President Joe Biden will today announce the details of how $42 billion in funding to bolster broadband internet access will be allocated. The investment, which was funded by the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, aims to give all Americans access to high-speed internet by 2030.

Last year, the White House announced an initiative that would allocate at least $100 million to participating states through the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) Program. The remainder of the funding was on hold until the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) drew up a more detailed coverage map showing which homes and businesses lacked high-speed internet access. The funding will be allocated based on the map.

The FCC released its first draft of the overhauled map, which incorporates more granular data, in November. Still, politicians on both sides of the aisle were concerned it left out millions of businesses and homes and urged the White House to delay the broadband funding efforts until issues were resolved.

After taking feedback from the public and states, the FCC unveiled an updated version in May. According to The Washington Post, the updated map addressed around 4 million mistakes, resulting in approximately half a million more homes, businesses and other locations without any internet access being identified. In all, the FCC determined that more than 8.3 million homes and businesses lack access to high-speed internet.

States will first focus on bringing broadband to locations that have no access at all. If they have any funding left over, they can use it to improve internet access for those with slow speeds.

It could take up to two years for the government to dole out all the funding. States will submit their initial plans later this year and that will open up a fifth of the funding, according to Reuters. The rest of the $42 billion will be unlocked after states finalize plans for investing the funds.

Many of the locations that lack broadband access are in rural areas. By and large, major providers have shied away from rolling out broadband in these locales due to their smaller populations and the high cost of installing infrastructure.

Russian internet service providers have cut off access to Google News after President Vladamir Putin accused Yevgeny Prigozhin, the leader of the Wagner paramilitary group, of “organizing an armed rebellion.” According to internet monitor NetBlocks (via The New York Times), at least five Russian telecoms, including Rostelecom, U-LAN and Telplusl, are blocking web users inside the country from accessing the news aggregator. Google did not immediately respond to Engadget’s comment request.

On late Friday, Wagner Group mercenaries crossed the border from Ukraine into Rostov-on-Don, located 20 miles from the Sea of Azov, and appeared to take the city, which is home to Russia’s southern military headquarters, without much resistance from the regular army. As of Saturday, BBC News is reporting Wagner forces are moving north toward Moscow. Prigozhin has vowed to topple Russia’s Defense Ministry in response to a missile attack he claims the regular army carried out against Wagner personnel stationed in Ukraine. In addition to being the founder of the Wagner Group, Prigozhin is the funder and creator of the Internet Research Agency, the troll farm behind Russia’s 2016 US election interference campaign.

Putin, framing Prigozhin’s rebellion as a “deadly threat” to Russian statehood, has promised harsh consequences for any who join the paramilitary group. “Everyone who deliberately embarked on the path of betrayal, who prepared an armed rebellion, chose the path of blackmail and terrorist methods — they will suffer inevitable punishment,” he said Saturday, according to The Washington Post.

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year, many Western tech firms either pulled out of the country or saw their services blocked by telecom regulator Roskomnadzor. Facebook and Twitter are among the platforms that have either been partly or fully blocked within the country since March of last year.

If younger generations are more likely to feel the effects of climate change, shouldn't they have a say in related government policies? The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) thinks so. It's officially forming its "first-ever" National Environmental Youth Advisory Council. The agency is inviting 16 people aged 18 to 29 to have them influence the agency's approach to environmental issues that affect youth communities.

In keeping with the EPA's increasing focus on environmental justice, at least half of the council's overall membership will come from, live in or do most of its work in "disadvantaged" communities where clean air, land and water aren't guaranteed. Youth interested in the panel will have until August 22nd at 11:59PM Eastern to apply, with webinars for would-be applicants on June 30th and August 7th.

Agency head Michael Regan argues that it's not practical to address environmental issues without the help of younger people who are often at the "forefront of social movements." The council makes sure that youth play a role in decisions, the administrator adds.

Plans for the council were originally unveiled in June 2022, and come several months after the EPA created an Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights. That new division is meant to include "underserved communities" in the regulatory process, Vice President Kamala Harris said at the time. In that light, the youth council is an extension of last year's strategy.

President Biden's administration has made the environment a key element of its policy. The wide-ranging Inflation Reduction Act includes $3 billion in environmental justice grants as well as revised (if sometimes stricter) EV tax credits. The youth council won't necessarily lead to major changes in policy, but it makes sense when young adults are more likely to deal with the most severe effects of rising global temperatures than the official rule makers.

The US government is asking qualified members of the public for help in figuring out how to seize opportunities and overcome challenges associated with generative AI. Gina Raimondo, the US Secretary of Commerce, has announced that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is launching a public working group for AI technologies that can generate content, including text, images, videos, music and code. The group will also help the agency develop key guidance that organizations can follow to address risks brought by generative AI tech. 

According to the agency, the group will be composed of volunteers with technical expertise from the private and public sectors and will work together via a collaborative online workspace. To start with, the group will gather input on how the NIST AI Risk Management Framework — the framework the agency developed to "better manage risks to individuals, organizations and society associated with artificial intelligence" — may be used to support the development of generative AI tech. Then, the group is expected to support the agency's AI-related tests and evaluations. Its long-term goal, however, is to explore opportunities on how generative AI can be used to solve the most pressing issues of our time, such as problems related to health, climate change and the environment as a whole. 

Raimondo said in a statement:

"President Biden has been clear that we must work to harness the enormous potential while managing the risks posed by AI to our economy, national security and society. The recently released NIST AI Risk Management Framework can help minimize the potential for harm from generative AI technologies. Building on the framework, this new public working group will help provide essential guidance for those organizations that are developing, deploying and using generative AI, and who have a responsibility to ensure its trustworthiness."

The government has been scrambling to keep up with the rapidly advancing pace of generative AI technology. In April, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration asked for public comments on possible regulations that would hold AI creators accountable. The White House also invited American workers to share how automated tools are being used in their workplaces. Then in June, Representatives Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Ken Buck (R-CO) introduced legislation that would establish a 20-person commission to study ways to "mitigate the risks and possible harms" of AI while also "protecting" America's position as a global technology power. The legislation came after Microsoft vice chair and president Brad Smith spoke at Washington, DC and called on the US federal government to establish a new agency that's focused on regulating AI. 

A new decision from Meta's Oversight Board reiterates Facebook's continual role as a platform for dangerous election rhetoric. The Board reversed Meta's initial decision to leave public a video posted in January that called for insurrectionist actions in Brazil following the inauguration of its new president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

Lula took office on January 1st, and two days later, a user posted the video of a prominent Brazilian general — and supporter of the former president Jair Bolsonaro — telling people to "hit the streets" and "go to the National Congress … [and the] Supreme Court." Portugese text overlaid the video stating, "Come to Brasília! Let's Storm it! Let's besiege the three powers." Three Powers Plaza sits in the Brazilian capital and is home to the Congress, Supreme Court and the presidential offices.

Meta had previously acknowledged the risk of civil and election-centric unrest in Brazil, first labeling the country a "Temporary High-Risk Location" in September 2022 and then extending it to late February of this year. Yet, when an initial user reported the video, a moderator didn't find it in violation of Meta's policies — a second moderator agreed following an appeal. Seven moderators in total reviewed reports from four individuals between January 3rd and 4th, but none found an issue with the video. An accompanying caption for the video called for a "besiege" of Brazil's Congress as a last-ditch effort. Five days after the video arrived on Facebook, hundreds of protesters broke into the three governmental buildings and set fires, broke windows and assaulted police officers. 

The next day Meta called the riots a "violating event" and claimed to have "been removing content calling for people to take up arms or forcibly invade Congress, the Presidential palace and other federal buildings." Yet, the video remained on Facebook until January 20th, when Meta removed the post following the Oversight Board's choice to shortlist its review into it. Moderators should categorize a post as violating Meta's rules when it calls for forced entry into a high-risk place (like a government building) in a temporary high-risk location (as Brazil was at the time). Meta stated that leaving up the video with a military official calling for an insurrection was an "error." 

In its decision, the Oversight Board said it was "deeply concerned" that Meta's moderators had continually found the video not to violate its policies. The Board recommended that Meta finally "develop a framework for evaluating its election integrity efforts. This includes creating and sharing metrics for successful election integrity efforts, including those related to Meta's enforcement of its content policies and its approach to ads." It also called on the company to expand its protocols when evaluating if content causes harm in high-risk events.

The Oversight Board has operated since 2020 as an independently funded entity to which individuals can appeal content visibility decisions. It has the power to permit or remove Facebook and Instagram content with statements outlining its rationale accompanying each decision. The Board currently has 22 members (a report claims it will eventually be 40), including Nighat Dad, founder of the Digital Rights Foundation, and Ronaldo Lemos, a Rio De Janiero State University's Law School professor.

Meta has served as a home for right-wing conspiracy theorists and organizers, with at least 650,000 posts arguing against Joe Biden's victory shared on Facebook between Election Day 2020 in the US and the January 6th, 2021 insurrection. The social media platform had enacted some safety features after misinformation spread had spread across it around the 2016 Election, but it continued to do so, and ahead of the 2022 midterms and Brazil's general election, Meta quietly rolled back many of its safeguards.

News gatherers in the US may soon have safeguards against government attempts to comb through their data. Bipartisan House and Senate groups have reintroduced legislation, the PRESS Act (Protect Reporters from Exploitive State Spying), that limits the government's ability to compel data disclosures that might identify journalists' sources. The Senate bill, would extend disclosure exemptions and standards to cover email, phone records, and other info third parties hold.

The PRESS Act would also require that the federal government gives journalists a chance to respond to data requests. Courts could still demand disclosure if it's necessary to prevent terrorism, identify terrorists or prevent serious "imminent" violence. The Senate bill is the work of Richard Durbin, Mike Lee and Ron Wyden, while the House equivalent comes from representatives Kevin Kiley and Jamie Raskin.

Sponsors characterize the bill as vital to protecting First Amendment press freedoms. Anonymous source leaks help keep the government accountable, Wyden says. He adds that surveillance like this can deter reporters and sources worried about retaliation. Lee, meanwhile, says the Act will also maintain the public's "right to access information" and help it participate in a representative democracy.

The senators point to instances from both Democratic and Republican administrations where law enforcement subpoenaed data in a bid to catch sources. Most notably, the Justice Department under Trump is known to have seized call records and email logs from major media outlets like CNN and The New York Times following an April 2017 report on how former FBI director James Comey handled investigations during the 2016 presidential election.

Journalist shield laws exist in 48 states and the District of Columbia, but there's no federal law. That void lets the Justice Department and other government bodies quietly grab data from telecoms and other providers. The PRESS Act theoretically patches that hole and minimizes the chances of abuse.

There's no guarantee the PRESS Act will reach President Biden's desk and become law. However, both Congress camps are betting that bipartisan support will help. The House version passed "unanimously" in the previous session of Congress, Wyden's office says.

While lawmakers in Congress (and soon, the Senate) call for a "blue-ribbon commission" to study the potential impacts of AI on American society, President Biden on Tuesday met with leaders in the emerging field to discuss and debate the issue directly. The President met with Tristan Harris, executive director of the Center for Human Technology; Fei-Fei Li, Co-Director of Stanford’s Human-Centered AI Institute; and Jennifer Doudna, Professor of Chemistry at UC Berkeley, among others, at the Fairmont hotel in San Francisco.

Staying atop the growing swell of AI technology advancements in recent months and years, specifically the emergence of generative AI systems, has become a focal point for the Biden administration. Generative AI systems hold the promise to revolutionize many sectors of the economy and drastically reimagine the nature of modern office work. However, those same systems could just as likely wipe out entire professions, as the fields of digital art and journalism are now experiencing. 

The White House announced a $140 million investment in May to establish seven new National AI Research Institutes and has begun investigating the technology's use in business. As the White House chief of staff's office told AP, top White House staff meet regularly on the subject, two to three times each week. Biden himself has reportedly met with multiple subject matter experts and technical advisors on the subject to discuss, "the importance of protecting rights and safety to ensure responsible innovation and appropriate safeguards."

The wheels of government have finally begun to turn on the issue of generative AI regulation. US Representatives Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Ken Buck (R-CO) introduced legislation on Monday that would establish a 20-person commission to study ways to “mitigate the risks and possible harms” of AI while “protecting” America's position as a global technology power. 

The bill would require the Executive branch to appoint experts from throughout government, academia and industry to conduct the study over the course of two years, producing three reports during that period. The president would appoint eight members of the committee, while Congress, in an effort "to ensure bipartisanship," would split the remaining 12 positions evenly between the two parties (thereby ensuring the entire process devolves into a partisan circus).

"[Generative AI] can be disruptive to society, from the arts to medicine to architecture to so many different fields, and it could also potentially harm us and that's why I think we need to take a somewhat different approach,” Lieu told the Washington Post. He views the commission as a way to give lawmakers — the same folks routinely befuddled by TikTok — a bit of "breathing room" in understanding how the cutting-edge technology functions.

Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) plans to introduce the bill's upper house counterpart, Lieu's team told WaPo, though no timeline for that happening was provided. Lieu also noted that Congress as a whole would do well to avoid trying to pass major legislation on the subject until the commission has had its time. “I just think we need some experts to inform us and just have a little bit of time pass before we put something massive into law,” Lieu said.

Of course, that would then push the passage any sort of meaningful Congressional regulation on generative AI out to 2027, at the very earliest, rather than right now, when we actually need it. Given how rapidly both the technology and the use cases for it have evolved in just the last six months, this study will have its work cut out just keeping pace with the changes, much less convincing the octogenarians running our nation of the potential dangers AI poses to our democracy.

The Biden administration on Friday announced $930 million in grants designed to expand rural access to broadband internet. Part of the Department of Commerce’s “Enabling Middle Mile Broadband Infrastructure Program,” the grants will fund the deployment of more than 12,000 miles of new fiber optic cable across 35 states and Puerto Rico. The administration said Friday it expects grant recipients to invest an additional $848.46 million, a commitment that should double the program's impact.

“Much like how the interstate highway system connected every community in America to regional and national systems of highways, this program will help us connect communities across the country to regional and national networks that provide quality, affordable high-speed internet access,” Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said.

According to the Commerce Department, it received over 260 applications for the Middle Mile Grant Program, totaling $7.47 billion in funding requests. The agency primarily awarded grants to telecom and utility companies, though it also set aside funding for tribal governments and nonprofits. Per Gizmodo, the largest grant, valued at $88.8 million, went to a telecommunications company in Alaska that will build a fiber optic network in a part of the state where 55 percent of residents have no internet access. On average, the Commerce Department awarded $26.6 million to most applicants. Grant recipients now have five years to complete work on their projects, though the administration hopes many of the buildouts will be completed sooner.

In addition to creating new economic opportunities in traditionally underserved communities, the government says the projects should improve safety in those areas too. “They can improve network resilience in the face of the climate crisis, and increasing natural disasters like wildfires, floods, and storms, creating multiple routes for the internet traffic to use instead of just one, like a detour on the freeway,” White House infrastructure coordinator Mitch Landrieu told Bloomberg.

The funding is just one of many recent efforts by the government to close the rural digital divide. At the start of last year, the Federal Communications Commission announced an accountability program designed to ensure recipients of the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund properly spend the money they receive from the public purse.

Lawmakers from the European Union have taken a big step towards regulating the use of artificial intelligence systems in the region by passing a draft law known as the AI Act. As The New York Times notes, it's merely one part of a longer process, and the soonest we can see the final version of the law is most likely later this year. But if the law gets enforced in its current form, then the European Union will be banning the use of real-time and remote biometric systems, such as facial recognition scanning. 

It will also prohibit devices that exhibit cognitive behavioral manipulation, such as voice activated toys deemed to encourage dangerous behavior in children. Technologies that classify people based on their socio-economic status or personal characteristics will be banned, as well. Meanwhile, technologies considered "high risk" will need to be registered in an EU database. These include AI systems for biometric identification and those for use by law enforcement. 

The European Commission first proposed the AI Act back in April 2021. That was way before the meteoric rise in popularity of generative AI systems, which led to a rise in calls for artificial intelligence to be regulated. The version the lawmakers have voted on included rules for generative AI companies like OpenAI, including requiring them to disclose any content generated by artificial intelligence. These companies will also be required to ensure that their large language models can't generate illegal content. Also, they will have to publish summaries of copyrighted data used to train their models. 

Representatives from the European Parliament, the European Commission and the Council of the European Union still have to negotiate details for the final version of the law. They could decide to change some aspects of it and add certain exemptions, such as allowing the use of facial recognition for national security purposes. The AI Act would likely go through several iterations after this vote, though EU officials are hoping to finalize details by the end of the year.