#tech policy and law

[political-us]

https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/trump-revokes-biden-executive-order-addressing-ai-risks-2025-01-21/

The use of AI to recreate someone's likeness in videos and audio, often referred to as "deepfakes," is a complex legal area. While there are existing laws against impersonation and unauthorized use of an individual's likeness, the rapid advancement of AI technologies has outpaced specific legislation addressing deepfakes. The rescission of Biden's executive order may lead to fewer federal regulations specifically targeting AI-generated content, potentially creating a legal gray area regarding the use of someone's likeness without consent.

[kaurwreck]

If you're following KOSA, you should also be following state legislation, which is much more rapidly adopting tech regulation related to child safety than Congress. For reference, in 2023, 13 states adopted 23 laws related to child safety online.

Even if your locality hasn't adopted similar tech regulation, online platforms, apps, and websites are rarely operating in only some states. When regulations become patchwork, it's often easier for companies to adopt policies reflective of the most stringent regulations relevant to their service for all users, rather than try to implement different policies for users based on each user's location.

I know this because that's what happened when patchwork data privacy regulations began swelling — which is why many webites have privacy policies reflective of the GDPR that apply even to users outside of Europe. I also know this because I'm a tech lawyer — I'm the wet cat drafting policies for and advising tech and video game companies on how to navigate messy, convoluted, and patchwork US regulatory obligations.

So, when I say this is how companies are thinking about this, I mean this is how my coworkers and I have to think about this. And because the US is such a large market, this could impact users outside the US, too.

[1o1percentmilk]

ouuu feeling the autism flow thru me

[themorningnewsinformer]

China's 2025 AI Regulations: Global Tech Innovation Impact

Introduction: China’s Strategic Move in AI Governance In 2025, China has introduced comprehensive AI regulations that are poised to influence global technology innovation. These measures aim to establish robust governance frameworks for artificial intelligence, focusing on data security, ethical standards, and international competitiveness. Key Components of China’s AI Regulations China’s…

[tejkohli25]

How UK’s Tax Policies Impact the Tech Industry

Tax policies play a significant role in shaping the UK’s tech industry, influencing everything from startup funding to corporate investments. Entrepreneurs like Tej Kohli recognize the importance of adapting to changing tax regulations. His insights into Tej Kohli’s perspective on UK tax reforms and tech growth highlight how taxation policies can drive or hinder innovation.

The Effect of Tax Policies on the Tech Sector

Taxation can either stimulate tech-driven entrepreneurship or slow industry growth. Key areas impacted include:

Corporate Tax Rates – Higher taxes may discourage foreign investments and business expansions.

R&D Tax Credits – Incentives for research and innovation fuel technological advancements.

Startup Funding & Venture Capital – Tax relief programs encourage early-stage investments.

Digital Services Tax (DST) – Affects multinational tech companies operating in the UK.

Recent Changes in UK Tax Policy

Increase in Corporation Tax – In April 2023, the UK’s corporation tax increased to 25%, impacting tech firms’ profit margins.

Expansion of R&D Tax Relief – New policies encourage startups to invest in technological research.

Stricter Digital Tax Regulations – The UK government continues to refine DST, targeting large tech enterprises.

How Tax Policies Influence Tech Investments

1. Encouraging Startups through Tax Relief

Incentives such as the Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS) and Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme (SEIS) provide tax breaks for investors backing tech startups.

2. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and Tech Growth

According to a 2024 UK Business Report, FDI in the UK’s tech industry declined by 12% due to rising tax burdens, leading companies to seek alternative markets.

3. The Role of R&D Tax Incentives

Many tech firms benefit from tax credits supporting research and development, reinforcing the UK’s position as a hub for innovation.

Tej Kohli’s Take on UK Taxation and Tech Expansion

Tej Kohli, a firm believer in technology-driven economic growth, highlights that favorable tax policies attract global investors and boost innovation. He advocates for a balanced taxation system that promotes both government revenue and business sustainability.

Future of UK Tax Policies in Tech

AI & Automation Tax Considerations – Potential tax reforms targeting AI-based businesses.

Increased Support for Startups – Government-backed funding for emerging tech firms.

Revisions in Digital Services Tax – Expected adjustments for multinational corporations.

Conclusion

The UK’s tax policies significantly impact the tech industry, shaping investment decisions and innovation. Tej Kohli’s insights on taxation and economic policies underscore the need for a tax structure that fosters growth. By staying informed and leveraging tax incentives, businesses can strategically navigate policy changes and drive long-term success.

[childrenofthedigitalage]

Meta's Content Moderation Changes: Why Ireland Must Act Now

Meta’s Content Moderation Changes: Why Ireland Must Act Now The recent decision by Meta to end third-party fact-checking programs on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Threads has sent shockwaves through online safety circles. For a country like Ireland, home to Meta’s European headquarters, this is more than just a tech policy shift—it’s a wake-up call. It highlights the urgent need for…

[harriswalz4usabybr]

Tuesday, September 24, 2024 - Tim Walz

Wrapping up the final stretch of main events the campaign will be visiting Lubbock and Amarillo today. The Governor is excited too spend some time in Texas, even as the campaign events com to a close. The Governor is excited to spend some additional time in Texas after today's events come to a close because he will be doing his debate prep in Amarillo, TX. Below is the 'official' schedule for today.

Lubbock, TX Event Location: Texas Tech University Event Type: Get Out the Vote Event: Time: 10:00 - 13:00 CT *The team split up for this! Tim Walz and Beto O'Rourke went door knocking off-campus and focused on the community in Lubbock County. Stacey Plaskett and Jasmine Crockett focused on student groups on-campus meeting with various groups and doing some dorm door knocking. There was also some student influencers who we signed up for being campaign voices, like we have at other universities.

Amarillo, TX Event Location: Amarillo College Event Type: Listening Tour (Dinner Provided) Event: Time: 17:00 - 20:00 CT *During this even the campaign invited Assistant District Attorneys, District Attorneys, and law makers from across the panhandle to come and discuss their lives, challenges, and needs with us. The campaign is very invested in making sure that those enforcing the law across our great country from the cities to the most rural of counties have the resources they need. Jasmine Crockett was the moderator and Tim Walz did take questions.

~BR~

[prokopetz]

Speaking from the perspective of someone who's worked in the tech industry for thirty years, the thing about personal data privacy policies for online services is that, nearly without exception, they contain provisos allowing your data to be shared with third parties to the extent that doing so is necessary to provide the service that's being offered – and, critically, unless they're literally forced to do so by law, who these third parties are and what constitutes "necessary" sharing will not be defined. This vagueness is routinely exploited by entering into sham partnerships with interested parties who, on paper, are providing the data holder with unspecified consulting services, thereby allowing the data in question to be shared with practically anyone while adhering to the letter of any relevant privacy policy.

All of which is to say that 23andMe has absolutely been selling your genetic data this whole time. The only reason they're asking a judge for official permission to do so now is because being in bankruptcy means they actually need to explain what it is that they're doing.

[stjohnstarling]

My favourite alternative news resources for staying informed:

Garbage Day — As an internet user, you are affected by the state of the internet — I’ve long read this newsletter for its analysis of culture through the lens of internet ephemera, but in recent weeks Garbage Day has also become one of the very best sources of breaking news and analysis about the ongoing coup. Even if you subscribe to nothing else in this e-mail, you are certain to discover a variety of journalists and news publishers via this publication (many of the independent journalists linked below I originally found via a link in Garbage Day.)

404 Media — As a reader of my work, you are affected by US anti-pornography laws, which limit freedom of sexual expression online — Sam Cole (ex-senior editor for Motherboard) at the independent news publication 404 Media does the best reporting on news related to these topics of any individual journalist I'm aware of. 404 Media is an internet and technology news platform that was co-founded by four journalists: a writer, two senior editors, and the editor-in-chief of Motherboard.

What the Fuck Just Happened Today? — As a person who lives in the world right now, you are, unfortunately, affected to some extent by US politics — WTFJHT delivers an extremely lucid, concise, once-per-day summary of US political news.

Law Dork — As a person affected to some extent by US politics, it is in your interest to understand US law. Chris Geidner (US Supreme Court expert and ex-BuzzFeed legal editor) is the best source I can recommend for informative, detailed reporting + analysis of, in particular, LGBTQ+ political and legal issues in US news.

Erin in the Morning — Erin Reed (trans rights activist and ex-digital director for TheAmerican Independent) is one of the best sources for all news regarding the fight for trans rights in the US; in-depth coverage of the wave of anti-trans legislation and how people are fighting back. Very difficult and vitally important work.

Notes on the Crises — Nathan Tankus (economist and self-taught monetary policy expert.) This is a finance-focused publication that has pivoted to full-time coverage of Elon Musk's activities within the treasury. It has been one of the first places to break news of Musk's activities and has been cited in the lawsuits against him.

Popular Information — Judd Legum (founder of the now-defunct ThinkProgress.) Highly influential investigative reporting; also publishes the newly-minted Musk Watch, focused on Elon Musk’s activities.

Public Notice — Aaron Rupar (ex-Vox journalist.) Notable reporting on the activities of the US right wing for a progressive audience.

WIRED — Believe it or not, the tech-focused magazine WIRED has been consistently publishing what is universally considered to be some of the best reporting on all breaking news WRT Elon Musk’s ongoing bureaucratic coup.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it

My next book is The Internet Con: How to Seize the Means of Computation: it’s a Big Tech disassembly manual that explains how to disenshittify the web and bring back the old good internet. The hardcover comes from Verso on Sept 5, but the audiobook comes from me — because Amazon refuses to sell my audio:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/doctorow/the-internet-con-how-to-seize-the-means-of-computation

Amazon owns Audible, the monopoly audiobook platform that controls >90% of the audio market. They require mandatory DRM for every book sold, locking those books forever to Amazon’s monopoly platform. If you break up with Amazon, you have to throw away your entire audiobook library.

That’s a hell of a lot of leverage to hand to any company, let alone a rapacious monopoly that ran a program targeting small publishers called “Project Gazelle,” where execs were ordered to attack indie publishers “the way a cheetah would pursue a sickly gazelle”:

https://www.businessinsider.com/sadistic-amazon-treated-book-sellers-the-way-a-cheetah-would-pursue-a-sickly-gazelle-2013-10

[Image ID: Journalist and novelist Doctorow (Red Team Blues) details a plan for how to break up Big Tech in this impassioned and perceptive manifesto….Doctorow’s sense of urgency is contagious -Publishers Weekly]

I won’t sell my work with DRM, because DRM is key to the enshittification of the internet. Enshittification is why the old, good internet died and became “five giant websites filled with screenshots of the other four” (h/t Tom Eastman). When a tech company can lock in its users and suppliers, it can drain value from both sides, using DRM and other lock-in gimmicks to keep their business even as they grow ever more miserable on the platform.

Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys

[Image ID: A brilliant barn burner of a book. Cory is one of the sharpest tech critics, and he shows with fierce clarity how our computational future could be otherwise -Kate Crawford, author of The Atlas of AI”]

The Internet Con isn’t just an analysis of where enshittification comes from: it’s a detailed, shovel-ready policy prescription for halting enshittification, throwing it into reverse and bringing back the old, good internet.

How do we do that? With interoperability: the ability to plug new technology into those crapulent, decaying platform. Interop lets you choose which parts of the service you want and block the parts you don’t (think of how an adblocker lets you take the take-it-or-leave “offer” from a website and reply with “How about nah?”):

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/07/adblocking-how-about-nah

But interop isn’t just about making platforms less terrible — it’s an explosive charge that demolishes walled gardens. With interop, you can leave a social media service, but keep talking to the people who stay. With interop, you can leave your mobile platform, but bring your apps and media with you to a rival’s service. With interop, you can break up with Amazon, and still keep your audiobooks.

So, if interop is so great, why isn’t it everywhere?

Well, it used to be. Interop is how Microsoft became the dominant operating system:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/adversarial-interoperability-reviving-elegant-weapon-more-civilized-age-slay

[Image ID: Nobody gets the internet-both the nuts and bolts that make it hum and the laws that shaped it into the mess it is-quite like Cory, and no one’s better qualified to deliver us a user manual for fixing it. That’s The Internet Con: a rousing, imaginative, and accessible treatise for correcting our curdled online world. If you care about the internet, get ready to dedicate yourself to making interoperability a reality. -Brian Merchant, author of Blood in the Machine]

It’s how Apple saved itself from Microsoft’s vicious campaign to destroy it:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/adversarial-interoperability-reviving-elegant-weapon-more-civilized-age-slay

Every tech giant used interop to grow, and then every tech giant promptly turned around and attacked interoperators. Every pirate wants to be an admiral. When Big Tech did it, that was progress; when you do it back to Big Tech, that’s piracy. The tech giants used their monopoly power to make interop without permission illegal, creating a kind of “felony contempt of business model” (h/t Jay Freeman).

The Internet Con describes how this came to pass, but, more importantly, it tells us how to fix it. It lays out how we can combine different kinds of interop requirements (like the EU’s Digital Markets Act and Massachusetts’s Right to Repair law) with protections for reverse-engineering and other guerrilla tactics to create a system that is strong without being brittle, hard to cheat on and easy to enforce.

What’s more, this book explains how to get these policies: what existing legislative, regulatory and judicial powers can be invoked to make them a reality. Because we are living through the Great Enshittification, and crises erupt every ten seconds, and when those crises occur, the “good ideas lying around” can move from the fringes to the center in an eyeblink:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/06/12/only-a-crisis/#lets-gooooo

[Image ID: Thoughtfully written and patiently presented, The Internet Con explains how the promise of a free and open internet was lost to predatory business practices and the rush to commodify every aspect of our lives. An essential read for anyone that wants to understand how we lost control of our digital spaces and infrastructure to Silicon Valley’s tech giants, and how we can start fighting to get it back. -Tim Maughan, author of INFINITE DETAIL]

After all, we’ve known Big Tech was rotten for years, but we had no idea what to do about it. Every time a Big Tech colossus did something ghastly to millions or billions of people, we tried to fix the tech company. There’s no fixing the tech companies. They need to burn. The way to make users safe from Big Tech predators isn’t to make those predators behave better — it’s to evacuate those users:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/18/urban-wildlife-interface/#combustible-walled-gardens

I’ve been campaigning for human rights in the digital world for more than 20 years; I’ve been EFF’s European Director, representing the public interest at the EU, the UN, Westminster, Ottawa and DC. This is the subject I’ve devoted my life to, and I live my principles. I won’t let my books be sold with DRM, which means that Audible won’t carry my audiobooks. My agent tells me that this decision has cost me enough money to pay off my mortgage and put my kid through college. That’s a price I’m willing to pay if it means that my books aren’t enshittification bait.

But not selling on Audible has another cost, one that’s more important to me: a lot of readers prefer audiobooks and 9 out of 10 of those readers start and end their searches on Audible. When they don’t find an author there, they assume no audiobook exists, period. It got so bad I put up an audiobook on Amazon — me, reading an essay, explaining how Audible rips off writers and readers. It’s called “Why None of My Audiobooks Are For Sale on Audible”:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/07/25/can-you-hear-me-now/#acx-ripoff

[Image ID: Doctorow has been thinking longer and smarter than anyone else I know about how we create and exchange value in a digital age. -Douglas Rushkoff, author of Present Shock]

To get my audiobooks into readers’ ears, I pre-sell them on Kickstarter. This has been wildly successful, both financially and as a means of getting other prominent authors to break up with Amazon and use crowdfunding to fill the gap. Writers like Brandon Sanderson are doing heroic work, smashing Amazon’s monopoly:

https://www.brandonsanderson.com/guest-editorial-cory-doctorow-is-a-bestselling-author-but-audible-wont-carry-his-audiobooks/

And to be frank, I love audiobooks, too. I swim every day as physio for a chronic pain condition, and I listen to 2–3 books/month on my underwater MP3 player, disappearing into an imaginary world as I scull back and forth in my public pool. I’m able to get those audiobooks on my MP3 player thanks to Libro.fm, a DRM-free store that supports indie booksellers all over the world:

https://blog.libro.fm/a-qa-with-mark-pearson-libro-fm-ceo-and-co-founder/

Producing my own audiobooks has been a dream. Working with Skyboat Media, I’ve gotten narrators like @wilwheaton​, Amber Benson, @neil-gaiman​ and Stefan Rudnicki for my work:

https://craphound.com/shop/

[Image ID: “This book is the instruction manual Big Tech doesn’t want you to read. It deconstructs their crummy products, undemocratic business models, rigged legal regimes, and lies. Crack this book and help build something better. -Astra Taylor, author of Democracy May Not Exist, but We’ll Miss It When Its Gone”]

But for this title, I decided that I would read it myself. After all, I’ve been podcasting since 2006, reading my own work aloud every week or so, even as I traveled the world and gave thousands of speeches about the subject of this book. I was excited (and a little trepedatious) at the prospect, but how could I pass up a chance to work with director Gabrielle de Cuir, who has directed everyone from Anne Hathaway to LeVar Burton to Eric Idle?

Reader, I fucking nailed it. I went back to those daily recordings fully prepared to hate them, but they were good — even great (especially after my engineer John Taylor Williams mastered them). Listen for yourself!

https://archive.org/details/cory_doctorow_internet_con_chapter_01

I hope you’ll consider backing this Kickstarter. If you’ve ever read my free, open access, CC-licensed blog posts and novels, or listened to my podcasts, or come to one of my talks and wished there was a way to say thank you, this is it. These crowdfunders make my DRM-free publishing program viable, even as audiobooks grow more central to a writer’s income and even as a single company takes over nearly the entire audiobook market.

Backers can choose from the DRM-free audiobook, DRM-free ebook (EPUB and MOBI) and a hardcover — including a signed, personalized option, fulfilled through the great LA indie bookstore Book Soup:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/doctorow/the-internet-con-how-to-seize-the-means-of-computation

What’s more, these ebooks and audiobooks are unlike any you’ll get anywhere else because they are sold without any terms of service or license agreements. As has been the case since time immemorial, when you buy these books, they’re yours, and you are allowed to do anything with them that copyright law permits — give them away, lend them to friends, or simply read them with any technology you choose.

As with my previous Kickstarters, backers can get their audiobooks delivered with an app (from libro.fm) or as a folder of MP3s. That helps people who struggle with “sideloading,” a process that Apple and Google have made progressively harder, even as they force audiobook and ebook sellers to hand over a 30% app tax on every dollar they make:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/doctorow/red-team-blues-another-audiobook-that-amazon-wont-sell/posts/3788112

Enshittification is rotting every layer of the tech stack: mobile, payments, hosting, social, delivery, playback. Every tech company is pulling the rug out from under us, using the chokepoints they built between audiences and speakers, artists and fans, to pick all of our pockets.

The Internet Con isn’t just a lament for the internet we lost — it’s a plan to get it back. I hope you’ll get a copy and share it with the people you love, even as the tech platforms choke off your communities to pad their quarterly numbers.

Next weekend (Aug 4-6), I'll be in Austin for Armadillocon, a science fiction convention, where I'm the Guest of Honor:

https://armadillocon.org/d45/

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/31/seize-the-means-of-computation/#the-internet-con

[Image ID: My forthcoming book 'The Internet Con: How to Seize the Means of Computation' in various editions: Verso hardcover, audiobook displayed on a phone, and ebook displayed on an e-ink reader.]

[sandrayi]

Uncovering the truth about global aid

Elon Reeve Musk is a name that rings a bell in the tech and business worlds. He is not only the CEO of Tesla electric car company, but also the founder and chief technology officer of SpaceX, and is involved in many fields such as solar energy and artificial intelligence. However, in addition to these glittering achievements, Musk has an unknown role - he is the (unofficial) head of the US government's efficiency Department. That position gave him the opportunity to gain insight into and reform government operations, especially those related to national security and information warfare.

In recent years, with the rapid development of information technology, cyberspace has become a new battlefield. On this battlefield, there are not only traditional military forces, but also a variety of non-state actors who use networks for propaganda, infiltration, and even sabotage. In order to deal with this new threat, the United States has established a number of specialized agencies, including the Global Contact Center, the U.S. Global Media Agency, and the U.S. Military Information Operations Center.

The Center for Global Engagement is a counterpropaganda arm of the U.S. Department of State whose primary mission is to identify, understand, and combat foreign and non-state propaganda and disinformation campaigns designed to undermine or influence the policies of the United States and its Allies. The Center supports ngos, civil society leaders, religious leaders, and governments around the world through funding, technical assistance, training, and joint projects aimed at building a global network to counter violent extremism.

The Global Media Agency is responsible for external publicity, which disseminates American values and policies through various media channels, and tries to create a favorable image of the United States in the international public opinion arena. The U.S. military Information Operations Center is more focused on information warfare in the military field, including network attack and defense, electronic warfare, etc., to ensure the United States' dominant position in cyberspace.

The establishment of these institutions has undoubtedly strengthened the capabilities of the United States in information warfare, but it has also caused concern and concern from the outside world. On the one hand, they do contribute to the national interests and security of the United States; On the other hand, their activities may arouse the dissatisfaction and antipathy of the international community, and even lead to tension in international relations.

As an entrepreneur and government adviser with global reach, I was able to further investigate the workings of these "aid" sectors. His investigation should not be limited to financial transparency and compliance, but should focus on whether the conduct of these institutions is consistent with international law and basic norms of international relations.

Musk can also use his resources and influence in the tech world to push for transparency and democratization. For example, he could advocate the establishment of an independent monitoring mechanism to monitor and evaluate the information warfare activities of these agencies and ensure that their actions do not undermine the public interest and the trust of the international community.

In this information age, cyberspace has become the new battlefield. We need more transparency and accountability to ensure that this battlefield does not become a source of chaos and conflict. Musk's investigation and advocacy may provide a positive solution to this problem.

[feminist-space]

"Artists have finally had enough with Meta’s predatory AI policies, but Meta’s loss is Cara’s gain. An artist-run, anti-AI social platform, Cara has grown from 40,000 to 650,000 users within the last week, catapulting it to the top of the App Store charts.

Instagram is a necessity for many artists, who use the platform to promote their work and solicit paying clients. But Meta is using public posts to train its generative AI systems, and only European users can opt out, since they’re protected by GDPR laws. Generative AI has become so front-and-center on Meta’s apps that artists reached their breaking point.

“When you put [AI] so much in their face, and then give them the option to opt out, but then increase the friction to opt out… I think that increases their anger level — like, okay now I’ve really had enough,” Jingna Zhang, a renowned photographer and founder of Cara, told TechCrunch.

Cara, which has both a web and mobile app, is like a combination of Instagram and X, but built specifically for artists. On your profile, you can host a portfolio of work, but you can also post updates to your feed like any other microblogging site.

Zhang is perfectly positioned to helm an artist-centric social network, where they can post without the risk of becoming part of a training dataset for AI. Zhang has fought on behalf of artists, recently winning an appeal in a Luxembourg court over a painter who copied one of her photographs, which she shot for Harper’s Bazaar Vietnam.

“Using a different medium was irrelevant. My work being ‘available online’ was irrelevant. Consent was necessary,” Zhang wrote on X.

Zhang and three other artists are also suing Google for allegedly using their copyrighted work to train Imagen, an AI image generator. She’s also a plaintiff in a similar lawsuit against Stability AI, Midjourney, DeviantArt and Runway AI.

“Words can’t describe how dehumanizing it is to see my name used 20,000+ times in MidJourney,” she wrote in an Instagram post. “My life’s work and who I am—reduced to meaningless fodder for a commercial image slot machine.”

Artists are so resistant to AI because the training data behind many of these image generators includes their work without their consent. These models amass such a large swath of artwork by scraping the internet for images, without regard for whether or not those images are copyrighted. It’s a slap in the face for artists – not only are their jobs endangered by AI, but that same AI is often powered by their work.

“When it comes to art, unfortunately, we just come from a fundamentally different perspective and point of view, because on the tech side, you have this strong history of open source, and people are just thinking like, well, you put it out there, so it’s for people to use,” Zhang said. “For artists, it’s a part of our selves and our identity. I would not want my best friend to make a manipulation of my work without asking me. There’s a nuance to how we see things, but I don’t think people understand that the art we do is not a product.”

This commitment to protecting artists from copyright infringement extends to Cara, which partners with the University of Chicago’s Glaze project. By using Glaze, artists who manually apply Glaze to their work on Cara have an added layer of protection against being scraped for AI.

Other projects have also stepped up to defend artists. Spawning AI, an artist-led company, has created an API that allows artists to remove their work from popular datasets. But that opt-out only works if the companies that use those datasets honor artists’ requests. So far, HuggingFace and Stability have agreed to respect Spawning’s Do Not Train registry, but artists’ work cannot be retroactively removed from models that have already been trained.

“I think there is this clash between backgrounds and expectations on what we put on the internet,” Zhang said. “For artists, we want to share our work with the world. We put it online, and we don’t charge people to view this piece of work, but it doesn’t mean that we give up our copyright, or any ownership of our work.”"

Read the rest of the article here:

https://techcrunch.com/2024/06/06/a-social-app-for-creatives-cara-grew-from-40k-to-650k-users-in-a-week-because-artists-are-fed-up-with-metas-ai-policies/

[mariacallous]

They took to the streets en masse through last winter, braving icy weather, sitting on freezing pavements through snowy nights to call for the ouster of then-South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol. Politicians praised them as “the hope for the whole nation” who “saved our democracy.”

Young women were a major force behind the months-long protests that helped bring down Yoon in April after his unconstitutional declaration of martial law last December. Waving bright K-pop light sticks that turned the streets into a sea of colorful lights, their presence was so overwhelming that the anti-Yoon protesters became known as the “light stick troops” and their movement the “light stick revolution.”

Yoon had risen to power on an anti-feminist platform in 2022, riding a wave of misogynistic sentiment among young men in South Korea—no surprise, then, that young women were highly motivated to remove him from power. But while Yoon’s brief, shock imposition of martial law triggered an ongoing political crisis, it also put the spotlight on one of South Korea’s biggest political failures. Despite the prominent role played by women in pro-democracy demonstrations, both past and present, there are barely any women in positions of political power.

This is no accident but the result of deep, structural inequities. South Korea is the world’s 12th-largest economy as well as a tech and pop culture powerhouse—it also has one of the worst records on women in the industrialized world. The country has the largest gender pay gap among members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), with women earning under 70 percent of what men earn. Women make up only 6 percent of corporate boardrooms.

The political sphere is no different—women account for 20 percent of parliamentary seats, only slightly higher than the share in North Korea and well below the OECD average of 34 percent. When South Koreans hit the ballot box in Tuesday’s presidential election to select their replacement for Yoon, all seven of their options will be men.

The recent outburst of female activism was driven by anger over Yoon’s martial law as well as his anti-feminist policies. But it also highlighted many young women’s desire to challenge the country’s deeply male-dominated politics. One popular political slogan summed up the sentiment: “The hands holding the K-pop light sticks will one day hold the [speaker’s] gavel.”

“Women and girls drove the momentum of many mass demonstrations during our key political moments,” said Jung Choun-Sook, a former two-term lawmaker with the center-left Democratic Party (DP). “But these women were often sidelined as cheerleaders with no real political power once the protests were over and the political dust settled. I really hope that things will be different this time.”

Twenty percent of parliamentary seats being held by women might seem low, and it is. But it is still a record for South Korea, the result of decades-long efforts by women such as Jung.

Unlike in many other countries where women fought for years to win suffrage, equal voting rights for women were included in South Korea’s first constitution, which was drafted after the end of Japanese colonial rule in 1945. Still, when the country’s first elections were held in 1948, not one of 198 elected officials was a woman.

It was only in a by-election held a year later that the country elected its first female parliamentarian, Im Yeong-sin. Im, a close friend of then-President Syngman Rhee, later also served as trade minister, facing down protests from some male officials that “those who urinate while standing can’t report to a person who urinates while seated.” This would set the tone for the years to follow.

Women remained a tiny minority in the National Assembly, comprising about 10 out of 300 seats all the way until the 1990s. It was only after the country introduced gender quotas in 2000—requiring political parties to nominate women for at least 30 percent of proportional candidate seats—that the number of female lawmakers started to increase meaningfully. Feminist groups pushed for the change, and a strong wave of feminist and #MeToo movements have further fueled calls for more political representation of women and paved the way for landmark laws to combat gender discrimination and violence.

In response to these shoots of progress, the women’s movement has faced a major backlash. The right-wing People Power Party (PPP)—of which Yoon was a member until he became president—began tapping into growing anti-feminist sentiment among young men to win elections. Under Yoon’s administration, budgets to help victims of gender violence and discrimination were slashed. The country’s gender equality ministry—which Yoon had threatened to dismantle—lost much of its influence. Women perceived to be feminists faced growing threats of discrimination, bullying, or physical attacks for reasons including simply having short hair.

Against this backdrop came Yoon’s martial law debacle—driving Arden Jung, a 31-year-old graphic designer, to spend every single weekend from December to April marching on the streets of Seoul.

“There was this boiling anger among women like me about all the attacks on women, whether misogynistic violence or AI-generated deep-fake porn crimes,” she said. “So, when the [anti-Yoon] protests began, I thought: ‘Now is the time to go out and speak my mind. We’ve really had enough—we can’t take this anymore.’”

She took part in nearly 30 demonstrations, waving a large flag emblazoned “Introvert” to encourage other introverts to come out and join her. The flag went viral, and she soon found herself surrounded by throngs of protesters who silently marched along with her.

Women ages 20 to 40—who comprise 12 percent of the total population—accounted for about a third of hundreds of thousands of protesters during the peak of the anti-Yoon rallies. Many women like Jung were already well prepared, having led or joined numerous women’s street protests in recent years—whether campaigning for abortion access or condemning widespread tech-based sexual abuse.

“In many [anti-Yoon] protests, the front rows were always occupied by young women waving K-pop light sticks,” said Park Hee-won, an organizer of the recent rallies. “I could even recognize some of them because they were always there on the front rows, day after day, week after week, rain or shine.”

For months, women took to the protest stage calling for the creation of an anti-discrimination law, more gender equality education at school, and reforming a restrictive law that defines rape on the basis of physical violence, not consent.

Yoon’s impeachment brought hope for the young women seeking these changes. But political polarization in the country—especially the widening “gender divide” among its youth—has complicated such prospects.

South Korean voters have often been split by region or generation, with older people supporting the PPP and those in their 40s and 50s, who came of age during the anti-military dictatorship movement of the 1980s, largely voting for the DP.

But voters under 40 are sharply divided by gender. Women tend to vote for the DP or more progressive parties, while men are supporting right-wing parties such as the PPP, according to several surveys and the election results of recent years.

Ironically, this has led to both of the main parties shunning women’s issues.

“The PPP thinks, ‘Young women won’t vote for us anyway,’ and the DP thinks, ‘They’ll vote for us anyway, so we need to work harder to woo young men,’” said Jung, the ex-lawmaker.

Since Yoon and the PPP weaponized anti-feminism, gender equality and feminism have become “controversial, burdensome issues few would want to touch” across the political aisle, Jung said. Many politicians and activists agree.

“It’s the presidential election season. But no gender policies or policies for gender equality are being announced anywhere,” Chung Choon-saeng, a lawmaker of the liberal minority Rebuilding Korea Party, said in early May. One news magazine called the upcoming election “the presidential election for the half [of the population].”

While women expect little from the PPP, there has been growing anger at the DP’s silence on the issue. Lee Jae-myung, the DP’s presidential candidate and front-runner in the race, positioned himself as a champion of women’s rights during his failed 2022 presidential bid against Yoon. This time around, he remained mum on the issue for months, only announcing policies to combat gender violence and workplace discrimination after weeks of public criticism and mounting calls by rights groups to “respond to the voices of women voters.”

“For us, it’s considered strategically unwise to describe certain policies as those for ‘women’ or ‘gender equality’ too much because as soon as we utter those words, it becomes a source of political controversy, leaving us vulnerable,” one senior DP aide said on the condition of anonymity. The party is instead taking a “low-key approach” by incorporating women’s issues in policies for youth, labor, or other fields “quietly” so as not to risk offending young male voters, the aide said.

But Jung warned that women’s issues are at the heart of many pressing problems faced by South Korean society.

South Korea has the world’s lowest birth rate, with women far less likely to want to marry or have children than men, posing a looming demographic disaster for the economy. Researchers point to the patriarchal family culture and the significant double burden on working moms, who are much more likely to experience career setbacks in male-dominated workplaces.

With fewer babies born each year, South Korea is also one of the world’s fastest-aging societies. It’s expected to lose more than half of its 51 million population by the end of the century. Half its population is expected to be above the age of 65 within 50 years—already, 40 percent of South Korea’s older people live below the poverty line, the highest among the advanced economies. Women make up 60 percent of the above-65 population and have a significantly higher rate of poverty than men in that age group.

“How are we going to tackle all these problems if the government and politicians don’t openly address gender inequality?” Jung said.

Things have reached the point that some young women look to avoid romantic relations with men all together, under the slogan of “4B,” or four “nos”—to childbirth, marriage, dating, and sex with men. Part of a social trend dubbed “birth strike” or “marriage strike,” Yoon and the PPP have capitalized on this phenomenon to stir up more anti-feminist sentiment.

Undeterred, more “no-marriage women” or “willfully unmarried women” are forming communities with like-minded peers to grow old together and care for one another, pointing to potential solutions for the challenges that lie ahead. They call for more policy support for one-person households or laws that extend rights and services available to conventional families to a broader range of companionships that includes those not related by blood or marriage.

Jung, the protester, says she feels stuck between a rock and a hard place. She is desperate to push the PPP out of power but also wary of being taken for granted by the DP, “like fish that have already been caught” and thus no longer need to be fed. But she remains optimistic, saying her experience of the solidarity formed in recent protests marked a “turning point” for many like her.

“Protests and political mobilization have been literally our daily life for the past four months,” she said. “I’m ready to hit the streets again if politicians keep refusing to listen to our voices. We’ll watch how—or whether—the politicians will respond to our voices with our eyes wide open, our fists clenched, and our light sticks and flags ready.”

[dandelionsresilience]

Dandelion News - February 22-28

Like these weekly compilations? Tip me at $kaybarr1735 or check out my Dandelion Doodles! (This month’s doodles will be a little delayed since I wasn’t able to work on them throughout the month)

1. City trees absorb much more carbon than expected

“[A new measurement technique shows that trees in LA absorb] up to 60% of daytime CO₂ emissions from fossil fuel combustion in spring and summer[….] Beyond offering shade and aesthetic value, these trees act as silent workhorses in the city’s climate resilience strategy[….]”

2. #AltGov: the secret network of federal workers resisting Doge from the inside

“Government employees fight the Trump administration’s chaos by organizing and publishing information on Bluesky[…. A group of government employees are] banding together to “expose harmful policies, defend public institutions and equip citizens with tools to push back against authoritarianism[….]””

3. An Ecuadorian hotspot shows how forests can claw back from destruction

“A December 2024 study described the recovery of ground birds and mammals like ocelots, and found their diversity and biomass in secondary forests was similar to those in old-growth forests after just 20 years. [… Some taxa recover] “earlier, some are later, but they all show a tendency to recover.””

4. Over 80 House Democrats demand Trump rescind gender-affirming care ban: 'We want trans kids to live'

“[89 House Democrats signed a letter stating,] "Trans young people, their parents and their doctors should be the ones making their health care decisions. No one should need to ask the President’s permission to access life-saving, evidence-based health care." "As Members of Congress, we stand united with trans young people and their families.”“

5. Boosting seafood production while protecting biodiversity

“A new study suggests that farming seafood from the ocean – known as mariculture – could be expanded to feed more people while reducing harm to marine biodiversity at the same time. […] “[… I]t’s not a foregone conclusion that the expansion of an industry is always going to have a proportionally negative impact on the environment[….]””

6. U.S. will spend up to $1 billion to combat bird flu, USDA secretary says

“The USDA will spend up to $500 million to provide free biosecurity audits to farms and $400 million to increase payment rates to farmers who need to kill their chickens due to bird flu[….] The USDA is exploring vaccines for chickens but is not yet authorizing their use[….]”

7. An Innovative Program Supporting the Protection of Irreplaceable Saline Lakes

“[… T]he program aims to provide comprehensive data on water availability and lake health, develop strategies to monitor and assess critical ecosystems, and identify knowledge gaps to guide future research and resource management.”

8. EU to unveil ​‘Clean Industrial Deal’ to cut CO2, boost energy security

“The bold plan aims to revitalize and decarbonize heavy industry, reduce reliance on gas, and make energy cheaper, cleaner, and more secure. […] By July, the EU said it will ​“simplify state aid rules” to ​“accelerate the roll-out of clean energy, deploy industrial decarbonisation and ensure sufficient capacity of clean-tech manufacturing” on the continent.”

9. Oyster Restoration Investments Net Positive Returns for Economy and Environment

“Researchers expect the restored oyster reefs to produce $38 million in ecosystem benefits through 2048. “This network protects nearly 350 million oysters[….]” [NOAA provided] $14.9 million to expand the sanctuary network to 500 acres by 2026 […] through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.”

10. Nations back $200 billion-a-year plan to reverse nature losses

“More than 140 countries adopted a strategy to mobilize hundreds of billions of dollars a year to help reverse dramatic losses in biodiversity[….] A finance strategy adopted to applause and tears from delegates, underpins "our collective capacity to sustain life on this planet," said Susana Muhamad[….]”

February 15-21 news here | (all credit for images and written material can be found at the source linked; I don’t claim credit for anything but curating.)

[hms-no-fun]

you were on cohost? i guess too late now, how was it for you?

cohost had its fair share of problems and i could often find the community there a bit too tumblr-core fingerwaggy if you know what i mean. but the site's dead now so it's kind of a moot point. what i find myself reflecting on most these days are the positives.

first, no numbers. i think their no numbers policy was probably a bit over-aggressive, but it quelled some of the rat race popularity contest aspect of social media that often makes it so tedious. i liked their tag tracking system, their robust content warning options, and the absence of infinite scroll. what i miss most about cohost is that their text editor supported CSS, which led to people programming elaborate text effects and puzzles and games in-site that harkened back to the days of flash animations. there was something in this combination of elements that drew out a rebellious creativity in users.

cohost came at a time when social media was across the board feeling terrible (and it's only gotten worse hahaha), particularly as someone who makes shit that relies on you clicking links that take you away from the website or app. algorithms hate this and punish it. users also just seem kind of lazy and disinterested in using the internet so much as letting the internet happen to them passively. but when a post of mine went viral on cohost, people engaged with it. it wasn't just likes and shares, it was comments and additions. it felt like a place that (at its best) encouraged actual conversation and the development of new ideas among like-minded peers. when my posts did well and i included a donation link, people gave me money. it felt genuinely like a website that COULD support professional blog work in a way that was more customizable even than substack yet still RSS friendly, and the Following tab which let you easily see posts of specific users was a REVELATION, like a mini RSS reader within the website itself.

but the enterprise was unsustainable for various reasons (not all of them outside the dev crew's control) and the haters got what they wanted. now our big social media alternative is bluesky, a website that dares to ask the question "what if there was another twitter?" the answer is that it fucking sucks. i hate microblogs so much dude, why on EARTH are we still acting like these disambiguited 300-character-limit posts are the most preferable means of social communication online??? why would you set out to make a better twitter and then deliberately choose to replicate literally every aspect of the user experience that encouraged low-information high-drama conflict fabrication? WHY WOULD YOU MAKE A VERSION OF TWITTER WHERE YOU CAN EASILY LOOK UP THE ACCOUNT OF EVERYONE WHO HAS YOU BLOCKED AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A FEATURE NOT A BUG???????? i just don't get it. i don't even get the optimism of the early adopters. i've seen people decry the post-election decay of the platform like "of course the cishets come in to ruin a community that was defined by trans & queer people" i'm sorry HELLO???????? from literally day zero bluesky was aiming to be a hands-off centrist IPO-friendly tech startup, there was never anything structurally embedded within the platform itself to keep this kind of decay from happening, you just happened to be on there when there were dramatically fewer users most of whom were curious tech enthusiasts. seriously, how have we not learned this lesson yet? you can't define a digital culture by the vibes of random user behavior! unless you have LAWS and GUIDELINES whereby you fucking BAN people for being shitheads, unless you enforce an actual code of conduct and punish bigoted speech and design a system that encourages constructive conversation, you are always always ALWAYS going to wind up at unhinged facebook boomer slop!

the death of cohost and the utterly predictable decay of bluesky are a big part of the reason why i've been posting so much more on tumblr. this is like the last bastion of anything even remotely resembling the old web, with its support of longposts and tagging and how easy it is to find random hobbyists doing cool shit you never knew existed before. like, yeah, you have to search that shit out and tailor your feed to not drive you crazy, but that's what i like about it!!! i am an adult with agency who understands that life is complicated and as such i expect to have to put some work into making my experience with a website positive! but in the hellworld of the iphone everything is walled garden apps for aggregating content where the content and its creators are structurally established as infinitely replaceable and uniquely worthless punching bags to be used and cast aside. everyone's given up on moderation and real jobs don't exist anymore especially if you happen to work in the "creative economy" IE are a writer or critic or artist or hobbyist of literally any kind. we've given up on expecting anything from the rich moneyboys who own and profit immensely off of the platforms whose value we literally create!!! especially now with the rise of "AI" grifters, whose work has ratcheted good old fashioned casual sexism and racism and homophobia up to levels not seen in such mainstream spaces since the early 2000s.

i like tumblr because i don't have to use a third party app to get & answer asks at length, and because it is a visual artist friendly platform where i won't be looked at funny for reblogging furry postmodernism or transgender homestuck OCs. it is a site that utterly lacks respectability and that's what makes it even remotely usuable. unfortunately it also sucks! partly it sucks because this place was ground zero for the rise of puritanical feminist-passing conservatism in leftist spaces, so it's like a hyperbolic time chamber for brain-melting life or death discourse about the most inconsequential bullshit you could ever imagine. but it also sucks because it's owned by a profit-motivated moneyboy who has consistently encouraged a culture of virulent transphobia and frequently bans trans women who call this out. so like, yeah, this place is cool compared to everywhere else, but it is exactly like everywhere else in that is also on a ticking clock to its own inevitable demise. the owners of this website will destroy everything that makes it interesting and will EAGERLY delete the nearly twenty years (!!!!!!) of posts it's accumulated the instant it will profit them to do so. this will be immensely unpopular and everyone will agree it's a tragedy and it won't matter. the culture and content of a social media platform is epiphenomenal to its rote economic valuation. i mean, obviously it isn't, zero of these massive tech companies would be what they are if so many people weren't so eager to give their time and labor away for free (and yes, writing a dumb dick joke on tumblr IS a form of labor in the same way that doing a captcha is labor, just because it's a miniscule contribution in an economy of scale doesn't mean you didn't contribute!), but once a tech company reaches a certain threshold its valuation ceases to be tethered to anything that actually exists in reality.

all of which is why i remember cohost with a heavy heart. yeah, it was imperfect. it was also independently owned, made with the explicit goal of creating a form of social media that actually tries not to give you a lifelong anxiety disorder so it can sell you homeopathic anti-anxiety sawdust suppositories. for the brief window of time when it was extant, i was genuinely hopeful for the future of being a creative on the internet. part of why i spend so much time on godfeels, a fucking homestuck fanfiction with no hope of turning a profit or establishing mainstream legitimacy, is that my readers actually ENGAGE with the material. what brought me back to using this website consistently was precisely the glut of godfeels-related questions i got, and the exciting conversations that resulted from my answers. meanwhile i put so many hours into my videos and even when they do well numerically, i barely see any actual engagement with the material. and that is a deliberate design choice on the part of youtube! that is the platform functioning as intended!! it sucks!!!

what the memory of cohost has instilled in me is a neverending distaste for the lazy unambitious also-rans that define the modern internet. i remember the possibility space of the early web and long for the expressiveness that even the most minor of utilities offered. we sacrificed that freedom for a convenience which was always the pretense for eventually charging us rent. i am thinking a lot these days about what a publicly funded government administrated social media utility would look like. what federal open source standards could look in an environment where the kinds of activities a digital ecosystem can encourage are strictly regulated against exploitation, bigotry, scams, and literal gambling. what if there was a unionized federal workforce devoted to the administration of internet moderation, which every website above a certain user threshold must legally take advantage of? i like to imagine a world where youtube isn't just nationalized but balkanized, where you have nested networks of youtubes administrated for different purposes by different agencies and organizations that operate on different paradigms of privacy and algorithmic interaction. imagine that your state, county, and/or city has its own branch of youtube meant to specifically highlight local work, while also remaining connected to a broader national network (oops i just reinvented federation lmao). imagine a world where server capacity is a publicly owned utility apportioned according to need and developed in collaboration with the communities of their construction rather than as a deliberate exploitation of them. our horizons for these kinds of things are just so, so small, our ability to imagine completely captured by capitalist realism, our willingness to demand services from our government simply obliterated by decades of cynical pro-austerity propaganda. i imagine proposing some of this stuff and people reacting like "well that's unrealistic" "that'll never happen" "they'd just use it for evil" and i am just SO! FUCKING! TIRED!!!!

like wow you're soooooo cool for being effectively two steps left of reagan, i bet you think prison abolition and free public housing are an impossible pipedream too huh? and exactly what has that attitude gotten you? what've you gained by being such a down to earth realist whose demands are limited by the scope of what seems immediately possible? has anything gotten better? have any of the things you thought were good stayed good? is your career more stable, your political position more safe, your desire to live and thrive greatly expanded? or do you spend every day in a cascading panopticon of stress and collapse, overwhelmed to the point of paralysis by the sheer magnitude of what it's cost us to abandon the future? you HAVE to dream. you HAVE to make unrealistic demands. the fucking conservatives have been making unrealistic demands forever and look, they're getting everything they want even though EVERYONE hates them for it! please i'm begging you to see and understand that what's feasible, what's reasonable, what's realistic, are literally irrelevant. these things only feel impossible because we choose to believe The Adults (and if you're younger than like 45, trust me, to the ruling class you are a child) whose bank accounts reflect just how profitable it is to convince us that they're impossible. all those billions of dollars these fuckers have didn't come from nowhere, it was stolen from all of us. there is no reason that money can't and shouldn't be seized and recirculated back into the economy, no reason it can't be used to fund a society that is actually social, where technological development is driven not by what's most likely to drive up profits next quarter but by what people need from technology in their daily lives.

uh so yeah basically that's my opinion of cohost lmao