Big Tech Backs Colorado OS-Level Age Data Bill

Chamber of Progress, a lobbying group bankrolled by Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and OpenAI, is pushing Colorado Governor Jared Polis to sign SB 26-051 into law.

The bill would force operating system providers to harvest users’ dates of birth and pipe that data to app developers through an API every time you download or open an app. If Polis signs it, your phone’s operating system becomes more of an identity checkpoint, not just for children, but for everyone.

The bill landed on the Governor’s desk on May 12 after clearing both chambers of the Colorado legislature, passing the House 40-23 and the Senate 26-9.

We obtained a copy of the latest version of the bill for you here.

Sponsored by Democratic Senator Matt Ball and Representative Amy Paschal, the legislation mirrors California’s AB 1043, signed into law in October 2025. Colorado’s version would start applying to new users on July 1, 2028, with existing users folded in by January 1, 2029.

When you set up a device account, the OS asks for a date of birth. That data gets translated into one of four age brackets (under 13, 13 to 15, 16 to 17, and 18-plus) and stored as an “age signal.”

Developers are required to request that signal at first launch or account creation through a real-time API. Every app you open gets to ask your operating system how old you are.

Chamber of Progress told Colorado lawmakers that the bill “reflects an important effort to protect children online while minimizing risks to privacy and lawful speech.”

That framing collapses under the weight of what the bill constructs. It calls age-bracket data “nonpersonally identifiable,” but an age bracket combined with a device ID, app usage patterns and an IP address makes re-identification trivial. When that signal flows to dozens of apps at launch, the aggregate profile becomes far richer than any single data point suggests.

The bill also makes anonymous device use functionally harder. If account setup requires an age attestation that follows you into every app, you lose the ability to use the software without disclosing something about your identity. That has consequences for journalists, activists, domestic violence survivors, and anyone who treats privacy as a default.

The bill never specifies how age data is verified. Account holders just “indicate” a birth date. It may not have an ID check or a biometric scan, at least for now. But a 12-year-old can type in 1988 and the system accepts it.

As a mechanism for protecting children, this is useless, and everyone involved in writing it knows that. What it does accomplish is something else entirely. It builds the architecture: the API, the data pipeline, the legal obligation for developers to query an age signal at every app launch. Once that plumbing exists, the only question left is what gets poured through it.

Keep reading

Employee sues Google over ‘unfair’ dismissal linked to anti-Israel protest – Guardian

A former AI engineer at Google DeepMind has accused the US tech giant of unfairly dismissing him over protests against the company’s deals with Israel, The Guardian reported on Wednesday. The man described the decision to fire him as discriminatory and filed a claim with a British employment tribunal.

Google’s ties with the Israeli government, including a $1.2 billion AI and cloud computing contract signed jointly with Amazon, have repeatedly sparked employee protests. In 2024 alone, the company fired dozens of dissenting staff members.

According to the engineer, he was called into a meeting with a manager that led to his dismissal after distributing flyers around DeepMind’s London office reading: “Google provides military AI to forces committing genocide” and “Is your paycheck worth this?” He also reportedly sent emails to his colleagues and called on them to unionize.

The former employee, who is of Palestinian origin, alleged in his lawsuit that Google discriminated against his belief that no one should be complicit in war crimes and claimed he was acting as a whistleblower, according to The Guardian. The US tech giant insisted that the employee’s version of events “does not accurately reflect the facts” and said that he had resigned.

In October, several media outlets reported that the 2021 agreement Google and Amazon signed with Israel barred the companies from restricting West Jerusalem’s access to their services even in cases it violated their terms of use. The deal also reportedly included clauses explicitly preventing the two tech giants from breaking ties with Israel under pressure from employees, shareholders and activists.

Keep reading

X Agrees to Review Illegal “Hate” Within 48 Hours Under UK Online Safety Act

X has agreed to process the vast majority of content flagged as illegal “hate” under the UK’s Online Safety Act within 48 hours, giving Ofcom, Britain’s speech regulator, a significant new enforcement win.

The platform committed to “review and assess UK suspected illegal terrorist and “hate” content reported through its dedicated UK illegal content reporting tool on average within 24 hours of it being reported, to be calculated as a mean” and to “review and assess at least 85% of UK suspected illegal terrorist and hate content reported through its dedicated UK illegal content reporting tool within a maximum of 48 hours.”

The deal is a notable reversal for a platform that, less than a year ago, publicly accused Ofcom of taking a “heavy-handed approach” and warned that the Online Safety Act was “seriously infringing” on free expression.

X’s August 2025 statement, titled “What Happens When Oversight Becomes Overreach,” called out regulators by name and argued that the law amounted to a “conscientious decision to increase censorship in the name of ‘online safety.’” That language is gone now. What’s left is a compliance agreement with specific performance targets and a 12-month reporting obligation.

The commitments go beyond speed of review. X also agreed to block access to accounts in the UK if they are reported for “posting UK illegal terrorist content” and deemed to be “operated by or on behalf of a terrorist organisation proscribed in the UK.”

The platform will share quarterly performance data with Ofcom so the regulator can audit compliance. And following complaints from organizations that couldn’t tell whether X had received or acted on their reports, X agreed to “engage with experts regarding reporting systems for illegal hate and terror content.”

Who those experts are tells you something about the direction of travel. Ofcom’s own press release names the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) as one of the organizations it worked with to “gather evidence about suspected illegal terrorist content and illegal hate speech online.”

The CCDH is a pro-censorship campaign group co-founded in 2018 by Imran Ahmed and Morgan McSweeney, who went on to become UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s chief of staff.

McSweeney stepped down from CCDH’s board two days after Starmer became Labour leader. The organization maintains close ties to the current government and has stated that its goal was to “kill Musk’s Twitter,” according to leaked internal documents reported by Matt Taibbi and Paul Thacker.

Ahmed himself was sanctioned by the US State Department in December 2025 over concerns that his organization had led “organized efforts to coerce American platforms to censor, demonetize, and suppress American viewpoints.” A federal court blocked his deportation with a temporary restraining order.

This is the organization Ofcom chose to help build the evidence base for pressuring X into compliance. Ahmed, for his part, welcomed the deal. Speaking to POLITICO, he said CCDH will be “watching closely to ensure this results in meaningful action, not just words.”

Keep reading

Bombshell: Left-Wing Tech Billionaires Are Paying the Full Salaries of Dozens of ‘Journalists’ at Top Media Companies

If you want to talk about media corruption, how about the discovery that a left-wing political organization has embedded 80 “journalists” in the corporate media by paying their full salaries?

Breitbart News has previously reported on LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman’s dark money election meddling, as well as Facebook cofounder Dustin Moskovitz’s deep penetration of President Joe Biden’s administration with AI activists.

Behind this corruption is a far-left, globalist organization called Effective Altruism (EA), which the New York Post describes as a “billionaire-backed movement [that] aims to solve the world’s problems” which wants to send the message that “unchecked AI will destroy us all,” and that we must “prioritize causes like climate change, global health, poverty, [and] pandemics.”

EA wants to end factory farming. Okay, and replace it with what — insects? We have to feed 8.3 billion people every single day.

No one should blame EA. These fascist tech bros are merely doing whatever it takes to further their fascist cause. If you believe in something, you take every advantage to promote it.

What is obscene here…

What is indefensible here…

What is inexcusable here is this:

To spread their message the group has the Tarbell Center for AI Journalism — funded in part by EA foundations — which pays full salaries of journalists placed inside such newsrooms as TimeBloombergMIT Technology Review and The Guardian, NBC News, and The Verge.

Then there’s Ezra Klein at the New York Times:

New York Times superstar columnist Ezra Klein has maintained deep, longstanding ties to EA and its billionaires, and even uses his widely read NYT column to solicit donations to them.

How can you call yourself a progressive if you solicit donations to an organization run by… billionaires?

Keep reading

Leaked Documents Show Cisco Systems’ Deep Relationship with Israeli Security State

Cisco Systems is one of the most consequential—yet least visible—corporations in Silicon Valley. The San Jose-based networking giant, with a market capitalization in excess of $270 billion and annual revenue of $56.7 billion in 2025, manufactures the routers, switches, firewalls, and communications platforms that run the internet’s infrastructure, as well as many of its worldwide corporate, government, and military networks.

Cisco makes a point of publicly highlighting its commitment to corporate social responsibility, and building “an inclusive future for all” in the dozens of countries around the world in which it operates. Yet the company’s aggressive pursuit of contracts with the Israeli government and military—a small yet growing part of its global business—has led to accusations that behind this sunny facade the networking giant is profiting from genocide.

A new set of leaked documents—provided to Drop Site by whistleblowers disturbed by the company’s operations in Israel—shows Cisco’s deep and growing collaboration with the Israeli military and intelligence establishment in its regional wars and the genocide in Gaza.

In 2025, an Israeli Air Force officer publicly discussed using Cisco-powered infrastructure to support operations. The anonymous officer, identified as the head of the Israeli Air Force’s operational branch, told a tech conference in Israel that the Air Force had conducted “tens of thousands of attacks” in the past year, and described how IT systems had been vital to enabling this combat activity. The officer referenced Cisco infrastructure being used by air force intelligence personnel for communications and managing high volumes of operational data—including the use of networking tools by drone operators and ground forces to store and analyze videos and share coordinates for strikes.

Cisco’s work with the Israeli government and military has been documented in public news reports and new business announcements in the country. But the internal documents—including presentations, purchase and revenue records, and schedules—shed light on the rapidly expanding list of services that Cisco has been providing directly to the Israeli Ministry of Defense and other branches of the security state over the past several years.

Cisco did not respond to a request for comment.

Keep reading

Days Away: The TAKE IT DOWN Act Creates a Censorship Mechanism With No Safeguards

The Federal Trade Commission sent letters to 17 major tech companies this week, warning them to comply with the Take It Down Act by May 19 or face fines of $53,088 per violation.

Amazon, Alphabet, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, TikTok, X, Reddit, Discord, Snapchat, Pinterest, Bumble, Match Group, Automattic, and SmugMug all got the same message from Chairman Andrew Ferguson.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

“We stand ready to monitor compliance, investigate violations, and enforce the Take It Down Act,” Ferguson wrote.

“Protecting the vulnerable, especially children, from this harmful abuse is a top priority for this agency and this administration.”

The law, signed by President Trump in May 2025 with strong backing from First Lady Melania Trump, requires platforms to delete non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII), including AI-generated deepfakes, within 48 hours of receiving a removal request.

Platforms must also find and remove identical copies, provide clear notice about the removal process and let people track their requests. The FTC published a business guidance page alongside the letter spelling all of this out. The definition of “covered platform” is broad enough to capture social media, messaging apps, video sharing, gaming platforms, and essentially any site hosting user-generated content.

Nobody wants revenge porn circulating online. But the law Congress passed is far broader than the problem it claims to solve.

The TAKE IT DOWN Act borrows its structure from the DMCA’s already-controversial notice-and-takedown system, then strips out the safeguards.

Under the DMCA, a takedown request must include a statement under penalty of perjury. False claims can result in liability. There’s a counter-notice process so the person whose content was deleted can push back. TIDA has none of this. There’s no penalty for false claims, no counter-notice, no requirement that the filer prove anything before content disappears. A platform gets a complaint, has 48 hours, and deletes. That’s the entire process and exactly why the Take it Down Act introduces a new censorship mechanism.

The law defines a violation as involving an “identifiable individual” engaged in “sexually explicit conduct,” without defining that conduct narrowly.

Keep reading

Paris Prosecutors Move to Criminally Charge Musk and xAI

Paris prosecutors announced Thursday that their investigation into Elon Musk’s social platform X has been upgraded to a full criminal probe.

The Paris prosecutor’s office is now asking investigating magistrates to formally charge Musk, former X CEO Linda Yaccarino, and three companies linked to the platform, including xAI and X.AI Holdings Corp. If they refuse to appear for those charges, prosecutors say judges can issue warrants that carry the same legal weight.

The charges cover a long and growing list of alleged offenses: Complicity in possessing and distributing sexual images. Nonconsensual sexually explicit deepfakes. Denial of crimes against humanity. Fraudulent extraction of user data. Violation of the secrecy of electronic correspondence. Manipulation of an automated data processing system as part of an organized group. Illegal collection of personal data without adequate security.

The announcement came just three weeks after the US Department of Justice refused to cooperate with the French investigation, calling it an attempt to regulate American speech through foreign criminal law. France pushed ahead anyway.

The investigation did not begin with deepfakes or child safety. It began with politics.

French Member of Parliament Éric Bothorel, a member of President Macron’s centrist Renaissance party, filed a complaint in 2025 alleging that X’s algorithm had been manipulated for the purpose of “foreign interference” in French politics.

Bothorel accused the platform of narrowing “diversity of voices and options” after Musk’s takeover and cited Musk’s “personal interventions” in moderation decisions.

A second complaint, from a senior official in French public administration, alleged the same thing, claiming to observe a surge of “hateful, racist, anti-LGBTQ” content aimed at skewing democratic debate.

Keep reading

Bernie Sanders Attacks Google Founder and It’s Pathetic

Google is so ubiquitous that it’s not just a website. It’s a verb and part of our lexicon, fundamentally changing the way we get information and explore the Internet. While opinions may vary on whether or not that’s a good thing, founder Sergey Brin created a product that changed the world and deserves every penny of the wealth he earned.

Unless you’re a Democrat who thinks Brin is just being greedy for daring to participate in the democratic process that Democrats claim to love so much.

That’s what Bernie Sanders believes, and he attacked Brin for having more wealth while opposing the California Democrat’s plan to steal money from billionaires.

Remember, the proposed legislation has a provision that will allow California Democrats to confiscate a percentage of everyone’s wealth down the road, including middle- and working-class Californians.

Sanders, on the other hand, has done nothing of value. He was so lazy a socialist he got the boot from at least one commune. Despite that, he’s managed to game the capitalist system he despises, making a fortune and owning three houses.

Keep reading

Paris public prosecutor opens judicial investigation into Elon Musk and X

Paris’ public prosecutor has opened a judicial investigation into Elon Musk’s X social media platform, a new step in a probe over alleged abuse of algorithms and fraudulent data, the prosecutor’s office said on May 7.

The latest legal development puts investigating judges in charge of the probe and follows tech billionaire Mr Musk’s failure to appear at an April 20 summons for questioning.

The public prosecutor is requesting that judges place X.AI Holdings Corp, X Corp and xAI, as well as Mr Musk and former X chief executive officer Linda Yaccarino, under formal investigation.

This would be achieved by summoning them for that purpose, or, if they failed to appear, judges could issue a warrant which would be equivalent to putting them under formal investigation, the statement said.

Reuters could not immediately reach representatives for Mr Musk or X.

Mr Kami Haeri, a lawyer for X, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The investigation, which has been expanded in past months to include suspected complicity in the distribution of child pornography and the creation of sexual deepfakes by Grok, has added to strains in relations between the US and Europe over Big Tech and free speech.

Keep reading

New Mexico’s Meta Trial Opens with Judge Wary of State’s Broad Surveillance Demands

A New Mexico judge spent his first morning of the Meta remedies trial signaling that he doesn’t plan to become “a one-person legislator, judge and executive branch enforcer,” and the privacy stakes of that reluctance run deeper than the child safety framing suggests.

The bench trial opened Monday in Santa Fe before First Judicial District Judge Bryan Biedscheid, the second phase of a case that already produced a $375 million jury verdict against Meta in March.
State prosecutors now want the judge to rewrite how Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp operate inside New Mexico, with a remedy list that reaches well past algorithm tweaks into the architecture of identity verification and encrypted messaging itself.

Before opening statements, Biedscheid told both sides he held “some concerns” about the New Mexico Department of Justice’s proposals. “I’m probably not the easiest sell on an idea where I would become a one-person legislature, judge and executive branch enforcer of administrative code provisions,” he said.

The warning lands at a moment when several of the state’s requested fixes look like permanent surveillance infrastructure dressed up as protection. It start with age verification. The state wants Meta ordered to confirm the age of every New Mexico user, an obligation that cannot be met by asking people to type a birth year.

Keep reading