submitted by /u/ShaderError [link] [comments]

The European Commission is giving staffers visiting the US on official business burner laptops and phones to avoid espionage attempts, according to the Financial Times. The use of clean and locked-down hardware is common practice for anyone visiting China, Russia, and other states where aggressive electronic surveillance is expected. Apparently the European Union has added the United States to that list. "The transatlantic alliance is over," an EU official told the newspaper, which reported the commission "is issuing burner phones and basic laptops to some US-bound staff to avoid the risk of espionage — a measure traditionally reserved for trips to China." Next week, officials from the EU are due in Washington DC for the spring meetings of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund. Four sources told the FT the EC had changed its guidance to ensure that visitors to America take serious precautions against cyber-espionage. "They are worried about the US getting into the commission systems," said one. The relationship between the US and Europe has chilled severely in the past few months since President Trump threatened to invade Greenland, slapped tariffs on Euro imports, backed a Sieg-Heil'ing Elon Musk, sent Vice President JD Vance to lecture the continent on free speech, humiliated Ukraine's president, and made other smart foreign policy moves. Germany, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, and Ireland have all altered their travel advice for citizens visiting the Land of the Free, mainly urging travelers to follow all requirements as strictly as possible or consider simply not going, after a bunch of visitors from the EU and UK were detained for visa and immigration infractions. Trans-gendered travelers are advised that they may be barred from entry. France’s minister of higher education and research, Philippe Baptiste, lodged an official complaint last month after one French boffin was reportedly barred from entering the country for a conference after a border patrol examination of their phone found what was said to be extreme anti-Trump comments, although the US says it was because officers found confidential American information in the scientist's possession. Taking a burner device, to be honest, sounds like standard practice for people in sensitive lines of work, though this is all being interpreted as an indication of quite how badly relations have slipped between Europe and the US. And while a certain amount of spying on one's allies is expected – former German chancellor Angela Merkel was most peeved when it turns out her phone was being bugged by the NSA – a recommendation to take fresh devices is something new. Ultimately, spies spy, and when it comes to spying on the world, no one doubts America's abilities, regardless of who is in charge. "Washington is not Beijing or Moscow, but it is an adversary that is prone to use extra-legal methods to further its interests and power," Luuk van Middelaar, director of the Brussels Institute for Geopolitics think tank, told the FT. "Democrat administrations use the same tactics. It is an acceptance of reality by the Commission." A European Commission spokesperson, an in email to The Register, did not deny equipment was being handed out to staff as reported. And while the spinner claimed the commission had not issued official guidance to use burner laptops and phones, they did admit it had tweaked its recommendations. "We have recently updated several country specific traveling recommendation factsheets for officials. They reflect the latest changes in the way the commission communicates and the general increase of threats globally regarding cybersecurity," the spokesperson told us. "Finally, indeed we recommend linking the e-visa to an EU laissez-passer for senior officials, in order to underline the official nature of the visit and facilitate visa processes in embassies prior to departure. Again, these updated recommendations were included in many other countries' factsheets to the attention of travelling senior officials." We understand the FT stands by its yarn. And it wouldn't be the first time the EU had denied a story, only to later confirm its veracity. ® PS: Facebook giant Meta intends to train its AI on public posts and other data in Europe after last year pausing the practice. "People based in the EU who use our platforms can choose to object to their public data being used for training purposes," the tech giant noted.

Just say no After Harvard says no to feds, $2.2 billion of research funding put on hold The university also turned its homepage into a tribute to research. John Timmer – Apr 14, 2025 6:39 pm | 171 Credit: US Schools Credit: US Schools Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more The Trump administration has been using federal research funding as a cudgel. The government has blocked billions of dollars in research funds and threatened to put a hold on even more in order to compel universities to adopt what it presents as essential reforms. In the case of Columbia University, that includes changes in the leadership of individual academic departments. On Friday, the government sent a list of demands that it presented as necessary to "maintain Harvard’s financial relationship with the federal government." On Monday, Harvard responded that accepting these demands would "allow itself to be taken over by the federal government." The university also changed its home page into an extensive tribute to the research that would be eliminated if the funds were withheld. In response, the Trump administration later put $2.2 billion of Harvard's research funding on hold. Diversity, but only the right kind Harvard posted the letter it received from federal officials, listing their demands. Some of it is what you expect, given the Trump administration's interests. The admissions and hiring departments would be required to drop all diversity efforts, with data on faculty and students to be handed over to the federal government for auditing. As at other institutions, there are also some demands presented as efforts against antisemitism, such as the defunding of pro-Palestinian groups. More generally, it demands that university officials "prevent admitting students hostile to the American values and institutions." There are also a bunch of basic culture war items, such as a demand for a mask ban, and a ban on "de-platforming" speakers on campus. In addition, the government wants the university to screen all faculty hires for plagiarism issues, which is what caused Harvard's former president to resign after she gave testimony to Congress. Any violation of these updated conduct codes by a non-citizen would require an immediate report to the Department of Homeland Security and State Department, presumably so they can prepare to deport them. However, the most striking aspect of the letter is the complete shift in tone about diversity. After having presented Harvard's existing diversity efforts as the antithesis of a merit-based approach, it suddenly demands that the university enforce what it terms viewpoint diversity. It never defines what this term means—perhaps alchemy in the chemistry department? But the implications are that it amounts to affirmative action for conservatives. Harvard is directed to "audit the student body, faculty, staff, and leadership for viewpoint diversity, such that each department, field, or teaching unit must be individually viewpoint diverse." Any department that fails the audit would be required to start hiring new faculty until it can pass the undefined standards demanded by the feds. Again, all this is being presented as necessary for Harvard to continue receiving research funds. Harvard says nope! The university has decided these demands force it to fight, and it's attacking on two fronts. The first is public-facing; Harvard has turned its homepage into a tribute to its researchers and the work they pursue. Although it starts with a huge banner article as shown here, links to 30 individual articles on research fill the entire page. I have a fairly high-resolution screen, and it took hitting page down nine times to finally reach the bottom, where a handful of links to the rest of the university finally appear. The message is clear: The research that's under threat matters, and humanity will be worse off if its funding is cut. Harvard University's homepage on April 14, 2025. Credit: Harvard Separately, Harvard's legal response, which it made public today, is basically: nope. After detailing the steps the university has already taken to address antisemitism, it gets to the crux of the issue: "your letter disregards Harvard’s efforts and instead presents demands that, in contravention of the First Amendment, invade university freedoms long recognized by the Supreme Court." The harms these demands are meant to address, the letter alleges, haven't actually been demonstrated through processes that are required by law. It continues by essentially calling the government's demands the equivalent of a hostile takeover: The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights. Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government. Accordingly, Harvard will not accept the government’s terms as an agreement in principle. Let's be clear: There is a good chance that Harvard is risking a catastrophic loss of funding, resulting in entire research programs being shut down, layoffs, and grad students with no way to pursue their thesis projects. It could well be a crisis that requires generations of new faculty hires to recover from. At the same time, the university also saw one of its peers, Columbia University, accede to a somewhat more limited set of demands, and have its funding put on hold anyway. Given that, the decision to prepare to gain public support and fight it out in court doesn't seem unreasonable. This story has been updated to reflect the actions of the federal government. John Timmer Senior Science Editor John Timmer Senior Science Editor John is Ars Technica's science editor. He has a Bachelor of Arts in Biochemistry from Columbia University, and a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California, Berkeley. When physically separated from his keyboard, he tends to seek out a bicycle, or a scenic location for communing with his hiking boots. 171 Comments

submitted by /u/FR3NKD [link] [comments]

Facebook whistleblower testifies that company undermined national security by working with ChinaMeta executives ‘lied about what they were doing with the‬ ‭Chinese Communist Party to employees, shareholders, Congress and the‬‭ American public,’ Sarah Wynn-Williams told a Congressional subcommitteeKelly Rissmanin New YorkWednesday 09 April 2025 22:11 BSTFormer Facebook employee Sarah Wynn-Williams plans to testify to the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism about how Meta ‘undermined U.S. national security’ (AFP via Getty Images)Sign up for the daily Inside Washington email for exclusive US coverage and analysis sent to your inboxGet our free Inside Washington emailGet our free Inside Washington emailI would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. Read our privacy policyA Meta whistleblower testified before Congress Wednesday about how she witnessed the company repeatedly “undermine‬ U.S. national security.”Sarah Wynn-Williams, a former Facebook employee who released an explosive memoir last month accusing the social media giant of retaliating against her after she reported sexual misconduct, testified before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism with another revelatory allegation: the company was engaged in “illegal and dangerous activities” with China.Wynn-Williams worked at Facebook for seven years, starting in 2011. As director of global public policy, she worked closely with CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former COO Sheryl Sandberg. Throughout her tenure, she saw company executives “undermine U.S. national security” and said they “lied about what they were doing with the‬ ‭Chinese Communist Party to employees, shareholders, Congress and the‬‭ American public.”She he alleged that Meta executives worked hard to “win favor” with leaders in Beijing to build a $18 billion business in China.A Meta spokesperson slammed her remarks as being “divorced from reality and riddled with false claims” in a statement shared with The Independent prior to the hearing. “While Mark Zuckerberg himself was public about our interest in offering our services in China and details were widely reported beginning over a decade ago, the fact is this: we do not operate our services in China today.”Former Facebook employee Sarah Wynn-Williams plans to testify to the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism about how Meta ‘undermined U.S. national security’ (AFP via Getty Images)Wynn-Williams told Senators that she saw executives working “‘hand in glove’” with the Chinese Communist Party to construct and test‬‭ custom-built censorship tools that silenced and censored their critics. The whistleblower also testified that Meta provided China with access to users’ data, including that of Americans.“Meta has been willing to‬ ‭ compromise its values, sacrifice the security of its users, and undermine‬ ‭ American interests to build its China business. It’s been happening for years,‬ ‭ covered up by lies, and continues to this day,” she told the subcommittee.‭Meta began offering products and services in China as early as 2014, she claims. The tech giant constructed a “physical pipeline” connecting the United States and China that would have allowed the Chinese Communist Party to intercept Americans’ personal data.“The only reason China does not currently have access to U.S. user data through this pipeline is because Congress stepped in,” she said.The following year, the company started briefing the Chinese Communist Party. These briefings included discussions around critical emerging technologies, including AI, with the “explicit goal being to help China outcompete American companies,” Wynn-Williams said.“There’s a straight line you can draw from these briefings to the recent revelations that China is developing AI models for military use, relying on Meta’s Llama model,” she testified. “Meta’s internal documents describe their sales pitch for why China should allow them in the market by quote ‘help[ing] China increase global influence and promote the China Dream.’”Meta is led by Mark Zuckerberg. Meta executives ‘lied about what they were doing with the‬ ‭Chinese Communist Party to employees, shareholders, Congress and the‬‭ American public,’ Wynn-Williams plans to tell a Congressional subcommittee (AP)In her book Careless People, Wynn-Williams accused the tech giant of firing her in 2017 after she filed a sexual harassment complaint against her boss Joel Kaplan, who was then-vice president for global public policy. Meta previously told The Independent in a statement that she was fired for “poor performance and toxic behavior” and noted that an investigation into the incident determined that she made “misleading and unfounded allegations of harassment.” Kaplan now serves as chief global affairs officer.After her memoir was published in March, Meta sought to prevent her from further promoting the book, claiming that the allegations violated a non-disparagement clause in her severance agreement. The company described Wynn-Williams’ allegations detailed in her memoir as “a mix of out-of-date and previously reported claims about the company and false accusations about our executives.” A legal representative for Wynn-Williams shared a statement with The Independent last month: “Meta has made a number of false and inconsistent statements about Sarah since the news of her memoir broke. The events that led to her departure from Meta are described in detail in the memoir, and while Meta’s statements are trying to mislead the public, the book speaks for itself.”One day after the tech giant filed an arbitration demand, an arbitrator temporarily prohibited her from amplifying or repeating “disparaging, critical or otherwise detrimental comments.” In her remarks on Wednesday, Wynn-Williams described the block as a “legal gag order” that includes speaking to lawmakers. Still, she said, “I am here at considerable‬ ‭ personal risk because you have the power and the authority to hold them‬‭ accountable.”In his March 12 arbitration decision, the arbitrator clarified that the order didn’t prevent Wynn-Williams from “giving any testimony” or “cooperating” with a government agency during its investigation. There was never any prohibition on her testifying to Congress, Meta has said. The Independent has reached out to a representative for Wynn-Williams for clarification.Join our commenting forumJoin thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their repliesMost PopularPopular videosSponsored Features

Welcome to the “failed render” support group. This is a safe space where we share the pure rage (and occasional tears) we’ve all experienced in those final moments Model: ready, Lighting: perfect, Render time: wtf. This is a judgement free space. The more dramatic the better. submitted by /u/Virtuall_Pro [link] [comments]

Helloo, thought id share some of the high quality renders from this project, the animation i shared with you guys look somewhat blurry due to compression stuff. so, BEHOLD! feast your eyes. will be working on some other cool stuff soon. submitted by /u/L0rdCinn [link] [comments]

Sony has increased the price of its PlayStation 5 by 25% as the video game industry reels from the impact of Donald Trump’s tariffs.The Japanese game developer said it had made the “tough decision” to raise the price of the console’s digital edition to £429.99 in the UK and €499.99 in Europe, starting from Monday. There will be no price change for the standard PS5, which comes with a disk drive.The company cited “a challenging economic environment, including high inflation and fluctuating exchange rates” behind its decision to increase the retail price of the PS5 in some markets in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Oceania.In Australia, the standard PS5 will rise to A$829.95, while the digital edition will increase to A$749.95. In New Zealand, the standard console will increase to NZ$949.95, and the digital to NZ$859.95..The technology industry has been grappling with the possible impact of President Trump’s tariffs on its supply chains. Rival Japanese game developer Nintendo unveiled its new handheld console, the Switch 2, the day before Trump launched his barrage of “reciprocal” tariffs on foreign goods on 2 April. A few days later, the company postponed preorders of the device in the US, as it said it would need to assess the potential effect of tariffs.Japan was hit with a 24% tariff on its exports to the US on Trump’s “liberation day” on 2 April. Like most of Trump’s new tariffs, they have been paused for 90 days. However, the Japanese prime minister, Shigeru Ishiba, said on Monday that his country did not plan to make big concessions in negotiations with the US and that it would not rush to reach a deal. Talks between the two governments are due this week.Companies such as Apple, whose products are largely assembled in China, are also bracing for higher costs. Analysts at the investment bank UBS have warned that the price of an iPhone 16 Max, with 256GB of storage, could rise 79% from $1,199 (£915) to about $2,150 (£1,600), based on a total tariff of 145%.While there is still a great deal of uncertainty around Trump’s trade policy, Japanese shares rose on Monday after the US said it would pause levies on some electronics, including smartphones. Tokyo’s index of blue chip stocks, the Nikkei 225, closed up 1%.However, US officials said on Sunday that the pause on smartphones, laptops and other electronic products from import tariffs on China will be short-lived, with Trump warning on Sunday that no one was “getting off the hook”.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Business TodayFree daily newsletterGet set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morningPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionIn a post on Truth Social, his social media platform, the president promised to launch a national security trade investigation in the semiconductor sector and “the whole electronics supply chain”.“We will not be held hostage by other Countries, especially hostile trading Nations like China,” he wrote.

Addon to automatically focus the camera, with the unique feature of baking the scene to export and use in command-line renders or render farms. First of all, thank you to everyone who shared great tips and comments about this Blender addon! This project began as a complement to another addon I created, the Camera Controller Addon, which allows you to control the camera in real time using your smartphone. However, I was having trouble achieving automatic focus, and that’s when the development of this project started. All instructions are available on Gumroad, and I’ll soon be making some tutorials on how to use it, along with continuous improvements and new tools over time. Thank you all once again! submitted by /u/Longjumping_List_888 [link] [comments]

Landmark antitrust trial could force Zuckerberg to sell Instagram16 hours agoLily JamaliNorth America technology correspondent•@lilyjamaliReporting fromSan FranciscoReutersA trial in the landmark antitrust case against social media giant Meta kicks off in Washington on Monday.The US competition and consumer watchdog alleges that Meta, which already owned Facebook, bought Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 to eliminate competition, effectively giving itself a monopoly.The FTC reviewed and approved those acquisitions but committed to monitor the outcomes. If the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) wins the case it could force Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to sell off both Instagram and WhatsApp.Meta previously said it was sure it would win and experts have told the BBC it is likely to argue that Instagram users have had a better experience since it was taken over."The [FTC's] argument is the acquisition of Instagram was a way of neutralizing this rising competitive threat to Facebook," says Rebecca Haw Allensworth, a professor of antitrust at Vanderbilt Law School.Ms Allensworth says Mr Zuckerberg's own words, including those from his emails, may offer the most convincing evidence at trial."He said it's better to buy than to compete. It's hard to get more literal than that," Ms Allensworth says.Meta, on the other hand, is likely to argue that intent is not particularly relevant in an antitrust case."They're going to say the real question is: are consumers better off as a result of this merger?," she said. "They'll put on a lot of evidence that Instagram became what it is today because it benefited from being owned by Facebook."Mr Zuckerberg and the company's former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg are both expected to testify at the trial, which could run for several weeks.Shifting politicsThe case, FTC v Meta, was filed during US President Donald Trump's first administration but risks becoming politicized during his second term.Mr Zuckerberg has lobbied Trump in person to have the FTC drop the case, according to the Wall Street Journal.When asked by the BBC to confirm that report, Meta sidestepped the question but said in a statement: "The FTC's lawsuits against Meta defies reality.""More than 10 years after the FTC reviewed and cleared our acquisitions, the commission's action in this case sends the message that no deal is ever truly final," a Meta spokesperson told the BBC.Relations between Mr Zuckerberg and Trump had been frosty partly because Trump was barred from Meta's social media platforms after the US Capitol riot in January 2021.Since then, the relationship has thawed somewhat.Meta contributed $1m (£764,400) to Trump's inaugural fund, and in January announced Ultimate Fighting Championship Fighter (UFC) boss Dana White, a close Trump ally, would join its board of directors.The company also announced in January that it was doing away with independent fact-checkers.'A very clear message'President Trump's move to fire two FTC commissioners in March also hangs over the case.As Democrats, Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya were in the minority on the five-seat commission.Until Wednesday, just two seats of those seats were filled, both by Republicans. Another Republican was confirmed by the Senate on Thursday.Slaughter and Bedoya - who are suing the Trump administration to be reinstated - say the move to push them out was meant to intimidate."The president sent a very clear signal not only to us but to Chairman Ferguson and Commissioner [Melissa] Holyoak that if they do something he doesn't like, he could fire them too," Slaughter told the BBC in a recent interview."So if they don't want to do a favor for his political allies, they're on the chopping block as well," Slaughter said.Slaughter and Bedoya both expressed alarm at recent reports about Zuckerberg's lobbying efforts. "My hope is that there is no political interference," Mr Bedoya told the BBC.ReutersThe FTC did not respond to a request for comment from the BBC.Ferguson, who was appointed as FTC chair by Trump, recently told The Verge he would "obey lawful orders" when asked what he would do if the president directed him to drop a lawsuit like the one against Meta. Ferguson added that he would be very surprised if anything like that ever happened.The FTC is considered a key antitrust watchdog. In recent years, it has returned hundreds of millions of dollars to victims of fraud, in addition to passing laws that ban junk fees and subscription traps.But as the Meta trial begins, it's among the many independent regulatory agencies that the administration seems keen to rein in.Chair Ferguson is also recently quoted reaffirming his belief that independent regulatory bodies are "not good for democracy."The FTC's 'uphill battle'FTC v Meta begins as another major antitrust case - USA v Google - enters what's known as the remedies phase.The Department of Justice won the first phase of that case last summer when Judge Amit Mehta found that Google holds a monopoly in online search, with a market share of around 90%.Last month, the DOJ reiterated a demand made during the Biden administration that a court break up Google's search monopoly.The FTC's case against Meta will be tougher to prove, says Laura Phillips-Sawyer, an associate professor of business law at the University of Georgia."I think they have a real uphill battle," Ms Phillips-Sawyer said of the FTC."They have a long road before any consideration of divestiture of Instagram or WhatsApp is considered."That's because compared to online search, there's more competition in the personal network services space that Meta operates in, Ms Phillips-Sawyer said.Meta in a statement said the evidence at trial "will show what every 17-year-old in the world knows: Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp compete with Chinese-owned TikTok, YouTube, X, iMessage and many others."Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the world's top tech stories and trends. Outside the UK? Sign up here.InstagramMark Zuckerberg

Hey everyone!! I decided to released a FREE lite version of my add-on on Gumroad so that everyone can try it and see how they like it before they consider buying it. I hope you guys find it useful for your projects and I will definitely release tutorials soon with tips and tricks! Also I’m selling the full version for 50% off on Gumroad and 25% off on Blender Market If you do enjoy this version of the add-on, please give it a rating! Thank you so much to this great community! submitted by /u/patrick5544 [link] [comments]

The big American tech firms known as the “Silicon Six” have been accused of paying almost $278bn (£211bn) less corporate income tax in the past decade compared with the statutory rate for US companies making the same profits.Amazon, Meta, Alphabet, Netflix, Apple and Microsoft generated $11tn of revenue and $2.5tn of profits over the past 10 years.Yet they paid an average 18.8% in combined national and federal corporation taxes, compared with an average 29.7% in the US, according to the Fair Tax Foundation (FTF), which said the Silicon Six had “hardwired” tax avoidance into their business models.Analysis by the not-for-profit organisation found that if one-off repatriation tax payments in the US connected to historical tax avoidance were excluded, the average corporate income tax contribution of the six firms fell to 16.1% over the past decade.The companies had also inflated their stated tax payments by $82bn over the same period by including contingencies for tax they did not expect to pay, the report claimed.Paul Monaghan, the chief executive of the FTF, said: “Our analysis would indicate that tax avoidance continues to be hardwired into corporate structures. The Silicon Six’s corporate income tax contributions are, in percentage terms, way below what sectors such as banking and energy are paying in many parts of the world.”Monaghan pointed to “aggressive tax practices” such as the contingency tax positions, while the companies also exerted “enormous political influence as well as economic power”, spending millions of dollars on lobbying governments.The report comes as the US tech companies’ influence has been highlighted by the presence of their bosses including Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Apple’s Tim Cook and Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg at Donald Trump’s second inauguration.A significant tax cut for such companies has reportedly been at the heart of discussions with the UK in its attempts to secure lower tariffs on its products exported to the US.Monaghan said that much of the Silicon Six’s overseas revenue was subject to low-level rates of corporate income tax in the US via a tax break for foreign-derived intangible income. FTF said overseas sales were also subject to lower rates of income tax because of a combination of lower profit margins and booking profits in low-tax jurisdictions.Netflix had the lowest rate of tax actually paid compared with profit booked, at 14.7%, while Microsoft paid 20.4%. FTF said Amazon had the worst tax conduct based on the factors such as the total amount of tax paid and “obvious profit shifting” – such as booking a sizeable portion of its UK income in low-tax Luxembourg. However, Amazon’s corporate tax rate was 19.6%, well ahead of Netflix, Meta (15.4%) and Apple (18.4%).A spokesperson for Amazon said its UK retail revenues, associated expenses, profits and taxes were recorded in the UK, and reported and paid directly to HM Revenue and Customs.They said: “Governments write the tax laws and Amazon is doing the very thing these laws encourage companies to do – paying all taxes due while also investing billions in creating jobs and infrastructure. Since 2010, we have invested more than $1.2tn in the US and over €250bn [£215bn] in Europe. Coupled with low margins, this investment will naturally result in a lower cash tax rate, particularly when measured as a percentage of revenue.”A spokesperson for Meta said: “We follow international and local tax rules, ensuring that we pay all taxes required in each of the countries where we operate.”A Netflix spokesperson said: “Governments determine tax rules and rates – and companies comply with them. Netflix complies with the relevant tax rules and regulations in every country in which we operate.”Microsoft, Alphabet and Apple were all approached for comment.

The FTC called Mark Zuckerberg to the witness stand in its antitrust case against Meta. Chris Unger/Zuffa LLC via Getty Images 2025-04-14T20:45:20Z Save Saved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? Mark Zuckerberg testified in a landmark antitrust trial brought by the FTC against Meta. The FTC claims Meta's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp violated competition laws. Zuckerberg was the first witness to take the stand. Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg had a "crazy idea" in 2022 for Facebook — purge all users' friends.This came to light on Monday after the US government put Zuckerberg on the witness stand as it faced off against Meta in a landmark antitrust trial that could result in the break up of the social media empire.In an internal 2022 email to the social network's top brass, Zuckerberg — fearful that Facebook was losing cultural relevance — proposed his big idea."Option 1. Double down on Friending," Zuckerberg wrote in the message that the government revealed during his testimony. "One potentially crazy idea is to consider wiping everyone's graphs and having them start again."By "graphs" Zuckerberg meant Facebook users' friends connections.Tom Alison, the head of Facebook, responded with some hesitancy."I'm not sure Option #1 in your proposal (Double-down on Friending) would be viable given my understanding of how vital the friend use case is to IG," Alison wrote, referring to Instagram.Zuckerberg replied that he didn't follow Alison's concerns. He also raised another thought."Do you have a sense of how much work it would be to convert profiles to a follow model?" Zuckerberg asked in his reply.Reminded of his idea while under questioning by a Federal Trade Commission attorney during day one of the trial, Zuckerberg said that Facebook never followed through with his most drastic plan."As far as I can tell, we never did that," the Meta CEO and founder, who wore a suit and tie, said.During his hours of testimony in a Washington, DC, federal courtroom on Monday, Zuckerberg said that Facebook has greatly evolved since he launched the platform more than 20 years ago and that its main purpose isn't really to connect with friends anymore.The FTC argues that Meta monopolizes apps that share content with friends and family."The friend part has gone down quite a bit," Zuckerberg testified.The Facebook feed, Zuckerberg said, "has turned into more of a broad discovery and entertainment space."Zuckerberg, who was the first witness called after the trial opened on Monday, is expected to be questioned for as long as seven hours.The FTC argues in its case that Meta, then called Facebook, violated US competition laws when it acquired Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014.Meta's $1 billion acquisition of Instagram and $19 billion acquisition of WhatsApp were intended to box out competition and dominate the social media sphere, the FTC says. The government argues these acquisitions were part of Meta's "buy or bury" strategy to maintain market dominance.The FTC said in court papers that Meta has maintained its monopoly position "in significant part" by pursuing Zuckerberg's strategy outlined in an internal 2008 email in which the CEO wrote, "It is better to buy than compete.""Meta has for many years reaped massive economic profits beyond what you would expect to see in a competitive environment," FTC attorney Daniel Matheson said in his opening statement earlier Monday.Mark Hansen, an attorney for Meta, argued in his opening statement that the government's case amounts to a "grab bag of FTC theories at war with the facts and at war with the law."Hansen slammed the FTC's lawsuit against Meta as "misguided" as he said that the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp were not unlawful. There is no monopoly, Hansen argued, saying that Meta faces massive competition from rivals TikTok and YouTube.The case could be one of the most consequential antitrust trials in years. If FTC regulators have their way, Meta could be forced to sell off WhatsApp and Instagram.The antitrust trial is expected to last up to eight weeks. Judge James Boasberg will be the sole decider on whether Meta violated competition laws as there is no jury. Recommended video

Just one of those sudden motivation render. submitted by /u/lolororogiri [link] [comments]

TorontoShe was chatting with friends in a Lyft. Then someone texted her what they saidA Toronto woman is raising concerns about her privacy being breached after she received a text message transcript of her conversation with her roommates during a Lyft ride last month.Ride-sharing company says incident was not part of audio recording pilot it’s testing in some U.S. citiesNicole Brockbank · CBC News · Posted: Apr 14, 2025 4:00 AM EDT | Last Updated: April 14Anvi Ahuja received a text message transcript of her conversation with her roommates during their Lyft ride home on March 11. The company says it is investigating. (Nicole Brockbank/CBC)Social SharingAnvi Ahuja noticed a "freaky" new text message from a number she didn't know right after getting back to her downtown Toronto apartment last month. The text was a transcript of the conversation she'd just had with her roommates during their eight-minute Lyft ride home from a friend's place."I was like 'who is tapping me?'" Ahuja said. "The driver didn't inform us that we could be recorded."Within a few minutes she called the number the text came from and heard this looping, automated message: "We can't connect your call because your driver is not available right now.""It sounded like a pretty standard Lyft message, which raised a lot more questions," she said.Ahuja phoned Lyft that night looking for answers. In that initial call, she says a representative told her this was something the ride-sharing company was piloting. But then about a week later after following up with Lyft she received a written message from a member of the company's safety team which blamed the incident on the driver for recording her without her consent and said "proper actions" were taken against the driver. WATCH | Toronto woman explains concerns about 'freaky' text message: Ride-share recording incident leaves Toronto woman feeling 'stalked' 13 hours agoDuration 2:36A Toronto woman is speaking out, after a recent ride-share experience left her feeling uncomfortable, and unsafe. After the ride was over, she discovered her private conversation had been recorded. A transcript of the conversation was sent to her from an unknown number."These ride-sharing apps are big companies and people have a lot of sensitive conversations within cabs and they feel like they're secure," said Ahuja. "To know that nothing — even beyond our app experience — in the real world is secure anymore is really freaky and uncomfortable to me."Lyft says incident not part of U.S. pilot programThe company confirms the incident took place, but has offered varying explanations.After CBC Toronto contacted Lyft about this story last week, a Lyft representative called Ahuja. She says they told her the company is running a pilot program where audio is recorded from some rides and then the transcript is supposed to be sent to the ride-sharing company for reference if a security issue is reported. In a statement to CBC, a Lyft spokesperson acknowledged that the ride-sharing company has an in-app audio recording pilot in select U.S. markets with "strict opt-in protocols" but said this incident is not related to that pilot program or any other feature being tested by Lyft. "Safety is fundamental to Lyft, and we take reports like this very seriously and will investigate and take action for violations of our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy," said the statement."We can confirm that the communication was sent via a masked number, and the driver did not have access to the rider's personal phone number."Lyft's privacy policy says it works "with a third party to facilitate phone calls and text messages between riders and drivers without sharing either party's actual phone number with the other." And the company's recording device policy prohibits recording another person "without their express prior consent." The ride-sharing company wouldn't provide further details about the source of the transcript Ahuja received, but it appears the text could have come from the driver via a masked number from Lyft's third-party provider.Incident 'completely unacceptable' So how does Ahuja's experience jibe with Canadian privacy laws? A former privacy commissioner told CBC Toronto it doesn't. Former Ontario privacy commissioner Ann Cavoukian says this incident is 'completely unacceptable' and breaches Canada's federal privacy law. (Dave MacIntosh/CBC)"It is completely unacceptable," said Ann Cavoukian, who served as Ontario's privacy commissioner from 1997 to 2014."You're paying for a taxi-equivalent to take you somewhere, Lyft in this case. And of course, you assume that you're going to have conversations with the people in the car without it being taped and transcribed."In Canada, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) lays out the ground rules for how businesses — including companies like Lyft — can collect, use or share personal information.The federal law requires companies to obtain informed consent before collecting, using and disclosing their customers' personal information, according to the interim director of privacy, technology and surveillance program at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.Anaïs Bussières McNicoll is the interim director of the privacy, technology and surveillance program at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. (Submitted by Anaïs Bussières McNicoll)"Passengers not only have to be notified that they're being recorded, they also need to be told for what specific purpose they're being recorded," said Anaïs Bussières McNicoll. "They would definitely need to obtain passengers' meaningful consent, informed consent, and that includes being specific about how the data is going to be collected, how it's going to be used, how long it's going to be retained, how it's going to be destroyed."That never happened for Ahuja, and is part of the reason she still has concerns about the incident even if it was a one-off with her driver."Some sort of recording software was used in the car — that in itself is a breach of my privacy," she said."Even if I'm one of the very few people that experienced this, I'm still concerned about what happens to our data and our privacy — which is a responsibility that Lyft has to its customers."ABOUT THE AUTHORNicole BrockbankReporter, CBC TorontoNicole Brockbank is a reporter for CBC Toronto's Enterprise Unit. Fuelled by coffee, she digs up, researches and writes original investigative and feature stories. nicole.brockbank@cbc.caRelated Stories

an old project i decided to overcomplicate :D money shots here side note: light bounce was set to 32x and the whole hand is transmissive with some internal roughness submitted by /u/L0rdCinn [link] [comments]

Got a Tip?Are you a current or former government employee who wants to talk about what's happening? We'd like to hear from you. Using a nonwork phone or computer, contact the reporter securely on Signal at davidgilbert.01.One team that was purged from HHS managed over a hundred contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, including crucial cybersecurity licenses. It also managed the renewal of contracts for hundreds of specialized contractors who perform critical tasks for the department, including a dozen cybersecurity contractors who work at the Computer Security Incident Response Center (CSIRC)—the primary component of the department’s overall cybersecurity program which is overseen by the chief information security officer.While all of HHS’s agencies have their own cybersecurity and IT teams, the CSIRC is the only one that has visibility across the entire network of the department. This center, based in Atlanta, monitors the entire HHS network and is tasked with preventing, detecting, reporting, and responding to cybersecurity incidents at HHS.“It is the department’s nerve center,” the source says. “It has direct links to DHS, CISA, Defense Health Agency, and the intelligence community.”The contractors provide round the clock coverage on three, eight-hour shifts every single day, monitoring the network for any possible outages or attacks from inside or outside the network. Those contracts are set to expire on June 21; while there is time to renew them, it’s not clear who is authorized to do so or knows how, since the entire office that oversees the process is no longer working at HHS.Adding to the threat is the decision by the General Service Administration to terminate the lease for the CSIRC in Atlanta, effective December 31, 2025.Many of the cybersecurity and monitoring tools the contractors use to monitor the networks are also due for renewal in the coming months.If the situation is not addressed, “pretty soon, the department will be completely open to external actors to get at the largest databases in the world that have all of our public health information in them, our sensitive drug testing clinical trial information at the NIH or FDA, or different organizations’ mental health records,” the source claims, echoing the opinions of other sources who spoke to WIRED.In the weeks leading up to the RIF, some administrative staff did have interactions with Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) operatives, including Clark Minor, a software engineer who worked at Palantir for over a decade and was recently installed as the department’s chief information officer.As one employee was detailing the work they did at the OCIO, they said, they got the sense that Minor—whose online resume does not detail any experience in the federal government—seemed overwhelmed by the sheer scale of HHS, an agency that accounted for over a quarter of federal spending in 2024 and consists of an almost innumerable amount of offices and staff and operating divisions.Minor has not provided guidance to the remaining HHS staff on the transition, according to two sources still at the agency.Minor did not respond to a request for comment from WIRED.Some internal systems are already breaking down, according to sources still working at HHS. One employee, who facilitates travel for HHS employees, says the RIF “set federal travel back to processes that were in place prior to the first Electronic Travel System contract in 2004.”

Lighting and materials are by far the thing I struggle with the most when it comes to my animations. For example, how do you guys usually light an indoor scene without relying on a million point lights 😩 I feel like my efforts in this animation have created a super orange-y look to the restaurant scene. submitted by /u/VossaDova [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Sufficient-Bid1279 [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Pretend-Travel9478 [link] [comments]

Tesla (TSLA) is back in the spotlight after Swedish billionaire and hedge fund manager Christer Gardell issued a dramatic warning, predicting the stock could collapse by 95%. Speaking to EFN, Gardell criticized Tesla’s current valuation as “incomprehensible,” citing weakening demand, ongoing controversies surrounding Elon Musk, and production woes with the Cybertruck as major red flags. While he didn’t specify a timeline of a potential crash, Gardell cautioned that it’s inevitable and could be severe. Notably, Christer Gardell is the founder of Cevian Capital, one of Europe’s largest and most influential activist hedge funds. Gardell Flags Tesla’s Sky-High Valuation Tesla’s market capitalization currently sits in the hundreds of billions, but Gardell argues that this valuation is detached from the company’s core fundamentals. Gardell further stated that Tesla is probably the most overvalued stock on global markets, particularly given the ongoing political drama and backlash surrounding Musk. Furthermore, Gardell stressed that, fundamentally, Tesla remains an automaker, despite its expansion into robotics and AI. Therefore, compared to its auto industry peers, its stock is vastly overvalued. According to Companies Market Cap, Tesla’s valuation is more than three times that of major automakers like Toyota (TM) and Volkswagen (VWAPY). However, Tesla’s recent sales trends underperformed, showing declines across all major markets. Gardell also highlighted the poor performance of Tesla’s Cybertrucks. While Musk initially projected annual sales of 500,000 units, current figures indicate the model has not reached 10% of that target. To drive sales, Tesla has had to revise its financing options and offer more competitive interest rates to attract buyers. Is Tesla Stock a Buy Now? On Wall Street, analysts have maintained a neutral stance on Tesla stock. According to TipRanks, TSLA stock has received a Hold consensus rating, with 16 Buys, 11 Holds, and 11 Sells assigned in the last three months. The average price target for Tesla shares is $305.93, suggesting a potential upside of 21.3% from the current level. Year-to-date, TSLA stock has plunged over 37%. See more TSLA analyst ratings Disclaimer & DisclosureReport an Issue

Pro-Palestine protesters in front of Meta headquarters on November 3, 2023. Photo by Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images.A sweeping crackdown on posts on Instagram and Facebook that are critical of Israel—or even vaguely supportive of Palestinians—was directly orchestrated by the government of Israel, according to internal Meta data obtained by Drop Site News. The data show that Meta has complied with 94% of takedown requests issued by Israel since October 7, 2023. Israel is the biggest originator of takedown requests globally by far, and Meta has followed suit—widening the net of posts it automatically removes, and creating what can be called the largest mass censorship operation in modern history.Government requests for takedowns generally focus on posts made by citizens inside that government’s borders, Meta insiders said. What makes Israel’s campaign unique is its success in censoring speech in many countries outside of Israel. What’s more, Israel's censorship project will echo well into the future, insiders said, as the AI program Meta is currently training how to moderate content will base future decisions on the successful takedown of content critical of Israel’s genocide.To support Drop Site’s investigations, become a free or paid subscriber.The data, compiled and provided to Drop Site News by whistleblowers, reveal the internal mechanics of Meta’s “Integrity Organization”—an organization within Meta dedicated to ensuring the safety and authenticity on its platforms. Takedown requests (TDRs) allow individuals, organizations, and government officials to request the removal of content that allegedly violates Meta’s policies. The documents indicate that the vast majority of Israel’s requests—95%—fall under Meta’s “terrorism” or “violence and incitement” categories. And Israel’s requests have overwhelmingly targeted users from Arab and Muslim-majority nations in a massive effort to silence criticism of Israel.Multiple independent sources inside Meta confirmed the authenticity of the information provided by the whistleblowers. The data also show that Meta removed over 90,000 posts to comply with TDRs submitted by the Israeli government in an average of 30 seconds. Meta also significantly expanded automated takedowns since October 7, resulting in an estimated 38.8 million additional posts being “actioned upon” across Facebook and Instagram since late 2023. “Actioned upon” in Facebook terms means that a post was either removed, banned, or suppressed.Number of posts reported by the Israeli government over time, by country of post origin. Obtained by Drop Site News.Number of posts actioned upon by Meta over time, by country of post origin. Obtained by Drop Site News. Takedown RequestsAll of the Israeli government’s TDRs post-October 7th contain the exact same complaint text, according to the leaked information, regardless of the substance of the underlying content being challenged. Sources said that not a single Israeli TDR describes the exact nature of the content being reported, even though the requests link to an average of 15 different pieces of content. Instead, the reports simply state, in addition to a description of the October 7th attacks, that:This is an urgent request regarding videos posted on Facebook which contain inciting content. The file attached to this request contains link [sic] to content which violated articles 24(a) and 24(b) of the Israeli Counter-Terrorism Act (2016), which prohibits incitement to terrorism praise for acts of terrorism and identification or support of terror organizations. Moreover, several of the links violate article 2(4) of the Privacy Protection Act (1982), which prohibits publishing images in circumstances that could humiliate the person depicted, as they contain images of the killed, injured, and kidnapped. Additionally, to our understanding, the content in the attached report violates Facebook’s community standards.Meta's content enforcement system processes user-submitted reports through different pathways, depending on who is reporting it. Regular users can report posts via the platform’s built-in reporting function, triggering a review. Reported posts are typically first labeled as violating or non-violating by machine-learning models, though sometimes human moderators review them as well. If the AI assigns a high confidence score indicating a violation, the post is removed automatically. If the confidence score is low, human moderators review the post before deciding whether to take action.Governments and organizations, on the other hand, have privileged channels to trigger content review. Reports submitted through these channels receive higher priority and are almost always reviewed by human moderators rather than AI. Once reviewed by humans, the reviews are fed back into Meta’s AI system to help it better assess similar content in the future. While everyday users can also file TDRs, they are rarely acted upon. Government-submitted TDRs are far more likely to result in content removal.Meta has overwhelmingly complied with Israel’s requests, making an exception for the government account by taking down posts without human reviews, according to the whistleblowers, while still feeding that data back into Meta’s AI. A Human Rights Watch (HRW) report investigating Meta’s moderation of pro-Palestine content post-October 7th found that, of 1,050 posts HRW documented as taken-down or suppressed on Facebook or Instagram, 1,049 involved peaceful content in support of Palestine, while just one post was content in support of Israel.A source within Meta’s Integrity Organization confirmed that internal reviews of their automated moderation found that pro-Palestinian content that did not violate Meta’s policies was frequently removed. In other cases, pro-Palestinian content that should have been simply removed was given a “strike,” which indicates a more serious offense. Should a single account receive too many strikes on content that it publishes, the entire account can be removed from Meta platforms.When concerns about overenforcement against pro-Palestinian content were raised inside the Integrity Organization, the source said, leadership responded by saying that they preferred to overenforce against potentially violating content, rather than underenforce and risk leaving violating content live on Meta platforms.Remove, Strike, SuspendWithin Meta, several key leadership positions are filled by figures with personal connections to the Israeli government. The Integrity Organization is run by Guy Rosen, a former Israeli military official who served in the Israeli military’s signals intelligence unit, Unit 8200. Rosen was the founder of Onavo, a web analytics and VPN firm that then-Facebook acquired in October 2013. (Previous reporting has revealed that, prior to acquiring the company, Facebook used data Onavo collected from their VPN users to monitor the performance of competitors—part of the anti-competitive behavior alleged by the Federal Trade Commission under the Biden administration in its suit against Meta.)Rosen’s Integrity Organization works synergistically with Meta’s Policy Organization, according to employees. The Policy Organization sets the rules, and the Integrity Organization enforces them—but the two feed one another, they said. “Policy changes are often driven by data from the integrity org,” explained one Meta employee. As of this year, Joel Kaplan replaced Nick Clegg as the head of the Policy Organization. Kaplan is a former Bush administration official who has worked with Israeli officials in the past on fighting “online incitement.”Meta’s Director of Public Policy for Israel and the Jewish Diaspora, Jordana Cutler, has also intervened to investigate pro-Palestine content. Cutler is a former senior Israeli government official and advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Cutler has reportedly used her role to flag pro-Palestine content. According to internal communications reviewed by Drop Site, as recently as March, Cutler actively instructed employees of the company to search for and review content mentioning Ghassan Kanafani, an Arab novelist considered to be a pioneer of Palestinian literature. Immediately prior to joining Meta as a senior policymaker, she spent nearly three years as Chief of Staff at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C—and nearly five years serving as deputy to one of Netanyahu’s senior advisors, before becoming Netanyahu’s advisor on Diaspora Affairs.According to internal information reviewed by Drop Site, Cutler has continued to demand the review of content related to Kanafani under Meta’s policy “Glorification, Support or Representation” of individuals or organizations “that proclaim a violent mission or are engaged in violence to have a presence on our platforms.” Kanafani, who was killed in a 1972 car bombing orchestrated by the Mossad, served as a spokesperson for the left-wing Palestinian nationalist group, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). The PFLP was designated as a terrorist group over a quarter century after he was killed, which, according to Meta’s guidelines and Cutler’s efforts, serves as a basis to flag his content for removal, strikes, and possible suspension.Global ScopeThe leaked documents reveal that Israel’s takedown requests have overwhelmingly targeted users from Arab and Muslim-majority nations, with the top 12 countries affected being: Egypt (21.1%), Jordan (16.6%), Palestine (15.6%), Algeria (8.2%), Yemen (7.5%), Tunisia (3.3%), Morocco (2.9%), Saudi Arabia (2.7%), Lebanon (2.6%), Iraq (2.6%), Syria (2%), Turkey (1.5%). In total, users from over 60 countries have reported censorship of content related to Palestine, according to Human Rights Watch—with posts being removed, accounts suspended, and visibility reduced through shadow banning.Notably, only 1.3% of Israel’s takedown requests target Israeli users, making Israel an outlier among governments that typically focus their censorship efforts on their own citizens. For example, 63% of Malaysia’s takedown requests target Malaysian content, and 95% of Brazil’s requests target Brazilian content. Israel, however, has turned its censorship efforts outward, focusing on silencing critics and narratives that challenge its policies, particularly in the context of the ongoing conflict in Gaza and the West Bank.Despite Meta’s awareness of Israel’s aggressive censorship tactics for at least seven years, according to Meta whistleblowers, the company has failed to curb the abuse. Instead, one said, the company “actively provided the Israeli government with a legal entry-point for carrying out its mass censorship campaign.”Leave a comment

submitted by /u/BuffBaby_3D [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/SheridanR1_AR [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/emergency_nine_nines [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Logical_Welder3467 [link] [comments]

The exemption of smartphones, laptops and other electronic products from import tariffs on China will be short-lived, top US officials have said, with Donald Trump warning that no one was “getting off the hook.”“There was no Tariff ‘exception’, Trump said in a social media post on Sunday. “These products are subject to the existing 20% Fentanyl Tariffs, and they are just moving to a different Tariff ‘bucket.’”In the post on his Truth Social platform, Trump promised to launch a national security trade investigation into the semiconductor sector and the “whole electronics supply chain”.“We will not be held hostage by other Countries, especially hostile trading Nations like China,” he added.The White House had announced on Friday the exclusion of some electronic products from steep reciprocal tariffs on China. US stock markets were expected to stage a recovery after the announcement. Shares in Apple and chip maker Nvidia were on course to soar after tariffs on their products imported into the US were lifted for 90 days.However, Trump’s commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, said on Sunday that critical technology products from China would face separate new duties along with semiconductors within the next two months.Lutnick said Trump would enact “a special focus-type of tariff” on smartphones, computers and other electronics products in a month or two, alongside sectoral tariffs targeting semiconductors and pharmaceuticals. The new duties would fall outside Trump’s so-called reciprocal tariffs on China, he said.“He’s saying they’re exempt from the reciprocal tariffs, but they’re included in the semiconductor tariffs, which are coming in probably a month or two,” Lutnick said in an interview on ABC, predicting that the levies would bring production of those products to the United States. “These are things that are national security, that we need to be made in America.”The world’s two largest economies have been locked in a fast-moving game of brinkmanship since Trump launched a global tariff assault that particularly targeted Chinese imports.Tit-for-tat exchanges have seen US levies imposed on China rise to 145%, and Beijing setting a retaliatory 125% levy on US imports.Trump’s back-and-forth on tariffs triggered the wildest swings on Wall Street since the Covid pandemic of 2020. The benchmark Standard & Poor’s 500 index is down more than 10% since Trump took office on 20 January.After announcing sweeping import taxes on dozens of trade partners, Trump abruptly issued a 90-day pause for most of them. China was excluded from the reprieve.The fallout from Trump’s tariffs – and subsequent whiplash policy reversals – sent shock waves through the US economy, with investors dumping government bonds, the dollar tumbling and consumer confidence plunging.US senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat, criticised the latest revision to Trump’s tariff plan, which economists have warned could dent economic growth and fuel inflation.“There is no tariff policy – only chaos and corruption,” Warren said on ABC’s “This Week,” speaking before Trump’s latest post on social media.Beijing’s commerce ministry had said Friday’s move to exempt some electronic products only “represents a small step” and insisted that the Trump administration should “completely cancel” the whole tariff strategy.China has sought to strengthen ties with neighbouring countries amid the escalating trade war. Chinese president, Xi Jinping, will visit Vietnam on Monday as he begins a tour of south-east Asia.With Reuters and Agence France-Presse

submitted by /u/Sad_Cause8129 [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/ControlCAD [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/artben777 [link] [comments]