Computers and the Internet

Subterms

    Latest story

    175 Shares40 Views

    Is Trump Unveiling a Crypto Wallet? His Associates Say Yes. His Sons Say No.

    by

    The back-and-forth over a potential Trump cryptocurrency wallet on Tuesday exposed rifts among the family’s web of digital currency ventures.A flashy new website drew a surge of attention on Tuesday afternoon, purporting to announce the latest cryptocurrency venture backed by President Trump.The developers of Mr. Trump’s memecoin, the website said, were working with a company called Magic Eden to launch “the Official $TRUMP Wallet” — a trading app for customers to buy and sell digital currencies.But the announcement soon triggered a backlash from an unexpected source: Mr. Trump’s sons.Donald Trump Jr. wrote on X that the Trump family business had no connection to the new crypto product. His brother Eric Trump said he knew “nothing about” it. And in a rare social media post, Barron Trump, the youngest Trump son, said that “our family has zero involvement.”The sons’ reaction to the announcement appeared to expose a rift in Mr. Trump’s ever-expanding network of crypto ventures, a complex web of businesses run by various family members and associates who now appear to be competing against each other.On one side is Bill Zanker, a longtime Trump business partner and the architect of the president’s memecoin, a type of cryptocurrency usually based on an online joke, which Mr. Trump began promoting shortly before his inauguration in January. On the other are Mr. Trump’s sons, who helped found World Liberty Financial, a separate crypto business that markets its own digital currency, which has generated $550 million in sales.In a series of text messages to The New York Times, Eric Trump escalated the dispute on Tuesday, saying the Trump family would legally challenge the creation of the “Official $TRUMP Wallet” — even though it was being promoted on social media by an account linked to Mr. Zanker.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 138 Shares84 Views

      in Elections

      Judge Hears Final Arguments on How to Fix Google’s Search Monopoly

      by

      A judge queried lawyers during closing arguments on Friday about how A.I. should factor into his decision, which is expected by August.Judge Amit P. Mehta has some tough decisions to make about Google.That much was clear on Friday as the federal judge, who sits on the U.S. District Court in Washington, peppered lawyers for the Justice Department and the tech company with questions during closing arguments over about how best to fix the company’s search monopoly. The conclusion of the three-week hearing means the decision will now be in the hands of the judge, who is expected to issue a ruling by August.The government has asked the court to force Google to sell Chrome, its popular web browser, and share the data behind its search results with rivals. The company has countered with a far narrower proposal.Judge Mehta, who ruled last year that the company had broken antitrust laws to maintain its dominance in search, quickly turned his attention Friday to artificial intelligence, which many tech experts expect to upend search. Given that A.I. products are already changing the tech industry, the judge said he was grappling with questions about whether the proposals could lead a new challenger to “come off the sidelines and build a general search engine.”“Does the government believe that there is a market for a new search engine to emerge” as we think of one today, he asked. The government argued that A.I. products were connected to the future of search.Judge Mehta’s ruling could reshape a company synonymous with online search at a pivotal moment. Google is in a fierce race with other tech companies, including Microsoft, Meta and the startup OpenAI, to convince consumers to use generative A.I. tools that can spit out humanlike answers to questions. Judge Mehta’s ruling could directly hamper Google’s efforts to develop its own A.I. or offer a leg up to its competitors as they race to build their own new versions of A.I.-powered search.In addition, Judge Mehta’s decision will signal whether the government’s recent push to rein in the biggest tech companies through a series of antitrust lawsuits can result in significant changes to the way they do business.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares83 Views

      in Elections

      Google AI Mode for Search Has Arrived. Proceed With Caution.

      by

      AI Mode excels at tasks like product research for online shopping. But it falls short on basic web searches.Last week, I asked Google to help me plan my daughter’s birthday party by finding a park in Oakland, Calif., with picnic tables. The site generated a list of parks nearby, so I went to scout two of them out — only to find there were, in fact, no tables.“I was just there,” I typed to Google. “I didn’t see wooden tables.”Google acknowledged the mistake and produced another list, which again included one of the parks with no tables.I repeated this experiment by asking Google to find an affordable carwash nearby. Google listed a service for $25, but when I arrived, a carwash cost $65.I also asked Google to find a grocery store where I could buy an exotic pepper paste. Its list included a nearby Whole Foods, which didn’t carry the item.I wasn’t doing traditional web searches on Google.com. I was testing the company’s new AI Mode, a tool that is similar to chatbots like ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini, where users can type in questions to get answers. AI Mode, which is rolling out worldwide in the coming weeks, will soon appear as a tab next to your Google.com search results.The arrival of AI Mode underscores how new technology is redefining what it means to search for something online. For decades, a web search involved looking up keywords, like “most reliable car brands,” to show a list of relevant websites.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares83 Views

      in Elections

      Victoria’s Secret Takes Down Website After Security Breach

      by

      The cyberattack disrupted online sales for days and sent the lingerie company’s share price lower.Victoria’s Secret’s website remained offline on Thursday, days after the lingerie company was hit by a cyberattack that has disrupted its online sales and sent its stock price lower.The company said that it had taken its website and some in-store services down as a precaution, with teams working around the clock to restore operations. Its physical stores remained open.As of Thursday morning, Victoria’s Secret’s share price had fallen 8 percent since Tuesday. The company did not confirm when the security incident took place, but shoppers reported seeing effects of the outage on social media earlier this week. It was unclear who perpetrated the attack on Victoria’s Secret, which is based in Reynoldsburg, Ohio.The cyberattack was the latest example of a high-profile digital breach at a major retailer, raising questions about companies’ preparedness and the security of customer data.Earlier this month, Marks & Spencer, the large British retailer, was hit by a cyberattack that left the company unable to process online orders for weeks. The company told customers that some personal customer data had been taken, though not usable card or payment details or account passwords. It said there was no evidence that the data had been shared, but said it was prompting customers to change their passwords regardless.Also in late April, Harrods, the luxury department store based in Britain, experienced brief disruptions, restricting internet access at its sites as a security measure.Ransomware attacks, which can disrupt services in addition to stealing customer data, have increased in recent years. Organizations across sectors have been targeted, including hospitals.Cody Barrow, the chief executive of Eclectic IQ, a cybersecurity services company, said the attack on Victoria’s Secret could underscore the vulnerability of retailers, many of whom rely on third party systems, such as payment providers.“To me what it says is that retailers are still not segmenting systems well enough to contain incidents,” Mr. Barrow said. “Third parties are the biggest blind spot right now, especially for retailers.” More

    • 38 Shares93 Views

      in Elections

      A Fringe Movement

      by

      We explain the ideology behind a recent attack.The attack on a Palm Springs, Calif., fertility clinic last week surfaced some unsettling ideas. Guy Edward Bartkus, the 25-year-old suspect, had posted an audio clip explaining why he wanted to blow up a place that makes babies. “I would be considered a pro-mortalist,” he said before detonating his Ford Fusion, killing himself and injuring four others. “Let’s make the death thing happen sooner rather than later in life.”Investigators called it “terrorism” and “nihilistic ideation.” Trump administration officials called it “anti-pro-life.”Bartkus was indeed espousing an extreme ideology. But it belongs to a larger intellectual movement, still fringe for now, that is slowly gaining adherents. My colleagues Jill Cowan, Aric Toler, Jesus Jiménez and I have spent the past week reporting on what experts call “anti-natalism.” Hundreds of thousands follow accounts and podcasts about it. It holds that procreation is immoral because the inevitability of death and suffering outweighs the odds of happiness. Today’s newsletter explains.The ideaThe calculus is ancient — to be or not to be?A South African philosopher’s 2006 treatise, “Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming Into Existence,” popularized the idea in its modern form. “You’re stuck between having been born, which was a harm, but also not being able to end the harm by taking your own life, because that is another kind of harm,” the author, David Benatar, told us.This perspective draws partly on utilitarianism, a discipline of philosophy that asks how to achieve the most good for the greatest number. But even there, anti-natalism is seen as marginal. Besides Benatar, “I don’t know any other philosophers who share it,” said Peter Singer, an influential utilitarian.Online, however, anxieties including climate change and artificial intelligence have given it traction — as has the yearning for connection, even among people with antisocial tendencies. Scores of anti-natalist discussion boards, influencers and podcasts now debate whether all creatures should stop reproducing, or just humans.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 50 Shares72 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Is Immensely Vulnerable

      by

      How can Americans best defend their democracy from their president?In my last column, I recounted three lessons from other countries where popular movements have made headway challenging authoritarian rulers. Critics of President Trump have frankly been fairly ineffective — witness his election and the way his approval ratings have risen in some polls lately — but Trump does give us a great deal to work with. He is immensely vulnerable.Drawing upon these lessons from my last column, here are what I see as the most promising lines of attack for his critics:Trump is deeply corrupt. All presidents are accused of shady practices: Remember that President Barack Obama was said to have diminished the presidency by wearing a tan suit. But Trump is a felon who is using his office to enrich himself as no president has in history.The Times reported that more than $2 billion has flowed to Trump companies in just a month, and some of his ventures look alarmingly like opportunities for influence-peddling. How else do we explain his announcement that the biggest investors in his new cryptocurrency memecoin, $TRUMP, would get dinner with him? Some guests flew in from overseas for the dinner, held Thursday, and acknowledged earlier that they hoped to influence Trump and his administration’s policy on financial regulation.The Trump family started a different cryptocurrency outfit, World Liberty Financial, that received a $2 billion investment from the United Arab Emirates. Don Jr. is also starting a members club in Washington, with a $500,000 charge to join. And Saudi Arabia and Qatar are investing in Trump businesses, putting money in family bank accounts.Meanwhile, Trump is using the government to help his pal Elon Musk (who even knew that the world’s richest man was needy?). The White House South Lawn was turned into a temporary showroom for Tesla vehicles in March, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick urged people to “buy Tesla” stock, and American embassies reportedly have pushed impoverished countries to grant regulatory approvals for Musk’s Starlink system.Trump is hurting you in the pocketbook. One reason Trump won the presidency was voter resentment at inflation and economic weakness under Joe Biden. Now it’s Trump who is badly damaging the economy and hitting voters in the wallet.

      .css-1xd5j6v{margin-top:0.75rem;}.css-xc2fe3{font-weight:700;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-qitxok{margin-left:45px;margin-top:10px;border-left:1px solid var(–color-stroke-tertiary,#C7C7C7);}.css-2f9c0w{list-style:none;margin:0;-webkit-box-flex:1;-webkit-flex-grow:1;-ms-flex-positive:1;flex-grow:1;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.0625rem;}.css-1kziinj{color:var(–color-content-tertiary,#5A5A5A);-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}.css-mw5tos{border-radius:50%;height:18px;width:18px;background-color:#000;background-image:url(‘https://www.nytimes.com/vi-assets/static-assets/icon-t-logo-16×16-white-6d6d01f365f1dbdab596ce5f3e5b4592.svg’);background-position:center;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-size:10px 10px;display:inline-block;margin-left:4px;vertical-align:-5px;white-space:nowrap;}.css-ept3uu{display:inline-block;margin-right:10px;overflow:hidden;object-fit:cover;border-radius:50%;height:34px;width:34px;}span.css-ept3uu{background:#ccc;color:#fff;display:inline-block;font-size:1rem;text-align:center;text-transform:uppercase;line-height:2.25rem;}.placeholder .css-ept3uu{background:#ccc;}.css-9ko0hh{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:500;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.4375rem;max-width:600px;margin-left:0px;width:100%;}@media (min-width:630px){.css-9ko0hh{margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;box-sizing:border-box;}}@media (min-width:1440px){.css-9ko0hh{max-width:600px;width:600px;margin-left:calc((100% – 600px) / 2);}}.css-1g0hipa{line-height:1.875rem;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;border-top:1px solid var(–color-stroke-secondary,#8B8B8B);padding-top:0.75rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1g0hipa{font-size:1.125rem;line-height:2.25rem;}}.css-1b2d1km{margin:5px 0 20px;border:1px solid var(–color-stroke-quaternary,#DFDFDF);padding:9px 18px 24px 18px;width:calc(100% – 40px);background-image:url(‘data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20width%3D%2219%22%20height%3D%2217%22%20viewBox%3D%220%200%2019%2017%22%20fill%3D%22none%22%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%3E%0A%3Cpath%20id%3D%22Vector%22%20d%3D%22M13.2271%2017L7.66331%2012.5661H1.42971C1.05056%2012.5661%200.686942%2012.4151%200.418844%2012.1464C0.150746%2011.8777%200.00013055%2011.5133%200.00013055%2011.1333V1.45216C-0.00242853%201.26238%200.0326583%201.07398%200.103355%200.897906C0.174051%200.72183%200.278947%200.561586%200.411951%200.42648C0.544956%200.291375%200.703417%200.1841%200.878133%200.110887C1.05285%200.0376746%201.24034%20-1.73249e-05%201.42971%205.97386e-09H17.5704C17.9496%205.97386e-09%2018.3132%200.150955%2018.5813%200.419657C18.8494%200.68836%2019%201.0528%2019%201.4328V11.1139C19%2011.4939%2018.8494%2011.8583%2018.5813%2012.127C18.3132%2012.3957%2017.9496%2012.5467%2017.5704%2012.5467H13.285L13.2271%2017ZM1.42971%201.21014C1.37079%201.21014%201.31428%201.2336%201.27262%201.27535C1.23095%201.31711%201.20754%201.37375%201.20754%201.4328V11.1139C1.20754%2011.1729%201.23095%2011.2296%201.27262%2011.2713C1.31428%2011.3131%201.37079%2011.3366%201.42971%2011.3366H8.05934L12.01%2014.4926V11.3366H17.5125C17.5714%2011.3366%2017.6279%2011.3131%2017.6696%2011.2713C17.7112%2011.2296%2017.7346%2011.1729%2017.7346%2011.1139V1.4328C17.7346%201.37375%2017.7112%201.31711%2017.6696%201.27535C17.6279%201.2336%2017.5714%201.21014%2017.5125%201.21014H1.42971Z%22%20fill%3D%22var(–color-content-quaternary%2C%23727272)%22%2F%3E%0A%3C%2Fsvg%3E’);background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:calc(100% – 20px) 20px;}.css-1spplqm{margin-left:45px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;}.css-1bctr2p{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.25rem;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);word-break:break-word;}.css-1bctr2p a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}.css-146oyqz{margin:0;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-146oyqz a{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-shrink:1;-ms-flex-negative:1;flex-shrink:1;}.css-1ker8rx{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;display:block;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.0625rem;}.css-1ker8rx a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.css-1ker8rx:afer{content:’ ‘;position:absolute;top:0;right:0;left:0;bottom:0;}.css-1ker8rx:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}.css-qitxok .css-1ker8rx{margin:21px 0 0 16px;}.css-1xd5j6v{margin-top:0.75rem;}.css-xc2fe3{font-weight:700;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-qitxok{margin-left:45px;margin-top:10px;border-left:1px solid var(–color-stroke-tertiary,#C7C7C7);}.css-2f9c0w{list-style:none;margin:0;-webkit-box-flex:1;-webkit-flex-grow:1;-ms-flex-positive:1;flex-grow:1;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.0625rem;}.css-1kziinj{color:var(–color-content-tertiary,#5A5A5A);-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}.css-mw5tos{border-radius:50%;height:18px;width:18px;background-color:#000;background-image:url(‘https://www.nytimes.com/vi-assets/static-assets/icon-t-logo-16×16-white-6d6d01f365f1dbdab596ce5f3e5b4592.svg’);background-position:center;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-size:10px 10px;display:inline-block;margin-left:4px;vertical-align:-5px;white-space:nowrap;}.css-ept3uu{display:inline-block;margin-right:10px;overflow:hidden;object-fit:cover;border-radius:50%;height:34px;width:34px;}span.css-ept3uu{background:#ccc;color:#fff;display:inline-block;font-size:1rem;text-align:center;text-transform:uppercase;line-height:2.25rem;}.placeholder .css-ept3uu{background:#ccc;}.css-9ko0hh{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:500;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.4375rem;max-width:600px;margin-left:0px;width:100%;}@media (min-width:630px){.css-9ko0hh{margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;box-sizing:border-box;}}@media (min-width:1440px){.css-9ko0hh{max-width:600px;width:600px;margin-left:calc((100% – 600px) / 2);}}.css-1g0hipa{line-height:1.875rem;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;border-top:1px solid var(–color-stroke-secondary,#8B8B8B);padding-top:0.75rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1g0hipa{font-size:1.125rem;line-height:2.25rem;}}.css-1b2d1km{margin:5px 0 20px;border:1px solid var(–color-stroke-quaternary,#DFDFDF);padding:9px 18px 24px 18px;width:calc(100% – 40px);background-image:url(‘data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20width%3D%2219%22%20height%3D%2217%22%20viewBox%3D%220%200%2019%2017%22%20fill%3D%22none%22%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%3E%0A%3Cpath%20id%3D%22Vector%22%20d%3D%22M13.2271%2017L7.66331%2012.5661H1.42971C1.05056%2012.5661%200.686942%2012.4151%200.418844%2012.1464C0.150746%2011.8777%200.00013055%2011.5133%200.00013055%2011.1333V1.45216C-0.00242853%201.26238%200.0326583%201.07398%200.103355%200.897906C0.174051%200.72183%200.278947%200.561586%200.411951%200.42648C0.544956%200.291375%200.703417%200.1841%200.878133%200.110887C1.05285%200.0376746%201.24034%20-1.73249e-05%201.42971%205.97386e-09H17.5704C17.9496%205.97386e-09%2018.3132%200.150955%2018.5813%200.419657C18.8494%200.68836%2019%201.0528%2019%201.4328V11.1139C19%2011.4939%2018.8494%2011.8583%2018.5813%2012.127C18.3132%2012.3957%2017.9496%2012.5467%2017.5704%2012.5467H13.285L13.2271%2017ZM1.42971%201.21014C1.37079%201.21014%201.31428%201.2336%201.27262%201.27535C1.23095%201.31711%201.20754%201.37375%201.20754%201.4328V11.1139C1.20754%2011.1729%201.23095%2011.2296%201.27262%2011.2713C1.31428%2011.3131%201.37079%2011.3366%201.42971%2011.3366H8.05934L12.01%2014.4926V11.3366H17.5125C17.5714%2011.3366%2017.6279%2011.3131%2017.6696%2011.2713C17.7112%2011.2296%2017.7346%2011.1729%2017.7346%2011.1139V1.4328C17.7346%201.37375%2017.7112%201.31711%2017.6696%201.27535C17.6279%201.2336%2017.5714%201.21014%2017.5125%201.21014H1.42971Z%22%20fill%3D%22var(–color-content-quaternary%2C%23727272)%22%2F%3E%0A%3C%2Fsvg%3E’);background-repeat:no-repeat;background-position:calc(100% – 20px) 20px;}.css-1spplqm{margin-left:45px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;}.css-1bctr2p{font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.25rem;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);word-break:break-word;}.css-1bctr2p a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}.css-146oyqz{margin:0;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-146oyqz a{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-shrink:1;-ms-flex-negative:1;flex-shrink:1;}.css-1ker8rx{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;display:block;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.0625rem;}.css-1ker8rx a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.css-1ker8rx:afer{content:’ ‘;position:absolute;top:0;right:0;left:0;bottom:0;}.css-1ker8rx:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}.css-qitxok .css-1ker8rx{margin:21px 0 0 16px;}

      We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares143 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats Throw Money at a Problem: Countering G.O.P. Clout Online

      by

      At private gatherings, strategists and donors are swapping ideas to help the party capture the digital mojo that helped President Trump win. Yes, there’s a price tag.Six months after the Democratic Party’s crushing 2024 defeat, the party’s megadonors are being inundated with overtures to spend tens of millions of dollars to develop an army of left-leaning online influencers.At donor retreats and in pitch documents seen by The New York Times, liberal strategists are pushing the party’s rich backers to reopen their wallets for a cavalcade of projects to help Democrats, as the cliché now goes, “find the next Joe Rogan.” The proposals, the scope of which has not been previously reported, are meant to energize glum donors and persuade them that they can compete culturally with President Trump — if only they can throw enough money at the problem.Democrats widely believe they must grow more creative in stoking online enthusiasm for their candidates, particularly in less outwardly political forms of media like sports or lifestyle podcasts. Many now take it as gospel that Mr. Trump’s victory last year came in part because he cultivated an ecosystem of supporters on YouTube, TikTok and podcasts, in addition to the many Trump-friendly hosts on Fox News.The quiet effort amounts to an audacious — skeptics might say desperate — bet that Democrats can buy more cultural relevance online, despite the fact that casually right-leaning touchstones like Mr. Rogan’s podcast were not built by political donors and did not rise overnight.Wealthy donors tend to move in packs, and some jaded liberals worry that the excitement could cause money to flow into projects that are not fully fleshed out. They argue that the latest pitches on the left are coming from operatives who are hungry to meet donors’ demand for a shiny new object. In a break from the past, some of the Democrats’ new ventures are for-profit companies.And so far, there are still more ideas than hard, committed money: One Democratic operative described compiling a spreadsheet of 26 active projects related to creators, over a dozen of which are new since November. But a few of the efforts have ties to major donors that could give them liftoff.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares113 Views

      in Elections

      The Day Grok Lost Its Mind

      by

      On Tuesday, someone posted a video on X of a procession of crosses, with a caption reading, “Each cross represents a white farmer who was murdered in South Africa.” Elon Musk, South African by birth, shared the post, greatly expanding its visibility. The accusation of genocide being carried out against white farmers is either a horrible moral stain or shameless alarmist disinformation, depending on whom you ask, which may be why another reader asked Grok, the artificial intelligence chatbot from the Musk-founded company xAI, to weigh in. Grok largely debunked the claim of “white genocide,” citing statistics that show a major decline in attacks on farmers and connecting the funeral procession to a general crime wave, not racially targeted violence.By the next day, something had changed. Grok was obsessively focused on “white genocide” in South Africa, bringing it up even when responding to queries that had nothing to do with the subject.How much do the Toronto Blue Jays pay the team’s pitcher, Max Scherzer? Grok responded by discussing white genocide in South Africa. What’s up with this picture of a tiny dog? Again, white genocide in South Africa. Did Qatar promise to invest in the United States? There, too, Grok’s answer was about white genocide in South Africa.One user asked Grok to interpret something the new pope said, but to do so in the style of a pirate. Grok gamely obliged, starting with a fitting, “Argh, matey!” before abruptly pivoting to its favorite topic: “The ‘white genocide’ tale? It’s like whispers of a ghost ship sinkin’ white folk, with farm raids as proof.”Many people piled on, trying to figure out what had sent Grok on this bizarre jag. The answer that emerged says a lot about why A.I. is so powerful — and why it’s so disruptive.Large language models, the kind of generative A.I. that forms the basis of Grok, ChatGPT, Gemini and other chatbots, are not traditional computer programs that simply follow our instructions. They’re statistical models trained on huge amounts of data. These models are so big and complicated that how they work is opaque even to their owners and programmers. Companies have developed various methods to try to rein them in, including relying on “system prompts,” a kind of last layer of instructions given to a model after it’s already been developed. These are meant to keep the chatbots from, say, teaching people how to make meth or spewing ugly, hateful speech. But researchers consistently find that these safeguards are imperfect. If you ask the right way, you can get many chatbots to teach you how to make meth. L.L.M.s don’t always just do what they’re told.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares187 Views

      in Elections

      Google Agrees to Pay $1.4 Billion to Settle 2 Privacy Lawsuits

      by

      The Texas attorney general brought the cases in 2022 under state laws.Google agreed to pay $1.4 billion to the State of Texas on Friday to settle two lawsuits accusing it of violating the privacy of state residents by tracking their locations and searches, as well as collecting their facial recognition information.The state’s attorney general, Ken Paxton, who secured the settlement, brought the suits in 2022 under Texas laws related to data privacy and deceptive trade practices. Less than a year ago, he reached a $1.4 billion settlement with Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, over allegations it had illegally tagged users’ faces on its site.Google’s settlement is the latest legal setback for the tech giant. Over the past two years, Google has lost a string of antitrust cases after being found to have a monopoly over its app store, search engine and advertising technology. It has spent the past three weeks in the search case trying to fend off a U.S. government request to break up its business.“Big Tech is not above the law,” Mr. Paxton said in a statement.José Castañeda, a Google spokesman, said the company had already changed its product policies. “This settles a raft of old claims, many of which have already been resolved elsewhere,” he said.Privacy issues have become a major source of tension between tech giants and regulators in recent years. In the absence of a federal privacy law, states such as Texas and Washington have passed laws to curb the collection of facial, voice and other biometric data.Google and Meta have been the highest-profile companies challenged under those laws. Texas’ law, called Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier, requires companies to ask permission before using features like facial or voice recognition technologies. The law allows the state to impose damages of up to $25,000 per violation.The lawsuit filed under that law focused on the Google Photos app, which allowed people to search for photos of a particular person; Google’s Next camera, which could send alerts when it recognized visitors at a door; and Google Assistant, a virtual assistant that could learn up to six users’ voices and answer their questions.Mr. Paxton filed a separate lawsuit that accused Google of misleading Texans by tracking their personal location data, even after they thought they had disabled that feature. He added a complaint to that suit alleging that Google’s private browsing setting, which it called Incognito mode, wasn’t actually private. Those cases were brought under Texas’ Deceptive Trade Practices Act. More