Settlement in Meta Privacy Suit Spares Board Members Zuck, Sandberg, and Thiel From Testifying
The lawsuit, which was originally filed in 2018, asked the defendants to use billions of their personal wealth to compensate for the financial damages it accused them of inflicting on the company due to the privacy scandal, Reuters reports. The defense said that the lawsuit offered 'extreme claims' and denied the allegations, the outlet writes.
On Thursday, as the trial was set to continue, a settlement was announced by Sam Closic, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs. France24 reports that the agreement 'came together quickly' and spared past and present Meta board members from having to testify under oath before the court. Those board members included Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, as well as venture capitalists Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen, both of whom have played pivotal roles at the company. Sheryl Sandberg, who left Meta in 2022 and left its board last year, would have also had to testify. Had the settlement not been reached, Andreessen would have begun his testimony on Thursday.
The tail of the Cambridge Analytica scandal has obviously been long. The scandal, the events of which occurred in 2016 and involved violations of Facebook's privacy policy by a defense contractor specializing in psychological warfare, first made headlines all the way back in 2017. Since then, the company has weathered ongoing controversy, terrible press, and lawsuits. It was also the beginning of a rough string of years for the company, with other controversies—like the Facebook Papers—popping up during the same period. Amidst these various scandals, Facebook changed its name to Meta in 2021. In the end, it's still a massively profitable company that arguably faces less oversight under the second Trump administration than it ever has before.
A trial could have shed further light on the internal workings of Meta, as well as the leadership decisions surrounding the Cambridge Analytica scandal and its fallout. The details of the settlement were not shared in court. Gizmodo reached out to Meta for more information. Reuters has reported that a representative for the defendants declined to comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Online Safety Act: what are the new measures to protect children on social media?
Technology platforms operating in the UK now have a legal duty to protect young people from some of the more dangerous forms of online content. This includes pornography, content that encourages, promotes, or provides instructions for violence, promotion of self-harm and eating disorders. Those failing to comply face hefty fines. Until now, parents have had the unenviable role of navigating web content filters and app activity management to guard their children from harmful content. As of 25 July 2025, the Online Safety Actputs greater responsibility on platforms and content creators themselves. In theory, this duty requires tech organisations to curb some of the features that make social media so popular. These include changing the configuration of the algorithms that analyse a user's typical behaviour and offer content that other people like them usually engage with. This is because the echo chambers that these algorithms create can push young people towards unwanted (and crucially, unsolicited) content, such as incel-related material. The Online Safety Act directly acknowledges the impact of algorithms in targeting content to young people. It forms a key part of Ofcom's proposed solutions. The act requires platforms to adjust their algorithms to filter out content likely to be harmful to young people. It's yet to become clear exactly how tech companies will respond. There has been pushback over negative attitudes to algorithms, though. A response from Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, to Ofcom's 2024 consultation on protecting children from harms online counters the idea that 'recommender systems are inherently harmful'. It states: 'Algorithms help to sort information and to create better experiences online and are designed to help recommend content that might be interesting, timely or entertaining. Algorithms also help to personalise a user's experience, and help connect a user with their friends, family and interests. Most importantly, we use algorithms to help young people have age-appropriate experiences on our apps.' Age verification A further safety measure is the use of age checks. Here, Ofcom is enforcing platforms to make 'robust age checks' and, in the case of the most serious of content creation sites, these must be 'highly effective'. Users will need to prove their age. Traditionally, age-verification checks involve the submission of government-issued documents – often accompanied by a short video to verify the accuracy of the submission. There have been technological advances which some platforms are embracing. Age-estimation services involve uploading a short video or photo selfie which is analysed by AI. Read more: If enforced, the Online Safety Act may not only restrict access to pornography and other recognised extreme content, but it could also help stem the flow of knife sales. Research shows exposure to knife crime news on social media is linked to symptoms similar to PTSD. Research by one of us (Charlotte Coleman) and colleagues has previously shown that negative effects of seeing knife imagery may be more severe for girls and those who already feel unsafe. Even on strongly regulated platforms, though, some harmful material can seep through the algorithm and age checks net. Active moderation is therefore a further requirement of the act. This means platforms need to have processes in place to look at user-generated content, assess the potential harm and remove it if appropriate to ensure swift action is taken against content harmful to children. This may be through proactive moderation (assessing content before it is published), reactive moderation based on user reports, or more likely, a combination of the two. Even with these changes, invisible online spaces remain. A host of private, encrypted end-to-end messaging services, such as messages on Whatsapp and snaps on Snapchat, are impenetrable to Ofcom and the platform managers, and rightly so. It is a vital fundamental right that people are free to communicate with their friends and family privately without fear of monitoring or moderation. However, that right may also be abused. Negative content, bullying and threats may also be circulated through these services. This remains a significant problem to be addressed and one that is not currently solved by the Online Safety Act. These invisible online spaces may be an area that, for now, will remain in the hands of parents and carers to monitor and protect. It is clear that there are still many challenges ahead. Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK's latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Charlotte Coleman has previously received funding from UKRI to understand the negative online experiences of UK police staff. Jess Scott-Lewis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Billionaire Dan Loeb Sold Third Point's Entire Stake in Meta Platforms and Has Piled Into a Market Leader Whose Addressable Market Can 25X in a Decade
Key Points Form 13Fs provide a quick and easy way for investors to track the quarterly buying and selling activity of Wall Street's leading money managers. Surprisingly, billionaire Dan Loeb dumped his fund's entire position in Meta Platforms during the March-ended quarter. Third Point's billionaire investor also grabbed 1.45 million shares of Wall Street's hypergrowth artificial intelligence (AI) stock. 10 stocks we like better than Nvidia › Between earnings season -- the six-week period every quarter where a majority of the most-influential businesses report their operating results -- economic data releases, and updates from the Trump administration, keeping up on market-moving news events can be challenging for investors. In fact, it's easy for something of importance to slip through the cracks. One key data release that investors might have overlooked is the May 15 deadline for institutional investors with at least $100 million in assets under management to file Form 13F with the Securities and Exchange Commission. A 13F is required to be filed no later than 45 calendar days following the end to a quarter, and it provides investors with a concise snapshot of which stocks Wall Street's top-tier asset managers have been buying and selling. Though 13Fs have their flaws -- e.g., they can offer a stale snapshot for very active hedge funds -- they're invaluable in helping investors piece together which stocks and trends have the undivided attention of successful fund managers. While investors tend to wait on the edge of their seat to see what billionaire Warren Buffett has been up to, he's far from the only billionaire known to make waves in the stock market. Third Point's Dan Loeb is another billionaire asset manager known for spotting good deals. During the March-ended quarter, Third Point's billionaire chief made two curious trades in the artificial intelligence (AI) arena. He sent his fund's entire stake in Meta Platforms (NASDAQ: META) packing, and loaded up on shares of an undisputed AI leader whose addressable market can potentially grow 25-fold over a 10-year stretch. Billionaire Dan Loeb's Third Point logs out of Meta Based on Third Point's 13F, Loeb completely exited nine positions during the first quarter, none of which is more of an eyebrow-raiser than social media titan Meta Platforms. Loeb green-lit the sale of all 665,000 shares that were held at the end of 2024. It's quite possible that this sale represented nothing more than a profit-taking opportunity for Third Point's billionaire chief. On average, Loeb's fund holds its positions for a little over 13 months, and Third Point's Meta stake had been initiated during the third quarter of 2023. With Meta stock more than doubling during this period, Loeb had plenty of reason to cash in his chips. The question is: Was something more nefarious behind this selling activity than just benign profit-taking? One concern is the potential for the U.S. economy to fall into a recession. Though the New York Federal Reserve's recession probability tool only shows 28.7% chance of a recession occurring through June 2026, it has an uncanny track record of successfully forecasting economic downturns when this probability climbs above 32%, which it did in 2023 and 2024. The last time the New York Fed's recession probability indicator provided a false positive was October 1966. While most stocks tend to be adversely impacted by recessions, Meta is particularly vulnerable since almost 98% of its net sales derive from advertising. Businesses aren't shy about paring their marketing budgets at the first signs of trouble. It's also possible Dan Loeb was skeptical of Meta's future stock performance given CEO Mark Zuckerberg's plans to spend aggressively on AI-data center infrastructure. Despite Zuckerberg's phenomenal track record of developing new products and monetizing them only when the time is right, he's been consistently upping his company's projected capital expenditures (capex). Meta's capex forecast for 2025 slots in between $64 billion and $72 billion, which is up $5.5 billion at the midpoint from the company's prior guidance. Considering how pricey the stock market is as a whole, Wall Street and investors have little tolerance for mistakes. Meta Platforms spending billions on AI infrastructure above its prior forecast leaves the door open for disappointment. While I don't fault Dan Loeb for locking in his profits, I ultimately believe he'll regret exiting this position when looking back years from now. Third Point's billionaire investor scooped up shares of a hypergrowth stock Excluding options, Third Point's 13F from the March-ended quarter shows billionaire Dan Loeb opened 10 new positions, none of which offers more intrigue than the face of the AI revolution, Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA). During the first quarter, Loeb scooped up 1.45 million shares of Nvidia, which marks the first time his fund has held shares of this AI leader since the second quarter of 2023. To state the obvious, the global potential for artificial intelligence as a technology is otherworldly. The ability for software and systems empowered with AI to make split-second decisions without human oversight is a game-changer for most industries around the world. Based on estimates from UN Trade and Development, the global AI market is projected to skyrocket from a reported $189 billion in 2023 to $4.8 trillion come 2033. That's a 25X increase in a decade, for those of you keeping score at home. Nvidia becoming Wall Street's largest publicly traded company is a reflection of just how dominant its Hopper and Blackwell graphics processing units (GPUs) have been in AI-accelerated data centers. With demand for AI-GPUs significantly outweighing their supply, Nvidia has been able to not only sell more GPUs on a year-over-year basis, but also charge a 100%-plus premium to its direct external rivals. Not surprisingly, Nvidia's gross margin soared as the AI revolution took shape. Third Point's billionaire investor might also be excited about Nvidia's innovation timeline. CEO Jensen Huang expects to bring a new advanced AI chip to market annually. If all goes according to plan, Blackwell Ultra (2025), Vera Rubin (2026), and Vera Rubin Ultra (2027) will follow in the footsteps of Hopper and Blackwell. The key point here is that Nvidia's compute advantages appear untouchable. The other factor that's kept Nvidia humming along is its premier CUDA software platform. This is what developers use to maximize the compute potential of their Nvidia GPUs, as well as to build and train large language models. CUDA is quietly doing a phenomenal job of keeping Nvidia's clients loyal to its ecosystem of products and services. But what, arguably, makes this buy intriguing is its timing. For more than three decades, every game-changing innovation has worked its way through an early stage bubble-bursting event. Though artificial intelligence shows plenty of promise, most businesses haven't come anywhere close to optimizing their AI solutions as of yet. With signs pointing to AI being the next in a long line of bubbles, Nvidia stock could eventually crumble. Loeb's buy is also interesting in the sense that it comes as competition in the AI space is exploding. While most investors are paying close attention to direct external competition, the biggest threat to Nvidia likely comes from within. Many of its largest customers by net sales are internally developing AI-GPUs for their data centers. These chips, while inferior on a compute basis to Nvidia's hardware, are notably cheaper and more readily accessible. They can minimize AI-GPU scarcity, reduce Nvidia's pricing power and margins, and narrow its future opportunities in AI-accelerated data centers. It wouldn't be a surprise if this turned out to be nothing more than a quick trade for Third Point's chief. Should you invest $1,000 in Nvidia right now? Before you buy stock in Nvidia, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Nvidia 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 $665,092!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,050,477!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,055% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 180% 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 July 21, 2025 Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Sean Williams has positions in Meta Platforms. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Meta Platforms and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Billionaire Dan Loeb Sold Third Point's Entire Stake in Meta Platforms and Has Piled Into a Market Leader Whose Addressable Market Can 25X in a Decade was originally published by The Motley Fool 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
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Chan Zuckerberg Initiative Introduces New GREmLN Model For Genetics
3D illustration of a DNA molecule with sparkling effects symbolizing complexity and genetic ... More diversity. Futuristic concept of genomics, precision medicine, and computational life sciences. If you've been paying attention to modern research and AI, you know that genetics is a major application of this technology to our lives. Alphafold, for which its founders received a Nobel prize in science, is a major example, but it's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what AI is doing in healthcare, and in genetics in particular. This month we have a new announcement from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative backed by Mark Zuckerberg and Melissa Chan that contemplates a brand new system called GREmLN (Gene Regulatory Embedding-based Large Neural model) for identifying cellular behavior. It may help with cancer research and work on other diseases. Part of the project involves an imaging technique, and assistance in developing software for scientists. There's also what CZ calls a 'single cell data set' of 1 billion cells, developed with 10X Genomics and Ultima Genomics. From reading documentation, it sounds like what this means is that teams assembled data on no less than a billion cells, in order to build a collective model of what an average cell would look like and how it would function. The new model, scientists suggest, can help to characterize genetic drivers of disease, and find new ways to restore diseased cells to health. Four Major Goals and Challenges Amongst the announcement of this ground-breaking resource, spokespersons at CZ identify four broader objectives scientists are reaching for: One involves building an AI-based virtual cell model – which GREmLN is presumably instrumental in. Another is 'developing novel imaging technology to map, measure and model complex systems,' which sounds like a similar type of exercise. Reportedly, the teams also hope to figure out how to directly sense inflammation in the body, and to harness the human immune system for various kinds of immunotherapy. Parsing these objectives further, you can see how the new GREmLN model will drive research on what the CZ Institute calls 'molecular logic' or the study of how parts of a cell interact or work together. What are Biohubs? A press release from Chan Zuckerberg also mentions the creation of Biohubs as laboratories fueling collaborative development, or, in the words of spokespersons, 'cross-disciplinary research institutions.' ChatGPT provides a definition of a Biohub, and points out that the Chan Zuckerberg Biohubs are not the same as a series of Biohubs developed by the World Health Organization. 'Biohubs are collaborative research centers designed to accelerate breakthroughs in biomedical science by fostering interdisciplinary cooperation, sharing resources, and facilitating innovation,' the model notes. 'Typically established through partnerships between universities, research institutions, healthcare providers, government agencies, and industry leaders, Biohubs aim to address complex biological and medical challenges by combining expertise across biology, medicine, engineering, computing, and data science. … Prominent examples include the Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, which unites Stanford, UCSF, and UC Berkeley researchers to tackle infectious diseases and advance biomedical knowledge through open science.' Of the WHO Biohubs: 'A totally separate WHO initiative aimed at sharing biological materials (like virus samples with pandemic potential) among member states… So, while (CZ Biohubs and WHO Biohubs) share the 'Biohub' name, their missions, governance, and affiliations are entirely distinct.' The concept, however, is the same – scientists are banding together to do more innovative work on cell structure, for example, in nucleus and mitochondria DNA. A little research shows some of the distinctions between different types of DNA present in a cell. A lot of the DNA is isolated in the nucleus of the cell, but there's also mitochondria, less attached to that central cluster. Literature Weighs In Fans of Madeleine L'Engle's youth fiction in the 1980s will note that her work explored the idea of subcellular entities and their impact on macroscopic systems. Just for fun. I ask ChatGPT about L'Engle's impact on modern cellular and genomic research. 'Madeleine L'Engle's work didn't explicitly prefigure specific contemporary research into genetics or mitochondria, but her writing, particularly A Wrinkle in Time (1962), A Wind in the Door (1973), and the rest of her Time Quintet, did anticipate broad scientific and philosophical themes related to cellular biology, mitochondrial function, interconnectedness, and universal harmony,' the model said. 'In A Wind in the Door, for instance, L'Engle explores the concept of 'farandolae,' fictional microscopic entities within mitochondria, whose harmony or disharmony directly affects the health of living organisms and even the universe. Her vision captured a holistic view of biology, recognizing mitochondria as fundamental life engines, long before mainstream science widely emphasized mitochondria's central role in health, aging, and diseases.' How many readers remember the farandolae, which L'Engle characterized in promoting a kind of social symbiosis that was a more prominent idea in a less data-driven age? 'The young farandolae cannot fill an adult role, so they maintain a parasitic existence on the adult farae,' writes a poster on Literature Stack Exchange, where human readers get together to ruminate on different aspects of a text. 'In fact, so long as they are under the influence of the Echthroi, they revel in their parasitism. It is all taking and no giving…' In any case, ChatGPT provides this summary: 'Though not predictive in a literal scientific sense, L'Engle's imaginative storytelling prefigured ideas in modern genetics and mitochondrial research—particularly notions of cellular symbiosis, bioenergetics, systemic interconnectedness, and the vital relationship between microscopic structures and macrocosmic health.' Driving Further Change It's easy to see how these partnerships will allow scientists to work more proactively on disease solutions. I thought this news was worth covering as we move through a banner year for artificial intelligence in healthcare. We are finding use cases everywhere, from diagnosis, to scheduling, to the kinds of research that support these clinical solutions. That's a feather in AI's cap. However, we just might still have a place for the philosophical, sometimes fictional portrayal of such systems, as in L'Engle's work that leans more into the speculative than the technical approach. What do you think?
