Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Kids game Roblox faces legal backlash over allegations of child sex predation

Published

on

Kids game Roblox faces legal backlash over allegations of child sex predation

Happy Tuesday. Here’s your Tuesday Tech Drop, my collection of the past week’s top stories from the intersection of technology and politics.

Roblox faces a reckoning

Roblox, the popular online game for children, is under fire over allegations that it has failed to protect kids from sexual predators. The prevalence of pedophiles using Roblox has been under scrutiny for years now, as Bloomberg reported last year. But the issue has gained traction over the past couple weeks after a decision by Roblox executives to ban a user who claimed to have exposed predators on the platform. A statement from the company defended the ban, saying that “while seemingly well-intentioned, the vigilantes we’ve banned have taken actions that are both unacceptable and create an unsafe environment for users.”

That set off a torrent of backlash, including a petition circulated by U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., to urge Roblox to “do more to protect children, provide more support to parents, and strengthen law enforcement protocols that help bring predators to justice.” Meanwhile, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill filed a lawsuit against Roblox last week alleging the platform was intentionally or recklessly designed without effective age verification protocols and has allowed child predation, a claim Roblox called “categorically untrue.” (Roblox’s age verification rules are posted here.)

The company is also facing multiple civil suits that allege it has enabled child predation. A company spokesperson told Wired this week“We are deeply troubled by any incident that endangers our users, and safety is a top priority,” and, “While no system is perfect, Roblox has implemented rigorous safeguards, including restrictions on sharing personal information, links, and user-to-user image sharing, and prohibiting sexual conversations.”

Read more on the Louisiana lawsuit on NBC News here.

Man chases Meta’s flirty AI bot

A Reuters report uncovered the story of a man with cognitive issues who died while on a quest to “meet” a chatbot on Facebook Messenger after it reportedly flirted with him and convinced him it was a real person. (Meta didn’t comment to Reuters regarding the man’s death or “address questions about why it allows chatbots to tell users they are real people.”)

The story is a cautionary one about the spread of such chatbots across social media and what can happen when the humans who interact with them lose their grasp on reality.

Read more at Reuters here.

Zuck unnerves the neighborhood

A New York Times report highlighted how Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has unnerved neighbors in the Crescent Park neighborhood of Palo Alto, California. The tech mogul has purchased at least 11 properties as part of a massive compound for himself and his family, while subjecting nearby residents to surveillance and frequent construction that some neighbors say has disrupted their lives. (A spokesman for Zuckerberg and his wife said that “the couple tried hard to do right by their neighbors,” according to the Times.)

Read the New York Times report here.

Newsmax to pay for propaganda push

Far-right media platform Newsmax has reached a settlement with election technology company Dominion Voting Systems, agreeing to pay $67 million to end a defamation suit over lies the network repeatedly aired after the 2020 presidential election in which it falsely implicated Dominion in a vote-rigging scheme against Donald Trump. A Newsmax spokesperson told NBC News that the company “was not required to apologize or issue a retraction as part of the settlement.”

Read more about the settlement on MSNBC here.

Trump Admin launches ‘after’

The Trump administration last week announced a program it’s calling USAi, to allow employees at federal agencies to experiment with generative artificial intelligence tools provided by OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta and Google.

The announcement has been met with concern by some tech experts who fear what these tools could be trained to do. “These tools are marketed as making employees’ jobs easier, but agentic AI is largely unregulated and untested in making important decisions like loan approval, medicare enrollment, or social security payments,” J.B. Branch, a Big Tech accountability advocate at activist group Public Citizen, said in a statement. “The systems may have biased responses tied to historical data, which is troubling given the Trump administration’s ‘Woke AI’ executive order aiming to keep issues of diversity and equity out of AI.”

Read more at Politico here.

N.Y. attorney general sues Zelle parent company

New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a lawsuit last week against Early Warning Services, the parent company of payment platform Zelle, alleging the company failed to protect users of the platform from fraud by neglecting to develop critical security features. The state case comes after a similar suit filed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was quashed by the Trump administration. A spokesperson for Zelle called the suit “a political stunt to generate press, not progress.”

Read more at CNBC here.

See no evil

A report from Mother Jones found that several police departments across the nation that are using AI to convert police bodycam footage into police reports have deactivated safeguards meant to prevent digital “hallucinations” and ensure human oversight.

Read more at Mother Jones here.

Microsoft probes Israeli spying allegations

Microsoft launched an investigation last week into allegations that an Israeli military surveillance group, called Unit 8200, used the company’s technology to conduct a massive spying campaign on Palestinians. The probe follows a report from The Guardian alleging Israeli spies used Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform to store intercepted phone calls. Microsoft told the news outlet that the company “appreciates that the Guardian’s recent report raises additional and precise allegations that merit a full and urgent review.”

An Israeli military spokesperson told The Guardian that “its work with companies such as Microsoft is ‘conducted based on regulated and legally supervised agreements’ and the military ‘operates in accordance with international law.’”

Read more at The Guardian here.

Extremist influencers

A recent report from Wired exposed how Christian extremists — some armed and militant — are using Instagram to recruit followers by branding themselves as social media influencers.

Read the Wired report here.

Cybertruck sales still sliding

Tesla’s Cybertrucks have hit a slump in sales. A new CNBC video report sources the issue to several factors, including Tesla’s failure to deliver on key capabilities it had promised, the company having overpriced the vehicle, and numerous recalls due to defective parts.

Watch CNBC’s explainer on “Why Tesla Cybertrucks Aren’t Selling” below.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

‘I don’t care about that’: Trump moves the goal posts on Iran’s uranium stockpile

Published

on

‘I don’t care about that’: Trump moves the goal posts on Iran’s uranium stockpile

More than a month into the war in Iran, there’s still great uncertainty about why the United States launched this military offensive in the first place. There’s reason to believe, however, that the conflict has something to do with Iran’s nuclear program.

At an unrelated White House event on Tuesday, for example, Donald Trump said“I had one goal: They will have no nuclear weapon, and that goal has been attained.”

It was a curious comment, in part because by the president’s own assessmentIran didn’t have a nuclear weapon before he decided to launch the war, and in part because Secretary of State Marco Rubio this week presented the administration’s four major objectives in the conflict, none of which had anything to do with Iran’s nuclear program.

As for whether Trump’s newly manufactured “goal” has actually been “attained,” The New York Times reported“Unless something changes over the next two weeks — the target Mr. Trump set to begin withdrawing from the conflict — he will have left the Iranians with 970 pounds of highly enriched uranium, enough for 10 to a dozen bombs. The country will retain control over an even larger inventory of medium-enriched uranium that, with further enrichment, could be turned into bomb fuel, if the Iranians can rebuild that capacity after a month of steady bombing.”

The American president has acknowledged that these details are true, though he apparently no longer cares. Ahead of an Oval Office address to the nation about the war in Iran, the Republican spoke to Reuters about his perspective:

Of the enriched uranium, Trump said: ‘That’s so far ⁠underground, I ​don’t care about that.’

‘We’ll always be watching it by satellite,’ he added. He said Iran was ‘incapable’ of developing a weapon ​now.

The president’s comments definitely have a practical element: It’s been an open question for weeks as to whether Trump intends to try to seize Iran’s uranium stockpile, which would require ground troops and be profoundly dangerous for U.S. military service members.

If Trump told Reuters the truth and is prepared to let Iran keep the uranium it already has because he no longer “cares about that,” it would drastically reduce the likelihood of a ground invasion — one that would almost certainly cost lives.

But there’s another element to this worth keeping in mind as the process moves forward: Ever since the Obama administration struck the original nuclear agreement with Iran in 2015, Trump has insisted that it was wrong to allow the country to hold onto nuclear materials that might someday be used in a nuclear weapon.

A decade later, he’s suddenly indifferent to Iran’s uranium stockpile — which has only grown larger since Trump abandoned the Obama-era policy.

Trump’s goalposts, in other words, are on the move.

Indeed, if the American president’s comments reflect his true perspective (and with this guy, one never really knows), we’re due for a serious public conversation about the motives and objectives for the war. Because as things stand, before the war, Iran had a regime run by radical religious clerics and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard; the country had a significant uranium stockpile; and the Strait of Hormuz was open.

And now, Trump’s apparent vision for a successful offensive will include Iran with a regime run by radical religious clerics and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard; the country still holding a significant uranium stockpile; and the Strait of Hormuz will be open.

Mission accomplished, I guess?

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Mike Johnson caves to the Senate, paving the way for likely DHS shutdown deal

Published

on

Just days after labeling the Senate deal to end the record-breaking shutdown at the Department of Homeland Security a “crap sandwich,” Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., now appears ready to swallow it whole.

Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., announced Wednesday they will move forward with the two-track approach senators unanimously backed last Friday. They will pass a bill to fund most of DHS — with the exception of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and parts of Customs and Border Patrol — and then look to approve money for ICE and CBP in a separate reconciliation package.

“In following this two-track approach, the Republican Congress will fully reopen the Department, make sure all federal workers are paid, and specifically fund immigration enforcement and border security for the next three years so that those law-enforcement activities can continue uninhibited,” Johnson and Thune said in a joint statement.

The announcement amounts to a stunning reversal for Johnson, who was facing pressure from conservatives to oppose the Senate deal. Their objections centered on the lack of money for ICE, as well as the Senate’s failure to include new voter ID restrictions, championed by President Donald Trump, with the so-called SAVE America Act.

Instead, Johnson on Friday forced a House vote on an alternative measure to fund all of DHS for eight weeks. While it passed almost entirely along party linesthe stopgap measure stood no chance in the Senate, where Democrats have repeatedly rejected a similar proposal in recent weeks.

Lawmakers were back to square one.

But it turns out, all they needed was a little push from Trump.

Less than three hours before Johnson and Thune’s announcement, Trump urged Republicans — in a lengthy statement on Truth Social — to pass funding for ICE and border patrol through budget reconciliation. While that approach allows GOP lawmakers to bypass Democratic opposition, it requires near-unanimous GOP support.

Trump said he wants the legislation on his desk by June 1 — an ambitious timeline that dramatically increased pressure on Republicans.

“We are going to work as fast, and as focused, as possible to replenish funding for our Border and ICE Agents, and the Radical Left Democrats won’t be able to stop us,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “We will not allow them to hurt the families of these Great Patriots by defunding them. I am asking that the Bill be on my desk NO LATER than June 1st.”

With Johnson suddenly on board, lawmakers appear poised to end the DHS shutdown just as soon as the House can reconvene. It’s unclear exactly when that might happen. The House isn’t due back until April 14. But Johnson could always call lawmakers back sooner — or look to pass the Senate bill while both chambers are out on recess through a special process.

Because the House never technically sent its 60-day continuing resolution to the Senate, the House could just recede from its amendment of the Senate-passed bill and immediately send the legislation to the president.

Either way, barring another sudden shift from Trump or House leadership, the longest government shutdown in U.S. history may soon be over — and Democrats are already taking a victory lap.

“Throughout this fight, Senate Democrats never wavered,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. “We were clear from the start: fund critical security, protect Americans, and no blank check for reckless ICE and Border Patrol enforcement.”

“We were united, held the line, and refused to let Republican chaos win,” Schumer added.

Kevin Frey is a congressional reporter for MS NOW.

Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Former White House official: Trump’s Supreme Court attendance could be ‘perceived as intimidation’

Published

on

Former White House official: Trump’s Supreme Court attendance could be ‘perceived as intimidation’

President Donald Trump became the first sitting American president to attend oral arguments at the Supreme Court on Wednesday morning when he sat in the audience to hear his administration argue to limit birthright citizenship guarantees for the children of undocumented immigrants and temporary U.S. residents.

Before arguments began, Trump entered the courtroom wearing his usual red tie and sat in the front row of the public seating area. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Attorney General Pam Bondi were also in the room.

None of the justices acknowledged Trump’s presence while he was in the courtroom.

As the justices began to question U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer, who was arguing on behalf of the administration, Trump remained focused and wore a blank expression.

After Sauer finished his arguments, Trump remained in the courtroom for a few minutes. He got up and quietly left, flanked by Secret Service agents, shortly after Cecillia Wang began her arguments for the ACLU.

Chart: Carson Elm-Picard / MS NOW; Photos courtesy the Supreme Court of the United States

Trump’s presence at the court is significant. A sitting president of the United States has never attended oral arguments at the high court before, which is widely considered a sign of respect for the balance of power between the federal government and the judiciary.

Two senior White House officials who requested anonymity to speak about the president’s internal strategy told MS NOW that Trump wanted to listen to the oral argument because “it’s an important case.” The outcome of the case will have sweeping legal implications for Trump’s sprawling immigration enforcement agenda.

“Behind closed doors there’s a realization of the tremendous legal wall this is to climb,” a former White House official familiar with Trump’s thinking who spoke on the condition of anonymity told MS NOW.

“I’m not sure of the calculation from him to go today. It will be perceived as intimidation, and some justices won’t like that,” the former official said.

Trump has shown scorn for the justices for their ruling on his aggressive tariff policy. Earlier this year, Trump said the justices who ruled against the policy were an “an embarrassment to their families.” The president has railed against the justices, including the ones he appointed in his first term, for striking down his sprawling trade agenda.

Trump has pivoted between slamming the justices on social media for the February tariff ruling and calling on them to uphold his birthright citizenship order.

Domicile, the legal term for the place where an individual maintains a permanent home, was at the heart of Sauer’s argument Wednesday. Sauer argued that parents of children born in the U.S. must be domiciled in the United States and demonstrate allegiance to the country in order for their children to be granted citizenship.

Trump left the court after his administration’s argument faced pushback from the court’s key conservative justices, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch, as well as the rest of the justices on the bench.

As Trump’s motorcade rolled back to the White House, droves of tourists watched and responded with positive and negative gestures. National Guard members were in the crowds, as well.

The case, Trump v. Barbara, centers on the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, which has long been understood to confer citizenship to almost all individuals born on U.S. soil: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

Shortly after returning to the White House last year, Trump signed an executive order seeking to end that guarantee. The justices will weigh whether the executive order complies with the federal statute that codified that clause.

Trump did not stay to hear more than the first few minutes of the dissenting arguments. But after returning to the White House, he posted a response on his Truth Social platform. “We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow “Birthright” Citizenship!”

Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.

Jake Traylor is a White House correspondent for MS NOW.

Fallon Gallagher is a legal affairs reporter for MS NOW.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending