Ashley Gold

A California effort to regulate artificial intelligence has divided the tech world, with some trying

Democratic frontrunner Kamala Harris is a long-time friend to the tech industry. For those in Silicon Valley, some of whom have vocally supported former President Trump and Sen. J.D. Vance, Harris' California bona fides may make them think twice. Though Harris would continue President Biden's tech policy agenda, she'd likely be more hesitant to break up Big Tech and strip platforms of their liability shield. As San Francisco's top prosecutor, California's attorney general and the state's U.S.

Lawmakers agreed on six spending bills to partially fund the government for the rest of 2024, but fell far short of CHIPS and Science Act goals and agency budget requests. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration received less than half its 

CEO's from Meta, Snap, X, TikTok, and Discord testified in a contentious and emotional Senate hearing on child online safety. Lawmakers invoked the stories of online child abuse victims—many of whom sat directly behind the tech leaders—to issue a stunning rebuke to Meta's Mark Zuckerberg and other executives.

Congress' stall on technology policy is empowering courts to handle important decisions about everything from liability to content moderation. Technology moves faster than Congress can keep up with, and in the absence of new laws, lasting decisions about tech regulation are being determined by judges and courts across the country. Federal agencies, state governments, and attorneys representing different interests and motives for trying to regulate the tech industry are pushing cases forward. A high-profile instance came last week when the Supreme Court 

A bevy of proposals to limit Big Tech firms' power gave up their last gasp as Congress released the text of its year-end spending bill. But the following major tech-related b

Samuel Levine, director of the Federal Trade Commission's bureau of consumer protection, said the agency won't hesitate to sue companies that play fast and loose with customers' data.

Tech firms are warning the Supreme Court that weakening liability protections for online speech could put all types of service providers — including those operating offline — at risk of costly, business-wrecking litigation. Companies and parties to the suits made early filings and statements in 

Twitter faces a mass of forces abroad and in Washington that aim to compel the company to obey privacy rules, speech limits and other regulations as Elon Musk remakes the service. Musk's word is law inside Twitter now, but his disdain for rules will encounter tough pushback from governments around the world — just as the company has lost most of the people who managed its relationships with regulators and legislators. Twitter's biggest challenges lie abroad, particularly in Europe, which has been steadily tightening tech regulations for years.

Many election deniers on the ballot, particularly for the crucial secretary-of-state roles, lost their races. This is because platforms, governments, and the media took countermeasures that were at least partially effective, based on their lessons from 2016, 2018, and 2020.  Though misinformation remains present in large quantities, this time it had less reach, was more spread out, and was harder to find.