Autonomous vehicle startup Gatik says it will start using its self-driving box trucks in Kansas as it expands to more territories. Governor Laura Kelly last week signed a bill that makes it legal for self-driving vehicles to run on public roads under certain circumstances.

Following a similar effort in Arkansas, Gatik says it and its partner Walmart worked with legislators and stakeholders to "develop and propose legislation that prioritizes the safe and structured introduction of autonomous vehicles in the state." Before Gatik's trucks hit Kansas roads, the company says it will provide training to first responders and law enforcement.

Gatik claims that, since it started commercial operations three years ago, it has maintained a clean safety record in Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana and Ontario, Canada. It still has a safety driver at the wheel in some jurisdictions. Last August, Walmart started making fully driverless deliveries with Gatik trucks in Arkansas, albeit on a fixed loop.

The Biden administration may be struggling in its efforts to fight security-related misinformation. The Washington Postsources claim the Department of Homeland Security has "paused" a Disinformation Governance Board just three weeks after its April 27th announcement. Officials reportedly decided to shut down the board May 16th, but that decision appears to be on hold after a last-minute effort to retain board leader Nina Jankowicz. She resigned from the board and the DHS today (May 18th).

While the leakers didn't directly explain why the Disinformation Governance Board was frozen, they claim the White House neither had clear messaging nor a defense against misinformation and threats levelled against Jankowicz. The board was meant to examine approaches for fighting viral lies and had no power over content, but far-right influencers and outlets misrepresented it as a censorship tool and villainized Jankowicz. The campaigns led to harassment and threats against the board leader — in other words, the board was the victim of the very sort of attack it was supposed to prevent.

We've asked the DHS for comment. In a statement to the Post, the department said the board's role had been "grossly mischaracterized" and that Jankowicz had been targeted by "unjustified and vile personal attacks and threats." Previously, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and White House press secretary Jen Psaki have respectively tried to clarify the board's objectives and debunk falsehoods with little effect.

There is a chance the board could survive depending on a Homeland Security Advisory Council review. If the reports are true, though, the US government may have to rethink its anti-disinformation efforts if they're going to survive both criticism and internal scrutiny.

Trade industry groups representing tech giants, such as Google and Facebook, have filed an emergency application with the Supreme Court to block HB 20. That's the controversial law Texan law that bars social media websites from removing or restricting content based on "the viewpoint of the user or another person." It also allows users to sue large platforms with more than than 50 million active monthly users if they believe they were banned for their political views. As The Washington Post reports, it reflects Republicans' claims that they're being being censored by "Big Tech."

A federal judge blocked HB 20 from being implemented last year, but the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision recently. The panel of judges agreed with the state of Texas that social networks are "modern-day public squares," which means they're banned from censoring certain viewpoints. One of the judges also said that social networks aren't websites but "internet providers" instead. The panel allowed the law to take effect while its merits are still being litigated in lower court. 

NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), the groups representing the tech industry, have maintained that the law is an attack on the First Amendment and have previously questioned its constitutionality. In their emergency application, they said HB 20 is an "unprecedented assault on the editorial discretion of private websites... that would fundamentally transform their business models and services." 

They explained that under the law, platforms would have no choice but to allow the dissemination of "all sorts of objectionable viewpoints," such as Russian propaganda justifying the invasion of Ukraine, posts supporting neo-Nazis, KKKs and Holocaust deniers, as well as posts encouraging dangerous behavior, such as disordered eating. "The Fifth Circuit has yet to offer any explanation why the District Court’s thorough opinion was wrong," they wrote in their application (PDF).

NetChoice and CCIA also argue that by allowing the law to be enforced, it could influence and interfere with the decision of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Atlanta-based appeals court will decide the fate of a similar law in Florida that was initially blocked by a federal judge for violating Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

The Biden administration has formally started its $45 billion effort to bring affordable and reliable high-speed broadband internet access to everyone in the US by 2030. The Internet for All funding is part of the $65 billion earmarked for broadband in the $1 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Starting today, states and other entities can apply for funding from three Internet for All programs.

“In the 21st century, you simply cannot participate in the economy if you don’t have access to reliable, affordable high-speed internet,” Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, who is overseeing the distribution of the funds, said. “Thanks to President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Americans across the country will no longer be held back by a lack of high-speed internet access. We are going to ensure every American will have access to technologies that allow them to attend class, start a small business, visit with their doctor and participate in the modern economy.”

States could use the funding to install fiber-optic cables, put more Wi-Fi networks in place or even offer some people free broadband internet access. The launch of the program follows news earlier this week that the Biden administration has teamed up with 20 providers to offer subsidized internet service to low-income households.

Most of the Internet for All funding will be available from the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) Program. States and other territories will need to file a letter of intent and a budget for planning funds. They'll then receive $5 million in planning funds to help them put together a five-year plan detailing how they'll provide comprehensive internet access to all residents.

Each state that takes part in the program will receive at least $100 million from the BEAD pot of $42.5 billion. After that, funding allocations will be decided in part based on updated broadband coverage maps that the Federal Communications Commission is expected to release this fall.

Under the $1 billion Enabling Middle Mile Broadband Infrastructure Program, funding will be allocated based on a "technology-neutral, competitive basis" to build, buy or improve infrastructure elements that carry "large amounts of data at high speeds over long distances." As for the $1.5 billion State Digital Equity Planning Grant Program, that's designed to bolster adoption and use of the internet with the help of digital literacy training.

US Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO) wants to establish a federal watchdog that would focus on overseeing digital platforms and tech giants. The lawmaker has introduced the Digital Platform Commission Act (PDF) in Congress in hopes of establishing a five-person federal body appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. They would be experts in relevant fields, including computer science, software development and technology policy.

The commission would be in charge of assuring "the fairness and safety of algorithms on digital platforms" as well as promoting competition. It would also have the authority to conduct investigations, impose penalties and to set new rules, such as those that ensure moderation transparency and the protection of consumers. The commission would create requirements for regular public risk assessments on the distribution of harmful content on digital platforms, as well.

Under the commission, a "Code Council" comprised of technologists and public interest experts will conjure up standards and policies that could be implemented. In addition, the commission will establish a research office with 20 dedicated employees to conduct internal research and coordinate with outside academics and experts. 

As mentioned in the legislation's announcement, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission are in charge of overseeing digital platforms today. Bennett argues, however, that they lack the expert staff and tech-oriented culture necessary for robust oversight. 

The Washington Post reports that Bennett's motivation was his personal experience viewing disinformation as part of the Senate Intelligence Committee, as well as seeing how social media has affected his children. As the publication notes, though, it remains to be seen whether the legislation would be approved by the Senate, where Democrats have a 50-50 majority.

The UK's Royal Mail wants to set up as many as 50 drone routes over the next three years to make deliveries to remote communities. The plan, which requires approval from the Civil Aviation Authority, would see the service secure up to 200 of the autonomous devices from logistics drone company Windracers.

The Royal Mail said the first communities to benefit would be the Isles of Scilly (off the coast of Cornwall in south-west England) and the Scottish islands of Shetland, Orkney and the Hebrides.

Test flights started last year. In the most recent one, held in April, the service was able to use a UAV to deliver mail to Unst, Britain's most northerly inhabited island, from Tingwall Airport on Shetland's largest island. That's a 50-mile flight each way.

The twin-engine drone used in the tests can carry a payload of up to 100 kg of mail and take two return flights each day. The Royal Mail said the device has a wingspan of 10 meters and can withstand difficult weather conditions with the help of its autopilot system. After the drone arrives at its destination, a postal worker will retrieve the mail and parcels and deliver them.

The Royal Mail claimed the drones would help it reduce carbon emissions and provide a more reliable delivery service to islands. It eventually hopes to have a fleet of more than 500 drones that will operate across the UK.

Notorious facial recognition company Clearview AI has agreed to permanently halt sales of its massive biometric database to all private companies and individuals in the United States as part of a legal settlement with the American Civil Liberties Union, per court records.

Monday's announcement marks the close of a two-year legal dispute brought by the ACLU and privacy advocate groups against the company over allegations that it had violated Illinois data laws. Additionally, Clearview will not offer any of its services to Illinois local and state law enforcement agencies for the next five years, though Federal agencies and state departments outside of Illinois will be unaffected. The settlement must still be approved by a federal judge before it takes effect.

“By requiring Clearview to comply with Illinois’ pathbreaking biometric privacy law not just in the state, but across the country, this settlement demonstrates that strong privacy laws can provide real protections against abuse,” Nathan Freed Wessler, a deputy director of the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, said in Monday's statement. “Clearview can no longer treat people’s unique biometric identifiers as an unrestricted source of profit. Other companies would be wise to take note, and other states should follow Illinois’ lead in enacting strong biometric privacy laws.” 

Developing... 

American regulators may not have made a decision on flavored e-cigarettes, but that isn't stopping them from cracking down on the conventional variety. The New York Timesreports the US Food and Drug Administration has proposed a ban on menthol-flavored cigarettes as well as any non-tobacco cigar flavors. Menthol both makes cigarettes more appealing to young smokers and magnifies the addictive qualities of nicotine, officials said, and banning it could both prevent the "next generation of smokers" while helping adults quit.

The potential rules won't punish individual possession of banned cigarettes and cigars. You'll have a chance to comment on the proposal between May 4th and July 5th, with the FDA holding "public listening sessions" on June 13th and June 15th to obtain more feedback.

Notably, the possible ban doesn't include menthol e-cigarettes. The FDA is in the midst of reviewing all e-cigarette products and still allows sales of some menthol-flavored offerings. E-cigs reached the market before the FDA had the power to regulate them.

It's easy to see the menthol ban shaping e-cig policy, however. An alliance of 31 states and territories is pressuring the FDA to limit flavored offerings, including menthol. They're concerned about teens taking up e-cigs in large numbers (nearly a fifth of high schoolers had used them recently as of 2020), and see flavor bans steering youth away.

Producers might not be quite as thrilled. While Juul stopped selling mint-flavored e-cigs in 2019, it continues to offer menthol despite studies showing its popularity among young smokers. If a successful ban on conventional menthol cigarettes extends to e-cigs, brands like Juul may lose a significant portion of its customers regardless of age. Still, the FDA isn't likely to be swayed — companies might not want to count on selling menthol smoking products of any kind in the long run.

The US Postal Service is facing more than just stern warnings over its decision to buy mostly gas-powered mail delivery trucks. Environmental activist groups (including the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club) and 16 states have filed lawsuits in California and New York State to challenge the Postal Service's Next Generation Delivery Vehicle purchasing decision. They argue the USPS's environmental review was flawed and illegal, ignoring the "decades of pollution" the combustion-engine trucks would produce.

The USPS allegedly violated the National Environmental Policy Act by committing to buy 165,000 delivery vehicles (just 10 percent of them electric) without first conducting a "lawful" environmental review. The service only started its review six months after it had signed a contract, according to the California lawsuit. Both suits accuse the USPS of using botched estimates, including "unrealistically high" battery costs as well as wildly low fuel prices and emissions levels. They also noted that contract recipient Oshkosh Defense has no experience producing EVs.

The lawsuit also pointed out that the gas versions of the next-gen vehicle weren't much kinder to the climate than their roughly 30-year-old predecessors. While the 14.7MPG without air conditioning beats the earlier models' 8.2MPG, that fuel economy drops to just 8.6MPG with air conditioning turned on. Many of the powerplant-independent upgrades revolve around ergonomics, such as easier access to packages.

In a statement to the Associated Press, USPS spokesperson Kim Frum maintained that the organization implemented a "robust and thorough review" that met NEPA requirements. Previously, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy maintained that the institution couldn't afford to buy more EVs and needed to concentrate on basic infrastructure upgrades. Unlike many government agencies, the Postal Service is legally required to be self-sufficient and can't request government help to tackle deficits and debts.

Not that those arguments will necessarily help. If successful, the lawsuits will halt the truck order until it honors the plaintiffs' expectations for NEPA and other regulations. This doesn't guarantee an increased volume of EVs, but it won't be surprising if the USPS ends up falling more in line with the current White House's push for zero-emissions vehicles.

US Congress was evacuated yesterday after Capitol Police said it was "tracking an aircraft that poses a possible threat to the Capitol Complex," CBS News reported. Everyone stood down a short time later when it turned out to be a parachute demonstration, but the incident caused a lot of ire. "The Federal Aviation Administration’s apparent failure to notify Capitol Police of the pre-planned flyover [at] Nationals Stadium is outrageous and inexcusable," wrote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. 

The plane belonged to the Army Golden Knights parachuting team, dropping parachutists into the stadium for Military Appreciation Day. The pilot reportedly avoided flying over the restricted airspace over the Capitol Building and was coordinating with the control tower, but may not have had proper clearance, according to The Associated Press. 

FlightRadar24

The FAA acknowledged the incident and promised an "expeditious" review. "We know our actions affect others, especially in our nation's capital region, and we must communicate early and often with our law enforcement partners," it said in a statement. The plane's entire voyage was tracked by FlightRadar24 (above).

The incident demonstrates the level of coordination needed between FAA, law enforcement and other interested parties, particularly near restricted areas. As such, it may be an example of why the agency has been so careful in permitting passenger or delivery drones to operate in populated or sensitive areas. Such incidents are rare nowadays, but things could get chaotic with thousands of new drones plying the skies if the government doesn't have a comprehensive plan.