On March 23, 23andMe, the pioneer in at-home genetic testing, shocked the public by filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, signaling a potential sale of the company. With 15 million customers relying on the service, many are now left wondering: What happens to my genetic data?

As privacy advocates raise alarms, and even two state attorneys general urge Americans to delete their data, 23andMe insists that its bankruptcy proceedings will not affect how it handles user information. But with the company’s future uncertain, experts believe there’s a huge incentive for corporations and researchers to get their hands on the treasure trove of genetic data 23andMe has accumulated.

Genetic data provides more than just information about your ancestry—it can reveal a lot about your health, food preferences, and even traits passed down through generations. Despite growing privacy concerns, this data holds incredible potential for industries ranging from medical research to advertising.

“Genetic data is permanent and unique,” says Katie Hasson, associate director for the Center for Genetics and Society. “It could reveal information about people who don’t even exist yet, many years from now.”

As 23andMe seeks a buyer, one thing is clear: corporations, advertisers, and medical researchers are eager to access the wealth of information embedded in these DNA profiles.

The value of genetic data goes far beyond simple ancestry reports. Take, for example, how genetics can influence food preferences. Researchers have discovered hundreds of genetic variants tied to specific tastes, such as liking or disliking certain foods. Gideon Nave, an associate professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, explains that genetic data could be more insightful than your shopping cart—especially since the items you buy may be for someone else.

“Genetic data can often tell us more about a person’s preferences than even their stated choices,” Nave says. “It’s a much deeper level of personalization for companies, especially when it comes to targeted advertising.”

Moreover, 23andMe’s health-related services offer subscribers insights into their genetic predispositions for certain diseases, like Type 2 diabetes or celiac disease. That’s where the real value lies for healthcare companies and researchers: using genetic data to better understand diseases, create personalized treatments, and improve diagnoses.

Healthcare professionals often rely on rules of thumb, tests, and symptom-checking to diagnose patients, but many conditions share similar symptoms. This is where combining genetic data with clinical information can make a difference, says Vasant Dhar, a professor of business and data science at NYU’s Stern School of Business.

“Doctors are following rules and doing tests, but a lot of diseases have similar symptoms,” Dhar explains. “Genetic data, combined with clinical information, could lead to more accurate diagnoses and better treatments.”

Healthcare research is poised to benefit greatly from genetic information, especially when it comes to developing tailored medical interventions. However, the potential for misuse also raises significant concerns.

While genetic data is highly valuable for research and healthcare, it also brings significant privacy risks. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) prohibits the use of genetic data in health insurance and employment decisions, but there are few regulations surrounding its use in other industries, like disability insurance.

Katie Hasson warns that genetic data could be exploited in ways that people aren’t even aware of. For example, genetic traits linked to health risks might be used for targeted advertising, potentially manipulating consumers based on information they don’t fully understand about themselves.

“There’s a darker side to this,” says Dhar. “With genetics, companies could know a lot more about you than you realize. That kind of personal information could be exploited in ways that aren’t fully transparent.”

23andMe’s potential sale wouldn’t be the first time a genetic testing company has been acquired. In 2020, private equity firm Blackstone acquired Ancestry.com. But there’s a key difference: genetic data doesn’t expire. Unlike traditional consumer data, genetic information can be useful for companies long into the future, even if it’s not immediately applied.

For instance, companies could use genetic data to shape future marketing strategies, develop new products, or even predict consumer behavior based on health traits.

However, as Nave points out, this also brings risks. “One of the dangers of genetic data is that it’s permanent. It doesn’t have an expiration date,” he says. “If companies ever use it for marketing, they could target consumers based on health traits they aren’t even aware of.”

As 23andMe enters this uncertain chapter, the future of its data—and its millions of users—remains in the balance. The company promises to continue selling its DNA test kits and offering subscriptions, but who will buy the company and what they will do with the data remains to be seen.

For now, the key takeaway is clear: genetic data is incredibly powerful, and it’s more than just a tool for tracing your family tree. It’s a valuable commodity with vast potential—and the companies that acquire it could hold your most personal information for years to come.

As the world of genetic data continues to evolve, privacy concerns are sure to rise. Whether consumers will have a say in how their information is used remains to be seen, but one thing is certain: the sale of 23andMe’s data will open up a whole new world of possibilities—and risks.

Source: CNN – 23andMe’s DNA data is going up for sale. Here’s why companies might want it

The post 23andMe’s DNA Data Is Up for Sale: What Happens to Your Genetic Information? appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Britain’s security officials have demanded that Apple create a so-called “back door” to access the encrypted data stored on users‘ iCloud accounts worldwide, according to a report by The Washington Post on Friday. The request would allow the UK government to retrieve all content uploaded by Apple users to the cloud.

Apple’s Response and Potential Consequences

In response, Apple is reportedly considering halting its encrypted storage services in the UK, rather than compromising its security promises to users, the report suggests. The UK’s Home Secretary’s office issued a “technical capability notice” to Apple, officially ordering the company to comply with the request.

Government and Apple Reactions

Apple did not provide a comment outside of regular business hours when approached by Reuters. Additionally, the UK’s interior ministry has yet to respond to the Washington Post’s report.

Background on the Investigation

This move follows Britain’s earlier actions in January, when the government used its regulatory powers to launch an investigation into Apple and Google. The probe focuses on smartphone operating systems, app stores, and browsers, raising concerns about the influence of major tech companies in the UK market.

Source

The post UK Demands Apple Open Encrypted iCloud Accounts, Report Says appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

On Friday, TikTok warned that it will shut down access to the app for over 170 million Americans starting Sunday, unless President Joe Biden’s administration intervenes urgently to ensure the company will not face penalties under the looming ban.

In April, a bipartisan law was signed by Biden, which mandates TikTok to sell its operations to American buyers by Sunday or face a complete ban in the U.S. The Supreme Court upheld the controversial law earlier Friday, allowing the ban to take effect.

The Biden administration has signaled that enforcement of the law will be left to President-elect Donald Trump, who is set to take office on Monday. A White House official stated that the administration has made its position clear, though it left open the possibility of further actions before the deadline.

Despite this, TikTok insisted that the Biden administration’s statements were insufficient, failing to provide clear assurances to service providers who risk heavy fines for allowing access to TikTok post-ban.

“The statements issued today by both the Biden White House and the Department of Justice have failed to provide the necessary clarity to service providers,” TikTok said. “Unless the Biden Administration provides a definitive statement assuring non-enforcement, TikTok will be forced to go dark on January 19.”

While Trump has not directly committed to enforcing the ban, he had asked the Supreme Court to delay its implementation until his administration could negotiate a sale of TikTok’s U.S. operations. The Supreme Court rejected his appeal, but the app could potentially return if Trump offers reassurances against penalties for violating the law.

Service providers, fearing significant financial penalties, told TikTok that they still lack the clarity needed to continue hosting the app after Sunday.

Biden’s Role and Transition to Trump

The Biden administration’s power will officially end on Monday, with White House aides confirming that enforcement of the law will now fall to Trump’s incoming team.

TikTok executives are acting cautiously, aiming to avoid legal and financial repercussions while maximizing efforts to keep the app available in the U.S.

Supreme Court’s Ruling and National Security Concerns

The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the ban to proceed focused on concerns related to TikTok’s data collection practices and its potential ties to China. The Court noted that the app’s data collection raised national security concerns, emphasizing that foreign adversaries, like China, should not be allowed to monitor Americans’ personal information.

Although the ruling acknowledged TikTok’s role as an important platform for millions of Americans, the Court maintained that Congress’s national security concerns justified the ban.

TikTok’s Response and Future Outlook

In a TikTok video following the decision, CEO Shou Chew reiterated the company’s commitment to protecting free speech and ensuring the platform’s continued availability in the U.S., potentially with Trump’s support.

“We are fighting to protect the rights of the 170 million Americans who use our platform,” Chew said. “We are grateful for President Trump’s commitment to find a solution.”

Chew also thanked Trump for his understanding of the platform, which he has used personally to engage with the public.

Trump Weighs In

Trump spoke to CNN after the Court’s ruling, asserting that he would make the final decision on the matter. He confirmed discussions with Chinese President Xi Jinping regarding TikTok, stating that they had a “great talk.”

The Biden administration’s position, according to White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, has been clear: TikTok should remain available under American ownership to address national security concerns. However, due to the timing of the transition, the new administration will handle the next steps.

Potential Impact of the Ban

The law imposes heavy fines on companies that distribute or update TikTok once the ban is in place, with penalties up to $5,000 per user, which could total billions. TikTok is now seeking assurances that the law will not be enforced immediately, allowing the new administration time to assess the situation.

Legal and Financial Uncertainty

A U.S. law enforcement official stated that the Biden administration is leaving it to companies to interpret compliance with the law until the new administration takes office. TikTok is hoping for a period of grace while the new administration assesses the future of the app.

Chew assured users, “We will do everything in our power to keep TikTok available,” while hinting at ongoing efforts to resolve the situation.

Future Developments and Trump’s Influence

Trump’s upcoming inauguration might signal a shift in TikTok’s fate, with some in Congress suggesting that more time should be given to allow a sale of the app to an American company. The law permits a 90-day extension if significant progress is made toward a deal.

The Supreme Court ruling emphasizes national security concerns related to TikTok’s data collection, but the future of the app remains uncertain. Both TikTok and its users are in a state of suspense, waiting to see how the next administration will handle the ban and its implications for American consumers and businesses.

Conclusion

With the clock ticking, TikTok’s fate hangs in the balance. As the company braces for the potential shutdown, all eyes are on President-elect Trump, who will ultimately decide the future of the app in the U.S., and how the new administration will navigate the complex issue of national security and international business relationships.

Source

The post TikTok Threatens to Shut Down in U.S. Without Immediate Action from Biden appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The U.S. Supreme Court expressed openness on Wednesday to a Texas law that seeks to block children and teenagers from accessing online pornography. However, the justices indicated they may send the case back to a lower court for further consideration of the law’s impact on adults’ free speech rights.

Texas is one of over a dozen states with laws designed to restrict young people’s access to online pornography. These laws stem from concerns about the ease with which children can access explicit material online, particularly through smartphones. The states argue these laws are essential in the face of the growing prevalence and availability of hardcore pornography on the internet.

Concerns Over Technology and Free Speech

Chief Justice John Roberts, part of the court’s conservative majority, acknowledged the rapid expansion of online pornography. “Technological access to pornography has exploded, right?” Roberts said during the hearing.

However, the Free Speech Coalition, a trade group representing the adult entertainment industry, argues that the Texas law unfairly impacts adults. The law requires individuals to submit personal identifying information to access adult content online, raising concerns over privacy, potential data breaches, and the risk of online tracking. Pornhub, a major adult website, has already ceased operations in several states due to difficulties in complying with such laws.

While the Free Speech Coalition agrees that children should be protected from explicit material, it contends that the Texas law is overly broad. The law’s vague language could also affect legitimate content, such as sexual education resources or depictions of simulated sex in movies. Additionally, the law primarily targets adult websites, leaving search engines—frequently used to find pornography—untouched. The group advocates for content filtering over age-verification requirements.

Content Filtering Challenges

Justice Amy Coney Barrett appeared skeptical of the law’s practicality, pointing out the numerous ways children can access the internet. As a mother of seven, Barrett said, “Content filtering for all those different devices, I can say from personal experience, is difficult to keep up with.”

Historical Precedent and Free-Speech Concerns

This is not the first time the Supreme Court has addressed the issue of online pornography. In 1996, the court struck down parts of a law banning explicit material accessible to children online. In 2004, the court upheld less restrictive measures, like content filtering, but rejected more extreme laws aimed at curbing children’s access to pornography.

Texas argues that technology has significantly improved since then. The state claims that online platforms can now use simple tools, like verifying a user’s age through a quick photo, much like checking ID at a store. Texas believes this new technology makes age verification no more invasive than traditional methods used for decades.

Legal and Constitutional Questions

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals recently sided with Texas, ruling that the law could go into effect despite earlier challenges. However, some justices expressed concerns that the lower court had not applied a strict enough legal standard regarding the law’s impact on First Amendment rights.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson questioned how far the state could go in requiring adults to prove their age, asking, “How far can a state go in terms of burdening adults showing how old they are?”

Justice Elena Kagan raised concerns about potential unintended consequences for other laws involving free speech, regardless of how the court rules on this case.

A Potential Compromise

Some justices seemed interested in the position of the Biden administration, which has suggested sending the case back to the 5th Circuit for further deliberation. The administration proposed that, if carefully written, such laws could pass a higher legal standard. The goal of protecting children from pornography is widely supported, but it must be balanced against the constitutional rights of adults.

Other states with similar laws include Tennessee, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, Utah, and Virginia.

The Texas law imposes fines of up to $10,000 per violation, with penalties increasing to as much as $250,000 if the violation involves a minor.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on the case by June.

Source

The post Texas Law Aims to Protect Kids from Porn, Raises Free-Speech Concerns appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Career-networking giant LinkedIn has pushed back against proposed Australian legislation aimed at banning social media access for children under 16, arguing that its platform is simply too unappealing to minors to be included in the ban.

“LinkedIn simply does not have content interesting and appealing to minors,” the Microsoft-owned company stated in a submission to the Australian Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee.

Australia’s Push for a Social Media Ban

The Australian government has proposed “world-leading” legislation to restrict children’s access to social media, citing concerns over online harm. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese emphasized that the measures are designed to address the worries of parents about their children’s online safety.

While other tech giants like Meta, Google, Snapchat, and TikTok have raised objections, LinkedIn took a different stance, asserting that its professional focus and minimum age requirement of 16 make it irrelevant to younger audiences. The company added that it actively removes accounts belonging to underage users when identified.

Industry Concerns and Criticism

Other social media platforms have voiced significant concerns about the proposed legislation:

• Meta (parent company of Facebook and Instagram) argued the bill would fail to ease the burden on parents and claimed it disregards expert advice from child safety and mental health professionals.
• TikTok Australia criticized the legislation’s rushed timeline, warning it could lead to unintended consequences.
• Google, Snapchat, and X (formerly Twitter) raised legal and practical issues, including the bill’s reliance on age verification technologies still under trial.

Privacy and Consultation Issues

Privacy advocates and human rights experts have also criticized the bill for its hasty development and potential privacy implications. Carly Kind, Australia’s privacy commissioner, and Lorraine Findlay, human rights commissioner, have both called for more comprehensive consultation and scrutiny before the legislation is enacted.

LinkedIn’s Case for Exemption

LinkedIn argued that regulating its platform under the new law would impose unnecessary costs and barriers for its users in Australia. By avoiding inclusion in the legislation, the platform could also sidestep the need for additional age verification processes.

International Interest

Australia’s approach has garnered attention worldwide. In the UK, Technology Secretary Peter Kyle mentioned similar legislation as a possibility, while France has already implemented a law requiring parental consent for children under 15 to access social media. However, research suggests nearly half of French minors have bypassed the restrictions using VPNs.

What’s Next?

The Australian government plans to pass the legislation before the end of the parliamentary year. However, experts warn the current timeframe and lack of consultation could hinder its effectiveness.

As the debate continues, LinkedIn’s professional focus and limited appeal to younger audiences may ultimately exempt it from these sweeping changes.

Source

The post Why LinkedIn Says It’s Too Boring for a Social Media Ban on Minors appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Introduction

The social media platform X (formerly Twitter) has introduced updated terms of service effective November 15, which include a controversial provision allowing the platform to use users’ content for training its artificial intelligence (AI) models. The decision has ignited widespread debate, with concerns ranging from data privacy to ethical issues surrounding the use of creative work.

What’s in the Updated Terms?
The revised terms grant X a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to analyze user-generated content for various purposes, explicitly including the training of machine learning and AI models. This broad scope means that everything users post—text, photos, and other media—can potentially be used to refine X’s AI tools, such as its chatbot Grok.

While using user data for AI training is not uncommon among tech companies, X’s updated terms stand out for their explicitness. Alex Fink, CEO of Otherweb, pointed out that X’s approach removes ambiguity often seen in similar agreements on other platforms.

Concerns from Creatives and Privacy Advocates
The new policy has alarmed artists and creators who fear their work could be exploited to train AI systems that might eventually replace human creativity. Many X users are also apprehensive about personal information being processed for AI purposes. Some have started removing personal photographs and sensitive content from their accounts.

Privacy concerns are further exacerbated by the lack of clarity regarding opt-out mechanisms. Previously, users could disable data sharing for AI training through privacy settings, but it is uncertain if this option remains valid under the new terms. Moreover, the language in the revised agreement no longer differentiates between public and private accounts.

Legal Implications and Jurisdiction
Another contentious update involves changes to dispute resolution. Any legal issues arising from the new terms must be filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas or state courts in Tarrant County, Texas. This stipulation places potential legal battles in a jurisdiction over 100 miles from X’s new headquarters in Austin, raising logistical challenges for users wishing to contest the terms.

Grok’s Controversies
Grok, X’s AI chatbot, has already drawn criticism for spreading misinformation about elections and generating inappropriate content. These incidents highlight the potential risks of relying on user data to improve AI tools without stringent safeguards.

A Broader Issue in the Tech Industry
X’s move aligns with a broader trend of tech companies leveraging user-generated content for AI development. Giants like Google and Microsoft have faced similar backlash over the unintended consequences of their AI initiatives, from misinformation to ethical violations.

Conclusion
While X’s new terms of service are within the scope of what is common for social media platforms, their explicit wording and wide-ranging implications have sparked significant pushback. Whether users retain any control over their data in this new framework remains to be seen, but the update underscores the growing tension between AI advancement and individual rights in the digital age.

Source

The post X’s New Terms of Service: How Your Posts Could Train AI Models appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.