Bilingual

Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers
a month ago
- Meta's legal threats against whistleblower Sarah Wynn-Williams, including an $11 million+ arbitration award and demands for her silence, highlight a strategy to intimidate ex-employees.
- Mark Zuckerberg's aggressive response to 'Careless People' parallels authoritarian tactics, as seen in Belarusian dissidents' flash mobs, aiming to suppress dissent through fear.
- The Streisand Effect may boost the book's visibility, but Meta continues escalating actions, suggesting a calculated move to deter other potential whistleblowers amid company struggles.
- Wynn-Williams has sued to invalidate her contract after Meta claimed even her silent stage appearance violated the agreement, pushing her to legal action.
- The article links to broader themes of surveillance, inequality, and tech ethics, including references to AI failures, unionization efforts, and historical protests.
Zuckerberg's Increasingly Bizarre War on Whistleblowers
20 days ago
- Mark Zuckerberg's legal attack on whistleblower Sarah Wynn-Williams includes demanding $111 million and trying to enforce silence, escalating to absurd levels like penalizing her for silent stage appearances.
- Sarah Wynn-Williams's book 'Careless People' exposes Facebook/Meta's misconduct, including enabling genocide in Myanmar, and personal failings of executives like Sheryl Sandberg and Zuckerberg.
- Meta uses nondisclosure, non-disparagement, and binding arbitration clauses to silence ex-employees, with Wynn-Williams now suing to invalidate her contract after extreme compliance efforts.
- Analogies are drawn to Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenka's oppressive tactics, like arresting people for eating ice cream, highlighting how both use fear to suppress dissent.
- The article suggests Meta's harsh treatment of Wynn-Williams aims to terrorize other ex-employees into silence, especially amid layoffs and AI investment failures, despite the Streisand Effect boosting book sales.
Why are US consumers so angry? It's not just high prices
14 days ago
- Nearly 80% of Americans experienced service or product problems in 2025, with two-thirds feeling 'rage' about it.
- Consumer frustration stems from overcharges, billing mistakes, poor service, shoddy products, and a backdrop of high inflation and corporate consolidation.
- The 'annoyance economy' costs U.S. households $165 billion annually in time, fees, and irritation.
- Federal consumer protection has weakened under recent administrations, with agencies like the CFPB rolling back enforcement and settlements.
- State actions and some federal efforts, like by the FTC, offer limited relief, but overall regulatory oversight is declining.
- Consumer journalism has significantly declined since the 1970s, reducing corporate accountability, though some nonprofit and citizen journalism efforts persist.
- Historical consumer protections from the Nader era have eroded, with corporate power now largely unchecked in many political arenas.
- Legal avenues may increase as consumers turn to litigation due to federal inaction.
- Public frustration manifests in extreme cases, reflecting widespread feelings of powerlessness and distrust toward corporations.
- The Guardian plans to explore causes, impacts, and solutions to consumer rage, inviting readers to share their experiences.
EU officials peeved after Anthropic sends junior staffer to testify about safety
10 days ago
- European policymakers criticized Anthropic for not sending a senior official to discuss AI risks in Brussels.
- Anthropic sent technical employee Donny Greenberg via video from New York instead of requested policy head Sarah Heck.
- Greenberg emphasized he is 'a technical person, not a policy person' during the session.
Guerrilla London bus ads mock Kylie Jenner’s Meta glasses campaign
10 days ago
- Guerrilla ads by Everyone Hates Elon mock Meta's Kylie Jenner glasses campaign, highlighting privacy and consent concerns.
- Spoof bus stop ad flips between Jenner's image and an X-ray version with the tagline "We're always watching," referencing the film They Live.
- Meta's latest smart glasses allow three minutes of recording, raising fears of secret surveillance, especially by "Manosphere" creators harassing women.
- Researchers used Meta glasses footage for facial recognition to extract personal data, showing gaps in privacy laws and ethical oversight.
- Activists question why billionaires fund such surveillance technology instead of societal benefits like cancer cures.
If an AI chatbot misleads you, who is to blame?
9 days ago
- A German court ruled Google is liable for AI search summaries, rejecting defenses that users can verify or should not blindly trust AI-generated information.
- Internet companies have historically straddled the line between carriers (transmitting content without liability) and publishers (responsible for content they curate or create), with Section 230 shielding them from liability for others' speech.
- AI summaries, like Google's AI Overview, involve rewriting content with editorial discretion, making companies more akin to publishers and thus liable for inaccuracies or harm, as seen in Air Canada's case where a court held the airline responsible for its chatbot's promises.
- Liability for AI agents is crucial to ensure accuracy and accountability; allowing companies to hide behind faulty AI would create harmful incentives, undermining trust in systems like Visa's planned AI purchasing agents.
- If the German ruling stands, it could force Google to improve its AI system due to high error rates, potentially making some AI applications commercially unviable but benefiting users by ensuring reliability.

corporate accountability

Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

Zuckerberg's Increasingly Bizarre War on Whistleblowers

Why are US consumers so angry? It's not just high prices

EU officials peeved after Anthropic sends junior staffer to testify about safety

Guerrilla London bus ads mock Kylie Jenner’s Meta glasses campaign

If an AI chatbot misleads you, who is to blame?