Policy – Page 5

Elon Musk wants to be “AGI dictator,” OpenAI tells court

agi, AI, Artificial Intelligence, elon musk, openai, Policy, sam altman, Twitter, X, xAI / Mike M. / April 11, 2025

Elon Musk’s “relentless” attacks on OpenAI must cease, court filing says.

Yesterday, OpenAI counter-sued Elon Musk, alleging that Musk’s “sham” bid to buy OpenAI was intentionally timed to maximally disrupt and potentially even frighten off investments from honest bidders.

Slamming Musk for attempting to become an “AGI dictator,” OpenAI said that if Musk’s allegedly “relentless” yearslong campaign of “harassment” isn’t stopped, Musk could end up taking over OpenAI and tanking its revenue the same way he did with Twitter.

In its filing, OpenAI argued that Musk and the other investors who joined his bid completely fabricated the $97.375 billion offer. It was allegedly not based on OpenAI’s projections or historical performance, like Musk claimed, but instead appeared to be “a comedic reference to Musk’s favorite sci-fi” novel, Iain Banks’ Look to Windward. Musk and others also provided “no evidence of financing to pay the nearly $100 billion purchase price,” OpenAI said.

And perhaps most damning, one of Musk’s backers, Ron Baron, appeared “flustered” when asked about the deal on CNBC, OpenAI alleged. On air, Baron admitted that he didn’t follow the deal closely and that “the point of the bid, as pitched to him (plainly by Musk) was not to buy OpenAI’s assets, but instead to obtain ‘discovery’ and get ‘behind the wall’ at OpenAI,” the AI company’s court filing alleged.

Likely poisoning potential deals most, OpenAI suggested, was the idea that Musk might take over OpenAI and damage its revenue like he did with Twitter. Just the specter of that could repel talent, OpenAI feared, since “the prospect of a Musk takeover means chaos and arbitrary employment action.”

And “still worse, the threat of a Musk takeover is a threat to the very mission of building beneficial AGI,” since xAI is allegedly “the worst offender” in terms of “inadequate safety measures,” according to one study, and X’s chatbot, Grok, has “become a leading spreader of misinformation and inflammatory political rhetoric,” OpenAI said. Even xAI representatives had to admit that users discovering that Grok consistently responds that “President Donald Trump and Musk deserve the death penalty” was a “really terrible and bad failure,” OpenAI’s filing said.

Despite Musk appearing to only be “pretending” to be interested in purchasing OpenAI—and OpenAI ultimately rejecting the offer—the company still had to cover the costs of reviewing the bid. And beyond bearing costs and confronting an artificially raised floor on the company’s valuation supposedly frightening off investors, “a more serious toll” of “Musk’s most recent ploy” would be OpenAI lacking resources to fulfill its mission to benefit humanity with AI “on terms uncorrupted by unlawful harassment and interference,” OpenAI said.

OpenAI has demanded a jury trial and is seeking an injunction to stop Musk’s alleged unfair business practices—which they claimed are designed to impair competition in the nascent AI field “for the sole benefit of Musk’s xAI” and “at the expense of the public interest.”

“The risk of future, irreparable harm from Musk’s unlawful conduct is acute, and the risk that that conduct continues is high,” OpenAI alleged. “With every month that has passed, Musk has intensified and expanded the fronts of his campaign against OpenAI, and has proven himself willing to take ever more dramatic steps to seek a competitive advantage for xAI and to harm [OpenAI CEO Sam] Altman, whom, in the words of the president of the United States, Musk ‘hates.'”

OpenAI also wants Musk to cover the costs it incurred from entertaining the supposedly fake bid, as well as pay punitive damages to be determined at trial for allegedly engaging “in wrongful conduct with malice, oppression, and fraud.”

OpenAI’s filing also largely denies Musk’s claims that OpenAI abandoned its mission and made a fool out of early investors like Musk by currently seeking to restructure its core business into a for-profit benefit corporation (which removes control by its nonprofit board).

“You can’t sue your way to AGI,” an OpenAI blog said.

In response to OpenAI’s filing, Musk’s lawyer, Marc Toberoff, provided a statement to Ars.

“Had OpenAI’s Board genuinely considered the bid, as they were obligated to do, they would have seen just how serious it was,” Toberoff said. “It’s telling that having to pay fair market value for OpenAI’s assets allegedly ‘interferes’ with their business plans. It’s apparent they prefer to negotiate with themselves on both sides of the table than engage in a bona fide transaction in the best interests of the charity and the public interest.”

Musk’s attempt to become an “AGI dictator”

According to OpenAI’s filing, “Musk has tried every tool available to harm OpenAI” ever since OpenAI refused to allow Musk to become an “AGI dictator” and fully control OpenAI by absorbing it into Tesla in 2018.

Musk allegedly “demanded sole control of the new for-profit, at least in the short term: He would be CEO, own a majority equity stake, and control a majority of the board,” OpenAI said. “He would—in his own words—’unequivocally have initial control of the company.'”

At the time, OpenAI rejected Musk’s offer, viewing it as in conflict with its mission to avoid corporate control and telling Musk:

“You stated that you don’t want to control the final AGI, but during this negotiation, you’ve shown to us that absolute control is extremely important to you. … The goal of OpenAI is to make the future good and to avoid an AGI dictatorship. … So it is a bad idea to create a structure where you could become a dictator if you chose to, especially given that we can create some other structure that avoids this possibility.”

This news did not sit well with Musk, OpenAI said.

“Musk was incensed,” OpenAI told the court. “If he could not control the contemplated for-profit entity, he would not participate in it.”

Back then, Musk departed from OpenAI somewhat “amicably,” OpenAI said, although Musk insisted it was “obvious” that OpenAI would fail without him. However, after OpenAI instead became a global AI leader, Musk quietly founded xAI, OpenAI alleged, failing to publicly announce his new company while deceptively seeking a “moratorium” on AI development, apparently to slow down rivals so that xAI could catch up.

OpenAI also alleges that this is when Musk began intensifying his attacks on OpenAI while attempting to poach its top talent and demanding access to OpenAI’s confidential, sensitive information as a former donor and director—”without ever disclosing he was building a competitor in secret.”

And the attacks have only grown more intense since then, said OpenAI, claiming that Musk planted stories in the media, wielded his influence on X, requested government probes into OpenAI, and filed multiple legal claims, including seeking an injunction to halt OpenAI’s business.

“Most explosively,” OpenAI alleged that Musk pushed attorneys general of California and Delaware “to force OpenAI, Inc., without legal basis, to auction off its assets for the benefit of Musk and his associates.”

Meanwhile, OpenAI noted, Musk has folded his social media platform X into xAI, announcing its valuation was at $80 billion and gaining “a major competitive advantage” by getting “unprecedented direct access to all the user data flowing through” X. Further, Musk intends to expand his “Colossus,” which is “believed to be the world’s largest supercomputer,” “tenfold.” That could help Musk “leap ahead” of OpenAI, suggesting Musk has motive to delay OpenAI’s growth while he pursues that goal.

That’s why Musk “set in motion a campaign of harassment, interference, and misinformation designed to take down OpenAI and clear the field for himself,” OpenAI alleged.

Even while counter-suing, OpenAI appears careful not to poke the bear too hard. In the court filing and on X, OpenAI praised Musk’s leadership skills and the potential for xAI to dominate the AI industry, partly due to its unique access to X data. But ultimately, OpenAI seems to be happy to be operating independently of Musk now, asking the court to agree that “Elon’s never been about the mission” of benefiting humanity with AI, “he’s always had his own agenda.”

“Elon is undoubtedly one of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time,” OpenAI said on X. “But these antics are just history on repeat—Elon being all about Elon.”

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Elon Musk wants to be “AGI dictator,” OpenAI tells court Read More »

Take It Down Act nears passage; critics warn Trump could use it against enemies

AI, Deepfakes, Policy, take it down act / Rejus Almole / April 10, 2025

Anti-deepfake bill raises concerns about censorship and breaking encryption.

The helicopter with outgoing US President Joe Biden and first lady Dr. Jill Biden departs from the East Front of the United States Capitol after the inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20, 2025 in Washington, DC. Credit: Getty Images

An anti-deepfake bill is on the verge of becoming US law despite concerns from civil liberties groups that it could be used by President Trump and others to censor speech that has nothing to do with the intent of the bill.

The bill is called the Tools to Address Known Exploitation by Immobilizing Technological Deepfakes On Websites and Networks Act, or Take It Down Act. The Senate version co-sponsored by Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) was approved in the Senate by unanimous consent in February and is nearing passage in the House. The House Committee on Energy and Commerce approved the bill in a 49-1 vote yesterday, sending it to the House floor.

The bill pertains to “nonconsensual intimate visual depictions,” including both authentic photos shared without consent and forgeries produced by artificial intelligence or other technological means. Publishing intimate images of adults without consent could be punished by a fine and up to two years of prison. Publishing intimate images of minors under 18 could be punished with a fine or up to three years in prison.

Online platforms would have 48 hours to remove such images after “receiving a valid removal request from an identifiable individual (or an authorized person acting on behalf of such individual).”

“No man, woman, or child should be subjected to the spread of explicit AI images meant to target and harass innocent victims,” House Commerce Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) said in a press release. Guthrie’s press release included quotes supporting the bill from first lady Melania Trump, two teen girls who were victimized with deepfake nudes, and the mother of a boy whose death led to an investigation into a possible sextortion scheme.

Free speech concerns

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has been speaking out against the bill, saying “it could be easily manipulated to take down lawful content that powerful people simply don’t like.” The EFF pointed to Trump’s comments in an address to a joint session of Congress last month, in which he suggested he would use the bill for his own ends.

“Once it passes the House, I look forward to signing that bill into law. And I’m going to use that bill for myself too if you don’t mind, because nobody gets treated worse than I do online, nobody,” Trump said, drawing laughs from the crowd at Congress.

The EFF said, “Congress should believe Trump when he says he would use the Take It Down Act simply because he’s ‘treated badly,’ despite the fact that this is not the intention of the bill. There is nothing in the law, as written, to stop anyone—especially those with significant resources—from misusing the notice-and-takedown system to remove speech that criticizes them or that they disagree with.”

Free speech concerns were raised in a February letter to lawmakers sent by the Center for Democracy & Technology, the Authors Guild, Demand Progress Action, the EFF, Fight for the Future, the Freedom of the Press Foundation, New America’s Open Technology Institute, Public Knowledge, and TechFreedom.

The bill’s notice and takedown system “would result in the removal of not just nonconsensual intimate imagery but also speech that is neither illegal nor actually NDII [nonconsensual distribution of intimate imagery]… While the criminal provisions of the bill include appropriate exceptions for consensual commercial pornography and matters of public concern, those exceptions are not included in the bill’s takedown system,” the letter said.

The letter also said the bill could incentivize online platforms to use “content filtering that would break encryption.” The bill “excludes email and other services that do not primarily consist of user-generated content from the NTD [notice and takedown] system,” but “direct messaging services, cloud storage systems, and other similar services for private communication and storage, however, could be required to comply with the NTD,” the letter said.

The bill “contains serious threats to private messaging and free speech online—including requirements that would force companies to abandon end-to-end encryption so they can read and moderate your DMs,” Public Knowledge said today.

Democratic amendments voted down

Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) cast the only vote against the bill in yesterday’s House Commerce Committee hearing. But there were also several party-line votes against amendments submitted by Democrats.

Democrats raised concerns both about the bill not being enforced strictly enough and that bad actors could abuse the takedown process. The first concern is related to Trump firing both Democratic members of the Federal Trade Commission.

Rep. Kim Schrier (D-Wash.) called the Take It Down Act an “excellent law” but said, “right now it’s feeling like empty words because my Republican colleagues just stood by while the administration fired FTC commissioners, the exact people who enforce this law… it feels almost like my Republican colleagues are just giving a wink and a nod to the predators out there who are waiting to exploit kids and other innocent victims.”

Rep. Darren Soto (D-Fla.) offered an amendment to delay the bill’s effective date until the Democratic commissioners are restored to their positions. Ranking Member Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.) said that with a shorthanded FTC, “there’s going to be no enforcement of the Take It Down Act. There will be no enforcement of anything related to kids’ privacy.”

Rep. John James (R-Mich.) called the amendment a “thinly veiled delay tactic” and “nothing less than an attempt to derail this very important bill.” The amendment was defeated in a 28-22 vote.

Democrats support bill despite losing amendment votes

Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) said she strongly supports the bill but offered an amendment that she said would tighten up the text and close loopholes. She said her amendment “ensures constitutionally protected speech is preserved by incorporating essential provisions for consensual content and matters of public concern. My goal is to protect survivors of abuse, not suppress lawful expression or shield misconduct from public accountability.”

Dingell’s amendment was also defeated in a 28-22 vote.

Pallone pitched an amendment that he said would “prevent bad actors from falsely claiming to be authorized from making takedown requests on behalf of someone else.” He called it a “common sense guardrail to protect against weaponization of this bill to take down images that are published with the consent of the subject matter of the images.” The amendment was rejected in a voice vote.

The bill was backed by RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network), which praised the committee vote in a statement yesterday. “We’ve worked with fierce determination for the past year to bring Take It Down forward because we know—and survivors know—that AI-assisted sexual abuse is sexual abuse and real harm is being done; real pain is caused,” said Stefan Turkheimer, RAINN’s VP of public policy.

Cruz touted support for the bill from over 120 organizations and companies. The list includes groups like NCMEC (National Center for Missing & Exploited Children) and the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), along with various types of advocacy groups and tech companies Microsoft, Google, Meta, IBM, Amazon, and X Corp.

“As bad actors continue to exploit new technologies like generative artificial intelligence, the Take It Down Act is crucial for ending the spread of exploitative sexual material online, holding Big Tech accountable, and empowering victims of revenge and deepfake pornography,” Cruz said yesterday.

Jon is a Senior IT Reporter for Ars Technica. He covers the telecom industry, Federal Communications Commission rulemakings, broadband consumer affairs, court cases, and government regulation of the tech industry.

Take It Down Act nears passage; critics warn Trump could use it against enemies Read More »

Trump boosts China tariffs to 125%, pauses tariff hikes on other countries

china tariffs, consumer technology, Donald Trump, Policy, tariffs, us-china trade war / Rejus Almole / April 10, 2025

On Wednesday, Donald Trump, once again, took to Truth Social to abruptly shift US trade policy, announcing a 90-day pause “substantially” lowering reciprocal tariffs against all countries except China to 10 percent.

Because China retaliated—raising tariffs on US imports to 84 percent on Wednesday—Trump increased tariffs on China imports to 125 percent “effective immediately.” That likely will not be received well by China, which advised the Trump administration to cancel all China tariffs Wednesday, NPR reported.

“The US’s practice of escalating tariffs on China is a mistake on top of a mistake,” the Chinese finance ministry said, calling for Trump to “properly resolve differences with China through equal dialogue on the basis of mutual respect.”

For tech companies, trying to keep up with Trump’s social media posts regarding tariffs has been a struggle, as markets react within minutes. It’s not always clear what Trump’s posts mean or how the math will add up, but after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent clarified Trump’s recent post, the stock market surged, CNBC reported, after slumping for days.

But even though the stock market may be, for now, recovering, tech companies remain stuck swimming in uncertainty. Ed Brzytwa, vice president of international trade for the Consumer Technology Association (CTA)—which represents the $505 billion US consumer technology industry—told Ars that for many CTA members, including small businesses and startups, “the damage has been done.”

“Our small business and startup members were uniquely exposed to these reciprocal tariffs and the whipsaw effect,” Brzytwa told Ars. “There’s collateral damage to that.”

In a statement, CTA CEO Gary Shapiro suggested that the pause was “a victory for American consumers,” but ultimately the CTA wants Trump to “fully revoke” the tariffs.

“While this is great news, we are hearing directly from our members that the ongoing additional 10 percent universal baseline tariffs and this continued uncertainty, are already hurting American small businesses,” Shapiro said. “CTA urges President Trump to focus his efforts on what he does best, dealmaking. Now is the time to reposition the United States with our allies as a reliable trading partner while growing the American and global economy.”

Trump boosts China tariffs to 125%, pauses tariff hikes on other countries Read More »

Twitch makes deal to escape Elon Musk suit alleging X ad boycott conspiracy

elon musk, online advertising, Policy, twitch, Twitter, twitter ad boycott, X / Mike M. / April 9, 2025

Instead, it appears that X decided to sue Twitch after discovering that Twitch was among advertisers who directly referenced the WFA’s brand safety guidelines in its own community guidelines and terms of service. X likely saw this as evidence that Twitch was allegedly conspiring with the WFA to restrict then-Twitter’s ad revenue, since X alleged that Twitch reduced ad purchases to “only a de minimis amount outside the United States, after November 2022,” X’s complaint said.

“The Advertiser Defendants and other GARM-member advertisers acted in parallel to discontinue their purchases of advertising from Twitter, in a marked departure from their prior pattern of purchases,” X’s complaint said.

Now, it seems that X has agreed to drop Twitch from the suit, perhaps partly because the complaint X had about Twitch adhering to WFA brand safety standards is defused since the WFA disbanded the ad industry arm that set those standards.

Unilever struck a similar deal to wriggle out of the litigation, Reuters noted, and remained similarly quiet on the terms, only saying that the brand remained “committed to meeting our responsibility standards to ensure the safety and performance of our brands on the platform.” But other advertisers, including Colgate, CVS, LEGO, Mars, Pinterest, Shell, and Tyson Foods, so far have not.

For Twitch, its deal seems to clearly take a target off its back at a time when some advertisers are reportedly returning to X to stay out of Musk’s crosshairs. Getting out now could spare substantial costs as the lawsuit drags on, even though X CEO Linda Yaccarino declared the ad boycott was over in January. X is still $12 billion in debt, X claimed, after Musk’s xAI bought X last month. External data in January seemed to suggest many big brands were still hesitant to return to the platform, despite Musk’s apparent legal strong-arming and political influence in the Trump administration.

Ars could not immediately reach Twitch or X for comment. But the court docket showed that Twitch was up against a deadline to respond to the lawsuit by mid-May, which likely increased pressure to reach an agreement before Twitch was forced to invest in raising a defense.

Twitch makes deal to escape Elon Musk suit alleging X ad boycott conspiracy Read More »

Victory for DOGE as appeals court reinstates access to personal data

doge, Policy / Tim Belzer / April 9, 2025

A US appeals court ruled yesterday that DOGE can access personal data held by the US Department of Education and Office of Personnel Management (OPM), overturning an order issued by a lower-court judge.

The US government has “met its burden of a strong showing that it is likely to succeed on the merits of their appeal,” said yesterday’s ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. In a 2-1 decision, a panel of judges granted the Trump administration’s motion to stay the lower-court ruling pending appeal.

“The Supreme Court has told us that, unlike a private party, the government suffers an irreparable harm when it cannot carry out the orders of its elected representatives… Judicial management of agency operations offends the Executive Branch’s exclusive authority to enforce federal law,” wrote Court of Appeals Judge Steven Agee, a George W. Bush appointee.

Agee was joined by Judge Julius Richardson, a Trump appointee, in voting to grant the motion to stay pending appeal. Judge Robert King, a Clinton appointee, voted to deny the motion.

Judge “strongly” dissents

In a separate 8-7 vote, the full court denied King’s request for an en banc hearing. King’s dissent said:

Given the exceptional importance of this matter, I sought initial en banc consideration of the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal of the district court’s award of preliminary injunctive relief—an injunction that bars the defendant federal agencies and officials from disclosing to affiliates of the President’s new Department of Government Efficiency, or “DOGE,” highly sensitive personal information belonging to millions of Americans. Regrettably, my request for initial hearing en banc has been denied on an 8-7 vote, and the panel majority has granted the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal on a 2-1 vote. I strongly dissent from both decisions.

At stake is some of the most sensitive personal information imaginable—including Social Security numbers, income and assets, federal tax records, disciplinary and other personnel actions, physical and mental health histories, driver’s license information, bank account numbers, and demographic and family details. This information was entrusted to the government, which for many decades had a record of largely adhering to the Privacy Act of 1974 and keeping the information safe. And then suddenly, the defendants began disclosing the information to DOGE affiliates without substantiating that they have any need to access such highly sensitive materials.

Yesterday’s decision overturned a ruling by US District Judge Deborah Boardman in the District of Maryland. Plaintiffs include the American Federation of Teachers; the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers; the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association; the National Federation of Federal Employees; and the International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers. There are also six individual plaintiffs who are military veterans.

Victory for DOGE as appeals court reinstates access to personal data Read More »

Trump gives China one day to end retaliations or face extra 50% tariffs

china tariffs, consumer technology, Donald Trump, Policy, trump tariffs, us-china trade war / Kris Guyer / April 8, 2025

China expects to outlast US in trade war, alarming Big Tech.

Tech companies’ worst nightmare ahead of Donald Trump’s election has already come true, as the US and China are now fully engaged in a tit-for-tat trade war, where China claims it expects to be better positioned to withstand US blows long-term.

Trump has claimed that Americans must take their “medicine,” bearing any pains from tariffs while waiting for supposed long-term gains from potentially pressuring China—and every other country, including islands of penguins—into a more favorable trade deal. On Monday, tech companies across the US likely winced when Trump threatened to heap “additional” 50 percent tariffs on China, after China announced retaliatory 34 percent tariffs on US imports and restricted US access to rare earth metals.

Posting on Truth Social, Trump gave China one day to withdraw tariffs to avoid higher US tariffs.

As of this writing, the trade rivals remain in a stand-off, with US tech companies taking hits in the form of higher costs and supply chain disruptions from both sides.

Trump is apparently hoping that his threat will send China cowering before their retaliatory tariffs kick in April 10, while China appears to feel that it has little reason to back down. According to CNN, “a flurry of state media coverage and government statements” flooded Chinese news sites over the weekend, reassuring Chinese citizens and businesses that “US tariffs will have an impact (on China), but ‘the sky won’t fall.'”

“Since the US initiated the (first) trade war in 2017—no matter how the US fights or presses—we have continued to develop and progress, demonstrating resilience—’the more pressure we get, the stronger we become,'” a Sunday story in the “Chinese Communist Party’s mouthpiece People’s Daily read,” CNN reported.

For China, the bet seems to be that by imposing tariffs broadly, the US will drive other countries to deepen their investments in China. If the US loses too much business, while China potentially gains, then China could potentially emerge as the global leader, possibly thwarting Trump’s efforts to use tariffs as a weapon driving investment into the US.

Trump has no plans to pause tariffs

Currently, duties on all Chinese imports coming into the US are over 54 percent, CNN reported. And Trump’s threat of additional tariffs, while unclear precisely how much it would move the needle, would certainly push that figure above the 60 percent threshold that had US tech companies scrambling last year to warn of potentially dire impacts to the US economy.

At that time, the Consumer Technology Association (CTA) warned that laptop prices could nearly double, game console prices could rise by 40 percent, and smartphone prices by 26 percent. Now, the CTA has joined those warning that Trump’s tariffs could not only spark price hikes but also potentially cause a recession.

“These tariffs will raise consumer prices and will force our trade partners to retaliate,” Gary Shapiro, CTA’s CEO and vice chair, wrote in a press statement. “Americans will become poorer because of these tariffs.”

Various reports following Trump’s tariffs announcement signal prices could soon match CTA’s forecast or go even higher. PC vendors told PCMag they’re already preparing for prices economists estimate could increase by 45 percent by this time the next year. And Apple products like iPhones, iPads, MacBooks, and AirPods could increase by 40 percent, a financial planning analyst told CNET. Meanwhile, the entire game industry is apparently bracing, as China is one of two countries where most console hardware is produced.

With stocks plummeting, Trump has refused to back down, seeming particularly unwilling to relent from his hard stance against China. He has branded rumors that he might pause tariffs “fake news,” even as his aggressive tariff regime has disrupted markets for the US and many allies, like Australia, Japan, South Korea, and India. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick even defended imposing tariffs on the islands of penguins by insisting that any path any country may take to dodge tariffs by diverting shipments must be cut off.

“The idea is that there are no countries left off,” Lutnick told CBS News.

According to Lutnick, Trump is “resetting global trade,” and controversial tariffs will remain in place for potentially weeks, while Trump hopes to push more companies to manufacture products in the US.

Americans “will feel real pain,” tech group warned

Back in February, economist and trade expert Mary Lovely warned in a New York Times op-ed that Trump’s push for an “arbitrary” trade policy might make investing in the US “less attractive” by creating too much instability. Imagine a tech company diverts manufacturing into the US, only to have its supply chain disrupted by arbitrary tariffs. They might “think twice” about building here, Lovely suggested, which could possibly push US allies to find other partners—perhaps even benefiting China, if commercial ties are deepened there instead of in the US.

Economists told Chinese media that countries hit by US tariffs are already looking to deepen ties with China, CNN reported. According to those experts, China is “ready to compete with the US in redefining the new global trade system” and cannot afford to “tolerate US bullying.”

In her op-ed, Lovely suggested that Congress could intervene to possibly disrupt Trump’s trade policy in pursuit of “a fairer, more resilient economy.”

Last week, Politico reported that some top Republicans are pushing to reassert Congress’ power over tariffs as the trade war escalates. They’ve introduced a bill that would force Trump to give Congress 48 hours’ notice before imposing tariffs and to get congressional approval 60 days before tariffs could kick in. That could help companies avoid experiencing whiplash but wouldn’t necessarily change the trade policy. And lawmakers may entertain the bill, since the CTA warned that Republicans may lose voters if they don’t intervene.

“Make no mistake: American consumers, families, and workers will feel real pain, and elected policymakers in Washington will be held accountable by voters,” Shapiro said.

However, “it’s highly unlikely this proposal will ever become law,” Politico noted, as the majority of Republicans who control both chambers appear unlikely to support it.

In the meantime, Trump’s use of tariffs as a weapon could stoke never-before-seen retaliations from China, the CTA’s VP of International Trade, Ed Brzytwa, told Ars last year. That could include retaliation outside the economic arena, Brzytwa said, if China runs out of ways to strike back to hurt the US’s bottomline.

Panicked by the trade war, many Americans are rushing to make big-ticket purchases before prices shift, Fortune reported, perhaps hurting future demand for tech companies’ products.

For tech companies like Apple—which promised to invest $500 billion in the US, likely to secure tariff exemptions—Trump’s trade war threatens long-term supply chain disruptions, spiked costs, and unhappy customers potentially suddenly unable to afford even their latest devices. (Elsewhere, Switch 2 fans were recently dismayed when tariffs delayed deliveries of their preorders.)

And it kind of goes without saying that Trump’s long-term plan to push investments and supply chains into the US needs more than weeks to fulfill. Even if all companies strove to quickly move manufacturing into the US and blocked all imports from China within the next decade, Lovely told Ars last year, “we would still have a lot of imports from China because Chinese value added is going to be embedded in things we import from Vietnam and Thailand and Indonesia and Mexico.”

Ultimately, the US may never be able to push China out of global markets, and even coming close would likely require coordination across several presidential terms, Lovely suggested.

“The tariffs can be effective in changing these direct imports, as we’ve seen, yeah, but they’re not going to really push China out of the global economy,” Lovely told Ars.

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Trump gives China one day to end retaliations or face extra 50% tariffs Read More »

Judge calls out OpenAI’s “straw man” argument in New York Times copyright suit

AI training, chatgpt, copyright, copyright act, DMCA, new york times, openai, Policy / Paul Patrick / April 5, 2025

“Taken as true, these facts give rise to a plausible inference that defendants at a minimum had reason to investigate and uncover end-user infringement,” Stein wrote.

To Stein, the fact that OpenAI maintains an “ongoing relationship” with users by providing outputs that respond to users’ prompts also supports contributory infringement claims, despite OpenAI’s argument that ChatGPT’s “substantial noninfringing uses” are exonerative.

OpenAI defeated some claims

For OpenAI, Stein’s ruling likely disappoints, although Stein did drop some of NYT’s claims.

Likely upsetting to news publishers, that included a “free-riding” claim that ChatGPT unfairly profits off time-sensitive “hot news” items, including the NYT’s Wirecutter posts. Stein explained that news publishers failed to plausibly allege non-attribution (which is key to a free-riding claim) because, for example, ChatGPT cites the NYT when sharing information from Wirecutter posts. Those claims are pre-empted by the Copyright Act anyway, Stein wrote, granting OpenAI’s motion to dismiss.

Stein also dismissed a claim from the NYT regarding alleged removal of copyright management information (CMI), which Stein said cannot be proven simply because ChatGPT reproduces excerpts of NYT articles without CMI.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) requires news publishers to show that ChatGPT’s outputs are “close to identical” to the original work, Stein said, and allowing publishers’ claims based on excerpts “would risk boundless DMCA liability”—including for any use of block quotes without CMI.

Asked for comment on the ruling, an OpenAI spokesperson declined to go into any specifics, instead repeating OpenAI’s long-held argument that AI training on copyrighted works is fair use. (Last month, OpenAI warned Donald Trump that the US would lose the AI race to China if courts ruled against that argument.)

“ChatGPT helps enhance human creativity, advance scientific discovery and medical research, and enable hundreds of millions of people to improve their daily lives,” OpenAI’s spokesperson said. “Our models empower innovation, and are trained on publicly available data and grounded in fair use.”

Judge calls out OpenAI’s “straw man” argument in New York Times copyright suit Read More »

EU may “make an example of X” by issuing $1 billion fine to Musk’s social network

Digital Services Act, elon musk x, Policy / Mike M. / April 5, 2025

European Union regulators are preparing major penalties against X, including a fine that could exceed $1 billion, according to a New York Times report yesterday.

The European Commission determined last year that Elon Musk’s social network violated the Digital Services Act. Regulators are now in the process of determining what punishment to impose.

“The penalties are set to include a fine and demands for product changes,” the NYT report said, attributing the information to “four people with knowledge of the plans.” The penalty is expected to be issued this summer and would be the first one under the new EU law.

“European authorities have been weighing how large a fine to issue X as they consider the risks of further antagonizing [President] Trump amid wider trans-Atlantic disputes over trade, tariffs and the war in Ukraine,” the NYT report said. “The fine could surpass $1 billion, one person said, as regulators seek to make an example of X to deter other companies from violating the law, the Digital Services Act.”

X’s global government affairs account criticized European regulators in a post last night. “If the reports that the European Commission is considering enforcement actions against X are accurate, it represents an unprecedented act of political censorship and an attack on free speech,” X said. “X has gone above and beyond to comply with the EU’s Digital Services Act, and we will use every option at our disposal to defend our business, keep our users safe, and protect freedom of speech in Europe.”

Penalty math could include Musk’s other firms

The Digital Services Act allows fines of up to 6 percent of a company’s total worldwide annual turnover. EU regulators suggested last year that they could calculate fines by including revenue from Musk’s other companies, including SpaceX. Yesterday’s NYT report says this method is still under consideration:

EU may “make an example of X” by issuing $1 billion fine to Musk’s social network Read More »

NJ teen wins fight to put nudify app users in prison, impose fines up to $30K

ai csam, ai deepfakes, Artificial Intelligence, nudify apps, Online Privacy, Policy / Rejus Almole / April 5, 2025

Here’s how one teen plans to fix schools failing kids affected by nudify apps.

When Francesca Mani was 14 years old, boys at her New Jersey high school used nudify apps to target her and other girls. At the time, adults did not seem to take the harassment seriously, telling her to move on after she demanded more severe consequences than just a single boy’s one or two-day suspension.

Mani refused to take adults’ advice, going over their heads to lawmakers who were more sensitive to her demands. And now, she’s won her fight to criminalize deepfakes. On Wednesday, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed a law that he said would help victims “take a stand against deceptive and dangerous deepfakes” by making it a crime to create or share fake AI nudes of minors or non-consenting adults—as well as deepfakes seeking to meddle with elections or damage any individuals’ or corporations’ reputations.

Under the law, victims targeted by nudify apps like Mani can sue bad actors, collecting up to $1,000 per harmful image created either knowingly or recklessly. New Jersey hopes these “more severe consequences” will deter kids and adults from creating harmful images, as well as emphasize to schools—whose lax response to fake nudes has been heavily criticized—that AI-generated nude images depicting minors are illegal and must be taken seriously and reported to police. It imposes a maximum fine of $30,000 on anyone creating or sharing deepfakes for malicious purposes, as well as possible punitive damages if a victim can prove that images were created in willful defiance of the law.

Ars could not reach Mani for comment, but she celebrated the win in the governor’s press release, saying, “This victory belongs to every woman and teenager told nothing could be done, that it was impossible, and to just move on. It’s proof that with the right support, we can create change together.”

On LinkedIn, her mother, Dorota Mani—who has been working with the governor’s office on a commission to protect kids from online harms—thanked lawmakers like Murphy and former New Jersey Assemblyman Herb Conaway, who sponsored the law, for “standing with us.”

“When used maliciously, deepfake technology can dismantle lives, distort reality, and exploit the most vulnerable among us,” Conaway said. “I’m proud to have sponsored this legislation when I was still in the Assembly, as it will help us keep pace with advancing technology. This is about drawing a clear line between innovation and harm. It’s time we take a firm stand to protect individuals from digital deception, ensuring that AI serves to empower our communities.”

Doing nothing is no longer an option for schools, teen says

Around the country, as cases like Mani’s continue to pop up, experts expect that shame prevents most victims from coming forward to flag abuses, suspecting that the problem is much more widespread than media reports suggest.

Encode Justice has a tracker monitoring reported cases involving minors, including allowing victims to anonymously report harms around the US. But the true extent of the harm currently remains unknown, as cops warn of a flood of AI child sex images obscuring investigations into real-world child abuse.

Confronting this shadowy threat to kids everywhere, Mani was named as one of TIME’s most influential people in AI last year due to her advocacy fighting deepfakes. She’s not only pressured lawmakers to take strong action to protect vulnerable people, but she’s also pushed for change at tech companies and in schools nationwide.

“When that happened to me and my classmates, we had zero protection whatsoever,” Mani told TIME, and neither did other girls around the world who had been targeted and reached out to thank her for fighting for them. “There were so many girls from different states, different countries. And we all had three things in common: the lack of AI school policies, the lack of laws, and the disregard of consent.”

Yiota Souras, chief legal officer at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, told CBS News last year that protecting teens started with laws that criminalize sharing fake nudes and provide civil remedies, just as New Jersey’s law does. That way, “schools would have protocols,” she said, and “investigators and law enforcement would have roadmaps on how to investigate” and “what charges to bring.”

Clarity is urgently needed in schools, advocates say. At Mani’s school, the boys who shared the photos had their names shielded and were pulled out of class individually to be interrogated, but victims like Mani had no privacy whatsoever. Their names were blared over the school’s loud system, as boys mocked their tears in the hallway. To this day, it’s unclear who exactly shared and possibly still has copies of the images, which experts say could haunt Mani throughout her life. And the school’s inadequate response was a major reason why Mani decided to take a stand, seemingly viewing the school as a vehicle furthering her harassment.

“I realized I should stop crying and be mad, because this is unacceptable,” Mani told CBS News.

Mani pushed for NJ’s new law and claimed the win, but she thinks that change must start at schools, where the harassment starts. In her school district, the “harassment, intimidation and bullying” policy was updated to incorporate AI harms, but she thinks schools should go even further. Working with Encode Justice, she is helping to push a plan to fix schools failing kids targeted by nudify apps.

“My goal is to protect women and children—and we first need to start with AI school policies, because this is where most of the targeting is happening,” Mani told TIME.

Encode Justice did not respond to Ars’ request to comment. But their plan noted a common pattern in schools throughout the US. Students learn about nudify apps through ads on social media—such as Instagram reportedly driving 90 percent of traffic to one such nudify app—where they can also usually find innocuous photos of classmates to screenshot. Within seconds, the apps can nudify the screenshotted images, which Mani told CBS News then spread “rapid fire” by text message and DMs, and often shared over school networks.

To end the abuse, schools need to be prepared, Encode Justice said, especially since “their initial response can sometimes exacerbate the situation.”

At Mani’s school, for example, leadership was criticized for announcing the victims’ names over the loudspeaker, which Encode Justice said never should have happened. Another misstep was at a California middle school, which delayed action for four months until parents went to police, Encode Justice said. In Texas, a school failed to stop images from spreading for eight months while a victim pleaded for help from administrators and police who failed to intervene. The longer the delays, the more victims will likely be targeted. In Pennsylvania, a single ninth grader targeted 46 girls before anyone stepped in.

Students deserve better, Mani feels, and Encode Justice’s plan recommends that all schools create action plans to stop failing students and respond promptly to stop image sharing.

That starts with updating policies to ban deepfake sexual imagery, then clearly communicating to students “the seriousness of the issue and the severity of the consequences.” Consequences should include identifying all perpetrators and issuing suspensions or expulsions on top of any legal consequences students face, Encode Justice suggested. They also recommend establishing “written procedures to discreetly inform relevant authorities about incidents and to support victims at the start of an investigation on deepfake sexual abuse.” And, critically, all teachers must be trained on these new policies.

“Doing nothing is no longer an option,” Mani said.

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

NJ teen wins fight to put nudify app users in prison, impose fines up to $30K Read More »

$critics-suspect-trump’s-weird-tariff-math-came-from-chatbots$

Critics suspect Trump’s weird tariff math came from chatbots

AI, chatgpt, Claude, Donald Trump, Gemini, Google, grok, Policy, tariffs / Paul Patrick / April 4, 2025

Rumors claim Trump consulted chatbots

On social media, rumors swirled that the Trump administration got these supposedly fake numbers from chatbots. On Bluesky, tech entrepreneur Amy Hoy joined others posting screenshots from ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Grok, each showing that the chatbots arrived at similar calculations as the Trump administration.

Some of the chatbots also warned against the oversimplified math in outputs. ChatGPT acknowledged that the easy method “ignores the intricate dynamics of international trade.” Gemini cautioned that it could only offer a “highly simplified conceptual approach” that ignored the “vast real-world complexities and consequences” of implementing such a trade strategy. And Claude specifically warned that “trade deficits alone don’t necessarily indicate unfair trade practices, and tariffs can have complex economic consequences, including increased prices and potential retaliation.” And even Grok warns that “imposing tariffs isn’t exactly ‘easy'” when prompted, calling it “a blunt tool: quick to swing, but the ripple effects (higher prices, pissed-off allies) can complicate things fast,” an Ars test showed, using a similar prompt as social media users generally asking, “how do you impose tariffs easily?”

The Verge plugged in phrasing explicitly used by the Trump administration—prompting chatbots to provide “an easy way for the US to calculate tariffs that should be imposed on other countries to balance bilateral trade deficits between the US and each of its trading partners, with the goal of driving bilateral trade deficits to zero”—and got the “same fundamental suggestion” as social media users reported.

Whether the Trump administration actually consulted chatbots while devising its global trade policy will likely remain a rumor. It’s possible that the chatbots’ training data simply aligned with the administration’s approach.

But with even chatbots warning that the strategy may not benefit the US, the pressure appears to be on Trump to prove that the reciprocal tariffs will lead to “better-paying American jobs making beautiful American-made cars, appliances, and other goods” and “address the injustices of global trade, re-shore manufacturing, and drive economic growth for the American people.” As his approval rating hits new lows, Trump continues to insist that “reciprocal tariffs are a big part of why Americans voted for President Trump.”

“Everyone knew he’d push for them once he got back in office; it’s exactly what he promised, and it’s a key reason he won the election,” the White House fact sheet said.

Critics suspect Trump’s weird tariff math came from chatbots Read More »

Vast pedophile network shut down in Europol’s largest CSAM operation

child porn, child sexual abuse materials, csam, dark web, europol, kidflix, Policy / Kris Guyer / April 3, 2025

Europol has shut down one of the largest dark web pedophile networks in the world, prompting dozens of arrests worldwide and threatening that more are to follow.

Launched in 2021, KidFlix allowed users to join for free to preview low-quality videos depicting child sex abuse materials (CSAM). To see higher-resolution videos, users had to earn credits by sending cryptocurrency payments, uploading CSAM, or “verifying video titles and descriptions and assigning categories to videos.”

Europol seized the servers and found a total of 91,000 unique videos depicting child abuse, “many of which were previously unknown to law enforcement,” the agency said in a press release.

KidFlix going dark was the result of the biggest child sexual exploitation operation in Europol’s history, the agency said. Operation Stream, as it was dubbed, was supported by law enforcement in more than 35 countries, including the United States.

Nearly 1,400 suspected consumers of CSAM have been identified among 1.8 million global KidFlix users, and 79 have been arrested so far. According to Europol, 39 child victims were protected as a result of the sting, and more than 3,000 devices were seized.

Police identified suspects through payment data after seizing the server. Despite cryptocurrencies offering a veneer of anonymity, cops were apparently able to use sophisticated methods to trace transactions to bank details. And in some cases cops defeated user attempts to hide their identities—such as a man who made payments using his mother’s name in Spain, a local news outlet, Todo Alicante, reported. It likely helped that most suspects were already known offenders, Europol noted.

Vast pedophile network shut down in Europol’s largest CSAM operation Read More »

Not just Signal: Michael Waltz reportedly used Gmail for government messages

michael waltz, Policy, trump administration / Tim Belzer / April 3, 2025

National Security Advisor Michael Waltz and a senior aide used personal Gmail accounts for government communications, according to a Washington Post report published yesterday.

Waltz has been at the center of controversy for weeks because he inadvertently invited The Atlantic Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg to a Signal chat in which top Trump administration officials discussed a plan for bombing Houthi targets in Yemen. Yesterday’s report of Gmail use and another recent report on additional Signal chats raise more questions about the security of sensitive government communications in the Trump administration.

A senior Waltz aide used Gmail “for highly technical conversations with colleagues at other government agencies involving sensitive military positions and powerful weapons systems relating to an ongoing conflict,” The Washington Post wrote.

The Post said it reviewed the emails. “While the NSC official used his Gmail account, his interagency colleagues used government-issued accounts, headers from the email correspondence show,” the report said.

Waltz himself “had less sensitive, but potentially exploitable information sent to his Gmail, such as his schedule and other work documents, said officials, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe what they viewed as problematic handling of information,” the report said. “The officials said Waltz would sometimes copy and paste from his schedule into Signal to coordinate meetings and discussions.”

Separately, The Wall Street Journal described additional Signal chats in a report on Sunday about Waltz losing support inside the White House. “Two US officials also said that Waltz has created and hosted multiple other sensitive national-security conversations on Signal with cabinet members, including separate threads on how to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine as well as military operations. They declined to address if any classified information was posted in those chats,” the WSJ wrote.

We contacted the White House about the reported use of Gmail and Signal today and will update this article if we get a response.

Not just Signal: Michael Waltz reportedly used Gmail for government messages Read More »