Connect with us

News desk

Anatomy of the week the Musk tornado hit Twitter

Published

on

Half of Twitter's 7,500 employees have lost their jobs
Share this:

The whirlwind week that Elon Musk took over Twitter began with sleepless nights for company engineers — and ended with half the staff getting the axe.

“It was a strange week,” said one former employee speaking on condition of anonymity.

“Executives were getting fired or were resigning, but there was basically no official communication until 5 pm Thursday,” some seven days after the deal was officialized.

The employees received a first email Thursday informing them that they would know their fate the next day. On Friday, the second email confirmed the rumors: 50 percent of the staff lost their jobs.

The cull hit the marketing department hard, took two-thirds of the design department, and maybe 75 percent of managers. Content moderation was somewhat spared, with a layoff rate of only 15 percent, according to Yoel Roth, head of safety at the platform.

After 24 hours without addressing the layoffs, Musk finally tweeted that “unfortunately there is no choice when the company is losing over $4M/day” and that all those who lost their jobs were “offered three months of severance.”

The layoff decision did not come as a surprise to employees — rumors had been growing — but they were shocked by how brutally it was carried out.

“People would find out not by any phone call or any email… but just by seeing their work laptop automatically reboot and just to go blank,” Emmanuel Cornet, a French engineer who had been at Twitter for a year and a half, told AFP on Friday.

– Class-action suit –

Cornet was dismissed Tuesday after being told in an email he had “violated” several company policies, without further explanation, after spending an entire weekend in the office on projects launched by edict of the new owner.

“I’m still trying to find out what the actual reason is,” he said.

The Tesla chief executive had engineers from his flagship company parachute in to assess the work of Twitter developers, examining in particular the volume of code produced by each, Cornet said. 

He is one of five former Twitter employees who filed a class-action suit against the company on the grounds that they had not received the 60-day notice required by the 1988 federal Warn Act in the event of a plant closing or mass layoff.

The French expat said many laid-off colleagues were in an unenviable “position in terms of health insurance or visas.”

“Some were on parental leave. One colleague gave birth yesterday, only to be laid off today.”

Those laid off must continue to abide by the company’s rules during the notice period. Many fear that the new management will look for excuses to accuse them of misconduct and not pay them severance.

“If anyone says something disparaging, or does anything they can use to dismiss them for cause they’ll do that instead of severance,” said the former employee speaking anonymously.

– A summer exodus –

For six months, the platform’s employees were preparing for the possibility that the world’s richest man might take control. 

He is preceded by his reputation, from the punishing work rates in his plants to his rejection of telecommuting, which is highly popular in the tech sector, and his absolutist vision of free speech, which his detractors claim can only lead to harassment, disinformation and a tolerance for hate speech.

This summer, more than 700 people left on their own, even before they knew whether the $44 billion acquisition would go through.

The radical change in corporate culture was confirmed as early as last Friday, when teams of engineers were mobilized to redesign certain features in a very short time, with their jobs on the line.

“There probably was too many layers of management… Twitter was not a well-oiled, efficient machine,” said the anonymous ex-employee. “But I don’t know if (the mass layoffs) is gonna fix it.”

“I think lots of people who remain now will leave, and maybe that’s what Elon wants,” he added.

“I feel sorry for anyone who didn’t get fired (to be honest). Elon will run those left into the ground with his hare-brained ideas,” reacted James Glynn, a London-based content moderation team leader who was laid off.

“Any kind of Twitter we knew before is dead.”

Share this:

News desk

US Congress to take on TikTok ban bill — again

Published

on

By

TikTok est depuis plusieurs mois dans le collimateur des autorités américaines, de nombreux responsables estimant que la plateforme de vidéos courtes et divertissantes permet à Pékin d'espionner et de manipuler ses 170 millions d'utilisateurs aux Etats-Unis
Share this:

The US House of Representatives will again vote Saturday on a bill that would force TikTok to divest from Chinese parent company ByteDance or face a nationwide ban.

The measure has been written into a massive $61 billion aid bill for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, which could ease its passage in both chambers of the US Congress.

Under the bill, ByteDance would have to sell the app within a few months or be excluded from Apple and Google’s app stores in the United States.

It would also give the US president the authority to designate other applications as a threat to national security if they are controlled by a country deemed hostile.

TikTok slammed the bill, saying it would hurt the US economy and undermine free speech. 

“It is unfortunate that the House of Representatives is using the cover of important foreign and humanitarian assistance to once again jam through a ban bill,” a company spokesman said.

He added a ban would “trample the free speech rights of 170 million Americans, devastate 7 million businesses, and shutter a platform that contributes $24 billion to the US economy annually.”

Western officials have voiced alarm over the popularity of TikTok with young people, alleging that it is subservient to Beijing and a conduit to spread propaganda, claims denied by the company and Beijing.

Joe Biden reiterated his concerns about TikTok during a phone call with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in early April.

The House of Representatives last month approved a similar bill cracking down on TikTok, but the measure got held up in the Senate.

Share this:
Continue Reading

News desk

Taiwan chip giant TSMC’s profits surge on AI demand

Published

on

By

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company -- whose clients include Apple and Nvidia -- controls more than half the world's output of silicon wafers
Share this:

Taiwanese semiconductor giant TSMC announced Thursday a nearly 9 percent increase in net profits in the first quarter of 2024, buoyed by global demand for its microchips used to power everything from mobile phones to AI technology.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company — whose clients include Apple and Nvidia — controls more than half the world’s output of silicon chips, which have been called the “lifeblood” of the modern world.

The company said Thursday its net profit increased 8.9 percent on-year in January-March to NT$225.4 billion ($6.97 billion) compared to NT$206.9 billion in the same period last year. 

First-quarter revenues also rose 13 percent year-on-year to $18.87 billion, it said.

CFO Wendell Huang also said during an earnings call Thursday that TSMC expects its second-quarter revenues to increase by 27.6 percent.

TSMC, which produces some of the most advanced microchips in the world, dominates the chip-making industry, as well as its customer US-based Nvidia. 

The bulk of its fabrication plants making its most high-tech products are based in Taiwan, a self-ruled island that is claimed by neighbouring China — which has in recent years ramped up political and military pressures on Taipei. 

With a supply chain so vulnerable to shocks, customers — as well as governments concerned about critical supplies — have called for the firm to move more chip production lines off the island, which is also prone to natural disasters like earthquakes. 

Earlier this month, a massive magnitude-7.4 quake hit Taiwan and “a certain number of wafers in process were impacted and had to be scrapped”, Huang said. 

“But we expect most of the lost production to be recovered in the second quarter and thus minimum impact to the second quarter revenue,” he said. 

– ‘Significant progress’ –

The firm had also earlier this month announced plans to build a third semiconductor factory in Arizona — adding to the two fabrication units already in progress there. 

The preliminary agreement with the US Commerce Department — tied to a major investment law called the Chips and Science Act — would see TSMC receiving up to $6.6 billion in direct funding from the US government. 

That would raise its total investment in the United States to $65 billion.

“In Arizona, we have received the strong commitment and support from our US customers and plan to build three fabs… We have made significant progress in our first fab, which has already entered engineering wafer production in April,” said CC Wei, the company’s CEO.

“We are well on track for volume production in first half of 2025.”

He added that the second fab in Arizona has been upgraded “to utilise 2-nanometre technologies to support the strong AI-related demand in addition to the previously announced 3-nanometre” chips. 

TSMC’s projects in Arizona have faced some obstacles in the past year, which the company had attributed to a lack of human resources, as making microchips requires a highly specialised skillset. 

But if successful, the TSMC fabs in Arizona would be the “first time” that super-advanced chips will be made on American soil, said US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo earlier this month. 

The company had also in February launched a new $8.6 billion plant in the southern Japanese island of Kyushu — a coup for Japan as it vies with the United States and Europe to woo semiconductor firms with huge subsidies.

It is also planning another facility in Kumamoto for more advanced chips.

Share this:
Continue Reading

News desk

Meta shouldn’t force users to pay for data protection: EU watchdog

Published

on

By

Meta in November launched a 'pay or consent' system -- a model that has faced several challenges
Share this:

Facebook owner Meta and other online platforms must not force users to pay for the right to data protection enshrined in EU law when offering ad-free subscriptions, the European data regulator said Wednesday. 

“Online platforms should give users a real choice when employing ‘consent or pay’ models,” the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) chair Anu Talus said in a statement. 

“The models we have today usually require individuals to either give away all their data or to pay,” she said. “As a result, most users consent to the processing in order to use a service, and they do not understand the full implications of their choices.”

Meta in November launched a “pay or consent” system allowing users to withhold use of their data for ad targeting in exchange for a monthly fee — a model that has faced several challenges from privacy and consumer advocates.

Meta has long profited from selling user data to advertisers but this business model has led to multiple battles with EU regulators over data privacy.

The latest announcement came after the data protection authorities of The Netherlands, Norway and the German state of Hamburg went to the EDPB for an opinion regarding the pay-or-consent model used by Meta.

The Silicon Valley company allows users of Instagram and Facebook in Europe to pay between 10 and 13 euros (around $11 and $14) a month to opt out of data sharing.

Meta pointed to an EU court ruling last year that it said opened the way for subscriptions as a “legally valid” option. “Today’s EDPB opinion does not alter that judgment and subscription for no ads complies with EU laws,” a Meta spokesperson said.

Meta is waiting for a decision on its model by the data privacy regulator in Ireland where the company is headquartered.

– ‘Binary choice’ –

All digital platforms must comply with the European Union’s mammoth general data protection regulation (GDPR), which has been at the root of EU court cases against Meta.

The EDPB in its opinion argued that Meta’s model was at odds with the GDPR’s requirement that consent for data use must be freely given.

“In most cases, it will not be possible for large online platforms to comply with the requirements for valid consent if they confront users only with a binary choice between consenting to processing of personal data for behavioural advertising purposes and paying a fee,” the opinion read.

The EDPB also warned the type of subscription service put forward by Meta “should not be the default way forward” for platforms.

It suggested that platforms should consider an alternative that would give users the right to reject being tracked for advertising purposes without the need to pay.

Privacy defenders welcomed the opinion.

“Overall, Meta is out of options in the EU. It must now give users a genuine yes/no option for personalised advertising,” said prominent online privacy activist Max Schrems.

“We know that ‘Pay or Okay’ shifts consent rates from about three percent to more than 99 percent — so it is as far from ‘freely given’ consent as North Korea is from a democracy,” said Schrems.

Tech lobby group CCIA however warned the EDPB risked “opening a Pandora’s Box”.

“Forcing businesses to offer services at a loss is unprecedented and sends the wrong signals,” said CCIA Europe’s senior policy manager, Claudia Canelles Quaroni.

“All companies should be able to offer paid-for versions of their services.”

Share this:
Continue Reading

Featured