News of the Cyber World

[kyonides]

OpenAI fires co-founder and CEO Sam Altman for allegedly lying to company board

Sam Altman, the chief executive and co-founder of OpenAI, has been ousted from his own company after its board accused him of “being not consistently candid in his communications”.

Altman’s dismissal is a major shakeup in Silicon Valley. Following the launch of ChatGPT, the wildly popular chatbot developed by OpenAI, Altman became one of the world’s most visible tech executives and a sought-after expert on artificial intelligence.

In a statement on Friday, Open AI’s board “no longer has confidence in his ability to lead” and said new leadership is “necessary” as the company moves forward, said a statement posted on its website. He is likewise leaving the company’s board.

OpenAI offers to pay for ChatGPT customers’ copyright lawsuits
Read more
“Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities,” the board’s statement said. What Altman had allegedly hidden from his company’s board was not clear.
...
Mira Murati, OpenAI’s CTO, will become interim CEO in his place, according to the statement. Murati has been a part of the San Francisco-based company’s leadership for five years. Greg Brockman will step down from his role as the chair of the board but will retain his other position as OpenAI president, according to the statement.
...
OpenAI scheduled an emergency all-hands meeting on Friday afternoon to discuss the news with employees, a person familiar with the matter told Reuters.

Altman has been regarded as the leading voice in the AI field since his company released ChatGPT in November 2022. The generative AI chatbot accrued more than 100 million users in less than a year.

The 38-year-old has led efforts to create “artificial general intelligence”, or AGI, an AI system capable of completing any task a human can achieve.

I wish they were a hell lot more specific on what it means to not be consistently candid in his communications. Till that happens one day, I would just suspect this is another attempt to implement gender ideology that brings no actual benefits to any company.

Why did i say that? Because it is not based on merits, knowledge and abilities as it should always be the case. This means that it does not matter if the current and the next CEO's are male or female, the decision will be based solely on solid grounds that anybody inside the company, especially stakeholders, can confirm at any given time if ever needed.

Censorship Industry: ‘Business Booming’ for Ex-Facebook ‘Disinformation’ Experts amid Wars

According to one industry insider interviewed by CNBC, the worldwide market for “trust & safety”  (Silicon Valley shorthand for “censorship”) services now stands at $11 billion.

Via CNBC:

Manu Aggarwal, a partner at research firm Everest Group, said trust and safety is among the fastest-growing segments of a part of the market called business process services, which includes the outsourcing of various IT-related tasks and call centers.

By 2024, Everest Group projects the overall business process services market to be about $300 billion, with trust and safety representing about $11 billion of that figure. Companies such as Accenture and Genpact, which offer outsourced trust and safety services and contract workers, currently capture the bulk of spending, primarily because Big Tech companies have been “building their own” tools, Aggarwal said.

Like any other industry, the censorship racket even has its own annual conference:

For the TrustCon conference in July, tech policy wonks and other industry experts headed to San Francisco to discuss the latest hot topics in online trust and safety, including their concerns about the potential societal effects of layoffs across the industry.

Several startups showcased their products in the exhibition hall, promoting their services, talking to potential clients and recruiting talent. ActiveFence, which describes itself as a “leader in providing Trust & Safety solutions to protect online platforms and their users from malicious behavior and content,” had a booth at the conference. So did Checkstep, a content moderation platform.

CNBC notes that third party “trust & safety” companies are booming as Google, Facebook, X/Twitter and other major companies have cut back on their internal departments. Many of the companies that have been at the heart of recent censorship scandals, such as NewsGuard, are private companies that offer third party services to augment censorship on social media companies.

First we learned about Google paying Apple to be its search engine but there are other companies or corporations that are involved in this complex case.

Japan's Ajinomoto to acquire US gene therapy start-up

Japanese food maker Ajinomoto has said it will enter the gene therapy business by acquiring a US startup, aiming to strengthen its healthcare business as a high-growth area.

Ajinomoto announced the deal with Forge Biologics Holdings on Monday. It said that it will purchase all shares of the gene therapy firm for about 550 million dollars. The acquisition is scheduled to be completed as early as in December.

Forge Biologics develops and manufactures drugs to treat hereditary diseases. According to Ajinomoto, the US firm has one of the world's top production capacities in the gene therapy field.

If you ever ever thought you wouldn't hear about Google once again, let me tell you now that you were totally wrong about that! 

All About Lawsuits

Google Antitrust Trial 2.0: Internet Giant Pays Samsung $8 Billion to Secure Default App Status

The Hill reports that Google’s constant quest to cement its dominance in the smartphone market has come with a hefty price tag: a staggering $8 billion paid to Samsung. This deal, spanning four years, was disclosed in the ongoing antitrust case involving Epic Games, developer of massively popular video game Fortnite. The Samsung deal is a clear indicator of the tech giant’s strategy to maintain its stranglehold over the fiercely competitive app market.

The details of this agreement emerged during the antitrust trial as part of the testimony of James Kolotouros, Google vice president for partnerships. The deal entails a revenue-sharing arrangement, ensuring that Samsung’s Android devices come preinstalled with Google Play. Epic Games claims this move isn’t just about brand presence; it’s a strategic effort to dominate the app marketplace.

In 2020, Epic sued Google, alleging that the company’s practices in its app marketplace were in violation of antitrust laws. The focus of this lawsuit is Google’s alleged creation of an illegal monopoly on Android apps, enabling it to earn substantial profits through commissions ranging between 15 to 30 percent on in-app purchases.

Google’s defense revolves around competition with Apple and its App Store. However, Epic’s attorneys, including Lauren Moskowitz, have criticized this argument, suggesting that Google’s actions go beyond healthy competition. The lawsuit also draws attention to the interconnectedness of big tech firms, highlighting the other ongoing antitrust case involving Google, focused on Google’s payments to Apple to maintain its search engine’s dominance on iPhones.

The case, unfolding in the Northern District of California, is expected to continue until the end of the year. It’s a critical examination of the practices of tech giants in a market where they wield considerable influence. As Epic’s attorney Gary Bornstein puts it, Google’s approach can be seen as one of “bullying and bribing” to stifle competition.

Tokyo doctor to sue Google over 'harmful' Maps app reviews

NHK has learned that a doctor in Tokyo is preparing to sue Google. The physician says the US IT giant has refused to delete harmful reviews of their clinic from its Maps application.

Google Maps allows users to post reviews about facilities and locations and rate them. It is said to be the most popular map application in Japan.

The doctor says some of the reviews of the clinic are unfounded, with one person claiming to have been turned away at the door. The doctor apparently asked Google to delete the posts, but it said a court order is needed to do so.

The lawyer for the clinic aims to explain in court that Google's inadequate response is hurting its interests, and that clearer standards for deleting harmful reviews are needed.

A class-action suit with other doctors with similar problems may also be in the works.

Lawsuit: Popular ‘Roblox’ Video Game Exposes Children to Sexual Content and Grooming

PC Gamer reports that Roblox, a global online platform known for its gaming experiences targeted towards children, has recently come under intense scrutiny. The company is now facing a class-action lawsuit filed in California, brought forth by parents accusing Roblox of exposing their children to inappropriate sexual content and grooming. This lawsuit highlights a growing concern among parents about the safety of online environments for children, particularly on platforms like Roblox, which boasts a significant young audience.

The lawsuit alleges that The Roblox Corporation engaged in “intentional and negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and State Consumer Protection Acts.” These accusations stem from the platform’s alleged failure to effectively shield its predominantly young users, with over 60 percent under 16 years old, from harmful content and potential predators.

Parents have expressed deep concerns over the platform’s safety measures, or lack thereof. Alexandra Walsh of Walsh Law, representing the parents, stated, “There’s a misperception that Roblox is safe–the brand has a bit of a halo around it due to the company falsely advertising itself that way to parents.” The lawsuit details disturbing incidents, including children encountering avatars engaged in explicit activities and being subjected to inappropriate messages and grooming tactics.

One case involved a seven-year-old child whose mother, identified as K.M., spent around $4,000 on the game, only to discover her child receiving abusive messages, including requests for virtual sexual acts. Another plaintiff, Damien Uhl, shared a harrowing account of his 12-year-old daughter being groomed by an adult posing as a young girl on Roblox, leading to the exchange of inappropriate emails and photos.

Elon Musk Backs Down on Threat to Sue Tesla Customers Who Sell Their Cybertruck

Chron.com reports that Tesla found itself under fire this past weekend as it introduced a new clause in the Cybertruck purchase agreement. The clause stipulated that anyone reselling the electric pickup within the first year of ownership could face a lawsuit demanding $50,000 or more. This decision, however, was short-lived as Tesla rapidly removed the clause in the wake of public criticism.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has previously stated that the automaker “dug our own grave with the Cybertruck,” and the continued drama around the vehicle seems to be adding to this sentiment. Electrek, an EV news publication that is often optimistic about Tesla, even criticized the initial clause, with Electrek’s Jameson Dow writing: “Nobody likes a scalper, but also nobody likes being told what they can’t do with their car.”

The now-deleted clause was seen by many as an unprecedented move in the auto industry, primarily since the Cybertruck is a mass-produced vehicle. Its inclusion raised significant concerns about owner rights and the extent of Tesla’s attempt to regulate the resale market.

The primary purpose of the clause, according to industry experts, was to deter scalpers, individuals who buy high-demand products solely to resell them at inflated prices. With the Cybertruck drawing considerable attention and amassing around 1.9 million potential orders, the likelihood of scalping is high. However, the swift backlash against the clause from Tesla buyers seems to have quickly led to its removal.

For somebody that claims that defends free speech, that controversial clause truly sounded like a total oxymoron that had to be ditched ASAP for the company's own good.  I mean, if they had learned about the Unity mess, they would have thought that it was the automaker industry's version of Unity's pricing policy update crisis.