Tag: mark zuckerberg

Judge Orders Tech CEOs to Testify in Case Using Algorithmic Design Rules as a New Avenue for Indirect Online Censorship Pressure

Three of the tech industry’s most recognizable leaders, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Evan Spiegel of Snap, and Adam Mosseri of Instagram, will be required to testify in court early next year.

The order came from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl, who ruled that their participation is essential in a lawsuit alleging that social media platforms were deliberately designed to harm young users’ mental health.

Attorneys for the companies had tried to prevent the CEOs from appearing, arguing that earlier depositions and other executive testimonies already provided sufficient information.

Judge Kuhl disagreed, stating, “The testimony of a CEO is uniquely relevant, as that officer’s knowledge of harms, and failure to take available steps to avoid such harms could establish negligence or ratification of negligent conduct.”

She also noted that their testimony would be “unique,” since the claims center on design features built to “be addictive” and “drive compulsive” use among minors.

Meta argued that compelling both Zuckerberg and Mosseri to testify would disrupt their ability to manage the business and “set a precedent” for future cases. Snap’s lawyers said the decision to call Spiegel to the stand was an “abuse of discretion.”

Judge Kuhl rejected both arguments, saying that those in charge must directly answer questions about their companies’ conduct instead of delegating that responsibility.

After the ruling, Meta declined to comment.

Keep reading

Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta Launches Super PAC to Combat AI Regulations

Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta has announced the launch of a new super PAC aimed at electing state candidates from both parties who support the company’s stance on AI development and regulation. According to the company, the American Technology Excellence Project super PAC is launching “amid a growing patchwork of inconsistent regulations that threaten homegrown innovation and investments in AI.”

Axios reports that social media and AI giant Meta has launched a new super PAC called the American Technology Excellence Project to help fight what it perceives as burdensome AI and tech policy bills across multiple states. The announcement highlights the company’s focus on state-level legislation as the federal government appears unlikely to pass significant tech policy regulation in the near future.

The super PAC will be run by Brian Baker, a longtime Republican operative, and the Democratic consulting firm Hilltop Public Solutions, with Meta investing tens of millions of dollars into the project. Baker stated, “America’s innovation edge is at a crossroads. We need state legislators who will champion our tech future, not cede it to global adversaries. We’ll fight to keep the US ahead of the curve, driving growth and opportunity for all.”

In a statement to Breitbart News, Meta VP of Public Policy Brian Rice wrote:

Amid a growing patchwork of inconsistent regulations that threaten homegrown innovation and investments in AI, state lawmakers are uniquely positioned to ensure that America remains a global technology leader. This is why Meta is launching an effort to support the election of state candidates across the country who embrace AI development, champion the U.S. technology industry, and defend American tech leadership at home and abroad.

The American Technology Excellence Project will focus on three main pillars: promoting and defending U.S. technology companies and leadership, advocating for AI progress, and empowering parents to control how their children experience online apps and AI technologies. While Meta has not yet shared which states the PAC will immediately focus on or how many people it will employ, the company claims it is committed to supporting the election of state candidates who embrace AI development, champion the U.S. technology industry, and defend American tech leadership both domestically and internationally.

Keep reading

Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta Notches Legal Win Against Authors in AI Copyright Case

Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta has prevailed in a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by authors who claimed the company violated their rights by using millions of copyrighted books to train its AI language model, Llama. Although the decision is a win for Meta and other AI giants, the judge stated the decision was more about the plaintiffs’ poor case than about Meta’s approach to AI training.

Bloomberg Law reports that a San Francisco federal court has ruled in favor of Mark Zuckerberg’s in a lawsuit brought by a group of authors. The plaintiffs alleged that Meta had violated their copyrights by using millions of books to train its generative AI model, Llama, without obtaining permission.

Judge Vince Chhabria determined that Meta’s use of the copyrighted books for AI training falls under the fair use defense in copyright law. However, the judge cautioned that his opinion should not be interpreted as a blanket endorsement of Meta’s practices, stating that the ruling “does not stand for the proposition that Meta’s use of copyrighted materials to train its language models is lawful.”

The judge’s decision appears to hinge on the authors’ failure to effectively argue their case, rather than a definitive legal interpretation of the fair use doctrine in the context of AI training. This suggests that future cases involving similar issues may yield different outcomes, depending on the strength of the arguments presented.

The lawsuit, which was closely watched by the tech industry and legal experts, is believed to be the first of its kind to challenge the use of copyrighted material for training AI models. As generative AI technologies continue to advance and become more prevalent, the question of how copyright law applies to the use of protected works in AI training is likely to remain a contentious issue.

A Meta spokesperson told Breitbart News, “We appreciate today’s decision from the Court. Open-source AI models are powering transformative innovations, productivity and creativity for individuals and companies, and fair use of copyright material is a vital legal framework for building this transformative technology.”

Keep reading

No Mark Zuckerberg, AI ‘Friends’ are not Good for Mental Health

Think you could use a few more friends? Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says AI will do the trick. In a recent interview with podcaster Dwarkesh Patel, the Silicon Valley titan said the average American has fewer than three friends but a desire to have “something like fifteen.”

Zuckerberg thinks computer code will fill the gap: “The average person wants more connectivity, connection than they have,” he observed. “As the personalization loop kicks in, and the AI just starts to get to know you better, I think that will be just really compelling.” 

It’s interesting advice from a guy who heads up two of the largest platforms on the planet for bringing people together.

It’s also an admission from Zuckerberg that chatting with real people isn’t cutting it anymore.

His solution? More technology, not less. Meta has made billions of dollars monetizing our attention. Why not monetize our loneliness, too?  

Turns out it’s a bad time to tell us to make AI friends when we’re already struggling to navigate our digital lives. In 2023, US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy warned of an epidemic of loneliness and isolation.

“One in two adults in America is living with measurable levels of loneliness,” Murthy reported, “but the numbers are even higher among young people.” He pointed to social media and online interactions as a driving factor. 

And we’re not just lonely. Rates of depression and anxiety are on the rise, too, again particularly in our youth.

According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data published last month, the prevalence of depression in people age 12 and older has nearly doubled in a decade, jumping from 8.2% between 2013 and 2014 to 13.1% between 2021 and 2023.

Of course, Zuckerberg knew his products were negatively impacting young people years ago.

In 2021, The Wall Street Journal revealed that Facebook, which owns Instagram, had internal evidence showing Instagram use is linked with poorer mental health, particularly among young women.

Facebook buried its findings and failed to address the problem.

Zuckerberg doesn’t seem to understand that the struggle is real for millions of Americans who are finding it anything but easy to manage their well-being around constant online stimulation: “People are smart. They know what’s valuable in their lives,” Zuckerberg told Patel. “I think people have a good sense of what they want.”

Keep reading

Zuckerberg’s free speech charade

Mark Zuckerberg wants America to believe he has had a “Road to Damascus” conversion on free speech. Since President Trump’s return to office in January, Mr. Zuckerberg has positioned himself as a champion of the First Amendment, condemning “cancel culture” and claiming that Meta platforms now welcome diverse political viewpoints, all while ignoring the obvious subtext that his platforms are hostile to conservative speech.

It is his recent aggressive actions to silence a whistleblower that expose the deep hypocrisy of his recent and convenient conversion to a supposed free expression champion.

By now, most of the world has heard of Sarah Wynn-Williams’ bombshell book, “Careless People,” which reveals shocking details about Mr. Zuckerberg’s yearslong crusade to enter the Chinese market by creating sophisticated censorship tools for the Chinese Communist Party to use on Facebook, all the while playing innocent to the American public. According to Ms. Wynn-Williams’ account, Mr. Zuckerberg was willing to compromise every personal and political principle belonging to American citizens, including the security of American users, to gain access to the profit margins that Chinese consumers would bring to Facebook’s revenue streams.

Most disturbing is what, according to Ms. Wynn-Williams’ Senate testimony, Mr. Zuckerberg traded away to build his $18 billion business in China. America is in an artificial intelligence war with China, and it is winner-take-all. Yet Ms. Wynn-Williams’ revelations show that, for years, Mr. Zuckerberg has been transferring the technological expertise he and his company have to the Chinese Communist Party. Detailed briefings on data centers, facial recognition and, of course, artificial intelligence — all mission-critical to our country’s future.

Rather than address these serious allegations, Mr. Zuckerberg has hidden behind lawyers, invoking arbitration clauses and gag orders to silence Ms. Wynn-Williams, who, it must be said, clearly has a steel spine that Mr. Zuckerberg can only dream of. The irony couldn’t be more stark: While publicly posturing as a free speech advocate to curry favor with the Trump administration, he uses legal maneuvers to suppress whistleblowers from warning the public and lawmakers of these critical truths about his company.

Keep reading

Sen. Hawley Considers Criminal Referral for Zuckerberg — Demands Testimony Under Oath After Whistleblower Exposes Meta’s Dangerous Collusion with Communist China

The globalist empire of Big Tech is being dragged into the light, and U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) is leading the charge.

In a scathing letter sent Thursday, Hawley invited Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to testify before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, following explosive testimony from a former Meta executive turned whistleblower.

Sarah Wynn-Williams, who served as Facebook’s Director of Global Public Policy from 2011 to 2017, delivered a bombshell under oath: Meta didn’t just sell out American users — it surrendered to the Chinese Communist Party.

In her riveting testimony, Wynn-Williams exposed Meta’s secret project—code-named “Project Aldrin”—an initiative that allegedly handed China’s Communist regime access to sensitive U.S. artificial intelligence technologies.

Her most alarming claim? That Meta executives deliberately briefed Chinese officials on cutting-edge AI to give Beijing the upper hand over American companies.

“These briefings focused on critical emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence – explicit goal being to help China outcompete American companies,” said Wynn-Williams.

She warned that Meta’s LLaMA AI model is already being used by China in military applications and stated that the only reason the CCP doesn’t currently have unrestricted access to U.S. user data is because Congress intervened.

This is no longer just about privacy—it’s about national survival in the face of an aggressive foreign adversary, aided and abetted by America’s own Big Tech titans.

Keep reading

Meta to spend up to $65 bln this year to power AI goals, Zuckerberg says

Meta Platforms plans to spend between $60 billion and $65 billion this year to build out AI infrastructure, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said on Friday, joining a wave of Big Tech firms unveiling hefty investments to capitalize on the technology.

As part of the investment, Meta (META.O) will build a more than 2-gigawatt data center that would be large enough to cover a significant part of Manhattan. The company — one of the largest customers of Nvidia’s (NVDA.O) coveted artificial intelligence chips — plans to end the year with more than 1.3 million graphics processors.

“This will be a defining year for AI,” Zuckerberg said in a Facebook post. “This is a massive effort, and over the coming years it will drive our core products and business.”

Zuckerberg expects Meta’s AI assistant — available across its services, including Facebook and Instagram — to serve more than 1 billion people in 2025, while its open-source Llama 4 would become the “leading state-of-the-art model”.

Shares of the company were 1.6% higher in early trading.

Big technology companies have been investing tens of billions of dollars to develop AI-related infrastructure after the meteoric success of OpenAI’s ChatGPT highlighted the potential for the technology.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced that OpenAI, SoftBank Group (9984.T) and Oracle (ORCL.N) will form a venture called Stargate and invest $500 billion in AI infrastructure across the United States.

Keep reading

O’Keefe Media Group Releases Evidence That Mark Zuckerberg Lied About Biden Administration Pressuring Him to Censor COVID-19 Information, Gave Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars in Free Ads to Pro-Vax Groups

James O’Keefe’s O’Keefe Media Group has released new evidence on Mark Zuckerberg’s efforts to censor anti-COVID vaccine narratives and promote those that align with the Democrat party. 

This comes as Meta/Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg is on an apology tour, shifting all blame to the Biden Regime and claiming to be innocent in the censorship scandal.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, Zuckerberg, in August, admitted in a letter to Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan that the social media giant was subject to government censorship around stories related to COVID and the 2020 election and that he would, in the future, fight such efforts harder than he did previously.

In a recent interview on his apology tour with Joe Rogan, Zuckerberg also claimed that the Biden Administration “forced Facebook” to censor and eliminate content related to COVID-19 Vaccines.

Keep reading

Yes, Mark Zuckerberg, You Can Shout ‘Fire’ in a Crowded Theater

Mark Zuckerberg has joined a dubious list of prominent Americans—including judges, members of Congress, and even a vice presidential nominee—who believe that you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater. In an interview with Joe Rogan last week, the Meta CEO attempted to justify the company’s pandemic-era censorship policies by arguing that “even people who are like the most ardent First Amendment defenders” know that there is a limit to free speech. 

“At the beginning, [COVID-19 was] a legitimate public health crisis,” Zuckerberg told Rogan. “The Supreme Court has this clear precedent: It’s like, all right, you can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater. There are times when if there’s an emergency, your ability to speak can temporarily be curtailed in order to get an emergency under control. I was sympathetic to that at the beginning of COVID.”

The thing is, Zuckerberg is simply wrong when it comes to how the First Amendment works.

The common misconception that it’s illegal to shout “fire” in a crowded theater originates with a hypothetical used by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in the 1919 Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States.

In his opinion, Holmes wrote that “the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done,” adding that “the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” Not only was this passage a pure hypothetical used to illustrate Holmes’ larger opinion that the First Amendment didn’t protect the dissemination of anti-draft pamphlets, but Schenck itself was overturned in 1969 by Brandenburg v. Ohio.

“To the contrary, if the theater is on fire, you not only may shout ‘FIRE,’ but indeed, you should do so! The constant misstatement of this famous line from a 1919 Supreme Court decision is significant, because it overlooks the critical, common-sense distinction between protected and unprotected speech,” former American Civil Liberties Union President Nadine Strossen said in 2021. “This old canard, a favorite reference of censorship apologists, needs to be retired. It’s repeatedly and inappropriately used to justify speech limitations. People have been using this cliché as if it had some legal meaning, while First Amendment lawyers roll their eyes”

Zuckerberg’s interview came in the wake of a January 7 announcement that Meta platforms would no longer use third-party fact-checkers to label and restrict content, as well as loosen restrictions on some subjects “that are part of mainstream discourse.” 

“After [Donald] Trump first got elected in 2016, the legacy media wrote nonstop about how misinformation was a threat to democracy,” Zuckerberg said in a video announcing the change. “We tried in good faith to address those concerns without becoming the arbiters of truth. But the fact-checkers have just been too politically biased and have destroyed more trust than they’ve created, especially in the U.S.”

While this change is a welcome shift from Meta’s previous content-moderation regime, that Zuckerberg is still getting this basic element of the First Amendment wrong hardly bodes well for Meta’s future as a platform friendly to free expression.

Keep reading

Rogan Torches Zuckerberg To His Face Over COVID Vaccines

While Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is going out of his way to frame himself as having gone through some sort of MAGA awakening, a section of his appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast this past weekend has many believing its all an act.

Zuckerberg spoke at length about regretting bowing to censorship requests from Biden Administration officials, who he claimed would “scream” and “curse” at Meta employees to remove accurate information from its platforms.

As we highlighted last week, Zuckerberg has also ditched so called ‘fact checkers’ in favour of an X-like community notes system, sending the establishment censorship industry into a panic.

Yet, when Zuckerberg’s conversation with Rogan turned to COVID vaccines, he reverted to his old self again.

Zuckerberg claimed that while he disagrees with the methods the Biden regime used to push mass vaccination, it was all for the greater good.

“I think…they (the Biden regime) were doing something. Their goal to get everyone vaccinated was actually a good goal,” he declared.

Rogan wasn’t having it.

“Yeah, it was a good goal if it worked…if it really did prevent people from getting COVID, from infecting others,” Rogan responded, emphasising that “it didn’t, so it wasn’t a good deal.”

Zuckerberg responded, “Still, on balance, I still think it’s good for more people to get the vaccine.”

“I’m not sure in that case how much of it was like a personal political gain that they were going for. I think that they had a kind of goal that they thought was in the interests of the country,” Zuckerberg continued.

Keep reading