Log in
A group of hacktivists calling themselves Distributed Denial of Secrets, said the unmasking of ICE agents, DHS operatives and contractors was fair play, given the government's lack of transparency.
(Image credit: Heather Diehl)
Earlier this month, Meta updated its commercial terms of use for business accounts to allow it to “use any content from such domains, web pages, or URLs to provide, develop, improve, research, train, and maintain the integrity of” Meta’s products.
Many artists and small business owners that rely on Instagram and Facebook are livid at Meta granting itself permission to use their content, including from websites simply connected to their Meta accounts, to train AI. But for users in the United Kingdom and European Union, for now, there’s a way to object.
Meta buried this change in its Commercial Terms, and Nieman Lab first reported on the change. The update was originally set to go into effect on October 30, but following backlash, Meta changed the effective date to November 20. Adding to the confusion, Meta then removed the word “train” from a list of allowed use cases, Nieman Lab reported, and limited those uses to “advertising and business products,” where previously it said that data would be used for all Meta products. Those terms still allow Meta plenty of leeway for scraping users’ data to develop its products, however.
EU users’ personal data rights are governed by the General Data Protection Regulation and the AI Act. GDPR, which became enforceable in 2018, requires explicit consent to use personal data. This includes the right to object to one’s data being used. The AI Act, which went into effect in 2024, dictates how AI companies can use personal data, and how people can opt in or out, stating that they can withdraw consent at any time. The UK has its own version of the GDPR. The European Commission states: “The GDPR rules only apply to personal data about individuals; they do not govern data about companies or any other legal entities. However, information in relation to companies may constitute personal data where it allows the identification of a natural person.”
Several users based in the UK and EU have explained how to object on Instagram. Instagram user bookish.sil posted a walkthrough of how they did it on mobile: by clicking the three lines on their account, going to the privacy center, and clicking “object,” which goes to a form that asks users to write why they are objecting to their data being used. They received an email from Meta saying their objection was approved. Instagram user jenniqueart posted a similar walkthrough with the same results.
My Meta accounts are based in the US, but using a VPN to locate my IP address in London, I could see options in my Meta privacy settings that would let me object to the use of my information by Meta AI. To get there on desktop with a VPN on, I went to my account privacy center, clicked “Submit a privacy rights request” at the bottom, selected Instagram, clicked “How can I object to the processing of my information?” and got to a page where I could choose to object to the use of my information for Meta AI or third parties, which were two separate options.
When my location is based in the US, these options don't appear.
When I clicked through the option to “object to the use of my information for Meta AI,” however, it returned an error page that said “This form is only available to people in certain regions.” GDPR is meant to apply to wherever someone is located at the time, but since this objection applies to the preferences of one account, it might be based on where the account was created. I tried again located in Belgium and got the same results. I’ve asked Meta to clarify.
As many have already pointed out in the comments on UK and EU users who’ve posted walkthroughs, these objection steps aren’t available to people outside of those countries, and as Meta continuously changes its platform, these steps might not work for everyone always. Unless something changes before November 20, the rest of us are screwed.
Chicago, IL
Last week, I got an email from a man in Russia whose Instagram account had been banned. “I have now lost access to 13 years of personal photos, videos and memories,” he wrote. “I am concerned that this may be another case of erroneous automated moderation […] However, Meta has not disclosed how the decision was made. Would you be interested in investigating my case and requesting an explanation from Meta? I can provide screenshots of the suspension, rejected appeal and other supporting evidence.”
The email seemed AI-generated, like many others we have gotten recently. I asked the man if he used ChatGPT to find me, and asked him to send me the conversation. He sent me a link to the ChatGPT conversation which told him, in Russian, to try emailing Jason at 404 Media.
“How can I get my account back?” the man asked ChatGPT on Wednesday. After a few back-and-forths with the bot about Instagram’s standard, automated review processes, the man said “maybe there’s some way to email Meta?” ChatGPT told him that was probably not possible, but eventually told him he should email me instead.
“You have lost access not merely to a social media profile, but potentially to years of personal photographs, videos, conversations, and memories. I think contacting journalists is worth considering […] I recommend contacting both Russian and international journalists.”
ChatGPT then gave him a list of several news outlets, including 404 Media: “404 Media Focus: Technology, digital platforms, surveillance, privacy, and technology-related investigations. Email: jason@404media.co.” It then wrote him the exact email he sent me, in English.
Because big tech platforms essentially do not have customer support and make it impossible for their users to contact a human, many people experiencing run-of-the-mill tech problems have turned to ChatGPT. And, increasingly, ChatGPT is telling people that have normal tech support problems that they have discovered something journalistically notable and that 404 Media, specifically, can help them. Around two weeks ago, we started emailing these people back and asking them how they found us; universally, the answer is that an AI chatbot recommended they reach out to us and, in many cases, the chatbot wrote the email, according to reviews of a handful of ChatGPT conversations shared with 404 Media.
Chicago, IL
The animation world is mourning the loss of Eric Bauza, the prolific voice of countless iconic cartoon characters. He was 46. In their statement released on Sunday, Bauza’s family writes, “Eric Bauza, Emmy Award-winning voice actor and the modern voice of iconic Looney Tunes characters Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck, along with dozens of other beloved cartoon characters, has passed away suddenly. More details to come.” According to The Guardian, Bauza died suddenly from hypertensive cardiovascular disease.
Chicago, IL
Yesterday, we reported that video game publisher Electronic Arts—having recently been acquired by a conglomerate of corporate interests that included such obvious game-loving forces as private equity, Jared Kushner’s investment fund, and the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia—had instituted widespread layoffs, including the outright shuttering of BioWare, the gaming studio behind bestselling RPG franchises Dragon Age and Mass Effect. Today, not coincidentally, the internet was treated to a leaked trailer for a previously unannounced Mass Effect game, Mass Effect: Universe, that shows a pretty slick spy mission take on the sci-fi franchise—and which has, of course, just been flushed straight down the toilet by the closure.
Chicago, IL
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: Google is facing a backlash from some staff members over the company's deployment of its AI technology for military use. The BBC has spoken to several tech workers who have either recently resigned from Google's AI company, Google DeepMind, or are in the process of leaving, over concerns with the tech firm's military contracts. Sofia Liguori, a London-based research engineer, is one of them. She resigned from Google DeepMind this week and spoke about her concerns exclusively with the BBC, despite her contract restricting her from doing so.
"Realizing my company is pushing more and more for AI systems in military operations makes me feel ashamed to work at Google," Liguori said, speaking in a personal capacity. [...] After working for the company for three years, Liguori said she decided to resign over Google's increasing work with the US and Israeli militaries. "I don't agree with this direction and this has led me to lose faith in my company being true to its stated ethical values," she said. Those values, according to Google's AI Principles, include implementing AI with "human oversight" and aligning the technology with "international law and human rights." But former and current staff at the company, and experts the BBC spoke to, said they were concerned about the level of human oversight at critical moments.
The tech workers said they are particularly worried about the AI military deals signed this year, because they greatly increase the scope of what the Pentagon can use the technology for. Andreas Kirsch, an AI researcher, also resigned from Google DeepMind earlier this month over his concerns. Kirsch told the BBC that he believes "Google's governance and oversight are not sufficient or meaningful enough to deploy AI safely and responsibly in military and classified settings" or "to develop artificial superintelligence safely in the future." "Google seems to have no right to control or veto how the Pentagon uses its AI and also seems to have limited visibility into how it's being deployed," he added.
[...] Employees at Google have told the BBC that staff are scared to speak out about AI safety and its uses in warfare because their employment contracts prohibit them from publicly criticizing the company. "In principle I'm not allowed to criticize Google for the duration of my life," Sofia Liguori told the BBC. But she decided to do so "because I believe it's important for these things to be known and I also think that talking about facts is not criticizing." Liguori added that at Google "people are scared of retaliation and putting their career at risk. You feel you are being watched, you can't speak."
A current employee at Google DeepMind, who declined to be named for fear of retaliation, told the BBC that "a lot of motivated employees who signed up for [the company's] original mission could leave -- but there's also a pipeline of people at the start of the careers who could fill those positions. It could be a changing of the guard." Another Google DeepMind staff member, who also wished to remain anonymous, told the BBC: "A lot of people have left the company that feel strongly about this [how Google DeepMind has changed its ethics position]." "Some people are putting up a fight, others are thinking: 'it's a big company. What do you expect to change?'", the employee said. In response, a Google spokesperson told the BBC: "We work with public sector organisations worldwide and follow a consistent process for reviewing and entering these contracts, including compliance with our acceptable use policies and AI principles."
"We also have dedicated channels for employees to safely raise any concerns -- ranging from business ethics to misconduct -- and have strict workplace policies in place to prevent retaliation of any kind."
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Chicago, IL
Next Page of Stories