![]() Had Signal, Element, Session, Threema, Viber, WhatsApp, and Apple not formed a united front, there would have been little chance of the government backtracking. If anything, this backdown by the UK government provides a reprieve for users and providers alike, but it may be short-lived.ĭespite the fact that the “spy clause” has not been removed from the law and the UK government has given no guarantees about its future uses, this case shows that pressure, when applied by many actors, really does work. Although the British government promised not to force companies to use unproven technology to snoop on users, it may try to enforce the so-called “spy clause” in the future if better and more secure (in the government’s eyes) technology emerges. While some industry players, notably, Signal’s Meredith Whittaker, called the UK government’s decision “a victory” for end-to-end encrypted messengers we are not out of the woods yet. So, now the UK government says that it won’t use the powers in the bill to force them to scan messages for the signs of child sexual abuse material (CSAM), acknowledging that there is no technology right now that would enable them to do so without undermining privacy and end-to-end encryption. The plan, embodied by the UK’s Online Safety Bill, drew pushback from Signal, WhatsApp, and Apple, who all threatened to withdraw from the country if it went through. We have previously written about the UK government’s plan to compel service providers, including messengers, to scan encrypted chats for child porn. UK backs down on encryption-breaking plan, but too early to celebrate This approach may not seem very generous, as Adobe notes that the payment is subject to its discretion and “is not guaranteed.” However, it is better than nothing, and it may pave the way for more companies to follow suit. Adobe’s announcement says that “subsequent bonus” will be based on new approved images and licenses they generated, which implies that creators would be compensated for specific images only once, even if they continue to generate revenue for Adobe through Firefly. The bonus will be calculated on an individual basis and depend on the number and popularity of images used for AI training during a 12-month period from June 2022 to June 2023. The announcement coincided with Firefly’s official release - the feature had been in beta since March, and was used to generate about 2 billion images in that time. ![]() Adobe has now started to make good on its promise to compensate Adobe Stock creators who may lose out from the widespread adoption of AI. To train Firefly, its generative AI model, the company only uses content that it has rights to through its stock image platform Adobe Stock or that is in the public domain. Adobe starts paying out stock contributors for helping train AIĪt the time when Google claims it has the right to scrape everything you post online and use it for its AI training, Adobe is taking a different approach. By introducing Topics in Chrome anyway, Google has essentially embedded its user-tracking platform into the browser itself. However, cookies’ successor - Topics - is just as bad, as we and others like Apple and Mozilla have repeatedly pointed out. Google has been trying to rebrand itself as a champion of privacy, and its plan to phase out tracking cookies is supposed to become the icing on that cake. Hopefully there will be more interest in the matter from the Dutch court where the case has been filed. Last year, the EU’s top privacy watchdog was even sued by activists for failing to investigate “the largest data breach ever,” as they call Google’s ad auctions that allow it to trade people’s data in real time. Unlike fellow tech giant Meta, Google has escaped relatively unscathed from the claws of EU regulators. The lawsuit cites previous research into Google that has revealed that so-called “ad auctions,” in which the internet activity and locations of EU users are traded, take place “on average almost 380 times a day.” The plaintiffs argue that Google scoops up data about their online behavior and location with little transparency and without their explicit permission - all to then sell it to the highest bidder. Google has been accused of intrusive online surveillance by more than 82,000 people who have signed up to a class action lawsuit against the tech giant in the Netherlands. Google’s ‘ad auctions’ face a privacy challenge in the Netherlands In this edition of AdGuard’s digest: Google faces a privacy investigation in the Netherlands, Adobe is paying creators for having used their images to train AI, the UK delays killing E2E encryption, WhatsApp may be toying with an idea to introduce ads, X (formerly Twitter) wants subscribers to upload government IDs for verification.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |