Social media companies are businesses and data is their asset. Now, Beijing has come up with a new idea, it is planning a new exchange- it's not to trade shares but data, yes, it's true!

Report: Data could become a tradable asset in China

President Joe Biden came away from his summit with China’s President Xi Jinping on Nov. 15 committed to prosecuting what he called “simple, straightforward competition” with China. Yet Beijing is already beating the United States and its allies in one crucial domain: data.

Data is the oil of the 21st century, the indispensable resource that will fuel artificial-intelligence algorithms, economic strength and national power. The wellspring of this data is all of us: our health records and genetic sequences, our online habits, the supply chain flows of our businesses, the terabytes of imagery guzzled by phones, drones and autonomous cars.

The competition for global influence in the 21st century will require protecting and harnessing this data to achieve commercial, technological and military advantages. So far, China is winning, and the West is barely even engaged.

Through a latticework of recent laws and regulations, Mr. Xi has been hard at work making the Chinese Communist Party the world’s most powerful data broker. How does Beijing do that? By walling Chinese data off from the world, exerting new extraterritorial power over global data flows and putting foreign companies operating in China in a legal bind — all while absorbing other countries’ data by means licit and illicit.

Mr. Xi knows that even locking down only Chinese data, representing the patterns and behavior of some 1.4 billion people, would hobble Beijing’s rivals in the quest for global economic superiority.

The Biden administration has spoken about the importance of data in our competition with China. But no visible strategy has emerged. That threatens Americans’ privacy, economic competitiveness, national security and future global standing. This will be a major test of America’s China policy in 2022.

Washington’s blind spot to the centrality of big data in Beijing’s ambitions and to the ways our own data are being exploited in service of those ambitions is perplexing at a time when American politicians are growing more concerned about the collection and potential exploitation of big data by U.S. tech giants.

It is further perplexing because Americans in bipartisan fashion also are wising up to the ways that Beijing exploits and weaponizes other U.S. resources, like our capital markets.

That’s evident in how Washington is finally — if fitfully — beginning to address the self-destructive flow of U.S. dollars into China’s military and global surveillance apparatus. While these sorts of measures still need to be scaled up dramatically, at least policymakers now have some tools to curb Beijing’s easy access to U.S. capital.

Not so when it comes to data, where Beijing believes that it has a free hand and that the West is too distracted or feckless to respond meaningfully. Mr. Xi is thinking and acting big, and has been since his first days in power.

In 2013, shortly after assuming the presidency in Beijing, Mr. Xi declared: “The vast ocean of data, just like oil resources during industrialization, contains immense productive power and opportunities. Whoever controls big data technologies will control the resources for development and have the upper hand.”

Since then, Beijing has been building the framework to ensure that mass accumulations of data serve the Chinese Communist Party’s strategic interests.

A series of laws implemented in 2017 asserted the party’s power to gain access to private data on Chinese networks, whether in China or associated with Chinese firms such as Huawei overseas.

Now Beijing has quietly enacted a new set of laws — first the Data Security Law in September, followed in November by the Personal Information Protection Law — that go even further by demanding not just access to private data but also effective control over it.

This has a huge impact on foreign firms operating in China. Not only must their Chinese data stay in China and be accessible by the state, but Beijing now demands control over whether they can send it to their own headquarters; to a corporate lab in, say, California; or to a foreign government that has made a law enforcement or regulatory request.

Beijing’s new laws may make it criminal to comply with foreign sanctions against China that involve data — like shutting off banking or cloud services to a Chinese entity linked to human rights atrocities. In these cases, foreign firms can comply with U.S. law, or they can comply with Chinese law, but not both.

The impact of these laws is clear. Tesla, Apple and others have opted to build dedicated Chinese data centers — sometimes in partnership with Chinese state entities, lest they lose access to the large Chinese consumer market. Goldman Sachs faced pressure against sending memos to its U.S. headquarters.

Beijing’s recent actions complement its longstanding efforts to buy, steal and otherwise acquire data from foreign sources worldwide. Beijing hacks multinational corporate databases. It runs “talent recruitment” programs at foreign universities and firms. It buys foreign companies, such as an Italian maker of military drones. It funds its own data-driven start-ups in open foreign markets like Silicon Valley.

The approach is nakedly nonreciprocal. It relies on access to foreign data while denying foreigners access to Chinese data — and appears to assume that foreign governments won’t respond. The United States, after all, has no comprehensive federal approach to data governance, while the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation is focused mostly on consumer privacy.

Will American and allied policymakers develop approaches to limit strategic data flows to China? For now, the Biden administration’s answer is: maybe.

“Our strategic competitors see big data as a strategic asset,” the U.S. national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said this summer, “and we have to see it the same way.”

This is clear and compelling language. But data did not appear to be high on Mr. Biden’s agenda with Mr. Xi, judging from official readouts of the summit.

And to date, U.S. policy remedies are idle and insufficient.

In June, the administration issued an executive order embracing a new regulatory process to restrict cross-border data flows on national security grounds. But the new process hasn’t yet been put to use — not against Chinese drones, Chinese access to U.S. data centers and biotech labs, or other potential targets.

In the meantime, U.S. diplomats’ and trade negotiators’ engagement on data issues is dominated by bitter fights with European regulators over privacy rules for American tech giants. The far greater threat from Beijing goes largely unaddressed.

The good news is that if democratic nations get their act together, they may be in a better position than Beijing, which complicates its own progress through apparent paranoia.

In recent months, Mr. Xi has cracked down on private Chinese tech giants such as Alibaba and Tencent, forcing them to relinquish their data troves to state-controlled third parties. This crackdown, which helped erase more than $1 trillion in market value, will make these companies less innovative now that they no longer control their data.

But banking on Chinese authoritarian overreach to preserve America’s edge is no strategy.

A smarter approach would begin domestically, with actual (and robust) implementation of the Biden administration’s June executive order. This would entail blocking or unwinding arrangements by which large volumes of sensitive U.S. data flow to China, whether through medical records, cellphone apps or other channels — all of which are basically unregulated right now.

Democratic allies must also work together to promote data sharing among themselves while limiting flows to China. A blueprint was introduced by former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan. This idea, called Data Free Flow With Trust, ought to become allied policy.

For upward of a generation, Beijing has been coldly effective in designing a strategy of global data mercantilism: data hoarding for me, data relinquishing for thee.

If Washington and its allies don’t organize a strong response, Mr. Xi will succeed in commanding the heights of future global power.

President Joe Biden came away from his summit with China’s President Xi Jinping on Nov. 15 committed to prosecuting what he called “simple, straightforward competition” with China.

President Joe Biden came away from his summit with China’s President Xi Jinping on Nov. 15 committed to prosecuting what he called “simple, straightforward competition” with China. Yet Beijing is already beating the United States and its allies in one crucial domain: data. Data is the oil of the 21st century, the indispensable resource that will fuel artificial-intelligence algorithms, economic strength and national power. The wellspring of this data is all of us: our health records and genetic sequences, our online habits, the supply chain flows of our businesses, the terabytes of imagery guzzled by phones, drones and autonomous cars. The competition for global influence in the 21st century will require protecting and harnessing this data to achieve commercial, technological and military advantages. So far, China is winning, and the West is barely even engaged. Through a latticework of recent laws and regulations, Mr. Xi has been hard at work making the Chinese Communist Party the world’s most powerful data broker. How does Beijing do that? By walling Chinese data off from the world, exerting new extraterritorial power over global data flows and putting foreign companies operating in China in a legal bind — all while absorbing other countries’ data by means licit and illicit. Mr. Xi knows that even locking down only Chinese data, representing the patterns and behavior of some 1.4 billion people, would hobble Beijing’s rivals in the quest for global economic superiority. The Biden administration has spoken about the importance of data in our competition with China. But no visible strategy has emerged. That threatens Americans’ privacy, economic competitiveness, national security and future global standing. This will be a major test of America’s China policy in 2022. Washington’s blind spot to the centrality of big data in Beijing’s ambitions and to the ways our own data are being exploited in service of those ambitions is perplexing at a time when American politicians are growing more concerned about the collection and potential exploitation of big data by U.S. tech giants. It is further perplexing because Americans in bipartisan fashion also are wising up to the ways that Beijing exploits and weaponizes other U.S. resources, like our capital markets. That’s evident in how Washington is finally — if fitfully — beginning to address the self-destructive flow of U.S. dollars into China’s military and global surveillance apparatus. While these sorts of measures still need to be scaled up dramatically, at least policymakers now have some tools to curb Beijing’s easy access to U.S. capital. Not so when it comes to data, where Beijing believes that it has a free hand and that the West is too distracted or feckless to respond meaningfully. Mr. Xi is thinking and acting big, and has been since his first days in power. In 2013, shortly after assuming the presidency in Beijing, Mr. Xi declared: “The vast ocean of data, just like oil resources during industrialization, contains immense productive power and opportunities. Whoever controls big data technologies will control the resources for development and have the upper hand.” Since then, Beijing has been building the framework to ensure that mass accumulations of data serve the Chinese Communist Party’s strategic interests. A series of laws implemented in 2017 asserted the party’s power to gain access to private data on Chinese networks, whether in China or associated with Chinese firms such as Huawei overseas. Now Beijing has quietly enacted a new set of laws — first the Data Security Law in September, followed in November by the Personal Information Protection Law — that go even further by demanding not just access to private data but also effective control over it. This has a huge impact on foreign firms operating in China. Not only must their Chinese data stay in China and be accessible by the state, but Beijing now demands control over whether they can send it to their own headquarters; to a corporate lab in, say, California; or to a foreign government that has made a law enforcement or regulatory request. Beijing’s new laws may make it criminal to comply with foreign sanctions against China that involve data — like shutting off banking or cloud services to a Chinese entity linked to human rights atrocities. In these cases, foreign firms can comply with U.S. law, or they can comply with Chinese law, but not both. The impact of these laws is clear. Tesla, Apple and others have opted to build dedicated Chinese data centers — sometimes in partnership with Chinese state entities, lest they lose access to the large Chinese consumer market. Goldman Sachs faced pressure against sending memos to its U.S. headquarters. Beijing’s recent actions complement its longstanding efforts to buy, steal and otherwise acquire data from foreign sources worldwide. Beijing hacks multinational corporate databases. It runs “talent recruitment” programs at foreign universities and firms. It buys foreign companies, such as an Italian maker of military drones. It funds its own data-driven start-ups in open foreign markets like Silicon Valley. The approach is nakedly nonreciprocal. It relies on access to foreign data while denying foreigners access to Chinese data — and appears to assume that foreign governments won’t respond. The United States, after all, has no comprehensive federal approach to data governance, while the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation is focused mostly on consumer privacy. Will American and allied policymakers develop approaches to limit strategic data flows to China? For now, the Biden administration’s answer is: maybe. “Our strategic competitors see big data as a strategic asset,” the U.S. national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said this summer, “and we have to see it the same way.” This is clear and compelling language. But data did not appear to be high on Mr. Biden’s agenda with Mr. Xi, judging from official readouts of the summit. And to date, U.S. policy remedies are idle and insufficient. In June, the administration issued an executive order embracing a new regulatory process to restrict cross-border data flows on national security grounds. But the new process hasn’t yet been put to use — not against Chinese drones, Chinese access to U.S. data centers and biotech labs, or other potential targets. In the meantime, U.S. diplomats’ and trade negotiators’ engagement on data issues is dominated by bitter fights with European regulators over privacy rules for American tech giants. The far greater threat from Beijing goes largely unaddressed. The good news is that if democratic nations get their act together, they may be in a better position than Beijing, which complicates its own progress through apparent paranoia. In recent months, Mr. Xi has cracked down on private Chinese tech giants such as Alibaba and Tencent, forcing them to relinquish their data troves to state-controlled third parties. This crackdown, which helped erase more than $1 trillion in market value, will make these companies less innovative now that they no longer control their data. But banking on Chinese authoritarian overreach to preserve America’s edge is no strategy. A smarter approach would begin domestically, with actual (and robust) implementation of the Biden administration’s June executive order. This would entail blocking or unwinding arrangements by which large volumes of sensitive U.S. data flow to China, whether through medical records, cellphone apps or other channels — all of which are basically unregulated right now. Democratic allies must also work together to promote data sharing among themselves while limiting flows to China. A blueprint was introduced by former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan. This idea, called Data Free Flow With Trust, ought to become allied policy. For upward of a generation, Beijing has been coldly effective in designing a strategy of global data mercantilism: data hoarding for me, data relinquishing for thee. If Washington and its allies don’t organize a strong response, Mr. Xi will succeed in commanding the heights of future global power.

China, the most powerful data broker in the world, is winning the war against the US

Despite announcing changes to its advertising rules for children in July this year, Facebook (now called Meta) is still tracking and harvesting children`s personal data to fuel their advertising delivery system, a new research has shown.

The only difference is that the kids` targeting by Facebook is `optimised` by a highly-trained artificial intelligence (AI) `Delivery System`, according to a new report by non-profits Fairplay, Global Action Plan and Reset Australia.

"The replacement of targeting `selected by advertisers` with targeting `selected by an AI delivery system` does not represent a demonstrable improvement for children in the way that Facebook characterised in their announcement and reiterated at a US Senate committee hearing," the report mentioned.

"Given the predictive power of AI, this system may in fact be worse for children," the researchers argued.

On July 27, Facebook announced changes to its advertising rules for children, claiming to have `heard from youth advocates` about these concerns. Facebook stated that "we agree with them, which is why we`re taking a more precautionary approach in how advertisers can reach young people".

This precautionary approach meant "that previously available targeting options, like those based on interests or on their activity on other apps and websites, will no longer be available to the advertisers".

The researchers said that they are calling on Facebook to go on record to correct its claims, and end surveillance advertising for children and teens across all its platforms.

"Data-driven advertising can be more misleading for children than traditional advertising and can increase commercial pressures, leading to consumerism, disappointment and parent-child conflict, all with associated consequences for mental health and wellbeing," they argued.

One estimate suggests that by the time a child turns 13, advertisers already hold over 72 million data points about him/her, and the surveillance advertising industry for children is worth in excess of $1 billion.

Facebook has faced strong international criticism for its surveillance advertising practices for children. Earlier this year, youth advocates in Australia and the US had outlined that Facebook`s targeting processes allowed advertisers to target children interested in alcohol, gambling and weight loss.

Facebook-owned Instagram had said last month that it would soon roll out two new tools to safeguard teenagers from harmful content, after whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before the US Congress that Instagram can have a negative effect on the mental health of teenagers.

The researchers stressed that Facebook`s ad delivery system continues to harvest teen data, for the sole purpose of serving them surveillance advertising, with all the associated concerns.

"Facebook must provide more transparency about the impacts of its recent rule changes in advertising to teens, and clarify if this is an improvement for children. It appears that young people`s personal data is still being harvested to deliver them a stream of even more personalised advertising with all of the associated risks," the research team noted.

Despite announcing changes to its advertising rules for children in July this year, Facebook (now called Meta) is still tracking and harvesting children`s personal data to fuel their advertising delivery system, a new research has shown.

Despite announcing changes to its advertising rules for children in July this year, Facebook (now called Meta) is still tracking and harvesting children`s personal data to fuel their advertising delivery system, a new research has shown. The only difference is that the kids` targeting by Facebook is `optimised` by a highly-trained artificial intelligence (AI) `Delivery System`, according to a new report by non-profits Fairplay, Global Action Plan and Reset Australia. "The replacement of targeting `selected by advertisers` with targeting `selected by an AI delivery system` does not represent a demonstrable improvement for children in the way that Facebook characterised in their announcement and reiterated at a US Senate committee hearing," the report mentioned. "Given the predictive power of AI, this system may in fact be worse for children," the researchers argued. On July 27, Facebook announced changes to its advertising rules for children, claiming to have `heard from youth advocates` about these concerns. Facebook stated that "we agree with them, which is why we`re taking a more precautionary approach in how advertisers can reach young people". This precautionary approach meant "that previously available targeting options, like those based on interests or on their activity on other apps and websites, will no longer be available to the advertisers". The researchers said that they are calling on Facebook to go on record to correct its claims, and end surveillance advertising for children and teens across all its platforms. "Data-driven advertising can be more misleading for children than traditional advertising and can increase commercial pressures, leading to consumerism, disappointment and parent-child conflict, all with associated consequences for mental health and wellbeing," they argued. One estimate suggests that by the time a child turns 13, advertisers already hold over 72 million data points about him/her, and the surveillance advertising industry for children is worth in excess of $1 billion. Facebook has faced strong international criticism for its surveillance advertising practices for children. Earlier this year, youth advocates in Australia and the US had outlined that Facebook`s targeting processes allowed advertisers to target children interested in alcohol, gambling and weight loss. Facebook-owned Instagram had said last month that it would soon roll out two new tools to safeguard teenagers from harmful content, after whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before the US Congress that Instagram can have a negative effect on the mental health of teenagers. The researchers stressed that Facebook`s ad delivery system continues to harvest teen data, for the sole purpose of serving them surveillance advertising, with all the associated concerns. "Facebook must provide more transparency about the impacts of its recent rule changes in advertising to teens, and clarify if this is an improvement for children. It appears that young people`s personal data is still being harvested to deliver them a stream of even more personalised advertising with all of the associated risks," the research team noted.

Facebook still harvesting teen data to fuel ads, warns research

In a massive case of data breach, Robinhood Markets said that the personal information of about 7 million of its customers was compromised. This accounts for nearly one-third of its customers. In a statement, Robinhood said that the intruder obtained the email addresses of about 5 million people. Also, full names for a separate group of about 2 million were obtained.

"We also believe that for a more limited number of people—approximately 310 in total—additional personal information, including name, date of birth, and zip code, was exposed, with a subset of approximately 10 customers having more extensive account details revealed. We are in the process of making appropriate disclosures to affected people," the trading app said.

However, it believes that no Social Security, bank account or debit card numbers were exposed during the incident, nor that customers had to go through any financial loss.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/good-newwz-us-couple-sues-ivf-clinic-for-baby-mix-up-427874">Also read |&nbsp;'Good Newwz': US couple sues IVF clinic, for baby 'mix-up'</a>

A Robinhood spokesperson revealed that the hacker made threats about what would be done with the compromised information and demanded payment. The spokesperson has declined to say whether the firm paid the culprit.

Robinhood Chief Security Officer Caleb Sima said, "As a Safety First company, we owe it to our customers to be transparent and act with integrity."

&nbsp;“Following a diligent review, putting the entire Robinhood community on notice of this incident now is the right thing to do.”&nbsp;

The company has said that it has contained the breach, notified law enforcement and enlisted security firm Mandiant to investigate.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/world-business-watch-robinhood-app-hit-by-data-breach-exposing-email-of-5-million-customers-427893/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

In a massive case of data breach, Robinhood Markets said that the personal information of about 7 million of its customers was compromised. This accounts for nearly one-third of its customers.

In a massive case of data breach, Robinhood Markets said that the personal information of about 7 million of its customers was compromised. This accounts for nearly one-third of its customers. In a statement, Robinhood said that the intruder obtained the email addresses of about 5 million people. Also, full names for a separate group of about 2 million were obtained. "We also believe that for a more limited number of people—approximately 310 in total—additional personal information, including name, date of birth, and zip code, was exposed, with a subset of approximately 10 customers having more extensive account details revealed. We are in the process of making appropriate disclosures to affected people," the trading app said. However, it believes that no Social Security, bank account or debit card numbers were exposed during the incident, nor that customers had to go through any financial loss. Also read | 'Good Newwz': US couple sues IVF clinic, for baby 'mix-up' A Robinhood spokesperson revealed that the hacker made threats about what would be done with the compromised information and demanded payment. The spokesperson has declined to say whether the firm paid the culprit. Robinhood Chief Security Officer Caleb Sima said, "As a Safety First company, we owe it to our customers to be transparent and act with integrity." “Following a diligent review, putting the entire Robinhood community on notice of this incident now is the right thing to do.” The company has said that it has contained the breach, notified law enforcement and enlisted security firm Mandiant to investigate.

Robinhood app hit by data breach; Emails of 5 million customers compromised

Chinese tech giant Alibaba Group Holding Ltd said on Tuesday it has developed a processor that will be used to power servers in its data centers.

The development marks the latest foray into semiconductors for the company, mirroring moves from other global cloud computing players while also dovetailing with Chinese government's priorities to boost the nation's chip sector.

Also Read |<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/five-us-lawmakers-accuse-amazon-of-possibly-lying-to-congress-following-reuters-report-421811">&nbsp;Five US lawmakers accuse Amazon of possibly lying to Congress following Reuters report</a>

Developed by Alibaba's in-house semiconductor unit T-Head, the chip — the Yitian 710 — is based on architecture from UK-based Arm Ltd, and will not be available for commercial use outside of Alibaba.

Alibaba is the largest cloud computing provider in China by market share and the third-largest globally, according to research firm Gartner.

Its rivals in the sector have also released server chips of their own. Huawei Technologies Co Ltd and Amazon.com Inc rely on their respective Kunpeng and Graviton chips to power their cloud computing infrastructure.

Alibaba also said it has a developed proprietary line of servers, called Panjiu, and added that it will make the source code for its Xuantie series of IP cores — based on the RISC-V open source architecture — available to the public. Alibaba unveiled the Xuantie in 2019.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/exhausted-chinese-employees-start-worker-lives-matter-campaign-over-grueling-work-hours-421420">Exhausted Chinese employees start 'worker lives matter' campaign over grueling work hours</a>

China's government has long urged industry to invest in the domestic chip sector, which remains behind that of global counterparts.

The country remains reliant on overseas companies for much of its advanced semiconductors, a vulnerability brought forth when US&nbsp;sanctions against Huawei crippled that company`s booming smartphone business.

In addition to Alibaba, search giant Baidu Inc, phone maker Xiaomi Corp, and a number of Chinese automotive and appliance companies have begun investing in chips.

Chinese tech giant Alibaba Group Holding Ltd said on Tuesday it has developed a processor that will be used to power servers in its data centers. The development marks the latest foray into semiconductors for the company, mirroring moves from other global cloud computing players while also dovetailing with Chinese government's priorities to boost the nation's chip sector.

Chinese tech giant Alibaba Group Holding Ltd said on Tuesday it has developed a processor that will be used to power servers in its data centers. The development marks the latest foray into semiconductors for the company, mirroring moves from other global cloud computing players while also dovetailing with Chinese government's priorities to boost the nation's chip sector. Also Read | Five US lawmakers accuse Amazon of possibly lying to Congress following Reuters report Developed by Alibaba's in-house semiconductor unit T-Head, the chip — the Yitian 710 — is based on architecture from UK-based Arm Ltd, and will not be available for commercial use outside of Alibaba. Alibaba is the largest cloud computing provider in China by market share and the third-largest globally, according to research firm Gartner. Its rivals in the sector have also released server chips of their own. Huawei Technologies Co Ltd and Amazon.com Inc rely on their respective Kunpeng and Graviton chips to power their cloud computing infrastructure. Alibaba also said it has a developed proprietary line of servers, called Panjiu, and added that it will make the source code for its Xuantie series of IP cores — based on the RISC-V open source architecture — available to the public. Alibaba unveiled the Xuantie in 2019. Also Read | Exhausted Chinese employees start 'worker lives matter' campaign over grueling work hours China's government has long urged industry to invest in the domestic chip sector, which remains behind that of global counterparts. The country remains reliant on overseas companies for much of its advanced semiconductors, a vulnerability brought forth when US sanctions against Huawei crippled that company`s booming smartphone business. In addition to Alibaba, search giant Baidu Inc, phone maker Xiaomi Corp, and a number of Chinese automotive and appliance companies have begun investing in chips.

Alibaba unveils custom ARM-based server chip for cloud computing data centers

New data shows that September was the worst month in the US for new cases and deaths. Data from the American Academy of Pediatrics reveals that cases among children peaked in September, as many schools opened for offline classes amid growing cases of delta variant.

More than 6 million children have tested positive for COVID-19 since the beginning of the pandemic, with more than 1.1 million new cases recorded from September 3 to September 30.

The data has been obtained from individual states, which have varying definitions of “child.”

While some include 19-year-olds, West Virginia includes people up to age 20.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/pfizer-asks-us-government-to-allow-covid-vaccine-for-children-ages-5-11-418917">Also read |&nbsp;Pfizer asks US government to allow COVID vaccine for children ages 5-11</a>

A very small proportion of young children infected with COVID-19 get severely ill or die.&nbsp;

The weekly data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that COVID-19 deaths among children under age 15 also reached their highest level in September.&nbsp;

Recently, Pfizer has asked the US government to approve the use of its COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5 to 11 years old, and if regulators agree, injections may start within weeks. In a trial of children, Pfizer had previously declared that a lower dose of their vaccine worked and looked to be safe.

Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech officially submitted their application to the Food and Drug Administration on Thursday.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/france-stole-millions-of-covid-vaccines-from-uk-in-an-act-of-war-report-418646">Also read |&nbsp;France 'stole' millions of Covid vaccines from UK in an 'act of war': Report</a>

The data will be debated by FDA advisers later this month.

Last month, Pfizer submitted research to the US Food and Drug Administration on the effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine in children. Pfizer says it will also submit the data to the European Medicines Agency and other regulators.

New data shows that September was the worst month in the US for new cases and deaths. Data from the American Academy of Pediatrics reveals that cases among children peaked in September, as many schools opened for offline classes amid growing cases of delta variant.

New data shows that September was the worst month in the US for new cases and deaths. Data from the American Academy of Pediatrics reveals that cases among children peaked in September, as many schools opened for offline classes amid growing cases of delta variant. More than 6 million children have tested positive for COVID-19 since the beginning of the pandemic, with more than 1.1 million new cases recorded from September 3 to September 30. The data has been obtained from individual states, which have varying definitions of “child.” While some include 19-year-olds, West Virginia includes people up to age 20. Also read | Pfizer asks US government to allow COVID vaccine for children ages 5-11 A very small proportion of young children infected with COVID-19 get severely ill or die. The weekly data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that COVID-19 deaths among children under age 15 also reached their highest level in September. Recently, Pfizer has asked the US government to approve the use of its COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5 to 11 years old, and if regulators agree, injections may start within weeks. In a trial of children, Pfizer had previously declared that a lower dose of their vaccine worked and looked to be safe. Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech officially submitted their application to the Food and Drug Administration on Thursday. Also read | France 'stole' millions of Covid vaccines from UK in an 'act of war': Report The data will be debated by FDA advisers later this month. Last month, Pfizer submitted research to the US Food and Drug Administration on the effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine in children. Pfizer says it will also submit the data to the European Medicines Agency and other regulators.

US: COVID-19 cases among children peaked in September, shows data

The trial of patrol robots has sparked privacy concerns in Singapore. These robots are designed to blast warnings at people who are seen engaging in "undesirable social behaviour". &nbsp;

Singapore is seeing an explosion of tools to track inhabitants. These include CCTV cameras to lampposts kitted out with facial recognition tech.

Officials have long pushed for a vision of a hyper-efficient, tech-driven "smart nation". But this approach has drawn criticism from activists who say that privacy is being sacrificed&nbsp;and people have little control over what happens to their data.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/cosmic-music-check-out-nasa-post-on-heavenly-sounds-from-galaxys-centre-418128">'Cosmic Music': Check out NASA post on 'heavenly' sounds from galaxy's centre</a>

Singapore is frequently criticised for curbing civil liberties and people are accustomed to tight controls, but there is still growing unease at intrusive tech.

The government's latest surveillance devices are robots on wheels, with seven cameras, that issue warnings to the public and detect "undesirable social behaviour".

This includes smoking in prohibited areas, improperly parking bicycles, and breaching coronavirus social-distancing rules.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/before-chickens-early-humans-reared-one-of-the-most-dangerous-birds-study-417744">Before chickens, early humans reared one of the most dangerous birds: Study</a>

During a recent patrol, one of the "Xavier" robots wove its way through a housing estate and stopped in front of a group of elderly residents watching a chess match.

"Please keep one-metre distancing, please keep to five persons per group," a robotic voice blared out, as a camera on top of the machine trained its gaze on them.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/nasa-has-captured-image-of-eye-in-the-sky-418294">NASA has captured image of 'eye in the sky'</a>

During a three-week trial in September, two robots were deployed to patrol the housing estate and a shopping centre.

"It reminds me of Robocop," said Frannie Teo, a 34-year-old research assistant, who was walking through the mall.

It brings to mind a "dystopian world of robots... I'm just a bit hesitant about that kind of concept", she added.

(With inputs from agencies) 
&nbsp;

The trial of patrol robots has sparked privacy concerns in Singapore. These robots are designed to blast warnings at people who are seen engaging in "undesirable social behaviour".

The trial of patrol robots has sparked privacy concerns in Singapore. These robots are designed to blast warnings at people who are seen engaging in "undesirable social behaviour". Singapore is seeing an explosion of tools to track inhabitants. These include CCTV cameras to lampposts kitted out with facial recognition tech. Officials have long pushed for a vision of a hyper-efficient, tech-driven "smart nation". But this approach has drawn criticism from activists who say that privacy is being sacrificed and people have little control over what happens to their data. Also Read | 'Cosmic Music': Check out NASA post on 'heavenly' sounds from galaxy's centre Singapore is frequently criticised for curbing civil liberties and people are accustomed to tight controls, but there is still growing unease at intrusive tech. The government's latest surveillance devices are robots on wheels, with seven cameras, that issue warnings to the public and detect "undesirable social behaviour". This includes smoking in prohibited areas, improperly parking bicycles, and breaching coronavirus social-distancing rules. Also Read | Before chickens, early humans reared one of the most dangerous birds: Study During a recent patrol, one of the "Xavier" robots wove its way through a housing estate and stopped in front of a group of elderly residents watching a chess match. "Please keep one-metre distancing, please keep to five persons per group," a robotic voice blared out, as a camera on top of the machine trained its gaze on them. Also Read | NASA has captured image of 'eye in the sky' During a three-week trial in September, two robots were deployed to patrol the housing estate and a shopping centre. "It reminds me of Robocop," said Frannie Teo, a 34-year-old research assistant, who was walking through the mall. It brings to mind a "dystopian world of robots... I'm just a bit hesitant about that kind of concept", she added. (With inputs from agencies)

Singapore: Patrol robots seeking 'undesirable social behaviour' spark privacy concerns

UK government borrowing dropped in June with easing lockdown measures boosting the economy, official data showed Wednesday.

Public sector net borrowing slid to £22.8 billion ($31 billion, 26.4 billion euros) last month, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said in a statement.

Although down £5.5 billion compared with June 2020 when the UK was in a strict lockdown, the latest number was still the second highest June level on record.

A sizeable amount of the government's borrowing since the start of the pandemic has gone on a furlough scheme to pay the bulk of wages for millions of private sector workers.

"I'm proud of the unprecedented package of support we put in place to protect jobs and help thousands of businesses survive the pandemic, and that we are continuing to support those who need it," finance minister Rishi Sunak said following Wednesday's data.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/never-seen-this-before-britain-france-spain-witness-surge-in-covid-19-cases-399293">Also read |&nbsp;'Never seen this before': Britain, France &amp; Spain witness surge in COVID-19 cases&nbsp;</a>

"However, it's also right that we ensure debt remains under control."

An influential think tank on Wednesday warned that while government borrowing was set to come in lower than expected for the UK fiscal year to March 2022, Chancellor of the Exchequer Sunak was unlikely to be able to embark on a post-pandemic spending splurge.

"Permanent economic damage done by the pandemic and rising debt interest costs mean that... the chancellor has little, if any, additional headroom," the Institute for Fiscal Studies said in a report.

Economists reckon on interest rates rising sooner than expected as the reopening of economies pushes up inflation.

At the same time, the highly-transmissible Delta variant of the coronavirus is sweeping the globe and forcing some countries to reimpose restrictions.

But in England, the bulk of lockdown measures were lifted on Monday. Tougher restrictions remain across the rest of the UK.

UK government borrowing dropped in June with easing lockdown measures boosting the economy, official data showed Wednesday. Public sector net borrowing slid to £22.

UK government borrowing dropped in June with easing lockdown measures boosting the economy, official data showed Wednesday. Public sector net borrowing slid to £22.8 billion ($31 billion, 26.4 billion euros) last month, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said in a statement. Although down £5.5 billion compared with June 2020 when the UK was in a strict lockdown, the latest number was still the second highest June level on record. A sizeable amount of the government's borrowing since the start of the pandemic has gone on a furlough scheme to pay the bulk of wages for millions of private sector workers. "I'm proud of the unprecedented package of support we put in place to protect jobs and help thousands of businesses survive the pandemic, and that we are continuing to support those who need it," finance minister Rishi Sunak said following Wednesday's data. Also read | 'Never seen this before': Britain, France & Spain witness surge in COVID-19 cases "However, it's also right that we ensure debt remains under control." An influential think tank on Wednesday warned that while government borrowing was set to come in lower than expected for the UK fiscal year to March 2022, Chancellor of the Exchequer Sunak was unlikely to be able to embark on a post-pandemic spending splurge. "Permanent economic damage done by the pandemic and rising debt interest costs mean that... the chancellor has little, if any, additional headroom," the Institute for Fiscal Studies said in a report. Economists reckon on interest rates rising sooner than expected as the reopening of economies pushes up inflation. At the same time, the highly-transmissible Delta variant of the coronavirus is sweeping the globe and forcing some countries to reimpose restrictions. But in England, the bulk of lockdown measures were lifted on Monday. Tougher restrictions remain across the rest of the UK.

UK borrowing drops as lockdowns ease, reveals data

US&nbsp;tech giants Facebook Inc, Alphabet Inc's Google and Twitter Inc have privately warned the Hong Kong government that they could stop offering their services in the city if authorities proceed with planned changes to data-protection laws, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday, citing a letter.

The laws could make the tech companies liable for the malicious sharing of individuals' information online, the newspaper added.

A letter sent by an industry group that includes the internet firms said companies are concerned that the planned rules to address 'doxing' could put their staff at risk of criminal investigations or prosecutions related to what the firms' users post online, Journal reported.

Doxing is an act of revealing people's personal information such as real name, home address or workplace online without the user's permission.

Facebook, Google and Twitter did not immediately respond to requests for a comment.

Hong Kong's Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau in May proposed amendments to the city's data-protection laws that it said were needed to combat doxing, a practice that was prevalent during 2019 protests in the city, the newspaper said.

According to the newspaper, the letter dated June 25 was sent by Singapore-based Asia Internet Coalition.&nbsp;"The only way to avoid these sanctions for technology companies would be to refrain from investing and offering the services in Hong Kong," the Journal reported, quoting the letter.

(With inputs from agencies)

US tech giants Facebook Inc, Alphabet Inc's Google and Twitter Inc have privately warned the Hong Kong government that they could stop offering their services in the city if authorities proceed with planned changes to data-protection laws, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday, citing a letter.

US tech giants Facebook Inc, Alphabet Inc's Google and Twitter Inc have privately warned the Hong Kong government that they could stop offering their services in the city if authorities proceed with planned changes to data-protection laws, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday, citing a letter. The laws could make the tech companies liable for the malicious sharing of individuals' information online, the newspaper added. A letter sent by an industry group that includes the internet firms said companies are concerned that the planned rules to address 'doxing' could put their staff at risk of criminal investigations or prosecutions related to what the firms' users post online, Journal reported. Doxing is an act of revealing people's personal information such as real name, home address or workplace online without the user's permission. Facebook, Google and Twitter did not immediately respond to requests for a comment. Hong Kong's Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau in May proposed amendments to the city's data-protection laws that it said were needed to combat doxing, a practice that was prevalent during 2019 protests in the city, the newspaper said. According to the newspaper, the letter dated June 25 was sent by Singapore-based Asia Internet Coalition. "The only way to avoid these sanctions for technology companies would be to refrain from investing and offering the services in Hong Kong," the Journal reported, quoting the letter. (With inputs from agencies)

Facebook, Google, Twitter say could quit Hong Kong over proposed data laws: Report

China's ride hailing giant Didi Global Inc stores all China user and roads data at servers in the country and it is 'absolutely not possible' that the company passed data to the United States, a senior company executive said on Saturday. 
 
Didi Vice President Li Min also said the company would sue any social media users, who said the company transferred data during its recent initial public offering (IPO) process after claims were made on China's Twitter-like Weibo platform. 
 
China's cyberspace agency announced on Friday it had launched an investigation into Didi to protect national security and the public interest, just two days after the company began trading on the New York Stock Exchange. 
 
News of the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) probe, and the agency's decision to block Didi from registering new users during its investigation, knocked 5% off Beijing-based Didi's shares on Friday. 
 
"Like many overseas-listed Chinese companies, Didi stores all domestic user data at servers in China, it is absolutely not possible to pass data to the United States," Li said in a post on Weibo. 
 
Didi, which offers services in China and more than 15 international markets, gathers vast amounts of real-time mobility data every day. It uses some of the data for autonomous driving technologies and traffic analysis. 
 
Founded by Will Cheng in 2012, the company has already faced regulatory probes in China over safety and its operations licence.

The cyberspace agency did not give any indication of how the long the investigation would last or provide any other details. 
 
Didi said on Friday, it planned to conduct a comprehensive examination of cybersecurity risks and would cooperate fully with the relevant government authority. It also said apart from the suspension of new user registrations in China, it was operating normally. 
 
(With inputs from agencies)

China's ride hailing giant Didi Global Inc stores all China user and roads data at servers in the country and it is 'absolutely not possible' that the company passed data to the United States, a senior company executive said on Saturday.

China's ride hailing giant Didi Global Inc stores all China user and roads data at servers in the country and it is 'absolutely not possible' that the company passed data to the United States, a senior company executive said on Saturday. Didi Vice President Li Min also said the company would sue any social media users, who said the company transferred data during its recent initial public offering (IPO) process after claims were made on China's Twitter-like Weibo platform. China's cyberspace agency announced on Friday it had launched an investigation into Didi to protect national security and the public interest, just two days after the company began trading on the New York Stock Exchange. News of the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) probe, and the agency's decision to block Didi from registering new users during its investigation, knocked 5% off Beijing-based Didi's shares on Friday. "Like many overseas-listed Chinese companies, Didi stores all domestic user data at servers in China, it is absolutely not possible to pass data to the United States," Li said in a post on Weibo. Didi, which offers services in China and more than 15 international markets, gathers vast amounts of real-time mobility data every day. It uses some of the data for autonomous driving technologies and traffic analysis. Founded by Will Cheng in 2012, the company has already faced regulatory probes in China over safety and its operations licence. The cyberspace agency did not give any indication of how the long the investigation would last or provide any other details. Didi said on Friday, it planned to conduct a comprehensive examination of cybersecurity risks and would cooperate fully with the relevant government authority. It also said apart from the suspension of new user registrations in China, it was operating normally. (With inputs from agencies)

Didi says stores all user and roads data at servers in China

Hackers have stolen data on about 4.5 million Air India passengers around the world in the latest breach reported by a major airline.

Names, credit card numbers and passport information were among the data stolen, Air India said in a statement released late Friday.

The state-owned giant said it was "securing the compromised servers" and using "external specialists" on data security as well as working with credit card companies.

"We deeply regret the inconvenience caused and appreciate continued support and trust of our passengers," the airline said.

A number of airlines have been hit by data breaches in recent years. British Airways was fined $28 million last year by a British watchdog after details of 400,000 passengers were lost in a 2018 cyberattack.

Cathay Pacific was fined $700,000 after details of more than nine million clients were lost in 2018.

And low-cost carrier EasyJet said last year that hackers had taken the email and travel details of about nine million customers.

Air India announced in March that it had been informed in February by its data processing company, SITA PSS of a cyberattack.

The breach involved personal data registered between August 2011 and February 2021, the airline said.

SITA, which provides IT backup to much of the aviation industry, said at the time that it had been the target of a "highly sophisticated attack" that had affected a number of airlines.

Air India is part of the Star Alliance coalition of airlines and SITA handles computer operations for its frequent flyer programme.

Other airlines in the alliance warned passengers in March of the cyberattack but most said only names and frequent flyer numbers had been accessed.

Hackers have stolen data on about 4.5 million Air India passengers around the world in the latest breach reported by a major airline. Names, credit card numbers and passport information were among the data stolen, Air India said in a statement released late Friday.

Hackers have stolen data on about 4.5 million Air India passengers around the world in the latest breach reported by a major airline. Names, credit card numbers and passport information were among the data stolen, Air India said in a statement released late Friday. The state-owned giant said it was "securing the compromised servers" and using "external specialists" on data security as well as working with credit card companies. "We deeply regret the inconvenience caused and appreciate continued support and trust of our passengers," the airline said. A number of airlines have been hit by data breaches in recent years. British Airways was fined $28 million last year by a British watchdog after details of 400,000 passengers were lost in a 2018 cyberattack. Cathay Pacific was fined $700,000 after details of more than nine million clients were lost in 2018. And low-cost carrier EasyJet said last year that hackers had taken the email and travel details of about nine million customers. Air India announced in March that it had been informed in February by its data processing company, SITA PSS of a cyberattack. The breach involved personal data registered between August 2011 and February 2021, the airline said. SITA, which provides IT backup to much of the aviation industry, said at the time that it had been the target of a "highly sophisticated attack" that had affected a number of airlines. Air India is part of the Star Alliance coalition of airlines and SITA handles computer operations for its frequent flyer programme. Other airlines in the alliance warned passengers in March of the cyberattack but most said only names and frequent flyer numbers had been accessed.

Air India says data on 4.5 million passengers stolen

Out of the 740 million users that are now part of the LinkedIn service, Data from over 500 million users is being sold online to hackers, marking the second major cybersecurity incident to be revealed in the past week, following news of a similar occurrence involving Facebook.&nbsp;

&nbsp;An archive with data purportedly scraped from 500 million LinkedIn profiles has been put for sale on a popular hacker forum, with another 2 million records leaked as a proof-of-concept sample by people behind the hack.

"The four leaked files contain information about the LinkedIn users whose data has been allegedly scraped by the threat actor, including their full names, email addresses, phone numbers, workplace information, and more," reports CyberNews.

The leaked data up on sale includes LinkedIn IDs, full names, email addresses, phone numbers, genders, links to LinkedIn profiles, links to other social media profiles, professional titles and other work-related data

"While users on the hacker forum can view the leaked samples for about $2 worth of forum credits, the threat actor appears to be auctioning the much-larger 500 million user database for at least a 4-digit sum, presumably in bitcoin," the report mentioned.

LinkedIn said in a statement on Thursday that it has "investigated an alleged set of LinkedIn data that has been posted for sale and have determined that it is an aggregation of data from several websites and companies".

"It does include publicly viewable member profile data that appears to have been scraped from LinkedIn. This was not a LinkedIn data breach, and no private member account data from LinkedIn was included in what we've been able to review," the company said.

"When anyone tries to take member data and use it for purposes LinkedIn and our members haven't agreed to, we work to stop them and hold them accountable".

The author of the post, however, claims that the data was scraped from LinkedIn.

Earlier this month, personal data of nearly 533 million (53.3 crores) Facebook users, including 61 lakh Indians, emerged online after a hacker posted the details on a digital forum.

The leaked data included Facebook ID numbers, profile names, email addresses, location information, gender details, job data, and other details.

Facebook said this was old data that it previously reported on in 2019.

"We found and fixed this issue in August 2019," a Facebook spokesperson said.

(With inputs from agencies)

Out of the 740 million users that are now part of the LinkedIn service, Data from over 500 million users is being sold online to hackers, marking the second major cybersecurity incident to be revealed in the past week, following news of a similar occurrence involving Facebook.

Out of the 740 million users that are now part of the LinkedIn service, Data from over 500 million users is being sold online to hackers, marking the second major cybersecurity incident to be revealed in the past week, following news of a similar occurrence involving Facebook. An archive with data purportedly scraped from 500 million LinkedIn profiles has been put for sale on a popular hacker forum, with another 2 million records leaked as a proof-of-concept sample by people behind the hack. "The four leaked files contain information about the LinkedIn users whose data has been allegedly scraped by the threat actor, including their full names, email addresses, phone numbers, workplace information, and more," reports CyberNews. The leaked data up on sale includes LinkedIn IDs, full names, email addresses, phone numbers, genders, links to LinkedIn profiles, links to other social media profiles, professional titles and other work-related data "While users on the hacker forum can view the leaked samples for about $2 worth of forum credits, the threat actor appears to be auctioning the much-larger 500 million user database for at least a 4-digit sum, presumably in bitcoin," the report mentioned. LinkedIn said in a statement on Thursday that it has "investigated an alleged set of LinkedIn data that has been posted for sale and have determined that it is an aggregation of data from several websites and companies". "It does include publicly viewable member profile data that appears to have been scraped from LinkedIn. This was not a LinkedIn data breach, and no private member account data from LinkedIn was included in what we've been able to review," the company said. "When anyone tries to take member data and use it for purposes LinkedIn and our members haven't agreed to, we work to stop them and hold them accountable". The author of the post, however, claims that the data was scraped from LinkedIn. Earlier this month, personal data of nearly 533 million (53.3 crores) Facebook users, including 61 lakh Indians, emerged online after a hacker posted the details on a digital forum. The leaked data included Facebook ID numbers, profile names, email addresses, location information, gender details, job data, and other details. Facebook said this was old data that it previously reported on in 2019. "We found and fixed this issue in August 2019," a Facebook spokesperson said. (With inputs from agencies)

Data from half a billion LinkedIn users leaked and put online

In major news from Google, the company announced on Wednesday that it will no longer save the complete record of searches made by new users.

For a long time, the company has been criticised for being hooded in terms of sharing what it does with user data. On the other hand, its rival Apple has managed a better and more privacy-oriented record on this front.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="/world/apple-google-amazon-take-aim-at-trump-visa-ban-308029" hreflang="en">Apple, Google, Amazon take aim at Trump visa ban</a>

As per Chief Executive Sundar Pichai, all saved data of new users will be deleted 18 months after they join. Earlier, the information was stored on its servers forever, which the company claimed was done to improve user experience and to offer personalisation.

All information of people, even the ones who had opted to storing all of their history will now no longer be lodged into Google’s system forever, but instead will deleted after 18 months by default.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="/world/google-extends-fact-checking-to-image-search-307990" hreflang="en">Google extends fact-checking to image search</a>

“As we design our products, we focus on three important principles: keeping your information safe, treating it responsibly, and putting you in control”, Pichai said.&nbsp;However, this auto-deletion system will not apply to Gmail and Google Photos, which are designed to store personal content.

Introduced as an option last year, the feature allows users to continue using its “smart” services, without the need to store the record of their web activity. However, people who already have a Google account, exactly 1.5 billion of them, need to manually turn enable the feature.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="/technology/google-launches-experimental-app-keen-resembling-pinterest-307128" hreflang="en">Google launches experimental app 'Keen' resembling Pinterest</a>

Google already has, and is expected to roll out emails reminding users to complete a “privacy check-up”, which in essence is a confirmation from the company on whether users would like their data to be stored.

Google’s rival, Apple Inc follows a model which relies very little on private data. In its most recent OS release, Apple announced another useful feature with minimal dependence on user data, which will translate for users fully offline.&nbsp;Google’s new feature runs differently, for it will allow the company to gather data, but not indefinitely.

In major news from Google, the company announced on Wednesday that it will no longer save the complete record of searches made by new users. For a long time, the company has been criticised for being hooded in terms of sharing what it does with user data.

In major news from Google, the company announced on Wednesday that it will no longer save the complete record of searches made by new users. For a long time, the company has been criticised for being hooded in terms of sharing what it does with user data. On the other hand, its rival Apple has managed a better and more privacy-oriented record on this front. Also read: Apple, Google, Amazon take aim at Trump visa ban As per Chief Executive Sundar Pichai, all saved data of new users will be deleted 18 months after they join. Earlier, the information was stored on its servers forever, which the company claimed was done to improve user experience and to offer personalisation. All information of people, even the ones who had opted to storing all of their history will now no longer be lodged into Google’s system forever, but instead will deleted after 18 months by default. Also read: Google extends fact-checking to image search “As we design our products, we focus on three important principles: keeping your information safe, treating it responsibly, and putting you in control”, Pichai said. However, this auto-deletion system will not apply to Gmail and Google Photos, which are designed to store personal content. Introduced as an option last year, the feature allows users to continue using its “smart” services, without the need to store the record of their web activity. However, people who already have a Google account, exactly 1.5 billion of them, need to manually turn enable the feature. Also read: Google launches experimental app 'Keen' resembling Pinterest Google already has, and is expected to roll out emails reminding users to complete a “privacy check-up”, which in essence is a confirmation from the company on whether users would like their data to be stored. Google’s rival, Apple Inc follows a model which relies very little on private data. In its most recent OS release, Apple announced another useful feature with minimal dependence on user data, which will translate for users fully offline. Google’s new feature runs differently, for it will allow the company to gather data, but not indefinitely.

Google will no longer store user data 'indefinitely', will auto-delete after 18 months

Amazon.com Inc said on Monday its founder and Chief Executive Jeff Bezos is willing to testify to a congressional panel investigating potential violations of U.S. antitrust law by big technology companies.

The company confirmed a letter that its attorney sent to members of the House Judiciary Committee saying Amazon had cooperated with the probe. "This includes making Jeff Bezos available to testify at a hearing with the other CEOs this summer," said the letter from Robert Kelner of Covington and Burling LLP.

The big four tech platforms -- Alphabet Inc's Google, Apple Inc, Amazon and Facebook Inc -- are under investigation by a House Judiciary Committee panel and the U.S. Justice Department. The Federal Trade Commission is probing Facebook and Amazon and groups of U.S. state attorneys general are looking at Facebook and Google.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="/world/elon-musk-feels-its-time-to-break-up-amazon-tweets-to-jeff-bezos-303448" hreflang="en">Elon Musk feels it's 'time to break up Amazon'; tweets to Jeff Bezos</a>

Kelner said in the letter that Amazon and the committee would need to "resolve a number of questions regarding timing, format, and outstanding document production issues, all necessarily framed by the extraordinary demands of the global pandemic."

This would be the first time that Bezos has appeared before Congress, according to a source familiar with the company.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="/world/amazons-jeff-bezos-invests-in-uk-based-company-beacon-302223" hreflang="en">Amazon's Jeff Bezos invests in UK-based company Beacon</a>

In early May, the committee wrote the Amazon.com CEO to demand his testimony in the wake of a report that the online retailer uses data from its third-party sellers to create competing products. Amazon's associate general counsel, Nate Sutton, had denied under oath last July that Amazon used sensitive information from its independent sellers to develop Amazon products.

Further, the letter also noted that Amazon had given the committee's antitrust panel more than 225,000 pages of documents and notes that the committee has not given a "binding commitment" that they would be confidential.

Amazon.com Inc said on Monday its founder and Chief Executive Jeff Bezos is willing to testify to a congressional panel investigating potential violations of U.S.

Amazon.com Inc said on Monday its founder and Chief Executive Jeff Bezos is willing to testify to a congressional panel investigating potential violations of U.S. antitrust law by big technology companies. The company confirmed a letter that its attorney sent to members of the House Judiciary Committee saying Amazon had cooperated with the probe. "This includes making Jeff Bezos available to testify at a hearing with the other CEOs this summer," said the letter from Robert Kelner of Covington and Burling LLP. The big four tech platforms -- Alphabet Inc's Google, Apple Inc, Amazon and Facebook Inc -- are under investigation by a House Judiciary Committee panel and the U.S. Justice Department. The Federal Trade Commission is probing Facebook and Amazon and groups of U.S. state attorneys general are looking at Facebook and Google. Also read: Elon Musk feels it's 'time to break up Amazon'; tweets to Jeff Bezos Kelner said in the letter that Amazon and the committee would need to "resolve a number of questions regarding timing, format, and outstanding document production issues, all necessarily framed by the extraordinary demands of the global pandemic." This would be the first time that Bezos has appeared before Congress, according to a source familiar with the company. Also read: Amazon's Jeff Bezos invests in UK-based company Beacon In early May, the committee wrote the Amazon.com CEO to demand his testimony in the wake of a report that the online retailer uses data from its third-party sellers to create competing products. Amazon's associate general counsel, Nate Sutton, had denied under oath last July that Amazon used sensitive information from its independent sellers to develop Amazon products. Further, the letter also noted that Amazon had given the committee's antitrust panel more than 225,000 pages of documents and notes that the committee has not given a "binding commitment" that they would be confidential.

Amazon says CEO Bezos willing to testify before US Congress

Google has started phasing out 'cookies' on its Google Chrome browser. Cookies are small pieces of data sent from a website and stored on the user's computer by their web browser while browsing.

Cookies were designed to facilitate websites to remember relevant information or to record the user's browsing activity.

Businesses track their customers using these cookies, and that's what <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/study-finds-google-system-could-improve-breast-cancer-detection-271720">Google</a> is trying to stop over the next two years. If successful, the move could re-define the consumption of user date online.

According to an official statement, Google is planning to prevent advertising software companies and other organisations from linking their browser cookies with websites they have no jurisdiction over.

<h6><img alt="Cookie" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="399d2829-57fb-4640-b56b-f39330ea8632" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%282%29_34.jpg" /> 
Image:&nbsp;Cookies were designed to facilitate websites to remember relevant information or to record the user's browsing activity | Twitter user @rustybrick&nbsp;</h6>

&nbsp;

Google's rival Apple underwent a similar change in 2017 with its browser Safari by limiting access and the use of cookies.

Currently, Google Chrome has a clear market monopoly with over 64 per cent of global users preferring the browser over others. This is almost thrice as greater as Safari's share, as reported by tracking company Statcounter.

The announcement was expected by industry insiders for months. However, the two-year goal is a fresh addition that was unheard of, until now.

After the announcement of ''cookie'' removal, shares of many advertising software companies fell. These include Criteo, which witnessed an 8 per cent decline, and Trade Desk Inc, which dropped by 1.4 per cent.

Until now, cookies were not regulated which allowed virtually any company to improve and target specific advertisements on the internet.

With cookies and the user data, it ushered in, users were kept logged into a website for multiple days. Specific target advertisements that are user-oriented are also enabled by cookies. Software vendors provide the information to advertisers who then target and sell.

Ever since the ''cookie'' came into being, and especially in contemporary times where data-breach and data privacy are becoming pertinent discourses, users and regulators have questioned the usage of this data by businesses.

Over the last three years, new privacy laws in California and Europe have triggered changes in the modus operandi of internet businesses.

<h6><img alt="Google" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="e800b09f-f7f5-4fc2-8c6a-1fc14c5c404d" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%281%29_45.jpg" /> 
Image:&nbsp;The Google logo is seen January 8, 2020 at the 2020 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas | AFP</h6>

&nbsp;

Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University College London (UCL) and Aarhus University conducted a joint study into the use of cookies. They analysed five companies that offer consent management platforms (CMPs) for cookies used in the UK.

European Union laws demand that consent for cookies should be informed and explicit, however only 11.8 per cent of the sites met the minimal requirements of the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) law.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/france-fines-google-167-million-over-search-engine-ads-269344">France fines Google $167 million over search engine ads</a>

However, Google added that this cookie-blocker would not be enforced until more user-oriented privacy-focused alternatives are available.&nbsp;

If this cookie-elimination becomes a template pan-industry, it would require investment from website operators.

According to financial analysts, this move would have negligible to no effect on <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/google-settles-longstanding-tax-dispute-with-australia-268943">Google's</a> self-operated advertisement business, for the technology giant has multiple others inlays into user data.

(With inputs from Reuters)

Google has started phasing out 'cookies' on its Google Chrome browser. Cookies are small pieces of data sent from a website and stored on the user's computer by their web browser while browsing.

Google has started phasing out 'cookies' on its Google Chrome browser. Cookies are small pieces of data sent from a website and stored on the user's computer by their web browser while browsing. Cookies were designed to facilitate websites to remember relevant information or to record the user's browsing activity. Businesses track their customers using these cookies, and that's what Google is trying to stop over the next two years. If successful, the move could re-define the consumption of user date online. According to an official statement, Google is planning to prevent advertising software companies and other organisations from linking their browser cookies with websites they have no jurisdiction over. Image: Cookies were designed to facilitate websites to remember relevant information or to record the user's browsing activity | Twitter user @rustybrick Google's rival Apple underwent a similar change in 2017 with its browser Safari by limiting access and the use of cookies. Currently, Google Chrome has a clear market monopoly with over 64 per cent of global users preferring the browser over others. This is almost thrice as greater as Safari's share, as reported by tracking company Statcounter. The announcement was expected by industry insiders for months. However, the two-year goal is a fresh addition that was unheard of, until now. After the announcement of ''cookie'' removal, shares of many advertising software companies fell. These include Criteo, which witnessed an 8 per cent decline, and Trade Desk Inc, which dropped by 1.4 per cent. Until now, cookies were not regulated which allowed virtually any company to improve and target specific advertisements on the internet. With cookies and the user data, it ushered in, users were kept logged into a website for multiple days. Specific target advertisements that are user-oriented are also enabled by cookies. Software vendors provide the information to advertisers who then target and sell. Ever since the ''cookie'' came into being, and especially in contemporary times where data-breach and data privacy are becoming pertinent discourses, users and regulators have questioned the usage of this data by businesses. Over the last three years, new privacy laws in California and Europe have triggered changes in the modus operandi of internet businesses. Image: The Google logo is seen January 8, 2020 at the 2020 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas | AFP Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University College London (UCL) and Aarhus University conducted a joint study into the use of cookies. They analysed five companies that offer consent management platforms (CMPs) for cookies used in the UK. European Union laws demand that consent for cookies should be informed and explicit, however only 11.8 per cent of the sites met the minimal requirements of the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) law. Also read: France fines Google $167 million over search engine ads However, Google added that this cookie-blocker would not be enforced until more user-oriented privacy-focused alternatives are available. If this cookie-elimination becomes a template pan-industry, it would require investment from website operators. According to financial analysts, this move would have negligible to no effect on Google's self-operated advertisement business, for the technology giant has multiple others inlays into user data. (With inputs from Reuters)

Third-party cookies on Google Chrome all set to crumble

Today one of the loudest talking points globally is around privacy of data, rather around lack of it. On a daily basis, roughly 2.5 quintillion bytes of data gets generated by the Internet users collectively. Is all of this data private? Where is it stored? And ultimately, who owns this data?  &nbsp;

These are questions that the world is waking up to. And the slow realisation that almost all this digital data generated by private internet users around the world is owned by just 4 to 5 large companies is startling everyone

This is the result of all the technology innovations that happened in the first decade of this millennium, that is, between 2000 and 2009. There were big technology&nbsp;innovations in the world in this period and a lot of innovative organisations were born, such as Google, Amazon, Airbnb, Facebook, Twitter, etc. These companies provided effective and instant solutions such as easy access to information, ability to socially networking online and instant communication at large, and as a result, they are being used by a few billion people around the world.&nbsp;

However, the construct of these innovations is such that the ownership of digital data being generated by these billions of people gets consolidated on the platforms provided by these few large companies. In consolidation lay the dangers of data misuse, breach and theft which increasingly became commonplace in the subsequent decade – from 2010 to 2019.&nbsp;

That current decade which is now coming to an end in 2019 has also seen the world waking up to the fact that the ability of these large corporations to store, access and analyse private digital data of the masses has reached dangerous proportions. Their understanding of billions of people’s preferences, relationships, likes, dislikes, prejudices and leanings, etc has evolved them from mere digital platforms into a powerful position of shaping social perspectives and influencing national events of humanity at large. A cyber-attack on the security systems of these companies also jeopardises the data of millions of private individuals in one go.&nbsp;

There are attempts being made towards creating privacy of personal data – such as GDPR of Europe, CCPA of California, PDPA of Singapore, etc. But these solutions lie within the current ownership structure of the internet where the access and control of the large volume of data continue to remain in the hands of a few large corporations, resulting in these solutions being ineffective or sub-par. Ownership and access continue to remain massively consolidated.&nbsp;

As Marx had espoused the redistribution of the ownership of means of production in the 19th century, we now need a new Marx to propagate the idea of redistribution of the ownership of digital data in this 21st century. Only this will create an effective solution to the critical issue of privacy of data.&nbsp;

In the next decade beginning in 2020, there will come a real technology&nbsp;innovation that will lead to private and individual ownership of space and data on the internet – an innovative concept that doesn’t exist today.&nbsp;

As is the case in the physical world where a person who owns a house or a car or even a mobile phone has complete ownership and access rights over it, technology&nbsp;innovation is due to bringing in a similar concept in the digital world. Such a tech revolution in the online world will enable people to do away with dependence on large organisations for storing their data.&nbsp;

The issue of digital privacy will be solved by solving the issue of data ownership on the internet.&nbsp;

(Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Today one of the loudest talking points globally is around privacy of data, rather around lack of it. On a daily basis, roughly 2.5 quintillion bytes of data gets generated by the Internet users collectively.

Today one of the loudest talking points globally is around privacy of data, rather around lack of it. On a daily basis, roughly 2.5 quintillion bytes of data gets generated by the Internet users collectively. Is all of this data private? Where is it stored? And ultimately, who owns this data?   These are questions that the world is waking up to. And the slow realisation that almost all this digital data generated by private internet users around the world is owned by just 4 to 5 large companies is startling everyone This is the result of all the technology innovations that happened in the first decade of this millennium, that is, between 2000 and 2009. There were big technology innovations in the world in this period and a lot of innovative organisations were born, such as Google, Amazon, Airbnb, Facebook, Twitter, etc. These companies provided effective and instant solutions such as easy access to information, ability to socially networking online and instant communication at large, and as a result, they are being used by a few billion people around the world. However, the construct of these innovations is such that the ownership of digital data being generated by these billions of people gets consolidated on the platforms provided by these few large companies. In consolidation lay the dangers of data misuse, breach and theft which increasingly became commonplace in the subsequent decade – from 2010 to 2019. That current decade which is now coming to an end in 2019 has also seen the world waking up to the fact that the ability of these large corporations to store, access and analyse private digital data of the masses has reached dangerous proportions. Their understanding of billions of people’s preferences, relationships, likes, dislikes, prejudices and leanings, etc has evolved them from mere digital platforms into a powerful position of shaping social perspectives and influencing national events of humanity at large. A cyber-attack on the security systems of these companies also jeopardises the data of millions of private individuals in one go. There are attempts being made towards creating privacy of personal data – such as GDPR of Europe, CCPA of California, PDPA of Singapore, etc. But these solutions lie within the current ownership structure of the internet where the access and control of the large volume of data continue to remain in the hands of a few large corporations, resulting in these solutions being ineffective or sub-par. Ownership and access continue to remain massively consolidated. As Marx had espoused the redistribution of the ownership of means of production in the 19th century, we now need a new Marx to propagate the idea of redistribution of the ownership of digital data in this 21st century. Only this will create an effective solution to the critical issue of privacy of data. In the next decade beginning in 2020, there will come a real technology innovation that will lead to private and individual ownership of space and data on the internet – an innovative concept that doesn’t exist today. As is the case in the physical world where a person who owns a house or a car or even a mobile phone has complete ownership and access rights over it, technology innovation is due to bringing in a similar concept in the digital world. Such a tech revolution in the online world will enable people to do away with dependence on large organisations for storing their data. The issue of digital privacy will be solved by solving the issue of data ownership on the internet. (Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

2020 technology innovations likely to solve data privacy issue

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/facebook-and-instagram-suffer-global-outages-265135">Facebook</a> on Thursday said it is investigating a report that a database containing names and phone numbers of more than <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-corrects-users-post-under-new-singapore-fake-news-law-265378">267 million users</a> was exposed online.

The database was made available for download last week on an online hacker forum that belonged to a criminal group, according to a blog post on the website Comparitech.

Watch:&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/facebooks-zuckerberg-testifies-before-united-states-house-panel-257769/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

"We are looking into this issue, but believe this is likely information obtained before changes we made in the past few years to better protect people's information," a Facebook spokesperson said.

Comparitech said that security researcher Bob Diachenko spotted the database, which was openly accessible and contained Facebook users' names, user IDs and phone numbers.

The discovery was reported and the database was no longer available by Thursday, according to Comparitech.

The revelation of the exposed data comes as the social network strives to rebuild trust and alleviate concerns over the protection of people's information.

US regulators earlier this month said that British consultancy Cambridge Analytica -- at the centre of a massive scandal involving Facebook data hijacking &nbsp;-- deceived the social network's users about how it collected and handled their personal information.

The Federal Trade Commission said its investigation launched in March 2018 concluded that the now-defunct political consulting firm "engaged in deceptive practices to harvest personal information from tens of millions of Facebook users for voter profiling and targeting."

The FTC said the British firm, which worked on Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, made "false and misleading" claims when it offered Facebook users a "personality quiz" -- stating it would not download names or any personally identifiable information.

The case created a firestorm over data protection when it was disclosed that Cambridge Analytica was able to create psychological profiles using data from millions of Facebook users.

Facebook's own investigation found that some data from 87 million users in the United States and elsewhere had been compromised by the firm, and claimed the practices violated the social network's terms of service.

Facebook paid a record $5 billion penalty early this year in a settlement with the regulator over mishandling users' private data.

Facebook on Thursday said it is investigating a report that a database containing names and phone numbers of more than 267 million users was exposed online. The database was made available for download last week on an online hacker forum that belonged to a criminal group, according to a blog post on the website Comparitech.

Facebook on Thursday said it is investigating a report that a database containing names and phone numbers of more than 267 million users was exposed online. The database was made available for download last week on an online hacker forum that belonged to a criminal group, according to a blog post on the website Comparitech. Watch: "We are looking into this issue, but believe this is likely information obtained before changes we made in the past few years to better protect people's information," a Facebook spokesperson said. Comparitech said that security researcher Bob Diachenko spotted the database, which was openly accessible and contained Facebook users' names, user IDs and phone numbers. The discovery was reported and the database was no longer available by Thursday, according to Comparitech. The revelation of the exposed data comes as the social network strives to rebuild trust and alleviate concerns over the protection of people's information. US regulators earlier this month said that British consultancy Cambridge Analytica -- at the centre of a massive scandal involving Facebook data hijacking -- deceived the social network's users about how it collected and handled their personal information. The Federal Trade Commission said its investigation launched in March 2018 concluded that the now-defunct political consulting firm "engaged in deceptive practices to harvest personal information from tens of millions of Facebook users for voter profiling and targeting." The FTC said the British firm, which worked on Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, made "false and misleading" claims when it offered Facebook users a "personality quiz" -- stating it would not download names or any personally identifiable information. The case created a firestorm over data protection when it was disclosed that Cambridge Analytica was able to create psychological profiles using data from millions of Facebook users. Facebook's own investigation found that some data from 87 million users in the United States and elsewhere had been compromised by the firm, and claimed the practices violated the social network's terms of service. Facebook paid a record $5 billion penalty early this year in a settlement with the regulator over mishandling users' private data.

Profiles of 267 million users exposed, Facebook says investigating personal data leak

Apple Inc is mobilizing suppliers to launch its first 5G iPhone range, the Nikkei Asian Review said on Wednesday.

"It will be the first time Apple introduces 5G iPhones ... There will be three of them and the company has set an aggressive sales target," Nikkei&nbsp;quoted a source as saying.

The three new iPhones will carry a 5G modem chip designed by Qualcomm Inc, Nikkei added, citing four people familiar with the plan.

Apple and Qualcomm did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment.

Apple Inc is mobilizing suppliers to launch its first 5G iPhone range, the Nikkei Asian Review said on Wednesday. "It will be the first time Apple introduces 5G iPhones .

Apple Inc is mobilizing suppliers to launch its first 5G iPhone range, the Nikkei Asian Review said on Wednesday. "It will be the first time Apple introduces 5G iPhones ... There will be three of them and the company has set an aggressive sales target," Nikkei quoted a source as saying. The three new iPhones will carry a 5G modem chip designed by Qualcomm Inc, Nikkei added, citing four people familiar with the plan. Apple and Qualcomm did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment.

Apple mobilises suppliers to unveil first 5G iPhones: Report

Facebook has sued South Korean data analytics company, Rankwave, for allegedly misusing data in its advertising and marketing services, the social media giant said in a statement.

Rankwave ran applications on the<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/facebook-under-pressure-to-censor-hate-speech-217637"> Facebook platform</a> which have since been suspended by the social media company.

The lawsuit was filed Friday in a court in California, US, Jessica Romero, the director of litigation and compliance of the platform said in a statement.

"Facebook was investigating Rankwave’s data practices in relation to its advertising and marketing services. Rankwave failed to cooperate with our efforts to verify their compliance with our policies, which we require of all developers using our platform," Romero said.

The American company suspects that Rankwave could have used user data collected through its applications for its own commercial purposes.

"By filing the lawsuit, we are sending a message to developers that Facebook is serious about enforcing our policies, including requiring developers to cooperate with us during an investigation," Romero added.

So far, Rankwave has not commented on the lawsuit.&nbsp;

The case could again tarnish the image of the social network and its security measures on the processing of personal data after data from millions of users was compromised by British data analysis firm Cambridge Analytica for political purposes.

What appeared to be an inoffensive fun app in the form of a personality quiz encouraged millions of users to share data about themselves.

Facebook alleges that Rankwave was slurping up user data based on Facebook activity that was then sold on to advertising clients of the South Korean data handling company.&nbsp;

Facebook's demand against Rankwave was presented the same day that the president and co-founder of the American company, Mark Zuckerberg, met in Paris with French <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-rejects-co-founder-call-for-breakup-senator-urges-us-antitrust-probe-217697">President Emmanuel Macron</a>, at a time when France is preparing to toughen its legislation on social networks.

Facebook has sued South Korean data analytics company, Rankwave, for allegedly misusing data in its advertising and marketing services, the social media giant said in a statement.

Facebook has sued South Korean data analytics company, Rankwave, for allegedly misusing data in its advertising and marketing services, the social media giant said in a statement. Rankwave ran applications on the Facebook platform which have since been suspended by the social media company. The lawsuit was filed Friday in a court in California, US, Jessica Romero, the director of litigation and compliance of the platform said in a statement. "Facebook was investigating Rankwave’s data practices in relation to its advertising and marketing services. Rankwave failed to cooperate with our efforts to verify their compliance with our policies, which we require of all developers using our platform," Romero said. The American company suspects that Rankwave could have used user data collected through its applications for its own commercial purposes. "By filing the lawsuit, we are sending a message to developers that Facebook is serious about enforcing our policies, including requiring developers to cooperate with us during an investigation," Romero added. So far, Rankwave has not commented on the lawsuit. The case could again tarnish the image of the social network and its security measures on the processing of personal data after data from millions of users was compromised by British data analysis firm Cambridge Analytica for political purposes. What appeared to be an inoffensive fun app in the form of a personality quiz encouraged millions of users to share data about themselves. Facebook alleges that Rankwave was slurping up user data based on Facebook activity that was then sold on to advertising clients of the South Korean data handling company. Facebook's demand against Rankwave was presented the same day that the president and co-founder of the American company, Mark Zuckerberg, met in Paris with French President Emmanuel Macron, at a time when France is preparing to toughen its legislation on social networks.

Facebook sues South Korean analytics firm for misuse of data

US federal prosecutors are conducting a criminal investigation into data deals<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-instagram-down-in-large-parts-of-the-the-world-203174"> Facebook Inc </a>struck with some of the world's largest technology companies, the New York Times reported on Wednesday.

A grand jury in New York has subpoenaed records from at least two prominent makers of smartphones and other devices, the newspaper reported, citing people familiar with the requests and without naming the companies.

Both companies are among the more than 150, including Amazon.com Inc, Apple Inc and Microsoft Corp, that have entered into partnerships with Facebook for access to the personal information of hundreds of millions of its users, according to the report.

Facebook is facing a slew of lawsuits and regulatory inquiries over its privacy practices, including ongoing investigations by the US Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and two state agencies in New York.

In addition to looking at the data deals, the probes focus on disclosures that the company shared the user data of 87 million people with Cambridge Analytica, a British consulting firm that worked with US President Donald Trump's campaign.

Facebook said it was cooperating with investigators in multiple federal probes, without addressing the grand jury inquiry specifically.

"We've provided public testimony, answered questions, and pledged that we will continue to do so," Facebook said in a statement.

Facebook has defended the data-sharing deals, first reported in December, saying none of the partnerships gave companies access to information without people's permission.

A spokesman for the United States attorney's office for the Eastern District of New York, which The New York Times reported is overseeing the inquiry, said he could not confirm or deny the probe.

US federal prosecutors are conducting a criminal investigation into data deals Facebook Inc struck with some of the world's largest technology companies, the New York Times reported on Wednesday.

US federal prosecutors are conducting a criminal investigation into data deals Facebook Inc struck with some of the world's largest technology companies, the New York Times reported on Wednesday. A grand jury in New York has subpoenaed records from at least two prominent makers of smartphones and other devices, the newspaper reported, citing people familiar with the requests and without naming the companies. Both companies are among the more than 150, including Amazon.com Inc, Apple Inc and Microsoft Corp, that have entered into partnerships with Facebook for access to the personal information of hundreds of millions of its users, according to the report. Facebook is facing a slew of lawsuits and regulatory inquiries over its privacy practices, including ongoing investigations by the US Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and two state agencies in New York. In addition to looking at the data deals, the probes focus on disclosures that the company shared the user data of 87 million people with Cambridge Analytica, a British consulting firm that worked with US President Donald Trump's campaign. Facebook said it was cooperating with investigators in multiple federal probes, without addressing the grand jury inquiry specifically. "We've provided public testimony, answered questions, and pledged that we will continue to do so," Facebook said in a statement. Facebook has defended the data-sharing deals, first reported in December, saying none of the partnerships gave companies access to information without people's permission. A spokesman for the United States attorney's office for the Eastern District of New York, which The New York Times reported is overseeing the inquiry, said he could not confirm or deny the probe.

US prosecutors probing Facebook's data deals: Report

Data is the new oil: This is how the World Economic Forum (WEF) hailed the birth of a new “asset class” in 2011.

The WEF views are even more rosy in 2019 — about the exponential expansion of this “data universe”. Ok, we get it.&nbsp;

WEF, the rich man’s club, now finds data even more valuable than oil. As long as machines can produce and consume ever larger amounts of data, the immaterial world of money and data can expand ad infinitum. And wow, that’s a lot of money to be made.

Let’s pass over some simple, mundane questions. The sort that ask if people can eat data or wear it, the sort that place people where they live — in the material universe.

Let’s not take issue with our leaders who say the physical universe — the pakoda producing-consuming one — is expanding. Let’s consider the data universe instead, and the happy rumours of ever-growing data leading to financial growth. The data universe turns out to be even more unequal than the one we know. Its “growth” does not create jobs; indeed, it creates job loss. Twenty-six individuals now own wealth equal to that of the bottom half of the world’s population. Yes, it creates wealth, but for whom?

Professor Shoshanna Zuboff of the Harvard Business School and no radical, writes in ‘The Age of Surveillance Capitalism’, that the object of collecting, processing and using data is no longer to service our needs better. It is to automate us, to modify our behaviour, producing a “behavioural surplus” that fuels the digital economy. This outcome has darkened the digital dream, and caused its rapid mutation into surveillance capitalism.

Professor Tim Wu, who coined the term ‘net neutrality’, has a slightly different take. He believes that attention capital — capturing our attention — is the key driver in the digital economy. For both Wu and Zuboff, digital monopolies comprise a form of rogue capitalism, and it is creating a dystopian society.

Whether critical or rosy, these views of the digital economy capture only one aspect of today’s world. The digital monopolies are the fastest growing monopolies the world has ever seen.

If we take the top five companies in the Fortune 500 list by market capitalisation today (2018), they are all digital monopolies. Collecting raw data and processing it makes up the key element of this growth.

If data is powering this growth, who owns the data? Most people ask questions about whether the data belongs to the companies that collect and process it, or to the individuals whose data is being collected.

Both frames conceive of data as property, their only question is who owns this property. Other assumptions — such as the one that data is neither a commodity nor property, but a part of the digital commons — are dropped out of the debate.

Those who take a narrow view of data — of merely, protecting our privacy — miss out two aspects of data. The first point is that the most useful data is not our personal demographic data: Who we are in terms of age, gender or ethnicity. It is the data of our social interactions. It’s useful, at this point, to recall the film on Facebook, and why it was called, ‘The Social Network’.

The second point is that a huge amount of data today is collected from sensors, cameras and devices. They belong to larger collectives, towns, municipalities, and other such entities; not individuals.

If data is the new oil — or the new super oil WEF sees with excitement — the question of who controls this data and its flow is not just an economic issue. It is deeply political as well.

Great Britain built its colonial empire (over which the sun never set), on the back of naval control of the oceans. Who controls the data and its flow will decide who will rule the world in the 21st century.

This is the context in which we have to view the recent move by the World Economic Forum to initiate e-commerce negotiations within the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

Apart from the absurdity of WEF starting WTO negotiations, negotiations on e-commerce or, more correctly, use of digital platforms to buy and sell goods, WEF has little to do with trade.

The “negotiations” are all about control over data and its flows: No restrictions on digital platforms; open collection of peoples data and no taxes on digital goods. In effect, a blatant plea for a neo-colonial data regime.

Indian big capital has been showing interest in controlling the data of Indians. Mukesh Ambani has already pitched in. The dream here? Exercising control over data for their private gain, with the Indian State giving them access to the Aadhaar ecosystem built with public money.

Yes, there is the question of who will control data. But the critical question has to do with the purpose. Is data being collected and processed for the benefit of digital monopolies — global or Indian? Or is it for public good?

The demand that our peoples’ data should belong to digital monopolies will create a more unequal world. A Luddite reaction to this development may be to smash physical and algorithmic machines.

The right response is working out a trajectory different from the dystopian one of ever-growing digital capital. That means re-imagining our digital future with people at its centre, not capital. 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-data-and-its-discontents-2718461">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Data is the new oil: This is how the World Economic Forum (WEF) hailed the birth of a new “asset class” in 2011. The WEF views are even more rosy in 2019 — about the exponential expansion of this “data universe”.

Data is the new oil: This is how the World Economic Forum (WEF) hailed the birth of a new “asset class” in 2011. The WEF views are even more rosy in 2019 — about the exponential expansion of this “data universe”. Ok, we get it. WEF, the rich man’s club, now finds data even more valuable than oil. As long as machines can produce and consume ever larger amounts of data, the immaterial world of money and data can expand ad infinitum. And wow, that’s a lot of money to be made. Let’s pass over some simple, mundane questions. The sort that ask if people can eat data or wear it, the sort that place people where they live — in the material universe. Let’s not take issue with our leaders who say the physical universe — the pakoda producing-consuming one — is expanding. Let’s consider the data universe instead, and the happy rumours of ever-growing data leading to financial growth. The data universe turns out to be even more unequal than the one we know. Its “growth” does not create jobs; indeed, it creates job loss. Twenty-six individuals now own wealth equal to that of the bottom half of the world’s population. Yes, it creates wealth, but for whom? Professor Shoshanna Zuboff of the Harvard Business School and no radical, writes in ‘The Age of Surveillance Capitalism’, that the object of collecting, processing and using data is no longer to service our needs better. It is to automate us, to modify our behaviour, producing a “behavioural surplus” that fuels the digital economy. This outcome has darkened the digital dream, and caused its rapid mutation into surveillance capitalism. Professor Tim Wu, who coined the term ‘net neutrality’, has a slightly different take. He believes that attention capital — capturing our attention — is the key driver in the digital economy. For both Wu and Zuboff, digital monopolies comprise a form of rogue capitalism, and it is creating a dystopian society. Whether critical or rosy, these views of the digital economy capture only one aspect of today’s world. The digital monopolies are the fastest growing monopolies the world has ever seen. If we take the top five companies in the Fortune 500 list by market capitalisation today (2018), they are all digital monopolies. Collecting raw data and processing it makes up the key element of this growth. If data is powering this growth, who owns the data? Most people ask questions about whether the data belongs to the companies that collect and process it, or to the individuals whose data is being collected. Both frames conceive of data as property, their only question is who owns this property. Other assumptions — such as the one that data is neither a commodity nor property, but a part of the digital commons — are dropped out of the debate. Those who take a narrow view of data — of merely, protecting our privacy — miss out two aspects of data. The first point is that the most useful data is not our personal demographic data: Who we are in terms of age, gender or ethnicity. It is the data of our social interactions. It’s useful, at this point, to recall the film on Facebook, and why it was called, ‘The Social Network’. The second point is that a huge amount of data today is collected from sensors, cameras and devices. They belong to larger collectives, towns, municipalities, and other such entities; not individuals. If data is the new oil — or the new super oil WEF sees with excitement — the question of who controls this data and its flow is not just an economic issue. It is deeply political as well. Great Britain built its colonial empire (over which the sun never set), on the back of naval control of the oceans. Who controls the data and its flow will decide who will rule the world in the 21st century. This is the context in which we have to view the recent move by the World Economic Forum to initiate e-commerce negotiations within the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Apart from the absurdity of WEF starting WTO negotiations, negotiations on e-commerce or, more correctly, use of digital platforms to buy and sell goods, WEF has little to do with trade. The “negotiations” are all about control over data and its flows: No restrictions on digital platforms; open collection of peoples data and no taxes on digital goods. In effect, a blatant plea for a neo-colonial data regime. Indian big capital has been showing interest in controlling the data of Indians. Mukesh Ambani has already pitched in. The dream here? Exercising control over data for their private gain, with the Indian State giving them access to the Aadhaar ecosystem built with public money. Yes, there is the question of who will control data. But the critical question has to do with the purpose. Is data being collected and processed for the benefit of digital monopolies — global or Indian? Or is it for public good? The demand that our peoples’ data should belong to digital monopolies will create a more unequal world. A Luddite reaction to this development may be to smash physical and algorithmic machines. The right response is working out a trajectory different from the dystopian one of ever-growing digital capital. That means re-imagining our digital future with people at its centre, not capital. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Data and its discontents

Data Blackout Before Bangladesh Polls

Facebook-owned WhatsApp today refuted reports that it is keeping track of the messages and said that it collects very little data and every message is end-to-end encrypted. 
 
WhatsApp was responding to concerns by experts that the popular instant messaging service with over 200-million active users in India might not be as secure as being claimed. Questions were also being raised over certain provisions of the user agreement wherein most of its wrongdoings would go un-remedied and un-challenged. 
 
WhatsApp collects very little data and every message is end-to-end encrypted. Contrary to recent comments in the media, we are not keeping track of the friends and family you have messaged, a WhatsApp spokesperson told PTI. 
 
"The privacy and security of our users is incredibly important to WhatsApp. Invite links are an optional feature available to group administrators to be used only with trusted individuals", the spokesperson told PTI in response to a question. 
 
The popular messaging platform, which was acquired by Facebook in 2014, has one billion users globally and is one of the most popular mediums of instant messaging in India. 
In the aftermath of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, WhatsApp has come under attack from critics. 
 
"One-to-one communication between users are encrypted and may be as secure as WhatsApp claims. But the metadata, information about the calls, is likely being mined by the company," Vivek Wadhwa, a top American technology entrepreneur and academic, told PTI a day earlier. 
 
"WhatsApp has admitted that it is sharing information about identity and device information with Facebook, allowing it to do the dirty work in snooping on users", he said. 
 
Wadhwa said that the group chat feature of WhatsApp puts users at greater threat than their postings on Facebook because of the availability of mobile phone numbers.

Noting that almost one-quarter or more of the world's population is using WhatApp for free, eminent New York-based attorney Ravi Batra said that it makes money by harvesting user data and using it in conjunction with others including Facebook. 
 
He further said, "There is an old saying: There is no free lunch. Yet, there is a new brave digital world - that is free to use, and the costs and profit of providing the free services must come from 'mining' the habits and data connected to each user."

WhatsApp was responding to concerns by experts that the popular instant messaging service with over 200-million active users in India might not be as secure as being claimed

Facebook-owned WhatsApp today refuted reports that it is keeping track of the messages and said that it collects very little data and every message is end-to-end encrypted. WhatsApp was responding to concerns by experts that the popular instant messaging service with over 200-million active users in India might not be as secure as being claimed. Questions were also being raised over certain provisions of the user agreement wherein most of its wrongdoings would go un-remedied and un-challenged. WhatsApp collects very little data and every message is end-to-end encrypted. Contrary to recent comments in the media, we are not keeping track of the friends and family you have messaged, a WhatsApp spokesperson told PTI. "The privacy and security of our users is incredibly important to WhatsApp. Invite links are an optional feature available to group administrators to be used only with trusted individuals", the spokesperson told PTI in response to a question. The popular messaging platform, which was acquired by Facebook in 2014, has one billion users globally and is one of the most popular mediums of instant messaging in India. In the aftermath of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, WhatsApp has come under attack from critics. "One-to-one communication between users are encrypted and may be as secure as WhatsApp claims. But the metadata, information about the calls, is likely being mined by the company," Vivek Wadhwa, a top American technology entrepreneur and academic, told PTI a day earlier. "WhatsApp has admitted that it is sharing information about identity and device information with Facebook, allowing it to do the dirty work in snooping on users", he said. Wadhwa said that the group chat feature of WhatsApp puts users at greater threat than their postings on Facebook because of the availability of mobile phone numbers. Noting that almost one-quarter or more of the world's population is using WhatApp for free, eminent New York-based attorney Ravi Batra said that it makes money by harvesting user data and using it in conjunction with others including Facebook. He further said, "There is an old saying: There is no free lunch. Yet, there is a new brave digital world - that is free to use, and the costs and profit of providing the free services must come from 'mining' the habits and data connected to each user."

WhatsApp says it collects very little data and every message is end to end encrypted

After a<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/user-details-on-namo-app-sold-to-private-companies-french-security-researcher-36994"> French security researcher</a> accused PM Modi of passing on the data of people who sign up for his official NaMo app to American companies, the government has given clarification dismissing the allegations.&nbsp;

A statement released by the government stated that the &quot;Narendra Modi App is a unique App, which unlike most Apps, gives access to users in &lsquo;guest mode&rsquo; without even any permission or data. The permissions required are all contextual and cause-specific. For example, a selfie campaign requires access to the camera and/or photo gallery.&quot;

The statement further read: &quot;Contact access is required to connect with friends or fellow party workers on the New India connect module. If a person has entered his email address and date of birth, he receives a personalised birthday greeting from the PM. Each function asks for the specific permission when access is required. The app does not ask for blanket permissions when the app is started.&quot;

Narendra Modi App provides a platform for millions of his fans and party cadre to connect directly with the Prime Minister. It is a &quot;one of its kind&quot;&nbsp;app which enables unprecedented engagement and interactivity. It is way different from the standard &lsquo;one-way&rsquo; flow apps belonging to political leaders and parties possess. It has numerous features which comprise the best of features from social media networks like Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc, the statement mentioned.

About the allegations against the BJP leader, the statement said, &quot;The data exposed by the French Twitter user is the data entered by the user on his own device. This is not a security breach. The person does not have access to any data apart from his own data.&quot;

&quot;Data is being used for analytics using third-party service, similar to Google Analytics. The data in no way is stored or used by the third party services.&nbsp;Analytics and processing of the user data are done for offering users the most contextual content. This ensures that a user gets the best possible experience by show content in his/her own language,&quot;&nbsp;the statement said.&nbsp;

&#39;It also enables a unique, personalized experience according to a person&rsquo;s interests. For example, a person who looks up content related to agriculture will get agriculture-related content prominently. A person from Tamil Nadu will get notifications in Tamil and get an update when the PM is in Tamil Nadu&#39; it added.

Congress president Rahul Gandhi stepped up his attack on Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday accusing the BJP leader of passing on the data of people who sign up for his official NaMo app to American companies.&nbsp;

Congress president Rahul Gandhi stepped up his attack on Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday accusing the BJP leader of passing on the data of people who sign up for his official NaMo app to American companies

After a French security researcher accused PM Modi of passing on the data of people who sign up for his official NaMo app to American companies, the government has given clarification dismissing the allegations. A statement released by the government stated that the "Narendra Modi App is a unique App, which unlike most Apps, gives access to users in ‘guest mode’ without even any permission or data. The permissions required are all contextual and cause-specific. For example, a selfie campaign requires access to the camera and/or photo gallery." The statement further read: "Contact access is required to connect with friends or fellow party workers on the New India connect module. If a person has entered his email address and date of birth, he receives a personalised birthday greeting from the PM. Each function asks for the specific permission when access is required. The app does not ask for blanket permissions when the app is started." Narendra Modi App provides a platform for millions of his fans and party cadre to connect directly with the Prime Minister. It is a "one of its kind" app which enables unprecedented engagement and interactivity. It is way different from the standard ‘one-way’ flow apps belonging to political leaders and parties possess. It has numerous features which comprise the best of features from social media networks like Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc, the statement mentioned. About the allegations against the BJP leader, the statement said, "The data exposed by the French Twitter user is the data entered by the user on his own device. This is not a security breach. The person does not have access to any data apart from his own data." "Data is being used for analytics using third-party service, similar to Google Analytics. The data in no way is stored or used by the third party services. Analytics and processing of the user data are done for offering users the most contextual content. This ensures that a user gets the best possible experience by show content in his/her own language," the statement said. 'It also enables a unique, personalized experience according to a person’s interests. For example, a person who looks up content related to agriculture will get agriculture-related content prominently. A person from Tamil Nadu will get notifications in Tamil and get an update when the PM is in Tamil Nadu' it added. Congress president Rahul Gandhi stepped up his attack on Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday accusing the BJP leader of passing on the data of people who sign up for his official NaMo app to American companies.

The data in no way is stored or used by the third party services: Government on NaMo app

data

Data, News on Data, stories on Data, articles on Data, Data stories at Wion, Data news, Data latest news