Search the Community

Summary A US state government has proposed a law requiring retroactively that generative AI models have their training data sources disclosed. Quotes My thoughts This is nothing but good IMO. If we start requiring AI models to disclose what data they have ingested, we will have better quality models that can be checked against biases, and highlight which models are likely to result in output being lawsuit bait from purposely scraping/ripping commercial websites of non-free UGC material and other UGC sources. What I predict, is that if it does become law, commercial use of AI (eg ChatGPT) might slow down because the need to disclose will reveal which models have ingested copyrighted material should the output of an AI be claimed to be plagiarized of a copyrighted work. Can't use the defense of "well ChatGPT created it", when ChatGPT might have actually used the copyrighted work in it's training. Visual and Musical Artists will have a field day should it be revealed that their works were used to train a model and are being commercially used to replicate their styles. What I don't see happening is any actual abandoning or shutdown of commercial generative AI use. They'll just change their TOS to put the liability on the end user for checking. *UGC = User Generated Content, where the website is merely the publisher, not the owner. Think DeviantArt and Reddit. Sources https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/04/us-lawmaker-proposes-a-public-database-of-all-ai-training-material/ https://schiff.house.gov/news/press-releases/rep-schiff-introduces-groundbreaking-bill-to-create-ai-transparency-between-creators-and-companies https://schiff.house.gov/imo/media/doc/the_generative_ai_copyright_disclosure_act.pdf

Summary The Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act called for action against TikTok and their parent company ByteDance. If this bill passes it means that ByteDance will be forced to let go of their beloved TikTok or just remove themselves from the US market. Quotes My thoughts I will not be sad if TikTok is removed from the US. I am not sure what specifically the CCP are doing with the data they are presumably taking from the US. Honestly though tiktok is one of the most toxic platforms there is but I think that there is not any better alternative. But at least china won't have my data anymore? ***Update*** The Bill has passed through the house even though there are concerns about it being unconstitutional. You can read more about it here: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/03/bill-that-could-ban-tiktok-passes-in-house-despite-constitutional-concerns/ Source https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/03/house-committee-votes-50-0-to-force-tiktok-to-divest-from-chinese-owner/

Hello, I want to ask the opinion of you guys here about the legality of my current job. At first, when I applied for this job, the job description was only ‘Computer Operator Needed’, but after I got accepted, I immediately felt that this was not a proper job because: I had to log in to a Facebook account using a session cookie that I have no idea where it came from (and this method is eerily similar to how LTT YouTube channel got hacked recently) I had to spam share links using a special software repeat number 1 Screen capture of the work I do: https://youtu.be/OA4z2y5Xvek Personally, I think this job I had is morally wrong, but I'm not particularly sure about the legality of it. Please enlighten me about this. Thanks in advance

My first post in the forum, let me know if I did something wrong! Summary New York State outlaws "intimate" images or videos, altered in a realistic manner or computer generated images, which are posted without consent of those who appear in them, AND with the intent to humiliate or blackmail. My thoughts I think this law makes sense, it's basically intending to outlaw deep-fake revenge porn. Especially given the "intent to cause harm" clause, which necessitates a burden of proof. But I really don't know if they could effectively enforce it. It might be a good first step in protecting people who are affected, giving them recourse they might not have had otherwise. Sources https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/central-ny/politics/2023/10/26/hochul-signs-bill-into-law-on-ai-created-intimate-images https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2023/S1042

Summary There is a lot of information out about a law just proposed which is nominally meant to ban Tik Tok but does not name Tik Tok specifically. The Restrict Act would ban anyone from accessing a online service ran by a US adverssary. This law is so sweeping it even mentions things like "Post Quantum Cryptography" and "Synthetic Biology" Some readings of it could imply that acceing such a service via a VPN would be against this law. However, this act is not intended to go after Joe user trying to find dance or cat videos but is intended to stop such services from bypassing the Restrict act. That said the law does have some concerning provisions, applies far beyond social media and specifies things like games and forums, and does contain both civli and federal criminal penalties. Though it only applies to such things that have over 1 million users over the course of a year. The act specifies that the app would have to in the judgement of the President and certain cabinet secretaries be operated by or from and adversary of the United states and have been: Used for sabotage, "catastrophic effects on the security or resilience of the critical infrastructure or digital economy of the United States" (hacking), " interfering in, or altering the result or reported result of a Federal election" , "coercive or criminal activities by a foreign adversary that are designed to undermine democratic processes", "otherwise poses an undue or unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the safety of United States persons" . Note this law has bipartisan support. Quotes Part of the text of the Bill Per newsweek. My thoughts The first thing to note is that this is not the same law as was discussed in this thread. This thread discussed a state law in Utah, and similar more draconian state laws in other states and another fedearl proposal regarding age limits on social media no matter where it was located. Some of these proposals do not specify what counts as "social media" i.e. Obviously Twitter and Facebook...but what about say Discord or the chat functions built into online games? This law is about outright total banning of large online services from outside the US and from countires that are deemed to be adverssaries by the government, specifically by the executive branch. Which in the US means it's only elected member, the president by way of the cabinet. Some are concerned with vesting so much power over our digital lives in one man in a law so broad and so sweeping it even covers QUOTE information and communications technology products and services integral to— (A) artificial intelligence and machine learning; (B) quantum key distribution; (C) quantum communications; (D) quantum computing; (E) post-quantum cryptography; (lol) (F) autonomous systems; (G) advanced robotics; (H) biotechnology; (I) synthetic biology; (LMAO) (J) computational biology; and (K) e-commerce technology and services, including any electronic techniques for accomplishing business transactions, online retail, internet-enabled logistics, internet-enabled payment technology, and online marketplaces. UNQUOTE (lols and LMAOS added by me) Are they trying to pass a law that would apply to Data from Star Trek or something? Is this a law for the United States or a Federation Star Fleet regulation? This law seeks to be so tech and future forward that it would apply when we have freaking warp drive. As ridiculous as it sounds this regulation which is about FAR more than Tik Tok looks like it will be enacted and singed into law as it has a lot of support. In short if you care about technology you will want to read this bill. This taken with laws seeking to restrict all social media by age will make web 3.0 a far different experience than web 2.0 has been. This Rossman video is so important it should be part of the original post. Sources https://www.dailydot.com/debug/restrict-act-tiktok-jail-time-vpn/ Does TikTok Ban Allow for 20 Year Prison Sentence? (newsweek.com) Text - S.686 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): RESTRICT Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress White House ‘very in favor’ of bill thought to target TikTok | US news | The Guardian

Summary Ministerial Mandate Letters issued by Prime Minister Trudeau on December 16, 2021, directs Ministers to implement a right to repair, including for the repair of “digital devices and systems”. Quotes My thoughts This does not necessarily tell us much, but it is a start. It points out the importance of right to repair, at least from the environmental perspective. How this will be implement remains to be seen. Will this be done through legislation or another policy instrument? It seems it will be through legislation when it comes to the right to repair “digital services and systems”. I’m curious to find out more. This part may be aimed at the John Deere’s of this world. My apologies that there isn’t anything more detailed to share. I thought this would be of interest since right to repair was often brought up these past Wan shows. Sources https://pm.gc.ca/en/mandate-letters/2021/12/16/minister-innovation-science-and-industry-mandate-letter

EU has forced apple to use USB C in iphone. But power supply in PCs have bad convention when comes to modular cables layout. It's a burn your house with whole family on it situation. 1 EU should mandate, okay maybe not mandate, at least standardize PSU cables. This is also directly connected to energy and climate change, rather than iphone's connection to sustainability. Intel and others are trying to standardize both atx and sfx and maybe even flex PSU. But their standardization has issues. They don't mandate a modular layout. Intel is actually trying to create different motherboard power port, 10 to 16 pin rather than 20. The whole thing is getting convoluted. Nvidia is trying a different power port 10pin for gpu? This whole thing is getting so convoluted in 5 years it's gonna be impossible to untangle this mess. within next 5 years Intel and AMD mobo and Nvidia and AMD cards will have totally different layouts and you will need more adapters inside your PC than an iphone sheeple. 2 RGB hardwares require different softwares. That is more of a problem regarding privacy and monopoly rather than direct climate change, but EU can intervene claiming sustainability issue with rgb. EU already demanding that apple release iMessage to android because they think iMessage is a monopoly. So why not pass a law to have all RGB lighting/ keyboard mouse maker to support one open source standard, without screwing up 5v or 12v hardwares. Also, no more stupid old molex for fans and RGB please. We need modern sata power or those tiny little argb ports. I bet Taran van Hemert gonna like it. One software to run all RGB XD. 3 We need to legislate game store software api too. This is not really a climate change or power shortage issue but Linus was talking the other day about EU legislating interoperability for the better of the people. Different game stores like xbox-pc, epic, steam has different softwares. We need to mandate an API that all softwares gotta support... so one game client in pc to download and buy all the games. Right now there are already several unified game clients. But the issue is in most of those unified launchers you can't install game and you can't buy games from stores. 4 Hopefully one day we will have one software to control settings of all mouse and keyboard. Although that is gonna be difficult because different mouse have different architecture. 5 I am a Linus tech tips fan. So why not also standardize power outlets. It's difficult to standardize it now in 2022 So maybe just demand Airbnb and other hotel or housing apps that they have to show labels saying this room has universal power sockets. 6 While we are at it, USB forums have their issues too. Before they name USB 4.0 supersonic hedgehog speed ³√(2*2) we need to interfere. USB cable companies and laptop device makers are not clear about their capabilities. Can a cable show display via USB C. Can a USBc port charge the device. Can a port or cable reverse charge, charge your phone via lappy? USB 4 gonna make it worse, because even though it will be fast not all laptop gonna be able to do external GPU using it. Maybe pass a law, that device manufacturer have to be totally clear about their ports. or Linus can videos like make sheet manufacturers don't say about their ports.

Summary Norfolk County Council in England is taking the tech giant to court, claiming that they mislead investors about handset demand in November 2018. The council holds shares in Apple as part of an employee pension scheme. Quotes My thoughts Its seems Apple is in the courts a lot recently with the ongoing suit with Epic Games and the US monopoly investigations. I feel that the pensions group working on behalf of the council (my council, I should add, not that it changes my opinion because they're pretty naff) would have to come up with some serious evidence that Tim Apple did anything wrong if it wants to compete with both Apple and the US court system. Tomato Sources https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/politics/norfolk-county-council-suing-apple-1-6920108

So if I were start a company and produce cheap chips called "7700k" would I get fined/sued/put to jail? It's just a model number.

The reason behind the bill: According to this article, the law might help companies like Microsoft updating our computers with security patches due to the amount of vulnerabilities they are finding. This is the bill they are trying to pass: Even if there will probably be no-one to enforce this bill, I hope it does help M$ and other companies to secure their piece of software... Edit: fixing the post to fit the community guidelines @Energycore

Montreal Police have been found to have obtained 24 warrants to surveil La Presse columnist 24/7. The warrants issued were broad, allowing the police to not only track his location at all time, but also to allow them to obtain the information of everyone who he contacted. Toronto Star CBC This is part of a bigger issue at hand. Last year the Canadian Government passed Bill C-51, a bill which the Harper government created to increase the police's power to surveil Canadians and which granted them more power to act on intelligence. This new bill created a warrant which can “contravene a right or freedom guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms” or be “contrary to other Canadian law”. Overall, it's essentially the Patriot Act, but in Canada; but to see the police using the additional powers granted them in this bill (which was centered around terrorism) is disturbing. Sadly, this isn't the first time that an issue such as this has happened (specifically, the Montreal Police have done things like this before) and I suspect that it will only become all too common in the future.

The EU's court has ruled that dynamic IPs can no longer be stored by websites without there being a explicit reason like protecting the website against attacks. The plaintif (a member of the german pirate party) has argued that by storing his IP a website owner could over time build up a profile of his interests and should therefore be counted as "personal data" and be protected as such. Since the EU has begun enforcing stricter policies on cookies (such as having a banner that warns users that they are being tracked) it has been increasingly difficult for website operators to track its customers for statistics and advertising purposes. In its argument, the EU court has emphasized the legitimate need of website owners to guard against cyberattacks and that it views storing each visitors IP as a reasonable means to ensure cybersecurity. It is therefore likely that dynamic IPs will still be stored going forward, but only for administrative purposes, not for statistics and marketing. as ArsTechnica notes: " The case now goes back to the German Federal Court of Justice, which will make its judgment based on the CJEU's opinion. Given the top court's reasoning, it seems likely that Breyer won't be granted an injunction restraining Germany's federal sites from storing data about his visits. " Source 1: Ars Technica (20.10.16 1000 GMT+1) Source 2: Der Strandard (German Source) (20.10.16 1000 GMT+1)

The Commission has reportedly been investigating Google since 2010, as result of complaints made by Microsoft and others. While this is a good step to creating a fairer internet for businesses, the fine is of course very small for the monster of alphabet, which has $172bn of assets. Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-40406542

EPIC has filed a lawsuit against President Trump's Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity (PACEI) for allegedly violating American voter's digital privacy rights by requesting sensitive voter information from several US states. EPIC's claims: 1. NOTE: This information requested was to be sent to an unsecured URL. 2. Furthermore, EPIC claims that such an action is a violation of the E-Government Act of 2002, which requires that federal agencies make a "Privacy Impact Assessment" before completing these requests for voter data (I am unsure as to whether this is because the commission stated intent to publish the documents publicly or whether this is because the commission requested such information via an apparently unsecured website). 3. EPIC also claims that such a request, even with a PIA, violates, both substantively and procedurally, the 5th Amendment of the US Constitution (and subsequent case law - NASA v. Nelson, Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, Whalen v. Roe). Substantive vs procedural law explanation: Substantive law violations refer to violates that break the spirit of a law - for example, uninvited guests being in your house (when you never made any hint of a suggestion that anyone could pop into your house). Procedural law refers to the documentation and specific procedurals that are required to determine if a violation took place and how to go about punishing/remediating it. For example, a coal facility may deposit coal ash into an artificial wetland nearby, but only at a 20 tons/day rate maximum (no more) and must document the permits to do so with local authorities and have appropriate instruments to measure its rate. If it does not do these things, it is procedurally violating a law (assuming it cannot exceed 20 tons/day). 4. It requests that what data has been collected be securely deleted, halt the collection of further data, that a PIA be completed, and that EPIC be compensated for its litigation costs. IMPACT ON YOU: If you live in America, this may be another reason to pay attention to government power over your records via digital means. As an American, I know I would not want my SSNs passing through an unsecured web page! Canadians need not worry and can just say "eyyyy" all day (unless, of course, your PM does similar in the future). For a list of the rest of the documentation, here is the EPIC web page dedicated to it.

source: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/286852/South_Korea_cracks_down_on_cheaters_with_law_targeting_illicit_game_mods.php there are two kinds of mods someone can make benign ones - like HD texture packs, sound mods .. cheats - aimbots South Korea just passed an amendment to a law that promotes the game industry; the said amendment outright bans creation and distribution of software that are not allowed by the game's publisher / developer and their respective Terms of Service in practice, the law is so ambiguous that it also can be used to outright outlaw the said benign mods

Source: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/19/south_carolina_calls_for_smutfree_pcs/ South Carolina is attempting to crack down on porn accessibility, starting by locking new PCs from viewing porn out of the box: Legislators claim this a non-partisan issue that must be addressed quickly: There is a loophole however in this proposed law; pay $20 to confirm you are "of age" if you want to unlock porn on your new desktop: The Bill Itself (or part of it): as you can see there would be criminal punishments for individuals violation this law by removing the lock... Opinion: this sounds like more social conservatives trying to micromanage citizen's lives while extracting a bit of cash in the meantime. Perfect example of big government at its worst. Update: Reuters has picked up the story: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-south-carolina-pornography-idUSKBN149251?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter

Hello, I had an idea to create a DB related to reporting IPs from players who are cheating in games (the higher reports the higher chance it is true) and then feed this to a program I own which essentially is just a firewall and then cut them off if they are in your set threshold. Etc IP has to be reported more than 10 times the last week, or on the stricter side like 2 reports last month or so, you get the point. How would a service like this go on towards GDPR? The DB will be publicly searchable and list times of reports. Only the user who reported can see their name in the timeline everything else is not public info (but stored in DB). I ask since a service which provide a DB with reported IPs with malicious intension like abuseipdb exists, and I don't know how they go with the GDPR. Service will contain EU IP's and does already have EU users (just a reminder the service I'm talking about does not yet exists). I'm also located in Norway so I have to follow GDPR which I gladly would do.

The ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) is suing Google for breaching Australian privacy laws in regards to data collection and dissemination. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-29/google-faces-accc-federal-court-misleading-use-of-data/11649356

Summary The Network fo the Defense of Digital Rights in Mexico (R3D) warns the public that a law has been aproved that would have consequences spanning internet censorship and even reduced freedom of speech online (something worse than the U.S Net Neutrality Act). This law also means that users will not be ale to repair or modify their electronic devices unless they take them direcly to the manufacturer. Small repair shops will be illegal or prone to high fees; only the big manufacturers will be allowed to continue repairs. And if any device has a software lock, for example the 2018 MacBook Pro, it will be illegal to bypass it, and it will require you to go only to apple. This also means that online censorship is getting to dangerous levels, before as it is pointed out in the article below, there have been entire online publication / newspapers taken down for governmental purposes , to cover up corruption, with the excuse of it infringes copyright law even though they were entirely original contetnt. Before government censorship was present but this law will give them the tools to take down any website or article without needing to provide any explanation at all. Quotes My thoughts Saldy to a tech head like myself this means that my small business involving computer building, computer repair, and computer upgradesh shop may now be illegal to maintain. Suddendly most computer markets that offer small phone repair services may go out of business due to this law. Man Louis Rossman would me mad right now. Mexico has just lost an important battle when it comes to right to repair... Sources El Universal: One of the biggest mexican newsletters - https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/techbit/diputados-aprueban-ley-iras-la-carcel-si-reparas-o-modificas-tus-dispositivos-electronicos Translated: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eluniversal.com.mx%2Ftechbit%2Fdiputados-aprueban-ley-iras-la-carcel-si-reparas-o-modificas-tus-dispositivos-electronicos Milenio Noticias: Another reputable newspaper - https://www.milenio.com/negocios/censura-multas-reparar-electronicos-leyes-t-mec Translated: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.milenio.com%2Fnegocios%2Fcensura-multas-reparar-electronicos-leyes-t-mec

Interesting but brief read. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180708/14144940199/canadian-court-affirms-citizens-still-have-expectation-privacy-devices-being-repaired-third-parties.shtml I think it's a fairly minor victory for privacy but a step in the right direction.

Consider this scenario: I am a huge fan of Apple and Samsung phones, as a hobby I made a publicly accessible website that showcases Apple and Samsung phones hosted in the US with photos and other media formats on the domain www.myfavoritephones.com. This website does not sell any merchandise, and is not sponsored. This site shows advertisements which are moderated by a third party. This website makes money through ads. Would I legally need Apple or Samsung's consent to strictly showcase their logos and products? This website is in no way misrepresenting (as far as I know) the above mentioned companies and their products. Does any of this sound illegal or infringes any laws that you can think of on the top of your head? Thank you and sorry, i'm too broke to hire a lawyer.

Full story: https://www.polygon.com/2018/8/11/17661254/bethesda-sell-used-games-amazon-block In what could be described as a massive overreach - Bethesda is sending take-down notices to vendors re-selling Bethesda products on places like Amazon and eBay If left unchallenged, this could impact the scope of the 'First Sale Doctrine' in the United States, which offers legal protection for re-selling goods. The action in question The seller's reason for the listing Bethesda's letter and the seller's response Bethesda's justification - specifically pointing to the lack of warranty determines that the product is 'materially different' from the 'genuine product' (A legal benchmark for the first sale doctrine). Bethesda's legal threats

Polygon https://www.polygon.com/windows/2018/4/25/17280178/eric-lundgren-windows-restore-disks-microsoft-prison arsTECHNICA (Most Recent) https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/04/why-the-man-who-tried-to-sell-windows-recovery-discs-will-go-to-prison/ Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2018/04/24/recycling-innovator-eric-lundgren-loses-appeal-on-computer-restore-discs-must-serve-15-month-prison-term/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1b6641afb067 Summary: Eric Lundgren, 33, has been sentenced to 15 months in federal prison and a 50k fine, with the court ruling that his "restore disks" infringed upon Microsoft products costing $700,000. In 2011, Lundgren ordered $80,000 worth of re-printed Windows recovery disks from China. These were intercepted by US Customs and Border protection. It is reported that these are restore disks, which do not come with a product key or license and cannot be used to activate Windows. Therefore, these disks should be nearly worthless, as an installation/restore disk can be made free of cost with a utility provided by Microsoft. However, as many forum members have noted, it is against Microsoft's terms of use to redistribute this software. Note that currently being reported is that a US appeals court upheld a district judge's ruling. This is an appeal, not the original conviction or sentencing. Qyotes: My favorite:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-netherlands-referendum/dutch-say-no-in-referendum-on-spy-agency-tapping-powers-idUSKBN1GX0QU A while ago a new law was introduced in the netherlands which allowed for a lot more freedom for the security agency. They could now tap about everything they wanted. After a lot of protests a referendum was called for which was held yesterday. With almost all votes counted it seems there is a very slight inclination to "no" but the results are almost 50/50. Personally I was one of the "yes" voters while I believe a new law was needed because the last law originated from the 1980's and internet wasn't a consideration then. But the law was a bit to open on part, still personally I believe it was better then having nothing. But I can also see the reasons why people would vote "no". But it seems the results we are getting now are the best for both parties as the dutch government is considering reevaluating the law and making changes too it. This isn't 100% sure yet but it's going to be interesting to see what this will result in. And hopefully the Dutch can once again set a good example on how to balance security and privacy. Any other dutch people here who want to weigh in on the discussion or other people who want to voice their opinions?

Hi there, So I'm a massive film lover, I tend to like a nice rainy Sunday where I can sit down and watch films with my family. We're exhausting the range of Netflix films available so I was wondering this: In the UK, is it illegal to stream films online for free? I looked into it a few years ago and it seemed to be a grey area, so I'm wondering if anyone can give me a definite yes it is or no it isn't or if they can give me a good alternative. Thanks