The background to EU citizens’ court win over US tech giants – The Guardian

A ruling of the court of justice of the European Union (CJEU) could prevent tech companies like Facebook from sending data from the trading bloc to the US, after finding that there are not enough protections against snooping by American intelligence agencies. It is the latest ruling in a long-running European legal saga.

July 2000: EU and US develop the Safe Harbour Privacy Principles, which allow personal information to be transferred between the two without breaching the EUs data protection rules. Under the principles, US companies can self-certify that they comply with the EU data protection directive.

August 2011: Max Schrems, an Austrian lawyer, files the first of 22 privacy complaints in a two-month period with the Irish data protection commissioner, which regulates Facebook in the EU, alleging widespread violations including the inability to prevent yourself being tagged in a photo, and the refusal to fully delete data about revoked friendships. He requests 1,222 pages of material gathered about him by the company.

June 2013: The Guardian reveals the NSAs Prism program, a vast surveillance operation involving direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet giants. Schrems files his 23rd complaint, about the program.

June 2014: A judicial review of Schrems complaint fails in the Irish high court, where the judge, Desmond Hogan, said that only the naive or credulous could have been surprised by the Snowden expos. But Hogan passes the foundational question, about the Safe Harbour agreement, on to the European court of justice.

July 2014: Schrems withdraws all but the Prism complaint, and decides to focus attention and funding on pursuing a judicial review.

August 2014: Schrems launches a class action suit against Facebook, capping participation at 25,000 members.

March 2015: The CJEU begins considering the case.

October 2015: In a surprise move, the court of justice rules in Schrems favour, and declares that the Safe Harbour agreement is invalid given the NSAs snooping. Prism, the court rules, enables interference, by United States public authorities, with the fundamental rights of persons.

November 2015: Facebook Ireland uses a standard contractual clause in its agreement with Facebooks HQ to continue the internal data transfer. The contract requires Facebook US to follow European law when processing the data of European citizens.

July 2016: The EU agrees the EU-US Privacy Shield, an all-encompassing replacement for the Safe Harbour, which again attempts to ensure that European citizens data is safe from US government interference, in order to resume free transfer of data across the Atlantic.

June 2018: Schrems files his second case against Facebook Ireland, arguing that the standard contractual clauses and the EU-US Privacy Shield are invalid, as they do not fully protect citizens rights.

December 2019: The advocate general of the CJEU delivered a preliminary opinion that standard contractual clauses were likely to be valid, and raised questions over whether the Privacy Shield could be valid given the impacts of US surveillance.

July 2020: The CJEU rules, upholding standard contractual clauses in general but striking down the privacy shield, arguing that the US still does not limit surveillance of EU citizens to that which is strictly necessary.

See the rest here:

The background to EU citizens' court win over US tech giants - The Guardian

Coronavirus scams (back) in the spotlight – POLITICO – Politico

With help from Cristiano Lima, Steven Overly and Tim Starks

Programming announcement: Our newsletters are evolving. Morning Tech will continue to publish daily for POLITICO Pro subscribers, but starting in fall 2020 will consolidate to a weekly newsletter for all others. There will be no changes to the policy newsletters available to POLITICO Pro subscribers. To continue to receive Morning Tech daily, as well as access POLITICO Pros full suite of policy tools and trackers, get in touch about a Pro subscription. Already a Pro subscriber? Learn more here.

First the House, now the Senate: As the country braces for a second wave in coronavirus cases, a Senate subcommittee is holding a hearing on the persistence of Covid-19 robocalls and related scams and what businesses and the government should do about it.

Tech measures advance in the House: Lawmakers approved a set of amendments to their annual defense spending bill dealing with everything from TikTok to deepfakes and bias in artificial intelligence.

In social media we trust: Or do we? More than half of social media users have less confidence in tech platforms ability to protect the November election from foreign interference after last weeks unprecedented Twitter hack, according to a new poll.

ITS TUESDAY; WELCOME TO MORNING TECH! Im your host, Alexandra Levine.

Got a news tip? Write Alex at [emailprotected], or follow along @Ali_Lev and @alexandra.levine. An event for our calendar? Send details to [emailprotected] Anything else? Full team info below. And don't forget: Add @MorningTech and @PoliticoPro on Twitter.

A message from Facebook:

Facebook launches Global State of Small Business Report. At Facebook, we are committed to helping small businesses succeed. We partnered with the World Bank and the OECD to survey businesses in 50+ countries and regions to understand the challenges they face and ways we can better support them. Go further: Read the first report

TODAY, IRL, ON THE HILL: SENATE EXAMS SCAMS The director of the FTCs Consumer Protection Bureau, Andrew Smith, is among the witnesses testifying this afternoon at a Senate Commerce consumer protection subcommittee hearing on Covid-19 scams. Chair Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) plans to single out illegal robocalls pitching low-priced health insurance and other scams targeting vulnerable populations like seniors, per opening remarks shared with POLITICO. He also plans to press the witnesses on current enforcement efforts to detect, identify and prosecute criminal organizations engaged in these illegal activities.

Sound familiar? Todays session is more or less a Senate counterpart to a House Energy & Commerce Committee hearing earlier in July on Covid-19 privacy harms and scams online, from price gouging to counterfeit products. Today, Smith and the other witnesses including Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt are expected to highlight what businesses and federal and state governments are doing, and what they should be doing more of, to crack down on pandemic-era ploys.

HOUSE VOTES TO ADVANCE SLEW OF TECH MEASURES In a rare flurry of activity for tech policy on Capitol Hill, House lawmakers on Monday approved a series of amendments to their annual defense spending bill that touched on everything from government use of TikTok to the dangers of so-called deepfakes and to bias in artificial intelligence.

What made it through: The House passed a massive bloc of amendments that included a proposal by Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) to ban the use of TikTok on federal devices; two plans from Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) to ban the Defense Department from using some funds to acquire AI not vetted for algorithmic bias, and separately to require that regulators file reports to Congress on how deepfake videos affect national defense; and a Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) amendment requiring DoD to issue a report to Congress on social media use by terrorists and on the threat of online radicalization.

Whats next: The House is slated to consider amendments today to have the GAO probe predatory social media targeting service members and their families and to establish an Open Technology Fund to promote global internet freedom by countering internet censorship and repressive surveillance by authoritarian regimes. Neither is up for debate on the House floor, indicating likely passage. The House is expected to pass its version of the National Defense Authorization Act today, with a Senate vote likely soon to follow. The two chambers will then need to reconcile differences between the bills.

TikTok's reaction: A TikTok spokesperson said in response to the House vote that the company's "entire and growing U.S. team have no higher priority than promoting a safe app experience that protects our users' privacy." They added, "Millions of American families use TikTok for entertainment and creative expression, which we recognize is not what federal government devices are for."

TECH TO TIKTOKS RESCUE After the House voted to bar TikTok on government devices, a leading tech research institute is warning the Trump administration against banning the Chinese-owned video app in the U.S. an idea floated in recent weeks by top officials and the president himself. Instead, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation argues, members of Congress should prove that TikTok has done wrong, as lawmakers claim it has, and then U.S. regulators should hold TikTok accountable for any missteps.

TikTok has stated clearly and unambiguously that it has not and will not provide U.S. user data to the Chinese government, said ITIF Vice President Daniel Castro. If the U.S. government has evidence to the contrary, it should share this information with lawmakers and the public. Similarly, if the app is not complying with U.S. data privacy or other laws, regulators should hold it accountable for any violations. He added that the U.S. punishing foreign tech firms based on rumors and innuendo sets a precedent for other countries to retaliate and freely impose trade restrictions on digital goods and services for vague and undefined national security threats.

ASK THE AUDIENCE: DO YOU TRUST TWITTER AHEAD OF THE ELECTION? In the wake of last week's unprecedented Twitter hack, more than half of social media users fear that the platforms cannot successfully thwart election interference or disinformation campaigns ahead of November, according to a new Morning Consult poll.

Of more than 2,000 social media users polled over the weekend following the breach, 56 percent said they have less confidence in tech platforms ability to fight such attempts from bad actors and more than 70 percent have little or no trust in the sites to protect sensitive personal information like full name, email address, birth date and geolocation. (Sixty-five percent felt the same about banking information.)

Meanwhile, over in Congress: The top two Democrats in the House and Senate, as well as the top two Democrats on the respective intelligence committees, put out an urgent call for an FBI briefing on an apparent election-related foreign influence operation targeting lawmakers, our POLITICO colleagues report: Among the Democrats concerns is that a Senate investigation being led by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) has become a vehicle for laundering a foreign operation to damage Joe Biden, according to two people familiar with the demand. A Johnson spokesperson didnt immediately reply to a request for comment.

What does Biden have to say about that? In his most definitive statements to date on election interference obtained first by POLITICO the presumptive 2020 Democratic nominee threatened to hold the Kremlin and other foreign governments accountable for any meddling if elected, Natasha Bertrand reports. Biden said he will treat foreign interference in our election as an adversarial act that significantly affects the relationship between the United States and the interfering nations government, and plans to direct the U.S. Intelligence Community to report publicly and in a timely manner on any efforts by foreign governments that have interfered, or attempted to interfere, with U.S. elections.

LOBBYING LATEST: HEY, SMALL SPENDER Google continues to reduce its spending on federal lobbying, at least the kind that has to be publicly disclosed. The search giant shelled out $1.69 million during the second quarter, new records show. For comparison, Google spent $2.94 million during the same quarter last year and $5.83 million in the second quarter of 2018. Google has laid off several outside firms and restructured its internal staff over the past two years, but the steep decline is still surprising given the companys woes in Washington have only grown. Google declined to comment.

Twitter spending held relatively flat at $390,000 in the second quarter, but the social network has tapped TwinLogic Strategies as its latest outside lobbyist. The firm will work on content moderation and intermediary liability issues, among other policy matters. Other notable new contracts: Cypress Advocacy is lobbying for Amazon Web Services on the CARES Act; BL Partners is on retainer for T-Mobile; and Mercury Public Affairs is advocating on behalf of Netflix.

Antitrust expert and former Justice Department official Fiona Scott Morton is advising Amazon and Apple as the tech giants face federal antitrust probes, per Bloomberg. Melody Neil, former founding partner and principal of an advocacy firm that offered government affairs expertise to companies and business trade associations, joined the data center services provider Digital Realty as a senior director of business operations and government affairs. Denise Linn Riedl, chief innovation officer for the city of South Bend, Ind., and Leon A. Wilson, the Cleveland Foundations chief of digital innovation and chief information officer, were named board members for the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. ICYMI: Alabama announced the creation of the Alabama Innovation Commission, also known as Innovate Alabama, its first statewide commission promoting entrepreneurial and tech growth. The advisory council includes Alabama native and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Trumps texting trouble: When the Trump campaign recently tested out its mass-text messaging program, key for its small-donor outreach and voter turnout, the program was flagged as spam and shut down by telecom giants, POLITICO reports.

Surprise: Google promised privacy with its coronavirus contact tracing app, but government agencies are now surprised that this isnt quite the case, NYT reports.

Orders for the oversight board: "A new policy-focused nonprofit that emerged from the recent wave of big tech scrutiny is calling for members of Facebook's Oversight Board to either step up or step down," TechCrunch reports on the group Accountable Tech.

Should Facebook take sides? Boycott organizers want Facebook to pick a side and align its corporate operations with aggressive activism on issues such as racism and social justice, former Facebook policy director Matt Perault, who now leads Dukes Center on Science and Technology Policy, writes on Chicago Booths ProMarket blog. But picking a side would mean a radical shift in the companys approach to its product and alienate many of its users.

Tips, comments, suggestions? Send them along via email to our team: Bob King ([emailprotected], @bkingdc), Heidi Vogt ([emailprotected], @HeidiVogt), Nancy Scola ([emailprotected], @nancyscola), Steven Overly ([emailprotected], @stevenoverly), John Hendel ([emailprotected], @JohnHendel), Cristiano Lima ([emailprotected], @viaCristiano), Alexandra S. Levine ([emailprotected], @Ali_Lev), and Leah Nylen ([emailprotected], @leah_nylen).

TTYL.

A message from Facebook:

Facebook helps small businesses with the Summer of Support Program

As many storefronts remain closed, Boost with Facebook's Summer of Support program is helping millions of people and small business owners gain skills and find resources they need to grow and transition online.

Learn more about the program

See the original post here:

Coronavirus scams (back) in the spotlight - POLITICO - Politico

With Just $130K In Funding, Indias Nimo Planet Is Looking To Challenge Tech Giants With Its Smart Glasses – Inc42 Media

Last week, Mukesh Ambani and Reliance introduced JioGlass to much hype and catapulted India into the smart eyewear craze. While the unveiling of JioGlass brought about umpteen discussions and debates on social media around mixed reality and how Reliance Jio is looking to conquer it, the reality is that the product is developed by a deeptech startup Tesseract, which was acquired by RIL in 2019.

JioGlass, when it launches, will join the club of products such as Google Glass, Magic Leap, Microsoft HoloLens, Oculus lineup of devices and more in the heads-up displays and smart eyewear segment. But it wont be the only Indian product in the list if Nimo Planet has its way.

Kochi-based Nimo Planet is part of the burgeoning hardware tech startup ecosystem in Kerala and the deeptech startup has launched its smart glasses in beta with a select set of 200 beta testers. Founded in 2018 by Rohildev Nattukallingal, Nimo Planet launched its first smart glass in 2018 and has further iterated on it to launch the beta version this month.

Nimo Planets Smart Glass is not only proprietary hardware thats custom-made for the company, but also runs a custom Android-based operating system called Planet OS, which is claimed to be geared towards productivity. It is said to have features such as multi-screen multitasking, support for 1,000s of work and productivity apps, compatibility with existing laptops and mobile devices.

Talking to Inc42, Nattukallingal said that the hardware is fully compatible and optimised for Planet OS, which is built on top of the Linux kernel and Android. This, in turn, helps the company ship with low-powered hardware that can fit in the body of the glasses and optimise the software experience more thoroughly.

Nattukallingal said the idea behind Smart Glass was to create a computing device for multi-screen productivity. He said he had been using iPads for work, due to their portability and convenience, but struggled when he needed multiple screens. Having a portable multi-screen monitor enables more effective work, regardless of the location. And that is the core focus for Nimo enable work from anywhere.

The six-member team behind Nimo Planet has already built hardware futuristic solutions. In 2016, the team had built Fin Robotics, a wearable tech gadget which can be worn on the thumb making the palm a digital touch interface. The ring called Neyya was launched in retail stores like Sky Walk, Bloomingdales etc. However, due to conflicts with advisors and inventory loss in the US, the company discontinued the product.

The same team moved on to the next vision of creating the Smart Glass. The core focus was to design something thats super portable and at the same time delivers bigger screen experience and I thought in the form of face spectacle that will help me to solve that problem, Nattukallingal added.

In 2018, Nimo built a prototype, which could be used with a USB and a processing unit nearby. Just like Google Glass, the user could see a virtual screen pop-up at a three-meter distance to open different apps and interact with them. However, unlike Google Glass, Nimo incorporated the display into the lens of the glasses itself rather than projecting an image.

With feedback from users and testing, the team kept iterating on the design and finalised the current beta version, which will be ready for production by the end of the year.

Mimicking a standard pair of spectacles, Nimo enables the user to see a virtual screen on the lens, which actually looks as big as a 60-inch display thanks to its proximity to the eye. Essentially, the display fills up the users vision when its in use. With head-tracking sensors, users can operate windows and apps on up to six virtual screens.

In terms of tech specs, Nimo Smart Glass comes with HD-equivalent display for each eye, an unnamed Qualcomm-based processor, up to 4GB RAM, 64GB storage, and support for WiFi, Bluetooth connectivity. It also features the sensors for head tracking, a custom voice assistant and is said to support 1000s of productivity apps.

So clearly, Planet OS will be the key to success and app compatibility will be a major challenge. Talking about this, Nattukallingal told Inc42, Thats [Planet OS] helping us make hardware smaller because we did a lot of optimization, so the apps that the user is going to run on six different screens will not use too much battery. We have made interactions to open multiple tabs as screens instead of closing one and opening another. All this is already built into the OS now.

Smart Glass will support existing Android applications and app developers dont need to rewrite any of the existing apps from scratch. But how does the screen virtual screen work?

This has three support input systems Bluetooth input devices, a companion smartphone app and the head-tracking sensor.

At the moment, users can connect Bluetooth keyboards and mice to operate the OS. Because we are focusing on productivity we want to help people to save time and work from anywhere. When people are travelling and cant use a keyboard and mouse, they can use the smartphone as a keyboard and mouse with the Nimo app, he added.

Finally, the companys head tracking sensors can also enable users to give cues and perform actions. This would be further combined with voice cues for input. In the first version, we are not putting any speakers, people can pair with any of their existing Bluetooth speakers for the sound like AirPods or headphones or speakers because we want to make things simpler in the first version, he explained. The display has 26-degree diagonal FOV (field of view) for maximum immersion.

The battery in the beta version is said to work for 4 hours in normal use, and can be then extended for up to 7-8 hours of usage with a charging case. Overall, the product is priced at $699 at the moment, though this could change in the future.

Nimo is targeting enterprises in India and the US market initially, as several of them have gone full remote owing to the pandemic and may stay on the same path for a while longer. It is also directly focussing on employees for better productivity.

The first production units will be available to users by the end of the year with pre-booking already open. The timeline for delivery is Q2 or Q3 2021 at the moment.

We have a different pipeline for 2022-23 with more features, better display and more capabilities. The core areas that we are more interested in the future are health and entertainment. But right now, the focus is completely on productivity, he added.

The company is engaging with a manufacturing company in Taiwan for the beta and final production. However, Nimo is registered in Singapore and India. All the global operations will be considered from Singapore. Major certifications will be taken care of before the shipment for each country, he added.

At present, the company is working on streamlining the OS. It is also finalising the industrial design for the device and the mechanical design.

While the concept of smart glasses has been around for half a decade and more, its picked up pace this year with every major tech company now said to be working on its version of smart glasses. For instance, Apple and Facebook are rumoured to be working on AR glasses. Microsoft already sells an AR headset called HoloLens, but this is limited to developers. Facebook also revealed an early version of its holographic optics for thin and lightweight virtual reality in a research report.

Google launched Glass in May 2014 and retains an enterprise version of the product. It also recently bought North, a Canadian manufacturer of light, natural-looking smart glasses that are similar to Nimos concept. Even Amazon is after the smart glasses market and announced a pair of Alexa-enabled glasses called Echo Frames.

While the likes of Oculus, Magic Leap, Microsoft HoloLens and other HUDs or head-ups displays are fully immersive, they need to be connected to PCs or other devices. NImo, Google Glass and Apples upcoming wearables are standalone systems that dont offer such an immersive experience and are built for productivity or notification checking, rather than experiential usage. Nattukallingal claims that such experiences need multiple cameras, high processing power, bigger batteries and that is why they are costly. Microsoft HoloLens costs above $2,000. These glasses have got too many components inside and they need super high computing to do that, he added.

He claimed that even standalone smart glasses are not up to the mark when it comes to immersion without the bulky hardware, which is Nimos strong point. When you put these glasses on, you see a pretty small screen and thats full of information like single text and small images. The Google Glass failed because of that as user experience was very bad as wearing these feels like additional robotic things without solving any problems just delivering some animations on the small screen, he adds.

The differentiating factor for Nimo is that it is not focusing on VR-like immersion. Due to our core focus on productivity, we are optimising the operating system and all our software to match that direction, including the design hardware, and thats our IP too. And were going to innovate more and more into that direction in coming months, he added.

Against such capital-equipped technology giants who have poured in millions of dollars into developing these glasses with the best technology talent in the world, Nimo Planet cuts a diminutive figure. It has developed its proprietary prototype with just $130K in funding till date.

Even at the design stage, we take into consideration the cost and how we can optimise the complexity of making the hardware. We also keep a check on how we execute without using too many components in the glass and make it simple that also help to save a lot of costs and at the same time, the focus on the target use case is the focus, Nimo Planet founder Nattukallingal.

The company has raised funds from angels like Innov8 founder Dr Ritesh Malik, Ravi Linganuri along with a few US-based angel investors. The board also includes Advisors such as Aneet Chopra, Stephane Kasriel, Malik and Linganuri. The company has also filed a couple of patents including on the operating system, design and input interface. The company is also in the process of raising $4 Mn as its seed funding round.

Talking about using this capital wisely, Nattukallingal said that the company has built everything in-house and the team is taking a very low salary. He also emphasised that having been in the hardware industry in the past, Nimo had the right contacts for vendors and the focus areas for production.

Thats the core thing, you should be super focused on what you want to build and to whom, then a lot of unwanted costs would be reduced. And then you need to have the right connections with the vendors, manufacturing companies, etc. to make it happen, he added.

Read more here:

With Just $130K In Funding, Indias Nimo Planet Is Looking To Challenge Tech Giants With Its Smart Glasses - Inc42 Media

China’s aggression is undermining its tech giants’ global ambitions – Nikkei Asian Review

James Crabtree is an associate professor in practice at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore. He is author of "The Billionaire Raj."

TikTok makes a curious bellwether for a new age of techno-nationalism, with its apoliticalteenage audience and frivolous lip-sync videos. But the Chinese-owned app's decision to quit Hong Kong, alongside its ban in India, illustrates a deeper shift in the fortunes of China's biggest tech businesses.

The likes of e-commerce giant Alibaba Group Holdingand ByteDance, TikTok's Beijing-based parent, have long sought to transform themselves into global operations. Geopolitical tensions between China and the West are now making this aim much harder to achieve. Just as TikTok may soon be banned not just in India but also in the U.S., so the odds are growing that other Chinese tech groups will find their dreams of global growth frustrated too.

TikTok pulling out of Hong Kong was, at base, a sign of desperation. The app has grown wildly popular since its 2017 launch, amassing 800 million users and contributing a fair chunk of its parent's estimated $100 billion valuation.

But China's draconian new national security law raised concerns over data privacy in Hong Kong, while TikTok hoped its departure would help it avoid awkward questions about it and its parent's ties with the Chinese state -- for instance how it stores users' data and whether it would have to provide such data to China's authorities.

Those hopes now look forlorn. ByteDance has tried to keep TikTok separate from domestic apps like Douyin, which offers similar quirky short videos to Chinese users. TikTok now has an American CEO and says its operations are independent from Beijing. "We have never provided user data to the Chinese government, nor would we do so if asked," it said recently.

Such claims did little to convince India, which banned the service in June on national security grounds in the aftermath of Himalayan border clashes with China. Nor is it likely to win over U.S. President Donald Trump, whose Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on July 6 that the U.S. was examining the service.

On the face of it, the notion of TikTok as a national security threat is laughable, with its jocular content and youthful clientele. But such accusations underline how easily Chinese tech companies now come under suspicion, especially those that keep data on millions of users. Put another way: if TikTok can be considered a national security threat, then so can almost any other major Chinese digital business.

India was a particular blow to TikTok's plans, given the app's popularity in its potentially vast market. But in pushing a ban Prime Minister Narendra Modi showed TikTok's peculiar vulnerability, in large part because its audience was too young and powerless to offer much in the way of a complaint when the service was blocked.

Facing a tough election, Trump may well feel that banning the app makes political sense for him too. Governments in Europe are likely to increase their scrutiny of TikTok and other Chinese tech services, from gaming apps to cloud storage providers like Alibaba.

At one level, the main beneficiary of TikTok's troubles will be other U.S. tech groups, and Facebook in particular. TikTok's rapid popularity made it a plausible rival to parts of Mark Zuckerberg's business empire. Facebook paid TikTok the compliment of aping it by launching Lasso, a notably unsuccessful clone that the company soon plans to close. Now TikTok has been turfed out of India, however, and with the U.S. perhaps to follow, Facebook is left with one fewer competitor to worry about in its most important markets.

But it also signals how hard it is for any company to become a genuine global tech platform. U.S. companies like Facebook are already barred from China. Indian tech policy is becoming more nationalistic as Modi stacks the deck in favor of local tech champion Reliance Jio. And now major Chinese internet groups are facing extreme scrutiny in the U.S. and elsewhere.

This does not mean that the era of Big Tech itself is in decline. Companies like Facebook and ByteDance are growing more powerful, not least in the aftermath of COVID-19, as investors have sent their share prices soaring in anticipation of recession-defying growth. Many will continue to grow abroad too, as Google showed on July 14 with plans to invest an eye-catching $10 billion into India by 2027.

Nor does it mean that China's tech giants must stop expanding internationally; there are plenty of markets with more welcoming governments, including in Latin America and Southeast Asia, which has been a first port for companies like Alibaba and Tencent Holdings as they move abroad.

But it does leave China's tech giants facing a choice. Either they scale back their global ambitions in many advanced economies. Or if they wish to operate in places that are suspicious of China, like the U.S., they must develop a radically localized business structure to convince their critics that services like TikTok are indeed distanced from Beijing.

Such an approach would mirror the way some U.S. companies develop "in China, for China" subsidiaries to allow them to sell to Chinese consumers. And it is roughly this approach that ByteDance is trying to follow, in suggesting that TikTok is able to act independently in individual countries.

Even so, the odds that this will win over sceptical policymakers in the U.S. are slim, just as it did not do so in India. It also suggests that China's continued geopolitical assertiveness is now undermining the global reach of its tech sector -- torpedoing in the process its own government's aim of turning national internet champions into true global tech standard-bearers.

Read the original:

China's aggression is undermining its tech giants' global ambitions - Nikkei Asian Review

US Tech Giants trying to survive the Chinese Market – Market Capitalize

China and its economy wield great power over the American giant including the likes of Google, Apple and NBA; this week has certainly proven the same. Appeasing the Chinese government on every matter is non- negotiable for the United States based companies; it is a cost they have to pay if they wish to access the country market.

It has been proven time and again that these companies are left with little or no control or freedom to speak on vital issues, the latest of them being the ongoing protests in Hong Kong for democracy.

In other words, China does not need these US companies as much as they need China if they need to manage their bottom lines and profit margins. When compared to the state- backed Chinese firms, the share of US tech giants is pale in the market according to data aggregated by Statista.

For instance, tech giant Google holds only a 3.2 percent stake in the Chinese market as compared to its 88 percent stake in its home country.

Against Google stands, Baidu, a Chinese tech conglomerate that dominated the market share with its 76.7 percent. In order to gain more ground and standing in the Chinese market, Google has attempted projects like Dragonfly which was designed as a censored search engine for China; however it turned out to be a failure.

A similar attempt was tried out by Facebook which keeps getting banned by the Chinese government. Though banned currently in China, Facebook has 2.9 million Chinese users, given that it is still not banned in Hong Kong and Macau. Notably, a 1,1 billion user base is enjoyed by Chinas WeChat app, a social media messaging app.

Then options like Ubers merger with Chinese ride- hailing competitor Didi Chuxing in 2016 come to mind, a step that Uber took after it kept incurring tremendous losses due to the fierce competition with the latter.

Earlier this year, Amazon shut down its Chinese market place owing to its meager marjet share of 0.5 percent in China against the dominating Alibabas Tmall and others.

Link:

US Tech Giants trying to survive the Chinese Market - Market Capitalize

MPs say tech giants have ‘failed to tackle’ Covid-19 infodemic and Government must regulate them now – Press Gazette

A group of MPs is calling on the UK Government to immediately launch a new body to regulate social media giants whose bosses have failed to tackle the Covid-19 infodemic.

Julian Knight MP, chair of Parliaments DCMS Committee, said: Evidence that tech companies were able to benefit from the monetisation of false information and allowed others to do so is shocking. We need robust regulation to hold these companies to account.

The coronavirus crisis has demonstrated that without due weight of the law, social media companies have no incentive to consider a duty of care to those who use their services.

The committee suggested delays to online harms legislation promised by the Government 15 months ago have helped coronavirus misinformation to spread virulently.

The MPs, who have been investigating the Covid-19 infodemic for several months, also said evidence suggests tech companies have been able to monetise misinformation for themselves and others.

They said that efforts by the companies to tackle misinformation through warning labels or tools to correct the record have fallen short.

At the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, Press Gazette launched a campaign, Fight The Infodemic, calling on tech giants to do more to tackle misinformation.

The committees full report, which can be read here, also lays out evidence to show how misinformation is allowed to spread on social media.

It said: We know that novelty and fear (along with anger and disgust) are factors which drive engagement with social media posts; that in turn pushes posts with these features further up users newsfeedsthis is one reason why false news can travel so fast.

This is opposite to the corporate social responsibility policies espoused by tech companies relying on this business model.

The more people engage with conspiracy theories and false news online, the more platforms are incentivised to continue surfacing similar content, which theoretically encourages users to continue using the platform so that more data can be collected and more adverts can be displayed.

The report recommended: The current business model not only creates disincentives for tech companies to tackle misinformation, it also allows others to monetise misinformation too.

To properly address these issues, the online harms regulator will need sight of comprehensive advertising libraries to see if and how advertisers are spreading misinformation through paid advertising or are exploiting misinformation or other online harms for financial gain.

Another section of the report focused on the role quality journalism can play in fighting misinformation. The MPs expressed concerns about funding issues experienced by news organisations because of Google and Facebooks domination of the online advertising market.

Earlier this month, the UKs Competition and Markets Authority called on the Government to create new powers to regulate the digital ad market to create greater competition and improve the quality and accuracy of journalism.

The DCMS committee said: Tech companies rely on quality journalism to provide authoritative information. They earn revenue both from users consuming this on their platforms as well as (in the case of Google) providing advertising on news websites, and news drives users to their services.

We agree with the Competition and Markets Authority that features of the digital advertising market controlled by companies such as Facebook and Google must not undermine the ability of newspapers and others to produce quality content.

Tech companies should be elevating authoritative journalistic sources to combat the spread of misinformation. This is an issue to which the Committee will no doubt return.

A Facebook spokesperson said: We dont allow harmful misinformation and have removed hundreds of thousands of posts including false cures, claims that Coronavirus doesnt exist, that its caused by 5G or that social distancing is ineffective. In addition to what we remove, weve placed warning labels on around 90 million pieces of content related to Covid-19 on Facebook during March and April, which prevented people viewing the original post 95% of the time.

This month we also launched alerts at the top of peoples feeds encouraging users to wear face masks, a media literacy campaign and a special mythbusting section of our Covid Information Centre. And since February, we have directed more than 3.5 million visits to official Covid advice on the NHS and UK government websites.

Our free daily round-up of the biggest news about the world of news

Read the original post:

MPs say tech giants have 'failed to tackle' Covid-19 infodemic and Government must regulate them now - Press Gazette

Advertising giants agree to evaluate mutual definition of hate speech – Axios

The Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), an industry body consisting of the world's biggest advertising companies including a few Big Tech companies has agreed to evaluate some issues collectively, including deciding how to better define hate speech across the entire industry.

Why it matters: Social media companies have faced increased scrutiny for how they moderate content on their platforms. This is a step towards tackling the issue together, despite the fact that it's mostly a formality for now.

The backdrop: GARM was created last year at the annual Cannes Lions Festival to tackle brand safety in advertising.

What's happening: In a note to advertisers, Facebook's VP of Global Marketing Solutions Carolyn Everson said that the industry, via GARM, has settled on four areas to take immediate action on: definitions of harmful content like hate speech, measurement, audits and suitability controls.

Yes, but: Tech platforms still maintain their right to more narrowly define and police hate speech individually.

Between the lines: Everson often sends emails like this to advertisers. She is considered the face of Facebook's sales and advertising teams, and often serves as a leader within the industry to address tough issues.

Worth noting: GARM hosts working groups to discuss issues in advertising often. The group's policy recommendations aren't rules that every member must follow, but they are agreed-upon steps that the industry should take to tackle and define pressing problems.

Read the rest here:

Advertising giants agree to evaluate mutual definition of hate speech - Axios

The Streaming Wars Could Become a Battle of Tech Giants. Heres Why. – Barron’s

Text size

In 2020, media companies cant avoid streaming. Yet territorial battles mean that investors should expect ongoing conflict between platforms and programmers, says LightShed.

As cord-cutting accelerates, major media companies need to have direct-to-consumer (DTC) apps, analyst Richard Greenfield writes. But in many cases, theyve waited too long to do so, and now find that theyre pitted against far larger and more powerful tech companies.

That means that platforms including TV operating system and devices are facing off against apps, and this newly emerging battle is the single most important issue we are focused on in media today. For instance, while HBO Max launched in May, consumers still cant get it on Roku (ticker: ROKU) or Amazon.coms (AMZN) Fire TV platforms. Likewise, Peacockthe streaming division of Comcasts (CMCSA) NBCUniversal divisionis just days from its national launch, and will likely do so without Roku or Fire TV apps too.

The stakes couldnt be higher, argues Greenfield, as the company that has been able to claim the dominant operating system has historically reaped the lions share of the rewards, as Microsoft (MSFT) did with personal computing, and Apple (AAPL) and Alphabets (GOOGL) Google did with mobile computing. The failure of cable and satellite companies to adjust has left an opening, he argues, for some company to become the dominant global operating system for TVs globally.

If you control the TV OS platform, you can advantage your native apps relative to third-party competitors (think Roku Channel to Prime Video/Prime Music/IMDB.TV to Apple Music/Apple TV/Apple Arcade to YouTube/YouTube TV/Stadia) and leverage learnings from usage of competitive apps on the platform, he writes. You can also collect data and create an interdependent home ecosystem of products, enhanced by artificial intelligence. You quickly realize just how important it is to be a winner in the TV OS battle.

No wonder then, that big tech companies like Apple, Google, and Amazon are so eager to make their mark in the space, along with more media-focused rivals like Roku and Netflix (NFLX).

So who will win this prize? Its too early to tell, Greenfield says. Many times weve seen single-purpose companies win, which would point to contenders like Roku. However, much like cable TV, which bundled in broadband and phone to increase stickiness and reduce churn, we wonder if the ultimate TV OS winners will be large tech platforms that offer far more than streaming video. Time will tell, but this is a battle everyone should be watching keenly.

Write to Teresa Rivas at teresa.rivas@barrons.com

View post:

The Streaming Wars Could Become a Battle of Tech Giants. Heres Why. - Barron's

Chinese tech giants have tens of billions at stake in India – TechNode

As Chinese tech companies push abroad, India has been a land of opportunity. But rising tensions between the two countries are starting to raise questions about the future of Chinese tech in India.

In the past five years, firms including short-video giant Bytedance, e-commerce firm Alibaba, social media behemoth Tencent, and smartphone maker Xiaomi have participated in funding rounds for Indian startups totaling more than $12.3 billion, according to my analysis of public data. These investments have helped to scale Indian unicorns like Paytm, Snapdeal, Swiggy, and Ola.

Now, however, these Chinese companies could be caught in the crossfire of a geopolitical battle. On June 29, Indian officials banned 59 Chinese apps over national security concernsincluding apps made by companies that have been investing millions in the countrys startups.

Get instant access to all our premium content, archives, newsletters, and online community.

Get instant access to all our premium content, archives, newsletters, and online community.

More:

Chinese tech giants have tens of billions at stake in India - TechNode

American tech giants Google-Apple remove Palestine from world maps, replace with Israel – Daily Times

In a recent development, tech giant Google removed Palestine off its world map.

The latest stint has been followed even by Apple maps which marked the end of Israeli annexation of Palestine by completely removing the later country off the world map.

Google maps and Apple maps have officially removed Palestine from worldwide maps.Palestine is no longer a place according to google Ethnic cleansing, murder, land theft & corporate conspiracy, all is being done in the name of israel.#FreePalestine pic.twitter.com/wnwJtnn3Sv

Mohammad Abass (@imerabass) July 16, 2020

The change comes at the heels of Israel President Benjamin Netanyahu pledging to establish West Bank annexations. However, they have already triggered global criticism with many countries calling it human rights violation but the years-long Israel-Palestine conflict has only spiraled. Not losing any time to weaken the Palestinian Authority, Netanyahus coalition government have moved ahead with plans.

In 2016, Google clarified that the label Palestine had never been present on its mapping service, which instead includes labels for the West Bank and Gaza, as well as their respective outlines on the map.

There has never been a Palestine label on Google Maps, however, we discovered a bug that removed the labels for West Bank and Gaza Strip. Were working quickly to bring these labels back to the area, Google said in 2016.

Earlier, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson called for dialogue to resolve tensions over the proposed annexation by Israel of parts of the occupied Palestinian territories.

Meanwhile, 11 European foreign ministers have written to the EU to ask for possible actions that the bloc could take to prevent the proposed annexation.

Ministers from Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and Finland asked EU Minister for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell to set out the legal consequences of the move, following an initial request made at a meeting in May.

The letter suggested that doing so could help members deter annexation by laying out to Israel the consequences of such action.

Continued here:

American tech giants Google-Apple remove Palestine from world maps, replace with Israel - Daily Times

Kamala Harris blamed for EVERYTHING as Internet mocks news report ‘exposing’ her ties to tech giants – MEAWW

Friday, July 17, evening saw Twitter filled with tweets blaming Senator Kamala Harris for almost everything that ever happened in the world. In case you were wondering what brought on this weird trend, then we got you covered. The tweets were in response to a Huffington Post storyon how a series of e-mails revealed the proximity the senator shared with some big tech companies.

The report slammed Harris for treating the tech giants as allies rather than a threat to the security and freedom of the United States. The piece accused the senator of prioritizing the interests of tech giants over key policy-making issues. "As a senator, Harris has been mostly quiet on policy-making issues that carry implications for Facebook and Google. She sat out the debate on a 2018 sex trafficking bill once her signature issue only entering her name as a co-sponsor after it was clear the bill would pass by a wide margin," cited the story.

When Internet users stumbled upon the story and saw how it accused Harris of hobnobbing with tech giants like Facebook and Google, they were left feeling amused.So, in response to the Huffington Post story, several people took to their Twitter to blame Kamala for almost everything they could possibly think of, from blaming her for the split of Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston to letting Obama wear a tan suit. A user tweeted, "I can't believe Kamala Harris let Obama wear that tan suit. #huffpostHeadlines." Another user wrote, "Why didn't Kamala Harris stop me from marrying that guy in 2008? #huffpostHeadlines." "Why didn't Kamala Harris prosecute Big Red for assaulting Bird and dangling him out a window? #huffpostHeadlines," wondered another user.

"'Just In' Kamala Harris did indeed discover how the Pyramids were built, but she's selling the info to the highest bidder. So much for working 'For The Peoole'!! SMDH. #huffpostHeadlines," joked another user. "Kamala Harris could've prevented the death of Maya St Germain, but she chose to go out to dinner instead. #huffpostHeadlines," expressed a user.

"Why didnt Kamala Harris stop @HuffPostfrom letting @zachdcarter publish a hit piece that included ZERO on-the-record sources who criticized Harris' work as AG or bought into Carters opinion? #huffpostHeadlines She at least couldve made them label it as an opinion piece," wondered a user.

Read the original:

Kamala Harris blamed for EVERYTHING as Internet mocks news report 'exposing' her ties to tech giants - MEAWW

Wall Street delivered the ‘kind of pullback I’ve been waiting for,’ Jim Cramer says – CNBC

CNBC's Jim Cramer on Thursday advised that investors go hunting for companies that have strong fundamentals but whose stock prices are backtracking after Wall Street declined for the first time in multiple sessions.

"We needed a breather. The market can't go up every day without some sellers coming out of the woodwork," the "Mad Money" host said. "This is exactly, though, the kind of pullback I've been waiting for, so we have to use this moment to regroup and figure out the market's next move."

The market took a break from its upward climb as valuations on many stocks are nearing their limits, among other market-moving factors, he added.

"Review your portfolio. Understand that if you have a bunch of high-flying momentum stocks they're going to trade together and they're going to go down you might want to trim those positions, as we've been doing for my charitable trust," Cramer said.

The comments come after the Dow Jones dropped 135 points, or 0.50%, to 26,734.71 for the blue-chip index's first decline in four sessions and just the fourth down day this month. The S&P 500 slipped 0.34% to 3,215.57 and the Nasdaq Composite reversed 0.73% to 10,473.83.

The broad S&P index turned in its fourth decline in July and the tech-heavy Nasdaq declined for just the third time this month. The major averages are all up more or less 4% month to date.

Cramer offered viewers a playbook and handful of stocks he would keep an eye on to buy at attractive levels. While he did not contemplate how much further the market may decline, the host revealed what stocks he's keeping an eye on.

Those included Abbott Laboratories, PepsiCo, Morgan Stanleyand Johnson & Johnson. He also recommended tech giants of Facebook,Alphabet-subsidiary Google and Salesforce, all of who "have nothing to do with China and they're doing great."

In a speech earlier that day in Michigan, U.S. Attorney General William Barr chided Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Apple, Cisco and Hollywood for their dealings with China, claiming the entities are "all too willing to collaborate with the Chinese Communist Party. All of the aforementioned tech names, minus Facebook, saw their shares slip in Thursday's session.

Cramer also put Amazon on his watch list.

"The stock's now down more than 10% from its highs, though it did find a slew of buyers late today coming in off its lowest levels," he said. "That's exactly what should happen."

Regardless of the ongoing uncertainty surrounding the ongoing pandemic, Cramer said opportunities exist to put more money to work in the market. The sell-off was shaped largely by profit-taking.

"Don't panic. Look for the stocks of high-quality companies that are going lower even though they deserve to go higher," he said. "And if that's too much work for you, you've got my blessing to gradually leg into a low-cost index fund on the way down."

Disclosure: Cramer's charitable trust owns shares of Facebook, Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Johnson & Johnson, Abbott Labs, Salesforce and PepsiCo.

Disclaimer

Questions for Cramer?Call Cramer: 1-800-743-CNBC

Want to take a deep dive into Cramer's world? Hit him up!Mad Money Twitter - Jim Cramer Twitter - Facebook - Instagram

Questions, comments, suggestions for the "Mad Money" website? madcap@cnbc.com

Continue reading here:

Wall Street delivered the 'kind of pullback I've been waiting for,' Jim Cramer says - CNBC

How Huawei landed at the center of global tech tussle – Chicago Daily Herald

China's biggest tech firm, Huawei Technologies, has risen to global prominence as a leader in 5G, the much ballyhooed, next-generation wireless technology. It's also become a major target for the U.S., which has been trying to convince its allies to ban Huawei equipment from their national networks on spying concerns. In a major reversal, the U.K. decided in July to join the boycott, signaling fresh momentum for the American effort. Underlying the wrangling is the question of which country will take the lead in the nascent, "everything-connected" era, and who gets left behind.

U.S. government officials say Huawei is dangerous in part because it could use its growing share of the telecom equipment market to spy for the Chinese government. Already in 2012, a report by the U.S. House Intelligence Committee tagged Huawei and ZTE as potential security threats; the Federal Communications Commission designated them as such this year, a step toward driving them from the U.S. market. Concerns about Huawei drove the 2018 decision by President Donald Trump to block a hostile takeover bid from Broadcom, based at the time in Singapore, for the U.S. chipmaker Communal. The deal could have curtailed American investments in chip and wireless technologies and handed global leadership to Huawei. Such concerns have grown as carriers begin to spend billions of dollars on new 5G networks, which will collect data and enable services on an unparalleled scale.

In just over three decades it's grown from an electronics reseller into one of the world's biggest private companies, with leading positions in telecommunications gear, smartphones, cloud computing and cybersecurity, and substantial operations in Asia, Europe and Africa. Huawei generated 850 billion yuan ($122 billion) in sales in 2019 -- more than Boeing. It's plowed billions of dollars into 5G and broken into the top 10 recipients of U.S. patents last year. It has helped build 5G networks in more than 10 countries and expects to do the same in another 20 in 2020. U.S. sanctions spooked some Huawei customers and suppliers globally, while Chinese consumers and carriers rallied to its side.

The U.S. government -- like the Chinese and others -- is wary of employing foreign technology in vital communications for fear that manufacturers could install hidden "backdoors" for spies to access sensitive data, or that the companies themselves would hand it over to their home governments. U.S. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo has said the U.S. might hold back intelligence-sharing with NATO allies if they use Huawei equipment, a threat met with some skepticism. The 5G networks are of particular concern because they will go beyond making smartphone downloads faster. They also will enable new technologies like self-driving cars and the Internet of Things. U.K.-based carrier Vodafone was said to have found and fixed backdoors on Huawei equipment used in its Italian business in 2011 and 2012. While it's hard to know if those vulnerabilities were nefarious or accidental, the revelation dealt a blow to Huawei's reputation.

Japan and Australia are among a handful of places that have joined the U.S. boycott. The U.K. will prohibit its telecom operators from buying Huawei equipment starting next year, and equipment currently installed must be removed by 2027. Countries such as India and Vietnam are considered unlikely to use Huawei. But the company has won 5G customers in Russia, the Middle East and Asia, including the Philippines and Thailand. Its equipment tends to be less expensive than alternatives from Nokia and Ericsson and is often higher quality. In Malaysia, the prime minister has said his country will use "as much as possible."

Norway decided against a ban, leaving the choice to individual companies; so far two have gone with Ericsson. Huawei lost two big contracts in Singapore this year but still has a foothold in the market. In the European Union, there are signs of a coordinated balancing act. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is grappling with a potential revolt by lawmakers who want to effectively ban Huawei equipment. China's ambassador to Germany threatened Berlin with retaliation if such a ban were adopted, citing the millions of vehicles German carmakers sell in China. Brazil has said it isn't excluding anyone from bidding.

The U.S. has moved to curb Huawei's ability to sell equipment in the U.S. and, more significantly, to buy parts from U.S. suppliers, by adding Huawei to a Commerce Department blacklist in 2019. Accusing the company of seeking to "undermine" those export controls, the department on May 15 imposed further restrictions on chipmakers using American gear in designing or producing semiconductors, meaning suppliers such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing will have to cut off Huawei unless they get a waiver from Washington -- or potentially face penalties. The FCC prohibited the use of federal subsidies to buy equipment made by Huawei and ZTE and said it would consider requiring carriers now using the products to remove them.

7. What's going on in Canada?

In December 2018, at the request of the U.S., Canadian authorities arrested Huawei's chief financial officer, Meng Wanzhou, who's also the daughter of the company's founder, Ren Zhengfei. The U.S. is seeking her extradition as part of a criminal case alleging that she conspired to defraud banks into unwittingly clearing transactions linked to Iran in violation of U.S. sanctions. Both Meng, who is also deputy chairwoman, and the company have denied wrongdoing. Canada is still deciding whether to allow Huawei to play a bigger role in developing 5G.

In 2003, Cisco Systems sued Huawei for allegedly infringing on its patents and illegally copying source code used in routers and switches. Huawei removed the contested code, manuals and command-line interfaces and the case was dropped. Motorola sued in 2010 for allegedly conspiring with former employees to steal trade secrets. That lawsuit was later settled. In 2017 a jury found Huawei liable for stealing robotic technology from T-Mobile, and on Jan. 28, 2019, the Justice Department indicted Huawei for theft of trade secrets related to that case. The same month Poland, a staunch U.S. ally, arrested a Huawei employee on suspicion of spying for the Chinese government. Huawei fired the employee and denied any involvement in his alleged actions.

That U.S. restrictions are not about cybersecurity but are really designed to safeguard American dominance of global tech. It has repeatedly denied that it helps Beijing spy on other governments or companies. But bracing for continued pressure, it outlined plans to shake up its management ranks as revenue growth slowed. The company, which says it's owned by Ren as well as its employees through a union, has in recent years begun releasing financial results, spent more on marketing and engaged with foreign media in an effort to boost transparency. Ren has become more outspoken as he fights to save his company. While he said he was proud of his military career and Communist Party membership, he rejected suggestions he was doing Beijing's bidding or that Huawei handed over customer information. In March 2019, Huawei went on the offensive, filing a lawsuit in federal court against a statute that blocks U.S. government agencies from using its equipment.

Yes. In October, the Trump administration placed eight other Chinese tech giants on its blacklist, accusing them of being implicated in human rights violations against minority Muslims in the country's Xinjiang region. They included Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology and Zhejiang Dahua Technology, which by some accounts control as much as a third of the global market for video surveillance; SenseTime Group, the world's most valuable artificial intelligence startup; and fellow AI giant Megvii Technology. ZTE almost collapsed after the U.S. Commerce Department banned it for three months in 2018 from buying American technology. The U.S. Justice Department has charged state-owned Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit, its Taiwanese partner and three individuals with conspiring to steal trade secrets from Micron Technology.

The rest is here:

How Huawei landed at the center of global tech tussle - Chicago Daily Herald

The Twitter Hacks Have to Stop – The Atlantic

Read: The staggering vulnerability of global elites

Internet communications platformssuch as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTubeare crucial in todays society. Theyre how we communicate with one another. Theyre how our elected leaders communicate with us. They are essential infrastructure. Yet they are run by for-profit companies with little government oversight. This is simply no longer sustainable. Twitter and companies like it are essential to our national dialogue, to our economy, and to our democracy. We need to start treating them that way, and that means both requiring them to do a better job on security and breaking them up.

In the Twitter case this week, the hackers tactics werent particularly sophisticated. We will almost certainly learn about security lapses at Twitter that enabled the hack, possibly including a SIM-swapping attack that targeted an employees cellular service provider, or maybe even a bribed insider. The FBI is investigating.

This kind of attack is known as a class break. Class breaks are endemic to computerized systems, and theyre not something that we as users can defend against with better personal security. It didnt matter whether individual accounts had a complicated and hard-to-remember password, or two-factor authentication. It didnt matter whether the accounts were normally accessed via a Mac or a PC. There was literally nothing any user could do to protect against it.

Class breaks are security vulnerabilities that break not just one system, but an entire class of systems. They might exploit a vulnerability in a particular operating system that allows an attacker to take remote control of every computer that runs on that systems software. Or a vulnerability in internet-enabled digital video recorders and webcams that allows an attacker to recruit those devices into a massive botnet. Or a single vulnerability in the Twitter network that allows an attacker to take over every account.

For Twitter users, this attack was a double whammy. Many people rely on Twitters authentication systems to know that someone who purports to be a certain celebrity, politician, or journalist is really that person. When those accounts were hijacked, trust in that system took a beating. And then, after the attack was discovered and Twitter temporarily shut down all verified accounts, the public lost a vital source of information.

Read: Why Twitter may be ruinous for the left

There are many security technologies companies like Twitter can implement to better protect themselves and their users; thats not the issue. The problem is economic, and fixing it requires doing two things. One is regulating these companies, and requiring them to spend more money on security. The second is reducing their monopoly power.

The security regulations for banks are complex and detailed. If a low-level banking employee were caught messing around with peoples accounts, or if she mistakenly gave her log-in credentials to someone else, the bank would be severely fined. Depending on the details of the incident, senior banking executives could be held personally liable. The threat of these actions helps keep our money safe. Yes, it costs banks money; sometimes it severely cuts into their profits. But the banks have no choice.

Go here to read the rest:

The Twitter Hacks Have to Stop - The Atlantic

Tech giants this country needs YOU! Do your moral duty and stop avoiding tax to help save our economy – The Sun

THE BRITISH economy is out of intensive care, but the return of the patient to full health is painfully slow.

This weeks official figures revealed that growth in May was just 1.8 per cent, much lower than most economists predicted.

12

The anaemic recovery adds to the pressure for further action from the Chancellor Rishi Sunak, who has already lavished a fortune on support programmes.

His recent mini-Budget added another 30billion of public money to the colossal 280billion he had previously promised to prevent economic meltdown.

Nothing on this scale has ever been seen in peace time and public finances have taken an unprecedented battering.

12

As Government borrowing soars and the national debt swells, there is a real threat that the Chancellor will have to put up taxes to restore some stability.

But it would be profoundly unfair if ordinary British citizens were now to be hammered, when too many wealthy companies, particularly the hi-tech giants, avoid their financial responsibilities to the rest of us.

12

Brimming with self-righteousness, these firms love to trumpet their social concern, their commitment to equality and their desire to protect the environment, but they are never so quick to pay their financial dues to our nation.

For all their fashionable eco prattle, they are keener on reducing their tax bills than carbon emissions.

The best way to fulfil all their trendy language about supporting communities and campaigning for fairness would be to pay more to the Treasury.

If they paid a proper amount in taxation, then there would not be such a fiscal crisis at present.

But that is precisely what these politically correct global corporations fail to do.

12

Only last week it was revealed that, through sophisticated accounting manoeuvres, Apple paid just 6.2million in tax last year in the UK, despite enjoying British sales of no less than 1.37billion.

If they paid a proper amount in taxation, then there would not be such a fiscal crisis at present.

Those sums are a profound insult to millions of hard-working taxpayers, including successful employees who have to hand over to the Government 40 per cent of anything that they earn above 50,000.

As Richard Palmer, the executive director of the group Tax Justice UK said, People are fed up of big companies like Apple using clever tricks to slash their tax bills.

Apple is hardly unique.

12

Its rival Microsoft reported in June that its UK revenues increased to 2.85billion in 2019, up from 2.1billion the previous year.

Yet Microsoft paid just 34million in UK taxes, marginally up from 28million in 2018.

The same story can be found at the mighty Google empire.

12

In April, the company reported UK revenues of 1.6billion for the year to June 2019, up by almost 200million on the previous year, yet its corporation tax payment to HM Revenue and Customs was a measly 44.3million, down from 65.6million a year earlier.

Indeed, Google dished out ten times more in bonuses - 441million than it paid in corporation tax.

This prompted Paul Monaghan of Fair Tax Mark to complain, Once again, it seems like Google are writing their own rules in the UK. Income tax is up but corporation tax charges are down.

The hi-tech tax avoiders like to justify their actions by claiming that they abide by British law.

But this is not a question of legal compliance.

12

No one is accusing them of breaking the law.

It is a question of moral duty.

At a time when the entire economy is struggling because of the fallout from Covid-19, they are acting disgracefully in making such a meagre contribution to the states depleted coffers.

Who do they think pays for the roads or the health service or the education system used by their staff?

No one is accusing them of breaking the law. It is a question of moral duty.

12

Just as insultingly, with many of these hi-tech giants such as Facebook, the social networking site, it is the public that provides the data on which their commercial success is built.

The most valuable product is the users information rather than anything created by the company.

Yet that reality does not appear to inspire any sense of obligation to the public.

12

And the tech corporations refusal to fulfil their moral duty makes a mockery of all their fine talk about their ethical values.

They pose as champions of compassion, but act like the most hard-hearted capitalists.

And the tech corporations refusal to fulfil their moral duty makes a mockery of all their fine talk about their ethical values.

That is certainly the spirt of Amazon, run by the worlds richest person, Jeff Bezos.

Last September, it was revealed that Amazon paid just 220million in direct taxes in the UK in the previous year, despite total revenues in this country of 10.9billion.

12

Similarly, Facebook in 2018 paid just 28million in corporation tax last year despite record British sales of 1.6billion and a rise in pre-tax profits of 50 per cent.

The hugely popular streaming service Netflix even received a 57,000 tax rebate from the Government in 2018, even though it made an estimated 700million from British subscribers.

HMRC has been far too weak in allowing the giants almost to dictate their own terms.

But the companies themselves have been ruthless in exploiting their own financial muscle, with sorry consequences for us all.

As Alex Cobham, the chief executive of the Tax Justice Network, puts it, When multi-national corporations abuse their responsibilities to society, they weaken the supports that our economies need to work well and create wealth.

For all the frequent talk of government crackdowns, the culture of avoidance remains deeply embedded.

12

One study in December 2018 asserted that a fifth of the biggest enterprises pay no corporation at all, highlighting the case of the oil company BP which made a 5.6billion profit the year before, yet received tax credits worth 134million.

In the same vein, the Standard Chartered Bank made a 1.8 billion profit, yet was handed a 12 million.

The Tax Justice Network argues that 35 to 90 billion in taxes goes uncollected every year, while 164 billion is spent on relief that is poorly targeted.

The selfish behaviour of the avoiders like Google and Amazon stands in stark contrast to the more ethical companies who have shown a real social conscience during the Coronavirus crisis.

With a sense of respect for the public purse, several firms have decided to pay back the furlough money they were given by the Treasury to protect the jobs of their employees.

12

Better trading performances than they expected meant that they did not need the cash, so they honourably returned it.

Among such companies are Ikea, Scottish Sea Farms, Games Workshop, the Spectator magazine, and the housebuilders Taylor Wimpey and Redrow.

With the same patriotic outlook, some employers have refused to accept the 1000 bonus offered by the Government as set out in Rishi Sunaks mini-Budget - for each furloughed staff member they take back.

Several firms have decided to pay back the furlough money they were given by the Treasury to protect the jobs of their employees... among such companies are Ikea, Scottish Sea Farms, Games Workshop, the Spectator magazine, and the housebuilders Taylor Wimpey and Redrow.

With enough cash coming in, they do not require another round of subsidies. Those doing the right thing include Barratt homes, the betting giant William Hill and retailers John Lewis and Primark.

That is exactly the approach that the hi-tech firms should demonstrate towards taxation.

Those doing the right thing include Barratt homes, the betting giant William Hill and retailers John Lewis and Primark.

CAN'T BEA SEENAndrew left out of pics as Beatrice wears dress loaned by Queen for wedding

PARK CHAOSMan slashed at Thorpe Park as two arrested on suspicion of attempted murder

Exclusive

BRIDE HIS TIMEPrince Andrew gives Beatrice away at socially-distanced royal wedding

AY CARAMBA!Sunseekers flock to beaches and parks as UK hotter than MEXICO

Exclusive

COVID MIRACLECovid patient hails medics who saved her life after 130 DAYS in hospital

ON YOUR BIKE'Lycra lout' shouts abuse at pregnant driver in shocking road rage dispute

They are fond of pushing all the politically correct buttons about social justice.

We stand in solidarity with the black community boasts Amazon, while Netflix trumpets its freedom and responsibility culture and Microsoft aims to drive progress on diversity and inclusion.

But those words would have more meaning if their authors were not depriving our Government of so much cash.

Read the original here:

Tech giants this country needs YOU! Do your moral duty and stop avoiding tax to help save our economy - The Sun

Apple expands coding partnership with Black schools as tech firms grapple with lack of diversity – USA TODAY

Apple is expanding its coding partnership with historically black colleges and universities as big tech firms faceincreased scrutiny surrounding diversity and inclusion.

The iPhone giantsaid Thursday that it's adding 10 more HBCUsto its year-old community education programmeant to create opportunities for people seeking to learn coding skills. The announcement comes a month after the company launched a racial equality initiative aimed at communities of color.

Under the expansion into more HBCUs, Apple will give an increasing number of people of color"the building blocks of coding," the company said in a press release. Coding is the infrastructure that makes digital technologies operate, andmore Black programmers put more Black people in the running forin-demand, high-paying jobs tech jobs.

Morehouse College in Georgia,Tougaloo College in Mississippi, Dillard University in Louisiana and Prairie View A&M University in Texas are among Apple's roster of partnership schools.

Apples Community Education Initiative extends to 12 HBCUs across the US.(Photo: Apple)

Of the 24 locations listed in Apple's Community Education initiative, 12 are HBCUs, which were generally established in the 1800s to serve the needs of the Black community toward the end ofslavery for the decades that followed.

'Keep this energy up': Black-owned businesses see surge of interest amid racism protests

'Things must change': Apple launches $100 million Racial Equity and Justice Initiative

Later in July, educators from 10 HBCUs will take part in a virtual academy to learn the building blocks of coding with Swift, Apples coding language.(Photo: Apple)

It's clear that tech giants, including Apple, have a diversity problem.

Many companies, including Facebook and Google, have faced increasing backlash over lackluster minority representation, especially at a time when many firms are declaring to be allies in the Black Lives Matter movement.

While Black people make up roughly 13% of the population, representation at tech firms is minuscule.

From 2013 to 2018, Facebook failed to meaningfully increase the number of employees from underrepresented groups in its U.S. workforce, aUSA TODAY analysis shows.The number of Black employees rose from 1% toroughly 3.7%.

In 2012 at Google, African Americansmade up roughly1.5% of U.S. employees. In 2018, the most recent figures available for Google parent company Alphabet, its workforce was 2.6%Black.

Last month, Apple CEO Tim Cook acknowledged that said his company "must do more" to fight racism and promote diversity.

In aletter on Apple's website, Cook vowed to bring more technology to underserved school systems and addressinclusion and diversity within its ranks.

"To create change, we have to reexamine our own views and actions in light of a pain that is deeply felt but too often ignored," Cook wrote. "Issues of human dignity will not abide standing on the sidelines. To the Black community we see you. You matter and your lives matter."

Follow Dalvin Brown on Twitter: @Dalvin_Brown.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/07/16/apple-expands-hbcu-partnership-tech-grapples-lack-diversity/5449823002/

Read the rest here:

Apple expands coding partnership with Black schools as tech firms grapple with lack of diversity - USA TODAY

India’s Jio creates 5G tech in-house, teams with Google on affordable smartphone – FierceWireless

As major investments from tech giants stack up for Indias Jio Platforms, the chairman of parent Reliance Industries said a complete 5G solution created from scratch in-house by Jio can be ready for field deployments in 2021.

Speaking during Reliances Annual General Meeting on Wednesday, billionaire owner Mukesh Ambani laid out visions for its Jio Platforms unit, including plans to export 5G technologies to other telecom operators globally.

Jio Platforms is behind Indias largest mobile operator, which shook up the telecom market since entering the scene just four years ago now counting more than 388 million subscribers. Ambani said he sees a strong path for Jio to connect over 500 million mobile customers, more than a billion smart sensors and over 50 million homes and business in the next three years.

Like this story? Subscribe to FierceWireless!

The Wireless industry is an ever-changing world where big ideas come along daily. Our subscribers rely on FierceWireless as their must-read source for the latest news, analysis and data on this increasingly competitive marketplace. Sign up today to get wireless news and updates delivered to your inbox and read on the go.

With its 4G LTE-only network, Reliance Jio disrupted Indias telecom market that was largely 2G, offering very low pricing, broad coverage, and data. Some of Indias numerous operators at the time were forced to exit or decided to consolidate, leaving three major players Vodafone Idea, Bharti Airtel and Reliance Jio.

RELATED: Nokia scores major network deal with Indias Bharti Airtel

According to GSMAs Mobile Economy 2020 report (PDF), the resulting price war following Jios entry has meant India now has some of the cheapest mobile data pricing in the world, while 4G now accounts for almost 60% of total connections in the country.

Jio Platforms has secured billions in investments, including Google whichsaid yesterday it would put $4.5 billion into the company for a 7.7% share.Facebook is investing $5.7 billion for just under 10% in Jio Platforms.Other investors include Intel Capital, Qualcomm Ventures, private-equity firms Silver Lake, Vista Equity Partners, and General Atlantic, and Abu Dhabis two largest sovereign investment arms.

Ambani said the operators 4G and fiber network is already powered by several core software technologies and components developed by Jio engineers in India.

RELATED: Qualcomm invests $97M in Reliance Jio; Google commits $10B to India

This capability and know-how that Jio has developed positions Jio on the cutting edge of another exciting frontier 5G, Ambani said. The in-house 5G solution will enable us to launch a world-class 5G service in India using 100% home-grown technologies and solutions.

News of Jio developing end-to-end 5G technology to replace third-party vendors previously surfaced in March.

The 5G kit will be ready for trials as soon as 5G spectrum becomes available and ready for field deployments in 2021, Ambani added.

Jio can easily upgrade its 4G network to 5G, he told investors, citing the converged all-IP network architecture. And Jio has sights beyond India for its 5G tech.

Once Jios 5G solution is proven in India, Jio Platforms will be well positioned to be an exporter of 5G solutions to other telecom operators globally as a complete managed service, Ambani said.

Googles involvement with Jio also includes a commercial agreementto jointly develop an affordable 4G smartphone.

Part of Jios impact in connecting mobile users in India was the introduction of low-cost feature phone with 4G connectivity. The JioPhone launched in August of 2017 and sold over 100 million devices, costing less than $10.

In 2019, India surpassed the U.S. as the second-largest smartphone market globally with 158 million shipments and is still under penetrated relative to many markets, according to Counterpoint Research. By 2025 India will still be the second largest smartphone market with 1.04 billion users, only behind China, according to the GSMA.

Still, Ambani in his presentation saidthere are 350 million Indians who currently use a 2G feature phone that would want to upgrade to a conventional smartphone if it was affordable.

We believe we can design an entry-level 4G, or even a 5G, smartphone for a fraction of its current cost, Ambani said.

To that end, it's partnering with Google to build an Android-based smartphone operating system, designed with India in mind.

RELATED: Radisys supports Reliance Jio behind the scenes

Through this partnership we are confident that we can accelerate the national mission of putting a smart device in the hands of every Indian, he said, adding that existing 2G users shouldnt be deprived of the benefits that the digital and data revolution offer. Jio is determined to make India 2G-mukt.

Googles investment in Jio is the first part of a $10 billion Google for India Digitization Fund announced earlier this week. It aims to help accelerate Indias digital economy by making strategic investments in the country over the next 5-7 years.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai in a video appearance said getting technology into the hands of more people is a big part of our mission, and Google through its partnership with Jio Platforms sees a chance to have a greater impact than either entity could alone.

Pichai said he was excited the joint collaboration would focus on increasing access for hundreds of millions of Indians who dont currently own a smartphone, while simultaneously improving the mobile experience for all.

Read more here:

India's Jio creates 5G tech in-house, teams with Google on affordable smartphone - FierceWireless

G Suite’s new unified interface poses an existential threat to Zoom and Slack – Business Insider

Googleannounceda design overhaul for G Suite that will further integrate its enterprise productivity services including Gmail, Chat, Meet, and Docs. The new G Suite will beavailable to a select group of customers for preview starting this week, with a larger roll out slated for later in 2020.

Business Insider Intelligence

In essence, the redesign further blurs the lines between Google services: The Gmail app will also serve as a hub for Chat, Docs collaboration will be directly embedded in Chat rooms, and backend search will function across Chat and Gmail. Google claims these changes are intended to help G Suite users retain their focus by reducing the need to switch apps between tasks. The tech giant also noted more features are in development, such as supporting picture-in-picture video calls within Gmail and offering Meet functionality directly in Docs.

Deeper G Suite integrations pose an existential threat to Zoom and Slack, as enterprises will look to cut redundant software subscriptions.As we havenotedbefore, Google and Microsoft togetheraccountfor virtually the entire enterprise office suite market this gives the tech giants a considerable advantage over smaller competitors like Zoom and Slack, which only offer standalone enterprise communications platforms.

Google and Microsoft can exercise this advantage by promoting their less dominant services through their already dominant platforms. In concrete terms: If G Suite is suffused with Google Chat integrations available at no additional cost, it doesn't make sense for an enterprise to pay for both Slack and G Suite. And because there aren't viable competitors to Microsoft and Google in the enterprise office suite market, enterprises will choose to stay within their ecosystems, cutting the redundant services offered by Zoom and Slack.

Google will likely take a more gradual approach to rolling out the G Suite integrations due to concerns over both the user experience and antitrust regulation.For enterprises that use G Suite along with competing services like Slack or Zoom, the deeper integrations might come off as more invasive than useful, considering how much real estate they occupy within the revamped user interface. So even though Google could probably flip a switch and turn on every available integration at once, it risks alienating a significant number of customers by doing so. A more gradual approach could also help to avoid regulatory scrutiny.

In May, Slack CEO Stewart ButterfieldtoldThe Verge, "Microsoft is perhaps unhealthily preoccupied with killing us, and Teams is the vehicle to do that." Google is employing a similar strategy to grow market share in this domain, and as it faces antitrust scrutiny in both theUSandEurope, it may restrain its G Suite integration plan in an attempt to avoid attracting further regulatory attention.

Want to read more stories like this one? Here's how you can gain access:

Are you a current Insider Intelligence client? Log in here.

See the original post here:

G Suite's new unified interface poses an existential threat to Zoom and Slack - Business Insider

Trio of Tech Giants the Latest on Receiving End of BIPA Lawsuits – findBIOMETRICS

Tech giants Microsoft, Amazon and Google are the subjects of the latest high-profile lawsuits for privacy violations under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), which prohibits the capture or storage of an individuals biometric data without their express consent to do so.

The biometric data in question in these instances is faceprints obtained by the defendants from IBMs database of 100 million pictures called Diversity in Faces. The database aims to aid the development of less biased facial recognition algorithms by teaching them on a more diverse data package than what has been available up until recently.

The plaintiffs for these latest cases are Illinois residents Steven Vance and Tim Janecyk, who allege that Microsoft, Amazon and Google all obtained their facial geometry data from IBMs database which is derived from Creative Commons-licensed images from Flickr without their knowledge or consent.

Vance and Janecyk filed a similar BIPA suit against IBM earlier this year, with the results of that particular case still pending.

A number of lawsuits have been filed under BIPA over the past year, with a wide range of companies on the receiving end for alleged violations. Last month Facebook attempted to settle its suit for $550 million, however U.S. District Judge James Donato dismissed the settlement saying he required an explanation as to why it was so low considering the maximum fine under BIPA is $5,000 per infraction and the class-action case involved potentially millions of victims.

Google has faced a number of BIPA cases itself over the past several months, with one going in its favor when U.S. District Court Judge Edmond Chang ruled that the plaintiffs didnt suffer any concrete injury as a result of Googles practices.

Most people expose their faces to the general public every day, so ones face is even more widely public than non-biometric information like a social security number, Chang wrote in a summary of his judgement. Indeed, we expose our faces to the public such that no additional intrusion into our privacy is required to obtain a likeness of it.

This most recent case against Google was filed in a federal court in the Northern District of California, with the Amazon and Microsoft cases filed in the Western District of Washington.

A spokesperson for Microsoft commented that the company is reviewing the lawsuit against the company, saying, We take privacy seriously and we are committed to ensuring our AI technology is developed and used responsibly.

Sources: TechCrunch, MediaPost

July 17, 2020 by Tony Bitzionis

Here is the original post:

Trio of Tech Giants the Latest on Receiving End of BIPA Lawsuits - findBIOMETRICS

VMware Invests With Other Tech Giants In Digital Assets Series C Round – Forbes

VMware sign in front of VMware office in Palo Alto on February 16, 2018, Palo Alto, California. ... [+] (Photo by Yichuan Cao/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Digital Asset, an enterprise blockchain company, announced today that VMware VMW joined its series C financing round.

The amount of the investment was not disclosed but is expected to help Digital Asset grow its DAML blockchain platform.

This new round, disclosed last December, also includes Salesforce Ventures CRM and Samsung Venture Investment Corp (Samsung).

Brendon Howe, vice president and general manager of VMware Blockchain, also joined the companys Board of Directors. Brendon Howe joined VMware in September 2019 and is responsible for leading its Blockchain business unit.

Digital Assets partnership with VMware provides a truly enterprise-grade blockchain offering that meets the requirements of even the most demanding use cases across a range of markets, said Yuval Rooz, co-founder and CEO of Digital Asset. Brendon brings tremendous technical leadership within networking, storage, and virtualization to Digital Assets board.

See the original post here:

VMware Invests With Other Tech Giants In Digital Assets Series C Round - Forbes