×
A Dish of Neurons Playing DOOM Is the Wildest Thing I’ve Seen in Ages

A Dish of Neurons Playing DOOM Is the Wildest Thing I’ve Seen in Ages

A couple of years ago, a company called Cortical Labs released a video that showed a simplified version of Pong being played by a culture of human neurons in a Petri dish. The idea that a bunch of neurons in a dish can do anything is impressive enough, but it turns out that things have gotten significantly crazier since then, because the company has now managed to get a similar culture of neurons to play Doom.

In a very slick marketing video, the company demonstrates “real neuron gameplay”: Doom running on its CL-1 neural computing system, a microchip upon which 200,000 human neurons are mounted in something called a “multi-electrode array.” (For comparison, while the exact number of neurons in an average human brain remains the subject of some debate, it’s in the order of tens of billions—which really just reinforces how astonishingly powerful and complex our own brains are.)

Anyway, this video is wild—and it just gets wilder as various company representatives explain exactly what’s going on.

First, the chip isn’t running Doom; it’s playing Doom. Or, to be more accurate, various elements of the on-screen data are being mapped to patterns of electric stimuli, which are then transmitted to the neurons. The neurons respond to these stimuli with signals of their own, which control the on-screen character’s actions: “If the neurons fire in a specific pattern, Doomguy shoots. If they fire in another pattern, he moves to the right. And so on.”

At one point, a researcher shows some microscope images of the chip, and we see how intricate and very clearly organic webs of neurons wind around the crisp, straight lines of circuitry. It looks like something straight out of a sci-fi film. I mean, look at this:

© Cortical Labs / YouTube

The other thing is that the neurons are learning. At present, they’re not particularly good at Doom: “The cells play like a beginner who’s never seen a computer. And in all fairness, they haven’t.” But give them a couple of years, and who knows? The plasticity of the networks that neurons form is a big part of what makes our own brains so powerful and adaptable. If these networks adapt in the same manner, we might just find that they end up being very, very good at Doom.

(With that said, save for a couple of short exceptions, the footage doesn’t actually depict Doom. The neurons are playing Freedoom, which runs on the Doom engine—which has been open-sourced for decades—but uses none of Doom’s iconic demons or weapons, which remain under copyright. We have nothing against Freedoom per se, but come on—can we not at least furnish our future brain-in-a-vat overlords with a proper copy DOOM.WAD?)

There are obviously many fascinating and potentially troubling questions raised by this sort of technology. One that springs to mind immediately is, “Whose cells are these?” They must contain somebody’s DNA. Are we going to end up with another Henrietta Lacks situation two decades down the line, where every one of the neurocomputers thrashing everyone online at Call of Duty 17 contains neurons that originate with the same person?

The company has launched something it’s calling the “Cortical Cloud,” which promises to allow developers the world over to experiment with the CL-1 via a Python-based API. This collegiate spirit is admirable, but the idea of human neurons ending up being used to generate AI porn or something feels… unpleasant. Who knows, though? Maybe in a couple of generations’ time, it’ll feel just as commonplace as today’s insanely complicated processors being used for the same purpose.

Source link
#Dish #Neurons #Playing #DOOM #Wildest #Ive #Ages

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez won a historic sum of $375 million in a landmark child safety case against Meta earlier this year. But the next stage of the fight could be even more consequential for Meta and the social media industry at large.

Beginning Monday, attorneys for Meta and New Mexico will return to a Santa Fe courthouse for a three-week public nuisance trial, where they’ll argue over the changes the AG wants the judge to order Meta make to Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Those changes include adding age verification for New Mexico users, prohibiting end-to-end encryption for users under 18 and capping their use to 90 hours per month, limiting engagement-boosting features like infinite scroll and autoplay, and requiring Meta to detect 99 percent of new child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

“From the outset, our goal was to try and change the way the company’s doing business,” Torrez told The Verge on a recent visit to Washington, DC, to advocate for new kids safety legislation. “I recognize that even at $375 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business. In fact, there’s probably some folks in that company who think of it as the cost of doing business.”

“Even at $375 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business”

While any changes ordered by the judge would only apply to Meta and its operations in New Mexico, the company could apply the changes in other states for the sake of simplicity. Or, as it’s threatened to do, it could simply go dark in the state. A court order could send a message to other tech companies that courts may be willing to alter their businesses if they’re found liable.

During the trial, New Mexico will argue Meta has become a public nuisance by creating a public health hazard in the state. The AG’s office expects to call on about 15 witnesses, including experts who will testify to the feasibility of their proposed remedies, and fact witnesses who will testify about Meta’s alleged harms. After Meta makes its defense, Judge Bryan Biedscheid will evaluate which proposals are relevant and feasible — a process that could take some time, compared to the speedy turnaround of the jury verdict in March.

A sweeping win for New Mexico could energize Torrez and thousands of other plaintiffs currently pursuing cases against tech companies. Conversely, a limited order could be a significant blow. The outcome won’t directly impact other cases, but it will almost certainly color negotiations over potential settlements.

Several of Torrez’s requests are hot-button tech policy issues. Age verification would almost certainly require Meta or a third-party provider to collect more personal information on adults and minors alike, which privacy advocates have consistently warned can make users less safe. Don McGowan, who previously served on the board of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), said that barring encrypted communications on platforms like Facebook “is a great way to make sure that nobody uses Facebook Messenger anymore and just moves their activity to other platforms that aren’t touched by this lawsuit.”

The mandate may do little to change the reality of certain parts of the business — Meta recently announced it was getting rid of end-to-end encrypted messaging on Instagram that it said “very few people” actually used.

Peter Chapman, associate director of the Knight-Georgetown Institute, which works to connect policymakers and others with independent tech policy research, said there could be “significant tradeoffs” to a prohibition on encryption, and other changes may be more effective. For example, evidence presented by the state showed that Meta’s own profile recommendations were connecting adults and minors, a feature that poses a clearer danger of harm without much benefit, and which Torrez is also asking the court to stop. “There’s an opportunity to intervene at that level and try to prevent more of these harmful interactions from taking place without having to tackle encryption,” said Chapman.

No single feature change is likely to solve the entire child and teen safety problem, said Chapman, which is why it’s notable that Torrez plans to ask for several layers of changes. Still, the overall effectiveness of any given remedy will also depend on how it’s implemented and monitored. For instance, what would be the methodology Meta uses to report a 99 percent detection rate of new CSAM? How does it count or surmise what it hasn’t caught? The same goes for the accuracy and reliability of any mandated age verification.

Meta points to this potential issue in its argument against Torrez’s proposed remedies. “Regardless of where the accuracy threshold is set, Meta would never be able to prove that the system met that standard, because doing the calculation would require that Meta detect 100% of CSAM to use as the denominator,” the company wrote in a legal filing. Torrez’s chief deputy, James Grayson, said on a press call that the court and an appointed independent monitor would have some discretion over tracking; the office hasn’t yet identified who this monitor would be.

“The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation”

Meta and other groups that oppose the AG’s approach say the outcomes he’s seeking are counterproductive. “The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation,” said Maureen Flatley, president of Stop Child Predators, a group that advocates for more funding for enforcement of criminal laws against child predators, and has received funding from Meta-backed trade group NetChoice. “This notion that the platforms have to be responsible for pushing all these people out would be like saying to the US Bankers Association, ‘By the way, you are responsible for all the bank robberies from now on,’ which is ludicrous.”

“The New Mexico Attorney General’s focus on a single platform is a misguided strategy that ignores the hundreds of other apps teens use daily,” Meta spokesperson Chris Sgro said in a statement. “The state’s proposed mandates infringe on parental rights and stifle free expression for all New Mexicans. Regardless, we remain committed to providing safe, age-appropriate experiences and have already launched many of the protections the state seeks, including 13 safety measures this past year.”

But Torrez has taken aim at the broader tech industry, too. He recently visited Washington, DC, to advocate for new protections for kids online and an overhaul of Section 230, the law that protects tech platforms from being held liable for their users’ posts. “While we were able to prevail in our district court in Santa Fe, I still think the law as it currently exists creates a lot of ambiguity,” he told The Verge on that visit. “If Section 230 were not something that these companies could hide behind, then it increases the chances that they’re going to have to actually make their case to a jury.”

But Chapman said regulation through lawsuits isn’t an “uncommon sort of story” in the US. “Whether that’s tobacco, opioids, e-cigarettes, there is precedent for legal action moving a broader policy conversation.”

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#Metas #historic #loss #court #cost #lot #millionLaw,Meta,Policy,Privacy,Speech,Tech">Meta’s historic loss in court could cost a lot more than 5 millionNew Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez won a historic sum of 5 million in a landmark child safety case against Meta earlier this year. But the next stage of the fight could be even more consequential for Meta and the social media industry at large.Beginning Monday, attorneys for Meta and New Mexico will return to a Santa Fe courthouse for a three-week public nuisance trial, where they’ll argue over the changes the AG wants the judge to order Meta make to Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Those changes include adding age verification for New Mexico users, prohibiting end-to-end encryption for users under 18 and capping their use to 90 hours per month, limiting engagement-boosting features like infinite scroll and autoplay, and requiring Meta to detect 99 percent of new child sexual abuse material (CSAM).“From the outset, our goal was to try and change the way the company’s doing business,” Torrez told The Verge on a recent visit to Washington, DC, to advocate for new kids safety legislation. “I recognize that even at 5 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business. In fact, there’s probably some folks in that company who think of it as the cost of doing business.”“Even at 5 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business”While any changes ordered by the judge would only apply to Meta and its operations in New Mexico, the company could apply the changes in other states for the sake of simplicity. Or, as it’s threatened to do, it could simply go dark in the state. A court order could send a message to other tech companies that courts may be willing to alter their businesses if they’re found liable.During the trial, New Mexico will argue Meta has become a public nuisance by creating a public health hazard in the state. The AG’s office expects to call on about 15 witnesses, including experts who will testify to the feasibility of their proposed remedies, and fact witnesses who will testify about Meta’s alleged harms. After Meta makes its defense, Judge Bryan Biedscheid will evaluate which proposals are relevant and feasible — a process that could take some time, compared to the speedy turnaround of the jury verdict in March.A sweeping win for New Mexico could energize Torrez and thousands of other plaintiffs currently pursuing cases against tech companies. Conversely, a limited order could be a significant blow. The outcome won’t directly impact other cases, but it will almost certainly color negotiations over potential settlements.Several of Torrez’s requests are hot-button tech policy issues. Age verification would almost certainly require Meta or a third-party provider to collect more personal information on adults and minors alike, which privacy advocates have consistently warned can make users less safe. Don McGowan, who previously served on the board of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), said that barring encrypted communications on platforms like Facebook “is a great way to make sure that nobody uses Facebook Messenger anymore and just moves their activity to other platforms that aren’t touched by this lawsuit.”The mandate may do little to change the reality of certain parts of the business — Meta recently announced it was getting rid of end-to-end encrypted messaging on Instagram that it said “very few people” actually used.Peter Chapman, associate director of the Knight-Georgetown Institute, which works to connect policymakers and others with independent tech policy research, said there could be “significant tradeoffs” to a prohibition on encryption, and other changes may be more effective. For example, evidence presented by the state showed that Meta’s own profile recommendations were connecting adults and minors, a feature that poses a clearer danger of harm without much benefit, and which Torrez is also asking the court to stop. “There’s an opportunity to intervene at that level and try to prevent more of these harmful interactions from taking place without having to tackle encryption,” said Chapman.No single feature change is likely to solve the entire child and teen safety problem, said Chapman, which is why it’s notable that Torrez plans to ask for several layers of changes. Still, the overall effectiveness of any given remedy will also depend on how it’s implemented and monitored. For instance, what would be the methodology Meta uses to report a 99 percent detection rate of new CSAM? How does it count or surmise what it hasn’t caught? The same goes for the accuracy and reliability of any mandated age verification.Meta points to this potential issue in its argument against Torrez’s proposed remedies. “Regardless of where the accuracy threshold is set, Meta would never be able to prove that the system met that standard, because doing the calculation would require that Meta detect 100% of CSAM to use as the denominator,” the company wrote in a legal filing. Torrez’s chief deputy, James Grayson, said on a press call that the court and an appointed independent monitor would have some discretion over tracking; the office hasn’t yet identified who this monitor would be.“The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation”Meta and other groups that oppose the AG’s approach say the outcomes he’s seeking are counterproductive. “The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation,” said Maureen Flatley, president of Stop Child Predators, a group that advocates for more funding for enforcement of criminal laws against child predators, and has received funding from Meta-backed trade group NetChoice. “This notion that the platforms have to be responsible for pushing all these people out would be like saying to the US Bankers Association, ‘By the way, you are responsible for all the bank robberies from now on,’ which is ludicrous.”“The New Mexico Attorney General’s focus on a single platform is a misguided strategy that ignores the hundreds of other apps teens use daily,” Meta spokesperson Chris Sgro said in a statement. “The state’s proposed mandates infringe on parental rights and stifle free expression for all New Mexicans. Regardless, we remain committed to providing safe, age-appropriate experiences and have already launched many of the protections the state seeks, including 13 safety measures this past year.”But Torrez has taken aim at the broader tech industry, too. He recently visited Washington, DC, to advocate for new protections for kids online and an overhaul of Section 230, the law that protects tech platforms from being held liable for their users’ posts. “While we were able to prevail in our district court in Santa Fe, I still think the law as it currently exists creates a lot of ambiguity,” he told The Verge on that visit. “If Section 230 were not something that these companies could hide behind, then it increases the chances that they’re going to have to actually make their case to a jury.”But Chapman said regulation through lawsuits isn’t an “uncommon sort of story” in the US. “Whether that’s tobacco, opioids, e-cigarettes, there is precedent for legal action moving a broader policy conversation.”Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.Lauren FeinerCloseLauren FeinerPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Lauren FeinerLawCloseLawPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All LawMetaCloseMetaPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All MetaPolicyClosePolicyPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All PolicyPrivacyClosePrivacyPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All PrivacySpeechCloseSpeechPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All SpeechTechCloseTechPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All Tech#Metas #historic #loss #court #cost #lot #millionLaw,Meta,Policy,Privacy,Speech,Tech

won a historic sum of $375 million in a landmark child safety case against Meta earlier this year. But the next stage of the fight could be even more consequential for Meta and the social media industry at large.

Beginning Monday, attorneys for Meta and New Mexico will return to a Santa Fe courthouse for a three-week public nuisance trial, where they’ll argue over the changes the AG wants the judge to order Meta make to Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Those changes include adding age verification for New Mexico users, prohibiting end-to-end encryption for users under 18 and capping their use to 90 hours per month, limiting engagement-boosting features like infinite scroll and autoplay, and requiring Meta to detect 99 percent of new child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

“From the outset, our goal was to try and change the way the company’s doing business,” Torrez told The Verge on a recent visit to Washington, DC, to advocate for new kids safety legislation. “I recognize that even at $375 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business. In fact, there’s probably some folks in that company who think of it as the cost of doing business.”

“Even at $375 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business”

While any changes ordered by the judge would only apply to Meta and its operations in New Mexico, the company could apply the changes in other states for the sake of simplicity. Or, as it’s threatened to do, it could simply go dark in the state. A court order could send a message to other tech companies that courts may be willing to alter their businesses if they’re found liable.

During the trial, New Mexico will argue Meta has become a public nuisance by creating a public health hazard in the state. The AG’s office expects to call on about 15 witnesses, including experts who will testify to the feasibility of their proposed remedies, and fact witnesses who will testify about Meta’s alleged harms. After Meta makes its defense, Judge Bryan Biedscheid will evaluate which proposals are relevant and feasible — a process that could take some time, compared to the speedy turnaround of the jury verdict in March.

A sweeping win for New Mexico could energize Torrez and thousands of other plaintiffs currently pursuing cases against tech companies. Conversely, a limited order could be a significant blow. The outcome won’t directly impact other cases, but it will almost certainly color negotiations over potential settlements.

Several of Torrez’s requests are hot-button tech policy issues. Age verification would almost certainly require Meta or a third-party provider to collect more personal information on adults and minors alike, which privacy advocates have consistently warned can make users less safe. Don McGowan, who previously served on the board of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), said that barring encrypted communications on platforms like Facebook “is a great way to make sure that nobody uses Facebook Messenger anymore and just moves their activity to other platforms that aren’t touched by this lawsuit.”

The mandate may do little to change the reality of certain parts of the business — Meta recently announced it was getting rid of end-to-end encrypted messaging on Instagram that it said “very few people” actually used.

Peter Chapman, associate director of the Knight-Georgetown Institute, which works to connect policymakers and others with independent tech policy research, said there could be “significant tradeoffs” to a prohibition on encryption, and other changes may be more effective. For example, evidence presented by the state showed that Meta’s own profile recommendations were connecting adults and minors, a feature that poses a clearer danger of harm without much benefit, and which Torrez is also asking the court to stop. “There’s an opportunity to intervene at that level and try to prevent more of these harmful interactions from taking place without having to tackle encryption,” said Chapman.

No single feature change is likely to solve the entire child and teen safety problem, said Chapman, which is why it’s notable that Torrez plans to ask for several layers of changes. Still, the overall effectiveness of any given remedy will also depend on how it’s implemented and monitored. For instance, what would be the methodology Meta uses to report a 99 percent detection rate of new CSAM? How does it count or surmise what it hasn’t caught? The same goes for the accuracy and reliability of any mandated age verification.

Meta points to this potential issue in its argument against Torrez’s proposed remedies. “Regardless of where the accuracy threshold is set, Meta would never be able to prove that the system met that standard, because doing the calculation would require that Meta detect 100% of CSAM to use as the denominator,” the company wrote in a legal filing. Torrez’s chief deputy, James Grayson, said on a press call that the court and an appointed independent monitor would have some discretion over tracking; the office hasn’t yet identified who this monitor would be.

“The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation”

Meta and other groups that oppose the AG’s approach say the outcomes he’s seeking are counterproductive. “The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation,” said Maureen Flatley, president of Stop Child Predators, a group that advocates for more funding for enforcement of criminal laws against child predators, and has received funding from Meta-backed trade group NetChoice. “This notion that the platforms have to be responsible for pushing all these people out would be like saying to the US Bankers Association, ‘By the way, you are responsible for all the bank robberies from now on,’ which is ludicrous.”

“The New Mexico Attorney General’s focus on a single platform is a misguided strategy that ignores the hundreds of other apps teens use daily,” Meta spokesperson Chris Sgro said in a statement. “The state’s proposed mandates infringe on parental rights and stifle free expression for all New Mexicans. Regardless, we remain committed to providing safe, age-appropriate experiences and have already launched many of the protections the state seeks, including 13 safety measures this past year.”

But Torrez has taken aim at the broader tech industry, too. He recently visited Washington, DC, to advocate for new protections for kids online and an overhaul of Section 230, the law that protects tech platforms from being held liable for their users’ posts. “While we were able to prevail in our district court in Santa Fe, I still think the law as it currently exists creates a lot of ambiguity,” he told The Verge on that visit. “If Section 230 were not something that these companies could hide behind, then it increases the chances that they’re going to have to actually make their case to a jury.”

But Chapman said regulation through lawsuits isn’t an “uncommon sort of story” in the US. “Whether that’s tobacco, opioids, e-cigarettes, there is precedent for legal action moving a broader policy conversation.”

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

#Metas #historic #loss #court #cost #lot #millionLaw,Meta,Policy,Privacy,Speech,Tech">Meta’s historic loss in court could cost a lot more than $375 million

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez won a historic sum of $375 million in a landmark child safety case against Meta earlier this year. But the next stage of the fight could be even more consequential for Meta and the social media industry at large.

Beginning Monday, attorneys for Meta and New Mexico will return to a Santa Fe courthouse for a three-week public nuisance trial, where they’ll argue over the changes the AG wants the judge to order Meta make to Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Those changes include adding age verification for New Mexico users, prohibiting end-to-end encryption for users under 18 and capping their use to 90 hours per month, limiting engagement-boosting features like infinite scroll and autoplay, and requiring Meta to detect 99 percent of new child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

“From the outset, our goal was to try and change the way the company’s doing business,” Torrez told The Verge on a recent visit to Washington, DC, to advocate for new kids safety legislation. “I recognize that even at $375 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business. In fact, there’s probably some folks in that company who think of it as the cost of doing business.”

“Even at $375 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business”

While any changes ordered by the judge would only apply to Meta and its operations in New Mexico, the company could apply the changes in other states for the sake of simplicity. Or, as it’s threatened to do, it could simply go dark in the state. A court order could send a message to other tech companies that courts may be willing to alter their businesses if they’re found liable.

During the trial, New Mexico will argue Meta has become a public nuisance by creating a public health hazard in the state. The AG’s office expects to call on about 15 witnesses, including experts who will testify to the feasibility of their proposed remedies, and fact witnesses who will testify about Meta’s alleged harms. After Meta makes its defense, Judge Bryan Biedscheid will evaluate which proposals are relevant and feasible — a process that could take some time, compared to the speedy turnaround of the jury verdict in March.

A sweeping win for New Mexico could energize Torrez and thousands of other plaintiffs currently pursuing cases against tech companies. Conversely, a limited order could be a significant blow. The outcome won’t directly impact other cases, but it will almost certainly color negotiations over potential settlements.

Several of Torrez’s requests are hot-button tech policy issues. Age verification would almost certainly require Meta or a third-party provider to collect more personal information on adults and minors alike, which privacy advocates have consistently warned can make users less safe. Don McGowan, who previously served on the board of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), said that barring encrypted communications on platforms like Facebook “is a great way to make sure that nobody uses Facebook Messenger anymore and just moves their activity to other platforms that aren’t touched by this lawsuit.”

The mandate may do little to change the reality of certain parts of the business — Meta recently announced it was getting rid of end-to-end encrypted messaging on Instagram that it said “very few people” actually used.

Peter Chapman, associate director of the Knight-Georgetown Institute, which works to connect policymakers and others with independent tech policy research, said there could be “significant tradeoffs” to a prohibition on encryption, and other changes may be more effective. For example, evidence presented by the state showed that Meta’s own profile recommendations were connecting adults and minors, a feature that poses a clearer danger of harm without much benefit, and which Torrez is also asking the court to stop. “There’s an opportunity to intervene at that level and try to prevent more of these harmful interactions from taking place without having to tackle encryption,” said Chapman.

No single feature change is likely to solve the entire child and teen safety problem, said Chapman, which is why it’s notable that Torrez plans to ask for several layers of changes. Still, the overall effectiveness of any given remedy will also depend on how it’s implemented and monitored. For instance, what would be the methodology Meta uses to report a 99 percent detection rate of new CSAM? How does it count or surmise what it hasn’t caught? The same goes for the accuracy and reliability of any mandated age verification.

Meta points to this potential issue in its argument against Torrez’s proposed remedies. “Regardless of where the accuracy threshold is set, Meta would never be able to prove that the system met that standard, because doing the calculation would require that Meta detect 100% of CSAM to use as the denominator,” the company wrote in a legal filing. Torrez’s chief deputy, James Grayson, said on a press call that the court and an appointed independent monitor would have some discretion over tracking; the office hasn’t yet identified who this monitor would be.

“The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation”

Meta and other groups that oppose the AG’s approach say the outcomes he’s seeking are counterproductive. “The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation,” said Maureen Flatley, president of Stop Child Predators, a group that advocates for more funding for enforcement of criminal laws against child predators, and has received funding from Meta-backed trade group NetChoice. “This notion that the platforms have to be responsible for pushing all these people out would be like saying to the US Bankers Association, ‘By the way, you are responsible for all the bank robberies from now on,’ which is ludicrous.”

“The New Mexico Attorney General’s focus on a single platform is a misguided strategy that ignores the hundreds of other apps teens use daily,” Meta spokesperson Chris Sgro said in a statement. “The state’s proposed mandates infringe on parental rights and stifle free expression for all New Mexicans. Regardless, we remain committed to providing safe, age-appropriate experiences and have already launched many of the protections the state seeks, including 13 safety measures this past year.”

But Torrez has taken aim at the broader tech industry, too. He recently visited Washington, DC, to advocate for new protections for kids online and an overhaul of Section 230, the law that protects tech platforms from being held liable for their users’ posts. “While we were able to prevail in our district court in Santa Fe, I still think the law as it currently exists creates a lot of ambiguity,” he told The Verge on that visit. “If Section 230 were not something that these companies could hide behind, then it increases the chances that they’re going to have to actually make their case to a jury.”

But Chapman said regulation through lawsuits isn’t an “uncommon sort of story” in the US. “Whether that’s tobacco, opioids, e-cigarettes, there is precedent for legal action moving a broader policy conversation.”

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#Metas #historic #loss #court #cost #lot #millionLaw,Meta,Policy,Privacy,Speech,Tech
Audiences will have to wait a few months longer to see “Narnia: The Magician’s Nephew,” with the release date pushed back from Thanksgiving to February 12, 2027.

In addition to relaunching “Narnia” on big screens and serving as writer-director Greta Gerwig’s first film since “Barbie,” “The Magician’s Nephew” also looks like the next step in Netflix’s relationship with movie theaters — and it’s becoming an even bigger step with the delay.

The company had previously said “The Magician’s Nephew” would play exclusively on Imax screens for at least two weeks before a streaming release for Christmas. That would be an ambitious theatrical release by Netflix’s standards, but relatively limited compared to many other Hollywood blockbusters.

Now, Netflix says “The Magician’s Nephew” will begin exclusive Imax previews on February 10, 2027, followed by a wide global release in theaters on February 12. (In Netflix’s words, it will be a “global eventized release.”) The movie won’t start streaming until April 2.

The company’s announcement doesn’t get more specific about which theaters will be showing “The Magician’s Nephew,” but Imax released a statement noting that the delay will allow the film to have “a full theatrical window,” so the major theater chains are unlikely to complain

In fact, AMC Theatres recently highlighted the success of  its“Stranger Things” finale screenings and said it has plans for more collaborations with Netflix. At the same time, the streamer’s limited support for theatrical releases and its resistance to exclusive theatrical windows was reportedly a “dealbreaker” in negotiations with the creators of “Stranger Things,” who ultimately signed an exclusive deal with Paramount.

With a cast that includes Daniel Craig and Meryl Streep, “The Magician’s Nephew” adapts one of the later books in C.S. Lewis’ classic fantasy series —  a prequel that lays out the origins of Narnia.

Techcrunch event

San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026

In Netflix’s announcement, Gerwig said she first read the book as a child, when she “fell in love with the gorgeously improbable but completely brilliant concept of a cosmic lion singing the world of Narnia to life.”

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

#Netflix #delays #Greta #Gerwigs #Narnia #movie #big #theatrical #push #TechCrunchGreta Gerwig,Narnia: The Magician’s Nephew,Netflix">Netflix delays Greta Gerwig’s ‘Narnia’ movie for big theatrical push in 2027 | TechCrunch
Audiences will have to wait a few months longer to see “Narnia: The Magician’s Nephew,” with the release date pushed back from Thanksgiving to February 12, 2027.

In addition to relaunching “Narnia” on big screens and serving as writer-director Greta Gerwig’s first film since “Barbie,” “The Magician’s Nephew” also looks like the next step in Netflix’s relationship with movie theaters — and it’s becoming an even bigger step with the delay.







The company had previously said “The Magician’s Nephew” would play exclusively on Imax screens for at least two weeks before a streaming release for Christmas. That would be an ambitious theatrical release by Netflix’s standards, but relatively limited compared to many other Hollywood blockbusters.

Now, Netflix says “The Magician’s Nephew” will begin exclusive Imax previews on February 10, 2027, followed by a wide global release in theaters on February 12. (In Netflix’s words, it will be a “global eventized release.”) The movie won’t start streaming until April 2.

The company’s announcement doesn’t get more specific about which theaters will be showing “The Magician’s Nephew,” but Imax released a statement noting that the delay will allow the film to have “a full theatrical window,” so the major theater chains are unlikely to complain

In fact, AMC Theatres recently highlighted the success of  its“Stranger Things” finale screenings and said it has plans for more collaborations with Netflix. At the same time, the streamer’s limited support for theatrical releases and its resistance to exclusive theatrical windows was reportedly a “dealbreaker” in negotiations with the creators of “Stranger Things,” who ultimately signed an exclusive deal with Paramount.

With a cast that includes Daniel Craig and Meryl Streep, “The Magician’s Nephew” adapts one of the later books in C.S. Lewis’ classic fantasy series —  a prequel that lays out the origins of Narnia.

	
		
		Techcrunch event
		
			
			
									San Francisco, CA
													|
													October 13-15, 2026
							
			
		
	


In Netflix’s announcement, Gerwig said she first read the book as a child, when she “fell in love with the gorgeously improbable but completely brilliant concept of a cosmic lion singing the world of Narnia to life.”
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#Netflix #delays #Greta #Gerwigs #Narnia #movie #big #theatrical #push #TechCrunchGreta Gerwig,Narnia: The Magician’s Nephew,Netflix

Netflix says “The Magician’s Nephew” will begin exclusive Imax previews on February 10, 2027, followed by a wide global release in theaters on February 12. (In Netflix’s words, it will be a “global eventized release.”) The movie won’t start streaming until April 2.

The company’s announcement doesn’t get more specific about which theaters will be showing “The Magician’s Nephew,” but Imax released a statement noting that the delay will allow the film to have “a full theatrical window,” so the major theater chains are unlikely to complain

In fact, AMC Theatres recently highlighted the success of  its“Stranger Things” finale screenings and said it has plans for more collaborations with Netflix. At the same time, the streamer’s limited support for theatrical releases and its resistance to exclusive theatrical windows was reportedly a “dealbreaker” in negotiations with the creators of “Stranger Things,” who ultimately signed an exclusive deal with Paramount.

With a cast that includes Daniel Craig and Meryl Streep, “The Magician’s Nephew” adapts one of the later books in C.S. Lewis’ classic fantasy series —  a prequel that lays out the origins of Narnia.

Techcrunch event

San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026

In Netflix’s announcement, Gerwig said she first read the book as a child, when she “fell in love with the gorgeously improbable but completely brilliant concept of a cosmic lion singing the world of Narnia to life.”

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

#Netflix #delays #Greta #Gerwigs #Narnia #movie #big #theatrical #push #TechCrunchGreta Gerwig,Narnia: The Magician’s Nephew,Netflix">Netflix delays Greta Gerwig’s ‘Narnia’ movie for big theatrical push in 2027 | TechCrunch

Audiences will have to wait a few months longer to see “Narnia: The Magician’s Nephew,” with the release date pushed back from Thanksgiving to February 12, 2027.

In addition to relaunching “Narnia” on big screens and serving as writer-director Greta Gerwig’s first film since “Barbie,” “The Magician’s Nephew” also looks like the next step in Netflix’s relationship with movie theaters — and it’s becoming an even bigger step with the delay.

The company had previously said “The Magician’s Nephew” would play exclusively on Imax screens for at least two weeks before a streaming release for Christmas. That would be an ambitious theatrical release by Netflix’s standards, but relatively limited compared to many other Hollywood blockbusters.

Now, Netflix says “The Magician’s Nephew” will begin exclusive Imax previews on February 10, 2027, followed by a wide global release in theaters on February 12. (In Netflix’s words, it will be a “global eventized release.”) The movie won’t start streaming until April 2.

The company’s announcement doesn’t get more specific about which theaters will be showing “The Magician’s Nephew,” but Imax released a statement noting that the delay will allow the film to have “a full theatrical window,” so the major theater chains are unlikely to complain

In fact, AMC Theatres recently highlighted the success of  its“Stranger Things” finale screenings and said it has plans for more collaborations with Netflix. At the same time, the streamer’s limited support for theatrical releases and its resistance to exclusive theatrical windows was reportedly a “dealbreaker” in negotiations with the creators of “Stranger Things,” who ultimately signed an exclusive deal with Paramount.

With a cast that includes Daniel Craig and Meryl Streep, “The Magician’s Nephew” adapts one of the later books in C.S. Lewis’ classic fantasy series —  a prequel that lays out the origins of Narnia.

Techcrunch event

San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026

In Netflix’s announcement, Gerwig said she first read the book as a child, when she “fell in love with the gorgeously improbable but completely brilliant concept of a cosmic lion singing the world of Narnia to life.”

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

#Netflix #delays #Greta #Gerwigs #Narnia #movie #big #theatrical #push #TechCrunchGreta Gerwig,Narnia: The Magician’s Nephew,Netflix

Post Comment