Latest news with #POLITICOProTechnology
Politico
14-03-2025
- Business
- Politico
Scoop: Meet California's next top privacy boss
We hope you've enjoyed the preview of our new daily newsletter POLITICO Pro Technology: California Decoded. Today is the last day, so make sure you subscribe here to continue receiving California Decoded in your inbox. California Playbook PM will return on Monday, March 17. QUICK FIX — We've got the scoop on the new CPPA boss. — A new tech watchdog faces an uphill battle in Sacramento. — Major online safety bill suffers setback in court. Welcome to California Decoded! Thanks for starting your (almost) weekend with us. Send feedback, tips and story ideas to tkatzenberger@ and chasedf@ Driving the day FIRST IN DECODED: CPPA PICKS NEW BOSS: California's Privacy Protection Agency has named Tom Kemp as its next executive director, California Decoded can exclusively report today, putting the tech entrepreneur at the helm of the nation's only dedicated privacy rights enforcement agency. Kemp, formerly CEO of cybersecurity company Centrify and a longtime policy adviser to lawmakers pushing state-level privacy laws, will be the CPPA's second-ever leader after Ashkan Soltani departed as director in January. Kemp assumes control of a fledgling agency, created in 2020, seeking to flex its oversight authority by investigating companies and data brokers accused of violating privacy laws. He'll begin his role on April 1, just three days before the agency's five-member board meets to discuss potentially sweeping new rules for automated decision-making that have attracted strong backlash from Big Tech. 'The regulations, that's the control of the board,' Kemp told us in an interview. 'I'm going to walk in there with an open mind and listen.' Kemp is no stranger to California politics. He said he led campaign marketing for Proposition 24, the 2020 privacy rights ballot measure that created the CPPA. He's since advised state lawmakers on AI and data privacy legislation, including state Sen. Josh Becker's 2023 Delete Act and a 2024 bill that imposed labeling requirements on some AI-generated content. However, his past investment in data privacy and AI startups could become a line of attack for business and tech industry groups skeptical of the CPPA's work. Trade group Consumer Data Industry Association has argued Kemp's investments in Atlas Data Privacy — a company that provides data deletion services similar to what's mandated in Becker's Delete Act — are a potential conflict of interest. Kemp told us he will 'adhere to all regulations and requirements' for senior-level state employees from California's Fair Political Practices Commission. CPPA spokesperson Megan White added that Kemp 'previously had a small investment' in Atlas but divested it last year and has 'no current involvement in the company.' He also previously authored the book 'Containing Big Tech,' which proposed a roadmap for regulating online surveillance, AI and tech monopolies. California Decoded sat down with Kemp to ask about his plans for the CPPA. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. Why did you decide to pursue this position? It kind of ties in with the concerns that you raised in [yesterday's newsletter on location data]. And the reality is, even before the concerns involving the Trump administration, that studies such as a recent Pew Research [survey] have found people are concerned … about the overuse, misuse of personal information. I'm very familiar with the fact that California has the only dedicated privacy agency in the United States. And so when I heard about this — I obviously interfaced with the agency in the past — I was just very excited about the opportunity to promote the education and awareness of privacy to consumers, to help businesses maintain their responsibilities under the California Consumer Privacy Act [which established the agency]. CPPA board members have said during meetings that the agency needs more staff to aid its enforcement work. How do you plan to address this need? By statute, it originally started at $10 million upon its passage. The latest budget is in the $12.3 million area. So there is a limitation on what we can do as an agency. To be candid, I haven't started yet. When I do start, that is something that I sit down with staff members and board members to make sure … we [are] maximizing and leveraging the resources that we have. How do you envision the CPPA interfacing with the Legislature during your tenure? We certainly want to be very conscious and cognizant that we're listening to key stakeholders, like legislators. The good news is that I have worked over the last few years with privacy leaders like Senator Becker. I've testified a number of times in the past on behalf of some of Senator Becker's bills. The Legislature is one of the key stakeholders, and it's been built into the law that we need to provide advice based on their request. We will fulfill that. What is the biggest threat to Californians' privacy rights right now? There is a concern out there, based on Pew Research and other studies, that people are very concerned about intrusions on their privacy, but not as many people have been exercising their privacy. One of the goals of the CPPA is to continue to raise awareness with Californians about their ability to exercise their privacy rights. And so that is something that we're going to continue to build upon. How will you interface with business groups and tech industry groups that have been skeptical of the agency's rulemaking? I think the thing that I can bring is the fact that I've been in business. I've created jobs. I was even a member of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group board for five years, and a member of the executive board for one year … I'm an embodiment of the balancing of innovation and of strong privacy. On The Airwaves A FACE FOR TV — California Decoded editor Emma Anderson breaks down how Elon Musk is bringing a fast moving, and sometimes chaotic, Silicon Valley approach to D.C., in an interview with CBS News' America Decides, discussing the intersection of tech and policy. HAPPENING TODAY ALL DAY — The AI Developer Conference is today in San Francisco's Ferry Building. Influence and Industry FIRST IN DECODED: GOING BICOASTAL — With Big Tech pouring legal and lobbying dollars into Sacramento, a relatively upstart outfit with the mission of pushing back against industry titans called Tech Oversight Project told California Decoded it will launch its first state legislative branch in California. The two-year-old nonprofit from D.C. will launch Tech Oversight California with the goal of taking the fight to tech companies on issues from kids' safety online to antitrust, comms director Marjorie Connolly told Decoded. She said starting its first state branch in California would help groups working on more muscular tech regulation 'be aggressive and seize this moment and secure real progress and real legislative change in California that can be a model to others around the country and around the world.' The group faces something of an uphill battle. Moneyed tech interests have brought a series of challenges recently to tech-unfriendly bills on kids' online safety (more on that below). Connolly acknowledged as much, calling the fight against Big Tech a 'David and Goliath situation.' 'The fact that we're going to have one or two people in California that are going to be bulldogs for the people against Big Tech in the press is great,' Connolly said. 'They've got hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people,' she added of tech lobbying, but she said public opinion was on their side. Tech Oversight also has some fundraising to do, reporting less than $1 million in revenue in 2023, the most recent data available. The group telegraphed its priorities early, already throwing its weight behind California bills including state Sen. Steve Padilla's legislation protecting children from some AI chatbots; Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry's proposal to clamp down on price-fixing algorithms; and Assemblymember Christopher Ward's effort to stop businesses from basing prices on collected data. Nichole Rocha, former chief consultant to the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee, will take the helm as the group's policy adviser. Kevin Liao, who previously worked as ex-Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon's press secretary, will be communications adviser. In the Courts BLOCKED AND TACKLED — In a win for Big Tech in California, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks' Age Appropriate Design Code suffered a significant setback in a federal courtroom Thursday. U.S. District Judge Beth Freeman ordered that California cannot enforce any portion of the law, which requires social media sites to determine users' ages and limit data sharing and ad targeting for young people, pending a final ruling on the measure which was signed into law in 2022. Wicks promised to fight on despite the setback. 'Every parent in America understands that Big Tech is hurting our children, and it's infuriating that these companies continue to shirk responsibility for protecting them on even the most basic level,' she said in a statement to Decoded. 'The ruling [Thursday] is a deeply disappointing setback for our kids' safety, and a blow to every parent raising a child in 2025. But the fight isn't over, and I'm digging in my heels. I will keep pushing for basic online protections until our kids are safe,' she added. Social media FIRST IN POLITICO: TURN BACK THE CLOCK — Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal is adding the teeth back into his latest push to penalize social media companies for harming young users, likely setting up another showdown between the tech industry and online safety advocates. As we first reported for POLITICO Pro subscribers yesterday, new amendments to Lowenthal's AB 2 are nearly identical to his bill that passed the Assembly last year before being watered down in Senate Appropriations and ultimately getting pulled from the committee by Lowenthal himself. The new bill once again threatens fines of up to $1 million per child on social media companies whose products are found to cause harm through negligent practices. AB 2 sets up a rematch between lawmakers and tech giants like Meta that promises to reveal whether Sacramento Democrats can rally enough support to push social media regulations over the finish line after struggling to do so in recent years. Lowenthal said he's expecting 'massive amounts of enthusiasm' for his new bill after 'hearing across-the-board positive thoughts' about his original proposal from Republican and Democratic leaders in the Legislature. 'The paradigm that we're operating in is completely different,' the Long Beach Democrat said in an interview, citing what he called an 'unhealthy relationship' between Big Tech companies and President Donald Trump. Byte Sized — Trae Stephens, who has ties to Peter Thiel, is pitching a Christian-guided vision for the tech industry (Wired) — The Internal Revenue Service is reevaluating its approach to modernizing technology as AI continues to advance (Reuters) — AirPods may soon be able to live-translate in-person conversations, but competing earbuds have offered this feature for years (Bloomberg) Compiled by Nicole Norman Have a tip, event or new wiz-bang gizmo to share? Do reach out: Emma Anderson, California tech editor; Chase DiFeliciantonio, AI and automation reporter; and Tyler Katzenberger, Sacramento tech reporter.
Politico
13-03-2025
- Politics
- Politico
California doesn't want ICE to know your location
We hope you've been enjoying the preview of our new daily newsletter POLITICO Pro Technology: California Decoded. The preview ends on Friday, so make sure you subscribe here to continue receiving California Decoded in your inbox. California Playbook PM will return on Monday, March 17. QUICK FIX — Sacramento Democrats latch onto privacy rules as another Trump resistance tactic. — The kids' safety debate plays out in court — and exposes a fissure within Big Tech. Welcome to California Decoded! We've made it to Friday junior. Send feedback, tips and story ideas to tkatzenberger@ and chasedf@ Driving the day ANALYSIS: THE GREAT FIREWALL — California Democrats have a new approach to resisting President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown, beyond sanctuary cities and thwarting ICE raids: data protection. State lawmakers' fear, shared by civil liberties groups, is that the Trump administration could leverage massive caches of location data and other online personal information gathered by advertisers, mobile apps and data brokers to aid mass deportations or target people seeking gender-affirming care. They've authored a slate of bills this session to bolster the Golden State's already robust privacy laws, hoping to keep Trump at bay and closing any loopholes that could let sensitive information fall into his administration's hands. 'We've seen how location and digital data can be weaponized to target immigrant communities, protesters, and others whose identities or actions run counter to certain political agendas,' Assemblymember Chris Ward, a San Diego Democrat, told California Decoded in a statement. California Attorney General Rob Bonta — who has emerged as a major player across blue states' Trump resistance — just this week announced his office is investigating businesses that appear to be breaking California's rules for protecting location data, citing concerns about federal immigration policies. 'This location data is deeply personal,' Bonta said in a statement Monday. 'Given the federal assaults on immigrant communities, as well as gender-affirming healthcare and abortion, businesses must take the responsibility to protect location data seriously.' California immigrant rights groups have expressed similar concerns that data brokers sell personal information to Immigration and Customs Enforcement without asking for user consent, citing past reports that ICE has extensive purchasing contracts with data analytics firms like LexisNexis and Thomson Reuters. 'It really does seem like looking at technology and the use of information has been this sort of second frontier in terms of immigration enforcement,' said Shiu-Ming Cheer, deputy director of immigrant and racial justice at the California Immigrant Policy Center. ICE earlier this week made its first arrest in a wider investigation aimed at identifying and deporting foreign students who appear to be 'pro-Hamas' — an effort the State Department has said will involve tracing attendance at anti-war protests, like the ones across California campuses. (ICE did not respond to requests for comment. A State Department spokesperson said they use all available technology in visa screening and vetting.) 'It's really easy to see how all-powerful tech tools and data collection by private businesses could be weaponized by a government who is willing to go that far in targeting American citizens,' Jonathan Mehta Stein, executive director of democracy watchdog nonprofit California Common Cause, said in an interview. However, most people don't realize their devices and apps are sharing information about their precise location with third parties, state Sen. Josh Becker told Decoded. 'They're establishing a vast … surveillance network,' Becker, a forceful advocate for data privacy in the Legislature, said of the Trump administration. 'Certainly I think they're looking at all kinds of data sources. Data brokers could be one of them, and it's a source that people don't know.' The Menlo Park Democrat is carrying a bill this year, SB 361, that would require data brokers to publicly disclose whether they collect and sell sensitive information like immigration status, sexual orientation, union membership and government ID numbers. Becker has previously said his measure was 'especially necessary now as we see the reality of mass deportations of immigrants and the targeting of the transgender community.' Another bill by Ward, AB 1355, would outright prohibit companies from selling location information to any third party, including federal agencies. Ward in a statement told Decoded that Trump's deportation plans 'were not the primary reason for introducing' his bill but added that 'location data should never be sold to the highest bidder, especially when it can be used to surveil, intimidate, or punish people.' Stein called Ward's measure 'a really powerful solution' for protecting data from government overreach. Meanwhile, Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan is still finalizing a placeholder bill, AB 45, that promises to beef up privacy protections for patients seeking an abortion. Her measure includes a ban on 'geofencing,' a device location tracking technology used by some data brokers that can identify when people enter and exit abortion clinics. Bauer-Kahan didn't respond to a request for comment. She told POLITICO late last year that California needed more privacy safeguards for abortion patients in case Trump or Republicans in Congress passed laws restricting interstate abortion access. In the Courts CONTENT MODERATION — Judge Edward J. Davila for the U.S. District Court of Northern California just heard arguments today in NetChoice v. Bonta, a case brought by the tech industry group against a California law meant to offer parents more control over 'addictive' social media content. Davila already paused the law from taking effect back in January but said NetChoice failed to show the entire law violates the First Amendment. His ruling will determine if the District Court continues proceedings in the case or waits for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to make a final decision on whether other portions of the law infringe on free speech rights. Artificial Intelligence WHAT'S MY AGE AGAIN — It's not unusual for Big Tech to take shots at bills it doesn't like. What's less common is for Big Tech to take shots at well, Big Tech, over a piece of legislation. That is about the size of a shot Google fired at rival Meta on Wednesday over an age verification bill backed by the social media company in Utah, of all places, that would require an app store to tell app developers if a user is a child or a teenager. It's the latest front in a national battle to decide how to keep kids safe online — including in the case heard today in court over California's law against 'addictive' feeds authored by former state Sen. Nancy Skinner. Assemblymember Buffy Wicks is similarly awaiting the legal fate of her 2022 Age Appropriate Design Code, which largely prohibits apps and sites likely to be accessed by children from targeting and tracking young people for commercial purposes, and limits the sharing of their data, among other provisions. The Google-Meta spat shows the political fault lines are not just between companies and legislators, but also among the companies themselves and their differing profit motives, when it comes to the ongoing debate about how kids should be protected online. 'This level of data sharing isn't necessary — a weather app doesn't need to know if a user is a kid,' the post from Google's Director of Public Policy Kareem Ghanem said, brushing off the Utah proposal. Instead, he proposed a legal framework where data is only shared with consent, not by default. Google runs the Android app store, so data sharing issues aside, it's not surprising the search giant wants to avoid having to handle that kind of sensitive information and the risks that come with it. Meta has no app store to speak of, and is concerned with selling laser-targeted ads as well as skirting around sticky issues of online age verification. 'Parents across the country are calling for app stores to do more to keep children safe online, and fourteen US states and federal lawmakers have introduced legislation that responds to their concerns,' Meta spokesperson Stephanie Otway said in a statement to California Decoded. The company has also rolled out Instagram teen accounts with more default privacy settings, and would rather parents be in control of their kids' social media use. Laws in Florida, Texas, and elsewhere also give parents control over how and how much their children use social media. Otway painted Google's statement as an admission that the company can indeed share age data with app developers, adding: 'The simplest way to protect teens online is to put parents in charge. That's why legislation should require app stores to obtain parental consent before allowing children to download apps.' But splits in the tech family are often an exception, not a rule. Tech industry group NetChoice, which counts Google and Meta as members, is the one that sued over Wicks' Age Appropriate Design Code. A federal appeals court partially blocked that law while allowing some of its provisions to take effect, and the case is ongoing. NetChoice is also the tech industry's chosen champion for the case that was heard in federal court today, challenging the Skinner law that outlaws providing addictive social media feeds to kids in California. Byte Sized — Intel surges nearly 15 percent after appointing chip industry veteran Lip-Bu Tan as CEO (Reuters) — Meta plans to use X's technology to test community notes on Instagram and Facebook in the U.S. starting next week (NBC) — OpenAI alleges Chinese competitor DeepSeek is 'state-controlled' (TechCrunch) Have a tip, event or quality social media rant to share?? Do reach out: Emma Anderson, California tech editor; Chase DiFeliciantonio, AI and automation reporter; and Tyler Katzenberger, Sacramento tech reporter.
Politico
03-03-2025
- Automotive
- Politico
Digital Future Daily Special Edition: Introducing ‘California Decoded'
Presented by Hello Digital Future Daily readers! Below is the very first edition of POLITICO Pro Technology: California Decoded from our colleagues on the West Coast. We thought you would enjoy a one-day preview of their new daily newsletter. If you like what you read, you can subscribe here. QUICK FIX — The lawmaker spearheading a major AI safety effort tells us why he's feeling confident this year. — Exclusive interview with California AG Rob Bonta reveals his thinking on Trump's tech crusade. — What a major tech lobby group is eyeing in Sacramento this year. Hello and welcome to the first edition of California Decoded, the flagship daily newsletter from POLITICO's brand-new California tech team. I'm Chase DiFeliciantonio, your anchor for today, bringing you the latest from the AI and automation beat, which will be my main focus. My partner Tyler Katzenberger will be bringing you all things tech policy, from social media to privacy debates. We'll announce the final member of our team, who will cover Silicon Valley politics, tomorrow. Glad you're with us. Send feedback, tips and story ideas to chasedf@ and tkatzenberger@ Driving the day ANALYSIS: AI SAFETY IS BACK — A marquee AI safety bill loathed by Big Tech, lauded by Elon Musk and slammed by leading congressional Democrats including Rep. Nancy Pelosi is back in Sacramento. The measure from state Sen. Scott Wiener is one to watch not just because of the controversy it generated last time around, but also for what its slimmed-down look says about who gets to regulate AI in the Golden State, and beyond. Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat widely believed to have his eye on Pelosi's seat when she retires, relaunched the bill Friday after the failure of the notorious, at least in tech circles, measure known as SB 1047 last year. But the battle lines have been redrawn with the retooled proposal, which for now is a far cry from the sweeping effort that generated headlines and a Big Tech backlash. If Wiener wants to succeed this time, he will have to avoid a veto from Gov. Gavin Newsom, which felled his previous measure, and placate a governor who has shown little appetite for regulatory broadsides against one of California's most-profitable industries. He will also have to convince and cajole Big Tech players like Meta to OpenAI to hold their fire, something he tried mightily — and ultimately failed to do — before. Wiener appears to be taking a page out of the tech playbook of failing fast, resurrecting two key ideas from last year in the new bill to expand whistleblower protections for AI workers and to build out public computing resources for AI research. 'I would be very surprised if the bill drew meaningful opposition from tech,' Wiener told California Decoded on Friday after the bill language was first released. 'But I've been surprised before.' His revamped approach says plenty about who will be holding the reins in the effort to prevent runaway AI programs from using too much electricity or, as the naysayers fear, killing us all. Here's a look at the key players Wiener faces with his latest effort on AI: Musk: A long-time AI doomer, Musk somewhat grudgingly supported Wiener's prior bill focused on pre-release testing of AI models in a surprise post last year. He did not put muscle or money behind his position, however. And with the new bill focused on making it easier for AI developers to sound the alarm from within their companies, it's difficult to see Musk — who has shown himself to be no fan of whistleblowing and press leaks at Tesla — coming down on Wiener's side again. Newsom: The California governor not only vetoed Wiener's SB 1047, but also charted an alternative path by appointing a who's who of AI and legal experts to produce a report on how to best handle the safety risks posed by the technology. That writeup is expected imminently, within this first quarter of 2025. Wiener told California Decoded he hasn't been privy to the group's work, but is open to expanding his bill to include the panel's recommendations. That puts him more in the waiting room than the driver's seat with a smaller and more-focused measure potentially awaiting the input of Great Minds like Stanford's Fei-Fei Li, whose oft-repeated moniker, The Godmother of AI, carries weight. Democrats in Congress: Although Pelosi came out against Wiener's prior proposal, whether she supports the slimmed-down version, or takes notice at all, remains to be seen. That intra-party scuffle was back when President Joe Biden was leading the White House instead of Musk — I mean, President Donald Trump. Under Biden, executive actions and Kumbaya international AI safety meetings were the order of the day. With Democrats firmly out of power in Washington, those in the party might be more inclined to notch wins on a key tech policy issue wherever else they can find them. Big Tech: Last year, AI model makers OpenAI and Meta opposed Wiener's more-sweeping measure, which drew some tepid support from Anthropic, the San Francisco maker of the Claude chatbot. Wiener is betting the new bill will draw less wrath from tech companies by focusing on whistleblower protections instead of the expansive vetting regime of the previous bill. It's too early to know whether that happens, but we figured we'd ask anyway. Anthropic declined to comment to California Decoded when asked about the bill, and OpenAI did not respond to questions. A representative for the San Francisco startup incubator Y Combinator, which opposed the previous version of the bill, similarly could not be reached for comment. Among the Big Tech players last year, Meta strenuously opposed the bill, saying its testing rules created too much liability for startups using its free AI programs and hosting events to whip up opposition among Bay Area tech types. Meta spokesperson Jamie Radice told California Decoded that the company is reviewing the legislation. It's not uncommon for industry to take their time reading through the legalese of a new bill before taking a side — or not. Wiener said stripping out the testing provisions should allay much of the opposition. But replacing them with whistleblower protections is not a total olive branch in a tech industry where leaks can be tantamount to corporate treason that can cost significant cash and reputation loss. None of the companies contacted by California Decoded gave a flat 'no,' however, meaning tech still could come into the fold this time. HAPPENING TODAY 3:30 p.m. PT — The California Assembly's Banking and Finance Committee will meet, including to hear testimony on Republican Assemblymember Phillip Chen's bill aimed at saving cryptocurrency traders thousands of dollars on state-imposed licensing costs. In the Courts EXCLUSIVE: BONTA'S TECH PLAYBOOK — California Attorney General Rob Bonta isn't losing sleep over Trump and Big Tech's crusade against strict AI rules and data privacy protections, he told California Decoded in an exclusive, in-person interview today just hours before our launch. It comes as Trump wages a pressure campaign against tech rules in Europe, whose approach often inspires California legislation. 'We expect that maybe Trump will want to sue. Maybe he won't. No idea,' he told us when asked whether the president might expand his pressure campaign to California. 'We'll take him to court ... and as we usually do, we presume we have a high likelihood of success.' The Trump administration has threatened tariffs in response to European taxes and fines on U.S. tech firms, with FCC boss Brendan Carr today lashing out at what he called Europe's social media 'censorship.' Heard that line before? Us too. Tech industry groups — including Musk's X — have filed a string of lawsuits arguing California's social media and AI deepfake regulations violate the First Amendment. Trump hasn't implicated California, but both he and Musk have regularly made the state's left-leaning policies a political punching bag. Bonta told us his office isn't waiting for Trump to pull the trigger. 'The laws that we engage on — either we sponsor or that we provide technical assistance on — we're doing deeper dives on all of those,' he said. 'We know the playbook.' Influence & Industry GOLD RUSH — The liberal, pro-tech interest group Chamber of Progress is watching Golden State lawmakers like a hawk this year after opposing some of the state's most ambitious efforts to regulate social media and AI regulations last year. CEO Adam Kovacevich shared a rundown today of the group's top legislative fights in statehouses, and Sacramento features prominently. Atop the watchlist are proposals to mandate warning labels on social media platforms, including Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan's AB 56, which would force platforms to display unskippable, 90-second health warnings to users at least once per day. Bauer-Kahan also made the Chamber's shortlist for her first-in-the-nation bid to stop tech companies from undercutting Hollywood creatives by using copyrighted works to train AI models without prior consent. Kovacevich said the Chamber of Progress is monitoring scaled-back versions of legislation that failed last session, including Wiener's revived AI safety effort and Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry's third try at sticking human safety operators behind the wheel of some autonomous delivery vehicles. Byte Sized — Apple is reportedly struggling to keep up in the AI race, despite a partnership with OpenAI (Bloomberg) — Anthropic is now valued at $61.5 billion (CNBC) — Alongside California, lawmakers in other states like Texas are grappling with energy demand for data centers (E&E News) — John Bostic, who prosecuted Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes, says her case is a reminder to Silicon Valley to be cautious and honest about new technologies (Mercury News) With help from Nicole Norman Have a tip, event or AI chatbot prompt to send us? Do reach out: Emma Anderson, California tech editor; Chase DiFeliciantonio, AI and automation reporter; and Tyler Katzenberger, Sacramento tech reporter.
