California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed bill that will prohibit social media platforms from knowingly providing addictive feeds to minors without parental consent.

The new law will take effect in 2027 and will completely change how minors interact with platforms like TikTok, which sends them content based on content they have shared or what the algorithm has gleaned about them.

TikTok had already set a default time limit for users under 18 years old, but this was fairly easy for users to get around. This bill sees steps set in law to counter social media addiction.

Redefining What Minors See

Bill SB976 makes it illegal for feeds like the TikTok “For You” page to exist for minors in its current format. Instead, their feeds will simply be a chronological listing of posts from the people that they have actually followed.

The law will also restrict when social media platforms can send alerts to minors. Without parental consent, minors will not receive any notifications between 12-6am, and between 8am and 3 pm on weekdays during the school year.

Breaking Destructive Habits

Newsom said in a statement made to Associated Press:

“Every parent knows the harm social media addiction can inflict on their children — isolation from human contact, stress and anxiety, and endless hours wasted late into the night. With this bill, California is helping protect children and teenagers from purposely designed features that feed these destructive habits.”

There is a slight loophole, though. If the social media platform does not know that the user is a minor, the rules can’t be enforced. However, the authors of the bill have suggested that age verification rules will need to be put into place for when the law kicks in; as well as parental consent regulations.

‘Aggressive Action’

This latest bill follows on from a law Newsom signed in 2022, which barred social media platforms from essentially mining children’s personal information in ways that could hurt them physically or mentally. It was a first in the US.

California is leading the way in legislating and Newsom, as a father of four, seems to be a driving force. As he said in 2022: “We’re taking aggressive action in California to protect the health and wellbeing of our kids.”

The Perils of Social Media for Children

In June, United States Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, called for there to be a surgeon general’s warning on social media platforms in an opinion piece in the New York Times.

He also called for more research into the mental health impacts of social media on young people, including how much it disrupts sleep and exercise.

Organizations including Yale Medicine have published lengthy guides for parents on social media use. However, the onus remains on parents to monitor usage and sees them fighting a well-honed algorithm, which is demanding their children’s attention.

This Californian law places more responsibility with the social media platforms, but there will, no doubt, be scores of children who quickly figure out a workaround. There is also the chance that TikTok might not even exist in the US in 2027, but there will always be plenty of alternatives.

In a move that would have most HR professionals keeling over in dismay, two of Tesla’s top executives have been turning up at the homes of sick employees; and not to deliver flowers.

A German newspaper has reported that managing director André Thierig and head of human resources, Erik Demmler, have been visiting employees after being riled by the rising levels of sick leave.

Tesla is owned by Elon Musk, who seems to have an issue with work boundaries, including staff surveillance and the apparently grey area of impregnating your employee.

Surveillance State

This latest and bizarre act of employee infringement was reported by local German newspaper Handelsblatt and has now been picked up internationally. The newspaper had access to a recording from an internal meeting in which the two executives discussed what they had been up to and why.

Electric vehicle title, Electrive, published a translation of the conversation, in which the pair talk about how sick-leave levels at the Tesla factory in Berlin hit 17% in August and 11% at the start of September. The factory houses 12,000 workers.

Demmler says that the figures “…meant we had to go to the people. And that’s what we did.” He adds: “This has nothing to do with general suspicion. We simply picked out 30 employees who had the relevant abnormalities, who had been on sick leave for quite a long time, but also to a lot of people who handed in first sick notes.”

Frosty Reception

While Demmler insists that the visits were driven by a desire to see how sick the employees were and if they needed some help, the response to their visits was less than favorable. “You could just tell by the aggression,” Demmler says. “By having the door slammed shut. By being threatened with the police. By being asked if you don’t have to make an appointment first.”

Electrive adds that Tesla has form for being sticky about sick leave. Thierig is reported to have said in the past that there was no room in his factory for people who “couldn’t get out of bed” in the morning. Tesla also offered bonuses to employees who logged low sick leave in July 2024.

History of Employee Disgruntlement

This isn’t the first time that Musk’s company has gotten into hot water over staff treatment.

There were early mumblings about safety at the factories, reports of staff being fired on the spot by their irascible CEO, as well as accusations of racism from black workers that resulted in a lawsuit.

The erratic tech billionaire has also instigated a draconian RTO policy, which saw Tesla staff summoned to their line manager if they don’t turn up at the office. Musk said at the time: “Anyone who wishes to do remote work must be in the office for a minimum (and I mean *minimum*) of 40 hours per week or depart Tesla.”

Staff at X have faced a similar policy, which has not gone down well after a cull of 75% of staff.

Musk’s exec teams have obviously missed the memo that unhappy staff take more sick leave.

Musk Way or the Highway

As the LA Times wrote, working for Musk means “out-of-nowhere firings, the threats and the bluster, the pubescent jocularity, the day-to-day uncertainty and the urgent demands to work through the night.” Surprise visits to sick employees is just another addition to an already pretty shocking list.

The value of X, formerly Twitter, is now estimated to be less than a quarter of the $44 billion Elon Musk paid for it.

The social media platform has suffered an advertiser and user exodus sparked by concerns about both the content being allowed and the behavior of its owner.

Only last week, Musk drew the ire of some users when it was revealed that the company is diluting its Block functionality.

Plummeting Value at X

The estimated valuation has been published by Fidelity, the investment company that helped Musk buy the social network in April 2022. According to recent disclosures, as reported by TechCrunch, the company now values its stake in X at approximately $4.19 million. This is nearly an 80% drop in value.

This is also not the first time Fidelity has reported the value of its share in X Holdings tanking. In January, The Guardian reported that the company had marked down the value of its shares by 71.5% since Musk’s purchase.

X’s Reputational Crisis

There was high drama even before Musk bought the company when the tech billionaire attempted to back out from the deal. The drama has continued, if not escalated.

Just months after he became owner, Musk rebranded the platform and announced his plan to slash 75% of the Twitter workforce, which equated to around 5500 jobs.

Musk reportedly told staff to work longer hours or he would pay them to quit. He also slashed parental leave and faced a lawsuit from disgruntled former employees.

Advertisers Running Scared at X

The storms continued as accusations of rife hate speech mounted including a charge of anti-Semitism against Musk himself. Advertisers have taken flight. Fortune reports that the company’s ad revenue declined from more than USD1 billion per quarter in 2022 to approximately USD600 million per quarter in 2023.

Musk’s reaction to the exodus didn’t calm concerns. Advertisers were targeted in an expletive-filled explosion from Musk at an event in New York. Data Firm, Kantar, reported earlier this month that advertisers continue to be wary of the platform and are showing their unease by spending their money elsewhere.

With Musk still posting tirades against everyone from presidential hopeful, Kamala Harris, to the leadership of Brazil, advertisers are not going to come flocking back and the next valuation is unlikely to see a reversal of fortune.

What would have been one of the first regulations on AI in the US has been blocked by the Governor of California.

The Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act (SB 1047)  has proved very divisive with technology companies and Government officials alike.

There were claims from companies, including OpenAI, that the bill would stifle innovation but, in a twist, some employees of AI pioneering ventures broke ranks and came out in support.

AI Bill Deemed Potentially Damaging for the Economy

Governor Gavin Newsom has blocked the bill on the grounds that it is too sweeping.

Newsom writes in his letter to the California State Senate: “While well-intentioned, SB 1047 [the bill] does not take into account whether an Al system is deployed in high-risk environments, involves critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data.

“Instead, the bill applies stringent standards to even the most basic functions – so long as a large system deploys it.” He states: “I do not believe this is the best approach to protecting the public from real threats posed by the technology”.

Newsom also suggests that if the bill had been agreed, the State could see an exodus by the 32 AI companies it currently hosts.

AI Legislation Needed

The Governor makes it clear that he is not against legislation but says that a different measure of risk is needed than “the cost and number of computations needed to develop an Al model”.

The bill excludes smaller, specialized models, which he argues “may emerge as equally or even more dangerous than the models targeted by SB 1047”.

Newsom also suggests that a California-centric AI bill could still be agreed but just not this one. He writes: “To those who say there’s no problem here to solve, or that California does not have a role in regulating potential national security implications of this technology, I disagree. A California-only approach may well be warranted especially absent federal action by Congress – but it must be based on empirical evidence and science.”

History of AI Bill

Created by state Senator Scott Wiener, the bill targets developers of AI models that cost $100 million or more to train; but only if they are based in California.

It placed liability firmly with developers with the threat of charges if they don’t adopt precautionary measures before training their models. These measures include testing protocols to evaluate whether their model is posing any kind of threat.

It gained support from surprising places including Elon Musk and former Google Brain researcher and Turing Award winner, Geoffrey Hinton. OpenAI rival, Anthropic, had also signaled its support as did 113 employees or former employees of some of the biggest names in the AI space. They went public in a letter published earlier this month.

Newsom’s verdict also comes just one month after the California State Assembly passed the bill, pending a vote in the state Senate.

Next Steps for AI Bill

Senator Wiener has published his response to Newsom’s letter, and he and his co-sponsors are not going to go down quietly. Sunny Gandhi, Vice President of Political Affairs at Encode Justice, writes: “This veto is disappointing but we will not be stopped by it.”

Listening a host of terrifying, potential outcomes for AI gone bad, Wiener writes: “This veto leaves us with the troubling reality that companies aiming to create an extremely powerful technology face no binding restrictions from US policymakers, particularly given Congress’s continuing paralysis around regulating the tech industry in any meaningful way.”

Wiener also takes a side swipe at Newsom’s office, which he says could have had input into the bill during the legislative process, but chose not to.

The letter describes the veto as a “missed opportunity” but Wiener and his allies are clear in their intentions. As Wiener states: “California will continue to lead in [this AI] conversation — we are not going anywhere.”

If you’ve seen the headlines recently, you might think that remote jobs are drying up. Last week, Amazon announced that staff are expected back in the office five days a week, and Dell followed this week with a similar mandate.

However, there are still plenty of remote roles out there, at companies such as Apple, Google, Microsoft, and yes, Meta.

If you fancy working at the home of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, without leaving the house, read on to see what’s available right now.

Fully Remote Jobs at Meta in September 2024

If you’re wondering if Meta has any remote jobs going at the moment, then wonder no more – it does, over 100 of them at the time of writing. The roles vary from engineering to research to design, so there’s a wide scope of jobs to choose from.

We’ve gathered a few below, but if you want to peruse all 140, just check out the jobs page at Meta, and make sure to select the ‘remote jobs’ option.

• Product Manager, Global Workforce Solutions
• Developer Advocate
• Software Engineer, Test & Privacy
• UX Researcher, Qualitative
• Global Sales Analytics Lead
• Graphics Software Engineer, Rendering – Reality Labs
• Data Engineer, Analytics (Technical Leadership)
• Tech Art Generalist
• Product Designer
• Integration & Automation Lead
• MuleSoft Integrations Specialist
• Art Manager, Avatars Art Team
• QA Engineering Lead
• Software Engineer, iOS

Is Meta Committed to Remote Work?

Meta’s position on remote work is a slightly complicated one. Yes, the company does have remote roles, but the 140 available at the time of writing is only a small portion of the total 1,400 available.

Meta used to have a much more relaxed remote work policy, but many employees were called back to the office for three days a week in June last year.

In addition, Meta’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, is on record as saying that staff (specifically engineers) that work on site ‘get more done’. It’s a stark contrast to his beliefs during the pandemic, when Meta was one of the first companies to give workers the green light to work remotely.

As it stands, things seem to be stable at Meta currently, and there is no indication that fully remote jobs at the company will suddenly dry up.

Is your company about to stop remote work? Check out the 7 telltale signs.

How to Get a Remote Job in 2024

Despite some companies calling time on remote and hybrid work, there are still plenty of options out there, and if the roles at Meta don’t appeal, check out what Microsoft, Google and Apple have on offer this month.

Once you’ve spotted a role, you can further increase your chances of actually landing your dream remote job by ensuring your resume is remote friendly. We’ve put together a guide on the sorts of skills to mention to give yourself the best chance.

Additionally, why not take advantage of AI to give yourself the edge? You can create perfect looking AI headshots with free software, and even give your resume a glow up, too.

Lastly, exercise a little caution on your remote job journey. Only apply for roles at reputable companies, and avoid remote job scams.

Good luck! The right remote job is out there waiting for you – go get it!

As the dust continues to settle in the post-Covid era, the office-bound 9-5 feels more and more like a decaying relic of yesteryear. Suits have given way to tracksuits. “You’re on mute” has entered the public lexicon. And workers are happier, more productive, and more connected to their colleagues – in spite of the physical distance between them.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, this has done little to change the sensibilities of leading figures within the tech space, many of whom are hellbent on bringing their employees back to the office – and damn the expense. In recent months, the likes of Dell, Amazon, Meta, and more, have given staff their orders, joining a long list of businesses biting back on employee freedoms.

If, like 42% of workers, flexibility is a non-negotiable, this might be a scary prospect for you. That’s why we’ve put together a list of the biggest warning signs that your company might be about to issue a return-to-office (RTO) mandate.

What Are RTO Mandates?

Like the name suggests, RTO mandates are orders issued by a company that its staff must return to the office. In recent months, several businesses across the tech space have rolled back their hybrid working arrangements – often at the cost of deteriorating morale.

The likes of Dell, Microsoft, Amazon, and X are just a few of the high-profile names to issue such mandates in the last couple of years, with 14% of Fortune 100 companies issuing mandates as far back as 2021. Predictably, many of their employees have been unhappy.

So, how can you stay one step ahead of the higher-ups? Pay attention to these red flags:

7 Signs That Your Company is Ending Remote Work

1. Number of in-office days on the rise
2. Change of management
3. RTO becomes industry norm
4. Managers spending more time in the office
5. Company surveying employees on hybrid work opinions
6. Remote vacancies dry up
7. Investors pushing to end remote working

Let’s look at them in closer detail.

Number of In-Office Days on the Rise

According to research conducted by BambooHR, 70% of companies with flexible work schedules plan to increase employees’ in-office days by 2025. This is a big indicator that your company may be soft-launching an eventual full-office return. You have been warned.

Recent examples of this include both Amazon and Dell, who initially told staff they were expected in the office three days a week, but both have recently extended this to a full five.

Naturally, there will be pushback from employees. But some leaders think that this will help to root out workers who are less dedicated, as well as minimizing the risk of potential layoffs and reducing overall costs.

Change of Management

When a business changes hands, it often heralds a period of company-wide upheaval, with incoming bosses keen to put their stamp on the new workplace by assessing their options and implementing tried and tested maneuvers.

This also applies to their attitude to hybrid working. Recently, the new Starbucks CEO caused outrage after it emerged that he wouldn’t be required to relocate to Seattle – where the company is headquartered – despite insisting that its 3-day-a-week mandate be upheld.

If you have a new incoming CEO, check out the place they worked before. What was the remote work policy when they were in charge? It could prove a good indicator of what’s to come.

RTO Becomes Industry Norm

They say there’s no such thing as an original idea. That’s definitely applicable when it comes to office policies, with the industry serving as something of an echo chamber for flexible working sentiment.

Senior figures in the banking industry – including the likes of Morgan Stanley Executive Chairman James Gorman, Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon – would testify as such. They’ve all gone on record with their opposition to hybrid working in the last couple of years. Coincidence? This reporter says no.

Managers Set the Example with More Appearances

Research from ResumeBuilder has found that almost a quarter of employees attend the office more frequently than their managers, with less than half of managers attending about the same amount of time as their reports.

In other words, if your manager is starting to hang around, it’s probably a bad sign – they might be trying to get you to ditch the slippers and follow suit.

Company Surveying Employees on Office Sentiment

When it comes enacting policy change, one of the biggest assets a company has at its disposal is its staff. Increasingly, businesses are trying to shake off old school “top-down” management in favor of a more homogenous, “bottom-up” approach. Start-ups and tech disruptors have built entire companies around this philosophy.

You might start to notice your HR department circulating surveys on remote working. Your boss might casually bring it up in a one-to-one. Whatever the case may be, if remote working is on the agenda, there’s a good chance your business is mulling over bringing you back to the office.

Remote Vacancies Dry Up

As reported elsewhere by Tech.co, businesses across the tech sector are ending fully remote working in their droves, with new fully-remote roles becoming harder and harder to find. The likes of Starbucks, General Motors, Disney, Walmart, Meta, and more, have joined rank in recent months.

It’s worth checking the vacancies where you work. Are they still advertised as remote or hybrid? Or is the language used a lot more vague, or is it simply not mentioned at all? Companies committed to remote work are up front about it in their vacancy postings. Those that aren’t tend to be a bit more coy.

As the dust continues to settle in the post-Covid era, remote has given way to flexible. But that may not be the case for long…

Investors Pushing to End Remote Working

Companies that are pushing RTO mandates usually cite one or more of the following reasons: in-office working is better for productivity, fostering positive working relationships can only be done in-person, you can’t build a good workplace culture from behind a laptop screen, etc.

This is simply not borne out by the research, and, increasingly, workers are starting to take these arguments with a pinch of salt. It’s no secret that companies have expensive office leases to think about. As reported by CNBC, “financial incentives and pressure from shareholders” are forcing bosses’ hands in a lot of cases – 80% of whom are actually keen on hybrid working themselves.

But I Don’t Want to Return to the Office…What Can I Do?

All hope might not be lost. Tech.co maintains an up-to-date list of remote and hybrid roles at a variety of Big Tech companies, including the likes of Apple, Microsoft, Google, and more. There are also states and countries that will pay you to move and work remotely.

You can improve your chances too, by making sure that your resume is remote work ready. This means leaning into skills such as problem solving, and showing that you have the ability to work in isolation. Check out our guide to crafting the perfect remote work resume.

You may also be able to negotiate with your manager, and strike a deal that allows you to work a remote or hybrid schedule.

In a move that is starting to become all too familiar in the world of work, Dell has told some of its employees that they are expected to return to the office five days a week.

According to an internal memo, the Global Sales Team are affected, with updates on other remote workers to come at a later date.

It follows the news last week that Amazon has also told staff to come back to the office full time.

Dell Tells Staff Remote Work is Over

In an internal memo, seen by Reuters, Dell has told employees of its Global Sales Team that they are to return to the office five days a week, beginning next Monday (September 30th).

The reason given for the change is to enable the team to ‘collaborate’ and ‘grow skills’, with the communication adding that working remotely should be seen as the ‘exception rather than the rule.’

Previously, the team had only been expected in the office three days a week.

The memo also mentions that there will be further updates on remote workers in the coming weeks.

Worried your company might be next? Read the 7 telltale signs that a company is ending remote work.

Trouble at Dell

The demand that the Global Sales Team return to the office full time is just the latest in a long line of troublesome news for its employees.

In May of last year the company told staff that they were to ditch remote work and return to the office three days a week. Following this, staff when then told that if they didn’t comply, the risked future promotion opportunities. Those who continued to resist the move had their records marked with a red flag.

Needless to say, all this has had a negative effect on Dell’s workforce, with the latest internal staff survey showing that morale within the company has plummeted. This latest news is unlikely to change that.

As if this ordeal wasn’t bad enough for Dell workers, this week we reported that a data breach has leaked the data of more than 10,000 members of staff.

Is a Full Office Return the New Normal?

With last week’s news that Amazon has told staff to return to the office five days a week, and now Dell following suit, it may seem that the days of remote work and hybrid are over.

Right now, Dell and Amazon are the outliers, joining a handful of other companies such as Musk’s Tesla and X. However, as more companies call staff back, we may see a domino effect, with pressure from CEOs and investors to stay competitive meaning more firms change their remote work policies.

It’s likely this would be a mistake. We’ve already seen from Dell’s return to office path that it has a negative effect on staff morale, and a recent poll from Blind showed that 71% of Amazon workers are considering quitting after the recently issued mandate.

There are still plenty of companies that are offering remote and hybrid roles. If you want to make the move away from the office, don’t forget to make your resume remote ready.

Some of the tech world’s biggest names have committed to invest funds in a US Government scheme supporting AI technology access across the globe.

Amazon, Anthropic, Google, IBM, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, and OpenAI have all signed up to the Partnership for Global Inclusivity on AI.

The launch on the margins of the 79th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York comes at a time when AI uptake is rapidly advancing, but the safety frameworks around it have yet to be hammered out in the US.

Education and Access

The launch was headed up by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who announced that the technology partners had committed more than $100 million to the project. This includes $10 million in credits from Amazon Web Services and a commitment to provide free AI-specific skills training to two million people globally by 2025.

Anthropic is offering $1 million in API access to Claude and Claude for Teams. API credits are also on offer from OpenAI, which is launching an academy to invest in developers and organizations in low- and middle-income countries “who are leveraging AI to help solve hard problems and spur economic growth in their communities.”

For Google, this initiative is centered upon education, and it is providing $120 million to support a Global AI Opportunity Fund “to make AI education and training available throughout the world.” Training will be provided in local languages, the press statement adds, and the tech behemoth will be teaming up with local organizations to make this happen. Upskilling is the focus for NVIDIA, which will invest $10 million per year in training programs in emerging economies.

IBM shares that it will train two million learners in AI globally by 2026 and it’s boosting its Sustainability Accelerator, which will “provide up to $45 million in expertise and technologies, such as AI, by the end of 2028” to help vulnerable populations address environmental challenges.

Access is key for Meta, which will “invest more than $10 million in programmatic support globally to expand open-source AI innovation,” while Microsoft is promising to invest in the infrastructure needed for AI uptake “by investing more than $12 billion in AI data center infrastructure, connectivity, and skilling in the Global South”.

Government Funding

The State Department is adding $10 million in Foreign Assistance to the pot to close the AI access gap with an additional $23 million in funding “to promote the responsible use and governance of AI globally.”

This is an emphasis, says Blinken, who talked about the balance between driving sustainable development and “an unwavering commitment to safety, security, and trustworthiness in AI systems.” AI, the release states, is a “tool to advance democracy, promote human and labor rights, and foster justice and accountability.”

The Organization of American States, which includes countries in both North and South America, will be given funding to develop an AI policy framework – a push which is proving divisive in the US. The US has signed up to the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention in Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy, and the Rule of Law, but legislation is struggling to keep up with technological advancements.

Widening Gap Between Rich and Poor

The launch is targeting growing research and concern about the widening gulf in technology uptake between wealthy and poorer countries. The International Monetary Fund specifically talked about AI in a paper published in 2020. It warned new technologies, including AI “could…have negative consequences for jobs in developing countries by threatening to replace rather than complement their growing labor force.”

This partnership is a signaler that those in places of power – both in Government and private enterprises – are aware of this potential impact. But with warnings that even the most developed countries might strain under the energy demands AI makes, this might be the biggest block for developing nations.

In a shock move on Wednesday, OpenAI Chief Technology Officer Mira Murati announced that she is stepping down after 6.5 years with the company. Writing on X, she spoke of her wish to “create the time and space to do my own exploration.” She joins Chief Research Officer Bob McGrew and VP of Post Training Barret Zoph, who are also departing.

It has been a dramatic 18 months at the tech giant. In November last year, Murati was temporarily promoted to CEO after Sam Altman was ousted by the board – only to be reinstated just a few days later. Then, in May, Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever left in acrimonious circumstances, citing fears over the company’s approach to safeguarding AI misuse.

With this latest news, anxieties around the AI space – which has been been dubbed “chaotic” and the “Wild West” – will continue to swirl.

AI Figurehead Announces Shock Departure

OpenAI CTO, and briefly, CEO, Mira Murati is leaving the company, it has been announced. In a surprise memo issued to staff on Wednesday, and later posted on X, she expressed her eagerness to “create the time and space to do my own exploration.”

Said CEO Sam Altman, in response: “I feel tremendous gratitude towards her for what she has helped us build and accomplish.” Of the “abrupt” nature of the departure, he moved to quash potential negative rumors, claiming “leadership changes are a natural part of companies.” She joins CRO Bob McGrew and VP of Post Training Barret Zoph in departing the company at a time when it seeks funding to take its valuation north of $100 billion.

Given that it seemingly came from nowhere, the news will no doubt confound outside observers. Murati has been one of the recognizable figureheads of OpenAI for years, with numerous media appearances – and no shortage of controversy – under her belt.

Murati Weathers Storm of Outrage

Just three months ago, Murati found herself at the center of hot debate after appearing to stoke fears around generative AI and its perceived threat to the creative industry. During an address at Dartmouth College, the CTO claimed: “Some creative jobs maybe will go away, but maybe they shouldn’t have been there in the first place.”

The remarks came off the back of a lawsuit brought against OpenAI by a group of eight newspapers – The New York Daily News, Chicago Tribune, Denver Post, Mercury News, Denver Post, Orange County Register, St Paul Pioneer-Press, Orlando Sentinel, and South Florida Sun Sentinel – in April this year.

Elsewhere, she has proved indispensable to the startup since joining as a researcher in 2018, championing the possibilities of AI even in the face of mounting criticism. During her tenure, she has overseen the launches of ChatGPT, Dall-E, Codex, and Sora, and even briefly took over as CEO after Sam Altman was fired by the board. He was reinstated five days later.

AI “Wild West” Shows No Signs of Abating

Reflecting on the “abrupt” nature of Murati’s announcement, Altman acknowledged that OpenAI is “not a normal company.” Certainly, it has undergone a chaotic period, with a litany of high-profile departures and controversies in recent months.

In May, for instance, Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever resigned over concerns about safeguarding misuse. He was joined by former Safety Lead Jan Leike, while Co-Founder John Schulman left for rivals Anthropic in August. Sutskever has since launched a rival startup with $1 billion in investment.

Nevertheless, OpenAI is closing in on funding that would take its valuation to a dizzying $100 billion. While seemingly mired in scandal and intrigue at every turn, there would appear to be some method in the madness, with the numbers painting a pretty compelling picture. For the time being at least, OpenAI is staying competitive in the AI race.

Last year, the term “coffee badging” was coined to describe employees who showed up to in-office work simply to appear as if they were working in the physical space, before leaving to get the real work done remotely.

Now, the folks behind the original study that launched the term have released their 2024 report: According to Owl Labs, coffee badging is down 24% since last year.

At the same time, the presence of employee tracking software — which can let managers know exactly when their employees are in the office — has risen, with 48% of employees reporting their workplace uses some form of the technology.

Are People Still Coffee Badging?

Coffee badges are still being handed out, but at lower rates. According to Owl Labs’ State of Hybrid Work 2024, which surveyed 2,000 full-time white collar workers in the US about their work habits and environment, the US has undergone a bit of a coffee badge crackdown.

As noted above, the practice has dropped by 24% year-over-year. However, that doesn’t mean plenty of people aren’t relying on it to get them through their week: 44% of hybrid workers say they still do it.

How’s it working out for them? Well, 70% have been caught coffee badging by their bosses, so it’s not really a practice that’s easy to get away with very often. However, of those who were caught, 59% said their employers didn’t mind, compared to just 16% who say they’re now forced to stay in the office all day.

Perhaps the most fascinating new statistic from this report is that 75% of workers believe their employers’ expectations that they stick around in the office all day is “simply due to their traditional expectations” — a statistic that has jumped way up from just 9% who said the same in 2023.

Here’s how many employees report coffee badging in 2024. Source: Owl Labs.

Managers Are More Likely to Coffee Badge

Perhaps one of the reasons why so many coffee badgers are getting away without trouble even after their boss catches them? Because the bosses are even more likely to be doing the same thing. 47% of managers say they make an appearance but don’t spend their entire workday in the office, which is a solidly higher amount than the 34% of individual contributors who say the same.

Granted, this news won’t help middle managers shake certain unflattering stereotypes that tend to follow them around. However, the truth is that working remotely has plenty of upsides, and even managers can benefit from them.

We’ve highlight plenty of them at Tech.co in the past, from the higher productivity that tends to go along with increased remote work, to a boost in self-reported happiness for remote employees. Now, Owl Labs’ new report has a host of additional statistics to back up the value of working from home:

• 84% of hybrid and remote workers say they eat healthier food when working at home compared to when they work at the office.
• 38% of workers said they’d decline a job offer that required them to work in the office full-time.
• 90% of hybrid workers say they are just as, or more, productive when working in a hybrid format.
• 28% say that flexible working hours would be the most appealing work benefit a prospective employer could offer (that’s the second place result, after the 29% who picked better or more affordable health insurance, and tied with the 28% who chose increased 401K contributions)

Employee Monitoring Software Is Making Waves

There’s a dark side to the decline of coffee badging, however: It coincides with the increase of workplace surveillance software.

Close to half (46%) of workers polled reported that their companies had “increased usage of employee tracking software” in the past year. Since that’s a report of those who increased use, it indicates a sudden wave of interest in the technology just within the past 12 months.

That’s grim news for any employees wary of this type of automated micromanagement. A large majority of workers surveyed (86%) think that companies “should be legally required to disclose” if they’re using these tools.

Employee tracking software’s trajectory took the same path as remote work in general: It became popular suddenly in 2020, but has continued to remain a major force in US workplaces today. One survey at the time found that employees were unhappy with the technology for a range of reasons: 43% deemed it a violation of trust, 28% felt underappreciated, and 36% said the practice made them work longer hours.

In our own coverage of the technology’s rise, we interviewed marketer Saurabh Wani, who was monitored through screenshots from Hubstaff. “In terms of privacy, initially, I felt violated, but then I got used to it,” Wani told us.

Three days a week remains the favored amount for hybrid workers everywhere. Source: Owl Labs.

CEOs Aren’t Winning the Battle Against Remote Work

Tech company executives are still largely in favor of in-office work, with one study finding 64% of CEOs went on the record envisioning a future where their employees were back in the office five days a week. Another study backed this up in another way, finding that 86% of CEOs say they’d give better assignments, raises, or promotions to in-office workers to “reward” them.

Top tech companies are continuing the return-to-office push, with Amazon recently announcing a stringent 5-day in-office policy for all its workers, starting in early 2025. This might be unsurprising to anyone who noted the ecommerce titan’s approach to defeating coffee badging, since back in July Amazon mandated teams stayed for multiple hours when they visit its physical offices.

Yet Owl Labs’ new report indicates that remote work is thriving as we near the end of 2024, in contrast to CEO hopes and dreams.

Today, full-time in-office workers constitute 62% of the workforce, which is a slight 6% drop from last year. At the same time, 38% of workers are hybrid or remote, which marks a 15% increase year-over-year.

Employees would still prefer more remote time, with most hybrid workers who are clocking four days a week in the office saying they’d rather not go in that often.

If that’s you, we might be able to help: Check out our guide to asking your boss to let you work fully or partially remotely, as well as our suggestions for how to build the perfect resume to land you a new fully remote position. Just don’t bother asking anyone at Amazon.

Generative AI tools pose one huge problem to companies adopting them, according to the majority of technology professionals polled in a recent report: They can cause data leaks.

Ironically, one way generative AI can create data privacy problems is by making it way easier to access data without technical knowledge — a phenomenon that can be called “collapsing the expertise barrier.”

Pros are concerned about the potential for other ethical violations as well, from biased datasets to business workflows that will be disrupted by AI. Moving forward, AI may impact even the quality of data itself.

72% of Professionals Are Worried About Data Privacy

Nearly three out of every four (72%) professionals who responded to the survey put data privacy among their top three concerns surrounding the rapid rollout of generative AI tools across the technology landscape of modern business.

Plus, 40% of respondents cited data privacy as their number one concern — an amount three times higher than the next biggest concern (second place is data provenance, which 12% ranked number one).

The report, which curated responses from 1,848 business and technology professionals, is out from Deloitte this week.

How Does AI Pose a Threat to Data Privacy?

The actual ways in which AI can usher in a cybersecurity or data privacy risk will vary widely.

One big problem is that AI can encourage employees to overstep or cut corners in many areas of the business: How data is used, whether customer privacy is put first, what measures are taken to keep systems secure, and if all company tools are used appropriately.

These potential issues call to mind one eye-opening headline from last year, in which a lawyer submitted briefs using fake, ChatGPT-created citations. Perhaps more likely, however, is the rise of more news items similar to Samsung’s AI ban, reportedly issued after an employee copied sensitive company code into the bot.

Data Privacy Is More Important Than Ever

According to the new report, the technology professionals wary of data privacy issues may be due in part to their depth of knowledge about all the many ways a customer’s data can be misused.

“This may indicate personal unease about the protection of one’s data as well as awareness of the potential harms—to both individuals and organizations—from violations of customer and employee privacy and misuse of data.” – the report

Protective regulations like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the UK, or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the US, can cost companies millions if they don’t pay attention to their data usage.

As AI becomes more common in the workplace, proper education on data safety practices will likely surge right alongside the use of the new technology.

Telegram, the messaging app famed for its privacy absolutism, is amending its terms of service to say that it can now share user data with the authorities in certain circumstances.

Specifically, Telegram will be able to disclose IP addresses and phone numbers where requested to do so by court order in situations where there is a suspicion of criminal activity.

The move comes in the wake of last month’s arrest of Telegram CEO and co-founder Pavel Durov in France, where he faced charges implicating him in illicit activities taking place on the platform.

“These Measures Should Discourage Criminals”

Durov posted on his own channel on the platform that Telegram has been taking steps in the last few weeks to make it much safer.

As well as using a team of moderators and AI tools to identify and remove “problematic content,” he also confirmed that Telegram had amended its terms of services.

To deter criminals, he said, the terms have been updated so that the privacy policy now makes it clear that “the IP addresses and phone numbers of those who violate our rules can be disclosed to relevant authorities.”

“If Telegram receives a valid order from the relevant judicial authorities that confirms you’re a suspect in a case involving criminal activities that violate the Telegram Terms of Service, we will perform a legal analysis of the request and may disclose your IP address and phone number to the relevant authorities.” – Telegram Privacy Policy

“Telegram Search is meant for finding friends and discovering news,” Durov’s post reads, “not for promoting illicit goods.”

Durov Arrested in August

Telegram has built its reputation as a safe messaging platform with a commitment to securing the encrypted communications of its users. This has helped it build a user base of over 950 million people worldwide, with many ditching the Meta-owned WhatsApp service in favor of Telegram.

However, this means that Telegram has developed a reputation as a safe haven for criminals as well.

This perception contributed to Durov’s arrest in France on August 24th. The Russian entrepreneur has also held citizenship there since 2021 and was held for complicity in managing an online platform to allow illicit transactions by an organized group – a crime that can carry sentences of up to 10 years in prison and €500,000 fine.

What’s Next for Telegram Users?

In a previous post, Durov said that he was committed to putting the interests of the vast majority of his users over “the 0.001% involved in illicit activities.”

“We won’t let bad actors jeopardize the integrity of our platform for almost a billion users.” – Pavel Durov, CEO of Telegram

But it remains to be seen whether the change to the terms of service will now prompt some users to find another messaging platform to use.

Several commentators responding to the news on X, formerly Twitter, voicing concerns that their personal privacy might be diluted by the move and suggested that the way forward might be a decentralized privacy app.

While Amazon’s employees are now gearing up for a return to the office five days a week from January, subsidiary Audible is giving its staff a little more time to comply.

The audiobook specialist is following its parent company’s strict RTO mandate, but employees will have until April 2, 2025 to enjoy their present flexibility.

Amazon staff have hit out at their employer’s draconian RTO measures, with some claiming that the new rules are even stricter than those they worked by before the pandemic.

Pre-Pandemic Policies

The news was relayed to Audible’s staff in an email from CEO Bob Carrigan, who explained that the current two-day a week mandate for office working is going.

The company is creating more space for workers at its Newark office and will be able to accommodate workers for three days a week from January.

Business Insider has noted the message and quotes Carrigan saying that the move is a bid to “ramp up to our pre-pandemic ways of working… as we increase in-person collaboration on our numerous critical initiatives.”

Complaints Falling on Deaf Ears

These words echo those of Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, who has ploughed ahead with his RTO policy despite widespread disgruntlement and a walkout in June 2023. On the walkout website, the Amazon Employees for Climate Justice (AECJ) and Amazon’s Remote Advocacy demanded that their employer not cycle back on what they see as progress in the workplace. They wrote: “The world is changing, and Amazon needs to embrace the new reality of remote and flexible work if it wants to remain an innovative company that attracts and retains world-class talent.”

They also stated that the RTO mandate will affect certain groups disproportionately. “Many of us, including women, people of color, and workers with disabilities report that having autonomy in where we work improves not only our relationship with it, but also our ability to be seen and treated as equals,” they explained.

Staggered Starts

Amazon has pushed ahead, and the timeframes seem to have been dictated by the logistics of such a monumental RTO after years of hybrid working and not by an attempt to lessen the blow for staff.

Amazon, Audible and another subsidiary, One Medical, have given their staff different return dates; but this reflects the juggling and finding of new space required to have all of the staff present all of the week.

Fall in Line or Leave

Jassey has made clear that staff must comply, unless there are mitigating circumstances including a house emergency or sick child.

Dell has taken an even harder line and was considering tracking staff attendance using a color-coding system. Some companies, including Spotify and Microsoft, are taking a softer approach, and it remains to be seen whether what they offer is tempting for other workers facing a five day week back in an office.

Russia is generating more AI content than any other country to influence the impending US presidential election.

That’s according to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), who said that the Kremlin is exerting its efforts to impact the election in former President Donald Trump’s favor at the cost of Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris.

How is Russia doing this? By using generative AI technology, it is possible to create social media profiles, deepfakes, and chatbot tools that spread misinformation about the candidates.

“Consistent With Russia’s Broader Efforts”

The report comes from Reuters, who took a briefing from an anonymous official in the ODNI.

Addressing the use of AI content by other powers in influencing the November election, they alleged that Russia was the most prolific user of the technology for that purpose.

They said that the use of AI in this context would be consistent with Russia’s wider activity to affect the pursuit of democracy in the US and its “efforts to boost the former president’s candidacy and denigrate the vice president and the Democratic Party, including through conspiratorial narratives.”

Reuters said that it had reached out to the Russian embassy in Washington for a response to the allegations but had not received a reply.

Sophisticated and Targeted Actions

Not only is Russia the most active user of AI for these statecraft purposes, according to the ODNI, but it’s also the most sophisticated. That’s thanks to its better understanding of how presidential elections work in the US.

The intelligence official gave Reuters’ reporters examples of Russia’s attempts to influence this year’s proceedings, using AI-enhanced social media accounts to disseminate pro-Kremlin messages.

They also described non-AI techniques to spread misinformation, such as staging a false video featuring a woman claiming she was hit by a car that Kamala Harris was driving.

Attempts are being made by social media companies to stymie the proliferation of this kind of misinformation, with TikTok following Facebook and Instagram in banning deceptive Russian media accounts.

And while Russia appears to be the greatest concern to US intelligence  agencies in the run up to the vote, the ODNI official also mentioned China and Iran as countries who were increasing their use of AI to influence international affairs.

AI and the Election

With Donald Trump saying that he will be the first “crypto president” of the United States, AI has frequently been part of the news cycle in relation to the race to the White House between him and Harris.

Billionaire owner of X, formerly Twitter, Elon Musk landed in hot water when he shared a deepfake of Kamala Harris describing herself as a deep state puppet.

The platform eventually bowed to pressure from five Secretaries of State to add an election warning to its Grok chatbot after it was found giving incorrect information to queries about ballot deadlines.

And OpenAI’s ChatGPT began sending users to CanIVote.Org when they asked questions about the election, before deciding to stop answering election questions altogether after it was found to be providing substantially incorrect responses.

At Dreamforce 2024, Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff admitted to using ChatGPT as a therapist during a fireside chat with NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang.

He’s not the only one. The practice of using ChatGPT and other popular AI chatbots as a sounding board for personal problems as become surprisingly common, if only because the cost is understandably more manageable.

Still, there are some notable reasons why using ChatGPT as a therapist is not a good idea, even if it is saving you a bundle on medical bills.

ChatGPT is Consistently Inaccurate

It’s no secret that AI chatbots like ChatGPT are less than 100% accurate. In fact, we’ve been collecting a list of all the errors and mistakes that AI has made over the last few years, and to say it’s extensive would be a grave understatement.

A fair amount of the misinformation and mistakes from AI chatbots is, however, fairly harmless. Silly portraits showing people with six fingers and laughably incorrect statistics pulled out of thin air aren’t going to dramatically impact the trajectory of someone’s life.

Therapy, on the other hand, does have a significant effect on the individual taking part, and with ChatGPT’s track record on medical inaccuracies, there’s an obvious risk associated. All that to say, maybe don’t put your mental health in the hands of a platform that can’t tell the difference between the Mona Lisa and Shrek.

ChatGPT Doesn’t Have any Qualifications

Non-AI chatbot therapists are obviously a lot more regulated than AI chatbots, which means that they are up to a higher standard of care for their patients.

ChatGPT doesn’t have a PhD, it didn’t go to medical school, and perhaps most importantly, it’s not yet subject to legal responsibility for bad medical advice.

“AI is not a substitute for good human judgment, and, for now, there are few options for defending against malpractice claims or holding AI providers accountable for bad AI-generated medical advice.” – Matthew Chung, Managing Editor of the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology in a post

Not only could you be getting therapy that is not equipped to handle your problem, but you’ll also have no legal recourse should something go wrong.

No Doctor-Patient Confidentiality with ChatGPT

Getting your diagnosis wrong is one thing, but what about your privacy? It’s safe to assume that as a person seeking help from a therapist, you don’t want your personal information to be available around the world.

With ChatGPT, that could very well be the case. The platform has been breached in the past, and hackers are getting more and more advanced thanks to the very platform you want to use for therapy. Heck, ChatGPT isn’t HIPAA compliant, so that’s a good place to start.

Given the decidedly sensitive nature of therapy and the relative lack of security in AI chatbots, the privacy risk alone should be worthy of investing in a real therapist instead of ChatGPT.

6 Things You Should Never Share with ChatGPT

ChatGPT Lacks any Sense of Empathy

We’ll be the first ones to admit that AI has gotten really good over the last few years. It’s gotten so good that many users forget they’re even talking to AI chatbots in the first place.

While the lines between AI and humans is more blurred than ever before, experts are quick to point out that AI is nowhere near advanced enough to handle all the nuances of the human experience, particularly when it comes to therapy.

“AI does a really good job in gathering a lot of knowledge across a continuum. At this time, it doesn’t have the capacity to know you specifically as a unique individual and what your specific, unique needs are.” – Olivia Uwamahoro Williams, PhD, co-chair of the American Counseling Association Artificial Intelligence Interest Network to Health.com

Therapy is more than just gleaning information about mental health and self-applying it to your own life. It’s designed to help you build a trusting relationship with a human being who is qualified to provide valuable insight into your ongoing situation. ChatGPT, and all AI chatbots for that matter, don’t have that capability, and it’s unclear if they ever will.

A web developer has revealed that X is planning on making changes to its Block functionality, which means that blocked users will be able to see public posts though not respond.

The move was immediately confirmed by the social media platform’s irascible owner, Elon Musk, who posted “High time this happened.”

In a relatively constrained post – compared to his feverish and constant attacks on Kamala Harris – Musk gave his support to the move and didn’t clap back at dissenters (yet).

Changes to the Way Block Works on X

While some media outlets are reporting that X is completely getting rid of the Block option, this is not the case. As Musk himself explained in a post: “The block function will block that account from engaging with, but not block seeing, public post.”

At the moment, if you have been blocked from an account, you will get a “You’re blocked” message pop-up on screen if you try and view their profile image; see their followers and following list; replies and media. When the change is in place, blocked users will be able to see all of the above.

Musk Want to Get Rid of Block Feature

But this move doesn’t go far enough for Musk who posted in August that he would like to see the Block option mothballed. He posted that it “makes no sense” and “needs to be deprecated in favor of a stronger form of mute.”

Musk argues that users can just create an anonymous account to see posts from an account that has blocked them or can also view when logged out. However, the team at The Verge says that the latter is not true. They wrote: “Several of us at The Verge have noticed that X actually prevents you from viewing someone’s profile if you’re logged out.”

Waves of Abuse on X

The change is already causing concern not least because the platform has been slammed as a hotbed of misinformation and hatred since Musk took over. One study by the Center for Countering Digital Hate found that shortly after Musk’s takeover, use of homophobic and racist slang rapidly spiked.

Users are taking to X to disagree with the tech billionaire for this very reason. They argue that the Block function does make sense as both protection and empowerment. One user wrote: It makes a ton of sense. Let[’s] people control their feed and what abuse they are willing to take.” Another user wrote: “I don’t want the creeps I’ve blocked seeing my posts at all.”

There isn’t an update on when the changes will come into effect as yet, which might give someone time to count how many X users have blocked Elon Musk.

TikTok has removed accounts associated with two Russian media organizations, accusing them of running ‘covert influence operations’.

The accounts are associated with Rossiya Segodnya – the parent company of Russian news agency Sputnik – and state-owned TV-Novosti, which owns RT TV.

They have now been completely banned for violating TikTok’s community guidelines, echoing a move that Meta also made against the organizations last week.

TikTok Bans Russian Media Accounts

More details will be published in TikTok’s September Covert Influence Operations report. We do know that the ban centers upon the guidelines on deceptive behavior, which is “behavior that may spam or mislead our community.”

In a statement, TikTok says that it had already taken action against the accounts, citing “their content was [decided to be] ineligible for the For You feed to limit attempts to influence foreign audiences on topics of global events and affairs, and their accounts were labeled as state-controlled media to provide important context about the source of the content.”

Covert and Insidious Operations

In the US, President Biden declared earlier this month that the news channel was acting for Moscow’s spy agencies. “RT wants its new covert intelligence capabilities, like its longstanding propaganda and disinformation efforts, to remain hidden,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken told the press. “Our most powerful antidote to Russia’s lies is the truth. It’s shining a bright light on what the Kremlin is trying to do under the cover of darkness.”

The Government didn’t hold back any punches. James Rubin, coordinator for the State Department’s Global Engagement Center stated that RT News is “a fully-fledged member of the intelligence apparatus and operation of the Russian government.”

The news network has long been watched by the US Government. In July, US officials took action against nearly 1000 accounts on X/ Twitter, which were pretending to be American but were actually Russian bots. The US Justice Department said that a deputy editor at RT News was behind the operation.

Wider Ban Across Social Media for RT and Sputnik

RT-News’ X account has also been “withheld” in 28 European countries though you can still access this and Sputnik’s account in the US.  Indeed, Sputnik took to X to vent. It posted: “TikTok users and our 86,000 subscribers are no longer allowed to know the truth about most urgent geopolitical issues and laugh at Western politicians’ gaffes in Sputnik International videos.”

YouTube and Meta have also put bans in place.

Denial and Determination from Russian Media

RT News denies any wrongdoing. Its editor-in-chief, Margarita Simonyan was reported by Reuters to threaten that they will continue to get content into the US, whatever bans they face. “They close entry to us, and we will go through the window; close the window, and we will go through the vents, and we will see what holes there are in the organism of the United States of America.”.

TikTok’s report on August’s covert activity reveals exactly how persistent these organizations can be. In just that one month, TikTok removed 7792 accounts “associated with previously disrupted networks attempting to re-establish their presence within this reporting period”. These accounts targeted conversations about the Ukraine war; political discussions in Mexico and conversations about Russia.

Meanwhile, TikTok is facing its own battle about insidious foreign activity. The Chinese-owned company is facing a ban in the US after accusations that it has not been ring-fencing sensible user information from the Chinese Government.

While this battle plays out in court, and this very divisive US Election approaches, TikTok will be going into overdrive to protect its users from meddling and misinformation from bad foreign players like Russia, and, ironically, its host country, China.

TikTok has kicked off its subscription model expansion to include users who aren’t signed up to Live.

The new deal means that more TikTok users will be able to access features including being able to offer their followers “exclusive perks, unique experiences and a members-only community for a monthly fee”.

TikTok seems to be pushing on with business as usual even as the deadline for its sale or closure in the US looms ever closer.

What Does TikTok Deal Offer Creators?

The company, which is currently locked in a battle for its survival in the US, has made a raft of announcements in recent weeks including launching an Election Center for US users.

This latest announcement means more users will be able to make money from their content.

The subscription for Live creators was rolled out in 2022. It mirrors offerings from competitors including YouTube membership and Instagram’s Subscription model.

It allowed access to tools that users can deploy to drive “more meaningful” engagement, TikTok explained. Specifically, they could offer three tiers of subscription to their own audience and select which benefits would match each tier.

Options include access to sub Space, chats, comments, and messages for direct interactions. TikTokers can also create exclusive content for their different levels of subscribers and perks “such as performance requests, Discord roles, shout-outs, and LIVE topics, or custom perks designed by the creator specifically for their community.”

More Money for TikTok

All of these options have the endgame of driving engagement and bringing in new subscribers, which TikTok creators can monetize. Live subscriptions start at $2.99/ month.

The social media platform revealed its plans to expand the subscription to non-Live members at the Future Formats Summit in March, where it also unveiled the Creator Academy, where creators can get answers to queries about “account health, creation tools, content skills, and monetization features”.

How Will TikTok Live Expansion be Rolled Out?

Initially, the subscription was available on an invite-only basis. Now TikTok has widened its reach but shares that the subscription isn’t going to be available to everyone. Eligible creators must be 18 years or older, have an account “in good standing”, but also must have a minimum of 10K followers, and 100K video views in the past calendar month.

The subscription is rolling out to Brazil, France, Germany, Spain, the UK, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, and the US first; but other markets will follow.

Computing manufacturer Dell is the latest big company to be the subject of a database hack, with a data breach potentially exposing the private information of more than 10,000 employees and their partners.

Full names, employee status and internal IDs of Dell staff are all cited as being compromised by the threat actor known as ‘grep’, which is offering to sell the data for the equivalent of just $0.30. Dell has said that it is investigating the matter.

It’s the second big data breach coup for grep this month, having also obtained data from French IT consultants Capgemini.

Dell Internal Employee Data Exposed

The Dell data breach – originally reported by the BleepingComputer website – was posted by the grep profile on a data breach community forum.

It said that Dell had suffered a “minor data breach that exposed internal employees data”, before going on to state that more than 10,800 Dell employees and their partners had been affected.

The post listed the data points that had been breached by grep:

Compromised data: Employee ID, Employee full name, Employee status, Employee internal ID

The poster included in the thread a small sample of the data they had obtained, while making the entire database available for one 1 BreachForums credit. Credits are each worth the equivalent of approximately $0.30.

In response, Dell – who recently planned job cuts of around 12,000 staff – told BleepingComputer that it was aware of the claims and that its security team was investigating.

grep Developing Reputation

A later post by the threat actor grep alleged a further Dell data breach that would expose internal data. This second breach, it said, comprised a total of 3.5GB of uncompressed data that includes Jira files and scheme migration.

It’s not the first time that grep’s misdemeanors have been in the spotlight this month. It made claims back on 9th September that it had taken advantage of a significant data breach at Capgemini.

The post on BreachForums said that it had got its hands on 20GB of “Database, Source code, Private Keys, Credentials, API Keys, Projects, Employees data, Threat Reports, T-Mobile’s Virtual Machines logs, Documents and many more”.

Just like the Dell breach, it again made a sample of the exposed data available for free on the post.

The Year in Data Breaches

Data breaches are nothing new, with computer hacking dating back to the 1970s. But 2024 has seen more than its fair share of major companies falling foul of malicious actors breaching their cyber defenses.

Perhaps the most notable breach so far this year was the one perpetrated by the notorious ShinyHunters that obtained and leaked 440,000 tickets to concerts that included Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour. It placed an $8 million ransom on the tickets, with Ticketmaster the victim.

But that was far from the highest value or widest reaching hack. The now infamous Snowflake hack saw the cloud storage company targeted, with the details of 30 million bank accounts and 28 million credit cards compromised.

DNA testing company 23andMe agreed to pay out $30 million in compensation to victims of a breach of the company’s database, while U-Haul was forced to stump up $5 million.

And it was also revealed this weekend that UK department store Harvey Nichols had had sensitive customer data exposed.

Less than a year after it announced job losses numbering in excess of 1,200, tech manufacturer Qualcomm is set to let a further 226 employees go from its facilities in San Diego.

While last year’s job cut was attributed to “uncertainty in the macroeconomic and demand environment”, the company says the latest cull is necessary in order to “prioritize and align our investments, resources, and talent”.

The news comes at the same time that rumors have begun to swirl around Qualcomm’s potential takeover of rival Intel – a company worth close to $100 billion.

Qualcomm Makes 226 Layoffs Across 16 Facilities

The news of Qualcomm’s latest round of layoffs was originally broken by The San Diego Union-Tribune (paywalled), reporting that the majority of the cuts will be inflicted on Qualcomm’s engineering department.

In total, 226 people are expected to lose their job across 16 facilities in the Californian city of San Diego – the home of the tech giant’s headquarters – with the action set to take place on November 12th this year.

“Our leading technology and product portfolio has positioned us to execute on our diversification strategy,” said Kristin Stiles, Manager, Corporate Communications at Qualcomm.

“As part of a normal course of business, we prioritize and align our investments, resources, and talent to ensure we are optimally positioned to take advantage of the unprecedented diversification opportunities in front of us.”

Qualcomm Bringing Intel Inside

Despite Qualcomm’s concerns about demand and microeconomic factors, the company was still able to report earnings this year that exceeded expectations on Wall Street – July’s earnings call showed revenue of $9.39 billion and net income of $2.13 billion.

With such strength in the market, the UK’s Financial Times reported on Saturday that the chipmaker was now making approaches to long-time rival Intel about a possible ‘friendly’ takeover.

Qualcomm’s target is valued at around $96 billion, but has been making its own massive layoffs this year. In August Intel announced it would be cutting 15,000 employees – roughly 15% of the total workforce – citing a tougher than expected financial outlook for the company.

The takeover would, the Financial Times said, eclipse the game changing Microsoft acquisition of Activision that was finally approved by UK regulators last year and is worth $68.7 billion.

Major Tech Layoffs Continue

Qualcomm’s latest round of layoffs is just another in a long conveyer belt of tech companies making significant cuts to their staff. It’s been a savage few years for employees, with many big name tech companies making layoffs.

September alone has seen Microsoft and Gwyneth Paltrow’s wellness brand Goop make announcements about company restructuring that would spell the loss of hundreds of jobs.

Right up there with Intel as one of the biggest job cutters is computing manufacturer Dell. Last month Dell revealed it would cut 12,000 jobs to streamline the company and better embrace AI.

While elsewhere, 2024 has witnessed the likes of Google, Amazon, Twitch and Apple all wield the axe to their staff.

The US just announced plans to prohibit both automotive hardware and software from China across the country in an effort to curb national security threats.

It’s no secret that the US and China are at odds when it comes to the business world. The TikTok fiasco is a good example, with the US attempting to ban one of the most popular apps in the world because its parent company is based in China.

Now, the battle is bleeding over to the world of cars, with the latest move having a potentially significant impact on the auto industry as a whole.

US Commerce Department Proposes Chinese Car Tech Ban

Announced by the US Commerce Department this week, the Biden administration is pursuing a ban on Chinese automative hardware and software. The news, broken by Reuters, means that Chinese cars and vans would effectively be prohibited from the US market as a whole.

As is often the reason, officials have noted that national security is behind the decision to ban Chinese car tech from US roads.

“When foreign adversaries build software to make a vehicle [connected], that means it can be used for surveillance, can be remotely controlled, which threatens the privacy and safety of Americans on the road.” – Gina Raimondo, US Commerce Secretary

While the premise sounds straight out of a Fast and Furious movie, the concerns are at least somewhat founded. Given the nature of modern connected car technology, it’s certainly possible to gain control over a vehicle without being behind the wheel.

The Response From China

While threats to national security should certainly be addressed, Chinese officials have pointed out that the move to ban all connected car technology from the country is an escalation in what exactly is considered a “national security” threat.

“China opposes the US’s broadening of the concept of national security and the discriminatory actions taken against Chinese companies and products. We urge the US side to respect market principles and provide an open, fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory business environment for Chinese enterprises” – Lin Jian, spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry

The possible ban isn’t just concerning for Chinese automative manufacturers. In fact, some of the prohibitions could extend to other countries that are at odds with the US, including Russia.

US vs China on Cars

This isn’t the first shot across the bow when it comes to the US vs China in the business world, especially when it comes to cars. Whether it be to curb national security concerns or favor US manufacturers on the road, the Biden administration has made more than a few moves to hamper China’s efforts.

The US has raised tariffs on electric cars and electric car batteries from China, making it difficult to sell them in the US for a reasonable price. Officials have even banned Chinese-made cargo cranes from importation, setting a clear example that US doesn’t want China operating businesses in the country.

Suffice to say, the tensions between the US aren’t likely to abate any time soon, and the US will do what it can to slow China down. But with the country outpacing the US in AI and electric cars, it’s safe to say these bans are just the beginning.