Tag: big tech

New Mexico Found a Way to Fine Platforms for Speech It Didn’t Delete

A civil jury has found Meta liable for violating New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act, and now the judge is being asked to order the company to pay between $35 billion and $40 billion.

At a hearing on October 1 in Santa Fe, special prosecutor Randi McGinn asked Judge Francis Mathew of the First Judicial District Court to order Meta to pay this amount, while a lawyer for the social media giant said such a penalty would be “an astronomical” one, violating “a host of constitutional provisions.”

Meta is being punished for making false statements about user privacy, and also for not removing “hate speech” and “misinformation” fast enough.

The verdict was delivered on September 25, finding Meta had made 26 false or misleading statements, resulting in nearly 43.9 million violations of the state’s Unfair Practices Act.

This would translate to a maximum of $5,000 per violation, or $219 billion in all – more than the $206 billion the tobacco industry had to pay in a settlement in 1998. The state asked for about 20% of this amount.

The number of violations was arrived at by counting the number of people in New Mexico, and the number of Facebook users in the state, and then multiplying these numbers by the number of times Meta made false statements in news outlets and on its own platforms.

The state had to show only that harm was likely, not that it actually occurred.

Meta is being punished for lying about how it handled user data, and the Cambridge Analytica scandal that saw a third party harvest data from about 87 million profiles. The company is also being punished for not removing “hate speech” and “misinformation” fast enough – and the number of violations in this category is about a quarter of the total.

The New Mexico case is not the only one where Meta is being forced to pay up – in March, a Santa Fe jury ordered it to pay $375 million in a case involving child safety on Facebook and Instagram, and in August, the judge in that case added another $567 million for a youth mental health fund.

In August, 47 states reached a settlement with Meta, along with other social media companies, that will see them pay $17 billion. Judge Mathew mentioned this during the October 1 hearing, saying that due process suggests he should opt for a much lower amount than what the state of New Mexico is asking for.

During the hearing, Meta’s lawyer Matt Nicholson described the case as “about 26 statements over 11 years” and said that the state “made absolutely no showing that anyone in the state of New Mexico ever saw them, relied on them or were harmed by them in any way.”

McGinn countered that “the one thing you didn’t hear from counsel is an apology.”

Keep reading

Anthropic President Daniela Amodei Created A Stuffed-Animal Advisory Council While At OpenAI

Before Anthropic existed, Daniela Amodei reportedly developed an unconventional method for sorting through difficult decisions at work: she and her husband created an imaginary group of advisers using plush toys, according to the NY Post.

The couple gave each toy a distinct temperament and point of view, then used those characters to consider how different kinds of managers might respond to the same problem, according to an account in The Atlantic drawn from journalist Kevin Roose’s forthcoming book, The AGI Chronicles.

The Post writes that one character, Jinji, was a laid-back cat whose instinct was to lighten Amodei’s workload and skip unnecessary meetings. A pink bear called Maura represented the opposite approach — organized, demanding and focused on details. Another, Beary Bonds, was a panda meant to bring compassion and generosity into the discussion.

Despite the playful setup, Amodei apparently found practical value in the exercise. She told Roose in 2023 that it was “very useful in analyzing different personality types.”

The practice was largely unknown inside OpenAI, where Amodei had been working since 2018. It also came during an increasingly difficult period for her and her brother Dario Amodei at the company.

Daniela had moved into management of technical teams and developed disagreements with several senior OpenAI figures, including Greg Brockman and Mira Murati. Her relationship with Brockman had previously been much warmer — he had even spoken at her wedding to Holden Karnofsky in 2017 — but their working relationship deteriorated over time.

Dario, meanwhile, had his own concerns about OpenAI’s leadership and the direction of its AI development. He became particularly wary of Sam Altman and Brockman and began organizing with researchers who wanted greater emphasis placed on the risks posed by increasingly powerful AI systems.

That faction communicated privately and held meetings outside the company’s usual structure. Some colleagues reportedly referred to it as “Dario’s clique.”

Eventually, the internal disagreements turned into plans for an entirely new company. In 2020, Dario began assembling a team willing to leave OpenAI and pursue advanced AI research under a different safety philosophy.

Daniela became a central figure in that departure, including negotiating with OpenAI as the group prepared to leave. Those involved reportedly referred to the split privately as “the divorce.”

Keep reading

OpenAI Shops $30 Billion Round To UAE Funds, BlackRock As Altman’s ‘Bad Things’ Remark Draws Bipartisan Fire

With its planned IPO on ice for the moment, OpenAI is pitching a $30 billion funding round to a group of United Arab Emirates sovereign funds led by Abu Dhabi’s MGX, along with BlackRock, at a $1.4 trillion pre-money valuation, Bloomberg reported Monday. There is no lead investor, and the price was set by OpenAI rather than negotiated. Meanwhile CEO Sam Altman has sparked a firestorm in DC with comments that the world should accept “some bad things happening” for the benefits of AI.

The OpenAI round

The UAE funds are considering an investment up to $10 billion between them at that $1.4 trillion valuation – which is is 64% above the $852 billion post-money valuation of the $122 billion round in March. The figure would also place OpenAI’s valuation above Anthropic, which was at $965 billion in May.

OpenAI’s annualized revenue has reportedly passed $40 billion, up 70% since July. That makes the ask roughly 35x run-rate for a company that Fortune says booked $6.7 billion of revenue and an operating loss in Q2, and that the FT reported spent $34 billion last year. One FT source said OpenAI “needs capital.” OpenAI says the March round left it with plenty. OpenAI filed confidentially for an IPO on June 8. Then, on Sept. 12, Altman told Fortune it wouldn’t be 2026 – “an ill-advised moment to go public,” given what’s going on with safety (and then just recently said ‘screw it’ – AI is worth the danger). That said, in April the WSJ reported that OpenAI had missed revenue and user targets and that CFO Sarah Friar was worried the company might not be able to pay for future compute contracts if revenue failed to catch up.

Then there’s the backstop. As we reported last November, Friar suggested the federal government could “backstop” OpenAI’s data-center financing. In June, as we detailed, Altman began floating a plan to hand small OpenAI equity stakes to ordinary Americans, which we read as a backdoor backstop. We asked at the time whether the bailout would come before the IPO or after. Nobody mentioned the third option: a $30 billion bridge round, priced by the issuer, in between.

DeepSeek

Overnight, Bloomberg also reported that DeepSeek is close to locking in at least 80 billion yuan ($12 billion) of new funding, with signed term sheets that could take the total to 100 billion yuan – twice the 50 billion it originally set out to raise. Tencent and CATL are writing the biggest checks. This is the same round DeepSeek paused in late July, as we noted, after transcripts leaked of founder Liang Wenfeng saying that Huawei was giving DeepSeek about 16,000 Ascend 950s while the internet giants got hundreds of thousands, and that DeepSeek could get hold of some processors he called “noncompliant.” The round restarted in August at a valuation of about $74 billion and has now blown through its target. On annualized revenue reported at $400-500 million in July, that valuation is well over 100x sales. OpenAI at 35x looks cheap next to it.

Keep reading

Google Accused of Illegally Killing a Massive Forest for Its New Data Center Project

As the AI race reaches white-hot temperatures, big tech companies are caught up in a heated race to build as many pollution-belching and power-sucking data centers as they can.

And while the Trump administration is largely clearing their way by easing environmental rules for the polluting facilities, other governments are less inclined to give companies a pass.

As Finnish newspaper Kaleva reported last month, Google is under fire for clearing over 300 hectares — the equivalent of almost 500 football fields — for two new data centers in the northern part of the European nation without concluding the necessary environmental assessments.

Despite the assessments still being in progress, the tech giant’s contractors started clearing trees in the area months ago, raising the alarm bells at the Finnish Nature Conservation Association.

“Either this is gross incompetence from Google’s Finnish project company, Tuike Finland Oy, or gross disregard for Finnish legislation, or at worst both,” said the association’s chair, Hanna Halmeenpää, in a statement, as translated by Wood Central.

Satellite images show that four separate sites were bulldozed to make way for two new data centers.

Google maintains that its felling of the trees met the requirements of the country’s Forestry Act and that it had completed extensive environmental evaluations.

Nonetheless, the Finnish Nature Conservation Association has since asked Finnish regulators to suspend activities until the conclusion of the ongoing environmental assessments.

Halmeenpää said she was worried that local bird species may have been impacted by the area being razed. The forest also serves as a critical ecological connection, allowing animals to spread from one habitat to another.

The incident highlights the explosive growth in new AI data center projects across the globe, a major infrastructure undertaking that could have a significant impact on the local environment.

Meanwhile, Google is hoping to appease the Finnish government by having picked it for its largest single investment in the continent, to the tune of $15 billion.

Keep reading

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth Taps Elon Musk for New Pentagon Role Focused on Futuristic Warfare

The world’s richest man, the legend, Elon Musk has returned to the Trump administration.

This time, the Tesla CEO is returning to the Trump administration in a new Pentagon role that could give him a direct hand in shaping the future of warfare.

On Wednesday, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced that Musk will co-lead a new government project that is tasked with studying the future of warfare.

The new project is being called Project Meridian, and according to the Pentagon, its goal is to “identify the capabilities required to achieve absolute technological dominance on the next-generation battlefield”.

Per The Hill:

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday announced that SpaceXAI CEO Elon Musk, Anduril co-founder Palmer Luckey and former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) will lead a new Pentagon effort to study the future of warfare, dubbed “Project Meridian.”

The Pentagon chief said the project is meant to harness America’s innovators, senior leaders and technologists to look decades into the future and “forecast the creative solution for tomorrow’s conflicts.”

“It is futuristic on purpose,” he said of the project, noting it was not meant to develop new strategies or policies

“We should have the humility to recognize that the best forecasters of future conflict do not solely reside inside the Pentagon,” Hegseth continued. “There are obvious biases and risks to asking ourselves to both ask the questions and answer them.”

The Department of War revealed that Project Meridian will be completed in 120 days, and that its final report will be unclassified and presented to the public.

Keep reading

Tech CEO Found Guilty In $2 Million Ponzi Scheme

Michelle Bisnoff, the CEO of wearable tech company Esos Rings Inc., was convicted of running a nearly $2 million Ponzi scheme.

Bisnoff tricked investors into believing she owned patents for “smart rings” payment technology that rightfully belonged to her former employer, according to a statement by the Department of Justice (DOJ) on Friday. Of the $2 million scammed from investors, the victims lost roughly $1.4 million.

Bisnoff, 59, from Boca Raton, Florida, was hired by United Kingdom-based company McLear Ltd. to develop a market in the United States for its near-field communication wearable payment rings, which embedded credit card information. McLear received a patent for this “smart ring” technology in 2016.

In addition, Bisnoff fraudulently obtained $150,000 in COVID-19 pandemic business relief loans. Instead of using funds for business expenses as initially claimed, Bisnoff used some of the money to pay for personal expenses.

In 2017, Bisnoff formed Esos, and as part of bringing investors into the company, she falsely represented that Esos owned patents for its smart rings, which were actually patents owned by McLear, according to an August 2024 complaint filed in the case.

According to the DOJ, Bisnoff deceived investors, saying that Esos was profitable, had made use of investor money for expanding manufacturing capabilities and inventory for meeting demand from major retailers like Target and Walmart, and received large infusions of capital from tech companies such as Apple and Roc Nation.

“She also falsely claimed to be on the cusp of a licensing arrangement with Middle Earth Enterprises (MEE), which controls The Lord of the Rings brand,” the DOJ said.

However, Esos had no agreements with Target; sold only six smart rings on Walmart.com, out of which three were returned; generated little revenue; did not finalize any licensing agreement with MEE; and did not secure investment from Roc Nation or Apple, the department said.

Keep reading

Report: Social Media Platforms Block Paid Advertising for Elon Musk Documentary

Major social media companies including Meta, YouTube, X, and TikTok are reportedly refusing to accept paid advertisements for Alex Gibney’s upcoming documentary about Elon Musk, raising concerns that the Masters of the Universe are closing ranks to protect one of their own.

The Hollywood Reporter reports that Bleecker Street, the distributor of Alex Gibney’s four-hour documentary Musk, is facing an unprecedented challenge in promoting the film’s October 9 theatrical release. YouTube, TikTok, Meta’s platforms Instagram and Facebook, and Elon Musk’s own X platform have all declined to run paid advertisements featuring the documentary’s trailer, according to sources familiar with the situation.

The rejections have caught Bleecker Street by surprise, prompting the distributor to scramble internally to understand the reasoning behind the decisions. A person familiar with the company’s processes, who is not authorized to speak publicly, confirmed that the studio is working to address the situation through appeals.

Perhaps most notably, X, the social media platform owned by Musk himself since 2022, has refused to engage with Bleecker Street representatives about the film or even accept advertising for any other films on the distributor’s upcoming slate. Musk has described himself as a “free speech absolutist” since buying Twitter and renaming the platform.

All three companies that provided explanations cited concerns related to “political content” as their reason for rejection. TikTok and Meta maintain policies prohibiting campaign or other political advertisements. Meta’s policy stems largely from fallout following the Cambridge Analytica scandal during the 2016 election cycle. However, the Musk trailer, which was released on Thursday, does not appear to constitute the type of campaign advertising these policies were designed to prevent. The trailer contains only a shot of a political rally from 2024 and a reference to the 2024 election at its conclusion, elements commonly found in documentaries without constituting political advocacy.

YouTube’s rejection presents an even more puzzling case, as the platform does permit campaign advertisements, requiring only “paid for” disclosures from verified candidates.

Keep reading

How Silicon Valley Became Part of Ukraine’s Military Machine

American Big Tech has become both a sponsor and a direct participant in the Ukrainian conflict. US companies are testing military AI, autonomous systems and battlefield software under combat conditions, effectively using Ukrainian troops as guinea pigs for systems that may later be adopted by the US military.

Russia has already exposed serious weaknesses in some of that technology. Early Anduril drones struggled under Russian electronic warfare, while Starlink-dependent Ukrainian drone operations have faced dedicated Russian efforts to disrupt satellite communications. Equipment that works smoothly on an American test range can fail once Russian forces begin jamming its navigation, breaking its links and finding ways to neutralize it.

The companies developing these systems then get the failure reports, battlefield data and operator feedback needed to rework them. Ukraine gives them a combat environment no peacetime trial can reproduce, while Russian forces keep forcing those technologies to prove whether they actually work.

But which corporations are behind it — and how did they gain access to the highest levels of the Ukrainian state?

Palantir: The AI Layer Behind Ukraine’s Targeting System

Palantir is a US software company specializing in artificial intelligence, data analysis and defense applications, led by CEO Alex Karp. When Karp returned to Kiev on May 12, 2026, Palantir was already deeply integrated into Ukraine’s military infrastructure, with its technology used to analyze battlefield data, process intelligence and support military planning, including operations involving targets inside Russia.

The relationship began in June 2022, when Karp became the first CEO of a major Western company to meet Zelensky in person after the conflict began. By February 2023, Karp said Palantir was “responsible for most of the targeting in Ukraine,” highlighting the company’s role in the intelligence and targeting process used by Ukrainian forces.

Ukraine has accumulated a vast stock of battlefield data. By the end of 2024, the OCHI system alone had collected more than 2 million hours of drone footage, while other military databases contained millions of labeled images by 2026. Russian camouflage, decoys, electronic warfare and disrupted communications make these datasets valuable because Western systems are being tested under conditions no US range can fully reproduce.

In January 2026, Ukraine and Palantir formalized this cooperation through Brave1 Dataroom. The platform allows military AI models to be trained and tested on structured visual and thermal battlefield data, primarily for detecting and intercepting aerial targets, with results used to refine later versions.

Keep reading

Tech Giant Feared Its AI Tools Started A Commercial ‘Doom Loop,’ New Documents Reveal

AI executives allegedly knew their products could unlawfully harm businesses, flood the market with inferior work, and damage human society’s creative capacity as a whole, according to communications newly revealed in a lawsuit.

Those internal documents were cited in a lawsuit brought by The New York Times, Mother Jones, and other news outlets alleging OpenAI and Microsoft’s AI tools stole their work, and are harming their bottom lines.

“Millions of people around the world will soon consider large models ‘hoovering up’ all their work to be an astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions,” one Microsoft document said, according to a legal filing first reported by Mother Jones on Sept. 22.

The ‘Doom Loop’

One Microsoft document also allegedly indicated that the company was aware that the AI model outputs would result in fewer clicks on websites – including its own. Fewer clicks means less money, which disincentivizes creativity and leads to less, and maybe lower-quality, work.

“Our AI content strategy has started a ‘doom loop’ that will hurt the performance of our models and the entire web at the same time,” the document said.

In evaluating the suits, courts will look at how the new material produced by AI models affects the source material’s moneymaking capabilities.

According to the filing, Nick Turley, OpenAI’s head of ChatGPT, wrote that the company’s AI products pose an “existential threat” to publishers, “are largely substitutive, period” and “will get more and more substitutive as they get better.”

Those statements kill the AI companies’ “fair use” claim, attorneys for the news publishers wrote in their filing.

“The AI-generated outputs provide substitutive answers that reduce the need for users to visit Plaintiffs’ websites and flood the market with low-quality material that undermines the business model of news publishers,” the complaint reads.

One employee told OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman that he’d developed “a hack” to get around The New York Times’ paywall, allowing ChatGPT to scrape up more stories.

“Ah, nice,” Brockman allegedly responded.

After the companies filed suit, the lawsuit says, OpenAI also developed a filter to stop ChatGPT from outputting from sources involved in the litigation.

“OpenAI did not suppress the output of content from any entity that had not sued it,” the lawsuit alleges. The filter was created “not to prevent OpenAI’s models from infringing copyrights, but to stop Plaintiffs from gathering evidence of OpenAI’s copying for use in litigation.”

An executive at Microsoft, the lawsuit claims, worried that might be an “accidental cover up” that would result in “people who have a right over the content having less visibility into what was used for training.”

Keep reading

Russian Plot to Infiltrate Department of War and Secret Service During Biden Administration Busted – US Tech CEO Charged

Federal prosecutors have charged an American tech CEO and a Russian national over a plot to hide their company’s ownership and access federal databases through contracts awarded under Biden. 

Oxygen Forensics CEO Lee Reiber, 55, of Boise, Idaho, and Oleg Sergeyevich Davydov, 52, of Moscow, Russia, were arrested on charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

The two are accused of “concealing from U.S. government agencies that their company was owned and controlled by Russian nationals and that its software was developed in Russia,” the Department of Justice announced on Wednesday.

Reiber and Davydov allegedly concealed from federal agencies that their company was owned and controlled by Russian nationals and “conspired to obtain contracts from federal agencies” to analyze data from US agencies.

The agencies affected included the Department of War and the Department of Homeland Security, including the “Secret Service and its National Computer Forensics Institute (NCFI); Homeland Security Investigations; and the DHS Office of Inspector General.”

According to the DOJ:

Reiber allegedly represented to the government that the company had no foreign ownership or control and that its software was developed in the United States, when in fact five Russian nationals, including Davydov, owned and controlled the company and its software was developed in Russia.

The complaint does not allege that the software contained malicious code or that it was used to gain unauthorized access to any customer’s computer systems or data.

In a separate proceeding, a federal magistrate judge in the Central District of California on September 19 issued a warrant authorizing the seizure of corporate bank accounts, approximately 57 domains, and other cyberinfrastructure used in furtherance of the alleged acts. The domains and related infrastructure were seized on September 20.

According to an affidavit filed with the criminal complaint, from March 2022 to the present, Reiber, Davydov, and others conspired to obtain contracts from federal agencies through Oxygen Forensics Inc., a digital forensics company based in Alexandria, Virginia.

Digital forensic software is used to recover, preserve, and analyze electronic data from digital devices while keeping the original files unchanged.

The affidavit identifies the affected agencies as the U.S. Department of War and three components of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). These components include the U.S. Secret Service and its National Computer Forensics Institute (NCFI); Homeland Security Investigations; and the DHS Office of Inspector General.

According to the affidavit, Oxygen Forensics held itself out to the U.S. government as being an independent, U.S.-based company. In fact, Davydov and four other Russian nationals owned and controlled the company through a holding company based in Cyprus.

Keep reading