicious purposes.

During his presidency, Trump had previously criticized TikTok for these reasons and attempted to ban it. However, he has since shifted his stance due to various factors, including his popularity on the platform and the views of TikTok investor Jeff Yass.

Despite Trump’s change in position, Congressional Republicans have remained firm, and under bipartisan legislation signed by President Biden, TikTok was required to sell its assets to a U.S.-based company by January 19, with a possible 90-day extension for the sale process.”

Plans to sell TikTok have not been confirmed, but there is interest from figures like Frank McCourt and Kevin O’Leary. The U.S. Supreme Court has been involved in the matter, and despite objections from free speech advocates, the law remains in effect.

Trump’s court filing emphasizes his unique ability to negotiate a solution that addresses national security concerns while preserving the platform, but experts question the effectiveness of his approach.

Alan Rosenstein, a former National Security Adviser, dismissed the executive order as merely a symbolic gesture and stated that TikTok would likely remain banned despite Trump’s intentions.

Source: www.theguardian.com

President Trump plans to pull the US out of the Paris Agreement on climate change

Posted on by
Reply


President Donald Trump has signed an executive order to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate change agreement as one of his first acts in office.

The Paris Agreement, signed in 2016, requires participating countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions annually to prevent global temperatures from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The United States, along with other countries, has also pledged billions of dollars to assist developing nations with climate adaptation and mitigation.

The White House stated, “In recent years, the United States has entered into international agreements that do not align with our values or economic and environmental goals. These agreements direct American taxpayer dollars to countries that do not need or deserve financial assistance, to the detriment of the American people.”

The executive order mandates U.S. Ambassador to the UN to provide written notification of withdrawal, with immediate effect.

The United States will join Libya, Yemen, and Iran as countries not part of the Paris Agreement, impacting global climate action efforts.

Climate change groups have strongly criticized the decision, calling it a setback to efforts to combat climate change and protect the environment.

The world continues to see unprecedented levels of carbon dioxide emissions, leading to rising global temperatures and more extreme weather events.

As the largest historical emitter, the United States has a significant role to play in leading global efforts to reduce emissions and combat climate change.

Despite the withdrawal, experts emphasize the importance of ongoing efforts to meet the goals set by the Paris Agreement and address the challenges posed by climate change.

President Trump’s administration has reversed several climate initiatives put in place by the previous administration, aiming to prioritize energy production and economic growth over environmental concerns.

President Trump has also declared a national energy emergency, urging federal agencies to roll back “harmful” climate policies that impact food and fuel costs.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Tech Titans Bowing Down to President Trump in Silicon Valley

Posted on by
Reply

On January 28, 2017, I hurried to San Francisco International Airport (SFO). That evening, protests were gaining momentum across the United States against President Donald Trump’s travel ban on visitors from seven Muslim-majority countries. The night was unusually cold, and I had not brought a proper jacket. Luckily, the train to the airport was warm and filled with nervous and chatty protesters. The airport itself was chaotic. Angry demonstrators blocked roads, causing taxis and Ubers to be stranded with meters still running. A hijab-wearing protester prayed next to a protest sign in the baggage claim area, while others shouted at travelers collecting their luggage. At that time, Trump was the most controversial figure in America, and his election had shocked the world.

Later that night, rumors of a $150 billion face in the crowd started to circulate. Sergey Brin, the founder and co-founder of Google, was present. At that time, he was the president of Alphabet, Google’s parent company, which also owns YouTube. The impact was electrifying. One of the wealthiest and most influential men in the world was publicly expressing his displeasure with Trump by participating in a protest against him. Brin, originally from Moscow and immigrating to the United States at the age of 6, stated he was at SFO that night “because I’m a refugee,” delivering a personal rebuke to Mr. Trump, whom he described as a complete xenophobe.


Following Brin’s lead, Google and other tech giants condemned Trump’s travel ban. Nearly 100 technology companies, including Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, and Uber, supported a lawsuit challenging the measure.

However, today’s protests against President Trump’s reelection have had minimal impact. Silicon Valley is shifting its stance to show more deference to Mr. Trump. This week, the tech industry finished its nominations for the upcoming president.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced the cessation of the company’s fact-checking operations in the United States. In 2022, Meta had claimed to have built the largest global fact-checking network and spent $100 million on it.

A few days later, Mr. Zuckerberg revealed a reduction in efforts to enhance workforce diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) – a move met with controversy. These policies had been disdained by Trump and faced criticism from his prominent supporter, Elon Musk. Zuckerberg, seemingly driven by ambition rather than personal beliefs, took actions such as promoting Dana White to Meta’s board of directors after dining with Trump and supporting his inaugural committee.

Mr. Zuckerberg’s actions seemed to be influenced by Trump’s threats, as the president-elect had warned of dire consequences if Zuckerberg interfered in the election. Mehta, like others, stood to benefit from a friendly Trump administration, particularly concerning Meta’s antitrust lawsuit.

Several tech CEOs, including Tim Cook, Sundar Pichai, and Satya Nadella, also demonstrated support for President Trump, each contributing in different ways. Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi donated $2 million to Trump, and even Google made a substantial donation despite being targeted by Trump’s campaign.

The president-elect, noticing his newfound popularity, remarked on the change in attitude towards him. Meanwhile, Musk’s threats loomed over tech leaders like Jeff Bezos, Sam Altman, and Jensen Huang, demonstrating the power dynamics at play in the tech industry.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Tech giants Google and Microsoft donate $1 million each to President Trump’s inaugural fund

Posted on by
Reply

Google and Microsoft each contributed $1 million to President Donald Trump’s Inaugural Fund, along with companies like Amazon, Meta, OpenAI, and Uber.

“Google is supporting the 2025 Inauguration with a live stream on YouTube and a direct link to the homepage. We are also donating to the inaugural committee,” said Google Government Affairs & Public Policy global head Karan Bhatia in a statement to the Guardian on Thursday.

Google made the donation on Monday, as reported by CNBC. Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda mentioned that the company had previously donated to the Inauguration Fund and hosted a livestream of the inauguration.

Microsoft confirmed its $1 million donation to President Trump’s inaugural fund in a statement to Bloomberg on Thursday. The company had also donated to Trump’s 2017 inauguration and Joe Biden’s 2021 inauguration.

Many other major companies made significant donations to President Trump’s inaugural fund last month, including Toyota, Uber, Amazon, Meta, and OpenAI.

These donations helped raise funds for President Trump’s inaugural committee, which received a $170 million donation. This appears to be an attempt by tech giants to gain favor with President Trump for his second term in office.

President Trump’s relationship with big tech companies has been contentious, but as his inauguration approaches, there seems to be a shift in tone from both parties.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai criticized the January 6 riot and praised President Trump’s victory. President Trump also noted a change in attitude towards him from various tech companies.

Mark Zuckerberg of Meta Inc. announced changes in the company’s approach to fact-checking and censorship, aiming to reduce censorship and recommend more political content across their platforms.

Experts believe that contributing to Trump’s inauguration is a way for tech companies to gain support from the new administration and avoid being targeted by President Trump in the future.

Source: www.theguardian.com

How can the US Supreme Court and President Trump prevent the TikTok ban?

Posted on by
Reply

TikTok is a video sharing social media platform

Anatoly Babii / Alamy

A US law banning popular video-sharing app TikTok is expected to take effect in early 2025, but the US Supreme Court has ruled agreed To hear TikTok’s legal challenge to this. Meanwhile, President-elect Donald Trump has signaled he may take action against the law, raising new questions about whether it will survive.

What does a TikTok ban actually do?

From January 19, 2025, “Act to protect Americans from regulatory applications by foreign adversaries' will prevent US companies such as Google and Apple from allowing users to access or update TikTok through their own app stores unless TikTok's Chinese owner ByteDance sells the app to US companies. It turns out. It would also require internet service providers to block the platform on US internet browsers. The bill was approved by the House and Senate with bipartisan support and signed into law by President Joe Biden in April 2024.

If the ban were implemented, it would be virtually impossible for new users in the US to download the TikTok app. Kate Ruan At the Center for Democracy & Technology, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, DC. For the 170 million existing TikTok users in the United States, the app may remain on their phones. However, not having access to updates will reduce functionality over time.

People in the United States may still access TikTok using virtual private network (VPN) services that disguise the user's location. But the experience of using the app could still deteriorate, Ruan said. TikTok content will no longer be stored on nearby U.S. servers, so it will load more slowly.

These restrictions stem from privacy and security concerns. US lawmakers fear that the Chinese government could force ByteDance to hand over TikTok users' data, pressure the app to change its algorithm, and present content that could manipulate public opinion. , said TikTok is a “national security threat.” However, no solid evidence has been provided to support these claims. TikTok said We are investing heavily to keep U.S. data safe. From outside influences and manipulation.

“It is deeply concerning that a country like the United States, which has always led the world stage in championing a free, open, and interoperable internet, is taking steps to ban access to entire platforms within its borders. 'This is unusual and should be done,' says Luan.

Will the Supreme Court block TikTok's ban?

Previously, he was a judge on the D.C. Lower Circuit Court of Appeals. allowed With U.S. law in effect, the Supreme Court agreed to hear TikTok's appeal. TikTok position That is, the ban amounts to censorship that violates Americans' right to free speech under the First Amendment.

“We hope courts will seriously address how this law violates these rights and how governments should account for the rights of social media users when seeking to regulate these speech platforms. I think so,” Luan said. “Despite the fact that some users have filed lawsuits claiming that this law violates their First Amendment rights, which are different from TikTok, the court did so in the process of considering this particular law.” have not done so.”

The most likely short-term impact, Ruan said, is that the U.S. Supreme Court will temporarily halt enforcement of the law while the justices consider the case. This could delay implementation of the law for months, no matter how long it takes for the Supreme Court to rule in 2025. TikTok specifically seeks such a suspension in its court filing.

Ruane said the ban violates First Amendment rights and that the government would be justified in such an outright ban if the Supreme Court found that the U.S. government had less restrictive options at its disposal. It is possible that an injunction could be issued that would make it virtually impossible to do so. The Supreme Court could also ask the lower D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its analysis of the case. Such a decision could force governments to find more tightly tailored options for regulating TikTok.

How can Trump stop banning TikTok?

President-elect Trump supported plans to ban TikTok during his first term, but has since changed his mind. During the 2024 presidential campaign, he promised:Save TikTok'' he urged American voters to support him in a post on his social media platform “Truth Social.'' On December 16th, President Trump met TikTok's CEO later said in a press conference that the administration would “consider” the ban. Even if the Supreme Court ultimately agrees to keep the ban in place, President Trump could change the law's impact.

For example, the president could meet with U.S. lawmakers and ask for changes, such as repealing or amending domestic laws, Ruane said. She also described a possible scenario in which President Trump could instruct his administration's attorney general not to enforce the law, but warned that it would be outside the norm for how the U.S. government normally operates.

Even if President Trump's attorney general announces that the US government will not enforce the ban, US companies such as Google and Apple remain reluctant to allow people to access apps through their platforms. There is a possibility. “If I were in charge of legal risk at one of these companies, I don't know if I would be able to say, 'We believe in it.' [decision]It’s okay to allow access to this app, which is prohibited,” Ruane said.

What does the US ban on TikTok mean for the rest of the world?

If passed, the U.S. ban could have significant ramifications around the world. First, people in other countries will not be able to access new content from US-based TikTok creators and influencers. But more importantly, the U.S. government's actions could prompt other countries to consider similar restrictions.

The US is not the first country to take action against TikTok, with the Indian government blocking the app since 2020, but Luan said the US ban would lead to “authoritarian regimes” They expressed concern that this could prompt the banning of all apps, including those that are Similar national security justification.

“This will no doubt be used as a justification to ban TikTok elsewhere, and to ban access to other applications that have served as important speech platforms in countries where the internet is less open. will also be used,” Luan said.

Will banning TikTok protect privacy?

The ostensible purpose of the ban is to protect the privacy of U.S. TikTok users and prevent their data from falling into the hands of other countries, as well as to prevent the Chinese government from potentially manipulating the content presented to U.S. app users. It is to address the concerns that there are. But Ruane says there are many alternative steps U.S. lawmakers could take before blocking TikTok completely.

For example, governments could require TikTok to be more transparent about how it collects and shares individual user data and what steps it takes to protect privacy. There is sex. Lawmakers could require platforms to share how their algorithms filter and control the content users see to alleviate concerns about tampering, Ruan said.

The U.S. government may also consider enacting consumer privacy laws that would provide better legal protections for how social media platforms share personal data with other companies and the government. “These consumer privacy and transparency choices are not as extreme as banning the entire platform,” Ruan said.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Uber and its CEO contribute $1 million each to President Trump’s inaugural fund

Posted on by
Reply

Uber and its CEO have donated $1 million to Donald Trump’s inaugural fund, joining a growing list of technology companies and executives seeking to build good relations with the incoming administration.

This donation was announced by a spokesperson for Uber Technologies. The Wall Street Journal reported that on Tuesday, Uber and its CEO Dara Khosrowshahi each donated $1 million to Trump’s fund. Uber did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Guardian.

Uber had previously donated $1 million to President Biden’s 2021 inauguration, but Khosrowshahi did not donate to that event, according to the Wall Street Journal. The $1 million donation to Trump’s fund is said to be Khosrowshahi’s largest contribution to a political candidate or presidential inaugural fund.

The donations from Uber and Khosrowshahi add to a growing list of tech companies and executives who have pledged to donate $1 million to the president-elect’s inaugural fund.

Mehta, CEO of OpenAI, confirmed last week that he had donated $1 million to the foundation. CEO Sam Altman of OpenAI also planned to make a $1 million personal donation to the foundation. Amazon is also preparing to donate $1 million to Trump’s fund.

Unlike companies and executives like Mark Zuckerberg, Mehta, and Jeff Bezos, Uber and Khosrowshahi do not have a historically strained relationship with President Trump, making their donations especially significant.

Notably, Tony West, Uber’s chief legal officer, is the brother-in-law of Vice President and former Democratic candidate Kamala Harris. Mr. West took time off to volunteer with Mr. Harris’ presidential campaign before returning to his role at Uber.

Donations to inaugural committees are common among large companies looking to establish better relations with the new administration.

According to Amazon, the company donated $57,746 to President Trump’s first inaugural fund in 2017. Open Secrets reported that other companies such as Google and Microsoft also made donations. Mehta confirmed to the Guardian that he did not donate in 2017.

Recent donations from tech companies and executives come amidst reports of perks being offered to top donors to the president-elect’s inaugural fund. Since Trump’s election win, he has dined with several technology company executives.

In the past month, Trump has dined with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg at his Mar-a-Lago mansion. Apple CEO Tim Cook; as well as Google’s Sundar Pichai and Sergey Brin; are among those who have had dinners with Trump. Amazon founder Jeff Bezos is scheduled to have dinner with Trump this week.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Meme coin boom following President Trump’s election waves the flag of pure gambling in cryptocurrency markets

Posted on by
Reply

The attention economy can be likened to a phenomenon involving a social media-created celebrity named “hawk tua girl” Hayley Welch. She played a pivotal role in the launch of a cryptocurrency asset named Hawk Memecoin, which quickly gained enormous traction before facing backlash.

Initially valued at $490 million (£385 million) on December 4, the Hawk Memecoin has now exceeded its market capitalization and is valued at $17 million. Welch, a Tennessee native, rose to fame after responding to provocative interview questions but faced criticism for allegedly deceiving her social media followers.

Critics like cryptocurrency commentator Steven Findeisen, also known as Coffeezilla, labeled Hawk’s launch as a “rug pull,” which involves hyping a crypto project for short-term gains and then abandoning it. Despite the controversy, Hawk Memecoin is still being traded, with Welch stating that her team has not sold any tokens.

The rise of meme coins like Hawk reflects the growing trend within the cryptocurrency market, with meme coins collectively valued at $118 billion compared to $20 billion at the start of the year. These coins flood the market, with platforms issuing thousands of tokens daily.

Experts argue that meme coins lack fundamental value and are merely tied to digital trends. Memecoins blend the essence of memes and cryptocurrencies, leveraging social media attention to drive speculation and investment.

Meme coin trading often revolves around internet trends and influencer endorsements, creating a speculative environment with unpredictable outcomes. Participants acknowledge the speculative nature of memecoins, likening their trading to gambling but with the potential for significant returns.




Bitcoin’s value surpassed $100,000 for the first time a month after President Trump’s victory. Photo: Kevin Wurm/Reuters

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk enlists ‘high-IQ revolutionaries’ to volunteer on President Trump’s new project without compensation.

Posted on by
Reply

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswami are “high-IQ small-government revolutionaries” who are calling on Americans willing to work 80+ hours a week to join their new Ministry of Government Efficiency for no pay.

In a recent X post, which also served as an announcement of his appointment and a playful jab at Mr. Musk, the newly appointed president’s account stated: We are seeking ultra-high IQ small-government revolutionaries who are ready to work over 80 hours a week to bring costs down to earth.”

The department, not associated with the federal government, bears a resemblance to the popular Shiba Inu meme.

“If this sounds like you, please DM this account with your resume. Elon & Vivek will evaluate the top 1% of applicants,” the statement added.

Musk reiterated the call in another post, stating: “Yes, this may be a mundane job. You will make plenty of adversaries and receive no compensation.”

“How delightful!” Musk, the wealthiest person in the world, wrote with a laughing emoji. He pledged to reduce federal bureaucracy by a third and decrease U.S. government spending by $2 trillion, but acknowledged that the process “will inevitably involve temporary challenges.”

Earlier this week, President Donald Trump announced the appointment of Musk and Ramaswamy as president, emphasizing that they will lead efforts to streamline government bureaucracy, reduce excessive regulation, eliminate wasteful spending, and overhaul federal agencies. This is crucial to the “Save America” movement.

President Trump described the newly formed department as a “modern-day ‘Manhattan Project,'” likening it to the U.S.-led research program during World War II aimed at developing a nuclear bomb, which he noted came at a human cost. Estimation [Japan’s population in 1945 was 214,000].

Since the first attempt on Trump’s life in July, Musk has emerged as one of the president’s most devoted supporters, at one point dubbing himself a “Dark Maga” during the campaign. He contributed $120 million to the president-elect’s campaign, hosted rallies in Pennsylvania, and vigorously promoted Trump’s message on X.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Following Trump’s re-election, Musk shared an edited photo of himself holding a sink in the Oval Office, with text that read “Please sink.”

This image recalls a promotional campaign from October 2022, shortly after Musk sealed a $44 billion deal to acquire X (formerly Twitter). Musk entered the headquarters carrying Sink. According to new estimates from Fidelity, X’s value has dropped nearly 80% since Musk’s acquisition two years ago.

The caption with the featured photo was updated on November 14, 2024. A previous version erroneously identified the image as depicting Donald Trump when it was intended to be Elon Musk.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Former President of Twitter Vows to Take Action Against Elon Musk if Troubles Continue – Bruce Daisley

Posted on by
Reply

TThe current social media trend is familiar, with self-absorbed individuals posting excessively on the platforms they dominate, a scenario we’ve seen play out in the past. Donald Trump’s incendiary tweets post-election loss resulted in the Capitol siege on January 6, 2021. Following this, the then-president was banned from Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and even Pinterest, disappointing those aiming to emulate the Mar-a-Lago style on their mood boards.

The situation is likely to evolve differently this time, especially with social media provocateur Elon Musk at the helm of the platform he utilizes.

The two are set to engage on Monday, with Musk engaging directly with the former president. “An entertaining encounter is anticipated”.

During Trump’s tenure, I was stationed at Twitter as its highest-ranking official outside the U.S. Over my eight-year tenure, it became apparent that there was a disparity in the interpretation of free speech between the UK and the U.S., with the latter often championing a libertarian outlook on the concept.

As the UK subsidiary of an American entity, we witnessed a daily fervent defense of free speech. Twitter’s founding legal advisor, Alex MacGillivray, famously dubbed the company as “the free speech wing of the free speech party.” While the U.S. often assumes its freedoms are unique, the UK’s Human Rights Act of 1998 guarantees freedom of speech while also acknowledging its responsibility, stressing that it should not be used to incite criminal activities or spread hatred.

For American tech firms, the interpretation of “free speech” varies. During my tenure at Twitter under a more enlightened leadership, the UK team quickly realized that the Silicon Valley notion of “free speech” wasn’t always geared towards fostering an ideal world. Instead, it often allowed certain groups to target marginalized sections of society, such as women, the LGBTQ+ community, and ethnic minorities, with impunity, detracting from the platform’s original enjoyable nature.

Working within the UK office felt akin to operating within a parliamentary system devoid of a written constitution, relying more on external expectations to shape the organization’s direction.

Efforts to brand “free speech” as a philosophical conviction notwithstanding, its appeal to tech companies is primarily economic. As journalist Kara Swisher notes, Silicon Valley’s approach is more profit-driven than principle-based, evidenced by the support for Trump within San Francisco’s venture capital realm. Holding tech oligarchs accountable for their platforms’ content is feasible and necessary.

Considerations around Musk’s tweets often offer insights into his actions. For instance, his posts on social media platforms like Instagram highlight his late-night musings, providing clues about his mindset and geographic location. Musk’s propensity for controversial posts and real-world ramifications underscores the need for accountability on social media platforms.

The discussion centers on whether billionaire oligarchs like Musk should be allowed to influence societal discourse unchecked. Calls for regulation and accountability in the social media landscape are imperative to address the challenges posed by influential figures like Musk.

  • Bruce Daisley served as Twitter’s vice president for Europe, Middle East, and Africa from 2012 to 2020.

  • If you have any comments on the topics discussed in this article and wish to submit a response of up to 300 words for publication in our Letters section, please click here.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Bitcoin reaches highest value in six weeks following President Trump’s endorsement of cryptocurrency

Posted on by
Reply

After Donald Trump’s statement this past weekend that he would stop targeting the cryptocurrency industry if re-elected, Bitcoin surged to its highest price in over six weeks.

On Monday, the price of the cryptocurrency increased by more than 3%, reaching a peak of around $69,745, marking its highest value since June 12 when it surpassed $69,800.

Trump made supportive remarks at the Bitcoin 2024 convention in Nashville, Tennessee, declaring his intention to make the United States a global leader in cryptocurrency and adopt a more pro-Bitcoin stance compared to his opponent, Sen. Kamala Harris.

The former president assured the Bitcoin community that if he takes office, the current anti-cryptocurrency initiatives by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris would come to an end. He emphasized the importance of embracing cryptocurrency technology to prevent other countries like China from dominating.

Trump also vowed to remove the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on his first day as president, specifically targeting Gary Gensler, who has been critical of cryptocurrencies despite past endorsements.

At the Bitcoin Conference, Trump proposed the creation of a Presidential Cryptocurrency Advisory Council and the establishment of a national Bitcoin reserve using confiscated cryptocurrency held by the U.S. government.

Echoing his support for Bitcoin, Trump advised against selling the cryptocurrency, promising to retain all Bitcoin owned or acquired by the U.S. government if elected.

According to the Financial Times, Harris’ advisors have been reaching out to major crypto companies to mend relations between the Democratic Party and the cryptocurrency industry, including Coinbase, Circle, and Ripple Labs.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Meta removes limitations on President Trump’s access to Facebook and Instagram accounts

Posted on by
Reply

Meta has lifted previous restrictions on Donald Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts as the 2024 presidential election approaches, the company announced on Friday.

After being banned for his online behavior during the January 6 riot, President Trump was allowed to return to the social network in 2023 with “guardrails” in place. But those guardrails have now been removed.

“In assessing the responsibility of permitting political expression, I believe the American people should be able to hear from presidential candidates with the same standards,” Mehta said in a blog post, alluding to Trump formally becoming the party’s nominee at the Republican National Convention scheduled for next week.

As a result, Mr. Trump’s account will no longer be subject to the harsh suspension, which he said was instituted in response to “extreme and extraordinary circumstances” and “was not necessary to apply.”

“All US presidential candidates are required to follow the same community standards as all Facebook and Instagram users, including policies to prevent hate speech and incitement to violence,” the company said in a blog post.

Since returning to the meta social network, Trump has mainly used his account to share campaign information, attacks on Democratic candidate Biden and memes.

Critics of Trump and online safety advocates have expressed concern that his return could lead to an increase in misinformation and incitement to violence like that seen during the storming of the Capitol, which initially prompted the president’s travel ban.

The Biden campaign condemned Mehta’s decision in a statement on Friday, calling it a “greedy and reckless decision” that amounts to “a direct attack on our security and democracy.”

“Restoring his access would be like giving car keys to someone you know is going to drive his car into a crowd and off a cliff,” campaign spokesman Charles Kretschmer Luttwak said. “It’s like giving a megaphone to a real racist who is going to shout hatred and white supremacy from the rooftops and make it mainstream.”

In addition to the Meta platform, other major social media companies, including Twitter (now X), Snapchat and YouTube, have also banned Trump’s accounts due to his online activity surrounding the January 6 attack.

The former president was allowed to return to X last year following a decision by Elon Musk, who bought the company in 2022, but has yet to tweet.

Trump Came back It is set to appear on YouTube in March 2023. He remains banned from Snapchat.

Trump launched his own social network, Truth Social, in early 2022.

Source: www.theguardian.com