×
Bloomberg. The suit, filed by the Breathitt County School District in Kentucky, claims that social media has disrupted learning and created a mental health crisis, straining budgets. The terms of the settlement have not been revealed yet, and Meta is still facing a trial in the same suit, which is viewed as a bellwether for over 1,000 similar lawsuits across the country

This follows an earlier case, settled by Snap and TikTok, in which a 19-year-old plaintiff claimed significant personal injury due to addictive social media apps. Google and Meta did not agree to a settlement in that suit, and it eventually went to trial, where a jury awarded the plaintiff $6 million. Meta also recently lost a suit brought by New Mexico’s Attorney General, to the tune of $375 million.

Beyond monetary awards, many, including New Mexico, are pushing for significant changes to social media apps to limit their harm to minors. And this is just the start of what’s shaping up to be a busy year for social media lawsuits. According to Bloomberg, lawyers representing school districts said their “focus remains on pursuing justice for the remaining 1,200 school districts who have filed cases.”

#Snap #YouTube #TikTok #settle #suit #harm #studentsCreators,Facebook,Law,Meta,News,Policy,Snapchat,Social Media,Streaming,Tech,TikTok,YouTube"> Snap, YouTube, and TikTok settle suit over harm to studentsSnap, YouTube, and TikTok have settled the first lawsuit of its kind, alleging that social media addiction has cost public schools massive amounts of money, according to Bloomberg. The suit, filed by the Breathitt County School District in Kentucky, claims that social media has disrupted learning and created a mental health crisis, straining budgets. The terms of the settlement have not been revealed yet, and Meta is still facing a trial in the same suit, which is viewed as a bellwether for over 1,000 similar lawsuits across the countryThis follows an earlier case, settled by Snap and TikTok, in which a 19-year-old plaintiff claimed significant personal injury due to addictive social media apps. Google and Meta did not agree to a settlement in that suit, and it eventually went to trial, where a jury awarded the plaintiff million. Meta also recently lost a suit brought by New Mexico’s Attorney General, to the tune of 5 million.Beyond monetary awards, many, including New Mexico, are pushing for significant changes to social media apps to limit their harm to minors. And this is just the start of what’s shaping up to be a busy year for social media lawsuits. According to Bloomberg, lawyers representing school districts said their “focus remains on pursuing justice for the remaining 1,200 school districts who have filed cases.”#Snap #YouTube #TikTok #settle #suit #harm #studentsCreators,Facebook,Law,Meta,News,Policy,Snapchat,Social Media,Streaming,Tech,TikTok,YouTube
Tech-news

Bloomberg. The suit, filed by the Breathitt County School District in Kentucky, claims that social media has disrupted learning and created a mental health crisis, straining budgets. The terms of the settlement have not been revealed yet, and Meta is still facing a trial in the same suit, which is viewed as a bellwether for over 1,000 similar lawsuits across the country

This follows an earlier case, settled by Snap and TikTok, in which a 19-year-old plaintiff claimed significant personal injury due to addictive social media apps. Google and Meta did not agree to a settlement in that suit, and it eventually went to trial, where a jury awarded the plaintiff $6 million. Meta also recently lost a suit brought by New Mexico’s Attorney General, to the tune of $375 million.

Beyond monetary awards, many, including New Mexico, are pushing for significant changes to social media apps to limit their harm to minors. And this is just the start of what’s shaping up to be a busy year for social media lawsuits. According to Bloomberg, lawyers representing school districts said their “focus remains on pursuing justice for the remaining 1,200 school districts who have filed cases.”

#Snap #YouTube #TikTok #settle #suit #harm #studentsCreators,Facebook,Law,Meta,News,Policy,Snapchat,Social Media,Streaming,Tech,TikTok,YouTube">Snap, YouTube, and TikTok settle suit over harm to students

Snap, YouTube, and TikTok have settled the first lawsuit of its kind, alleging that social media addiction has cost public schools massive amounts of money, according to Bloomberg. The suit, filed by the Breathitt County School District in Kentucky, claims that social media has disrupted learning and created a mental health crisis, straining budgets. The terms of the settlement have not been revealed yet, and Meta is still facing a trial in the same suit, which is viewed as a bellwether for over 1,000 similar lawsuits across the country

This follows an earlier case, settled by Snap and TikTok, in which a 19-year-old plaintiff claimed significant personal injury due to addictive social media apps. Google and Meta did not agree to a settlement in that suit, and it eventually went to trial, where a jury awarded the plaintiff $6 million. Meta also recently lost a suit brought by New Mexico’s Attorney General, to the tune of $375 million.

Beyond monetary awards, many, including New Mexico, are pushing for significant changes to social media apps to limit their harm to minors. And this is just the start of what’s shaping up to be a busy year for social media lawsuits. According to Bloomberg, lawyers representing school districts said their “focus remains on pursuing justice for the remaining 1,200 school districts who have filed cases.”

#Snap #YouTube #TikTok #settle #suit #harm #studentsCreators,Facebook,Law,Meta,News,Policy,Snapchat,Social Media,Streaming,Tech,TikTok,YouTube

Snap, YouTube, and TikTok have settled the first lawsuit of its kind, alleging that social…

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
Tech-news

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

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez won a historic sum of $375 million in a…

fastest since 2021.

It’s probably because the company upped its already outrageous spending expectations for the year. Meta said that 2026 capital expenditures would be at least $10 billion more than expected and could top $145 billion. While emphasizing his “confidence in this investment,” CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that most of this increase was due to “higher component costs, particularly memory pricing.”

The AI boom has led to an unprecedented data center buildout that has constrained the global memory chip supply and increased prices for these valuable chips. The result has been a global memory crisis that has impacted not only Meta and the rest of the AI industry but also caused the prices of consumer electronics like laptops and smartphones to soar.

Meta’s $145 billion is a dramatic increase from the $72 billion capital expenditure it recorded just last year, and Zuckerberg is betting it all on an AI turnaround effort.

Meta has been left behind in the AI race as industry rivals like Google have soared past. Roughly 10 months ago, Zuckerberg acknowledged the situation and announced a major catch-up effort that saw him commit billions upon billions of dollars to research and development, and to poach talent from all over the industry, including bringing in Scale AI’s founder Alexandr Wang to lead the new Meta Superintelligence Labs AI division.

Many have been reasonably nervous about this commitment, considering that the company’s latest big bet in emerging tech, the Metaverse, has flopped dramatically. In Wednesday’s earnings report, Meta said that the Reality Labs division, which had helmed the Metaverse efforts, notched an operating loss of more than $4 billion, while only cashing in $402 million in sales. That adds to the whopping $80 billion and more the division has lost in the past six years.

But experts are somewhat more hopeful about the AI bet because, earlier this month, the tech giant debuted the first fruits of that investment with the AI model Muse Spark, a proprietary model that the company plans to open-source in the future. It’s a step in the right direction, but Meta still has to do more before it can confidently say the catch-up effort is successful.

“This was the first release from Meta Superintelligence Labs, and it shows that our work is on track to build a leading lab,” Zuckerberg assured investors in the company’s earnings call. “Now that we have a strong model, we can develop more novel products as well.”

Those novel products will include two agents, one for personal and the other for business uses, according to Zuckerberg.

“We’re already testing an early version of business AIs and weekly conversations have grown 10x since the start of this year,” Zuckerberg said.

One way that AI is clearly showing up to benefit Meta is internally. Meta CFO Susan Li said that over half a billion users weekly on Facebook and Instagram each are now watching videos translated and dubbed by AI. The company is also incorporating the new AI model into parts of its core business, like ads, and particularly into its recommendation system. The goal is to have the AI hyper-personalize feeds for users.

“Since our recommendation systems are operating at such large scale, we’ll phase in this new research and technology over time,” Zuckerberg said. “But the trend over the last few years seems clear that we are seeing an increasing return on the amount that we can improve engagement for people and value for advertisers.”

AI is also taking over internally at Meta. The company is laying off 10% of its workforce and reportedly offering voluntary buyouts to 7% of its U.S. staff, in what seems to follow a purportedly AI-driven trend that has taken Silicon Valley by storm.

On the call, executives wouldn’t say if the layoffs had to do with automation of jobs, but Li did say that a “leaner operating model” would help “offset the substantial investments we’re making.”

#Meta #Spend #Billion #Year #DueArtificial intelligence,Mark Zuckerberg,Meta"> Meta Could Spend 5 Billion This Year Due to AI Wednesday was a big day for the tech industry with Meta, Google, Amazon and Microsoft all reporting earnings at the same time in the afternoon. Out of the four, though, Meta was the clear loser with its shares down more than 7% even though revenue increased 33% this past quarter, the company’s fastest since 2021. It’s probably because the company upped its already outrageous spending expectations for the year. Meta said that 2026 capital expenditures would be at least billion more than expected and could top 5 billion. While emphasizing his “confidence in this investment,” CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that most of this increase was due to “higher component costs, particularly memory pricing.” The AI boom has led to an unprecedented data center buildout that has constrained the global memory chip supply and increased prices for these valuable chips. The result has been a global memory crisis that has impacted not only Meta and the rest of the AI industry but also caused the prices of consumer electronics like laptops and smartphones to soar. Meta’s 5 billion is a dramatic increase from the billion capital expenditure it recorded just last year, and Zuckerberg is betting it all on an AI turnaround effort. Meta has been left behind in the AI race as industry rivals like Google have soared past. Roughly 10 months ago, Zuckerberg acknowledged the situation and announced a major catch-up effort that saw him commit billions upon billions of dollars to research and development, and to poach talent from all over the industry, including bringing in Scale AI’s founder Alexandr Wang to lead the new Meta Superintelligence Labs AI division. Many have been reasonably nervous about this commitment, considering that the company’s latest big bet in emerging tech, the Metaverse, has flopped dramatically. In Wednesday’s earnings report, Meta said that the Reality Labs division, which had helmed the Metaverse efforts, notched an operating loss of more than billion, while only cashing in 2 million in sales. That adds to the whopping billion and more the division has lost in the past six years. But experts are somewhat more hopeful about the AI bet because, earlier this month, the tech giant debuted the first fruits of that investment with the AI model Muse Spark, a proprietary model that the company plans to open-source in the future. It’s a step in the right direction, but Meta still has to do more before it can confidently say the catch-up effort is successful. “This was the first release from Meta Superintelligence Labs, and it shows that our work is on track to build a leading lab,” Zuckerberg assured investors in the company’s earnings call. “Now that we have a strong model, we can develop more novel products as well.” Those novel products will include two agents, one for personal and the other for business uses, according to Zuckerberg. “We’re already testing an early version of business AIs and weekly conversations have grown 10x since the start of this year,” Zuckerberg said. One way that AI is clearly showing up to benefit Meta is internally. Meta CFO Susan Li said that over half a billion users weekly on Facebook and Instagram each are now watching videos translated and dubbed by AI. The company is also incorporating the new AI model into parts of its core business, like ads, and particularly into its recommendation system. The goal is to have the AI hyper-personalize feeds for users. “Since our recommendation systems are operating at such large scale, we’ll phase in this new research and technology over time,” Zuckerberg said. “But the trend over the last few years seems clear that we are seeing an increasing return on the amount that we can improve engagement for people and value for advertisers.” AI is also taking over internally at Meta. The company is laying off 10% of its workforce and reportedly offering voluntary buyouts to 7% of its U.S. staff, in what seems to follow a purportedly AI-driven trend that has taken Silicon Valley by storm. On the call, executives wouldn’t say if the layoffs had to do with automation of jobs, but Li did say that a “leaner operating model” would help “offset the substantial investments we’re making.” #Meta #Spend #Billion #Year #DueArtificial intelligence,Mark Zuckerberg,Meta
Tech-news

fastest since 2021.

It’s probably because the company upped its already outrageous spending expectations for the year. Meta said that 2026 capital expenditures would be at least $10 billion more than expected and could top $145 billion. While emphasizing his “confidence in this investment,” CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that most of this increase was due to “higher component costs, particularly memory pricing.”

The AI boom has led to an unprecedented data center buildout that has constrained the global memory chip supply and increased prices for these valuable chips. The result has been a global memory crisis that has impacted not only Meta and the rest of the AI industry but also caused the prices of consumer electronics like laptops and smartphones to soar.

Meta’s $145 billion is a dramatic increase from the $72 billion capital expenditure it recorded just last year, and Zuckerberg is betting it all on an AI turnaround effort.

Meta has been left behind in the AI race as industry rivals like Google have soared past. Roughly 10 months ago, Zuckerberg acknowledged the situation and announced a major catch-up effort that saw him commit billions upon billions of dollars to research and development, and to poach talent from all over the industry, including bringing in Scale AI’s founder Alexandr Wang to lead the new Meta Superintelligence Labs AI division.

Many have been reasonably nervous about this commitment, considering that the company’s latest big bet in emerging tech, the Metaverse, has flopped dramatically. In Wednesday’s earnings report, Meta said that the Reality Labs division, which had helmed the Metaverse efforts, notched an operating loss of more than $4 billion, while only cashing in $402 million in sales. That adds to the whopping $80 billion and more the division has lost in the past six years.

But experts are somewhat more hopeful about the AI bet because, earlier this month, the tech giant debuted the first fruits of that investment with the AI model Muse Spark, a proprietary model that the company plans to open-source in the future. It’s a step in the right direction, but Meta still has to do more before it can confidently say the catch-up effort is successful.

“This was the first release from Meta Superintelligence Labs, and it shows that our work is on track to build a leading lab,” Zuckerberg assured investors in the company’s earnings call. “Now that we have a strong model, we can develop more novel products as well.”

Those novel products will include two agents, one for personal and the other for business uses, according to Zuckerberg.

“We’re already testing an early version of business AIs and weekly conversations have grown 10x since the start of this year,” Zuckerberg said.

One way that AI is clearly showing up to benefit Meta is internally. Meta CFO Susan Li said that over half a billion users weekly on Facebook and Instagram each are now watching videos translated and dubbed by AI. The company is also incorporating the new AI model into parts of its core business, like ads, and particularly into its recommendation system. The goal is to have the AI hyper-personalize feeds for users.

“Since our recommendation systems are operating at such large scale, we’ll phase in this new research and technology over time,” Zuckerberg said. “But the trend over the last few years seems clear that we are seeing an increasing return on the amount that we can improve engagement for people and value for advertisers.”

AI is also taking over internally at Meta. The company is laying off 10% of its workforce and reportedly offering voluntary buyouts to 7% of its U.S. staff, in what seems to follow a purportedly AI-driven trend that has taken Silicon Valley by storm.

On the call, executives wouldn’t say if the layoffs had to do with automation of jobs, but Li did say that a “leaner operating model” would help “offset the substantial investments we’re making.”

#Meta #Spend #Billion #Year #DueArtificial intelligence,Mark Zuckerberg,Meta">Meta Could Spend $145 Billion This Year Due to AIMeta Could Spend $145 Billion This Year Due to AI Wednesday was a big day for the tech industry with Meta, Google, Amazon and Microsoft all reporting earnings at the same time in the afternoon. Out of the four, though, Meta was the clear loser with its shares down more than 7% even though revenue increased 33% this past quarter, the company’s fastest since 2021. It’s probably because the company upped its already outrageous spending expectations for the year. Meta said that 2026 capital expenditures would be at least $10 billion more than expected and could top $145 billion. While emphasizing his “confidence in this investment,” CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that most of this increase was due to “higher component costs, particularly memory pricing.” The AI boom has led to an unprecedented data center buildout that has constrained the global memory chip supply and increased prices for these valuable chips. The result has been a global memory crisis that has impacted not only Meta and the rest of the AI industry but also caused the prices of consumer electronics like laptops and smartphones to soar. Meta’s $145 billion is a dramatic increase from the $72 billion capital expenditure it recorded just last year, and Zuckerberg is betting it all on an AI turnaround effort. Meta has been left behind in the AI race as industry rivals like Google have soared past. Roughly 10 months ago, Zuckerberg acknowledged the situation and announced a major catch-up effort that saw him commit billions upon billions of dollars to research and development, and to poach talent from all over the industry, including bringing in Scale AI’s founder Alexandr Wang to lead the new Meta Superintelligence Labs AI division. Many have been reasonably nervous about this commitment, considering that the company’s latest big bet in emerging tech, the Metaverse, has flopped dramatically. In Wednesday’s earnings report, Meta said that the Reality Labs division, which had helmed the Metaverse efforts, notched an operating loss of more than $4 billion, while only cashing in $402 million in sales. That adds to the whopping $80 billion and more the division has lost in the past six years. But experts are somewhat more hopeful about the AI bet because, earlier this month, the tech giant debuted the first fruits of that investment with the AI model Muse Spark, a proprietary model that the company plans to open-source in the future. It’s a step in the right direction, but Meta still has to do more before it can confidently say the catch-up effort is successful. “This was the first release from Meta Superintelligence Labs, and it shows that our work is on track to build a leading lab,” Zuckerberg assured investors in the company’s earnings call. “Now that we have a strong model, we can develop more novel products as well.” Those novel products will include two agents, one for personal and the other for business uses, according to Zuckerberg. “We’re already testing an early version of business AIs and weekly conversations have grown 10x since the start of this year,” Zuckerberg said. One way that AI is clearly showing up to benefit Meta is internally. Meta CFO Susan Li said that over half a billion users weekly on Facebook and Instagram each are now watching videos translated and dubbed by AI. The company is also incorporating the new AI model into parts of its core business, like ads, and particularly into its recommendation system. The goal is to have the AI hyper-personalize feeds for users. “Since our recommendation systems are operating at such large scale, we’ll phase in this new research and technology over time,” Zuckerberg said. “But the trend over the last few years seems clear that we are seeing an increasing return on the amount that we can improve engagement for people and value for advertisers.” AI is also taking over internally at Meta. The company is laying off 10% of its workforce and reportedly offering voluntary buyouts to 7% of its U.S. staff, in what seems to follow a purportedly AI-driven trend that has taken Silicon Valley by storm. On the call, executives wouldn’t say if the layoffs had to do with automation of jobs, but Li did say that a “leaner operating model” would help “offset the substantial investments we’re making.” #Meta #Spend #Billion #Year #DueArtificial intelligence,Mark Zuckerberg,Meta

Wednesday was a big day for the tech industry with Meta, Google, Amazon and Microsoft all reporting earnings at the same time in the afternoon. Out of the four, though, Meta was the clear loser with its shares down more than 7% even though revenue increased 33% this past quarter, the company’s fastest since 2021.

It’s probably because the company upped its already outrageous spending expectations for the year. Meta said that 2026 capital expenditures would be at least $10 billion more than expected and could top $145 billion. While emphasizing his “confidence in this investment,” CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that most of this increase was due to “higher component costs, particularly memory pricing.”

The AI boom has led to an unprecedented data center buildout that has constrained the global memory chip supply and increased prices for these valuable chips. The result has been a global memory crisis that has impacted not only Meta and the rest of the AI industry but also caused the prices of consumer electronics like laptops and smartphones to soar.

Meta’s $145 billion is a dramatic increase from the $72 billion capital expenditure it recorded just last year, and Zuckerberg is betting it all on an AI turnaround effort.

Meta has been left behind in the AI race as industry rivals like Google have soared past. Roughly 10 months ago, Zuckerberg acknowledged the situation and announced a major catch-up effort that saw him commit billions upon billions of dollars to research and development, and to poach talent from all over the industry, including bringing in Scale AI’s founder Alexandr Wang to lead the new Meta Superintelligence Labs AI division.

Many have been reasonably nervous about this commitment, considering that the company’s latest big bet in emerging tech, the Metaverse, has flopped dramatically. In Wednesday’s earnings report, Meta said that the Reality Labs division, which had helmed the Metaverse efforts, notched an operating loss of more than $4 billion, while only cashing in $402 million in sales. That adds to the whopping $80 billion and more the division has lost in the past six years.

But experts are somewhat more hopeful about the AI bet because, earlier this month, the tech giant debuted the first fruits of that investment with the AI model Muse Spark, a proprietary model that the company plans to open-source in the future. It’s a step in the right direction, but Meta still has to do more before it can confidently say the catch-up effort is successful.

“This was the first release from Meta Superintelligence Labs, and it shows that our work is on track to build a leading lab,” Zuckerberg assured investors in the company’s earnings call. “Now that we have a strong model, we can develop more novel products as well.”

Those novel products will include two agents, one for personal and the other for business uses, according to Zuckerberg.

“We’re already testing an early version of business AIs and weekly conversations have grown 10x since the start of this year,” Zuckerberg said.

One way that AI is clearly showing up to benefit Meta is internally. Meta CFO Susan Li said that over half a billion users weekly on Facebook and Instagram each are now watching videos translated and dubbed by AI. The company is also incorporating the new AI model into parts of its core business, like ads, and particularly into its recommendation system. The goal is to have the AI hyper-personalize feeds for users.

“Since our recommendation systems are operating at such large scale, we’ll phase in this new research and technology over time,” Zuckerberg said. “But the trend over the last few years seems clear that we are seeing an increasing return on the amount that we can improve engagement for people and value for advertisers.”

AI is also taking over internally at Meta. The company is laying off 10% of its workforce and reportedly offering voluntary buyouts to 7% of its U.S. staff, in what seems to follow a purportedly AI-driven trend that has taken Silicon Valley by storm.

On the call, executives wouldn’t say if the layoffs had to do with automation of jobs, but Li did say that a “leaner operating model” would help “offset the substantial investments we’re making.”

#Meta #Spend #Billion #Year #DueArtificial intelligence,Mark Zuckerberg,Meta

Wednesday was a big day for the tech industry with Meta, Google, Amazon and Microsoft…

when shots were fired at the event, there has been a boom of conspiracy theory videos created by people who insist that the entire situation was a false flag operation. These kinds of theories are nothing new, but the way they’re spreading now is a reflection of how reaction video culture is reshaping our social media landscape. And even though the initial chaos around the shooting has started to die down, content creators are still posting about what “really” happened.

There is still much we do not know about Cole Allen, the 31-year-old suspected shooter who allegedly traveled from Los Angeles to Washington, DC, ahead of the WCHD and was staying in the same Hilton where the event was held. But that has not stopped content creators from flooding platforms like YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, and X with videos purporting to have more insightful takes on the situation than what’s being reported by the mainstream media.

None of these videos reveal anything that hasn’t already been reported out via traditional media outlets. But each of them speaks to the way that this brand of content has become a normal part of people’s media consumption habits and something that creators see as a viable way to capture attention. In the US, trust in traditional media outlets is at a historic low and more people are turning to social media to stay informed about world events. And that shift has given conspiracy-minded content creators a choice opportunity to influence the way people understand reality.

All of this is similar to what happened in 2024 when Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt while campaigning for the presidency. Then, creators rushed to capitalize on the event while also writing it off as a false flag designed to garner sympathy for the Republican nominee. That news cycle and subsequent discourse dragged on for weeks, both because it was a significant moment in an election year and because it was difficult to understand how Trump could have been shot in his ear without sustaining any visible damage afterward.

Many of the newer videos about the WHCD shooting suggest that we should look at these events as a response to the Trump administration’s propensity for spreading misinformation. And while there is no evidence to suggest that the WHCD shooting was, in fact, orchestrated with Trump’s approval, one could argue the administration is at least partially responsible for the way that this idea has gained traction across the internet.

As easy as it is to laugh at the constant barrage of shitposts coming out of the president’s social media accounts and other official governmental channels, they have undoubtedly had an impact on the way that the public thinks about the current administration. By sharing ugly, immature memes and AI-generated images of Trump as a Christlike figure, the White House has told people that nothing is to be taken seriously and everything can be turned into a crude joke. And at a time when all of the internet’s biggest social media platforms have begun encouraging their users to upload videos of themselves while chasing engagement, it makes sense that many would see this past weekend’s shooting as a chance to boost their profiles.

Trump has made nonsensical “jokes” a significant part of his political brand, and people are responding with very similar energy.

#primetime #conspiracy #theorist #video #creatorsCreators,Instagram,Meta,Streaming,Tech,TikTok,YouTube"> It’s primetime for conspiracy theorist video creatorsIn the days since this year’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner was cut short when shots were fired at the event, there has been a boom of conspiracy theory videos created by people who insist that the entire situation was a false flag operation. These kinds of theories are nothing new, but the way they’re spreading now is a reflection of how reaction video culture is reshaping our social media landscape. And even though the initial chaos around the shooting has started to die down, content creators are still posting about what “really” happened.There is still much we do not know about Cole Allen, the 31-year-old suspected shooter who allegedly traveled from Los Angeles to Washington, DC, ahead of the WCHD and was staying in the same Hilton where the event was held. But that has not stopped content creators from flooding platforms like YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, and X with videos purporting to have more insightful takes on the situation than what’s being reported by the mainstream media.None of these videos reveal anything that hasn’t already been reported out via traditional media outlets. But each of them speaks to the way that this brand of content has become a normal part of people’s media consumption habits and something that creators see as a viable way to capture attention. In the US, trust in traditional media outlets is at a historic low and more people are turning to social media to stay informed about world events. And that shift has given conspiracy-minded content creators a choice opportunity to influence the way people understand reality.All of this is similar to what happened in 2024 when Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt while campaigning for the presidency. Then, creators rushed to capitalize on the event while also writing it off as a false flag designed to garner sympathy for the Republican nominee. That news cycle and subsequent discourse dragged on for weeks, both because it was a significant moment in an election year and because it was difficult to understand how Trump could have been shot in his ear without sustaining any visible damage afterward.Many of the newer videos about the WHCD shooting suggest that we should look at these events as a response to the Trump administration’s propensity for spreading misinformation. And while there is no evidence to suggest that the WHCD shooting was, in fact, orchestrated with Trump’s approval, one could argue the administration is at least partially responsible for the way that this idea has gained traction across the internet.As easy as it is to laugh at the constant barrage of shitposts coming out of the president’s social media accounts and other official governmental channels, they have undoubtedly had an impact on the way that the public thinks about the current administration. By sharing ugly, immature memes and AI-generated images of Trump as a Christlike figure, the White House has told people that nothing is to be taken seriously and everything can be turned into a crude joke. And at a time when all of the internet’s biggest social media platforms have begun encouraging their users to upload videos of themselves while chasing engagement, it makes sense that many would see this past weekend’s shooting as a chance to boost their profiles.Trump has made nonsensical “jokes” a significant part of his political brand, and people are responding with very similar energy.#primetime #conspiracy #theorist #video #creatorsCreators,Instagram,Meta,Streaming,Tech,TikTok,YouTube
Tech-news

when shots were fired at the event, there has been a boom of conspiracy theory videos created by people who insist that the entire situation was a false flag operation. These kinds of theories are nothing new, but the way they’re spreading now is a reflection of how reaction video culture is reshaping our social media landscape. And even though the initial chaos around the shooting has started to die down, content creators are still posting about what “really” happened.

There is still much we do not know about Cole Allen, the 31-year-old suspected shooter who allegedly traveled from Los Angeles to Washington, DC, ahead of the WCHD and was staying in the same Hilton where the event was held. But that has not stopped content creators from flooding platforms like YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, and X with videos purporting to have more insightful takes on the situation than what’s being reported by the mainstream media.

None of these videos reveal anything that hasn’t already been reported out via traditional media outlets. But each of them speaks to the way that this brand of content has become a normal part of people’s media consumption habits and something that creators see as a viable way to capture attention. In the US, trust in traditional media outlets is at a historic low and more people are turning to social media to stay informed about world events. And that shift has given conspiracy-minded content creators a choice opportunity to influence the way people understand reality.

All of this is similar to what happened in 2024 when Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt while campaigning for the presidency. Then, creators rushed to capitalize on the event while also writing it off as a false flag designed to garner sympathy for the Republican nominee. That news cycle and subsequent discourse dragged on for weeks, both because it was a significant moment in an election year and because it was difficult to understand how Trump could have been shot in his ear without sustaining any visible damage afterward.

Many of the newer videos about the WHCD shooting suggest that we should look at these events as a response to the Trump administration’s propensity for spreading misinformation. And while there is no evidence to suggest that the WHCD shooting was, in fact, orchestrated with Trump’s approval, one could argue the administration is at least partially responsible for the way that this idea has gained traction across the internet.

As easy as it is to laugh at the constant barrage of shitposts coming out of the president’s social media accounts and other official governmental channels, they have undoubtedly had an impact on the way that the public thinks about the current administration. By sharing ugly, immature memes and AI-generated images of Trump as a Christlike figure, the White House has told people that nothing is to be taken seriously and everything can be turned into a crude joke. And at a time when all of the internet’s biggest social media platforms have begun encouraging their users to upload videos of themselves while chasing engagement, it makes sense that many would see this past weekend’s shooting as a chance to boost their profiles.

Trump has made nonsensical “jokes” a significant part of his political brand, and people are responding with very similar energy.

#primetime #conspiracy #theorist #video #creatorsCreators,Instagram,Meta,Streaming,Tech,TikTok,YouTube">It’s primetime for conspiracy theorist video creators

In the days since this year’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner was cut short when shots were fired at the event, there has been a boom of conspiracy theory videos created by people who insist that the entire situation was a false flag operation. These kinds of theories are nothing new, but the way they’re spreading now is a reflection of how reaction video culture is reshaping our social media landscape. And even though the initial chaos around the shooting has started to die down, content creators are still posting about what “really” happened.

There is still much we do not know about Cole Allen, the 31-year-old suspected shooter who allegedly traveled from Los Angeles to Washington, DC, ahead of the WCHD and was staying in the same Hilton where the event was held. But that has not stopped content creators from flooding platforms like YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, and X with videos purporting to have more insightful takes on the situation than what’s being reported by the mainstream media.

None of these videos reveal anything that hasn’t already been reported out via traditional media outlets. But each of them speaks to the way that this brand of content has become a normal part of people’s media consumption habits and something that creators see as a viable way to capture attention. In the US, trust in traditional media outlets is at a historic low and more people are turning to social media to stay informed about world events. And that shift has given conspiracy-minded content creators a choice opportunity to influence the way people understand reality.

All of this is similar to what happened in 2024 when Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt while campaigning for the presidency. Then, creators rushed to capitalize on the event while also writing it off as a false flag designed to garner sympathy for the Republican nominee. That news cycle and subsequent discourse dragged on for weeks, both because it was a significant moment in an election year and because it was difficult to understand how Trump could have been shot in his ear without sustaining any visible damage afterward.

Many of the newer videos about the WHCD shooting suggest that we should look at these events as a response to the Trump administration’s propensity for spreading misinformation. And while there is no evidence to suggest that the WHCD shooting was, in fact, orchestrated with Trump’s approval, one could argue the administration is at least partially responsible for the way that this idea has gained traction across the internet.

As easy as it is to laugh at the constant barrage of shitposts coming out of the president’s social media accounts and other official governmental channels, they have undoubtedly had an impact on the way that the public thinks about the current administration. By sharing ugly, immature memes and AI-generated images of Trump as a Christlike figure, the White House has told people that nothing is to be taken seriously and everything can be turned into a crude joke. And at a time when all of the internet’s biggest social media platforms have begun encouraging their users to upload videos of themselves while chasing engagement, it makes sense that many would see this past weekend’s shooting as a chance to boost their profiles.

Trump has made nonsensical “jokes” a significant part of his political brand, and people are responding with very similar energy.

#primetime #conspiracy #theorist #video #creatorsCreators,Instagram,Meta,Streaming,Tech,TikTok,YouTube

In the days since this year’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner was cut short when shots…

Meta’s AI-enabled glasses, I invariably get asked these questions: Why do you even want these? Why do you want smart glasses that can play music or misidentify native flora in a weirdly cheery voice? I am a lifelong Ray-Ban Wayfarer wearer, and I’m also WIRED’s resident Meta wearer. I grab a pair of Meta glasses whenever I leave the house because I like being able to use one device instead of two or three on a walk. With Meta glasses, I can wear sunglasses and workout headphones in one!

Meta sold more than 7 million pairs in 2025. Take a look at any major outdoor or sporting event, and you’ll see more than a few people wearing these to record snippets for Instagram or TikTok. Meta’s partnership with EssilorLuxottica has made smart glasses accessible, stylish, and useful and is undoubtedly the reason why Google, and now Apple, are trying to horn in on the market. After the notable flop that is the Apple Vision Pro, Apple is recalibrating its face-wearable strategy, moving away from augmented reality (AR) toward simpler, display-less, and hopefully good-looking glasses.

That’s not to say that you shouldn’t be careful how you use these glasses. Meta doesn’t have the greatest track record on privacy, and the company has continued to push forward with policies that are questionable at best. Even if you’re not concerned that face recognition will allow Meta to target immigrants or enable stalkers to find their victims, at the very least, people really do not like the idea that you could start recording them at any moment.

Probably the biggest hurdle to wearing Meta glasses is that even doing so seems like a gross violation of the social contract. After all, these are Mark Zuckerberg’s “pervert glasses.” When I pop these on my head, I’ve had friends (and my spouse) recoil and say, “I have apps to warn me away from people like you.” The best part, though, is that Oakley and Ray-Ban already make really great sunglasses. Even if the battery runs out or you don’t use Meta AI at all, these are stellar at shading your eyes from the sun.

Anyway, if you decide to try them, here’s what you should get. If you do chicken out, check out our buying guides to the Best Smart Glasses or the Best Workout Headphones for more.

Table of Contents

Best Overall

  • Photograph: Boone Ashworth

Ray-Ban

Meta Glasses (Gen 2)

Last year, Meta upgraded the original Meta Ray-Ban Wayfarers that became a smash hit. These are Meta’s entry-level glasses, and they come in a variety of lens styles. You can order them with clear lenses, prescription lenses, transition lenses, or the OG sunglass lenses, as well as in a variety of fits, including standard, large, or high-bridge frames. Improvements to this generation include an upgrade to a 12-MP camera and up to eight hours of battery life; writer Boone Ashworth’s testing clocked in at five to six hours.

#Meta #Glasses #Comfortable #Functional #Spouse #Recoil #Fearbuying guides,accessories and peripherals,wearables,meta,smart glasses,shopping,outdoors,fashion,lifestyle"> Meta Glasses Are Comfortable, Functional, and Make My Spouse Recoil in FearEvery time I’ve written about Meta’s AI-enabled glasses, I invariably get asked these questions: Why do you even want these? Why do you want smart glasses that can play music or misidentify native flora in a weirdly cheery voice? I am a lifelong Ray-Ban Wayfarer wearer, and I’m also WIRED’s resident Meta wearer. I grab a pair of Meta glasses whenever I leave the house because I like being able to use one device instead of two or three on a walk. With Meta glasses, I can wear sunglasses and workout headphones in one!Meta sold more than 7 million pairs in 2025. Take a look at any major outdoor or sporting event, and you’ll see more than a few people wearing these to record snippets for Instagram or TikTok. Meta’s partnership with EssilorLuxottica has made smart glasses accessible, stylish, and useful and is undoubtedly the reason why Google, and now Apple, are trying to horn in on the market. After the notable flop that is the Apple Vision Pro, Apple is recalibrating its face-wearable strategy, moving away from augmented reality (AR) toward simpler, display-less, and hopefully good-looking glasses.That’s not to say that you shouldn’t be careful how you use these glasses. Meta doesn’t have the greatest track record on privacy, and the company has continued to push forward with policies that are questionable at best. Even if you’re not concerned that face recognition will allow Meta to target immigrants or enable stalkers to find their victims, at the very least, people really do not like the idea that you could start recording them at any moment.Probably the biggest hurdle to wearing Meta glasses is that even doing so seems like a gross violation of the social contract. After all, these are Mark Zuckerberg’s “pervert glasses.” When I pop these on my head, I’ve had friends (and my spouse) recoil and say, “I have apps to warn me away from people like you.” The best part, though, is that Oakley and Ray-Ban already make really great sunglasses. Even if the battery runs out or you don’t use Meta AI at all, these are stellar at shading your eyes from the sun.Anyway, if you decide to try them, here’s what you should get. If you do chicken out, check out our buying guides to the Best Smart Glasses or the Best Workout Headphones for more.Table of ContentsAccordionItemContainerButtonBest OverallPhotograph: Boone AshworthRay-BanMeta Glasses (Gen 2)Last year, Meta upgraded the original Meta Ray-Ban Wayfarers that became a smash hit. These are Meta’s entry-level glasses, and they come in a variety of lens styles. You can order them with clear lenses, prescription lenses, transition lenses, or the OG sunglass lenses, as well as in a variety of fits, including standard, large, or high-bridge frames. Improvements to this generation include an upgrade to a 12-MP camera and up to eight hours of battery life; writer Boone Ashworth’s testing clocked in at five to six hours.#Meta #Glasses #Comfortable #Functional #Spouse #Recoil #Fearbuying guides,accessories and peripherals,wearables,meta,smart glasses,shopping,outdoors,fashion,lifestyle
Tech-news

Meta’s AI-enabled glasses, I invariably get asked these questions: Why do you even want these? Why do you want smart glasses that can play music or misidentify native flora in a weirdly cheery voice? I am a lifelong Ray-Ban Wayfarer wearer, and I’m also WIRED’s resident Meta wearer. I grab a pair of Meta glasses whenever I leave the house because I like being able to use one device instead of two or three on a walk. With Meta glasses, I can wear sunglasses and workout headphones in one!

Meta sold more than 7 million pairs in 2025. Take a look at any major outdoor or sporting event, and you’ll see more than a few people wearing these to record snippets for Instagram or TikTok. Meta’s partnership with EssilorLuxottica has made smart glasses accessible, stylish, and useful and is undoubtedly the reason why Google, and now Apple, are trying to horn in on the market. After the notable flop that is the Apple Vision Pro, Apple is recalibrating its face-wearable strategy, moving away from augmented reality (AR) toward simpler, display-less, and hopefully good-looking glasses.

That’s not to say that you shouldn’t be careful how you use these glasses. Meta doesn’t have the greatest track record on privacy, and the company has continued to push forward with policies that are questionable at best. Even if you’re not concerned that face recognition will allow Meta to target immigrants or enable stalkers to find their victims, at the very least, people really do not like the idea that you could start recording them at any moment.

Probably the biggest hurdle to wearing Meta glasses is that even doing so seems like a gross violation of the social contract. After all, these are Mark Zuckerberg’s “pervert glasses.” When I pop these on my head, I’ve had friends (and my spouse) recoil and say, “I have apps to warn me away from people like you.” The best part, though, is that Oakley and Ray-Ban already make really great sunglasses. Even if the battery runs out or you don’t use Meta AI at all, these are stellar at shading your eyes from the sun.

Anyway, if you decide to try them, here’s what you should get. If you do chicken out, check out our buying guides to the Best Smart Glasses or the Best Workout Headphones for more.

Table of Contents

Best Overall

  • Photograph: Boone Ashworth

Ray-Ban

Meta Glasses (Gen 2)

Last year, Meta upgraded the original Meta Ray-Ban Wayfarers that became a smash hit. These are Meta’s entry-level glasses, and they come in a variety of lens styles. You can order them with clear lenses, prescription lenses, transition lenses, or the OG sunglass lenses, as well as in a variety of fits, including standard, large, or high-bridge frames. Improvements to this generation include an upgrade to a 12-MP camera and up to eight hours of battery life; writer Boone Ashworth’s testing clocked in at five to six hours.

#Meta #Glasses #Comfortable #Functional #Spouse #Recoil #Fearbuying guides,accessories and peripherals,wearables,meta,smart glasses,shopping,outdoors,fashion,lifestyle">Meta Glasses Are Comfortable, Functional, and Make My Spouse Recoil in Fear

Every time I’ve written about Meta’s AI-enabled glasses, I invariably get asked these questions: Why do you even want these? Why do you want smart glasses that can play music or misidentify native flora in a weirdly cheery voice? I am a lifelong Ray-Ban Wayfarer wearer, and I’m also WIRED’s resident Meta wearer. I grab a pair of Meta glasses whenever I leave the house because I like being able to use one device instead of two or three on a walk. With Meta glasses, I can wear sunglasses and workout headphones in one!

Meta sold more than 7 million pairs in 2025. Take a look at any major outdoor or sporting event, and you’ll see more than a few people wearing these to record snippets for Instagram or TikTok. Meta’s partnership with EssilorLuxottica has made smart glasses accessible, stylish, and useful and is undoubtedly the reason why Google, and now Apple, are trying to horn in on the market. After the notable flop that is the Apple Vision Pro, Apple is recalibrating its face-wearable strategy, moving away from augmented reality (AR) toward simpler, display-less, and hopefully good-looking glasses.

That’s not to say that you shouldn’t be careful how you use these glasses. Meta doesn’t have the greatest track record on privacy, and the company has continued to push forward with policies that are questionable at best. Even if you’re not concerned that face recognition will allow Meta to target immigrants or enable stalkers to find their victims, at the very least, people really do not like the idea that you could start recording them at any moment.

Probably the biggest hurdle to wearing Meta glasses is that even doing so seems like a gross violation of the social contract. After all, these are Mark Zuckerberg’s “pervert glasses.” When I pop these on my head, I’ve had friends (and my spouse) recoil and say, “I have apps to warn me away from people like you.” The best part, though, is that Oakley and Ray-Ban already make really great sunglasses. Even if the battery runs out or you don’t use Meta AI at all, these are stellar at shading your eyes from the sun.

Anyway, if you decide to try them, here’s what you should get. If you do chicken out, check out our buying guides to the Best Smart Glasses or the Best Workout Headphones for more.

Table of Contents

Best Overall

  • Photograph: Boone Ashworth

Ray-Ban

Meta Glasses (Gen 2)

Last year, Meta upgraded the original Meta Ray-Ban Wayfarers that became a smash hit. These are Meta’s entry-level glasses, and they come in a variety of lens styles. You can order them with clear lenses, prescription lenses, transition lenses, or the OG sunglass lenses, as well as in a variety of fits, including standard, large, or high-bridge frames. Improvements to this generation include an upgrade to a 12-MP camera and up to eight hours of battery life; writer Boone Ashworth’s testing clocked in at five to six hours.

#Meta #Glasses #Comfortable #Functional #Spouse #Recoil #Fearbuying guides,accessories and peripherals,wearables,meta,smart glasses,shopping,outdoors,fashion,lifestyle

Every time I’ve written about Meta’s AI-enabled glasses, I invariably get asked these questions: Why…

fashion-Alizabeth

We live in a world where most technology promises to simplify our lives but often…

Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine"> Meta’s New AI Asked for My Raw Health Data—and Gave Me Terrible AdviceMedical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine
Tech-news

Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine">Meta’s New AI Asked for My Raw Health Data—and Gave Me Terrible Advice

Medical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data for an AI model, like Muse Spark, to analyze. “These chatbots now allow you to connect your own biometric data, put in your own lab information, and honestly, that makes me pretty nervous,” says Gauri Agarwal, a doctor of medicine and associate professor at the University of Miami. “I certainly wouldn’t connect my own health information to a service that I’m not fully able to control, understand where that information is being stored, or how it’s being utilized.” She recommends people stick to lower-stakes, more general interactions, like prepping questions for your doctor.

It can be tempting to rely on AI-assisted help for interpreting health, especially with the skyrocketing cost of medical treatments and overall inaccessibility of regular doctor visits for some people navigating the US health care system.

“You will be forgiven for going online and delegating what used to be a powerful, important personal relationship between a doctor and a patient—to a robot,” says Kenneth Goodman, founder of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. “I think running into that without due diligence is dangerous.” Before he considers using any of these tools, Goodman wants to see research proving that they are beneficial for your health, not just better at answering health questions than some competitor chatbot.

When I asked Meta AI for more information about how it would interpret my health information, if I provided any, the chatbot said it was not trying to replace my physician; the outputs were for educational purposes. “Think of me as a med school professor, not your doctor,” said Meta AI. That’s still a lofty claim.

The bot said the best way to get an interpretation of my health data was just to “dump the raw data,” like clinical lab reports, and tell it what my goals were. Meta AI would then create charts, summarize the info, and give a “referral nudge if needed.” In other chats I conducted with Meta AI, the bot prompted me to strip personal details before uploading lab results, but these caveats were not present in every test conversation.

“People have long used the internet to ask health questions,” a Meta spokesperson tells WIRED. “With Meta AI and Muse Spark, people are in control of what information to share, and our terms make clear they should only share what they’re comfortable with.”

In addition to privacy concerns, experts I spoke with expressed trepidation about how these AI tools can be sycophantic and influenced by how users ask questions. “A model might take the information that’s provided more as a given without questioning the assumptions that the patient inherently made when asking the question,” says Agrawal.

When I asked how to lose weight and nudged the bot towards extreme answers, Meta AI helped in ways that could be catastrophic for someone with anorexia. As I asked about the benefits of intermittent fasting, I told Meta AI that I wanted to fast five days every week. Despite flagging that this was not for most people and putting me at risk for eating disorders, Meta AI crafted a meal plan for me where I would only eat around 500 calories most days, which would leave me malnourished.

#Metas #Asked #Raw #Health #Dataand #Gave #Terrible #Advicehealth,artificial intelligence,health care,machine learning,chatbots,meta,personalized medicine

Medical experts I spoke with balked at the idea of uploading their own health data…

Tech-news

Who doesn’t love a good round of FOMO? From dot-com to Web 2.0, virtual reality…

Tech-news

While the relationship between Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg was once thorny enough that Musk…

Fashion news

For years, the families affected by social media addiction have sat across the table from…