German regulator urges DeepSeek app takedown on privacy grounds
This week, German data protection commissioner Meike Kamp formally asked Apple and Google to remove DeepSeek's app from their respective app stores in the country. The reason: concerns that user data is being transferred to China without adequate safeguards.
"DeepSeek has not been able to provide my agency with convincing evidence that German users' data is protected in China to a level equivalent to that in the European Union," Kamp said in a statement. "Chinese authorities have far-reaching access rights to personal data within the sphere of influence of Chinese companies."
Kamp said she had asked the company in May to comply with EU data transfer requirements or withdraw its app voluntarily. Since DeepSeek failed to act, her office moved forward with the request to block it.
Google confirmed it had received the notice and was reviewing the request. Apple did not immediately respond. DeepSeek also declined to comment.
According to its own privacy policy, DeepSeek stores users' personal data — including uploaded files and AI interactions — on servers located in China.
DeepSeek made headlines earlier this year with claims that its AI model could rival tools like ChatGPT at a significantly lower cost. However, the company has since come under scrutiny across multiple jurisdictions.
Italy was the first EU country to block DeepSeek's app, citing insufficient transparency around data handling. The Netherlands banned it on government devices. Belgium has issued an advisory against its use by officials, while Spain's consumer group OCU has asked its national data agency to investigate.
In the UK, the government has taken a hands-off approach so far. A spokesperson for the technology ministry said, "The use of DeepSeek remains a personal choice for members of the public," but added, "If evidence of threats arises, we will not hesitate to take the appropriate steps to protect our national security."
In the U.S., lawmakers are preparing legislation to ban executive agencies from using any Chinese-developed AI tools. Meanwhile, Reuters reported this week that DeepSeek is also supporting China's military and intelligence activities, raising further alarms in Western capitals.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
1 Brilliant Artificial Intelligence (AI) Stock That Will Be Worth More Than Apple by 2030
Key Points AWS and advertising drive Amazon's growth. Apple hasn't released an innovative product or feature in some time. 10 stocks we like better than Amazon › Apple is the world's third-largest company by a wide margin, with a $1 trillion gap between it and fourth-place Alphabet . However, I think several companies are slated to pass Apple in market share over the next five years, including fifth-place Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN), which is valued at around $2.4 trillion compared to Apple's $3.5 trillion. That's a wide gap to make up in five years, but looking at Amazon's growth tailwinds versus Apple's makes it fairly clear that Amazon is the much better stock pick. Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Learn More » Amazon has two business units driving profit growth Apple's business is fairly straightforward; it's the leading consumer tech brand and generates significant revenue selling iPhones and other products in the Apple ecosystem. Amazon is a bit more complex, as it has the online store that most investors are familiar with, but that's not the best reason to invest in it. Although its online stores division posted the best quarter in a long time (revenue rose 11% year over year), the real stars of the show are Amazon Web Services (AWS) and its advertising services division. AWS is Amazon's cloud computing platform, and it is seeing strong demand fueled by the migration of traditional workloads to the cloud, as well as by new artificial intelligence (AI) workloads. AWS grew revenue by 17% year over year in Q2, which is strong growth considering it generated nearly $31 billion in revenue during the quarter. However, AWS's primary competitors (Microsoft 's Azure and Google Cloud) posted stronger growth rates in their corresponding quarters, so investors are worried about AWS's long-term ability to perform in this sector despite its being the market-share leader. AWS will likely continue to underperform its peers due to its size, but 17% growth is nothing to sneer at. AWS is also a large part of Amazon's profit picture. In Q2, it accounted for 53% of Amazon's operating profits despite accounting for only 18% of revenue. Analysts still expect cloud computing to grow rapidly over the next few years, and if Amazon surpasses Apple in market cap, this will be a primary reason why. Advertising services is Amazon's fastest-growing segment, with revenue rising 23% year over year, an acceleration over previous quarters' growth rate. Amazon has one of the most lucrative places to advertise on the internet, as consumers are already coming to their platform to make purchases. Paying to place a product at the top of an Amazon search almost guarantees increased sales. This is worth a lot to its advertising clients and will be a key part of Amazon's investment thesis over the next few years. Amazon's margins are rising Amazon isn't a revenue growth story; it's a profit growth story. The rise of high-margin businesses like AWS and advertising services has helped Amazon boost its profit margins over the past few years. AMZN Profit Margin data by YCharts With its two high-margin business segments growing faster than other parts of its business, Amazon will naturally have elevated profit growth rates. In Q2, Amazon's operating income rose 31% year over year. Contrast that with Apple, whose Q3 FY 2025 (ending June 28) operating income increased by 11%. Amazon's profit growth rate is much faster. Over five years, a 30% growth rate will increase its operating income by 271% while an 11% growth rate increases operating income by only 69%. That would be enough to drive Amazon's profits higher than Apple's, propelling it to surpass it in size along the way. Amazon is an excellent stock pick for the next five years and a no-brainer buy at today's prices. Should you invest $1,000 in Amazon right now? Before you buy stock in Amazon, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Amazon wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $668,155!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,106,071!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,070% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 184% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 13, 2025 Keithen Drury has positions in Alphabet and Amazon. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
CBC
3 hours ago
- CBC
B.C. canola growers brace for new Chinese tariffs as harvest approaches
B.C. canola farmers are staring down millions in losses after China slapped new anti-dumping duties on Canadian canola just weeks before harvest begins. The retaliatory 75.8 per cent tariff on canola seed is the latest volley in the ongoing trade fight between the two countries. While farmers brace for the hit, experts are asking whether Canada's own 100 per cent tariffs on Chinese-made electric vehicles (EVs) are worth the cost, and if they should be scrapped in hopes China will reverse its canola tariff. Ernest Wiebe, who farms 800 acres of canola in Montney near Fort St. John, B.C., says producers are feeling discouraged by a recent drop in price for their crops. The price per bushel had been $15 to $16 earlier this year, but it's since dropped to about $12.50 to $13.20 a bushel, Wiebe said. And it's a long way off from the highs of $27 a bushel seen in 2022. "With all the uncertainty and stress of tariffs, and anti-dumping duties, we have seen a significant slide in our prices," he said. Doing the math A price drop by about $3 per bushel can wipe out between $120 and $180 an acre, depending on yield, according to Wiebe, who sits on the board of the Canadian Canola Growers Association. For the roughly 290 producers in the Peace Region, who seed up to 110,000 acres a year and grow 95 per cent of B.C.'s canola, that's a massive hit. Most of the crop is bound for China, where it's crushed and processed into cooking oil. Meanwhile, input costs keep climbing. Fertilizer alone is up $200 a metric ton this year, Wiebe said, on top of higher bills for land, fuel, equipment, and taxes. The growing price gap could mean tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, in losses for the average farmer, and millions for B.C.'s economy. WATCH | Canola farmers brace for tariff impact: Chinese tariffs on Canadian canola have farmers bracing for the worst 3 days ago A new Chinese tariff of over 75 per cent on Canadian canola seed takes effect today, effectively closing Canada's biggest export market for the product. The tariffs are an escalation in a mounting trade dispute between the two countries. "Overall, farmers [are] incredibly discouraged, and looking at it and going, 'Well, how are we going to make this all work?'" said Wiebe. B.C. growers are hoping for an average or slightly above-average crop this year. But a very dry May followed by late June rains has delayed maturity, raising the risk that bad weather — possibly even snow — could interfere with harvest. Pressure on Ottawa Werner Antweiler, an associate professor at University of British Columbia's Sauder School of Business, says he is worried about farmers suffering the consequences of "arbitrary" Canadian tariffs. The canola tariffs came after Canada's 100 per cent tariffs on Chinese EVs, and Antweiler says the EV tariffs weren't based on a proper investigation under World Trade Organization (WTO) principles. "We should definitely revisit this issue and, in that way, also maybe reduce the countervailing duties that we now see on canola exports." Stuart Smyth, a professor of agriculture and resource economics at the University of Saskatchewan, believes China's new tariffs are a strategic move to push down international canola prices before China buys large volumes at a discount. Similar tariffs in 2019 and 2020 cost the canola industry $2.3 billion, he said. "If this stays in for six or eight months, we could be looking at billions of dollars in costs," Smyth told CBC Radio West host Sarah Penton. China claims Canada is dumping canola below the cost of production, which the federal government denies. Smyth says Canada doesn't subsidize crops like other countries do, nor does it promote exports with subsidies. Canada and China are challenging each other at the WTO, and while Prime Minister Mark Carney says his government is working with industry to find solutions, Smyth doesn't expect much of a response. He believes Carney is prioritizing the steel, aluminum, and auto sectors to save jobs in southern Ontario, where there's a high density of voters. "The federal government has been very reserved on reaching out to China, having consultations, or even trying to set up discussions with them," Smyth said. Farmers running out of time Wiebe says the federal government needs to strike a deal with China soon, even if that means walking back its EV tariffs. "If that could be resolved, and the tariffs, or the anti-dumping duty in this case, lifted, I believe our canola price would probably jump $2 to $3 a bushel probably within the next week." Some may pivot from canola if profitability keeps sliding, Wiebe said, but planting other crops like wheat or oats has risks of its own. Flooding those markets could only end up driving down those prices too. "We're price takers," he said. "We can only sell at what the market offers."
Globe and Mail
3 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Truth will likely be the last casualty of war in Ukraine
Two men, a single maxim: It's the land, stupid. There, the similarities end. Donald Trump thinks of land in real estate terms. Vladimir Putin thinks of it in geopolitical terms. That's why, earlier this year, the U.S. President could conjure up a beachfront resort in Gaza, which he doesn't control. And that's why the Russian President is now demanding Donetsk and Luhansk, Ukrainian land he only partially controls. There aren't going to be Gaza Trump International resort beach bungalows any time soon, and probably never. But when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky meets with Mr. Trump in Washington Monday, he likely will be pressed to relinquish his 'Never settle' territory pledge – a phrase, coincidentally, that is the motto of the Trump luxury properties. Mr. Zelensky will be joined by an extraordinary high-ranking delegation of European leaders, all deeply troubled about the direction the fast-moving developments are taking. Their swiftly organized visit is both a remarkable symbol of European unity and a clear rebuke to Mr. Trump, who earlier warned Mr. Putin of dire consequences if his assault against Ukraine isn't paused. This group – which includes German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, and Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Union's executive arm – is perhaps the largest such impromptu gathering in Washington since world leaders rushed to the 1963 funeral of John F. Kennedy. Though mollified slightly by indications Ukraine will receive security assurances in an eventual peace settlement, they clearly are alarmed that Mr. Trump has swiftly, perhaps impulsively, backed away from putting pressure on Russia – in essence providing the country that began the conflict with a blank cheque while rendering a U.S. President already suspected of Russian sympathies vulnerable to critiques he is rewarding aggression. Putin agreed to let U.S., Europe offer Ukraine NATO-style security guarantees, Trump envoy says Now the pressure has moved from Russia to Ukraine, with Mr. Trump warning that 'Russia is a very big power, and they're not.' He told Mr. Zelensky that if Ukraine relinquished Donetsk, where Russia has had a strong position for more than a decade, Mr. Putin would freeze his troops in place. Mr. Zelensky rejected the notion, which would deliver to Russia a land mass more than twice the size of Nova Scotia. Already Mr. Putin, who appears to have profited the most from the summit, has registered a minor symbolic victory. 'They spent three years telling everyone Russia was isolated,' Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said Friday, 'and today they saw the beautiful red carpet laid out for the Russian President in the U.S.' The Trump-Zelensky parley, like the one Mr. Trump held in Anchorage, Alaska, with Mr. Putin, is yet another example of the realpolitik in the line The Rolling Stones inserted 16 times into a 1969 hit song: 'You can't always get what you want.' Mr. Trump wants a swift resolution to the war. He may not get it. Mr. Putin wants a cessation of hostilities but only on his own terms and as part of a broader settlement. He's more likely to prevail. Mr. Zelensky wants a ceasefire before a peace settlement, which Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin now oppose, and he ultimately wants an end to the fighting but only if his country's dignity and sovereignty are preserved and the wartime casualties do not seem to have been in vain. That's the fulcrum of Monday's discussions in Washington. Already the terms of debate have shifted dramatically, just as the momentum in the war has bounced in the last several months between the two colliding armies, now exhausted but still in desperate mortal combat. Trump tells Zelensky that Putin demands more control of Ukraine, urges Kyiv to make a deal Mr. Trump has delivered several deadlines to Mr. Putin, all ignored, defied or forgotten. The U.S. President assured Mr. Macron that a ceasefire was the goal of Friday's conversations at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson and then began his journey to the 49th state insisting he was working to win a ceasefire. By the time Mr. Trump was back in Washington, he was disavowing a ceasefire in favour of a broader settlement. ('The best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.') That was congruent with the view of Mr. Putin, who first wanted an unconditional military triumph and the annexation of Ukraine but apparently now will settle for the territorial gains he last week proscribed were the conditions for a 'promise' to end the war. One of the reasons the terms of diplomatic engagement (and military engagement) are constantly changing: the historical nature of Russia, a country itself constantly undergoing convulsive change and dramatic reversals. Russia was czarist before it was communist, then was capitalist and now is a one-man proto-dictatorship. It was allied with Nazi Germany before it was battling Nazi Germany. It was the clear leader in the Cold War space race (with the 1957 Sputnik launch and the pioneering 1961 orbital space flight of Yuri Gagarin, which were celebrated by Soviet Leader Nikita Khrushchev) before it was the clear laggard to the Americans (with Project Gemini, Project Apollo, and the 1969 redemption of President Kennedy's promise to land an American on the moon). The reprise line of Keith Richards and Mick Jagger's You Can't Always Get What You Want may offer a way for all three parties to view the almost certainly unsatisfying resolution to a war that has stretched well past three years: 'But if you try sometimes, you just might find/You get what you need.' For in the end, whenever it comes, all three parties may claim they got what they needed. It may be that truth is the first casualty of war. But the truth will also likely be the last casualty of the war in Ukraine.
