AI Listening Devices: Handy Helpers or Legal Minefields? - Tech News Briefing
Full Transcript
This transcript was prepared by a transcription service. This version may not be in its final form and may be updated.
Victoria Craig: Hey TNB listeners, before we get started, a heads up, we're going to be asking you a question at the top of each show for the next few weeks. Our goal here at Tech News Briefing is to keep you updated with the latest headlines and trends on all things tech. Now we want to know more about you, what you like about the show, and what more you'd like to be hearing from us. We already asked you about some corners of tech you might be interested in. Now we've got a few others in mind. Biotech, data science, robotics. Let us know what sparks your interest. If you're listening on Spotify, look for our poll under the episode description, or you can send us an email to tnb@wsj.com. Now onto the show. Welcome to Tech News Briefing. It's Monday, May 5th. I'm Victoria Craig for the Wall Street Journal. Weeks into a legal showdown between the Federal Trade Commission and Facebook parent company, Meta, what have we learned? Our reporter gives us an update from what he's seen and heard in the courtroom. Then, would you willingly allow a device to record your every word, every day? Our tech columnist did for three weeks. She'll share her insights from the experience. But first, is there enough competition in social media? That's the big question a judge is looking to answer, without a jury, in an ongoing legal battle between the Federal Trade Commission and Meta. The FTC argues that Meta created a monopoly by buying up its competition, WhatsApp and Instagram, more than a decade ago. But Meta says social media has become a lot more competitive since then, and it faces increasing competition from the likes of TikTok and YouTube. Dave Michaels, who covers antitrust litigation and corporate law enforcement for the Wall Street Journal has been in the courtroom as the trial unfolds. Dave, why is the FTC arguing that YouTube and TikTok don't actually compete with Meta's social media platforms?
Dave Michaels: The FTC says that those services as well as X, formerly Twitter, are basically entertainment services, or they're apps that connect you with your interests. The FTC says those services are not built on what's called a social graph, meaning they're not built on the relationships that you as a user have with friends and family. And the FTC says that network of relationships is what is at the heart of the value proposition for Facebook and Instagram and even WhatsApp, which is a messaging service, but a lot of people use it in a way that they stay in touch with groups of friends or groups of family members within the app. That's important because if the court agrees with the FTC that the social media market for friends and family just includes the companies that the FTC says it does, then the FTC has a good chance of winning. But if the social media market is broader and TikTok is part of it, then it will be a lot harder for the FTC to be able to convince the court that Meta has a monopoly today.
Victoria Craig: And I thought one of the interesting parts was what the Instagram co-founder had to say about the success, or not, of his platform before Meta bought it all those years ago.
Dave Michaels: There were some really compelling testimony from the Instagram co-founder, Kevin Systrom, and he was saying that Instagram was growing superfast. It was doing something similar to what Facebook did, but with photos at the center of their offering. And he was insistent that after Meta bought Instagram, Meta's executives, including Mark Zuckerberg, were really conflicted about the effect of Instagram's growth on Facebook's. That is that there was concern that they were competing for users and that the marginal new user for Instagram was perhaps not using Facebook as much as a result. Systrom eventually was questioned by Meta's lawyers, and he conceded a point that is important for Meta when he said that today these products, these social media products, they're all about entertaining users with video content. That's what TikTok does, that's what YouTube Shorts does, that's what Facebook does, that's what Instagram does. Even Systrom conceded that the market for user attention today is very different than it was in 2012.
Victoria Craig: You also mentioned in your story the judge presiding over this case. Can you just give us some context around some of the questions that he's been asking both sides in this case so far?
Dave Michaels: It's US District Judge James Boasberg, and on the one hand it's pretty apparent that he doesn't use a lot of social media, and he has asked some questions that get at the heart of the issue such as whether the differences between social media today are really firm or if it's, as he questioned it, it's just a difference in degree. In other words, these projects share a lot of features, and so perhaps they're not as different as the FTC maintains.
Victoria Craig: Dave, what's next in this case?
Dave Michaels: We think there's at least a week more of testimony from the FTCs witnesses, including the FTCs main expert. And expert witnesses can play a really big role in these antitrust cases trying to explain to the court why the market is defined the way that the FTC says, and the expert has to be very credible in making that presentation. But then Meta will get its chance and it will put its witnesses up on the stand. It will question those witnesses and try to drive home its point that this stuff about Instagram and WhatsApp being acquired is just ancient history. It's going to try to drive home that point that Meta today faces just an onslaught of competition from TikTok and YouTube and other forms of social media and entertainment that were just not as prevalent in 2012 when this market was making that transition from desktop to mobile.
Victoria Craig: That was WSJ reporter Dave Michaels. Coming up, if we want artificial intelligence to become all-knowing assistants in our daily lives, we got to let them learn by listening. At least that's the mantra our tech columnist followed recently. After the break, she'll explain how it's made her life easier and how it might cross some legal lines. Want AI to generate a to-do list for you or maybe remind you to send that email you keep forgetting? How about summarizing a long meeting you zoned out in? Well, 15 years ago I would've told you there's an app for that. Now I'll say there's an AI listening device that's always on for that. WSJ tech columnist, Joanna Stern strapped one to her wrist for three weeks. Joanna, first, why in the world would you do this?
Joanna Stern: Back in January I read about this device called the Bee Pioneer Bracelet, and it was $50, it was announced at CES, and I saw people talking about this device that just records everything. It is nonstop recording when it hears your voice or other voices, and then it uses AI to summarize and analyze what you are saying. And I will say that within a few minutes or hours of wearing this thing, I was completely blown away, one by how creepy it was, the fact that everything I had said had been transcribed and now lived in an app. And that wasn't only everything I'd said, but anyone I had talked to, that transcription was there. And then two, how it was proactively listening to those conversations and adding things that I had said I would do or somebody had asked me to do to a to-do list. And so my memories and everything I need to remember has just been outsourced to this bracelet on my wrist.
Victoria Craig: And that's the part that I'm so curious about because if you think about this device hearing absolutely everything you do in a day, what actionable information did it create for you from all that it was hearing you say and do?
Joanna Stern: Here's an example. Me and you were talking about this and at the end of this conversation I'll say, "I'm going to send you that recording. I'll do it when I'm done with this next meeting." And it would take that and put it on my to-do list. It would say, "Send Victoria the recording of the podcast." It has that context, it's using AI, using large language models to make sense of all that's being said.
Victoria Craig: A question that a lot of our listeners will probably have is, how exactly can it process all of that information, because you're talking about 24 hours a day, 365 days a year? What does it do with all that information and how does it process it so quickly?
Joanna Stern: The way Bee does it, and I did review some other devices, but I'll talk about how Bee does it, is the device is listening, it's monitoring for audio. Once it hears that audio, it uses Bluetooth to take the microphone, what it's hearing on the bracelet, sending it to the phone, and then sending it to the cloud to do the processing of the transcription. And Bee is actually tossing out the audio. You can't listen back to your conversations, you can only read the transcriptions. And frankly, they're not great transcriptions. Like we use transcriptions of course, a lot in our work and we want them to be as close as possible because we want to get the quote perfect. This doesn't really need to get the quote perfect, it just needs to get a general sense of what that conversation was about. And so then they take that transcription and they run it through large language models and they're using that to summarize as you go. Yes, it's a lot of data, but it's also not as much because you don't have that big audio file and it's been turned into a text file which is smaller and they're doing special stuff to make those files smaller and then send it back to your phone and your app so you can always access it.
Victoria Craig: What protections are in place to make sure that the private conversations that you do have, if you don't think about, because you mentioned in your story, there is a way that you can turn it off, make it stop listening, or is lack of privacy just something we're going to have to get used to as these things become wider spread?
Joanna Stern: Look, this is a privacy nightmare, but Bee and Limitless, which is the other one I've talked to, they have the right ideas about privacy in mind if you're going to build something like this. Yes, both of them have buttons on them to turn off the mics. Limitless is this little pendant that works in a similar way, but actually also gives you the audio to listen back to. It has a little light on it that's always glowing when you've got the mic on. Bee is in the process of changing the light setup, but right now it does also have a button. You press it and actually when you press the button to turn off the microphone, it glows red, which doesn't make much sense since the universal light for recording is red. But they are planning to switch that soon in an update. Another thing you can do is you can delete any conversations or your account from the apps and they say that completely clears this from their servers. Limitless, they keep that audio. You can say in the app how long you want them to keep the audio so they can toss it after a number of days or they have some presets that you can do. On top of that, both of them say that this information is encrypted on their servers, nobody or no employees can access it. But of course there's always risk with all of this stuff.
Victoria Craig: For the tech savvy first adopters out there though, one of the important things to consider as this, if this, becomes much more widespread, is that there are state by state restrictions on recording people's speech without their permission. Is this a minefield for individuals to navigate? Whose responsibility is this?
Joanna Stern: Absolutely. The first questions I started getting when I would tell people I was recording, and I was really clear with most of my conversations, "This is recording," it's not recording the audio with the Bee, and I would explain all of that. But almost always the first question I would get from people is, "Is that legal? Can you even record me without my consent?" And so talked to a few lawyers about this, and it really depends on what state you're in. I was in New York and New Jersey, which are one party consent states where only one person, that's me, in that case has to agree to the recording. But if I were in one of the about a dozen other states that require two party consent, I would need that permission of the person I was talking to and possibly people within an earshot that might be getting picked up. And I asked the companies about this, they said they're going to start to get more aggressive about telling people this. But there is such usefulness and utility in this that I do think some will start to use it. And I do think also I heard from a lot of readers in response, especially those that are starting to experience memory loss and they were pretty game to try it.
Victoria Craig: That was Wall Street Journal's senior personal tech columnist, Joanna Stern. And that's it for Tech News Briefing. Today's show was produced by Julie Chang with Deputy Editor Kristin Slee. I'm Victoria Craig for the Wall Street Journal. We'll be back this afternoon with TNB Tech Minutes. Thanks for listening.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time Business News
an hour ago
- Time Business News
Trending News, Meta Gadget News, and the Best Smart Home Devices in 2025
Technology is evolving faster than ever, with innovations transforming how we live, work, and interact. Every day, trending news headlines showcase breakthroughs in artificial intelligence, augmented reality, and connected devices. Among the most closely watched developments are Meta gadget news, revealing how the social media giant continues to push boundaries in virtual experiences and smart technology. At the same time, the best smart home devices in 2025 are bringing futuristic living into reality, offering convenience, security, and energy efficiency that would have seemed impossible a decade ago. In the fast-paced tech world, trending news changes daily, reflecting major product launches, mergers, security updates, and AI advancements. Recently, several themes have dominated technology headlines: AI-Powered Everything – From chatbots to creative design tools, AI is now embedded in apps, wearables, and home automation systems. Eco-Friendly Tech – Companies are adopting sustainable manufacturing and low-energy products to appeal to environmentally conscious consumers. AR and VR Integration – Virtual reality headsets and augmented reality glasses are becoming mainstream, influencing gaming, training, and communication. Cybersecurity Priorities – Data protection and encrypted communications are taking center stage as privacy concerns rise. 5G and 6G Rollouts – Ultra-fast connectivity is enabling real-time gaming, instant cloud processing, and seamless streaming. For consumers and businesses alike, keeping up with trending news is the key to making informed tech decisions. Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, has gone beyond software to become a major player in hardware innovation. The Meta gadget news over the past year has been packed with exciting developments in AR, VR, and smart devices. Some of the most notable updates include: Meta Quest 4 VR Headset – Featuring lighter design, sharper visuals, and improved motion tracking, it's aimed at both gamers and professionals. – Featuring lighter design, sharper visuals, and improved motion tracking, it's aimed at both gamers and professionals. AR Glasses for Everyday Use – Sleek, stylish eyewear integrating messaging, navigation, and voice commands directly into your vision. – Sleek, stylish eyewear integrating messaging, navigation, and voice commands directly into your vision. AI-Powered Content Creation Tools – New Meta devices are making it easier for creators to produce short-form videos, livestreams, and interactive content. – New Meta devices are making it easier for creators to produce short-form videos, livestreams, and interactive content. Smart Communication Displays – Upgraded versions of Meta Portal devices now offer holographic calling, making virtual meetings feel more natural. – Upgraded versions of Meta Portal devices now offer holographic calling, making virtual meetings feel more natural. Meta Home AI Integration – Meta is stepping into the smart home ecosystem by making its devices compatible with popular automation platforms. These Meta gadget news updates show the company's dedication to connecting people in more immersive and intelligent ways. The best smart home devices in 2025 are not just about convenience—they are about creating a safer, more efficient, and more personalized living environment. Here's a roundup of the top devices making headlines this year. Advanced assistants like Amazon Alexa 5.0 and Google Nest AI can predict user needs, automate daily routines, and control all connected devices seamlessly. Smart thermostats now use AI to adapt to your schedule and even monitor weather forecasts to adjust heating and cooling for maximum efficiency. Cameras, locks, and alarm systems now integrate facial recognition, biometric verification, and AI threat detection for enhanced protection. From refrigerators that suggest recipes based on contents to ovens that can cook meals automatically, kitchen tech is redefining convenience. AI-powered energy meters and solar storage systems help households reduce electricity bills and carbon footprints. Smart TVs with holographic displays and voice gesture controls make movie nights feel like stepping into another world. From air purifiers that track allergens to smart beds that adjust firmness for better sleep, wellness tech is becoming a core part of the smart home. One of the most exciting aspects of Meta gadget news is how seamlessly these devices are starting to integrate with the best smart home devices in 2025. Imagine taking a holographic call on your Meta AR glasses while adjusting your thermostat with a voice command—or having your Meta AI assistant coordinate with your home's energy system to reduce costs during peak hours. Meta's move toward smart home compatibility could reshape the market, giving users a unified system for communication, entertainment, and automation. The tech world moves quickly, and yesterday's innovations can become outdated within months. By staying updated on trending news, you can: Make smarter purchasing decisions for gadgets and appliances. Take advantage of early adoption benefits before products become mainstream. Understand how evolving trends might impact your work, security, and lifestyle. If you're ready to upgrade your living space, consider these tips: Check Compatibility – Ensure your devices can connect with your preferred smart assistant or platform. Prioritize Security – Look for products with strong encryption and privacy controls. Think Long-Term – Choose devices that can receive software updates to stay relevant. Balance Cost and Features – High-end gadgets are tempting, but mid-range products often provide excellent value. Go Green – Opt for energy-efficient models to save money and reduce environmental impact. As trending news continues to highlight AI, AR, and IoT advancements, the integration between social platforms and smart home ecosystems will deepen. Meta's hardware efforts could make it a central player in future households, combining communication, entertainment, and automation in one ecosystem. By blending Meta gadget news with insights into the best smart home devices in 2025, we can see a clear direction: a future where technology not only connects people but also adapts to their lifestyles in ways that feel intuitive, secure, and personalized. From the latest trending news to groundbreaking Meta gadget news and the best smart home devices in 2025, the technology landscape is rich with opportunities for innovation and transformation. Meta's move into AR, VR, and smart home integration signals a new chapter in connected living, while the rise of AI-powered home devices promises unprecedented convenience and efficiency. By staying informed and choosing the right tools, we can all take part in shaping a smarter, more connected future. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
AMD CEO won't offer $100 million salaries to poach talent like Mark Zuckerberg. She says it's more important staff don't feel like ‘a cog in the wheel'
Lisa Su, CEO of $284 billion semiconductor giant AMD, won't be matching Mark Zuckerberg's $100 million compensation packages in the great AI talent war. The tech leader reasons that money isn't the most important thing in attracting great workers; ensuring they're 'not just a cog in the wheel' is far more alluring in her eyes. Her philosophy echoes that of Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, who also refused to counter the eye-popping pay, reasoning it would be unfair and money can't buy loyalty. AI is set to become a $4.8 trillion industry by 2033—so the competition to snag the best talent is heating up, with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg attempting to poach rival staffers with $100 million pay packages. But some tech execs leading billion-dollar businesses are pushing back on wooing employees with golden handcuffs. 'I think competition for talent is fierce. I am a believer, though, that money is important, but frankly, it's not necessarily the most important thing when you're attracting talent,' Lisa Su, CEO of $284 billion semiconductor giant AMD, recently told Wired. 'I think it's important to be in the zip code [of those numbers], but then it's super important to have people who really believe in the mission of what you're trying to do.' Instead, she wants future hires at AMD to be wooed by the thought of being part of the company's meteoric rise and making an impact on the future of technology. 'From a recruitment standpoint, it's always like, 'Do you want to be part of our mission?' Because the ride is really what we're trying to attract people to. It's the ride of, 'Look, if you want to come do important technology, make an impact, you're not just a cog in the wheel, but you're actually someone who's going to drive the future of our road map, then you want to be at AMD.'' Plus, it's not as if AMD staffers are underpaid: 'I think people have done relatively well here, because the stock's done okay,' Su added. At the end of the day, the 55-year-old CEO says dishing out $100 million salaries to new staff would be unfair to existing workers with lower pay packages, still putting in hard work. 'It's not really about one person in our world,' Su reasoned. 'I mean, it's really about great people, don't get me wrong—we have some incredible people.' Fortune reached out to AMD for comment. Zuckerberg's $100 million pay package is 'trying to buy something that cannot be bought' Su isn't the only Silicon Valley chief executive refusing to match Zuckerberg's eye-popping pay packages. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei also isn't willing to shell out $100 million in poaching retaliation. And the two leaders agree on one thing: Their companies care about fostering innovation above all else—and that drive can't be bought with nine-figure salaries. 'I think that what they are doing is trying to buy something that cannot be bought, and that is alignment with the mission. I think there are selection effects here,' Amodei recently revealed on the Big Technology Podcast. 'Are they getting the people who are most enthusiastic, who are most mission aligned, who are most excited?' The Meta CEO has managed to poach at least seven staffers from rival AI companies, including OpenAI, with its $100 million offer. But Anthropic's leader is adamant that most of his employees are actually turning it down, and 'wouldn't even talk' to Zuckerberg. Echoing AMD's CEO that it would be unfair to pay or treat staffers differently in the AI talent war, Amodei thinks it could stifle innovation. In fact, he believes fighting fire with fire by offering the same sky-high compensation would actually 'destroy' company culture. 'We are not willing to compromise our compensation principles, our principles of fairness, to respond individually to these offers,' Amodei said. 'The way things work at Anthropic is there's a series of levels. One candidate comes in, they get assigned a level, and we don't negotiate that level, because we think it's unfair. We want to have a systematic way.' The Anthropic leader said Meta, and by extension Zuckerberg, are trying to buy employees who will be devoted to driving their AI models to new heights. But he may be hard-pressed to find such loyalty; Anthropic has a 80% retention rate for employees hired over the past two years, while Meta is trailing behind at 64%. This story was originally featured on


Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
What Trump's AI Action Plan Means For Copyright
President Trump's recently-unveiled AI Action Plan conceptually attempts to address the tension between the rights of copyright owners to control their works and the need of AI companies to use copyrighted works to train their systems. Other solutions, some pro-copyright owner and some not, have arisen to try and address the problem. Federal Courts find Fair Use Whether AI companies must secure permission from copyright owners to use their copyrighted works to train generative AI models continues to be a murky and debatable issue. In two recent federal court rulings on the issue, federal judges in the Northern District of California ruled that the use of copyrighted books to train AI systems - Anthropic's Claude system and Meta's Llama system, respectively - was a fair use and therefore did not require the book authors' permission. Those decisions, however, are not controlling outside of their jurisdictions, and, more importantly, are on or subject to appeal. Therefore, they could be reversed - although in my opinion, they will not be. Thus, they do not provide any definitive answer. Moreover, those decisions, like all court decisions, are limited to their facts. Other AI models, which use copyrighted works differently than Claude or Llama, might require different legal outcomes. Of note, Universal Studios and Disney are currently suing Midjourney for using their copyrighted works, alleging facts that seem much more troublesome than those involved in the Anthropic and Meta suits. President Trump's Proposed Solution The Trump administration favors the fair use position. President Trump has just released an AI Action Plan that prioritizes building the country's AI capabilities and removing regulatory and other barriers to that end. Speaking at a recent AI Summit, the President said: 'You can't be expected to have a successful AI program when every single article, book or whatever you've studied you're expected to pay for. We appreciate that, but you just can't do that because it's not do-able. And if you're going to try and do that, you're not going to have a successful program.' Echoing the analysis of Judge Alsup in his fair use decision, which analogized reading a book to increase one's knowledge to using a book to train an AI system, the President said: 'When a person reads a book or an article, you've gained great knowledge. That does not mean that you're violated copyright laws or have to make deals with every content provider,' he said. 'You just can't do it. China's not doing it.' How exactly the administration will implement such a rule, whether it will, and what authority the AI Action Plan would have remains to be seen. Legislative Solutions Meanwhile, on July 21, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) introduced a bill that would require AI companies to secure permission from copyright owners before using their works to train AI systems. The AI Accountability and Personal Data Protection Act would create a private tort action against any company using copyrighted material to train an AI system without the copyright owner's permission. The bill also contains provisions that any agreement to the contrary, other than a collective bargaining agreement, would be void. Market Based Solutions Some AI companies are striking deals to compensate copyright owners – or at least the companies who control copyrighted works - for using their works to train AI systems. Examples include a deal struck between Amazon and the New York Times, and between Open AI and News Corp. and the Associated Press. Opt-Out Solutions Other AI models have instituted 'opt-out' features in their end user agreements or user settings, allowing users to opt out of allowing the model to use its own creations to further train itself. Indeed, laws in countries outside the U.S., such as in the EU, have laws that expressly allow rightsholders to reserve their rights in their work from data-mining, effectively an opt-out of AI data training. Article 4(3) of the 2019 Directive on Copyright and Related Rights in the Digital Single Market states: 'The exception or limitation provided for [purposes of text and data mining] shall apply on condition that the use of works and other subject matter referred to in that paragraph has not been expressly reserved by their rightsholders in an appropriate manner, such as machine-readable means in the case of content made publicly available online.' Given this, I noted with interest that DreamWorks used the following disclaimer in the credits of its recent film The Bad Guys 2: 'ALL RIGHTS IN THIS WORK ARE RESERVED FOR PURPOSES OF LAWS IN ALL JURISDICTIONS PERTAINING TO DATA MINING OR AI TRAINING, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ARTICLE 4(3) OF DIRECTIVE (EU) 2019/790. THIS WORK MAY NOT BE USED TO TRAIN AI.' Whether this opt-out is or will be legally effective under U.S. law remains to be seen. The copyright/AI wars continue. Stay tuned.