Tag Archives: restrictions

YouTube Aligns with Australia’s Under-16 Social Media Ban; Lemon8 Implements Access Restrictions

Posted on by
Reply

YouTube will fall under the federal government’s ban on social media for users under 16, but its parent company Google has stated that the law “fails to ensure teens’ safety online” and “misunderstands” the way young people engage with the internet.

Communications Minister Annika Wells responded by emphasizing that YouTube must maintain a safe platform, describing Google’s concerns as “absolutely bizarre.”

In a related development, Guardian Australia has reported that Lemon8, a recently popular social media app not affected by the ban, will implement a restriction of users to those over 16 starting next week. The eSafety Commissioner has previously indicated that the app will be closely scrutinized for any potential bans.


Before Mr. Wells’ address at the National Press Club on Wednesday, Google announced it would start signing out minor users from its platform on December 10. However, the company cautioned that this might result in children and their parents losing access to safety features.

Initially, Google opposed the inclusion of YouTube, which had been omitted from the framework, in the ban and hinted it might pursue legal action. Nevertheless, the statement released on Wednesday did not provide further details on that front, and Google officials did not offer any comments.

Rachel Lord, Google’s senior manager of Australian public policy, stated in a blog post that users under 16 could view YouTube videos while logged out, but they would lose access to features that require signed-in accounts, such as “subscriptions, playlists, likes,” and standard health settings like “breaks” and bedtime reminders.

Additionally, the company warned that parents “will no longer be able to manage their teens’ or children’s accounts on YouTube,” including blocking certain channels in content settings.

Mr. Lord commented, “This rushed regulation misunderstands our platform and how young Australians use it. Most importantly, this law does not fulfill its promise of making children safer online; rather, it will render Australian children less safe on YouTube.”

While Lord did not address potential legal actions, they expressed commitment to finding more effective methods to safeguard children online.

Wells mentioned at the National Press Club that parents could adjust controls and safety settings on YouTube Kids, which is not included in the ban.

“It seems odd that YouTube frequently reminds us how unsafe the platform is when logged out. If YouTube asserts that its content is unsuitable for age-restricted users, it must address that issue,” she remarked.




Annika Wells will address the National Press Club on Wednesday. Photo: Mick Tsikas/AAP

Mr. Wells also acknowledged that the implementation of the government’s under-16 social media ban could take “days or even weeks” to properly enforce.

“While we understand it won’t be perfect immediately, we are committed to refining our platform,” Wells stated.

Wells commended the advocacy of families affected by online bullying or mental health crises, asserting that the amendments would “shield Generation Alpha from the peril of predatory algorithms.” She suggested that social media platforms intentionally target teens to maximize engagement and profits.

“These companies hold significant power, and we are prepared to reclaim that authority for the welfare of young Australians beginning December 10,” asserted Mr. Wells.

Sign up: AU breaking news email

Meta has informed users of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, along with Snapchat, about forthcoming changes. Upon reaching out to Guardian Australia, a Reddit spokesperson mentioned that they had no new information. Meanwhile, X, TikTok, YouTube, and Kick have not publicly clarified their compliance with the law nor responded to inquiries.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Platforms that do not take appropriate measures to exclude users under 16 may incur fines of up to $50 million. Concerns have been raised about the timing and execution of the ban, including questions about the age verification process, and at least one legal challenge is in progress.


The government believes it is essential to signal to parents and children the importance of avoiding social media, even if some minors may manage to bypass the restrictions.

Wells explained that it would take time to impose $50 million fines on tech companies, noting that the e-safety commissioner will request information from platforms about their efforts to exclude underage users starting December 11, and will scrutinize data on a monthly basis.

At a press conference in Adelaide on Tuesday, Mr. Wells anticipated that additional platforms would be included in the under-16 ban if children were to migrate to sites not currently on the list.

She advised the media to “stay tuned” for updates regarding the Instagram-like app Lemon8, which is not subject to the ban. Guardian Australia understands that the eSafety Commission has communicated with Lemon8, owned by TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, indicating that the platform will be monitored for potential future inclusion once the plan is enacted.

Guardian Australia can confirm that Lemon8 will restrict its user base to those over 16 starting December 10.

“If platforms like LinkedIn become hubs of online bullying, targeting 13- to 16-year-olds and affecting their mental and physical health, we will address that issue,” Wells stated on Tuesday.

“That’s why all platforms are paying attention. We need to be prompt and flexible.”

Australian crisis support services lifeline is available at 13 11 14. In the UK and Ireland, you can reach Samaritan via freephone 116 123 or by email at jo@samaritans.org or jo@samaritans.ie. In the US, contact the 988 Lifeline for suicide and crisis at 988 or via chat at 988lifeline.org. For further international helplines, visit: befrienders.org




Source: www.theguardian.com

Europe Eases AI Regulations, While the US Releases AI Restrictions

Posted on by
Reply

Greetings! Welcome to TechScape. I’m Blake Montgomery, your host. I bring you insights from an American grocer preparing for Thanksgiving pie.

In the realm of technology, the European Union is easing restrictions on artificial intelligence, while the United States has made more progress. The AI bubble remains intact, bolstered by Nvidia’s staggering quarterly profits, although worries continue. Additionally, Meta has managed to avoid disbanding for reasons analogous to those of Google.

Rollback of Regulations

The billions invested in AI far exceed Europe’s commitment to digital privacy and rigorous tech regulation. The EU’s AI legislation and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) have both faced delays and weakenings. Former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi had previously alerted that Europe was trailing behind the United States and China regarding innovation in critical technologies like AI. This sentiment was echoed by other stakeholders, including the EU’s Economic Commissioner.

My colleague Jennifer Rankin reported on Brussels’ pursuit for growth:

This initiative is part of the commission’s “digital omnibus” aimed at simplifying technical regulations, encompassing the GDPR, the AI Act, the ePrivacy Directive, and the Data Act.

Proposed modifications to the GDPR would facilitate tech firms in utilizing personal data for training AI models without needing consent. Furthermore, it aims to mitigate “cookie banner fatigue” by restricting how often users must consent to online tracking.

The committee also confirmed plans to postpone the implementation of key components of the AI Act, scheduled to be enforced in August 2024 and not yet fully applicable to enterprises.

Read more: European Commission faces ‘major setbacks’ in digital protection

Meanwhile, the United States is intensifying efforts to uphold its position in the AI sector by attempting to lift restrictions on the industry’s future expansion. Legislators have included provisions in the annual National Defense Authorization Act directing the federal government to obstruct state-level AI regulations. AI in the U.S. is less regulated compared to Europe or China, but this may soon change. Proposals within the NDAA could also prevent DJI, the leading Chinese drone manufacturer, from launching new products in America.

Last week, Donald Trump introduced a similar executive order, and earlier this year, Congressional Republicans suggested a 10-year halt on state regulations governing AI, which was overwhelmingly opposed with a 99-1 vote in the Senate. Future amendments may face similar resistance. Over 200 state legislative representatives and senators attended on Monday, and published a letter opposing the measure (pdf).

Under the proposed regulation, the Justice Department would take legal action against states trying to restrict AI, particularly targeting California and Colorado. If passed, the U.S. would advance further in regulating emerging technologies, refraining from imposing nationwide constraints on the companies that develop them while punishing state laws attempting to do so. Critics contend such actions could allow the risks associated with AI to proliferate unchecked and infringe on national sovereignty. Proponents from Silicon Valley argue that reducing legal impediments accelerates growth and profits, benefiting both the industry and the nation.

President Trump’s assertion of needing to simplify AI regulation in the U.S. has drawn skepticism. “It can’t go through 50 states. You need one standard. Fifty is chaos. Just one state can trigger a domino effect,” he stated during last week’s US-Saudi Investment Forum. “There will be some Waystars, but they resist this. They want to end AI.”

Which Technologies to Invest In

A Week in AI

Bubble Burst? Not Yet, Claims Nvidia

Comment from Nvidia’s CEO Jensen Huang: Photo: Anne Wang/Reuters

Nvidia released its quarterly results last week, showcasing strong performance, reflecting several consecutive years of impressive profits. The headline in August read: “NVIDIA Sets New Sales Record Amid Concerns of AI Bubble and Trump’s Trade War.” Fresh updates announced: “‘We excel at every AI stage’: NVIDIA CEO assuages Wall Street’s anxieties about an AI bubble amid market downturns.”

My colleague Johana Bhuiyan reported on the findings:

The company has outperformed Wall Street expectations across several metrics consecutively, demonstrating that the substantial economic AI boom shows no signs of slowing down. Nvidia posted diluted earnings per share of $1.30 on total revenue of $57.01 billion, exceeding investor anticipations of $1.26 per share with revenues of $54.9 billion. Year-over-year sales surged 62%. Data center sales reached $51.2 billion, outpacing the expected $49 billion. The company also predicts sales for the fourth quarter to be around $65 billion, while analysts anticipated $61 billion.

CEO Jensen Huang remarked, “There’s considerable talk regarding an AI bubble. From our perspective, it appears quite different. For clarity, Nvidia’s trajectory is distinct from other accelerators. We thrive at every phase of AI, from pre-training to post-training to inference.”

Stock prices globally surged due to Nvidia’s impact, and markets celebrated. The chip manufacturer’s success is robust; however, apprehensions about an impending decline linger. Despite a strong financial report, Nvidia’s stock dipped the following day. My colleague Callum Jones covered market fluctuations as follows:

Major U.S. stock indexes saw declines less than 24 hours after Nvidia’s impressive results initially propelled gains.

Wall Street experienced a surge when Nvidia, the largest publicly traded company, assured investors of a strong demand for its advanced data center chips. However, this relief diminished, with technology stocks central to the AI boom facing pressure.

In New York, the benchmark S&P 500 index closed down 1.6%, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell by 0.8%. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite Index ended 2.2% lower.

“Watching semiconductor companies selling to power AI doesn’t alleviate concerns that some of these hyperscalers may be overspending on AI infrastructure,” stated Robert Pavlik, senior portfolio manager at Dakota Wealth. “Your enterprise might benefit from it, but other firms are still heavily investing.”

Metastore in Burlingame, California Photo: Bloomberg/Getty Images

Recently, Meta lost a significant antitrust case filed by the U.S. government. The reasoning for the victory aligns with the rationale expressed by judges in another tech giant monopoly case, the United States v. Google. Both judges indicated that the technology sector had dramatically evolved since the inception of the case.

In recent years, notable competition has emerged in the tech sector, particularly in search and social media, challenging both Google and Meta. For Google, rival competitors include ChatGPT and broader generative AI. The tech titan has admitted that it faces an existential competition with smaller adversary OpenAI. In 2022, Google executives referred to ChatGPT as a “code red” for the search business. However, this David may not be equipped to overpower Goliath. Sam Altman noted that advancements in Google’s AI could present “temporary economic headwinds” and create a “challenging environment” for the company.

Meta’s competing force is TikTok. Mark Zuckerberg has used similar terms as Pichai, describing the rapid rise of apps as a “very urgent” threat to his social media platform. Shortly thereafter, Meta launched Reels, a short-form video feed on Instagram.

Judge James Boasberg pointed to the surge of popular Chinese social media platforms as evidence of increased competition in the social networking space. “The landscape that existed just five years ago when the Federal Trade Commission filed this antitrust case has changed dramatically.” He criticized the FTC for not considering YouTube as a relevant competitor. “Even excluding YouTube, the entry of TikTok alone could nullify the FTC’s lawsuit,” he opined.

Judge Boasberg determined that new competition would not compel Meta to divest Instagram, acquired in 2012 for only $1 billion, or WhatsApp, purchased in 2014 for $19 billion.

Read more: Meta prevails in significant U.S. antitrust case, removing the necessity to divest WhatsApp and Instagram

In September, the U.S. judge overseeing the U.S. v. Google case issued an opinion akin to Boasberg’s, with the exception being Google’s loss. The government had charged tech giants with unlawfully monopolizing the online search domain. According to the University of Pennsylvania, Google commands roughly 90% of the global search market. Wharton Business School. Google.com is the leading website globally. The judge concurred with the government’s stance but disagreed that the solution required Google to sell Chrome.

Google will not be compelled to divest Chrome, the world’s leading web browser, likely valued more than Instagram and WhatsApp combined. The judge acknowledged that generative AI has transformed the market forever, introducing types of competition that Google hasn’t encountered in decades. Companies such as OpenAI are positioned more favorably compared to any earlier challengers against Google.

Read more: How Google evaded a major breakup – and why OpenAI is grateful for it

The Broader TechScape

Quick Guide

Contact Us About This Story



Show

The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand reporting from those in the know.

If you have something to share regarding this matter, please contact us confidentially using the methods below.

Secure Messaging in the Guardian App

The Guardian app has a tool to submit story tips. Messages are end-to-end encrypted and hidden within the daily activities performed by all Guardian mobile apps. This prevents observers from knowing that you are communicating with us, much less what you are saying.

If you don’t already have the Guardian app, please download it (iOS/Android), then access ‘Secure Messaging’ from the menu.

SecureDrop, Instant Messenger, Email, Phone, Mail

If you can securely access the Tor network without being observed or monitored, you can send messages and documents to the Guardian through our SecureDrop platform.

Finally, our guide at theguardian.com/tips lists various ways to contact us safely and explains the associated pros and cons.


Illustration: Guardian Design/Rich Cousins

Thank you for your feedback.


Source: www.theguardian.com

EPA to Relax Mercury Restrictions on Power Plants

Posted on by
Reply

The Environmental Protection Agency is poised to roll back Biden-era regulations aimed at limiting pollutants, including mercury emissions, a neurotoxin harmful to brain development, as per internal agency documents.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin is set to unveil these proposed changes shortly, as informed by two individuals familiar with the agency’s intentions. He will also introduce another proposal to lift greenhouse gas restrictions on power plants, according to sources who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the information.

These alterations signify a rejection of the Biden administration’s initiatives to combat climate change and address the significant air pollution plaguing communities near power plants and industrial sites. Legal challenges are anticipated concerning these rules later this year.

This move aligns with a broader plan by the Trump administration to extend fossil fuel usage, which has exacerbated global warming. President Trump has recently taken multiple steps to bolster the reliance on polluting coal.

An EPA representative did not confirm specifics about the new regulations or the timeline for their release. However, Zeldin stated that he “opposes the shutdown of clean, affordable, and reliable energy for American families.”

He added, “The EPA should adopt sensible regulations to foster a great American recovery, instead of continuing the path of devastation and impoverishment of the previous administration.”

Zeldin’s proposal regarding mercury and other hazardous substances, as reported by the New York Times, speculates that in 2024, the Biden administration would “unjustly target” coal-fired power plants if contamination levels were restricted.

The documents indicate that new regulations will relax emission limits for harmful substances like lead, nickel, and arsenic by 67%. For certain coal plants, the proposed rule would decrease the mercury limit by 70%, while also dispensing with the requirement for all plants to continually monitor chimney emissions.

These amendments counter the most stringent rules set by the Biden administration, which aimed to reduce dangerous toxins and encourage a shift from coal-fired plants to renewable energy sources like solar and wind.

Burning coal emits mercury, which can contaminate land, oceans, and waterways. According to the EPA, coal-fired power plants are responsible for 44% of all mercury emissions in the United States.

In the atmosphere, mercury emissions transform into a toxic form known as methyl mercury, which accumulates in fish and other food sources. This exposure can lead to significant neurological harm in developing fetuses and children, and is linked to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases in adults.

“Children’s brains are growing rapidly, and mercury exposure can severely impact their development,” remarked Matthew Davis, a former EPA official. The initial regulations aimed at reducing mercury emissions from coal plants were established during the Obama administration.

The federal government first enacted strict controls on mercury emissions from power plants in 2011 under President Barack Obama. Following this, regulations were loosened during the initial Trump administration, but were tightened again under Biden. In October, the Supreme Court dismissed requests from 23 Republican states and some coal companies, preventing the reversal of the policy.

In April, the Trump administration granted exemptions for numerous coal-fired power plants from mercury and other air pollutant restrictions. Davis, currently the vice president for federal policy at the Conservation Voters Federation, referred to these as “get-out-of-jail-free cards” for polluters.

“This administration aims to demolish protections for our health and demonstrates indifference toward the well-being of future generations who might suffer from the harmful effects of this toxic substance,” he said.

Anticipated regulations aimed at weakening mercury standards are expected to accompany plans to eliminate all restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired power plants.

As per the latest data available on the EPA website, the electricity sector is the second largest contributor to greenhouse gases, following transportation. Power plants are responsible for approximately 30% of the pollution driving climate change globally.

However, according to a draft rule examined by The New York Times, Zeldin plans to contend that emissions from U.S. power plants have not contributed “significantly” to climate change.

He claims that emissions from U.S. fossil fuel-burning power plants accounted for only 3% of global greenhouse gases in 2022, down from 5.5% in 2005.

Analysts, however, argue that the Trump administration is making misleading comparisons. U.S. power plants were responsible for about 25% of greenhouse gas emissions produced in the country in 2022, with approximately 1.5 billion tons in emissions projected for 2023, exceeding total emissions from most countries.

Laura Kate Bender, assistant vice president of the American Lung Association, described this outdated rationale as a “setback” in combating climate change and air pollution.

“Together, these rules could lead to increased pollution that could have been avoided for communities surrounding power plants, exposing them to more harmful emissions that could have been mitigated,” she stated.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Fortnite Makes a Comeback on the US iPhone App Store, Ending Apple’s Restrictions

Posted on by
Reply

The widely acclaimed video game Fortnite has made its comeback to the US iPhone App Store, ending a prolonged absence due to a legal dispute over the fees Apple enforced annually via its payment system, which the tech giant has had to revise.

Fortnite, one of the most popular games globally, celebrated the much-anticipated return of its app to iPhone and iPad in a post on Tuesday, marking its availability on these devices for the first time since Apple removed it in 2020 to circumvent the 15% to 30% commissions on in-app transactions.

“Fortnite is back on iPhone and iPads in the App Store in the US. It’s also returning on Epic Games and Altstore in the EU! Check out a Tweet from the official game account. As a result of the legal battles with Apple, Epic has launched its own digital store.


The game, featuring a virtual battle on a digital island, returned just days after its parent company Epic Games requested a federal judge to mandate its restoration as part of a civil discovery process against Apple initiated late last month. Last week, the game temporarily disappeared from Apple devices globally and was inaccessible in several countries.

In a succinct court filing on Tuesday, Apple stated that the dispute preventing Fortnite from accessing iOS has been resolved. The tech company from Cupertino, California, did not instantly reply to requests for additional statements.

These legal conflicts are rooted in an enduring feud. Epic has accused Apple of converting the App Store into an illegal monopoly. This accusation was previously unfavorably ruled on in 2021 by a federal judge following a month-long trial.

The judge concluded that Apple had not breached antitrust regulations but ordered the company to relax its grip on in-app payment systems and permit links to alternative payment methods that could present lower costs.

After exhausting appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court last year, Apple allowed linking to alternative payment options while introducing a new structure that imposes a 27% charge for in-app transactions completed outside its own system.

Epic was incensed by Apple’s attempts to evade the legal process, reigniting court hearings that had lingered for nearly a year before Gonzalez Rogers delivered her decisive verdict, including a prohibition on any commission collection from alternative payment options.

Skip past newsletter promotions

While it appeared that Fortnite was paving the way for its re-entry to iPhone and iPad, last week Epic stated that the game remained blocked by Apple. Claiming it was permissible to maintain Fortnite while Apple pursued the implications of Gonzalez Rogers’ previous ruling, Epic pressed the matter by requesting the judge for a clear order permitting the game on iPhones and iPads.

On Monday, Gonzalez Rogers inquired why Apple continued to obstruct Fortnite’s return without an order from the Court of Appeal. She stated, “Apple can completely resolve this issue without further briefings or hearings,” as she reviewed Epic’s recent actions, anticipating a hearing on May 27th.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Trump Administration Backs Certain PFA Restrictions While Repealing Others

Posted on by
Reply

On Wednesday, the Environmental Protection Agency announced its support for drinking water standards concerning two hazardous “forever chemicals” that impact tap water for millions of Americans. However, it indicated plans to extend the deadline for relaxing regulations on four additional related substances.

PFAS refers to a vast category of chemicals commonly found in daily products, including non-stick cookingware, water-repellent clothing, stain-resistant carpets, and fire-fighting foams.

Research shows that exposure to PFAS, or Polyfluoroalkyl substances, may lead to metabolic disorders, lower birth rates in women, developmental delays in children, and a heightened risk of certain cancers such as prostate, kidney, and testicular cancers. As stated by the EPA.

President Joseph R. Biden Jr. is asking water providers for the first time to reduce the levels of six PFAS chemicals as close to zero as possible. He has imposed particularly stringent limits of four parts per 2 trillion units for two chemicals, known as PFOA and PFOS, which are frequently detected in drinking water systems.

The Trump administration endorsed these two PFAS regulations but allowed water providers to push back the deadline for compliance to 2031 by two additional years.

The EPA also announced the revocation of restrictions on four other chemicals.

“We are working to uphold national standards to safeguard Americans from harmful PFOAs and PFOS,” said EPA administrator Lee Zeldin in a statement. “At the same time, we aim to provide common-sense flexibility by allowing more time for compliance,” he added. “The EPA will continue utilizing regulatory and enforcement mechanisms to hold polluters accountable.”

Some efforts to relax PFAS regulations followed legal challenges from trade organizations and water providers connected to the chemical industry against the Biden administration’s restrictions.

These chemicals are so widespread that they can be detected in the blood of nearly every individual in the United States. Government studies have shown that PFAS chemicals are present in almost half of the country’s tap water.

In 2022, the EPA reported that these chemicals can cause harm at exposure levels “much lower than previously understood,” indicating that current exposure levels are nearly unsafe.

Under Biden-era regulations, water operators were mandated to monitor PFAS levels in the water supply. They also needed to inform the public and take action to lower contamination levels if they exceeded the prescribed limits: four parts for PFOA and PFOS, with 10 trillion parts for the other four chemicals.

These four chemicals include GenX, once deemed a safer alternative to PFOA, but now associated with liver, kidney, and immune system damage, along with developmental issues and cancer in animal studies. The other chemicals—PFHX, PFNA, and PFBS—are also linked to various negative health outcomes.

The agency intends to initiate a new rule-making process for these four chemicals in the fall, with plans to finalize new regulations by next spring.

The government’s initiative was first reported by the Washington Post.

Health and environmental advocates criticized these actions.

“We are committed to collaborating closely with our customers,” stated Emily Donovan, co-founder of Clean Cape Fear, an environmental organization focused on GenX and PFAS pollution in the Cape Fear River of North Carolina.

“This administration has promised voters to ‘make America healthy again,’ yet it seems inconsistent to rescind some PFAS drinking water standards,” she said. “This is disrespectful to communities affected by PFAS contamination who are suffering from severe health issues and losses.”

Eric D. Olson, Senior Strategy Director for Health at the Natural Resources Defense Council, remarked that the EPA’s approach offers “reassuring but conservative comfort.”

However, he also pointed out that the agency’s attempts to roll back drinking water standards contravene the no-backsliding provisions stipulated in the Safe Drinking Water Act.

“The law clearly states that the EPA cannot eliminate or undermine drinking water standards,” he emphasized. “This behavior is not only damaging but is also against the law.”

Industry groups that have filed lawsuits against the Biden administration’s PFAS rules, including the American Water Association, the American Chemical Council, and the National Manufacturers Association, did not provide immediate comments.

In a statement accompanying the EPA’s announcement, Alan Roberson, executive director of the Association of State Drinking Water Managers, expressed his support for the Trump administration’s framework. This association represents drinking water program managers across all 50 states.

Roberson noted that states and water systems are “struggling with tight timelines” under Biden-era regulations to test for PFAS and to establish the infrastructure needed to filter these chemicals from the water supply.

This announcement follows Zeldin’s recent disclosure of a series of initiatives to combat PFAS contamination.

The agency mentioned plans to create guidelines on the permissible PFAS discharge volumes from plants and to collaborate with Congress on how to hold polluters accountable.

Documents from the Trump administration highlighted strategies to transition away from paper straws, while also stressing the health dangers posed by PFAS.

Maintaining stringent regulations for PFOA and PFOS is expected to impose a significant financial burden on water operators. The EPA estimates compliance costs could reach approximately $1.5 billion annually, while utilities believe this figure could double, ultimately impacting the public through increased water bills.

James L. Ferraro, an environmental attorney representing several water companies, stated that while the Trump administration’s stance represents a middle ground, “one utility didn’t necessarily agree with it.”

The chemicals PFOA and PFOS, which are under strict EPA oversight, remain “the most frequently detected due to their widespread use over many years,” and pose an ongoing challenge for numerous utilities, he explained.

Many environmental organizations argue that the costs associated with cleaning up PFAS should ultimately be borne by the chemical manufacturers. They note that evidence indicating the risks of PFAS has been hidden by chemical companies for decades, as revealed by lawsuits, industry documents, and litigation. According to peer-reviewed research.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Nvidia CEO Makes Surprise Visit to Beijing Following Chip Sales Restrictions in China

Posted on by
Reply

The CEO of American chip maker Nvidia recently visited Beijing shortly after the US imposed new restrictions on the sale of AI chips to China.

According to state media-affiliated social media accounts, Jensen Fan’s unexpected visit was in response to an invitation from a trade agency.

China Central Television reported that Huang met with Ren Hongbin, the head of China’s Council to promote international trade.

The official English outlet of the Communist Party released a photo of Huang in Beijing, stating, “It’s three months since I promised to continue working with #China during my last visit.” The hashtag #OpportunityChina was included, previously used in a post promoting US-China exports.

This visit comes amidst a turbulent week for Nvidia. The recently announced US restrictions affect the shipment of the H20 DataCentre GPU, a specialized low-power version of Nvidia chips designed to comply with restrictions on sales to China under the Biden administration.

Amidst the ongoing race for AI dominance between the US and China, the US government informed Nvidia that the new rules aim to mitigate the risk of its products being utilized in Chinese supercomputers.

The company estimates that these new restrictions will cost around $5.5 billion (£4.2 billion) and experienced a 7% drop in its shares on Wednesday.

The tech industry has been under pressure due to US restrictions on high-tech supply to China and widespread tariffs. Nvidia’s shares decline is part of a broader trend in the sector which has seen many companies experiencing significant drops in recent weeks. Trump’s threats of separate tariffs on the global semiconductor industry further add to the uncertainty.

Following the announcement of the new Nvidia chip restrictions, semiconductor companies have pledged to invest up to $500 million in AI infrastructure in the US over the next four years.

Nvidia designs chips but outsources production to contractors like Taiwanese semiconductor manufacturers. TSMC, for instance, has committed to large-scale investment projects in the US, exempting them from tariffs. In response, the White House attributed Nvidia’s decision to “the Trump effect.”

Reportedly, Huang also met with Liang Wenfeng, the founder of Deepseek in Beijing, to discuss new chip designs for AI companies that would not trigger another US ban. Deepseek gained attention in January for its advanced AI chatbot developed with minimal investment, shaking up the tech industry and impacting global stock markets.

The US House of Representatives China Committee has raised concerns about Deepseek potentially using an export-controlled chip to power its AI app, posing a national security threat.

Huang has publicly stated that Nvidia is committed to advancing AI globally while complying with legal requirements and technological advancements under the Trump administration. He reassured reporters that the company will continue its progress in the field.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Huang’s visit to Beijing created a buzz on social media in China and Taiwan. As a Taiwanese celebrity, he was welcomed by a large number of fans on his recent visit, generating excitement and reports about his activities.

The chaos caused by Trump’s tariffs has raised concerns among global markets and governments, including US allies. Amidst changing tariff rates and negotiations, the focus remains on reshaping trade agreements to address trade imbalances and economic concerns.

Trump’s recent talks with Japan indicate a strategic approach to trade negotiations with various countries, signaling a priority for the US administration in reshaping global trade relations.

Additional report by Jason Tzu Kuan Lu

Source: www.theguardian.com

Nvidia’s finances to take a $5.5 billion hit amid US restrictions on AI chip exports to China.

Posted on by
Reply

Nvidia has announced that it is expecting a $5.5 billion (£4.1 billion) impact following the ban imposed by Donald Trump’s administration on chip designers selling crucial artificial intelligence chips in China.

In an official statement released late Tuesday, the company disclosed that the H20 AI chip, specifically tailored for the Chinese market to comply with export regulations, will now require a special license for sale in China indefinitely.

The US government, engaged in a competition with China for AI supremacy, informed Nvidia that new regulations have been enacted to mitigate the risk of their products being utilized in Chinese supercomputers.

As a result, the chip manufacturer is set to incur $5.5 billion in losses for the financial quarter ending on April 27th due to its investment in H20 chips.

Nvidia, known for driving significant advancements in AI technology, has delivered substantial returns for investors, with its stock surging over 1,400% since 2020, making it one of the few trillion-dollar companies in the US.

However, the news on Tuesday caused Nvidia’s stock to fall by approximately 6% in after-hours trading, potentially wiping out billions of dollars in market value by Wednesday’s opening bell.

In Asia, chipmakers like Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix from South Korea saw a 3% decline in their stocks overnight, while US competitors like senior equity microdevices dropped by 7% in after-hours trading.

Although the chip industry has been exempt from the 10% tariff that began on April 5th, Trump indicated this week that he plans to impose tariffs on imported semiconductors and mentioned that some companies in this sector may have flexibility.

The US Department of Commerce has recently launched an investigation into the impact of chip and drug imports on national security.

The US heavily relies on chip imports from Taiwan, with Trump previously imposing a 32% tariff on products from the country before suspending most tariffs last week.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Nvidia also revealed plans to invest up to $500 million in AI infrastructure in the US over the next four years to bolster its American manufacturing presence. While Nvidia designs chips, it outsources production to contractors, including Taiwanese semiconductor manufacturers.

Under the Biden administration, US officials had initially barred Nvidia and other AI chip manufacturers from selling advanced chips to China in October 2022. In response, Chinese authorities tightened controls over the tools and processors necessary for semiconductor production.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Trump administration postpones restrictions on costly bandages

Posted on by
Reply

The Trump administration announced Friday that it would delay the implementation of Biden-era rules intended to limit coverage of unproven, costly bandages known as skin substitutes.

The policy will be It’s late until 2026 allowing businesses to take advantage of the loopholes in Medicare rules to continue to set higher prices for new products. The New York Times reported Thursday that businesses are selling these bandages to doctors at discounted prices, while doctors are charging Medicare for the price of full stickers and pocketing the differences.

According to an analysis conducted by Earty Read, an actuarial company that assesses the costs of large healthcare companies, Medicare spending has skyrocketed above $10 billion from $1.6 billion in 2024. Some experts said bandage spending is one of the biggest examples of waste in the history of Medicare, an insurance program for the elderly.

The Super PAC for President Trump’s election campaign received a $2 million donation from Extreme Care, a leading seller of skin alternatives. Trump has criticised his social media policy twice, saying it hurts patients who use the product with diabetic pain.

“‘Crooked Joe’ has broken through policies that will lead to more suffering and death for Medicare diabetics,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in March.

Extremity care also criticized the plan, claiming it would disrupt the supply chain, eliminate innovation and increase costs for both doctors and patients. The company says it complies with high ethical standards, but did not respond immediately to requests for comment regarding the new delay in the policy.

Over 120 skin alternatives are on the market. They average an average of $5,089 per square inch, with the most expensive time exceeding $23,000.

Biden-era rules would have limited Medicare coverage for a small subset of products that have been shown to be effective in randomized clinical trials. The new policy will be applied to patients using ulcer and leg pain bandages known as ulcers. This can be caused by diabetes or poor circulation.

Medicare said in a Friday’s Statement It will consider policies as part of the transition to a new administration. During that time, he said, “We believe it is important to maintain patient access to skin replacement products with quality evidence of effectiveness.”

Mass Coalition, a group supporting the skin substitute industry, said it was “satisfied” with the delay. Public relations officer Preya Nonona Pinto said the group is looking forward to working with Medicare on “coverage policies and payment reforms that guarantee access to skin replacements.”

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump is being asked by the chemical industry for an exemption from pollution restrictions

Posted on by
Reply

President Trump is being asked by two chemical industry groups to grant a complete exemption to free factories from new restrictions on dangerous air pollution.

The Biden administration’s new rules will require chemical plastics to monitor and reduce the emission of toxic pollutants like ethylene oxide, a cancer-causing ingredient used in antifreezes and plastics.

The American Chemical Council and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Makers are seeking a temporary presidential exemption for all polluters in response to these rules.

The Environmental Defense Fund obtained a letter dated March 31, which stated that the new requirement imposed a significantly more expensive burden on member companies with an infeasible timeline.

The groups have written to the Environmental Protection Agency administrator expressing concerns that some of the new rules could cost businesses over $50 billion.

The EPA recently allowed businesses to apply for exemptions from clean air rules by sending emails to agents, citing the Clean Air Act’s provision for temporary exemptions in cases where necessary technology is unavailable or for national security reasons.

During Trump’s administration, the EPA rolled back many of the same rules, allowing businesses to be temporarily exempt from compliance.

A White House spokeswoman stated that Trump’s commitment was to unleash America’s energy, protect national security, and ensure environmental control.

The Biden-era regulations aimed to address the disproportionate environmental hazards faced by communities near chemical plants, particularly low-income, black, or Latino areas experiencing rising rates of asthma, cancer, and other health issues.

Updated regulations governing emissions from chemical plants considered cumulative effects on communities near major chemical hubs, requiring companies to strengthen controls and processes to limit chemical emissions.

Fence line monitoring and other measures are needed to ensure compliance, especially concerning ethylene oxide, which is used in various products such as batteries for electric vehicles and medical device sterilization.

The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers CEO criticized Biden-era rules as illegal and technically unachievable, posing risks to US manufacturing operations.

Environmental advocates expressed concerns that the Trump administration’s actions were allowing businesses to avoid complying with reasonable restrictions on toxic air pollution.

The move aligns with the administration’s efforts to prioritize cost reduction for businesses and promote energy control rather than environmental protection.

Last month, the administration halted a federal lawsuit against a chemical manufacturer accused of releasing carcinogenic substances from plants in Louisiana.

Source: www.nytimes.com

TikTok Implements Restrictions on Beauty Filters for Teens Due to Mental Health Concerns

Posted on by
Reply

Teenagers are facing new restrictions on beauty filters on TikTok that are aimed at addressing concerns about increasing anxiety and decreasing self-esteem.

In the near future, users under 18 will not be able to use filters that artificially alter features like enlarging eyes, plumping lips, or changing skin color.

Filters such as “Bold Glamor” that significantly alter a user’s appearance will be affected, while simple comic filters like bunny ears or dog noses will remain available. The changes were announced by TikTok during a safety forum at its European headquarters in Dublin.

Despite these restrictions, the effectiveness depends on users accurately providing their age on the platform.


Beauty filters on TikTok, whether provided by the platform or created by users, are a source of concern as they pressure teenagers, especially girls, to conform to unrealistic beauty standards and can lead to negative emotional impacts. Some young users have reported feeling insecure about their real appearance after using filters.

TikTok will also enhance its systems to prevent users under 13 from accessing the platform, potentially resulting in the removal of thousands of underage British users. An automated age detection system using machine learning will be piloted by the end of the year.

These actions come in response to stricter regulations on minors’ social media use under the Online Safety Act in the UK. TikTok already deletes millions of underage accounts globally each quarter.

Chloe Setter, head of public policy for child safety at TikTok, stated that they aim for faster detection and removal of underage users, understanding that this might be inconvenient for some young people.

Ofcom’s report from last December highlighted TikTok’s removal of underage users and raised concerns about the effectiveness of age verification enforcement. TikTok plans to implement a strict age limit of 13+ for social media users next summer.

Social media platforms will introduce new rules regarding beauty filters and age verification, anticipating stricter regulations on online safety in the future. These adjustments are part of broader efforts to enhance online safety.

Other platforms like Roblox and Instagram are also implementing measures to enhance child safety, reflecting a growing concern about the impact of social media on young users.

Andy Burrows, CEO of the Molly Rose Foundation, emphasized the importance of transparent age verification measures and the need to address harmful content promoted on social media platforms.

The NSPCC welcomed measures to protect underage users but stressed the need for comprehensive solutions to ensure age-appropriate experiences for all users.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Indonesia blocks sales of Apple iPhone 16 over insufficient investment, company faces restrictions

Posted on by
Reply

Indonesia has prohibited Apple from marketing and selling the iPhone 16 model due to non-compliance with local investment regulations, as stated by the Indonesian Ministry of Industry.

Despite Southeast Asia’s largest economy having a significant population of young, tech-savvy individuals with over 100 million people under the age of 30, Apple does not have an official store in the country. Those interested in Apple products resort to purchasing them from resale platforms.

A spokesperson for Indonesia’s Ministry of Industry revealed that imported iPhone 16 model phones released in September cannot be sold in the country because Apple’s local division fails to meet the requirement of 40% of the phones being manufactured with local parts.

“iPhone 16 devices imported by registered importers are currently not permitted for sale in the country,” stated ministry spokesperson Febri Hendry Antoni Arif on Friday.

“Apple Indonesia…has not fulfilled its investment commitments to obtain certification.”

To meet this criteria, Apple would need to invest in Indonesia and source materials for iPhone parts from the country, as reported by local media outlets. Apple had previously pledged Rp 1.7 trillion in investments in Indonesia but had only invested Rp 1.5 trillion by the beginning of the month.

Apple has not responded to inquiries from the Guardian.

The ministry clarified that new Apple mobile phones can be brought into Indonesia as long as they are not intended for commercial trade.

An estimated 9,000 new models have been imported into the country of approximately 280 million people. Although these products entered the country legally, selling them in Indonesia would be considered illegal.

Past bans imposed in Indonesia, similar to the one on Apple, have been aimed at promoting domestic production. However, the outcomes have been mixed.

According to Counterpoint Research, China’s Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo, and South Korea’s Samsung dominated Indonesia’s smartphone market shipment share in the second quarter of this year.

The absence of Apple in Indonesia signifies a missed opportunity for the company, which has experienced success in other parts of Asia. Indonesia currently has more mobile phones in use than its population.

In April, Apple CEO Tim Cook visited Indonesia to explore investment opportunities in Southeast Asia’s largest economy and diversify its supply chain away from China. He engaged in discussions with then-President Joko Widodo and his successor Prabowo Subianto after Apple announced plans to expand its developer academy in the country.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Multiple nations implement baffling export restrictions on quantum computers

Posted on by
Reply

Exports of quantum computers are restricted in many countries

Saigh Anys/Shutterstock

As a result of secret international negotiations, governments around the world have imposed identical export controls on quantum computers while refusing to disclose the scientific rationale behind the controls. Although quantum computers could theoretically threaten national security by breaking encryption technology, even the most advanced quantum computers currently publicly available are too small and error-prone to achieve this, making the bans seem pointless.

The UK: Quantum computers with more than 34 quantum bits (qubits) and error rates below a certain threshold. The intention seems to be to limit machines with certain capabilities, but the UK government has not stated this explicitly. New Scientist A Freedom of Information request seeking the basis for these figures was denied on national security grounds.

France has also imposed similar export controls. Quantum Bits The numbers and error rates are also improving, as are Spain and the Netherlands. Having the same limits across European countries might suggest EU regulation, but this is not the case. A spokesperson for the European Commission said: New Scientist EU member states are free to adopt national, rather than bloc-wide, measures when it comes to export controls. “The recent quantum computer restrictions by Spain and France are an example of such national measures,” they said. They declined to explain why the figures for the EU's various export bans are completely consistent if these decisions were taken independently.

A spokesman for the French Embassy in London said: New Scientist The limits were set at a level “likely to indicate a cyber risk,” they said. They noted that the regulations are the same in France, the UK, the Netherlands and Spain because of “multilateral negotiations that took place over several years under the Wassenaar Arrangement.”

“The limits chosen are based on scientific analysis of the performance of quantum computers,” the spokesperson said. New ScientistBut when asked for clarification about who carried out the analysis and whether its findings would be made public, a spokesman declined to comment further.

of Wassenaar Agreement The system, which is followed by 42 participating countries including EU member states, the UK, the US, Canada, Russia, Australia, New Zealand and Switzerland, controls the export of items with potential military applications, known as dual-use technologies. The export ban on quantum computers also includes similar language regarding 34 qubits..

New Scientist We wrote to dozens of Wassenaar member states asking whether there was quantum-computer-level research that posed a risk to export, whether it had been made public, and who had conducted it. Only a few countries responded.

“We closely monitor other countries as they introduce national restrictions on certain technologies,” a spokesperson for the Swiss Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs, Education and Research said, “but in specific cases it is already possible to block the export of such technologies using existing mechanisms.”

“We are closely following the Wassenaar discussions on the exact technical control parameters for quantum.” Milan Godin, Belgian Advisor to the EU Working Party on Dual-Use Goods, Belgium. China does not appear to have implemented its own export controls yet, but Godin said quantum computers are a dual-use technology. It has the potential to crack commercial or government codes, and its speed could ultimately enable militaries to plan faster and better, including for nuclear missile attacks.

A spokesperson for Germany's Federal Office for Economics and Export Control confirmed that the export restrictions on quantum computers are the result of negotiations under the Wassenaar Agreement, but Germany does not appear to have implemented any restrictions. “The negotiations are confidential and unfortunately we cannot provide any details or information about the considerations of the restrictions,” the spokesperson said.

Christopher MonroeThe co-founder of quantum computing company IonQ said industry participants have been aware of similar bans and are discussing their criteria, but he doesn't know where they come from.

“I don't know who decided the logic behind these numbers,” he says, but it may have something to do with the threshold for simulating a quantum computer with a regular computer. This gets exponentially harder as the number of qubits increases, so Monroe thinks the rationale behind the ban may be to limit quantum computers that are too advanced to simulate, even though such devices have no practical use.

“It would be a mistake to think that just because we can't simulate the behavior of a quantum computer doesn't mean it's useful, and severely restricting research into advances in this grey area would certainly stifle innovation,” he says.

topic:

  • safety/
  • Quantum Computing

Source: www.newscientist.com

FTC suggests fortifying COPPA and tightening restrictions on tech monitoring of children

Posted on by
Reply

The FTC proposed strengthening rules to protect children from the surveillance economy. The updated rules will require companies to get parental permission before sharing data with advertisers and prohibit them from retaining data for vague “internal operations,” among other things.

“The proposed changes to COPPA are much needed, especially in an era when online tools are essential to daily life and companies are deploying increasingly sophisticated digital tools to monitor children. Masu.” FTC Chair Lina Khan said: In a blog post. “Children need to be able to play and learn online without being endlessly tracked by companies looking to hoard and monetize their personal data.”

The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) has been in place since 2000 and remains effective at preventing the most egregious data collection and abuse of children, but it was last updated in 2013 and now has a new coat. can do. of paint. The FTC asked for comments a long time ago on how the rules should change, and (as is often the case with Internet privacy issues) the response was overwhelming.

“We received more than 175,000 comments after the FTC announced it was considering revisions to the COPPA rule.” the agency mentioned in a news release.. “The proposed rule reflects what he has heard from parents, educators, industry members, researchers and others, and his 23 years of experience enforcing COPPA.”

The agency will soon issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), a draft of the new COPPA regulations, that the public will be able to comment on and criticize for the next 60 days. The exact timing will depend on when this document is published in the Federal Register, which is outside the FTC’s control, but could happen in the coming weeks. In the meantime, what you can do is Watch the draft here.

The updated rules require:

  • Parents will opt-in before sharing their child’s information with third parties, unless sharing is “essential” to the service. Expect many things to suddenly “integrate” next year.
  • Narrow the loophole in “support for internal operations.” For example, Amazon exploited this exception to retain children’s information indefinitely to improve its speech recognition models. Hopefully it will be less.
  • Better justify “nudges” like push notifications to get kids to open apps or stay online.
  • We do not force children to provide personal data to use our apps or features. For example, “Give me your birthday to get her 100 free crystals.”
  • Data is not retained beyond its original stated use. As in the Amazon example, you can use your child’s voice command to launch an app (its primary use), but then you can’t “reliably” launch anything else.
  • Schools and school districts may authorize educational technology providers to collect and use personal information about students for educational purposes only.
  • “Personal information” now includes biometrics.

There are a few other details about the NPRM itself (of interest primarily to those directly involved). If you would like to know more about why these things are necessary, or why he needs COPPA in the first place, please contact Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya. We have released a helpful commentary on this topic.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) approved the update, calling it “an encouraging step toward putting safeguards in place to protect the youngest users of social media from constant surveillance and manipulation.” .

But, he continued, “Rulemaking is not a substitute for law, and Congress needs to act. Create minimum age requirements for social media use and prohibit algorithmic targeting of children and teens. We urgently need to pass legislation to protect children online.”

Given the current state of Congress and (at least) the prospect of losing a controversial election in 2024, I doubt the senators’ urgency will translate into legislation any time soon. FTC rules will need to remain in place for some time to come.

Source: techcrunch.com