Recent developments in US tech policy have halted the return of net neutrality rules and put the looming TikTok ban on pause, thereby raising significant questions about internet governance, corporate power, and digital rights.

What Is Net Neutrality?

Net neutrality, the principle that internet service providers (ISPs) must treat all data equally, ensures that ISPs cannot prioritise, throttle, or block access to specific websites or online services based on their content, source, or payment arrangements. It is designed to maintain an open and fair internet, where all users and businesses have equal access to information and services, regardless of their size or resources.

A Saga of Reversals

Although net neutrality has been a cornerstone of digital fairness debates, its history in the US to date has unfortunately been marked by policy reversals tied to political administrations. For example, under the Obama administration, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) classified ISPs as telecommunications services, thereby subjecting them to stringent neutrality rules. This decision was then reversed under Trump-era FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who championed deregulation. Next, the Biden administration attempted to reinstate neutrality rules, but recent judicial developments have derailed these efforts.

What’s Happened Now?

On 2 January 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld its stay on the FCC’s Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet Order. The court essentially ruled that ISPs are classified as ‘information services’, thereby exempting them from net neutrality regulations. The decision leaned heavily on the 2024 Supreme Court ruling ending the Chevron deference principle, which previously required courts to defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous laws. The Sixth Circuit’s decision concluded that the FCC lacked statutory authority to reimpose neutrality rules.

“We hold that Broadband Internet Service Providers offer only an ‘information service,’ and therefore, the FCC lacks the statutory authority to impose its desired net-neutrality policies,” stated the court order. This effectively nullifies the FCC’s authority to enforce net neutrality under current legislation.

Implications for Internet Users and Businesses

The absence of net neutrality rules ushers in an unregulated internet landscape. It means that ISPs can now legally prioritise or throttle specific traffic, potentially leading to a tiered internet where services like video streaming or cloud computing are accessible only to those who can pay premium fees. For businesses, particularly small enterprises, this raises concerns about equitable access to online resources, such as reliable video conferencing platforms for remote work or affordable e-commerce tools essential for reaching customers. The disparity could stifle innovation and hinder the competitiveness of smaller players.

The latest judgment also means that larger corporations with deep pockets may find it easier to secure prioritised bandwidth for their services, leaving smaller firms struggling to compete. Also, consumers could face higher costs for accessing content and services without the assurance of unbiased treatment by ISPs. Critics argue that the lack of neutrality poses a risk to free speech, as ISPs gain more control over the flow of information.

Brendan Carr To Champion Deregulation (and More ISP Freedom)

Brendan Carr is the person set to assume the role of Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair (replacing Jessica Rosenworcel) on 20 January 2025, coinciding with President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration. In the US, Mr Carr is known for his strong support of market-driven approaches to internet regulation. He is also known for consistently arguing that innovation and progress are best achieved through competition and minimal government intervention, rather than through federal regulations like net neutrality. It seems likely, therefore, that under his leadership, the FCC will give ISPs more freedom to manage their networks as they see fit, reinforcing the current administration’s deregulatory agenda.

TikTok Ban in Limbo

At the same time a court has just ruled that ISPs are again exempt from net neutrality regulations, it seems that TikTok still faces a perhaps precarious future in the US. The Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (set to take effect on 19 January 2025) requires ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese parent company, to sell the app or face an outright ban. Proponents of the law cite national security concerns, alleging that TikTok could be used by the Chinese government for data collection or propaganda. However, the issue has become a flashpoint for debates on free speech and economic competition.

Ban Delayed

In what some may see as a surprising move, President-elect Donald Trump has requested that the Supreme Court delay the implementation of the ban. Trump’s lawyers argue that the timing of the ban, coinciding with his inauguration, complicates his ability to negotiate a resolution. The filing notes that Trump has 14.7 million TikTok followers, which he views as critical for political engagement and freedom of expression.

Civil Liberties Groups Have Also Challenged TikTok Ban

It’s also worth noting here that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a nonprofit organisation dedicated to defending civil liberties in the digital world, has criticised the US government’s case against TikTok in a supporting brief. The EFF argues that the government “has not presented credible evidence of ongoing or imminent harm caused by TikTok.” This is a sentiment echoed by other civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, which contend that the government’s claims rely on speculative threats rather than concrete evidence. Both organisations warn that banning TikTok without sufficient justification could set a troubling precedent, potentially undermining free speech and digital rights.

Hearing 10 January

The US Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on 10 January, and its decision will likely determine TikTok’s fate in the US. If the court grants a pause, the new administration could explore alternative solutions, such as data localisation or third-party audits, to address security concerns while preserving the app’s availability.

The Broader Implications of Both

The developments in both net neutrality and TikTok’s future could be regarded as a reflection of broader tensions in tech governance. For example, whereas the rollback of neutrality rules highlights the growing influence of corporate interests in shaping internet policy, the TikTok case highlights the complex interplay between US national security, free speech, and global economic competition.

Turning Point?

For consumers and businesses alike, these decisions could represent a turning point. Without neutrality protections, the internet risks becoming a space where access and quality are dictated by financial clout. Also, the TikTok debate raises questions about how governments can balance security concerns with the rights of users and companies in a globalised tech ecosystem.

As the dust settles, the outcomes of these cases will likely influence not only US policy but also the global discourse on digital rights and internet regulation. Both issues serve as reminders of the profound impact legal and political decisions have on the digital lives of billions.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The recent rulings on net neutrality and the TikTok ban highlight the evolving and often contentious landscape of internet governance (in the United States). Both cases show the delicate balance policymakers must strike between fostering innovation, protecting national security, and upholding the principles of fairness and free expression.

The decision to block the return of net neutrality appears to signal a significant shift towards a market-driven internet, with ISPs gaining greater autonomy in how they manage their networks. While proponents argue this could spur innovation and competition, critics warn that it risks creating inequities that could disadvantage smaller businesses and marginalised users. The absence of regulation raises the spectre of a tiered internet, where those with financial resources receive preferential access, potentially stifling competition and undermining the democratic ethos of an open web.

Meanwhile, the debate over TikTok highlights the complexity of addressing security concerns in a globalised tech environment. While the app’s Chinese ownership has sparked legitimate fears about data privacy and propaganda, the lack of concrete evidence has raised concerns about overreach and the potential suppression of free speech. Also, President-elect Trump’s intervention introduces a political dimension to the debate, with his own social media presence on TikTok cited as a key consideration. The upcoming Supreme Court decision will be pivotal, not just for TikTok’s future in the US, but for the precedent it sets in handling foreign-owned platforms.

At their core, both cases illuminate the growing tension between corporate and governmental power in the digital age. The rollback of net neutrality highlights the influence of corporate interests on internet policy, while the TikTok ban raises questions about the extent to which governments should intervene in the digital economy. Together, these developments both highlight the profound implications of regulatory decisions on the digital lives of billions.

As these stories unfold, the outcomes will undoubtedly shape the trajectory of internet governance in the US and elsewhere. They serve as a reminder that the policies we adopt today will have far-reaching consequences, influencing not just the accessibility and fairness of the digital landscape but also the broader principles of freedom and equity in the information age.

Apple has agreed to pay $95m (£77m) to settle a lawsuit claiming its Siri virtual assistant recorded users without their consent and shared voice data with advertisers.

The class action, filed in Northern California, accused Apple of eavesdropping through unintentional Siri activations, collecting sensitive voice recordings without permission. Claimants alleged these recordings were then used by advertisers to target users with tailored ads. Apple denies any wrongdoing, maintaining it has never disclosed unauthorised recordings and permanently deleted earlier collected data before October 2019.

Lead plaintiff Fumiko Lopez claimed both she and her daughter were recorded without permission and subsequently targeted with ads for products they had only discussed aloud. The lawsuit highlighted the potential risks of smart devices inadvertently capturing private conversations, sparking privacy concerns among consumers globally.

Under the settlement, US-based claimants who owned Siri-enabled devices between 2014 and 2019 could receive up to $20 per device. However, legal fees and expenses will claim nearly $30m of the settlement, leaving the remainder to be distributed among eligible claimants. By settling, Apple avoids the possibility of a larger payout if the case went to trial.

This case is part of a broader wave of lawsuits challenging tech giants over privacy violations. Apple, while maintaining its commitment to user privacy, has faced multiple class actions in recent years, including a $500m settlement over deliberately slowing iPhones and a UK-led lawsuit over alleged iCloud overcharging.

For Apple, the settlement highlights the growing scrutiny tech companies face regarding data privacy. While the payout is modest for a company with quarterly revenues nearing $95bn, it signals a pressing need for stricter safeguards and transparency in handling user data. For businesses, it serves as a warning, i.e. prioritising user privacy is no longer optional, but essential to maintaining consumer trust.

Apple is under fire for enabling its Enhanced Visual Search feature by default on iOS 18.1 and macOS 15.1 devices, analysing users’ photos for landmarks without prior notice or consent.

The feature uses local machine learning to identify landmarks in photos, encrypts the data, and sends it to Apple’s servers for matching against a global database. Apple claims privacy is safeguarded through homomorphic encryption, differential privacy, and Oblivious HTTP (OHTTP) relays, ensuring it cannot access photo contents or user data.

Critics, however, have flagged transparency and consent issues, suggested that Apple has taken the choice out of users’ hands, and expressed frustration over an alleged lack of timely communication. Concerns have also been raised about metadata possibly being processed before users can disable the feature, even for non-iCloud photos.

Businesses can prevent similar privacy issues by communicating transparently about new features, requiring explicit consent for data sharing, and giving users clear control over their data to build trust and ensure compliance.

Electra, a Colorado-based startup, has unveiled a revolutionary method to produce emissions-free iron from lower-grade iron ore at temperatures lower than a cup of coffee.

Funding

This breakthrough technology has attracted substantial financial backing, with the company raising $180.4 million in its latest funding round, part of a total target of $256.7 million.

Carbon Emissions Reduction

The implications for the steel industry, responsible for 7 per cent of global carbon emissions, could be profound. For example, traditional ironmaking relies on blast furnaces operating at temperatures exceeding 1,600°C, fuelled by coal and other fossil fuels, major contributors to CO2 production and other atmospheric pollution. Electra’s process, in stark contrast, runs at just 60°C (140°F), utilising renewable energy and eliminating the need for fossil fuels.

How Electra’s Revolutionary Method Works

Electra’s approach is rooted in ‘electrowinning’, a process that uses electricity to extract and purify metals from a solution that has already been proven in the production of metals such as copper and nickel. However, adapting this process for iron production has posed significant challenges, primarily due to the need for high-grade ores in conventional methods. Electra’s innovation, however, lies in its ability to refine lower-grade iron ores, with less than 55 per cent iron content, into pure iron through a low-temperature, acid-based process.

The method begins with dissolving iron ore in an acid solution, which accelerates the dissolution process and isolates impurities. An electric current then separates the iron, which is electroplated into one-metre-square plates. These plates are perfect feedstock for electric arc furnaces (EAFs), which are widely used in steel production and can be powered by renewable energy. By integrating these technologies, the emissions typically associated with steelmaking could be largely eradicated.

Overcoming Industry Challenges

Ironmaking is one of the most carbon-intensive industrial processes, producing two tonnes of CO2 for every tonne of steel. With high-quality iron ore reserves dwindling, the ability to utilise lower-grade ores is not just innovative but may also be crucial for sustainability. Electra’s process also selectively removes impurities such as silica and alumina, which can be sold as by-products, further enhancing the efficiency and sustainability of the method.

Renewable Energy Enabled By Low Temperature Requirements

The technology also stands out for its adaptability to renewable energy. The process’s low-temperature requirements mean that power consumption can be modulated in line with the availability of intermittent renewable sources like wind and solar. This flexibility not only reduces costs but also aligns seamlessly with the global push for decarbonisation.

Industry and Investor Enthusiasm

It’s perhaps no surprise, therefore, that Electra’s breakthrough has captured the attention of major investors, including Amazon, Breakthrough Energy Ventures, and steel producer Nucor, all of whom contributed to the company’s previous $85 million funding round. A recent pilot plant launch in Boulder, Colorado, showcased the scalability of the technology, which aims to produce millions of tonnes of clean iron by the end of the decade.

Sandeep Nijhawan, Electra’s CEO and co-founder, has emphasised the broader significance of the development, saying: “Clean iron produced from a wide variety of ore types is the key constraint to decarbonising the steel industry sustainably” and that, “The pilot brings us closer to our goal of producing millions of tonnes of clean iron.”

Circularity and Sustainability

Noah Hanners, Nucor’s Executive Vice President of Raw Materials, has echoed these sentiments, highlighting how Electra’s iron can upcycle a broader range of steel scrap into high-value sustainable steel products. “This improves the circularity and sustainability of the steel industry,” he said.

Potential Ripple Effects Across the Industry

On the face of it, it’s easy to see how Electra’s technology could represent a significant step forward in the global race to decarbonise steel production, a $1 trillion industry. Competing approaches to “green steel” include substituting hydrogen for fossil fuels and implementing carbon capture, but these methods face scalability and cost challenges. Electra’s process offers a simpler, more sustainable alternative by circumventing the need for extreme temperatures and high-quality ores.

Financial Incentives

Beyond environmental benefits, the financial incentives for green steel production are becoming increasingly apparent. For example, companies like BMW and Porsche have already shown a willingness to pay premiums for steel produced with lower emissions. Electra’s ability to deliver high-purity, emissions-free iron could, therefore, position it to meet this growing demand.

As governments and industries intensify their focus on sustainability, the availability of green iron could set new benchmarks for steelmaking. As highlighted by Hilary Lewis of Industrious Labs, a nonprofit focused on reducing emissions in heavy industries, “Once there’s a green product available, everything else is going to be labelled as dirty. That will have a snowball effect on steelmakers.”

The Challenge – Scaling Up

While Electra’s pilot plant demonstrates the feasibility of the technology, the challenge now lies in scaling up. The company aims to establish its first commercial-scale facility capable of producing one million tonnes of iron annually by 2030. Achieving this, however, will require not only significant investment but also continued innovation to ensure cost-effectiveness and reliability.

That said, it seems that Electra’s Nijhawan is optimistic, saying that: “The market is at an inflection point. There is more demand than what is available on the supply side for these green products.”

Electra’s vision appears to extend beyond ironmaking, aiming to create a ripple effect across the steel industry. With the ability to minimise waste, reduce costs, and integrate seamlessly with existing EAF infrastructure, the company clearly thinks its innovative approach offers a template for a cleaner, more sustainable future.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

Electra’s breakthrough could represent a promising step towards addressing one of the most carbon-intensive industrial processes. By challenging the entrenched norms of traditional ironmaking, the company has introduced a potentially transformative method that leverages renewable energy and addresses the dual challenges of sustainability and dwindling high-quality ore reserves. The ability to refine lower-grade ores, coupled with the process’s compatibility with renewable power, could position Electra as a pioneer in the decarbonisation of the steel industry.

However, the path to widespread adoption is not without its hurdles. For example, scaling the technology from pilot plant to commercial-scale production will be a complex and resource-intensive process. Success will depend not only on securing continued investment but also on proving the process’s cost-effectiveness at scale and maintaining the high-purity standards required by steelmakers.

The enthusiasm of investors and industry stakeholders is promising and suggests a growing appetite for cleaner solutions in sectors historically resistant to change. With companies and governments under increasing pressure to meet ambitious climate targets, innovations like Electra’s could play a vital role in redefining the global steel industry. That said, the broader adoption of green steel solutions, including Electra’s, will likely hinge on whether the industry can balance environmental goals with economic feasibility.

Electra’s low-temperature, emissions-free ironmaking technology may well set a new standard for sustainable steel production. By aligning technical innovation with market demand for greener materials, the company appears to have already positioned itself as a key player in the race to decarbonise heavy industry. While significant challenges remain, it has to be said that Electra’s progress offers a hopeful and positive glimpse of a future where the steel industry could drastically reduce its environmental footprint, proving that cleaner pathways are not only possible but viable.

OpenAI now make using ChatGPT more organised than ever with their ‘Projects’ environment, which definitely helps keep your work less cluttered and more effective.

[Note – To Watch This Video without glitches/interruptions, It may be best to download it first]

Rather than opening additional apps, you can save time by simply using the built-in Windows calendar app to quickly calculate dates for deadlines, appointments, or projects. Here’s how:

To Open the Calendar:

– Click the date/time in the taskbar (bottom right).

Navigate Dates:

– Use the arrows or scroll to jump forward or backward, and click specific dates to set reminders or view events.