Apple Hits Back At Texas Online Safety Law: 'Better Proposals'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Apple has criticized a Texas bill mandating age verification for app store users, insisting that "better proposals" exist to protect children online.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed the bill into law on Tuesday, requiring Apple and Google to verify the ages of app store users and obtain parental consent for minors to download apps or make in-app purchases.
Why It Matters
Over 80 percent of Americans support parental consent for minors who want to create a social media account, according to a 2023 Pew Research poll, and more than 70 percent back age verification before use of social media.
In June 2024, Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy, who had regularly cautioned that excessive social media use among adolescents was linked to a higher risk of anxiety, depression, and body image issues, urged Congress to mandate warning labels on such platforms, alerting users to the potential mental health risks associated with them.
What To Know
Apple and Google, which own the two largest app stores in the U.S, had opposed the bill before it was signed, arguing that the law would require widespread data collection, even from Texans downloading non-sensitive apps that concern the weather or sports scores.
"If enacted, app marketplaces will be required to collect and keep sensitive personal identifying information for every Texan who wants to download an app, even if it's an app that simply provides weather updates or sports scores," Apple said in an official statement, according to Reuters.
Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, had argued that implementing age restrictions should occur at the app store level instead of in each app.
The Apple logo is displayed on the glass facade of an Apple Store, partially obscured by green foliage in the foreground, on May 20, 2025 in Chongqing, China.
The Apple logo is displayed on the glass facade of an Apple Store, partially obscured by green foliage in the foreground, on May 20, 2025 in Chongqing, China.
Getty Images
Apple and Alphabet, Google's parent company, have recommended alternative solutions, such as providing age-range data only to apps that pose risks, rather than to every app accessed by a user.
Texas follows Utah, which passed a similar law earlier this year. At the federal level, the proposed Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) advanced in the U.S. Senate but has stalled in the House.
Florida has also taken action against large tech companies over children accessing their sites, with the state suing Snapchat for failing to prevent kids under 13 from accessing harmful content.
What People Are Saying
Apple said in a statement: "If enacted, app marketplaces will be required to collect and keep sensitive personal identifying information for every Texan who wants to download an app, even if it's an app that simply provides weather updates or sports scores."
In 2024, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said during a U.S. Senate hearing that parents should not "have to upload an ID or proof they are a parent in every single app that their children use. The easier place to do this is in the app stores themselves."
Casey Stefanski, Executive Director, Digital Childhood Alliance, said: "The problem is that self-regulation in the digital marketplace has failed, where app stores have just prioritized the profit over safety and rights of children and families."
What Happens Next
The Texas law will take effect on January 1, 2026. Another pending Texas bill would prohibit social media usage by anyone under 18, though it has not yet passed the state legislature.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
30 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Scott Galloway sends strong message on Morgan Stanley and work
Scott Galloway, the popular podcaster and New York University professor, spoke with LinkedIn CEO Ryan Roslansky on June 3 and revealed his path to success. The discussion involved some words of weakness and strengths that Americans may find important and inspiring. Significantly, Galloway revealed why he decided to leave Morgan Stanley. Don't miss .the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter "The reason I left the corporate world was I literally recognized, 'I don't have the skills for this.'" Galloway told Roslansky on LinkedIn's The Path. "I was too insecure. People would go into a conference room at Morgan Stanley, and I would assume they were talking about me." "I couldn't handle people getting promoted that I didn't think were smart," Galloway continued. "It was a jambo of nerves and insecurity and I realized I am not cut out for the corporate world. I'm just not good at it. It wasn't because I thought, 'I'm so awesome. I need to let my freak flag of entrepreneurship fly.' I just knew I wouldn't be successful at a big company." Related: Scott Galloway warns Americans on 401(k), US economy threat Galloway talked more about how he found his calling, including some bad advice from wealthy people that he suggests people might not want to follow. "The worst advice the billionaires give is 'follow your passion.'" Galloway said. "Anyone who tells you to 'follow your passion' is already rich." "What I would say to anyone in their twenties is: 'Your job is to workshop.' If you're one of those people who knows exactly what you want to do and gets traction in it right away, that puts you in the 2% most fortunate," he said. "The key is just to keep trying, be resilient until you land on something you think you could be great at." Galloway explained his personal past and how it led to making choices that many would see as out of the ordinary. "I was raised by a single immigrant mother who lived and died as a secretary. Neither of my parents graduated from high school," Galloway explained. "Our household income was never over $40,000, so it wasn't a given that I was going go to college." Galloway talked more about his weaknesses and the fact that those problems did not discourage him. "I was remarkably unremarkable but America used to love unremarkable people," he said. "I got into UCLA with a 2.27 GPA and spent most of college watching Planet of the Apes. Now, you have to weigh off your economic situation, the value of the degree and if you could go out and make more money on your own." More on the U.S. economy: Dave Ramsey sounds alarm for Americans on Social SecurityScott Galloway warns Americans on 401(k), US economy threatShark Tank's Kevin O'Leary has message on Social Security, 401(k)s Galloway also discussed his warnings and about being an entrepreneur, particularly about romanticizing the notion. For Galloway, it appears he had some fears about leaving the Morgan Stanley and the corporate world. Related: Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary sends strong message on Social Security Galloway explains his experience with teaching college students about their hopes and dreams. "A ton of kids come to my office hours and they'll say, 'I have offers from Google and Salesforce, but I really want to start my own business,'" he said. "And I'll say, 'Don't be an idiot, go work for Google.'" Galloway clarified more about his thoughts on advising students. "They don't expect to hear that from me. We have a tendency to romanticize entrepreneurship," he said before asking a vital question. "Just ask yourself, 'Are you willing to risk public failure? Are you willing to be emotionally stressed? Are you willing to strain your relationships? Are you willing to borrow money from your in-laws?'" "With a prospect, you might have to show up at Thanksgiving having lost it," Galloway stressed. "Are you willing to sell everyone all the time?'" Related: Dave Ramsey sounds alarm for Americans on Social Security The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What is a GPT?
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The introduction of generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) marked a significant milestone in the adoption and utility of artificial intelligence in the real world. The technology was created by the then fledgling research lab OpenAI, based on previous research done on transformers in 2017 by Google Labs. It was Google's white paper "Attention is all you need", which laid the foundation for OpenAI's work on the GPT concept. As seen in > Model matchup surprise > ChatGPT announcements > Goodbye ChatGPT-4 > Why ChatGPT 4.1 is a big deal Transformers provided AI scientists with an innovative method of taking user input, and converting it to something that could be used by the neural network using an attention mechanism to identify important parts of the data. This architecture also allows for the information to be processed in parallel rather than sequentially as with traditional neural networks. This provides a huge and critical improvement in speed and efficiency of AI processing. OpenAI's GPT architecture was released in 2018 with GPT-1. By significantly refining Google's transformer ideas, the GPT model demonstrated that large-scale unsupervised learning could produce an extremely capable text generation model which operated at vastly improved speeds. GPT's also uprated the neural networks' understanding of context which improved accuracy and provided human-like coherence. Before GPT, AI language models relied on rule-based systems or simpler neural networks like recurrent neural networks (RNNs), which struggled with long-range dependencies and contextual understanding. The story of the GPT architecture is one of constant incremental improvements ever year since launch. GPT-2 in 2019 introduced a model with 1.5 billion parameters, which started to provide the kind of fluent text responses where AI users are now familiar with. However it was the introduction of GPT-3 (and subsequently 3.5) in 2020 which was the real game-changer. It featured 175 billion parameters, and suddenly a single AI model could cope with a vast array of applications from creative writing to code generation. GPT technology went viral in November of 2022 with the launch of ChatGPT. Based on GPT 3.5 and later GPT-4, this astonishing technology instantly propelled AI into public consciousness in a massive way. Unlike previous GPT models, ChatGPT was fine-tuned for conversational interaction. Suddenly business users and ordinary citizens could use an AI for things like customer service, online tutoring or technical support. So powerful was this idea, that the product attracted a 100 million users in a mere 60 days. Today GPT is one of the top two AI system architectures in the world (along with Google's Gemini). Recent improvements have included multimodal capabilities, i.e. the ability to process not just text but also images, video and audio. OpenAI has also updated the platform to improve pattern recognition and enhance unsupervised learning, as well as adding agentic functionality via semi-autonomous tasks. On the commercial front, GPT powered applications are now deeply embedded in many different business and industry enterprises. Salesforce has Einstein GPT to deliver CRM functionality, Microsoft's Copilot is an AI assisted coding tool which incorporates Office suite automation, and there are multiple healthcare AI models which are fine-tuned to provide GPT powered diagnosis, patient interaction and medical research. At the time of writing the only two significant rivals to the GPT architecture are Google's Gemini system and the work being done by DeepSeek, Anthropic's Claude and Meta with its Llama models. The latter products also use transformers, but in a subtly different way to GPT. Google however is a dark horse in the race, as it's becoming clear that the Gemini platform has the potential to dominate the global AI arena within a few short years. Despite the competition, OpenAI remains firmly at the top of many leaderboards in terms of AI performance and benchmarks. Its growing range of reasoning models such as o1 and o3, and its superlative image generation product, GPT Image-1 which uses the technology, continue to demonstrate that there is significant life left in the architecture, waiting to be exploited.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
6 Wall Street veterans share the best trades they've ever made
Wall Street money managers shared the highlights of their investing careers with BI. Their stories highlight the role of both skill and luck in making successful investment decisions. The trades range from buying undervalued stocks to strategic exits during the Great Financial Crisis. Last month, Business Insider highlighted tales of investing glory from 10 everyday Americans. For some, their best investment was their house. For others, it was holding on to superstar stocks like Nvidia or Apple. But what about the pros? Over the last few weeks, senior Wall Street money managers have regaled us with stories of their career highlights. A degree of luck played a role in each trade, to be sure, but all of the anecdotes also highlight why top asset managers are among the best in their business: their ability to spot timely opportunities and capitalize on them, either in the short term or over many years. GMO's Arjun Divecha used negotiating tactics at 3 a.m. to eventually realize a 6,400% return. Haverford Trust's Hank Smith knew to get out of a stock just a day before it fell 86%. Here are the stories of the best trades six Wall Street veterans made, either through their firms or for their personal accounts. In 1998, Russia experienced a financial crisis that caused its stock market to crash by 98% and sparked a brief global financial shock. Divecha started buying up discounted shares of machinery producer UralMash, now known as United Heavy Machinery, amassing a 5% stake in the company. One night, he got a call at 3 a.m. from a Russian investor who owned 2% of the firm and wanted to know if Divecha and GMO were interested in buying it. "I said, 'Ok, what is the bid-ask on this?' because one of the first things you learn in a crisis is you never say, 'What's the price?'" Divecha said. "There's no such thing as a price in a crisis." The investor was asking for a dollar a share, but the current bid was for 50 cents. Annoyed at being woken up, and knowing that several failed New York-based hedge funds were due to liquidate their shares in the company soon, Divecha said he would buy his stake for 23 cents a share and that the offer was good for a minute. The investor accepted. "I am convinced that had I said 25 cents, he would not have taken it," Divecha said. "When I said 23 cents, I was using something I call the illusion of precision — that somehow he thought that I had done some complicated math and come up with 23 cents." Divecha held the stock for four to five years before selling it for around $15 per share, he said. During the pandemic in early 2020, when the price of oil went negative, Nguyen had an idea: Get paid to hold oil. However, it's hard for a retail investor to take delivery of physical crude. Nguyen decided to approach the oil trade by gaining exposure to MLPs, or Master Limited Partnerships, which are generally companies that process and move oil. She did this via investments in specific ETFs. With the sector broadly cheap, casting a wide net made this the simplest approach. "It's kind of like the question do you want to look for the needle in a haystack, or do you want to buy the haystack?" Nguyen said. "When the haystack is full of great needles, you just want to buy the haystack." As it became clear that the world would normalize and reopen, her investment returned 50%. She eventually closed the position and transferred the proceeds to her donor-advised fund, which allows someone to set aside money they intend to donate. Nguyen's favorite charities to donate to include those focusing on education and food security in New York City. Amid the chaos of the 2008 crash, Smead — a top 1% investor, according to Morningstar data — noticed eBay trading at $11 a share and saw a bargain. While he liked the business model, Smead was more drawn to the fact that the company owned 100% of PayPal, 100% of StubHub, and 30% of Skype. They also had the equivalent of $3 per share in cash and were debt-free, he said. At Thanksgiving that year, Smead had a broker who was a family friend over, and remembers telling him about the stock. "I said, 'When you go back to your office on Monday, you call every single one of your clients and get them to buy a bunch of this stock and then never sell it," Smead said. Today, eBay trades at around $77 a share, and PayPal has split into a separate stock. Barr, whose fund has a five-star rating from Morningstar, said his best investment ever was in Nova (NVMI), a company that produces measurement systems used in the factory production of semiconductors. It's benefited hugely from the recent semiconductor boom amid the AI arms race. Barr bought it all the way back in the third quarter of 2009. Since then, it's up more than 6,000%. "It was no analyst coverage, nobody knew it," Barr said. "I knew one of their peers very well, and the peer was also a small-cap listed company that was doing great, and I owned it." In early 2021, retail traders blew up hedge fund Melvin Capital by piling into GameStop stock, sparking a now-infamous short squeeze. Hsu saw the Melvin collapse as an opportunity, as it likely signaled upside momentum on GME would run out quickly. It's not often that retail traders topple a hedge fund, so it seemed like a sign of the peak was near. He took the same position that rattled other short sellers and bet against GameStop. He timed it just right. As the stock fell 87% over the next couple of weeks, Hsu realized huge returns. "I was right in the analysis assessment, but I was no more right than the hedge fund that went ahead of me," Hsu said. "We did the same analysis, and I made the money by actually being late, which is not usually an attribute that's successful in this industry." He continued: "What I learned is if you do your analysis correctly, that's a part of investing successfully. Luck is so important. In that trade, if you're early, you die." Smith's best investment decisions were actually deciding when to sell during the Great Financial Crisis. In October of 2007, Citigroup's stock fell 21% in the span of a couple weeks after a bad earnings report. Smith sold the stock, sparking ire from his clients. "We were vilified by many of our clients for selling a bluechip company at the low," he said. "In fact, one consultant used that as an excuse to pull a handful of his clients that were invested with us." But Smith had made the right move. Citigroup's stock continued its freefall as the crisis unfolded. Today, it's still down 79% from its price in early November 2007. In September 2008, Smith then sold AIG at a steep loss before it collapsed by another 86% within a day. "We sold the entire position in one day at around $15 a share," he said. "The next day it opened at $2." He added: "A couple of days later, our clients got the trade confirmation, and they treated us like conquering heroes." Read the original article on Business Insider Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
