girlfreddy

In spring, 2018, Mark Zuckerberg invited more than a dozen professors and academics to a series of dinners at his home to discuss how Facebook could better keep its platforms safe from election disinformation, violent content, child sexual abuse material, and hate speech. Alongside these secret meetings, Facebook was regularly making pronouncements that it was spending hundreds of millions of dollars and hiring thousands of human content moderators to make its platforms safer. After Facebook was widely blamed for the rise of “fake news” that supposedly helped Trump win the 2016 election, Facebook repeatedly brought in reporters to examine its election “war room” and explained what it was doing to police its platform, which famously included a new “Oversight Board,” a sort of Supreme Court for hard Facebook decisions.

Several years later, Facebook has been overrun by AI-generated spam and outright scams. Many of the “people” engaging with this content are bots who themselves spam the platform. Porn and nonconsensual imagery is easy to find on Facebook and Instagram. We have reported endlessly on the proliferation of paid advertisements for drugs, stolen credit cards, hacked accounts, and ads for electricians and roofers who appear to be soliciting potential customers with sex work. Its own verified influencers have their bodies regularly stolen by “AI influencers” in the service of promoting OnlyFans pages also full of stolen content.

Meta now at best inconsistently responds to our questions about these problems, and has declined repeated requests for on-the-record interviews for this and other investigations. Several of the professors who used to consult directly or indirectly with the company say they have not engaged with Meta in years. Some of the people I spoke to said that they are unsure whether their previous contacts still work at the company or, if they do, what they are doing there. Others have switched their academic focus after years of feeling ignored or harassed by right-wing activists who have accused them of being people who just want to censor the internet.

The U.S. Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, managed to bridge its ideological divide in major rulings this month involving constitutional gun rights and access to the abortion pill, but that could change as the court heads into what may be the final week of its term.

Decisions are due in major cases involving Donald Trump's claim of presidential immunity from prosecution, an Idaho abortion ban that makes no exception to protect the health of pregnant women, and a doctrine called "Chevron deference" that long has bolstered federal regulations against legal challenges. Those cases are expected to once again expose the fault lines between the court's conservative and liberal justices.

"So far, the term has been less ideologically defined than the last two," said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Berkeley Law School. "But I really think it is (this) week's decisions that will determine how we think of the term."

Two years ago, the court's conservatives powered rulings rolling back abortion rights and widening gun rights. Last year, they rejected race-conscious admissions policies long used by colleges and universities to increase enrollment of Black and Hispanic students.

Some justices have come under fresh scrutiny for their actions away from the bench, including reports that flags associated with Trump's attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss flew outside Justice Samuel Alito's homes in Virginia and New Jersey, and fresh revelations about Justice Clarence Thomas accepting undisclosed travel from a wealthy benefactor.

European Union antitrust regulators charged on Monday that Apple breached the bloc's tech rules, a charge that could result in a hefty fine for the iPhone maker which also faces another investigation into new fees imposed on app developers.

The European Commission, which is also the EU's antitrust and technology regulator, said it had sent its preliminary findings to Apple following an investigation launched in March.

The charge against Apple is the first by the Commission under its landmark Digital Markets Act which seeks to rein in the power of Big Tech and ensure a level playing field for smaller rivals. It has until March next year to issue a final decision.

DMA violations could result in a fine of as much as 10% of a company's global annual turnover.

EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager cited issues with Apple's new terms, saying that they fell short of complying with the DMA. Apple can avoid a fine if it can address the concerns by modifying its business terms.

The killer was only 14 and had lived in youth homes as a ward of the authorities since he was eight.

A year ago, a gang helped the boy escape, put him up in a hotel and gave him cannabis, food and new clothes. Six days later, gang members told him it was time to repay them for their kindness. They had a job for him.

Together with another youth, the boy, who as a juvenile cannot be identified, shot dead a 33-year-old Hells Angels biker. He was convicted by a court which described the case as a gangland contract killing.

As he was too young to be sentenced, he was handed back to social services and sent to another youth home.

Sweden has long prided itself on one of the world's most generous social safety nets, with a state that looks after vulnerable people at all stages of life.

But these days it also has another distinction: by far the highest per capita rate of gun violence in the EU. Last year 55 people were shot dead in 363 separate shootings in a country of just 10 million people. By comparison, there were just six fatal shootings in the three other Nordic countries - Norway, Finland and Denmark - combined.

Last November, just weeks into the war in Gaza, Amichai Chikli, a brash, 42-year-old Likud minister in the Israeli government, was called into the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, to brief lawmakers on what could be done about rising anti-war protests from young people across the United States, especially at elite universities.

“I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again now, that I think we should, especially in the United States, be on the offensive,” argued Chikli.

Chikli has since led a targeted push to counter critics of Israel. The Guardian has uncovered evidence showing how Israel has relaunched a controversial entity as part of a broader public relations campaign to target US college campuses and redefine antisemitism in US law.

Seconds after a smoke alarm subsided during the hearing, Chikli assured the lawmakers that there was new money in the budget for a pushback campaign, which was separate from more traditional public relations and paid advertising content produced by the government. It included 80 programs already under way for advocacy efforts “to be done in the ‘Concert’ way”, he said.

Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, told the new chief of Ukraine’s state guard service to clear its ranks of people discrediting it after two of its officers were accused of plotting to assassinate senior officials.

The state Security Service (SBU) said last month that it had caught two guard service colonels accused of cooperating with Russia to plot the assassination of Zelenskiy and other officials, including military intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov. The guard service provides security for various governement officials.

Zelenskiy’s murder was intended as a “gift” for Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, who was inaugurated at the Kremlin last month for a fifth time, the SBU said.

Car dealerships in North America continue to wrestle with major disruptions that started last week with cyberattacks on a software company used widely in the auto retail sales sector.

CDK Global, a company that provides software for thousands of auto dealers in the U.S. and Canada, was hit by back-to-back cyberattacks Wednesday. That led to an outage that has continued to impact operations.

For prospective car buyers, that may mean delays at dealerships or vehicle orders written up by hand, with no immediate end in sight.

On Monday, Group 1 Automotive Inc., a $4 billion automotive retailers, said that it continued to use “alternative processes” to sell cars to its customers.

A fire likely sparked by exploding lithium batteries swept through a manufacturing factory near South Korea’s capital on Monday, killing 22 mostly Chinese migrant workers and injuring eight, officials said.

The fire began after batteries exploded while workers were examining and packaging them on the second floor of the factory in Hwaseong city, just south of Seoul, at around 10:30 a.m., fire officials said, citing a witness. They said they would investigate the cause of the blaze.

The dead included 18 Chinese, two South Koreans and one Laotian, local fire official Kim Jin-young told a televised briefing. He said the nationality of one of the dead couldn’t be immediately verified.

In the past few decades, many people from China, including ethnic Koreans, have migrated to South Korea to seek jobs. Like other foreign migrants from Southeast Asian nations, they often end up in factories or in physically demanding and low-paying jobs shunned by more affluent South Koreans.

US prosecutors have recommended that the Department of Justice (DoJ) brings criminal charges against Boeing.

It follows a claim by the DoJ that the plane maker had violated a settlement related to two fatal crashes involving its 737 Max aircraft which killed 346 people.

Boeing declined to comment when contacted by the BBC but previously it has denied violating the deferred prosecution agreement.

The DoJ has until 7 July to make a final decision on whether to prosecute the company. The DoJ has been contacted for comment.

The recommendation is not a final decision and the details of any potential criminal action are not known, according to CBS, the BBC's US partner.

"This is a really critical decision that is coming up,” said Ed Pierson, who is the executive director of the Foundation for Aviation Safety and a former senior manager at Boeing.

Last year, representatives of New Mexico’s oil industry met behind closed doors with the very groups with which they typically clash — state regulators and environmentalists — in search of an answer to the more than 70,000 wells sitting unplugged across the state. Many leak oil, brine and toxic or explosive gasses, and more than 1,700 have already been left to the public to clean up.

The situation is so dire that oil companies agreed to help try to find a solution.

After months of negotiations, the state regulators who ran the meetings emerged with a proposal that they hoped would appease everyone in the room. The bill would instruct drillers to set aside more money to plug their wells, authorize regulators to block risky sales to companies that would be unlikely to afford to clean up their wells and implement a buffer zone between wells and hospitals, schools, homes and other buildings.

The industry, unhappy with the state’s final language, turned against the bill it helped shape.

The influential New Mexico Oil and Gas Association told its supporters that HB 133 was “a radical and dangerous approach designed to strangle the oil and gas industry” and asked them to send their elected representatives a form letter opposing it. If passed, the trade group proclaimed, the bill would “Destroy New Mexico.” The Independent Petroleum Association of New Mexico, which represents small oil companies, called the bill “overzealous.”

Archive link

THIS IS A story about a story — one that I haven’t finished reporting.

Federal prosecutors are so consumed by my efforts to report on a terrorism court case that they accused me in a recent filing of having “improper motives.” They said that, by doing routine reporting, I was somehow colluding with a terrorism defendant to “taint the jury pool and undermine the fairness of the trial.”

These dangerous claims are the subject of an evidentiary hearing in U.S. District Court in Detroit on Thursday.

Although President Joe Biden boasts that his administration defends press freedoms around the world, his Justice Department’s public claims are an egregious attack against me filled with baseless assumptions and statements taken wildly out of context.

Prosecutors appear to have subjected me to this attack for no reason other than that I was doing journalism in the public interest. (Lawyers for The Intercept submitted a letter to U.S. District Judge Jonathan J. C. Grey and will be present at the hearing Thursday.)

David Lammy has reiterated that Labour would seek to implement an arrest warrant against Benjamin Netanyahu if one was issued by the international criminal court.

Speaking to CNN, the shadow foreign secretary said a Labour government would comply if an order was issued for the arrest of the Israeli prime minister, adding that he expected the response to be the same all over Europe.

Lammy has made the same commitment previously, but his remarks to the US TV channel’s Fareed Zakaria came at a time when the ICC is drawing closer to making a decision on the issue of warrants.

Labour has faced criticism from Israeli groups for making the commitment, which was previously made before the UK prime minister, Rishi Sunak, called a general election. Explaining his rationale, Lammy said: “The architecture that was created after the second world war, the rules-based order that we believe so much in, the international legal structure – one of the big architects of that was Churchill in our country.