More stories

  • in

    U.S. Court Denies TikTok’s Request to Freeze Sale-or-Ban Law

    TikTok had sought to temporarily freeze a law that requires its Chinese parent to sell the app or face a U.S. ban next month. The case may now head to the Supreme Court.A federal court on Friday denied TikTok’s request to temporarily freeze a law that requires its Chinese parent company to sell the app or face a ban in the United States as of Jan. 19, a decision that puts the fate of the app in the Supreme Court’s hands.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said in a filing late on Friday that an injunction was “unwarranted,” and that it had expedited its decision so that TikTok and its users could seek an emergency freeze from the Supreme Court.A week ago, three judges in the same court unanimously denied petitions from the company and its users to overturn the law. TikTok then asked the court on Monday to temporarily block the law until the Supreme Court decided on TikTok’s planned appeal of that decision, and sought a decision by Dec. 16.The court said on Friday that TikTok and its users “have not identified any case in which a court, after rejecting a constitutional challenge to an Act of Congress, has enjoined the Act from going into effect while review is sought in the Supreme Court.”It isn’t clear whether the Supreme Court will agree to temporarily freeze the law and hear the case, though experts say that is likely.Michael Hughes, a spokesman for TikTok, said, “As we have previously stated, we plan on taking this case to the Supreme Court, which has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech.” He said that American users’ voices would be “silenced” if the law were not stopped.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

  • in

    Australia Bans Social Media for Everyone Under 16

    The law sets a minimum age for users of platforms like TikTok, Instagram and X. How the restriction will be enforced online remains an open question.Australia has imposed a sweeping ban on social media for children under 16, one of the world’s most comprehensive measures aimed at safeguarding young people from potential hazards online. But many details were still unclear, such as how it will be enforced and what platforms will be covered.After sailing through Parliament’s lower house on Wednesday, the bill passed the Senate on Thursday with bipartisan support. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said that it puts Australia at the vanguard of efforts to protect the mental health and well-being of children from detrimental effects of social media, such as online hate or bullying.The law, he has said, puts the onus on social media platforms to take “reasonable steps” to prevent anyone under 16 from having an account. Corporations could be fined up to 49.5 million Australian dollars (about $32 million) for “systemic” failures to implement age requirements.Neither underage users nor their parents will face punishment for violations. And whether children find ways to get past the restrictions is beside the point, Mr. Albanese said.“We know some kids will find workarounds, but we’re sending a message to social media companies to clean up their act,” he said in a statement this month.As with many countries’ regulations on alcohol or tobacco, the law will create a new category of “age-restricted social media platforms” accessible only to those 16 and older. How that digital carding will happen, though, is a tricky question.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

  • in

    Forget the Instagram Hard Launch: Are You Location-Sharing Official?

    It’s the final frontier in digital expressions of coupledom. But for some people, it’s always going to be creepy.Niara Sterling is a D.J. living in Brooklyn who frequently travels to different cities and countries to perform in front of thousands of guests at parties, concerts and other events.In her last relationship, she shared her phone location with her girlfriend, as well as with a few close friends and family members — and didn’t think twice about it. She and her ex, a fellow female D.J., both frequently worked at night, so knowing where they each were afforded some peace of mind in case of an emergency.“God forbid something happens, you can find my location,” said Ms. Sterling, 30. “I also think I didn’t mind it because we had an honest relationship. I didn’t have anything to hide; we lived together already anyway.”Since Apple’s location-sharing app Find My debuted more than a decade ago, it has become widely used as a way not only to keep tabs on your devices, children or luggage, but also to check in on your romantic partner. But the app, which can be used to prioritize your closest friends above other acquaintances, can also complicate dynamics within friend groups.So it’s no surprise that the use of Find My — and similar location-sharing apps — is popular among those in romantic relationships. In many ways, the Find My app has become a way to signal that your relationship is official, much as users would give a partner pride of place in their Myspace Top 8, change their status on Facebook to “In a Relationship” or hard launch on Instagram.But while there are those who see Find My as a helpful tool when coordinating plans or preparing for emergencies, others find it to be controlling and intrusive.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

  • in

    Cómo gestiona Bluesky, la alternativa a X y Facebook, su crecimiento explosivo

    En febrero de 2023, media decena de expertos en tecnología presentaron un prototipo de red social a la que solo se podía acceder por invitación. Estrenaron deliberadamente su creación, Bluesky, con poca fanfarria para poder gestionar de cerca su crecimiento.Pero últimamente ha sido todo menos lento.En la última semana, el crecimiento de Bluesky ha estallado, duplicándose con creces hasta superar los 15 millones de usuarios, ya que la gente busca alternativas a X, Facebook y Threads. Se ha disparado hasta los primeros puestos de las tiendas de aplicaciones de Apple y Google como la aplicación gratuita más descargada. Su ascenso ha sido tan rápido que la empresa se ha visto obligada a crecer prácticamente de la noche a la mañana.Los 20 empleados a tiempo completo de Bluesky han estado trabajando sin descanso para hacer frente a los problemas que conlleva el hipercrecimiento: caídas del sitio, fallas en el código y problemas de moderación de contenidos. Y lo que es más importante, han intentado contentar a los primeros usuarios a medida que llegaban nuevos miembros.“Como equipo, estamos orgullosos de nuestra capacidad para crecer rápidamente”, dijo en una entrevista Jay Graber, de 33 años, directora ejecutiva de Bluesky. “Pero siempre hay algunas dificultades mientras creces”. Añadió que la aplicación —que sigue siendo eclipsada por Facebook, Instagram y X— estaba sumando más de un millón de nuevos usuarios al día.Bluesky está surgiendo en medio de la agitación en el mundo de las redes sociales. Después de que Elon Musk comprara Twitter en 2022, lo transformó en X, cambiando muchas de sus funciones y alejando a algunos de sus usuarios más fieles. Threads, una aplicación similar a X que Meta introdujo el año pasado, se basa principalmente en una opaca selección algorítmica que reduce la política de los contenidos que ve la gente. Esto ha provocado que algunas personas se dirijan a otras redes, como Bluesky, para debatir cuestiones sociales candentes.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

  • in

    TikTok Faces Lawsuits From 13 States Around Teens and Mental Health

    More than a dozen states sued TikTok on Tuesday for creating an app designed to be addictive to children and teens.Thirteen states and the District of Columbia sued TikTok on Tuesday for creating an intentionally addictive app that harmed children and teens while making false claims to the public about its commitment to safety.In separate lawsuits, a bipartisan group of attorneys general cited internal company documents to paint a picture of a multibillion dollar company that knowingly contributed to a mental health crisis among American teenagers to maximize its advertising revenue. They said that TikTok, which is owned by the Chinese company ByteDance, has relentlessly designed features to prompt heavy, compulsive use of TikTok and that many children were using the app late at night when they would otherwise have been asleep.TikTok “knew the harms to children,” Rob Bonta, the Democratic attorney general of California, said in an interview. “They chose addiction and more use and more eyeballs and more mental and physical harm for our young people in order to get profits — it’s really that simple.”The lawsuits add to a rapidly expanding list of challenges for TikTok in the United States, which now counts 170 million monthly U.S. users. A federal law passed in April calls for the app to be banned in the United States as of January unless it is sold. A federal lawsuit against the company in August also claimed that TikTok allowed children to open accounts, gathered information about them and made it difficult for their parents to delete the accounts.TikTok did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The states, many of which started investigating the company’s harms to minors in early 2022, are generally claiming that TikTok’s conduct violates their consumer protection laws. The states say that TikTok plays videos in a manner that aims to make young users lose track of time and sends them round-the-clock notifications and ephemeral content like livestreams to compel them to keep checking in. The longer users stay on the app, the more targeted ads TikTok is able to show them.The attorneys general say that TikTok has misled users about its so-called 60-minute screen time limits for young people and other features that promise to curate the videos that they see.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

  • in

    Did Apple Just Kill Social Apps?

    This year, when Apple announced iOS 18, the latest version of its mobile operating system, most of the attention went to its slate of new artificial intelligence features.But a lesser-noticed change in iOS 18 — a tweak to an obscure feature that allows users to share their contact lists with various apps — may wind up being more important.That’s because “contact sync,” as the feature is known by some developers, has played a critical role in the growth of many social and messaging apps for the past two decades. It’s how apps like Instagram, WhatsApp and Snapchat were able to find their footing, by quickly connecting millions of iPhone users to people they already knew, and suggesting other users for them to follow. That early momentum helped kick-start their viral growth, propelling them to the top of the App Store charts.Now, some developers are worried that they may struggle to get new apps off the ground. Nikita Bier, a start-up founder and advisor who has created and sold several viral apps aimed at young people, has called the iOS 18 changes “the end of the world,” and said they could render new friend-based social apps “dead on arrival.”That might be a little melodramatic. I recently spent some time talking to Mr. Bier and other app developers and digging into the changes. I also heard from Apple about why they believe the changes are good for users’ privacy, and from some of Apple’s rivals, who see it as an underhanded move intended to hurt competitors. And I came away with mixed feelings.On one hand, I’m sympathetic to the uphill battle faced by any developer trying to build a new social app today. The contact sharing changes in iOS 18 will undoubtedly make it harder for some fledgling apps to break through. And in a world where it’s harder for smaller apps to succeed, incumbents like Facebook and Instagram — which already have network effects, and don’t have to ask existing users for permission to keep collecting their contacts — obviously stand to benefit.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

  • in

    How Meta Distanced Itself From Politics

    In January 2021, after pro-Trump rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol, Mark Zuckerberg announced a new priority for Meta: He wanted to reduce the amount of political content on the company’s apps, including Facebook and Instagram.As the United States hurtles toward November’s election, Mr. Zuckerberg’s plan appears to be working.On Facebook, Instagram and Threads, political content is less heavily featured. App settings have been automatically set to de-emphasize the posts that users see about campaigns and candidates. And political misinformation is harder to find on the platforms after Meta removed transparency tools that journalists and researchers used to monitor the sites.Inside Meta, Mr. Zuckerberg, 40, no longer meets weekly with the heads of election security as he once did, according to four employees. He has reduced the number of full-time employees working on the issue and disbanded the election integrity team, these employees said, though the company says the election integrity workers were integrated into other teams. He has also decided not to have a “war room,” which Meta previously used to prepare for elections.Last month, Mr. Zuckerberg sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee laying out how he wanted to distance himself and his company from politics. The goal, he said, was to be “neutral” and to not “even appear to be playing a role.”“It’s quite the pendulum swing because a decade ago, everyone at Facebook was desperate to be the face of elections,” said Katie Harbath, chief executive of Anchor Change, a tech consulting firm, who previously worked at Facebook. 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

  • in

    Telegram Founder Pavel Durov Defends App in First Comments Since Arrest

    Pavel Durov, held in France since last month, blamed “growing pains” for the company’s problems and pledged to make improvements.Pavel Durov, the founder of the online communications tool Telegram, said on Thursday that it was a “misguided approach” to hold him personally responsible for the spread of illicit content on the platform.Mr. Durov’s comments, made on his Telegram account, were his first public remarks since he was arrested at an airport outside Paris and charged last month by the French authorities for failing to prevent illegal activity on the app. The crimes on Telegram included the spread of child sexual abuse material, fraud and drug sales, French prosecutors have said.“No innovator will ever build new tools if they know they can be personally held responsible for potential abuse of those tools,” Mr. Durov wrote. He said “growing pains” on Telegram, which has 950 million users, had made it easy for criminals to abuse the platform.“That’s why I made it my personal goal to ensure we significantly improve things in this regard,” he said.Mr. Durov’s case has become a point of contention in the politically charged debate over the limits of free speech on the internet. Telegram is committed to light supervision of what people say or do on the platform. The app has helped people living under authoritarian governments communicate and organize. But it has also become a hothouse for disinformation, extremism and other harmful content.Telegram has long been in the cross hairs of global law enforcement agencies because it has refused to cooperate with the authorities. French prosecutors said Mr. Durov had been arrested in part because of Telegram’s “almost total lack of response” to requests related to criminal investigations.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