aranym

The case started in August 2021 with a complaint that de Paço was upset about the Portuguese and English language versions of the articles about him. The first judicial pass went well. But that’s where the good news ends. The next level of Portugal’s court system decided the lower court was wrong about everything, which means that — for now — the person wanting to memory hole past allegations at least temporarily has the upper hand. The Portuguese court ruled against them on 13 July, and demanded that the Foundation turn over personal data about multiple users who worked on the article.

Obviously, Wikimedia is not just going to hand over user info just because this court weirdly decided it’s the guy who just wants people to stop making (apparently) factual allegations against him. Not only would this surrender of info go against Wikimedia’s own standards, it goes against European law, which does not align with this strange decision by Portugal’s appellate-level court.

In a well-intentioned yet dangerous move to fight online fraud, France is on the verge of forcing browsers to create a dystopian technical capability. Article 6 (para II and III) of the SREN Bill would force browser providers to create the means to mandatorily block websites present on a government provided list. Such a move will overturn decades of established content moderation norms and provide a playbook for authoritarian governments that will easily negate the existence of censorship circumvention tools.

While motivated by a legitimate concern, this move to block websites directly within the browser would be disastrous for the open internet and disproportionate to the goals of the legal proposal – fighting fraud. It will also set a worrying precedent and create technical capabilities that other regimes will leverage for far more nefarious purposes. Leveraging existing malware and phishing protection offerings rather than replacing them with government provided, device level block-lists is a far better route to achieve the goals of the legislation.

Twitter filed a lawsuit against the Center for Countering Digital Hate. “Despite our continued progress, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) and its backers have been actively working to assert false and misleading claims encouraging advertisers to pause investment on the platform. X is a free public service funded largely by advertisers. Through the CCDH’s scare campaign and its ongoing pressure on brands to prevent the public’s access to free expression, the CCDH is actively working to prevent public dialogue,” the company said in a blog post Monday.

“Musk and his legal team, led by attorney Alex Spiro at Quinn Emanuel, have engaged in an aggressive campaign to intimidate, bully, and silence CCDH,” the organization said in a statement released Monday. “While Elon Musk proclaims to be a ‘free speech absolutist,’ his actions against CCDH show the lengths he will go to silence those who seek to hold him to account.”

Meta briefly made Threads available on the web before pulling profiles offline a few hours later. The Verge was able to access Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s first thread (is that what we call them?!) using the web app, and many other brands and creators including Netflix, Gary Vee, and Instagram.

The head of Instagram, Adam Mosseri, already has nearly 2,500 followers, and Zuckerberg has less than 2,000, so it’s safe to say that early Threads access has only been provided to a few thousand testers so far. Alessandro Paluzzi has discovered some of the brands and creators that got early access.

Microsoft and OpenAI were sued on Wednesday by sixteen pseudonymous individuals who claim the companies' AI products based on ChatGPT collected and divulged their personal information without adequate notice or consent.

The complaint [PDF], filed in federal court in San Francisco, California, alleges the two businesses ignored the legal means of obtaining data for their AI models and chose to gather it without paying for it.

"Despite established protocols for the purchase and use of personal information, Defendants took a different approach: theft," the complaint says. "They systematically scraped 300 billion words from the internet, 'books, articles, websites and posts – including personal information obtained without consent.' OpenAI did so in secret, and without registering as a data broker as it was required to do under applicable law."

Chipmaker TSMC said on Friday that one of its hardware suppliers experienced a “security incident” that allowed the attackers to obtain configurations and settings for some of the servers the company uses in its corporate network. The disclosure came a day after the LockBit ransomware crime syndicate listed TSMC on its extortion site and threatened to publish the data unless it received a payment of $70 million.

The hardware supplier, Kinmax Technology, confirmed that one of its test environments had been attacked by an external group, which was then able to retrieve configuration files and other parameter information. The company said it learned of the breach on Thursday and immediately shut down the compromised systems and notified the affected customer.

A superficially modest blog post from a senior Hatter announces that going forward, the company will only publish the source code of its CentOS Stream product to the world. In other words, only paying customers will be able to obtain the source code to Red Hat Enterprise Linux… And under the terms of their contracts with the Hat, that means that they can't publish it.

AI programs such as TensorFlow, PyTorch, and Hugging Face Hub work well under their open source licenses. The new AI artifacts are another story. Datasets, models, weights, etc. don't fit squarely into the traditional copyright model. (OSI director) Maffulli argued that the tech community should devise something new that aligns better with our objectives, rather than relying on "hacks."

Specifically, open source licenses designed for software, Maffulli noted, might not be the best fit for AI artifacts. For instance, while MIT License's broad freedoms could potentially apply to a model, questions arise for more complex licenses like Apache or the GPL. Maffulli also addressed the challenges of applying open source principles to sensitive fields like healthcare, where regulations around data access pose unique hurdles.

As Biden noted, the FCC "proposed a new rule that would require cable and satellite TV providers to give consumers the all-in price for the service they're offering up front." The proposed rule would force companies like Comcast, Charter Spectrum, and DirecTV to publish more accurate prices.

Judge Kevin Castel on Thursday issued an opinion and order on sanctions that found Peter LoDuca, Steven A. Schwartz, and the law firm of Levidow, Levidow & Oberman P.C. had "abandoned their responsibilities when they submitted non-existent judicial opinions with fake quotes and citations created by the artificial intelligence tool ChatGPT, then continued to stand by the fake opinions after judicial orders called their existence into question."

To punish the attorneys, the judge directed each to pay a $5,000 fine to the court, to notify their client, and to notify each real judge falsely identified as the author of the cited fake cases.