According to Microsoft, it's time for the "next phase of Copilot innovation." On September 16, the company is live streaming an event called Microsoft 365 Copilot: Wave 2. Microsoft's CEO Satya Nadella and corporate vice president of AI at work, Jared Spataro, will host the event on LinkedIn (It is "your AI assistant for work," so it's a fitting platform). The stream starts at 8 AM PT/11 AM ET and is available here.
Spataro first announced Microsoft 365 Copilot in early 2023 to create responses, draft presentations, and break down data — to name a few of its uses. In the year and a half since, CoPilot has folded in Microsoft's chatbot Bing and expanded to serve entire teams, generate images, and reference multiple documents when it writes. It currently costs $360 annually per user.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/microsoft-is-sharing-copilots-next-phase-in-a-september-16-livestream-134451868.html?src=rss
Lyft is rolling out a new price lock feature that caps the cost of rides, in an attempt to solve the problem of cost unpredictability for those who rely on the platform for daily commutes. The company says this tool will even work during peak hours, when rides are usually at their most expensive. There are, however, some caveats.
First of all, there’s a required monthly subscription price to use this service, though it’s only $3 per month. There’s also a curious lack of details regarding how exactly the cap works. Does it just average past rides and exclude peak pricing? Is there a limit to just how much can be capped? We reached out to Lyft and will update this post if we hear anything.
Lyft
One thing is certain. Lyft is planning on this feature being a hit. It has suggested that commuters will take 40 percent more rides once the price lock tool becomes commonplace. However, it's worth noting that Lyft is the one that sets the prices in the first place, so it caused the instability that this tool sets out to solve.
There’s also a promotion to advertise the price lock mechanism: 100 customers who are starting new jobs will receive free “first day” rides. This will be handled via LinkedIn. Just 100 rides? That seems pretty stingy for a company as large as Lyft, but what do I know?
This isn’t the first time Lyft has tried its hand at a subscription-based service. The company’s Pink subscription service has been an on-again/off-again thing for years. This is more or less a bundle of add-ons at this point. Pink stopped offering ride discounts but began offering perks like free priority pickups and three free cancellations per month. This program is still live, at $10 per month or $100 per year.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/transportation/lyfts-new-price-lock-feature-caps-the-cost-of-rides-even-during-peak-hours-100014522.html?src=rss
Clearview AI is back in hot — and expensive — water, with the Dutch Data Protection Authority (DPA) fining the company €30.5 million ($33.6 million) for violating the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The release explains that Clearview created "an illegal database with billions of photos of faces," including Dutch individuals, and has failed to properly inform people that it's using their data. In early 2023, Clearview's CEO claimed the company had 30 billion images.
Clearview must immediately stop all violations or face up to €5.1 million ($5.6 million) in non-compliance penalties. "Facial recognition is a highly intrusive technology, that you cannot simply unleash on anyone in the world," Dutch DPA chairman Aleid Wolfsen stated. "If there is a photo of you on the Internet — and doesn't that apply to all of us? — then you can end up in the database of Clearview and be tracked." He adds that facial recognition can help with safety but that "competent authorities" who are "subject to strict conditions" should handle it rather than a commercial company.
The Dutch DPA further states that since Clearview is breaking the law, using it is also illegal. Wolfsen warns that Dutch companies using Clearview could also be subject to "hefty fines." Clearview didn't issue an objection to the Dutch DPA's fine, so it is unable to launch an appeal.
This fine is far from the first time an entity has stood up against Clearview. In 2020, the LAPD banned its use, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued Clearview, with the settlement ending sales of the biometric database to any private companies. Italy and the UK have previously fined Clearview €20 million ($22 million) and £7.55 million ($10 million), respectively, and instructed the company to delete any data of its residents. Earlier this year, the EU also barred Clearview from untargeted face scraping on the internet.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/clearview-faces-a-%E2%82%AC305-million-for-violating-the-gdpr-124549856.html?src=rss
If you have an account with Comcast Xfinity, then you also have a year-long subscription to the Perplexity Pro AI answer engine. Perplexity announced the special deal on Threads. Perplexity Pro differs from the company's free option by allowing unlimited quick answers from a choice of AI models, including GPT-4o, Claude-3 and Sonar Large. Engadget hasn’t reviewed the service, but if you’re already paying for Xfinity, free seems like a good price for you to make up your own mind on its value.
All you have to do to get your free year of Perplexity is to log into your Xfinity Rewards account and obtain a promo code. You’ll punch in your code on Perplexity’s website and you can start using the AI to explore life’s most puzzling mysteries like “Who was that guy who played that squirrely dude in Office Space?” (For the record, that was Stephen Root and his character was Milton).
A Perplexity Pro subscription normally costs $20 but if you take advantage of Comcast Xfinity’s perk, you’ll get a whole year for nothing. You still might want to take Perplexity’s answers with a big grain of salt. The media company Condé Nast has accused the company of plagiarism, and the online retail giant Amazon, which hosts some of Perplexity's infrastructure, has investigated whether the AI company's actions are within its terms of service. So this isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement for Perplexity Pro but again, it’s free so you could do worse. A lot worse.
Update, August 30, 4PM ET: A previous version of this article used imprecise wording that suggested Amazon, rather than just Condé Nast, had accused Perplexity of plagiarism. The article has been updated to correctly indicate that Amazon separately investigated claims made by Wired, one of Condé Nast's publications, and has made no allegations of wrongdoing. We regret the error.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/comcast-xfinity-customers-can-get-a-year-of-perplexity-pro-ai-for-free-183727093.html?src=rss
French authorities have now shared the why behind the August 24 arrest of Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov. His arrest came in response to a series of charges, including complicity in "distributing, offering or making available pornographic images of minors, in an organized group." The charges stem from a judicial investigation opened on July 8 against an unnamed individual.
The release, penned by Prosecutor of the Republic Laure Beccuau, details 12 charges in total, including money laundering, drug trafficking, fraud, running an online platform that allows illegal transactions and possessing child pornography. Durov can be held in custody until Wednesday, August 28.
The arrest has raised questions about how much leaders are responsible for what happens on their platforms. Telegram shared a post stating the company "abides by EU laws" and "It is absurd to claim that a platform or its owner are responsible for abuse of that platform." There have also been outcries from individuals like Elon Musk, the owner of X (formerly Twitter), who posted "#FreePavel" on X, and NSA whistleblower and now Russian citizen Edward Snowden, who called it politically motivated. Telegram is especially popular in Russia and Ukraine.
French President Emmanuel Macron responded on X (formerly Twitter) to "false information" that the arrest was politically motivated. "France is deeply committed to freedom of expression and communication, to innovation, and to the spirit of entrepreneurship. It will remain so," Macron shared on August 26. "In a state governed by the rule of law, freedoms are upheld within a legal framework, both on social media and in real life, to protect citizens and respect their fundamental rights. It is up to the judiciary, in full independence, to enforce the law."
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/telegram-ceo-charges-include-distributing-csam-and-money-laundering-125336547.html?src=rss
Meta’s decision to shut down CrowdTangle, an analytics tool that was an “invaluable” resource to the research community, is drawing fresh scrutiny from European Union regulators. The EU Commission, which had already raised concerns about the social network’s plan to discontinue the tool ahead of global elections in 2024, is now pressing Meta for more details about its work with researchers.
The EU Commission previously cited the impending shutdown of CrowdTangle as part of a broader investigation into the company’s handling of disinformation campaigns and election-related policies. Now, just days after CrowdTangle was shut off despite pleas from researchers and civil society organizations to keep it online through the end of the year, regulators are pointedly reminding Meta of its “obligation” under the Digital Services Act (DSA) to allow outside researchers access to its data.
“The Commission is requesting Meta to provide more information on the measures it has taken to comply with its obligations to give researchers access to data that is publicly accessible on the online interface of Facebook and Instagram, as required by the DSA, and on its plans to update its election and civic discourse monitoring functionalities,” the EU Commission wrote in a statement. “Specifically, the Commission is requesting information about Meta's content library and application programming interface (API), including their eligibility criteria, the application process, the data that can be accessed and functionalities.”
Meta has previously pointed to the Meta Content Library as a replacement for CrowdTangle. But access to the Meta Content Library is much more tightly controlled, and researchers have said it doesn’t replicate all of CrowdTangle’s functionality.
“We announced earlier this year that we would discontinue CrowdTangle because it did not provide a complete picture of what is happening on our platforms," a Meta spokesperson said in a statement to Engadget. "We have built new, more comprehensive tools for researchers, called the Meta Content Library & API, and we remain in discussion with the European Commission on this matter.”
Update August 16, 2024, 3:15PM ET: This story has been updated to add a statement from Meta.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/eu-regulators-question-meta-about-the-shutdown-of-crowdtangle-175641308.html?src=rss
As the US government weighs its options following a landmark “monopolist” ruling against Google last week, online publications increasingly face a bleak future. (And this time, it’s not just because of severely diminished ad revenue.) Bloombergreports that their choice now boils down to allowing Google to use their published content to produce inline AI-generated search “answers” or losing visibility in the company’s search engine.
The crux of the problem lies in the Googlebot, the crawler that scours and indexes the live web to produce the results you see when you enter search terms. If publishers block Google from using their content for the AI-produced answers you now see littered at the top of many search results, they also lose the privilege of appearing in other Google search programs like snippets and Discover.
Google uses a separate crawler for its Gemini (formerly Bard) chatbot, but its AI Overviews are generated using data from its main crawler. A Google spokesperson told Engadget that blocking an entire article from AI Overviews would not prevent its crawler from seeing "the full text of what's provided to us for ranking purposes" or from "being indexed and appearing in our web search results."
The spokesperson also said the company's tools for publishers allow sites to only block certain sections of a page from features like snippets or AI Overviews. Web publishers nonetheless have no way to fully prevent AI Overviews without impacting overall search performance.
The catch-22 has led publications, rival search engines and AI startups to pin their hopes on the Justice Department. On Tuesday, The New York Timesreported that the DOJ is considering asking a federal judge to break up parts of the company (spinning off sections like Chrome or Android). Other options it’s reportedly weighing include forcing Google to share search data with competitors or relinquishing its default search-engine deals, like the $18 billion one it inked with Apple.
iFixit CEO Kyle Wiens told Bloomberg, “I can block ClaudeBot [Anthropic’s crawler for its Claude chatbot] from indexing us without harming our business. But if I block Googlebot, we lose traffic and customers.”
Google
Another problem with combining the two is that it gives Google an immeasurable advantage over smaller AI startups. The company gets a plethora of free training data from publishers eager to remain visible in search. In contrast, AI companies are forced to pay publishers for access to their data — and, even then, it wouldn’t add up to the motherlode Google gets (essentially) for free.
From that perspective, it isn’t surprising to read that, according to Bloomberg, Google is spurning publishers that try to negotiate content deals. (Reddit has been the lone exception.) Why waste money on content deals when they get all the training data they want in exchange for the search results most publishers need to survive?
“Now you have a bunch of tech companies that are paying for content, they’re paying for access to that because they need it to be able to compete in any kind of serious way,” Alex Rosenberg, CEO of AI startup Tako Inc., told Bloomberg. “Whereas for Google, they don’t really have to do that.”
It comes down to leverage, which Google wields over desperate publishers. On top of the industry’s existing financial troubles (online ad revenue has fallen off a cliff over the past eight years), AdWeekreported in March that Google’s AI-generated search answers could lead to a 20 to 60 percent drop in organic search traffic.
The ball is now in the Justice Department’s court to figure out where Google — and, to an extent, the entire web — goes from here. Bloomberg’s full story is worth a read.
Update, August 16, 4:55PM ET: This story was updated after publishing to include a number of clarifications from a Google spokesperson.
The original article said that preventing an article from being used in AI Overviews could block Google's webcrawler from including it in search results. The spokesperson asserted that this was incorrect; while blocking an entire article from its AI Overviews does prevent it from being included other search enhancements like snippets and Google Discover, it does not block it from standard web results.
The article's subheading has been ammended to reflect the changes, and a full statement from Google follows:
“Every day, Google sends billions of clicks to sites across the web, and we intend for this long-established value exchange with websites to continue. With AI Overviews, people find Search more helpful and they’re coming back to search more, creating new opportunities for content to be discovered. People are using AI Overviews to discover more of the web, and we’re continuing to improve the experience to make that even easier.”
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/online-publishers-face-a-dilemma-allow-ai-scraping-from-google-or-lose-search-visibility-202246891.html?src=rss
T-Mobile has been fined $60 million for failing to both report and stop data breaches, as indicated by Bloomberg. The hefty fine was levied by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the US (CFIUS) and represents the largest such financial penalty the organization has ever issued. T-Mobile is owned by Deutsche Telekom, a company based in Germany, which is why CFIUS got involved.
These penalties have their origins in the terms of a 2020 deal in which T-Mobile purchased Sprint. CFIUS put some conditions on the purchase, including some related to protecting consumer data. The Committee found that T-Mobile didn’t comply with these conditions by failing to secure data and then by failing to report unauthorized access to this data, as reported by Reuters.
The data access occurred in 2020 and 2021. T-Mobile has blamed it on technical issues that sprang up during its post-merger integration with Sprint. The company says that this impacted “information shared from a small number of law enforcement information requests."
It also says that the data stayed within the law enforcement community, even after the unauthorized access of data. T-Mobile claims that these issues were reported “in a timely manner” and that they were “quickly addressed.”
A representative from the company reached out to Engadget and echoed the above sentiment, saying "this was not a data breach, but a technical issue."
CFIUS has been getting more aggressive in recent months with regard to fines and affiliated penalties. It issued six large penalties in the past year or so, though none get close to the $60 million fine T-Mobile was just hit with. This is approximately three times the number of penalties it has issued during any other similar timeframe throughout its existence, from 1975 until 2022.
“The $60 million penalty announcement highlights the committee’s commitment to ramping up CFIUS enforcement by holding companies accountable when they fail to comply with their obligations,” a US official told Reuters.
Update, August 15 2024, 2:40PM ET: This story has been updated to include a quote by T-Mobile.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/t-mobile-fined-60-million-for-failing-to-stop-data-breaches-170438570.html?src=rss
The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) crackdown on fabricated reviews and fake consumer and celebrity testimonials has produced new official federal regulations to prevent the use of these practices on websites and e-commerce hubs. The FTC approved the new rules against the buying and selling of fake reviews and product testimonials with a 5-0 vote on Wednesday. The rules will become effective in 60 days.
The new FTC rules address the practice of buying and selling fake consumer reviews, including the use of AI-generated consumer and celebrity testimonials for products or services. They also prevent “providing compensation or other incentives conditioned on the writing of consumer reviews expressing a particular sentiment, either positive or negative” and prohibit “a business from misrepresenting that a website or entity it controls provides independent reviews or opinions” about products or services, according to a statement released by the FTC.
The formal ban also comes with stiff penalties for violators of the new rules. Fines could reach as high as $50,000 per violation.
The FTC officially announced its intent to seek new rules for such practices last October. The Commission has been trying to get control of fake online reviews and testimonials for years. The first such case was resolved in 2019 against the Amazon seller Cure Encapsulations Inc. The company was accused of paying for fake feedback for its weight-loss products from the amazonvierifiedreviews.com website, and the FTC slapped them with a $12.8 million fine. The FTC has also investigated similar cases against the supplement maker The Bountiful Company for “review hijacking” its products’ reviews and ratings on Amazon that ended with a $600,000 fine, and the skincare maker Sunday Riley that created fake online reviews by ordering employees to write them.
The government isn’t the only entity trying to discourage the buying and selling of fake reviews. The service recommendation website Yelp created a database that lists businesses who received warnings for posting or buying fake reviews for its Yelp page.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/the-ftc-finalizes-its-rules-clamping-down-on-fake-online-reviews-191339646.html?src=rss
X’s live streaming infrastructure appears to have failed, once again, at a high-profile moment for the company. X owner Elon Musk was supposed to be interviewing Donald Trump live on Spaces, beginning at 8pm ET Monday. But the stream repeatedly crashed and was completely inaccessible to many users.
Musk claimed that the failure was due to a “massive DDOS [distributed denial of service] attack on X,” and that the company “tested the system with 8 million concurrent listeners earlier today.” Instead, only a “smaller number” of people will be able to listen to the conversation live. As of 8:30pm ET, the live stream had yet to begin. “Crashed,” “unable” and “Twitter blackout” trended on the platform.
Those who were able to join the stream were greeted with about a half hour of hold music followed by several minutes of total silence. The live stream finally started at 8:40pm ET. “All of our data lines, like basically hundreds of gigabits of data, were saturated,” Musk said. “We think we've overcome most of that.” Musk didn’t explain how a DDOS attack could target only one specific feature on the service without affecting other aspects of X’s app or website.
It’s not the first time a high-profile live stream on spaces has run into technical difficulties. Last year, Ron DeSantis attempted to announce his short-lived presidential bid during a live conversation with Musk on X, but that stream was also delayed after repeated crashes. Musk, at the time, said that Twitter’s servers were “kind of melting.” Musk’s biographer later reported that the issues were a result of months of instability within Twitter's systems after Musk instructed his cousins to hastily dismantle one of the company’s data centers.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/elon-musk-claims-massive-ddos-attack-delayed-his-live-stream-with-donald-trump-004457451.html?src=rss