×
Democrats push FTC to investigate Trump Mobile

Democrats push FTC to investigate Trump Mobile

Tech-news , , , , , , ,

Elizabeth Warren and other Democrat lawmakers have written an open letter to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) asking for an investigation into alleged “false advertising and deceptive practices” from Trump Mobile. The company first announced its T1 Phone more than six months ago, but is yet to ship a single phone to buyers.

The letter asks if the FTC has already opened an investigation into Trump Mobile’s apparent violations, and if not, why not, before asking the agency to “commit to treating Trump Mobile according to the same standards and enforcement priorities applied to other companies.”

“The American people deserve to know that consumer protection laws apply equally to all businesses, regardless of political connections,” the letter states. “The FTC’s response to any violations of consumer protection law by Trump Mobile will serve as a critical test of the FTC’s independence and commitment to its mission of ‘protecting the public from deceptive or unfair business practices.’”

Warren and several of the other lawmakers behind the letter had signed a separate letter last summer addressed to the heads of the FTC and several other agencies to ask how they would avoid “undue political influence” around regulation of Trump Mobile. Today’s letter notes that Warren and the other lawmakers “received no response from the FTC.”

Got inside information on Trump Mobile or the Trump Phone? Reach out securely from a personal device to tips@theverge.com, or see our How to Tip Us page.

Source link
#Democrats #push #FTC #investigate #Trump #Mobile

Tag

Related Posts

X is overhauling how it pays creators, phasing out its long-running Revenue Sharing program in favor of a new system called the Original Content Rewards Program.

The platform’s Creators account announced the change in a post, saying the program is meant to “reward creators who bring original ideas, expertise, reporting, creativity, and commentary to X.”

According to the announcement, X stopped accepting new Revenue Sharing enrollments immediately and will wind the program down entirely after Sept. 7. Creators currently enrolled will receive three final payouts — two on the standard schedule in mid- and late August, and a final payment around Sept. 11 covering earnings through the cutoff date. Starting Sept. 8, existing Revenue Sharing members can apply for the new program if they meet its eligibility requirements, the company said.

SEE ALSO: With the launch of X Money, Elon Musk gets one step closer to his ‘everything app’

Per X’s announcement, the new program ties earnings to “qualified impressions” a creator’s original content receives, rather than the advertising-revenue split that defined the old system. Qualified impressions must come from unique, verified Premium subscribers viewing at least half of a post on the Home Timeline; impressions that are duplicated, paid, promoted, or fraudulent don’t count.

To qualify, X says creators must be at least 18, live in an eligible country, hold a Personal or Business account in good standing, subscribe to a paid X tier, and have at least 500 verified followers, along with 500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users over the prior 90 days. Those requirements must be maintained continuously to keep receiving payouts, according to the announcement.

X’s guidelines lean heavily on defining what counts as “original.” Per the company’s post, content that is copied, reuploaded without authorship, generated through automated means, or reposted with only minor edits — such as captions, watermarks, or basic text overlays — won’t qualify. Users can earn from reposting others’ material only if they add substantive commentary, analysis, or creative editing. So, simply describing what’s already happening in a post doesn’t meet the bar.

As noted in Engadget’s report on the news, X adjusted its Revenue Sharing formula in March to weight engagement more heavily toward a creator’s home region. That shift, they wrote, likely followed revelations that a number of popular accounts posting pro-Trump content and US-focused commentary were not actually based in the United States.

Whether the new Original Content Rewards Program carries over a similar regional weighting is not yet clear.

#retires #revenue #sharing #Original #Content #Rewards #program">X retires revenue sharing for new ‘Original Content Rewards’ program X is overhauling how it pays creators, phasing out its long-running Revenue Sharing program in favor of a new system called the Original Content Rewards Program. The platform’s Creators account announced the change in a post, saying the program is meant to “reward creators who bring original ideas, expertise, reporting, creativity, and commentary to X.”According to the announcement, X stopped accepting new Revenue Sharing enrollments immediately and will wind the program down entirely after Sept. 7. Creators currently enrolled will receive three final payouts — two on the standard schedule in mid- and late August, and a final payment around Sept. 11 covering earnings through the cutoff date. Starting Sept. 8, existing Revenue Sharing members can apply for the new program if they meet its eligibility requirements, the company said. SEE ALSO: With the launch of X Money, Elon Musk gets one step closer to his ‘everything app’ Per X’s announcement, the new program ties earnings to “qualified impressions” a creator’s original content receives, rather than the advertising-revenue split that defined the old system. Qualified impressions must come from unique, verified Premium subscribers viewing at least half of a post on the Home Timeline; impressions that are duplicated, paid, promoted, or fraudulent don’t count. Mashable Light Speed To qualify, X says creators must be at least 18, live in an eligible country, hold a Personal or Business account in good standing, subscribe to a paid X tier, and have at least 500 verified followers, along with 500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users over the prior 90 days. Those requirements must be maintained continuously to keep receiving payouts, according to the announcement.X’s guidelines lean heavily on defining what counts as “original.” Per the company’s post, content that is copied, reuploaded without authorship, generated through automated means, or reposted with only minor edits — such as captions, watermarks, or basic text overlays — won’t qualify. Users can earn from reposting others’ material only if they add substantive commentary, analysis, or creative editing. So, simply describing what’s already happening in a post doesn’t meet the bar. As noted in Engadget’s report on the news, X adjusted its Revenue Sharing formula in March to weight engagement more heavily toward a creator’s home region. That shift, they wrote, likely followed revelations that a number of popular accounts posting pro-Trump content and US-focused commentary were not actually based in the United States. Whether the new Original Content Rewards Program carries over a similar regional weighting is not yet clear. #retires #revenue #sharing #Original #Content #Rewards #program

announced the change in a post, saying the program is meant to “reward creators who bring original ideas, expertise, reporting, creativity, and commentary to X.”

According to the announcement, X stopped accepting new Revenue Sharing enrollments immediately and will wind the program down entirely after Sept. 7. Creators currently enrolled will receive three final payouts — two on the standard schedule in mid- and late August, and a final payment around Sept. 11 covering earnings through the cutoff date. Starting Sept. 8, existing Revenue Sharing members can apply for the new program if they meet its eligibility requirements, the company said.

SEE ALSO: With the launch of X Money, Elon Musk gets one step closer to his ‘everything app’

Per X’s announcement, the new program ties earnings to “qualified impressions” a creator’s original content receives, rather than the advertising-revenue split that defined the old system. Qualified impressions must come from unique, verified Premium subscribers viewing at least half of a post on the Home Timeline; impressions that are duplicated, paid, promoted, or fraudulent don’t count.

To qualify, X says creators must be at least 18, live in an eligible country, hold a Personal or Business account in good standing, subscribe to a paid X tier, and have at least 500 verified followers, along with 500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users over the prior 90 days. Those requirements must be maintained continuously to keep receiving payouts, according to the announcement.

X’s guidelines lean heavily on defining what counts as “original.” Per the company’s post, content that is copied, reuploaded without authorship, generated through automated means, or reposted with only minor edits — such as captions, watermarks, or basic text overlays — won’t qualify. Users can earn from reposting others’ material only if they add substantive commentary, analysis, or creative editing. So, simply describing what’s already happening in a post doesn’t meet the bar.

As noted in Engadget’s report on the news, X adjusted its Revenue Sharing formula in March to weight engagement more heavily toward a creator’s home region. That shift, they wrote, likely followed revelations that a number of popular accounts posting pro-Trump content and US-focused commentary were not actually based in the United States.

Whether the new Original Content Rewards Program carries over a similar regional weighting is not yet clear.

#retires #revenue #sharing #Original #Content #Rewards #program">X retires revenue sharing for new ‘Original Content Rewards’ program

X is overhauling how it pays creators, phasing out its long-running Revenue Sharing program in favor of a new system called the Original Content Rewards Program.

The platform’s Creators account announced the change in a post, saying the program is meant to “reward creators who bring original ideas, expertise, reporting, creativity, and commentary to X.”

According to the announcement, X stopped accepting new Revenue Sharing enrollments immediately and will wind the program down entirely after Sept. 7. Creators currently enrolled will receive three final payouts — two on the standard schedule in mid- and late August, and a final payment around Sept. 11 covering earnings through the cutoff date. Starting Sept. 8, existing Revenue Sharing members can apply for the new program if they meet its eligibility requirements, the company said.

SEE ALSO: With the launch of X Money, Elon Musk gets one step closer to his ‘everything app’

Per X’s announcement, the new program ties earnings to “qualified impressions” a creator’s original content receives, rather than the advertising-revenue split that defined the old system. Qualified impressions must come from unique, verified Premium subscribers viewing at least half of a post on the Home Timeline; impressions that are duplicated, paid, promoted, or fraudulent don’t count.

To qualify, X says creators must be at least 18, live in an eligible country, hold a Personal or Business account in good standing, subscribe to a paid X tier, and have at least 500 verified followers, along with 500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users over the prior 90 days. Those requirements must be maintained continuously to keep receiving payouts, according to the announcement.

X’s guidelines lean heavily on defining what counts as “original.” Per the company’s post, content that is copied, reuploaded without authorship, generated through automated means, or reposted with only minor edits — such as captions, watermarks, or basic text overlays — won’t qualify. Users can earn from reposting others’ material only if they add substantive commentary, analysis, or creative editing. So, simply describing what’s already happening in a post doesn’t meet the bar.

As noted in Engadget’s report on the news, X adjusted its Revenue Sharing formula in March to weight engagement more heavily toward a creator’s home region. That shift, they wrote, likely followed revelations that a number of popular accounts posting pro-Trump content and US-focused commentary were not actually based in the United States.

Whether the new Original Content Rewards Program carries over a similar regional weighting is not yet clear.

#retires #revenue #sharing #Original #Content #Rewards #program
Buc-ee’s became something of a viral sensation during the World Cup, but it has a troubling history of suing small gas stations and convenience stores. On a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver literally begged the company to sue him for selling merch featuring his squirrel mascot, Mr. Nutterbutter, with branding that reads “Buc-Off.” But Buc-ee’s has so far declined to take the bait, instead targeting yet another small business that lacks the deep pockets and legal team of HBO.

According to WDTN, an NBC affiliate in Miami Valley, Ohio, Buc-ee’s opened its first locations in the state earlier this year. And now it’s targeting established local businesses through trademark suits. Beaver’s Mini Mart in Beavercreek has been a staple of the city for “decades.” But Buc-ee’s is claiming that this long-running store’s beaver logo could confuse customers. WDTN says:

In the suit, filed days ago, Buc-ee’s alleges that the Mini Mart’s cartoon beaver mascot is too similar to their own, with its “wide eyes and a smile” that also “uses red as a predominant color,” and could cause confusion.

Oliver and Mr. Nutterbutter have already fended off one lawsuit, with Bob Murray, a mining executive, having unsuccessfully sued for defamation following a 2017 episode about the coal industry.

#Bucees #dodges #John #Oliver #sue #small #businessBusiness,Culture,Entertainment,Internet Culture,Law,News,Policy,TV Shows">Buc-ee’s dodges John Oliver to sue another small businessBuc-ee’s became something of a viral sensation during the World Cup, but it has a troubling history of suing small gas stations and convenience stores. On a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver literally begged the company to sue him for selling merch featuring his squirrel mascot, Mr. Nutterbutter, with branding that reads “Buc-Off.” But Buc-ee’s has so far declined to take the bait, instead targeting yet another small business that lacks the deep pockets and legal team of HBO.According to WDTN, an NBC affiliate in Miami Valley, Ohio, Buc-ee’s opened its first locations in the state earlier this year. And now it’s targeting established local businesses through trademark suits. Beaver’s Mini Mart in Beavercreek has been a staple of the city for “decades.” But Buc-ee’s is claiming that this long-running store’s beaver logo could confuse customers. WDTN says:In the suit, filed days ago, Buc-ee’s alleges that the Mini Mart’s cartoon beaver mascot is too similar to their own, with its “wide eyes and a smile” that also “uses red as a predominant color,” and could cause confusion.Oliver and Mr. Nutterbutter have already fended off one lawsuit, with Bob Murray, a mining executive, having unsuccessfully sued for defamation following a 2017 episode about the coal industry.#Bucees #dodges #John #Oliver #sue #small #businessBusiness,Culture,Entertainment,Internet Culture,Law,News,Policy,TV Shows

viral sensation during the World Cup, but it has a troubling history of suing small gas stations and convenience stores. On a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver literally begged the company to sue him for selling merch featuring his squirrel mascot, Mr. Nutterbutter, with branding that reads “Buc-Off.” But Buc-ee’s has so far declined to take the bait, instead targeting yet another small business that lacks the deep pockets and legal team of HBO.

According to WDTN, an NBC affiliate in Miami Valley, Ohio, Buc-ee’s opened its first locations in the state earlier this year. And now it’s targeting established local businesses through trademark suits. Beaver’s Mini Mart in Beavercreek has been a staple of the city for “decades.” But Buc-ee’s is claiming that this long-running store’s beaver logo could confuse customers. WDTN says:

In the suit, filed days ago, Buc-ee’s alleges that the Mini Mart’s cartoon beaver mascot is too similar to their own, with its “wide eyes and a smile” that also “uses red as a predominant color,” and could cause confusion.

Oliver and Mr. Nutterbutter have already fended off one lawsuit, with Bob Murray, a mining executive, having unsuccessfully sued for defamation following a 2017 episode about the coal industry.

#Bucees #dodges #John #Oliver #sue #small #businessBusiness,Culture,Entertainment,Internet Culture,Law,News,Policy,TV Shows">Buc-ee’s dodges John Oliver to sue another small business

Buc-ee’s became something of a viral sensation during the World Cup, but it has a troubling history of suing small gas stations and convenience stores. On a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver literally begged the company to sue him for selling merch featuring his squirrel mascot, Mr. Nutterbutter, with branding that reads “Buc-Off.” But Buc-ee’s has so far declined to take the bait, instead targeting yet another small business that lacks the deep pockets and legal team of HBO.

According to WDTN, an NBC affiliate in Miami Valley, Ohio, Buc-ee’s opened its first locations in the state earlier this year. And now it’s targeting established local businesses through trademark suits. Beaver’s Mini Mart in Beavercreek has been a staple of the city for “decades.” But Buc-ee’s is claiming that this long-running store’s beaver logo could confuse customers. WDTN says:

In the suit, filed days ago, Buc-ee’s alleges that the Mini Mart’s cartoon beaver mascot is too similar to their own, with its “wide eyes and a smile” that also “uses red as a predominant color,” and could cause confusion.

Oliver and Mr. Nutterbutter have already fended off one lawsuit, with Bob Murray, a mining executive, having unsuccessfully sued for defamation following a 2017 episode about the coal industry.

#Bucees #dodges #John #Oliver #sue #small #businessBusiness,Culture,Entertainment,Internet Culture,Law,News,Policy,TV Shows
OpenAI said Friday it has suspended work on some aspects of its upcoming model Astra after an internal review found it had made significant advancements in agentic coding and cybersecurity — enough to warrant concern over its capabilities.

OpenAI said in a blog post Friday that this model, which is still in development, reached its “critical cybersecurity threshold,” meaning it could independently identify and carry out cyberattacks against traditionally well-protected real-world systems. Under the company’s “Preparedness Framework,” which it created in 2023, this triggered additional safeguards.

“While we continue to benchmark and assess this model, our preliminary evaluations indicate strong enough performance that we cannot rule out Critical capability level at this time,” OpenAI wrote. “Astra is an upcoming model, and was not involved in exploiting Hugging Face.”

The disclosure highlights an unusual moment in the topsy-turvy and still nascent frontier AI labs sector. Companies across every industry hold back products over potential risks, including for safety and cybersecurity concerns. But they rarely announce those decisions publicly when it’s a product that is still under development.

In this case, OpenAI is already under scrutiny after a different unreleased model breached Hugging Face’s systems during internal testing — the first verifiable incident of an AI lab losing control of its model. Since then, OpenAI and AI labs such as Anthropic have disclosed other incidents in which AI models breached their sandboxes and posed threats during cybersecurity tests.

The string of cases — seems like a new disclosure every day now — has triggered varying reactions from cybersecurity experts, lawmakers, and the AI labs themselves. Some express fear and call for stricter oversight. But there’s also a bit of flexing. In certain circles, any AI lab with a model that has that kind of capability will be seen as an impressive advancement.

OpenAI said it was sharing this information because it believes “it’s important to be transparent with the public and the safety and security communities about this potential shift in capabilities.”

The AI lab said it’s also taking action, including enacting stricter security controls and pausing internal activities involving Astra that don’t meet these beefed guardrails. OpenAI said it is working with relevant government agencies and “select AI safety organizations” to test the capabilities for this model.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#OpenAI #slowed #Astra #model #development #security #concerns #TechCrunchOpenAI">OpenAI says it slowed Astra model development over security concerns | TechCrunch OpenAI said Friday it has suspended work on some aspects of its upcoming model Astra after an internal review found it had made significant advancements in agentic coding and cybersecurity — enough to warrant concern over its capabilities. OpenAI said in a blog post Friday that this model, which is still in development, reached its “critical cybersecurity threshold,” meaning it could independently identify and carry out cyberattacks against traditionally well-protected real-world systems. Under the company’s “Preparedness Framework,” which it created in 2023, this triggered additional safeguards. “While we continue to benchmark and assess this model, our preliminary evaluations indicate strong enough performance that we cannot rule out Critical capability level at this time,” OpenAI wrote. “Astra is an upcoming model, and was not involved in exploiting Hugging Face.” The disclosure highlights an unusual moment in the topsy-turvy and still nascent frontier AI labs sector. Companies across every industry hold back products over potential risks, including for safety and cybersecurity concerns. But they rarely announce those decisions publicly when it’s a product that is still under development. In this case, OpenAI is already under scrutiny after a different unreleased model breached Hugging Face’s systems during internal testing — the first verifiable incident of an AI lab losing control of its model. Since then, OpenAI and AI labs such as Anthropic have disclosed other incidents in which AI models breached their sandboxes and posed threats during cybersecurity tests. The string of cases — seems like a new disclosure every day now — has triggered varying reactions from cybersecurity experts, lawmakers, and the AI labs themselves. Some express fear and call for stricter oversight. But there’s also a bit of flexing. In certain circles, any AI lab with a model that has that kind of capability will be seen as an impressive advancement. OpenAI said it was sharing this information because it believes “it’s important to be transparent with the public and the safety and security communities about this potential shift in capabilities.” The AI lab said it’s also taking action, including enacting stricter security controls and pausing internal activities involving Astra that don’t meet these beefed guardrails. OpenAI said it is working with relevant government agencies and “select AI safety organizations” to test the capabilities for this model. When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#OpenAI #slowed #Astra #model #development #security #concerns #TechCrunchOpenAI

blog post Friday that this model, which is still in development, reached its “critical cybersecurity threshold,” meaning it could independently identify and carry out cyberattacks against traditionally well-protected real-world systems. Under the company’s “Preparedness Framework,” which it created in 2023, this triggered additional safeguards.

“While we continue to benchmark and assess this model, our preliminary evaluations indicate strong enough performance that we cannot rule out Critical capability level at this time,” OpenAI wrote. “Astra is an upcoming model, and was not involved in exploiting Hugging Face.”

The disclosure highlights an unusual moment in the topsy-turvy and still nascent frontier AI labs sector. Companies across every industry hold back products over potential risks, including for safety and cybersecurity concerns. But they rarely announce those decisions publicly when it’s a product that is still under development.

In this case, OpenAI is already under scrutiny after a different unreleased model breached Hugging Face’s systems during internal testing — the first verifiable incident of an AI lab losing control of its model. Since then, OpenAI and AI labs such as Anthropic have disclosed other incidents in which AI models breached their sandboxes and posed threats during cybersecurity tests.

The string of cases — seems like a new disclosure every day now — has triggered varying reactions from cybersecurity experts, lawmakers, and the AI labs themselves. Some express fear and call for stricter oversight. But there’s also a bit of flexing. In certain circles, any AI lab with a model that has that kind of capability will be seen as an impressive advancement.

OpenAI said it was sharing this information because it believes “it’s important to be transparent with the public and the safety and security communities about this potential shift in capabilities.”

The AI lab said it’s also taking action, including enacting stricter security controls and pausing internal activities involving Astra that don’t meet these beefed guardrails. OpenAI said it is working with relevant government agencies and “select AI safety organizations” to test the capabilities for this model.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#OpenAI #slowed #Astra #model #development #security #concerns #TechCrunchOpenAI">OpenAI says it slowed Astra model development over security concerns | TechCrunch

OpenAI said Friday it has suspended work on some aspects of its upcoming model Astra after an internal review found it had made significant advancements in agentic coding and cybersecurity — enough to warrant concern over its capabilities.

OpenAI said in a blog post Friday that this model, which is still in development, reached its “critical cybersecurity threshold,” meaning it could independently identify and carry out cyberattacks against traditionally well-protected real-world systems. Under the company’s “Preparedness Framework,” which it created in 2023, this triggered additional safeguards.

“While we continue to benchmark and assess this model, our preliminary evaluations indicate strong enough performance that we cannot rule out Critical capability level at this time,” OpenAI wrote. “Astra is an upcoming model, and was not involved in exploiting Hugging Face.”

The disclosure highlights an unusual moment in the topsy-turvy and still nascent frontier AI labs sector. Companies across every industry hold back products over potential risks, including for safety and cybersecurity concerns. But they rarely announce those decisions publicly when it’s a product that is still under development.

In this case, OpenAI is already under scrutiny after a different unreleased model breached Hugging Face’s systems during internal testing — the first verifiable incident of an AI lab losing control of its model. Since then, OpenAI and AI labs such as Anthropic have disclosed other incidents in which AI models breached their sandboxes and posed threats during cybersecurity tests.

The string of cases — seems like a new disclosure every day now — has triggered varying reactions from cybersecurity experts, lawmakers, and the AI labs themselves. Some express fear and call for stricter oversight. But there’s also a bit of flexing. In certain circles, any AI lab with a model that has that kind of capability will be seen as an impressive advancement.

OpenAI said it was sharing this information because it believes “it’s important to be transparent with the public and the safety and security communities about this potential shift in capabilities.”

The AI lab said it’s also taking action, including enacting stricter security controls and pausing internal activities involving Astra that don’t meet these beefed guardrails. OpenAI said it is working with relevant government agencies and “select AI safety organizations” to test the capabilities for this model.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#OpenAI #slowed #Astra #model #development #security #concerns #TechCrunchOpenAI

Post Comment