Don’t Let Silicon Valley Move Fast and Break Children’s Minds; The New York Times, June 25, 2025

JESSICA GROSE , The New York Times; Don’t Let Silicon Valley Move Fast and Break Children’s Minds

"On June 12, the toymaker Mattel announced a “strategic collaboration” with OpenAI, the developer of the large language model ChatGPT, “to support A.I.-powered products and experiences based on Mattel’s brands.” Though visions of chatbot therapist Barbie and Thomas the Tank Engine with a souped-up surveillance caboose may dance in my head, the details are still vague. Mattel affirms that ChatGPT is not intended for users under 13, and says it will comply with all safety and privacy regulations.

But who will hold either company to its public assurances? Our federal government appears allergic to any common-sense regulation of artificial intelligence. In fact, there is a provision in the version of the enormous domestic policy bill passed by the House that would bar states from “limiting, restricting or otherwise regulating artificial intelligence models, A.I. systems or automated decision systems entered into interstate commerce for 10 years.”"

The alarming rise of US officers hiding behind masks: ‘A police state’; The Guardian, June 25, 2025

Sam Levin, The Guardian ; The alarming rise of US officers hiding behind masks: ‘A police state’

Mike German, an ex-FBI agent, said immigration agents hiding their identities ‘highlights the illegitimacy of actions’

"Some wear balaclavas. Some wear neck gators, sunglasses and hats. Some wear masks and casual clothes.

Across the country, armed federal immigration officers have increasingly hidden their identities while carrying out immigration raids, arresting protesters and roughing up prominent Democratic critics.

It’s a trend that has sparked alarm among civil rights and law enforcement experts alike.

Mike German, a former FBI agent, said officers’ widespread use of masks was unprecedented in US law enforcement and a sign of a rapidly eroding democracy. “Masking symbolizes the drift of law enforcement away from democratic controls,” he said.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has insisted masks are necessary to protect officers’ privacy, arguing, without providing evidence, that there has been an uptick in violence against agents...

Were you surprised by the frequent reports of federal officers covering their faces and refusing to identify themselves, especially during the recent immigration raids and protests in Los Angeles?

It is absolutely shocking and frightening to see masked agents, who are also poorly identified in the way they are dressed, using force in public without clearly identifying themselves. Our country is known for having democratic control over law enforcement. When it’s hard to tell who a masked individual is working for, it’s hard to accept that that is a legitimate use of authority. It’s particularly important for officers to identify themselves when they are making arrests. It’s important for the person being arrested, and for community members who might be watching, that they understand this is a law enforcement activity."

Copyright Cases Should Not Threaten Chatbot Users’ Privacy; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), June 23, 2025

 TORI NOBLE, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); Copyright Cases Should Not Threaten Chatbot Users’ Privacy

"Like users of all technologies, ChatGPT users deserve the right to delete their personal data. Nineteen U.S. States, the European Union, and a host of other countries already protect users’ right to delete. For years, OpenAI gave users the option to delete their conversations with ChatGPT, rather than let their personal queries linger on corporate servers. Now, they can’t. A badly misguided court order in a copyright lawsuit requires OpenAI to store all consumer ChatGPT conversations indefinitely—even if a user tries to delete them. This sweeping order far outstrips the needs of the case and sets a dangerous precedent by disregarding millions of users’ privacy rights.

The privacy harms here are significant. ChatGPT’s 300+ million users submit over 1 billion messages to its chatbots per day, often for personal purposes. Virtually any personal use of a chatbot—anything from planning family vacations and daily habits to creating social media posts and fantasy worlds for Dungeons and Dragons games—reveal personal details that, in aggregate, create a comprehensive portrait of a person’s entire life. Other uses risk revealing people’s most sensitive information. For example, tens of millions of Americans use ChatGPT to obtain medical and financial information. Notwithstanding other risks of these uses, people still deserve privacy rights like the right to delete their data. Eliminating protections for user-deleted data risks chilling beneficial uses by individuals who want to protect their privacy."

Can We See Our Future in China’s Cameras?; The New York Times, June 23, 2025

Megan K. Stack , The New York Times; Can We See Our Future in China’s Cameras?

"The Chinese Communist Party famously uses surveillance to crush dissent and, increasingly, is applying predictive algorithms to get ahead of both crimes and protest. People who screen as potential political agitators, for example, can be prevented from stepping onto trains bound for Beijing. During the Covid pandemic, Chinese health authorities used algorithmic contact tracing and QR codes to block people suspected of viral exposure from entering public spaces. Those draconian health initiatives helped to mainstream invasive surveillance and increase biometric data collection.

It would be comforting to think that China has created a singular dystopia, utterly removed from our American reality. But we are not as different as we might like to think.

Thankfully, our political architecture lacks a unified power structure akin to the C.C.P. Americans — who tend to value individual liberties over collective well-being — have deeply embedded rights which, at least theoretically, protect us from such abuses."

Global AI: Compression, Complexity, and the Call for Rigorous Oversight; ABA SciTech Lawyer, May 9, 2025

Joan Rose Marie Bullock, ABA SciTech Lawyer; Global AI: Compression, Complexity, and the Call for Rigorous Oversight

"Equally critical is resisting haste. The push to deploy AI, whether in threat detection or data processing, often outpaces scrutiny. Rushed implementations, like untested algorithms in critical systems, can backfire, as any cybersecurity professional can attest from post-incident analyses. The maxim of “measure twice, cut once” applies here: thorough vetting trumps speed. Lawyers, trained in precedent, recognize the cost of acting without foresight; technologists, steeped in iterative testing, understand the value of validation. Prioritizing diligence over being first mitigates catastrophic failures of privacy breaches or security lapses that ripple worldwide."

OpenAI to appeal copyright ruling in NY Times case as Altman calls for 'AI privilege'; Foxbusiness, June 6, 2025

 Bradford Betz, Foxbusiness; OpenAI to appeal copyright ruling in NY Times case as Altman calls for 'AI privilege'

"The OpenAI co-founder said the case has accelerated the need for a conversation about "AI privilege," in which "talking to an AI should be like talking to a lawyer or a doctor.""

We Already Have an Ethics Framework for AI; Inside Higher Ed, April 25, 2025

 Gwendolyn Reece, Inside Higher Ed; We Already Have an Ethics Framework for AI

"We need to develop an ethical framework for assessing uses of new information technology—and specifically AI—that can guide individuals and institutions as they consider employing, promoting and licensing these tools for various functions. There are two main factors about AI that complicate ethical analysis. The first is that an interaction with AI frequently continues past the initial user-AI transaction; information from that transaction can become part of the system’s training set. Secondly, there is often a significant lack of transparency about what the AI model is doing under the surface, making it difficult to assess. We should demand as much transparency as possible from tool providers.

Academia already has an agreed-upon set of ethical principles and processes for assessing potential interventions. The principles in “The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research” govern our approach to research with humans and can fruitfully be applied if we think of potential uses of AI as interventions. These principles not only benefit academia in making assessments about using AI but also provide a framework for technology developers thinking through their design requirements."

U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent; The Washington Post, April 25, 2025

Ariana Eunjung Cha

, 

Caitlin Gilbert

 and 

Fenit Nirappil

 , The Washington Post; U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

"The Trump administration has retreated from a controversial plan for a national registry of people with autism just days after announcing it as part of a new health initiative that would link personal medical records to information from pharmacies and smartwatches.

Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health, unveiled the broad, data-driven initiative to a panel of experts Tuesday, saying it would include “national disease registries, including a new one for autism” that would accelerate research into the rapid rise in diagnoses of the condition.

The announcement sparked backlash in subsequent days over potential privacy violations, lack of consent and the risk of long-term misuse of sensitive data.

The Trump administration still will pursue large-scale data collection, but without the registry that drew the most intense criticism, the Department of Health and Human Services said."

Delete your DNA from 23andMe right now; The Washington Post, March 24, 2025

 Geoffrey A. Fowler, The Washington Post; Delete your DNA from 23andMe right now

"The company said there will be “no changes” to the way it protects consumer data while in bankruptcy court. But unless you take action, there is a risk your genetic information could end up in someone else’s hands — and used in ways you had never considered. It took me just a minute to delete my data on the 23andMe website, and I’ve got instructions on how to do it below.

It’s a privacy nightmare, but also an example of how state privacy laws pioneered in California can help protect Americans — at least the proactive ones...

The California Consumer Protection Act of 2018 gives you the right to delete data from businesses that collect it. While the law specifically applies to California residents, many other states have passed similar laws.

And California also has a separate law pertaining to DNA data, called the Genetic Information Privacy Act. It gives you the right to delete your account, have your biological sample destroyed, and revoke consent you may have previously given to use or disclose your genetic data."

Literary gold … or betrayal of trust? Joan Didion journal opens ethical minefield; The Guardian, February 23, 2025

Donna Ferguson , The Guardian; Literary gold … or betrayal of trust? Joan Didion journal opens ethical minefield

"The announcement that these post-psychiatry notes, discovered by Didion’s literary executors in an unlabelled folder shortly after she died in 2021, are to be published in April has raised questions around the ethics of posthumous publishing."

Who Will Stop Elon Musk’s Coup?; The Nation, February 3, 2025

JEET HEER , The Nation; Who Will Stop Elon Musk’s Coup?

"This is a remarkable power grab on Musk’s part, because he’s a private citizen who is still overseeing his vast fortune even as he claims authority to unilaterally slash government funding. Further, Musk is doing this on behalf of DOGE, which The New York Times accurately describes as “the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.” In fact, DOGE is not a real department authorized by Congress but merely the fiat creation of an executive order signed by Trump. DOGE is an advisory group that is usurping power the Constitution grants to Congress alone. Last week, Trump issued a memo to freeze federal funding for government programs such as Medicaid and SNAP, only to retreat in the face of both popular protest and an adverse court decision. Under the Constitution, Congress alone has the power of the purse, while the president is obligated to “faithfully execute the laws.” Trump’s attempt to arrogate the power to not spend money already allocated by Congress thus constitutes “impoundment”—a practice forbidden by long-standing practices and court decisions.

Waleed Shahid, a Democratic Party strategist and member of The Nation’s editorial board, distilled with bracing clarity the breathtaking scope of Musk’s power grab:

Not with tanks in the streets or militias at government buildings, but with spreadsheets, executive orders, and a network of loyalists embedded in the federal bureaucracy. In just the past few days, Musk’s hand-picked agents have seized control of Treasury’s 6 trillion payment system, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and the General Services Administration (GSA)—institutions that, together, function as the central nervous system of the U.S. government…. In any other country, experts would call it state capture, a textbook coup. 

Because Musk and his DOGE minions have strong-armed their way into the offices of the Treasury, OPM, GSA, and USAID, they have access to an astonishing body of public data. Musk can, for example, find the Social Security number of any American citizen and also what funds (if any) they receive from the government.

Musk is currently targeting mainstream Protestant churches involved in immigration resettlement. On X, the social media site he owns, Musk went after Mariann Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, DC, who delivered a sermon calling for compassion to immigrants at a service Trump attended. Musk retweeted a claim that Episcopal Migration Ministries received $53 million for immigration resettlement and said, “She’s on the take.” There is a strong element of political theater in this smearing of Budde, as in Musk’s attack on the Lutheran church. Government funding of social programs run by religious organizations is a long-standing practice and already a matter of public record. But Musk is trying to create the illusion that he’s uncovered a deeply buried government secret.

What’s scandalous is Musk’s nebulous status as both a private citizen and presidential crony, which has allowed him access to data that that can easily be abused. Coming from Silicon Valley, Musk knows that data is power. Now, he has access to the full data set of the federal government, which he is both hoarding to himself and preventing the public from seeing (many government websites have already been shuttered, allegedly as a temporary measure during the Trump/Musk riorganizzazione, including those with public health information and Census data).

Most disturbingly, Musk and his DOGE team have no proper congressional authorization." 

Elon Musk’s Power Grab Is Lawless, Dangerous, and—Yes—a Coup; Slate, February 4, 2025

DAHLIA LITHWICK AND MARK JOSEPH STERN, Slate;  Elon Musk’s Power Grab Is Lawless, Dangerous, and—Yes—a Coup

"The federal government is currently under relentless and unlawful assault by a man no one elected to lead it. With Donald Trump’s blessing and enabling, Elon Musk and his confederates have laid siege to the executive branch in an onslaught whose appalling and far-reaching consequences have barely begun to be reported, much less understood. Musk’s team is tearing through federal agencies at a shocking clip, gaining access to classified material, private personal information, and payment systems that distribute trillions of dollars every year, all in alleged breach of the law. The richest person in the world, who works for no recognizable government entity and answers to nobody, apparently believes he has unilateral authority to withhold duly appropriated funds, violate basic security protocols protecting state secrets, and abolish a global agency in direct contravention of Congress’ explicit command. He is reportedly leading a purge of the federal workforce, persecuting life-saving charities, and pushing outprincipled civil servants who stand in the way of his rampage."

The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Government Takeover; Wired, February 2, 2025

 Vittoria Elliott, Wired; The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Government Takeover

"The engineers are Akash Bobba, Edward Coristine, Luke Farritor, Gautier Cole Killian, Gavin Kliger, and Ethan Shaotran. None have responded to requests for comment from WIRED. Representatives from OPM, GSA, and DOGE did not respond to requests for comment.

The six men are one part of the broader project of Musk allies assuming key government positions. Already, Musk’s lackeys—including more senior staff from xAI, Tesla, and the Boring Company—have taken control of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and General Services Administration (GSA), and have gained access to the Treasury Department’s payment system, potentially allowing him access to a vast range of sensitive information about tens of millions of citizens, businesses, and more. On Sunday, CNN reported that DOGE personnel attempted to improperly access classified information and security systems at the US Agency for International Development and that top USAID security officials who thwarted the attempt were subsequently put on leave. The Associated Press reported that DOGE personnel had indeed accessed classified material."

OpenAI holds off on promise to creators, fails to protect intellectual property; The American Bazaar, January 3, 2025

  Vishnu Kamal, The American Bazaar; OpenAI holds off on promise to creators, fails to protect intellectual property

"OpenAI may yet again be in hot water as it seems that the tech giant may be reneging on its earlier assurances. Reportedly, in May, OpenAI said it was developing a tool to let creators specify how they want their works to be included in—or excluded from—its AI training data. But seven months later, this feature has yet to see the light of day.

Called Media Manager, the tool would “identify copyrighted text, images, audio, and video,” OpenAI said at the time, to reflect creators’ preferences “across multiple sources.” It was intended to stave off some of the company’s fiercest critics, and potentially shield OpenAI from IP-related legal challenges...

OpenAI has faced various legal challenges related to its AI technologies and operations. One major issue involves the privacy and data usage of its language models, which are trained on large datasets that may include publicly available or copyrighted material. This raises concerns over privacy violations and intellectual property rights, especially regarding whether the data used for training was obtained with proper consent.

Additionally, there are questions about the ownership of content generated by OpenAI’s models. If an AI produces a work based on copyrighted data, it is tricky to determine who owns the rights—whether it’s OpenAI, the user who prompted the AI, or the creators of the original data.

Another concern is the liability for harmful content produced by AI. If an AI generates misleading or defamatory information, legal responsibility could fall on OpenAI."

US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a ‘clean slate’; The Guardian, January 4, 2025

Sam Levin, The Guardian; US newspapers are deleting old crime stories, offering subjects a ‘clean slate’

"Civil rights advocates across the US have long fought to free people from their criminal records, with campaigns to expunge old cases and keep people’s past arrests private when they apply for jobs and housing.

The efforts are critical, as more than 70 million Americans have prior convictions or arrests – roughly one in three adults. But the policies haven’t addressed one of the most damaging ways past run-ins with police can derail people’s lives: old media coverage.

Some newsrooms are working to fill that gap. 

A handful of local newspapers across the US have in recent years launched programs to review their archives and consider requests to remove names or delete old stories to protect the privacy of subjects involved in minor crimes.

“In the old days, you put a story in the newspaper and it quickly, if not immediately, receded into memory,” said Chris Quinn, editor of Cleveland.com and the Plain Dealer newspaper. “But because of our [search engine] power, anything we write now about somebody is always front and center.”

Quinn pioneered a “right-to-be-forgotten” experiment in 2018, motivated by the many inquiries he would receive from subjects describing the harms of past crime coverage and pleading for deletion. “People would say: ‘Your story is wrecking my life. I made a mistake, but … I’ve changed my life.’”

It was long considered taboo in media to retract or alter old stories, particularly when there are no concerns about accuracy. But Quinn said he felt an ethical obligation to rethink those norms. “I couldn’t take it any more … I just got tired of telling people no and standing on tradition instead of being thoughtful.”"

New Course Creates Ethical Leaders for an AI-Driven Future; George Mason University, December 10, 2024

Buzz McClain, George Mason University; New Course Creates Ethical Leaders for an AI-Driven Future

"While the debates continue over artificial intelligence’s possible impacts on privacy, economics, education, and job displacement, perhaps the largest question regards the ethics of AI. Bias, accountability, transparency, and governance of the powerful technology are aspects that have yet to be fully answered.

A new cross-disciplinary course at George Mason University is designed to prepare students to tackle the ethical, societal, and governance challenges presented by AI. The course, AI: Ethics, Policy, and Society, will draw expertise from the Schar School of Policy and Government, the College of Engineering and Computing(CEC), and the College of Humanities and Social Sciences (CHSS).

The master’s degree-level course begins in spring 2025 and will be taught by Jesse Kirkpatrick, a research associate professor in the CEC, the Department of Philosophy, and codirector of the Mason Autonomy and Robotics Center. 

The course is important now, said Kirkpatrick, because “artificial intelligence is transforming industries, reshaping societal norms, and challenging long-standing ethical frameworks. This course provides critical insights into the ethical, societal, and policy implications of AI at a time when these technologies are increasingly deployed in areas like healthcare, criminal justice, and national defense.”"

Why I regret using 23andMe: I gave up my DNA just to find out I’m British; The Guardian, November 30, 2024

 Kari Paul, The Guardian; Why I regret using 23andMe: I gave up my DNA just to find out I’m British

"With the future of 23andMe in peril, the overarching question among previous customers now is what will happen to the data that has already been collected. Leuenberger noted that by entering DNA into a database, users sacrifice not only their own privacy but that of blood relatives. Because an individual’s DNA is similar in structure to that of their relatives, information about others can be gleaned from one person’s sample. This is especially pronounced with the rise of open-access DNA sites like GEDMatch, on which users can upload genetic data that can be compared to other samples. A consumer genealogy test contributed to the identification of serial killer Joseph James DeAngelo.

“What is ethically tricky with genetic data is that it’s not just about self-knowledge – it’s also knowledge about all of your relatives,” Leuenberger said. “Morally speaking, it is not necessarily information that is yours to give – and this risk is exacerbated if this company goes down and the fate of the data becomes more perilous.”"

Ronan Farrow on surveillance spyware: ‘It threatens democracy and freedom’; The Guardian, November 23, 2024

Adrian Horton , The Guardian; Ronan Farrow on surveillance spyware: ‘It threatens democracy and freedom’

"Surveilled, now on HBO, is, on one level, a visual accompaniment to Farrow’s bombshell April 2022 report on how governments – western democracies, autocratic regimes and many in between – secretly use commercial spyware to snoop on their citizens. The hour-long documentary, directed by Matthew O’Neill and Perri Peltz, records the emotional toll, scope and threat potential of a technology most people are neither aware of nor understand. It also serves as an argument for urgent journalistic and civic oversight of commercial spyware – its deliberately obscure manufacturers, its abuse by state clients and its silent erosion of privacy.

The film, like Farrow’s 2022 article and much of his subsequent reporting, primarily concerns a proprietary spyware technology called Pegasus that is produced by the Israeli company NSO Group. Pegasus, as the film chillingly demonstrates, can infiltrate a private device through one of its many third-party apps, sometimes with one click – via a spam or phishing link – or, for certain models, without any help of the device’s owner at all. Once activated, Pegasus can control your phone, turn on your microphone, use the camera, record voice or video, and disgorge any of its data – your texts, photos, location. It is very possible, and now documented, to be hacked by Pegasus and not even know it.

Surveilled follows Farrow on his globe-trotting efforts to trace the invisible, international scope of Pegasus: to Tel Aviv, the center of the commercial spyware industry, where NSO executives toe the party line that the group only sells to governments for law enforcement purposes and has no knowledge of its abuses. To Silicon Valley, where the giant tech companies such as WhatsApp are in a game of cat and mouse with Pegasus and others infiltrating its services. To Canada, where the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab leads efforts for transparency on who has Pegasus, and what they are doing with it. And to Barcelona, where Citizen Lab representatives detect Pegasus hacks, suspected from and later confirmed by the Spanish government, on pro-Catalan independence politicians, journalists and their families...

“All of the privacy law experts that I’m talking to are very, very afraid right now,” he added. “This tech is just increasingly everywhere, and I think we have to contend with the inevitability that this is not just going to be this path of private companies selling to governments.”

Though in part a film of journalistic process, Surveilled also advocates for a regulatory framework on commercial spyware and surveillance, as well as awareness – even if you are not a journalist, a dissident, an activist, you could be surveilled, with privacy writ large at stake."