Author Archives: Karissa Bell

AI has spoken: the Apple Car would have been adorable

Posted on by

After a decade of rumors and speculation, the Apple Car is dead. Last week, Bloomberg reported that the multibillion-dollar project had finally been scrapped. Reports about the electric vehicle never quite seemed real, but now we have many new details about the car that never was thanks to an excellent post-mortem from Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman.

The story includes many astonishing details about various Apple executives’ plans for the car, and why the project ultimately failed. But some of the best details are the descriptions of what the vehicle was supposed to look like.

At one point, Apple’s leaders were adamant that the autonomous “microbus” should not include a steering wheel or pedals. It would have “club seating like a private plane” and curved sides and a glass roof. Famed Apple designer Jony Ive thought the interior should be “covered in stainless steel, wood and white fabric,” and that it should only come in one color: white.

Since any actual mock-ups of the car, which Gurman says was sometimes referred to as the “Bread Loaf,” are presumably locked deep inside a well-guarded Apple office, I did the next best thing and asked AI. The results are, actually, kind of cute?

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai-has-spoken-the-apple-car-would-have-been-adorable-020527007.html?src=rss

AI has spoken: the Apple Car would have been adorable

Posted on by

After a decade of rumors and speculation, the Apple Car is dead. Last week, Bloomberg reported that the multibillion-dollar project had finally been scrapped. Reports about the electric vehicle never quite seemed real, but now we have many new details about the car that never was thanks to an excellent post-mortem from Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman.

The story includes many astonishing details about various Apple executives’ plans for the car, and why the project ultimately failed. But some of the best details are the descriptions of what the vehicle was supposed to look like.

At one point, Apple’s leaders were adamant that the autonomous “microbus” should not include a steering wheel or pedals. It would have “club seating like a private plane” and curved sides and a glass roof. Famed Apple designer Jony Ive thought the interior should be “covered in stainless steel, wood and white fabric,” and that it should only come in one color: white.

Since any actual mock-ups of the car, which Gurman says was sometimes referred to as the “Bread Loaf,” are presumably locked deep inside a well-guarded Apple office, I did the next best thing and asked AI. The results are, actually, kind of cute?

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai-has-spoken-the-apple-car-would-have-been-adorable-020527007.html?src=rss

41 state attorneys general tell Meta to fix their customer support for hacking victims

Posted on by

A group of 41 state attorneys general are demanding that Meta step up its support services for users who have been victims of hacks and account takeovers. “We refuse to operate as the customer service representatives of your company,” the group writes in a letter addressed to Meta’s chief legal officer. “We request Meta take immediate action and substantially increase its investment in account takeover mitigation tactics, as well as responding to users whose accounts were taken over.”

The letter, which was first reported by Wired, pushes Meta to deal with an issue that has long been a source of frustration to Facebook and Instagram users: the difficulty in accessing support after you lose access to your account. Though the company has taken steps over the years to make it easier for people to recover lost accounts, Meta largely relies on automated systems and there are still many people who fall through cracks.

As the letter highlights, this can be especially devastating for people who lose access to business accounts and pages. Even high-profile creators can find themselves unable to get support from a human employee of the company unless they have a personal connection to someone who works at Meta. Other users sometimes resort to legal services or hiring their own hackers to get their accounts back.

While it may seem surprising that state law enforcement officials would get involved in this issue, Reddit and other online forums for hacking victims often advise people to lodge complaints with their local AG’s office as a last resort. Some users have reported regaining access to their accounts after a state attorney general’s office intervened on their behalf.

Now, AGs are apparently flooded with such requests. “Our offices have experienced a dramatic and persistent spike in complaints in recent years concerning account takeovers that is not only alarming for our constituents but also a substantial drain on our office resources,” the letter states.

In addition to putting more resources into customer service, the letter asks Meta to provide more details on “the number of account takeovers over the past five years; suspected causes of the increase in account takeovers; safeguards currently in place to prevent account takeovers; current policies and procedures related to Meta’s response to account takeovers; and staffing related to safeguarding the platforms against account takeovers as well as responding to complaints.”

In a statement, a Meta spokesperson said that “scammers use every platform available to them and constantly adapt to evade enforcement” from the company. “We invest heavily in our trained enforcement and review teams and have specialized detection tools to identify compromised accounts and other fraudulent activity. We regularly share tips and tools people can use to protect themselves, provide a means to report potential violations, work with law enforcement and take legal action."

In 2022, Bloomberg reported that Meta was in the “early stages” creating a customer service division that would be able to help users with account issues. It's unclear what became of the plan. Later that year, the company laid off thousands of employees. In their letter, the state AGs notes that they saw an uptick in complaints “around the same time Meta announced a massive layoff of around 11,000 employees in November 2022, which reportedly focused on the ‘security and privacy and integrity sector.’”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/41-state-attorneys-general-tell-meta-to-fix-their-customer-support-for-hacking-victims-184709904.html?src=rss

41 state attorneys general tell Meta to fix their customer support for hacking victims

Posted on by

A group of 41 state attorneys general are demanding that Meta step up its support services for users who have been victims of hacks and account takeovers. “We refuse to operate as the customer service representatives of your company,” the group writes in a letter addressed to Meta’s chief legal officer. “We request Meta take immediate action and substantially increase its investment in account takeover mitigation tactics, as well as responding to users whose accounts were taken over.”

The letter, which was first reported by Wired, pushes Meta to deal with an issue that has long been a source of frustration to Facebook and Instagram users: the difficulty in accessing support after you lose access to your account. Though the company has taken steps over the years to make it easier for people to recover lost accounts, Meta largely relies on automated systems and there are still many people who fall through cracks.

As the letter highlights, this can be especially devastating for people who lose access to business accounts and pages. Even high-profile creators can find themselves unable to get support from a human employee of the company unless they have a personal connection to someone who works at Meta. Other users sometimes resort to legal services or hiring their own hackers to get their accounts back.

While it may seem surprising that state law enforcement officials would get involved in this issue, Reddit and other online forums for hacking victims often advise people to lodge complaints with their local AG’s office as a last resort. Some users have reported regaining access to their accounts after a state attorney general’s office intervened on their behalf.

Now, AGs are apparently flooded with such requests. “Our offices have experienced a dramatic and persistent spike in complaints in recent years concerning account takeovers that is not only alarming for our constituents but also a substantial drain on our office resources,” the letter states.

In addition to putting more resources into customer service, the letter asks Meta to provide more details on “the number of account takeovers over the past five years; suspected causes of the increase in account takeovers; safeguards currently in place to prevent account takeovers; current policies and procedures related to Meta’s response to account takeovers; and staffing related to safeguarding the platforms against account takeovers as well as responding to complaints.”

In a statement, a Meta spokesperson said that “scammers use every platform available to them and constantly adapt to evade enforcement” from the company. “We invest heavily in our trained enforcement and review teams and have specialized detection tools to identify compromised accounts and other fraudulent activity. We regularly share tips and tools people can use to protect themselves, provide a means to report potential violations, work with law enforcement and take legal action."

In 2022, Bloomberg reported that Meta was in the “early stages” creating a customer service division that would be able to help users with account issues. It's unclear what became of the plan. Later that year, the company laid off thousands of employees. In their letter, the state AGs notes that they saw an uptick in complaints “around the same time Meta announced a massive layoff of around 11,000 employees in November 2022, which reportedly focused on the ‘security and privacy and integrity sector.’”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/41-state-attorneys-general-tell-meta-to-fix-their-customer-support-for-hacking-victims-184709904.html?src=rss

Lawmakers have a new plan to force ByteDance to sell TikTok

Posted on by

A group of lawmakers have introduced a new bill that would force ByteDance to sell TikTok in order for the app to remain available in the United States. The “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act” would prohibit US app stores and web hosting services from distributing TikTok unless it divested from parent company ByteDance.

The bill is the latest in a long line of attempts by lawmakers and other officials to ban or force a sale of the app. Former President Donald Trump attempted to force a sale of TikTok in 2020, but was ultimately unsuccessful. The Biden Administration has also pressured the company to divest. And a US District Court Judge recently blocked an attempt to ban the app in Montana.

The new bill, which comes from a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House, takes a different approach. It would give ByteDance a six-month window to sell TikTok before app store-level bans would come into effect. It would also require TikTok and other apps to “provide users with a copy of their data in a format that can be imported” into competing apps. And though TikTok is referenced several times in the text of the bill, the legislation would open the door for bans on other “foreign adversary-controlled” apps if the president deemed them to be a national security threat.

“This bill is an outright ban of TikTok, no matter how much the authors try to disguise it,” TikTok said in a statement. “This legislation will trample the First Amendment rights of 170 million Americans and deprive 5 million small businesses of a platform they rely on to grow and create jobs.”

TikTok CEO Shou Chew has maintained that a divestment would not fully address officials’ concerns about US user data. The company has spent years trying to address national security concerns about its service with an initiative called Project Texas. Under the plan, created as a result of years of negotiations with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), US users’ data would be separated into US-based servers and government officials would be able to oversee audits of TikTok’s source code and other aspects of its operations.

The Washington Post reported last year that TikTok’s negotiations with CFIUS had been recently “revived amid doubts the [Biden] administration has the authority to ban TikTok on its own.” If Congress was able to pass the new bill, it would clear up such questions and create a new process for forcing ByteDance's hand. 

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other digital rights groups have criticized the government's efforts to ban TikTok. In a statement on the latest bill, the ACLU said the proposed measure was "unconstitutional" and would hurt free speech. "Just because the bill sponsors claim that banning TikTok isn’t about suppressing speech, there’s no denying that it would do just that," senior policy counsel Jenna Leventoff said. 

Columbia University's nonprofit Knight First Amendment Institute raised similar concerns. "Congress can protect data privacy and security without banning Americans from accessing one of the world’s most popular communications platforms," the organization's executive director Jameel Jaffer said in a statement. "It should start by passing a comprehensive privacy law restricting the kinds of information that TikTok and other platforms can collect." 

Update March 5, 2024 6:50 PM ET: This story has been updated to add comments from the ACLU and Knight First Amendment Institute. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/lawmakers-have-a-new-plan-to-force-bytedance-to-sell-tiktok-220408004.html?src=rss

Lawmakers have a new plan to force ByteDance to sell TikTok

Posted on by

A group of lawmakers have introduced a new bill that would force ByteDance to sell TikTok in order for the app to remain available in the United States. The “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act” would prohibit US app stores and web hosting services from distributing TikTok unless it divested from parent company ByteDance.

The bill is the latest in a long line of attempts by lawmakers and other officials to ban or force a sale of the app. Former President Donald Trump attempted to force a sale of TikTok in 2020, but was ultimately unsuccessful. The Biden Administration has also pressured the company to divest. And a US District Court Judge recently blocked an attempt to ban the app in Montana.

The new bill, which comes from a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House, takes a different approach. It would give ByteDance a six-month window to sell TikTok before app store-level bans would come into effect. It would also require TikTok and other apps to “provide users with a copy of their data in a format that can be imported” into competing apps. And though TikTok is referenced several times in the text of the bill, the legislation would open the door for bans on other “foreign adversary-controlled” apps if the president deemed them to be a national security threat.

“This bill is an outright ban of TikTok, no matter how much the authors try to disguise it,” TikTok said in a statement. “This legislation will trample the First Amendment rights of 170 million Americans and deprive 5 million small businesses of a platform they rely on to grow and create jobs.”

TikTok CEO Shou Chew has maintained that a divestment would not fully address officials’ concerns about US user data. The company has spent years trying to address national security concerns about its service with an initiative called Project Texas. Under the plan, created as a result of years of negotiations with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), US users’ data would be separated into US-based servers and government officials would be able to oversee audits of TikTok’s source code and other aspects of its operations.

The Washington Post reported last year that TikTok’s negotiations with CFIUS had been recently “revived amid doubts the [Biden] administration has the authority to ban TikTok on its own.” If Congress was able to pass the new bill, it would clear up such questions and create a new process for forcing ByteDance's hand. 

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other digital rights groups have criticized the government's efforts to ban TikTok. In a statement on the latest bill, the ACLU said the proposed measure was "unconstitutional" and would hurt free speech. "Just because the bill sponsors claim that banning TikTok isn’t about suppressing speech, there’s no denying that it would do just that," senior policy counsel Jenna Leventoff said. 

Columbia University's nonprofit Knight First Amendment Institute raised similar concerns. "Congress can protect data privacy and security without banning Americans from accessing one of the world’s most popular communications platforms," the organization's executive director Jameel Jaffer said in a statement. "It should start by passing a comprehensive privacy law restricting the kinds of information that TikTok and other platforms can collect." 

Update March 5, 2024 6:50 PM ET: This story has been updated to add comments from the ACLU and Knight First Amendment Institute. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/lawmakers-have-a-new-plan-to-force-bytedance-to-sell-tiktok-220408004.html?src=rss

Twitter’s former CEO and other execs are suing Elon Musk and X for $128 million in unpaid severance

Posted on by

A group of former Twitter executives, including former CEO Parag Agrawal, are suing Elon Musk and X over millions of dollars in unpaid severance benefits. The claims date back to the chaotic circumstances surrounding Musk’s takeover of the company in October 2022.

When Musk took control of the company, his first move was to fire Agrawal, CFO Ned Segal, chief legal officer Vijaya Gadde and general counsel Sean Edgett. According to the lawsuit, Musk had “special ire” for the group because of the role they played in the months-long court battle that forced Musk to follow through with the acquisition after he attempted to back out of the deal. According to the lawsuit, Agrawal is entitled to $57.4 million in severance benefits, Segal is entitled to $44.5 million, Gadde $20 million and Edgett $6.8 million, for a total of about $128 million.

The lawsuit cites Musk biographer Walter Isaacson’s account of the events, which explains that Musk rushed to close the Twitter deal a day early so he could fire the executives “for cause” just before their final stock options were set to vest. According to Isaacson, Musk bragged that the legal maneuver saved him about $200 million. 

“Musk doesn’t pay his bills, believes the rules don’t apply to him, and uses his wealth and power to run roughshod over anyone who disagrees with him,” the lawsuit states,“Because Musk decided he didn’t want to pay Plaintiffs’ severance benefits, he simply fired them without reason, then made up fake cause and appointed employees of his various companies to uphold his decision.”

X didn’t respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit. Of note, it’s not the first time former Twitter employees have sued the company for failing to pay severance benefits. A separate lawsuit claimed Twitter owed former workers more than $500 million in unpaid severance. Agrawal, Segal and Gadde also previously sued the company over unpaid legal bills as a result of shareholder lawsuits and other investigations that resulted from Musk’s takeover,

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/twitters-former-ceo-and-other-execs-are-suing-elon-musk-and-x-for-128-million-in-unpaid-severance-231428042.html?src=rss

Twitter’s former CEO and other execs are suing Elon Musk and X for $128 million in unpaid severance

Posted on by

A group of former Twitter executives, including former CEO Parag Agrawal, are suing Elon Musk and X over millions of dollars in unpaid severance benefits. The claims date back to the chaotic circumstances surrounding Musk’s takeover of the company in October 2022.

When Musk took control of the company, his first move was to fire Agrawal, CFO Ned Segal, chief legal officer Vijaya Gadde and general counsel Sean Edgett. According to the lawsuit, Musk had “special ire” for the group because of the role they played in the months-long court battle that forced Musk to follow through with the acquisition after he attempted to back out of the deal. According to the lawsuit, Agrawal is entitled to $57.4 million in severance benefits, Segal is entitled to $44.5 million, Gadde $20 million and Edgett $6.8 million, for a total of about $128 million.

The lawsuit cites Musk biographer Walter Isaacson’s account of the events, which explains that Musk rushed to close the Twitter deal a day early so he could fire the executives “for cause” just before their final stock options were set to vest. According to Isaacson, Musk bragged that the legal maneuver saved him about $200 million. 

“Musk doesn’t pay his bills, believes the rules don’t apply to him, and uses his wealth and power to run roughshod over anyone who disagrees with him,” the lawsuit states,“Because Musk decided he didn’t want to pay Plaintiffs’ severance benefits, he simply fired them without reason, then made up fake cause and appointed employees of his various companies to uphold his decision.”

X didn’t respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit. Of note, it’s not the first time former Twitter employees have sued the company for failing to pay severance benefits. A separate lawsuit claimed Twitter owed former workers more than $500 million in unpaid severance. Agrawal, Segal and Gadde also previously sued the company over unpaid legal bills as a result of shareholder lawsuits and other investigations that resulted from Musk’s takeover,

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/twitters-former-ceo-and-other-execs-are-suing-elon-musk-and-x-for-128-million-in-unpaid-severance-231428042.html?src=rss

X walks back its misgendering policy after right-wing complaints

Posted on by

X has, once again, quietly changed its rules around deadnaming and misgendering without an explanation. With the latest change, it seems that there will be no penalties for misgendering or deadnaming people on X after al, except in cases when it may be “required by local laws.”

The update, which was first spotted by Mashable, comes after X appeared to reinstate some aspects of Twitter’s former policy, which fell under its hateful conduct rules. Prior to Elon Musk’s takeover, Twitter had barred targeted deadnaming and misgendering. That section of the company’s rules then disappeared last April. Then, last week, ArsTechnica noted that the policy was quietly updated to indicate that X would “reduce the visibility of posts that purposefully use different pronouns to address someone other than what that person uses for themselves, or that use a previous name that someone no longer goes by as part of their transition.”

While it wasn’t a full reversal of the earlier policy — under the company’s previous leadership, intentional misgendering was grounds for a suspension — it seemed that there once again would be penalties for this type of harassment. Now, that section of Twitter’s rules is prefaced with “where required by local laws.”

As with so much of what happens at X, there is significant confusion about the policy as the company’s rules seem to change based on the whims of Musk rather than a considered process. This was on display over the last fewldays as Musk fielded several complaints from right-wing personalities about last week’s change. On Thursday, Musk told one such account that the update “is just about repeated, targeted harassment of a particular person.” But by Saturday, Musk was offering a new explanation. “Turns out this was due to a court judgment in Brazil, which is being appealed, but should not apply outside of Brazil,” he said.

X didn’t respond to a request for comment about the policy or why it was changed twice in a matter of days. But Musk is known to be sympathetic to people who regularly engage in anti-trans harassment. One of his first moves after taking over the company was to reinstate a number of accounts banned for violating the company's previous hateful conduct policy. He has also repeatedly mocked people who specify their pronouns and publicly criticized X staff for attempting to apply the company’s “freedom of speech, not reach” policy to a transphobic documentary.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/x-walks-back-its-misgendering-policy-after-right-wing-complaints-202433498.html?src=rss

X walks back its misgendering policy after right-wing complaints

Posted on by

X has, once again, quietly changed its rules around deadnaming and misgendering without an explanation. With the latest change, it seems that there will be no penalties for misgendering or deadnaming people on X after al, except in cases when it may be “required by local laws.”

The update, which was first spotted by Mashable, comes after X appeared to reinstate some aspects of Twitter’s former policy, which fell under its hateful conduct rules. Prior to Elon Musk’s takeover, Twitter had barred targeted deadnaming and misgendering. That section of the company’s rules then disappeared last April. Then, last week, ArsTechnica noted that the policy was quietly updated to indicate that X would “reduce the visibility of posts that purposefully use different pronouns to address someone other than what that person uses for themselves, or that use a previous name that someone no longer goes by as part of their transition.”

While it wasn’t a full reversal of the earlier policy — under the company’s previous leadership, intentional misgendering was grounds for a suspension — it seemed that there once again would be penalties for this type of harassment. Now, that section of Twitter’s rules is prefaced with “where required by local laws.”

As with so much of what happens at X, there is significant confusion about the policy as the company’s rules seem to change based on the whims of Musk rather than a considered process. This was on display over the last fewldays as Musk fielded several complaints from right-wing personalities about last week’s change. On Thursday, Musk told one such account that the update “is just about repeated, targeted harassment of a particular person.” But by Saturday, Musk was offering a new explanation. “Turns out this was due to a court judgment in Brazil, which is being appealed, but should not apply outside of Brazil,” he said.

X didn’t respond to a request for comment about the policy or why it was changed twice in a matter of days. But Musk is known to be sympathetic to people who regularly engage in anti-trans harassment. One of his first moves after taking over the company was to reinstate a number of accounts banned for violating the company's previous hateful conduct policy. He has also repeatedly mocked people who specify their pronouns and publicly criticized X staff for attempting to apply the company’s “freedom of speech, not reach” policy to a transphobic documentary.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/x-walks-back-its-misgendering-policy-after-right-wing-complaints-202433498.html?src=rss