NEW YORK — Gone is the bullhorn. Instead, New York City emergency management officials have turned high-tech, using drones to warn residents about potential threatening weather. With a buzzing sound in the background, a drone equipped with a loudspeaker flies over homes warning people who live in basement or ground-floor apartments about impending heavy rains. “Be prepared to leave your location,” said the voice from the sky in footage released Tuesday by the city's emergency management agency. “If flooding occurs, do not hesitate.” About five teams with multiple drones each were deployed to specific neighborhoods prone to flooding. Zach Iscol, the city's emergency management commissioner, said the messages were being relayed in multiple languages. They were expected to continue until the weather impacted the drone flights. Flash floods have been deadly for New Yorkers living in basement apartments, which can quickly fill up in a deluge. Eleven people drowned in such homes in 2011 amid rain from the remnants of Hurricane Ida. The drones are in addition to other forms of emergency messaging, including social media, text alerts and a system that reaches more than 2,000 community-based organizations throughout the city that serve senior citizens, people with disabilities and other groups. “You know, we live in a bubble, and we have to meet people where they are in notifications so they can be prepared,” New York City Mayor Eric Adams said at a press briefing on Tuesday. Adams is a self-described “tech geek” whose administration has tapped drone technology to monitor large gatherings as well as to search for sharks on beaches. Under his watch, the city’s police department also briefly toyed with using a robot to patrol the Times Square subway station, and it has sometimes deployed a robotic dog to dangerous scenes, including the Manhattan parking garage that collapsed in 2023.

wichita falls, texas — Elon Musk's social media platform X has sued a group of advertisers, alleging that a "massive advertiser boycott" deprived the company of billions of dollars in revenue and violated antitrust laws. The company formerly known as Twitter filed the lawsuit Tuesday in a federal court in Texas against the World Federation of Advertisers and member companies Unilever, Mars, CVS Health and Orsted. It accused the advertising group's brand safety initiative, called the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, of helping to coordinate a pause in advertising after Musk bought Twitter for $44 billion in late 2022 and overhauled its staff and policies. Musk posted about the lawsuit on X on Tuesday, saying "now it is war" after two years of being nice and "getting nothing but empty words." X CEO Linda Yaccarino said in a video announcement that the lawsuit stemmed in part from evidence uncovered by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, which she said showed a "group of companies organized a systematic illegal boycott" against X. The Republican-led committee had a hearing last month looking at whether current laws are "sufficient to deter anticompetitive collusion in online advertising." The lawsuit's allegations center on the early days of Musk's Twitter takeover and not a more recent dispute with advertisers that came a year later. In November 2023, about a year after Musk bought the company, a number of advertisers began fleeing X over concerns about their ads showing up next to pro-Nazi content and hate speech on the site in general, with Musk inflaming tensions with his own posts endorsing an antisemitic conspiracy theory. Musk later said those fleeing advertisers were engaging in blackmail and, using a profanity, essentially told them to go away. The Belgium-based World Federation of Advertisers and representatives for CVS, Orsted, Mars and Unilever didn't immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday. A top Unilever executive testified at last month's congressional hearing, defending the British consumer goods company's practice of choosing to put ads on platforms that won't harm its brand. "Unilever, and Unilever alone, controls our advertising spending," said prepared written remarks by Herrish Patel, president of Unilever USA. "No platform has a right to our advertising dollar."

Chicago — Five secretaries of state are urging Elon Musk to fix an AI chatbot on the social media platform X, saying in a letter sent Monday that it has spread election misinformation. The top election officials from Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Washington told Musk that X's AI chatbot, Grok, produced false information about state ballot deadlines shortly after President Joe Biden dropped out of the 2024 presidential race. While Grok is available only to subscribers to the premium versions of X, the misinformation was shared across multiple social media platforms and reached millions of people, according to the letter. The bogus ballot deadline information from the chatbot also referenced Alabama, Indiana, Ohio and Texas, although their secretaries of state did not sign the letter. Grok continued to repeat the false information for 10 days before it was corrected, the secretaries said. The letter urged X to immediately fix the chatbot “to ensure voters have accurate information in this critical election year.” That would include directing Grok to send users to CanIVote.org, a voting information website run by the National Association of Secretaries of State, when asked about U.S. elections. "In this presidential election year, it is critically important that voters get accurate information on how to exercise their right to vote,” Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon said in a statement. "Voters should reach out to their state or local election officials to find out how, when, and where they can vote." X did not respond to a request for comment. Grok debuted last year for X premium and premium plus subscribers and was touted by Musk as a “rebellious” AI chatbot that will answer “spicy questions that are rejected by most other AI systems.” Social media platforms have faced mounting scrutiny for their role in spreading misinformation, including about elections. The letter also warned that inaccuracies are to be expected for AI products, especially chatbots such as Grok that are based on large language models. “As tens of millions of voters in the U.S. seek basic information about voting in this major election year, X has the responsibility to ensure all voters using your platform have access to guidance that reflects true and accurate information about their constitutional right to vote,” the secretaries wrote in the letter. Since Musk bought Twitter in 2022 and renamed it to X, watchdog groups have raised concerns over a surge in hate speech and misinformation being amplified on the platform, as well as the reduction of content moderation teams, elimination of misinformation features and censoring of journalists critical of Musk. Experts say the moves represent a regression from progress made by social media platforms attempting to better combat political disinformation after the 2016 U.S. presidential contest and could precipitate a worsening misinformation landscape ahead of this year's November elections.

Washington — A judge on Monday ruled that Google's ubiquitous search engine has been illegally exploiting its dominance to squash competition and stifle innovation in a seismic decision that could shake up the internet and hobble one of the world's best-known companies. The highly anticipated decision issued by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta comes nearly a year after the start of a trial pitting the U.S. Justice Department against Google in the country's biggest antitrust showdown in a quarter century. After reviewing reams of evidence that included testimony from top executives at Google, Microsoft and Apple during last year's 10-week trial, Mehta issued his potentially market-shifting decision three months after the two sides presented their closing arguments in early May. "After having carefully considered and weighed the witness testimony and evidence, the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly," Mehta wrote in his 277-page ruling. It represents a major setback for Google and its parent, Alphabet Inc., which had steadfastly argued that its popularity stemmed from consumers' overwhelming desire to use a search engine so good at what it does that it has become synonymous with looking things up online. Google's search engine currently processes an estimated 8.5 billion queries per day worldwide, nearly doubling its daily volume from 12 years ago, according to a recent study released by the investment firm BOND. Google almost certainly will appeal the decision in a process that ultimately may land in the U.S. Supreme Court. For now, the decision vindicates antitrust regulators at the Justice Department, which filed its lawsuit nearly four years ago while Donald Trump was still president and has been escalating it efforts to rein in Big Tech's power during President Joe Biden's administration. The case depicted Google as a technological bully that methodically has thwarted competition to protect a search engine that has become the centerpiece of a digital advertising machine that generated nearly $240 billion in revenue last year. Justice Department lawyers argued that Google's monopoly enabled it to charge advertisers artificially high prices while also enjoying the luxury of having to invest more time and money into improving the quality of its search engine — a lax approach that hurt consumers. As expected, Mehta's ruling focused on the billions of dollars Google spends every year to install its search engine as the default option on new cellphones and tech gadgets. In 2021 alone, Google spent more than $26 billion to lock in those default agreements, Mehta said in his ruling. Google ridiculed those allegations, noting that consumers have historically changed search engines when they become disillusioned with the results they were getting. For instance, Yahoo — now a minor player on the internet — was the most popular search engine during the 1990s before Google came along. Mehta said the evidence at trial showed the importance of the default settings. He noted that Microsoft's Bing search engine has 80% share of the search market on the Microsoft Edge browser. The judge said that shows other search engines can be successful if Google is not locked in as the predetermined default option. Still, Mehta credited the quality of Google's product as an important part of its dominance, as well, saying flatly that "Google is widely recognized as the best [general search engine] available in the United States." Mehta's conclusion that Google has been running an illegal monopoly sets up another legal phase to determine what sorts of changes or penalties should be imposed to reverse the damage done and restore a more competitive landscape. Besides boosting Microsoft's Bing search engine, the outcome could hurt Google at a critical pivot point that is tilting technology in the age of artificial intelligence. Both Microsoft and Google are among the early leaders in AI in a battle that now could be affected by Mehta's market-rattling decision. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella was one of the Justice Department's star witnesses during the testimony that covered his frustration with Google deals with the likes of Apple that made it nearly impossible for the Bing search engine to make any headway, even as Microsoft poured more than $100 billion in improvements since 2009. "You get up in the morning, you brush your teeth, and you search on Google," Nadella said at one point in his testimony. "Everybody talks about the open web, but there is really the Google web." Nadella also expressed fear that it might take an antitrust crackdown to ensure the situation didn't get worse as AI becomes a bigger force in search. Google still faces other legal threats besides this one, both in the U.S. and abroad. any antitrust lawsuits brought against Google domestically and abroad. In September, a federal trial is scheduled to begin in Virginia over the Justice Department's allegations that Google's advertising technology constitutes an illegal monopoly.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Commerce Department is expected to propose barring Chinese software in autonomous and connected vehicles in the coming weeks, according to sources briefed on the matter. The Biden administration plans to issue a proposed rule that would bar Chinese software in vehicles in the United States with Level 3 automation and above, which would have the effect of also banning testing on U.S. roads of autonomous vehicles produced by Chinese companies. The administration, in a previously unreported decision, also plans to propose barring vehicles with Chinese-developed advanced wireless communications abilities modules from U.S. roads, the sources added. Under the proposal, automakers and suppliers would need to verify that none of their connected vehicle or advanced autonomous vehicle software was developed in a "foreign entity of concern" like China, the sources said. The Commerce Department said last month it planned to issue proposed rules on connected vehicles in August and expected to impose limits on some software made in China and other countries deemed adversaries. Asked for comment, a Commerce Department spokesperson said on Sunday that the department "is concerned about the national security risks associated with connected technologies in connected vehicles." The department's Bureau of Industry and Security will issue a proposed rule that "will focus on specific systems of concern within the vehicle. Industry will also have a chance to review that proposed rule and submit comments." The Chinese Embassy in Washington did not immediately comment but the Chinese foreign ministry has previously urged the United States "to respect the laws of the market economy and principles of fair competition." It argues Chinese cars are popular globally because they had emerged out of fierce market competition and are technologically innovative. On Wednesday, the White House and State Department hosted a meeting with allies and industry leaders to "jointly address the national security risks associated with connected vehicles," the department said. Sources said officials disclosed details of the administration's planned rule. The meeting included officials from the United States, Australia, Canada, the European Union, Germany, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Spain, and the United Kingdom who "exchanged views on the data and cybersecurity risks associated with connected vehicles and certain components." Also known as conditional driving automation, Level 3 involves technology that allows drivers to engage in activities behind the wheel, such as watching movies or using smartphones, but only under some limited conditions. In November, a group of U.S. lawmakers raised alarm about Chinese companies collecting and handling sensitive data while testing autonomous vehicles in the United States and asked questions of 10 major companies including Baidu, Nio, WeRide, Didi Chuxing, Xpeng, Inceptio, Pony.ai, AutoX, Deeproute.ai and Qcraft. The letters said in the 12 months ended November 2022 that Chinese AV companies test drove more than 450,000 miles in California. In July 2023, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said his department had national security concerns about Chinese autonomous vehicle companies in the United States. The administration is worried about connected vehicles using the driver monitoring system to listen or record occupants or take control of the vehicle itself. "The national security risks are quite significant," Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said in May. "We decided to take action because this is really serious stuff."

Taipei, Taiwan — Concern is rising among China’s more than 1 billion internet users over a government proposal portrayed as a step to protect their personal information and fight against fraud. Many fear the plan would do the opposite. China's Ministry of Public Security and the Cyberspace Administration issued the draft "Measures for the Administration of National Network Identity Authentication Public Services" on July 26. According to the proposal, Chinese netizens would be able to apply for virtual IDs on a voluntary basis to "minimize the excessive collection and retention of citizens' personal information by online platforms" and "protect personal information." While many netizens appear to agree in their posts that companies have too much access to their personal information, others fear the cyber ID proposal, if implemented, will simply allow the government to more easily track them and control what they can say online. Beijing lawyer Wang Cailiang said on Weibo: "My opinion is short: I am not in favor of this. Please leave a little room for citizens' privacy." Shortly after the proposal was published, Tsinghua University law professor Lao Dongyan posted on her Weibo account, "The cyber IDs are like installing monitors to watch everyone's online behavior." Her post has since disappeared, along with many other negative comments that can only be found on foreign social media platforms like X and Free Weibo, an anonymous and unblocked search engine established in 2012 to capture and save posts censored by China’s Sina Weibo or deleted by users. A Weibo user under the name "Liu Jiming" said, "The authorities solemnly announced [the proposal] and solicited public opinions while blocking people from expressing their opinions. This clumsy show of democracy is really shocking." Beijing employs a vast network of censors to block and remove politically sensitive content, known by critics as the Great Firewall. Since 2017, China has required internet service and content providers to verify users’ real names through national IDs, allowing authorities to more easily trace and track online activities and posts to the source. Chinese internet experts say netizens can make that harder by using others’ accounts, providers, IDs and names on various platforms. But critics fear a single cyber ID would close those gaps in the Great Firewall. Zola, a network engineer and well-known citizen journalist originally from China’s Hunan province, who naturalized in Taiwan, told VOA "The control of the cyber IDs is a superpower because you don't only know a netizen's actual name, but also the connection between the netizen and the cybersecurity ID." Mr. Li, a Shanghai-based dissident who did not want to disclose his full name because of the issue's sensitivity, told VOA that the level of surveillance by China's internet police has long been beyond imagination. He said the new proposal is a way for authorities to tell netizens that the surveillance will be more overt "just to intimidate and warn you to behave." Some netizens fear China could soon change the cyber ID system from a voluntary program to a requirement for online access. A Weibo user under the name "Fang Zhifu" warned that in the future, if "the cyber ID is revoked, it will be like being sentenced to death in the cyber world." Meanwhile, China's Ministry of Public Security and Cyberspace Administration say they are soliciting public opinion on the cyber ID plan until August 25.

ANKARA, Turkey — Turkey's communications authority blocked access to the social media platform Instagram on Friday, the latest instance of a clampdown on websites in the country. The Information and Communication Technologies Authority, which regulates the internet, announced the block early Friday but did not provide a reason. Sabah newspaper, which is close to the government, said access was blocked in response to Instagram removing posts by Turkish users that expressed condolences over the killing of Hama political leader Ismail Haniyeh. It came days after Fahrettin Altun, the presidential communications director and aide to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, criticized the Meta-owned platform for preventing users in Turkey from posting messages of condolences for Haniyeh. Unlike its Western allies, Turkey does not consider Hamas to be a terror organization. A strong critic of Israel's military actions in Gaza, Erdogan has described the group as "liberation fighters." The country is observing a day of mourning for Haniyeh on Friday, during which flags will be flown at half-staff. Turkey has a track record of censoring social media and websites. Hundreds of thousands of domains have been blocked since 2022, according to the Freedom of Expression Association, a nonprofit organization regrouping lawyers and human rights activists. The video-sharing platform YouTube was blocked from 2007 to 2010.