Technology is being developed in Austin, Texas, to make cancer detection faster and tumor removal more precise. A device called the MasSpec Pen can detect cancer with just one touch, researchers said.

“Well, it’s a game changer because I was doing a case the other day with a surgeon, and we had to wait an additional two hours because the current method takes that long,” said Aydin Zahedivash, medical student and co-creator of the MasSpec Pen.

He says the pen can deliver results within 20 seconds and is much less invasive for the patient than the traditional method of diagnosis.

No biopsy needed

“That process usually will involve taking out some of the tissue, which means cutting it from a patient. Our technology can detect cancer inside of a tissue without cutting it or altering it,” Zahedivash said.

During surgery, a drop of water on the pen pulls molecules from the tissue in question. An instrument called the mass spectrometer then analyzes the water with the molecules to determine whether cancer is present in the tissue. It adds precision to detecting the disease. In seconds, surgeons will know what part of the tissue to extract, how much to cut, and what not to touch so healthy tissue is not damaged.

“We’ve done testing on human tissues that have been taken out of patients and those have shown 96 percent accuracy detecting cancer from non-cancer,” Zahedivash said.

Rapid development

New available technologies have allowed an interdisciplinary team to develop the MasSpec Pen in 2½ years. The team 3-D printed the prototype, allowing the creators to rapidly develop a design that worked.

Zahedivash said within the year, the MasSpec Pen will be tested in surgery at the Dell Medical School at the University of Texas at Austin. There are also plans to test the technology at the MD Anderson Cancer Center and Baylor College of Medicine in Houston.

The device would require approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration before becoming widely available.
…

Rural communities in United States and elsewhere often use portable backup electricity generators in case of power outages. But these machines can be costly to run for longer times and require periodic attendance. A team from West Virginia University is developing a small, natural gas-powered generator that will be able to run for years. VOA’s George Putic reports.
…

Rural communities in United States and elsewhere often use portable backup electricity generators in case of power outages. But these machines can be costly to run for longer times and require periodic attendance. A team from West Virginia University is developing a small, natural gas-powered generator that will be able to run for years. VOA’s George Putic reports.
…

More trouble may be ahead for Facebook as the Philippine government said it is investigating the social media giant over reports information from more than a million users in the Philippines was breached by British data firm Cambridge Analytica.

The Phliippines’ National Privacy Commission, or NPC, said it sent a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to let him know the NPC is requiring that the company “submit a number of documents relevant to the case, to establish the scope and impact of the incident to Filipino data subjects.”

The privacy watchdog also said through its website it wants to determine whether there is unauthorized processing of personal data of Filipinos. The letter was dated April 11.

A Facebook spokesperson tells the Reuters news agency the company is committed to protecting people’s privacy and is engaged with the privacy watchdog.

During U.S. congressional hearings this past week, Zuckerberg apologized for how Facebook has handled the uproar over online privacy and revelations the data breach allowed Cambridge Analytica to access the personal information of about 87 million Facebook users.

As Zuckerberg sat through about 10 hours of questioning over two days, nearly 100 members of Congress expressed their anger over Facebook’s data privacy controversy and delved into the social media platform’s practices.

And many legislators made it clear they did not think current U.S. laws were sufficient to protect users.

“As has been noted by many people already, we’ve been relying on self-regulation in your industry for the most part,” said Diana DeGette, a Democrat from Colorado. “We’re trying to explore what we can do to prevent further breaches.”

For Congress, the hearings proved to be an education in how internet companies handle user data and the legal protections for consumers.

While Zuckerberg said many times that Facebook doesn’t sell user data, congressional leaders wanted to know how 87 million people’s data ended up in the hands of Cambridge Analytica without their knowledge or permission.

“I think what we’re getting to here is, who owns the virtual you? Who owns your presence online?” asked Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican.

“Congresswoman, I believe that everyone owns their own content online,” answered Zuckerberg.

Shadow profiles?

But can Facebook users see all the information that the social media platform has about them, including what it has picked up from outside firms?

That is something congressional leaders probed in questions about “shadow profiles,” information the social network has collected about people who do not have Facebook accounts.

Zuckerberg maintained that Facebook collects this information for security reasons but congressional leaders wanted to know more about what non-Facebook users can do to find out what the company knows about them.

New federal agency?

In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission has taken the lead in overseeing internet firms and is investigating Facebook in the Cambridge Analytica case. Congressional leaders, however, pointed out the FTC cannot make new rules. They asked whether the FTC should be given new powers, or whether a new agency focused on privacy in the digital age should be created.

“Would it be helpful if there was an entity clearly tasked with overseeing how consumer data is being collected, shared and used, and which could offer guidelines, at least guidelines for companies like yours to ensure your business practices are not in violation of the law?” Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-California), asked. “Something like a digital consumer protection agency?”

“Congressman, I think it’s an idea that deserves a lot of consideration,” Zuckerberg replied. “But I think the details on this really matter.”

During the two days of hearings, congressional leaders repeatedly looked to Europe, where new regulation known as the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, governing people’s digital lives, goes into effect May 25. Zuckerberg said the regulation would apply to people in the U.S.

Zuckerberg said the company already has some of the new regulation’s privacy controls in place; but, the GDPR requires the company to do a few more things, “and we’re going to extend that to the world.”

A website dedicated to GDPR notes that organizations “in non-compliance may face heavy fines.”

Analysts note the controversy may lead to changes in how digital privacy issues are handled.

“We saw during these hearings that many, many members of Congress are ready and willing to get to work on privacy legislation,” said Natasha Duarte, a policy analyst at the Center for Democracy & Technology, an advocacy group focused on digital rights. “I think the details of what is the right legislation for the U.S. are very complex and we all need to come together and hammer it out.”

User privacy vs. monetized data

Ideas such as an outside auditor who will be checking on Facebook’s handling of user data will run into the business model of many internet firms that need data about people to offer them targeted ads.

“Monetizing data, for better or worse, is the model free services rely on,” she said.

That tension was on display in questions from Rep. Anna Eshoo, (D-California), who counts Zuckerberg among her Palo Alto constituents.

“Are you willing to change your business model in the interest of protecting individual privacy,” she asked.

In that instant, Zuckerberg demurred, saying he didn’t understand what the congresswoman meant, but acknowledged that there likely would be more internet regulation.

“The internet is growing in importance around the world and in people’s lives,” he said. “And I think it will be inevitable that there will need to be some regulation. So my position is not that there should be no regulation. But I think you have to be careful about the regulation you put in place.”

In light of the furor involving user data privacy, Facebook announced last month it was suspending Cambridge Analytica after finding such policies had been violated. Cambridge Analytica has counted U.S. President Donald Trump’s 2016 election campaign among its clients.

Separately, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has denied reports in the local media that his own 2016 election campaign worked with Cambridge Analytica. Duterte was quoted as saying, “I might have lost with them.”
…

More trouble may be ahead for Facebook as the Philippine government said it is investigating the social media giant over reports information from more than a million users in the Philippines was breached by British data firm Cambridge Analytica.

The Phliippines’ National Privacy Commission, or NPC, said it sent a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to let him know the NPC is requiring that the company “submit a number of documents relevant to the case, to establish the scope and impact of the incident to Filipino data subjects.”

The privacy watchdog also said through its website it wants to determine whether there is unauthorized processing of personal data of Filipinos. The letter was dated April 11.

A Facebook spokesperson tells the Reuters news agency the company is committed to protecting people’s privacy and is engaged with the privacy watchdog.

During U.S. congressional hearings this past week, Zuckerberg apologized for how Facebook has handled the uproar over online privacy and revelations the data breach allowed Cambridge Analytica to access the personal information of about 87 million Facebook users.

As Zuckerberg sat through about 10 hours of questioning over two days, nearly 100 members of Congress expressed their anger over Facebook’s data privacy controversy and delved into the social media platform’s practices.

And many legislators made it clear they did not think current U.S. laws were sufficient to protect users.

“As has been noted by many people already, we’ve been relying on self-regulation in your industry for the most part,” said Diana DeGette, a Democrat from Colorado. “We’re trying to explore what we can do to prevent further breaches.”

For Congress, the hearings proved to be an education in how internet companies handle user data and the legal protections for consumers.

While Zuckerberg said many times that Facebook doesn’t sell user data, congressional leaders wanted to know how 87 million people’s data ended up in the hands of Cambridge Analytica without their knowledge or permission.

“I think what we’re getting to here is, who owns the virtual you? Who owns your presence online?” asked Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican.

“Congresswoman, I believe that everyone owns their own content online,” answered Zuckerberg.

Shadow profiles?

But can Facebook users see all the information that the social media platform has about them, including what it has picked up from outside firms?

That is something congressional leaders probed in questions about “shadow profiles,” information the social network has collected about people who do not have Facebook accounts.

Zuckerberg maintained that Facebook collects this information for security reasons but congressional leaders wanted to know more about what non-Facebook users can do to find out what the company knows about them.

New federal agency?

In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission has taken the lead in overseeing internet firms and is investigating Facebook in the Cambridge Analytica case. Congressional leaders, however, pointed out the FTC cannot make new rules. They asked whether the FTC should be given new powers, or whether a new agency focused on privacy in the digital age should be created.

“Would it be helpful if there was an entity clearly tasked with overseeing how consumer data is being collected, shared and used, and which could offer guidelines, at least guidelines for companies like yours to ensure your business practices are not in violation of the law?” Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-California), asked. “Something like a digital consumer protection agency?”

“Congressman, I think it’s an idea that deserves a lot of consideration,” Zuckerberg replied. “But I think the details on this really matter.”

During the two days of hearings, congressional leaders repeatedly looked to Europe, where new regulation known as the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, governing people’s digital lives, goes into effect May 25. Zuckerberg said the regulation would apply to people in the U.S.

Zuckerberg said the company already has some of the new regulation’s privacy controls in place; but, the GDPR requires the company to do a few more things, “and we’re going to extend that to the world.”

A website dedicated to GDPR notes that organizations “in non-compliance may face heavy fines.”

Analysts note the controversy may lead to changes in how digital privacy issues are handled.

“We saw during these hearings that many, many members of Congress are ready and willing to get to work on privacy legislation,” said Natasha Duarte, a policy analyst at the Center for Democracy & Technology, an advocacy group focused on digital rights. “I think the details of what is the right legislation for the U.S. are very complex and we all need to come together and hammer it out.”

User privacy vs. monetized data

Ideas such as an outside auditor who will be checking on Facebook’s handling of user data will run into the business model of many internet firms that need data about people to offer them targeted ads.

“Monetizing data, for better or worse, is the model free services rely on,” she said.

That tension was on display in questions from Rep. Anna Eshoo, (D-California), who counts Zuckerberg among her Palo Alto constituents.

“Are you willing to change your business model in the interest of protecting individual privacy,” she asked.

In that instant, Zuckerberg demurred, saying he didn’t understand what the congresswoman meant, but acknowledged that there likely would be more internet regulation.

“The internet is growing in importance around the world and in people’s lives,” he said. “And I think it will be inevitable that there will need to be some regulation. So my position is not that there should be no regulation. But I think you have to be careful about the regulation you put in place.”

In light of the furor involving user data privacy, Facebook announced last month it was suspending Cambridge Analytica after finding such policies had been violated. Cambridge Analytica has counted U.S. President Donald Trump’s 2016 election campaign among its clients.

Separately, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has denied reports in the local media that his own 2016 election campaign worked with Cambridge Analytica. Duterte was quoted as saying, “I might have lost with them.”
…

Facebook Inc. Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg’s compensation rose 53.5 percent to $8.9 million in 2017, a regulatory filing showed Friday, largely because of higher costs related to the 33-year old billionaire’s personal security.

About 83 percent of the compensation represented security-related expenses, while much of the rest was tied to Zuckerberg’s personal usage of private aircraft.

Zuckerberg’s security expenses climbed to $7.3 million in 2017, compared with $4.9 million a year earlier.

His base salary was unchanged at $1, while his total voting power at Facebook rose marginally to 59.9 percent.

Menlo Park, California-based Facebook, which has consistently reported stronger-than-expected earnings over the past two years, has faced public outcry over its role in Russia’s alleged influence over the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Earlier this week, Zuckerberg emerged largely unscathed after facing hours of questioning from U.S. lawmakers on how the personal information of several million Facebook users may have been improperly shared with political consultancy Cambridge Analytica.
…

Facebook Inc. Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg’s compensation rose 53.5 percent to $8.9 million in 2017, a regulatory filing showed Friday, largely because of higher costs related to the 33-year old billionaire’s personal security.

About 83 percent of the compensation represented security-related expenses, while much of the rest was tied to Zuckerberg’s personal usage of private aircraft.

Zuckerberg’s security expenses climbed to $7.3 million in 2017, compared with $4.9 million a year earlier.

His base salary was unchanged at $1, while his total voting power at Facebook rose marginally to 59.9 percent.

Menlo Park, California-based Facebook, which has consistently reported stronger-than-expected earnings over the past two years, has faced public outcry over its role in Russia’s alleged influence over the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Earlier this week, Zuckerberg emerged largely unscathed after facing hours of questioning from U.S. lawmakers on how the personal information of several million Facebook users may have been improperly shared with political consultancy Cambridge Analytica.
…

If cancer is suspected in a patient, surgeons, in most cases, would have to cut some of the suspected tissue out and test it. Getting the results could be a long process. A new invention called a MasSpec Pen could cut the wait time to just seconds. VOA’s Elizabeth Lee reports from Austin, Texas, where the pen was created.
…

If cancer is suspected in a patient, surgeons, in most cases, would have to cut some of the suspected tissue out and test it. Getting the results could be a long process. A new invention called a MasSpec Pen could cut the wait time to just seconds. VOA’s Elizabeth Lee reports from Austin, Texas, where the pen was created.
…

Lawmakers in Washington peppered Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg with tough questions this week about his firm’s handling of user data and privacy. They also suggested new ways they or others might regulate internet firms. Michelle Quinn reports.
…

Lawmakers in Washington peppered Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg with tough questions this week about his firm’s handling of user data and privacy. They also suggested new ways they or others might regulate internet firms. Michelle Quinn reports.
…

Nonprofit international organization for public competitions XPRIZE has announced 10 finalists in its race to develop new technologies to lower carbon-dioxide emissions. Each team will get an additional incentive of $5 million to scale up their ideas and present them for the top prize of $20 million. VOA’s George Putic reports.
…

Nonprofit international organization for public competitions XPRIZE has announced 10 finalists in its race to develop new technologies to lower carbon-dioxide emissions. Each team will get an additional incentive of $5 million to scale up their ideas and present them for the top prize of $20 million. VOA’s George Putic reports.
…

Facebook says it will stop spending money to fight a proposed California ballot initiative aimed at giving consumers more control over their data.

The measure, known as the “California Consumer Privacy Act,” would require companies to disclose upon request what types of personal information they collect about someone and whether they’ve sold it. It also would allow customers to opt out of having their data sold.

The company made the announcement Wednesday as chief executive Mark Zuckerberg underwent questioning from Congress about the handling of user data.

Pressure has mounted on Facebook to explain its privacy controls following revelations that a Republican-linked firm conducted widespread data harvesting.

Facebook had donated $200,000 to a committee opposing the initiative in California — part of a $1 million effort by tech giants to keep it off the November ballot.

Facebook said it ended its support “to focus our efforts on supporting reasonable privacy measures in California.”

Proponents of the ballot measure applauded the move.

“We are thrilled,” said Mary Ross, president of Californians for Consumer Privacy.

The California Chamber of Commerce and other groups are fighting to keep the measure off the ballot through the “Committee to Protect California Jobs.” Google, AT&T, Verizon and Comcast also contributed $200,000 each to that effort in February.

Committee spokesman Steve Maviglio said the measure would hurt the California economy.

“It is unworkable and requires the internet in California to operate differently — limiting our choices, hurting our businesses, and cutting our connection to the global economy,” he said.
…

Facebook says it will stop spending money to fight a proposed California ballot initiative aimed at giving consumers more control over their data.

The measure, known as the “California Consumer Privacy Act,” would require companies to disclose upon request what types of personal information they collect about someone and whether they’ve sold it. It also would allow customers to opt out of having their data sold.

The company made the announcement Wednesday as chief executive Mark Zuckerberg underwent questioning from Congress about the handling of user data.

Pressure has mounted on Facebook to explain its privacy controls following revelations that a Republican-linked firm conducted widespread data harvesting.

Facebook had donated $200,000 to a committee opposing the initiative in California — part of a $1 million effort by tech giants to keep it off the November ballot.

Facebook said it ended its support “to focus our efforts on supporting reasonable privacy measures in California.”

Proponents of the ballot measure applauded the move.

“We are thrilled,” said Mary Ross, president of Californians for Consumer Privacy.

The California Chamber of Commerce and other groups are fighting to keep the measure off the ballot through the “Committee to Protect California Jobs.” Google, AT&T, Verizon and Comcast also contributed $200,000 each to that effort in February.

Committee spokesman Steve Maviglio said the measure would hurt the California economy.

“It is unworkable and requires the internet in California to operate differently — limiting our choices, hurting our businesses, and cutting our connection to the global economy,” he said.
…

Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg said on Tuesday his company would step up efforts to block hate messages in Myanmar as he faced questioning by the U.S. Congress about electoral interference and hate speech on the platform.

Facebook has been accused by human rights advocates of not doing enough to weed out hate messages on its social-media network in Myanmar, where it is a dominant communications system.

“What’s happening in Myanmar is a terrible tragedy, and we need to do more,” Zuckerberg said during a 5-hour joint hearing of the Senate Commerce Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee.

More than 650,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled Myanmar’s Rakhine state into Bangladesh since insurgent attacks sparked a security crackdown last August.

United Nations officials investigating a possible genocide in Myanmar said last month that Facebook had been a source of anti-Rohingya propaganda.

Marzuki Darusman, chairman of the U.N. Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar, said in March that social media had played a “determining role” in Myanmar.

“It has … substantively contributed to the level of acrimony and dissension and conflict … within the public. Hate speech is certainly of course a part of that. As far as the Myanmar situation is concerned, social media is Facebook, and Facebook is social media,” he said.

Zuckerberg said Facebook was hiring dozens more Burmese-language speakers to remove threatening content.

“It’s hard to do it without people who speak the local language, and we need to ramp up our effort there dramatically,” he said, adding that Facebook was also asking civil society groups to help it identify figures who should be banned from the network.

He said a Facebook team would also make undisclosed product changes in Myanmar and other countries where ethnic violence was a problem.
…

Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg said on Tuesday his company would step up efforts to block hate messages in Myanmar as he faced questioning by the U.S. Congress about electoral interference and hate speech on the platform.

Facebook has been accused by human rights advocates of not doing enough to weed out hate messages on its social-media network in Myanmar, where it is a dominant communications system.

“What’s happening in Myanmar is a terrible tragedy, and we need to do more,” Zuckerberg said during a 5-hour joint hearing of the Senate Commerce Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee.

More than 650,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled Myanmar’s Rakhine state into Bangladesh since insurgent attacks sparked a security crackdown last August.

United Nations officials investigating a possible genocide in Myanmar said last month that Facebook had been a source of anti-Rohingya propaganda.

Marzuki Darusman, chairman of the U.N. Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar, said in March that social media had played a “determining role” in Myanmar.

“It has … substantively contributed to the level of acrimony and dissension and conflict … within the public. Hate speech is certainly of course a part of that. As far as the Myanmar situation is concerned, social media is Facebook, and Facebook is social media,” he said.

Zuckerberg said Facebook was hiring dozens more Burmese-language speakers to remove threatening content.

“It’s hard to do it without people who speak the local language, and we need to ramp up our effort there dramatically,” he said, adding that Facebook was also asking civil society groups to help it identify figures who should be banned from the network.

He said a Facebook team would also make undisclosed product changes in Myanmar and other countries where ethnic violence was a problem.
…

Dumping sewage into a local river is common practice in some of America’s older cities.  With the benefits of modern engineering, cities like Washington D.C. will soon be able to divert hundreds of millions of liters of raw sewage every day to wastewater treatment plants instead of a river.  Arash Arabasadi reports.
…

The group known as the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots says fully autonomous lethal weapons that can strike selected targets are no longer within the realm of science fiction. The coalition says it wants pre-emptive action taken to ban them. Government experts will spend the next two weeks discussing the issue at a meeting of the U.N. Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.

The Campaign to stop Killer Robots – a coalition of 65 non-government organizations – says the world is running out of time to prevent these systems from becoming a dangerous reality.

Campaign co-founder Richard Moyes warns the world is moving closer to situations where machine intelligence, instead of humans, may make life and death decisions on the battlefield.

“We need humans involved in these processes and it needs to be a substantial engagement that allows sort of human ethical judgment and human moral engagements with the decision about the use of force…From my perspective, I think there is a real risk in thinking that violence and killing people can ever be a really clean business,” said Moyes. “I think…we should be very wary about thinking that machines and computers can solve that.”

Campaign co-founder Mary Wareham tells VOA autonomous weapons systems with decreasing levels of human control are currently in use and development by six countries – the United States, China, Israel, South Korea, Russia and Britain. She says the U.S. is the most advanced.”

“I think all of them have commented that these weapons systems, the fully autonomous weapons systems, lethal autonomous weapons systems, do not exist yet,” said Wareham. “That is the common refrain that we hear in the room; but, there is acknowledgement that this is the direction that it could head in.”   

Human Rights Watch – a founding member of the campaign – has said previously that precursors to killer robots include armed drones.  

The campaign says the government experts have made some progress in identifying key issues of concern regarding autonomy in weapons systems. It says 22 countries are calling for a ban on fully autonomous weapons and many others agree some human control must be retained over future weapons systems.  

The activists say they are heartened by the increasing number of countries that have expressed interest in negotiating a new international law on killer robots. The campaign says it wants member states to conclude a legally binding treaty “prohibiting the development, production, and use of fully autonomous weapons systems by the end of 2019.”

 
…

The group known as the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots says fully autonomous lethal weapons that can strike selected targets are no longer within the realm of science fiction. The coalition says it wants pre-emptive action taken to ban them. Government experts will spend the next two weeks discussing the issue at a meeting of the U.N. Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.

The Campaign to stop Killer Robots – a coalition of 65 non-government organizations – says the world is running out of time to prevent these systems from becoming a dangerous reality.

Campaign co-founder Richard Moyes warns the world is moving closer to situations where machine intelligence, instead of humans, may make life and death decisions on the battlefield.

“We need humans involved in these processes and it needs to be a substantial engagement that allows sort of human ethical judgment and human moral engagements with the decision about the use of force…From my perspective, I think there is a real risk in thinking that violence and killing people can ever be a really clean business,” said Moyes. “I think…we should be very wary about thinking that machines and computers can solve that.”

Campaign co-founder Mary Wareham tells VOA autonomous weapons systems with decreasing levels of human control are currently in use and development by six countries – the United States, China, Israel, South Korea, Russia and Britain. She says the U.S. is the most advanced.”

“I think all of them have commented that these weapons systems, the fully autonomous weapons systems, lethal autonomous weapons systems, do not exist yet,” said Wareham. “That is the common refrain that we hear in the room; but, there is acknowledgement that this is the direction that it could head in.”   

Human Rights Watch – a founding member of the campaign – has said previously that precursors to killer robots include armed drones.  

The campaign says the government experts have made some progress in identifying key issues of concern regarding autonomy in weapons systems. It says 22 countries are calling for a ban on fully autonomous weapons and many others agree some human control must be retained over future weapons systems.  

The activists say they are heartened by the increasing number of countries that have expressed interest in negotiating a new international law on killer robots. The campaign says it wants member states to conclude a legally binding treaty “prohibiting the development, production, and use of fully autonomous weapons systems by the end of 2019.”

 
…

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is set to testify publicly Tuesday before a group of U.S. senators after apologizing for the way his company handled data for millions of users.

He is due to appear before a joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate Commerce Committee, and on Wednesday will go before House lawmakers.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said users “deserve to know how their information is shared and secure,” and that he wants to explore with Zuckerberg ways to balance safety with innovation.

Zuckerberg met privately with lawmakers in Washington on Monday and released written testimony saying the social media network should have done more to prevent itself and the data of its members from being misused.

“We didn’t take a broad enough view of our responsibility, and that was a big mistake. It was my mistake, and I’m sorry,” Zuckerberg said.Zuckerberg was called to testify after news broke last month that personal data of millions of Facebook users had been harvested without their knowledge by Cambridge Analytica, a British voter profiling company that U.S. President Donald Trump’s campaign hired to target likely supporters in 2016.

WATCH:  Video report on Facebook Data Breach

Cambridge Analytica connection

Prior to 2016, Facebook allowed a British researcher to create an app on Facebook on which about 200,000 users divulged personal information that was subsequently shared with Cambridge Analytica. The number of affected Facebook users multiplied exponentially because the app also collected data about friends, relatives and acquaintances of everyone who installed it.

Cambridge Analytica said it had data for 30 million of Facebook’s 2.2 billion users.

On Capitol Hill, U.S. lawmakers signaled they want action, not just contrition, from social media executives.

“If we don’t rein in the misuse of social media, none of us are going to have any privacy anymore,” the top Democrat on the Senate Commerce Committee, Bill Nelson of Florida, told reporters after meeting privately with Zuckerberg Monday.

Meanwhile, Facebook announced it is starting to notify tens of millions of users, most of them in the United States, whose personal data may have been harvested by Cambridge Analytica.

New cyber firewalls

The social media giant is also empowering all its users to shut off third-party access to their apps and is setting up cyber “firewalls” to ensure that users’ data is not unwittingly transmitted by others in their social network.

For years, Congress took a largely “hands-off” approach to regulating the internet. Some analysts believe that is about to change after the Facebook data breach, as well as a cascade of revelations about Russian cyber-meddling.

“At this point in time, it’s really up to Congress and the federal agencies to step up and take some responsibility for protecting privacy, for regulating Facebook as a commercial service which it clearly is,” Marc Rotenberg, president of the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, told VOA. “We’ve gone for many years in the United States believing that self-regulation could work — that Facebook and the other tech giants could police themselves, but I think very few people still believe that.”

 
…

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is set to testify publicly Tuesday before a group of U.S. senators after apologizing for the way his company handled data for millions of users.

He is due to appear before a joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate Commerce Committee, and on Wednesday will go before House lawmakers.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said users “deserve to know how their information is shared and secure,” and that he wants to explore with Zuckerberg ways to balance safety with innovation.

Zuckerberg met privately with lawmakers in Washington on Monday and released written testimony saying the social media network should have done more to prevent itself and the data of its members from being misused.

“We didn’t take a broad enough view of our responsibility, and that was a big mistake. It was my mistake, and I’m sorry,” Zuckerberg said.Zuckerberg was called to testify after news broke last month that personal data of millions of Facebook users had been harvested without their knowledge by Cambridge Analytica, a British voter profiling company that U.S. President Donald Trump’s campaign hired to target likely supporters in 2016.

WATCH:  Video report on Facebook Data Breach

Cambridge Analytica connection

Prior to 2016, Facebook allowed a British researcher to create an app on Facebook on which about 200,000 users divulged personal information that was subsequently shared with Cambridge Analytica. The number of affected Facebook users multiplied exponentially because the app also collected data about friends, relatives and acquaintances of everyone who installed it.

Cambridge Analytica said it had data for 30 million of Facebook’s 2.2 billion users.

On Capitol Hill, U.S. lawmakers signaled they want action, not just contrition, from social media executives.

“If we don’t rein in the misuse of social media, none of us are going to have any privacy anymore,” the top Democrat on the Senate Commerce Committee, Bill Nelson of Florida, told reporters after meeting privately with Zuckerberg Monday.

Meanwhile, Facebook announced it is starting to notify tens of millions of users, most of them in the United States, whose personal data may have been harvested by Cambridge Analytica.

New cyber firewalls

The social media giant is also empowering all its users to shut off third-party access to their apps and is setting up cyber “firewalls” to ensure that users’ data is not unwittingly transmitted by others in their social network.

For years, Congress took a largely “hands-off” approach to regulating the internet. Some analysts believe that is about to change after the Facebook data breach, as well as a cascade of revelations about Russian cyber-meddling.

“At this point in time, it’s really up to Congress and the federal agencies to step up and take some responsibility for protecting privacy, for regulating Facebook as a commercial service which it clearly is,” Marc Rotenberg, president of the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, told VOA. “We’ve gone for many years in the United States believing that self-regulation could work — that Facebook and the other tech giants could police themselves, but I think very few people still believe that.”

 
…

Facebook users in Southeast Asia, particularly the Philippines, were especially exposed to recent data privacy breaches due to high user numbers and the popularity of an app at the core of the problem, analysts believe.

According to Facebook figures, the data of 1.175 million users in the Philippines may have been “improperly shared” with London-based voter profiling firm Cambridge Analytica. That estimate is the second highest, single-country total after the United States. Indonesia ranks third at around 1.1 million people exposed to data breaches. Vietnam was ninth with 427,000.

Filipinos had also enjoyed a personality quiz app that spread fast due to the sharing of results, said Renato Reyes, secretary general of the Bagong Alyansang Makabaya alliance of social causes in Manila. The app is suspected as a source of Cambridge Analytica data.

In Vietnam, where the media outlet VnExpress International estimates 64 million of the country’s 92 million people use Facebook, younger people like the outlet to show off, technology specialists say. Indonesians use it to communicate for free across their 13,000 islands, some impoverished.

The Silicon Valley social media giant said that beginning April 9 it would add a News Feed link for users to see what information they have shared on which apps.

“I think we are in a position to demand an explanation directly from the officials at Facebook considering that we are the second highest country in net exposure,” Reyes said.

Why Southeast Asia?

Data from about 87 million users worldwide may have been improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica, Facebook says.

Southeast Asia faced exposure because a rise in the number of “affordable” mobile phones has expanded consumption of news on social media, said Athina Karatzogianni, associate professor in media, communication and sociology at the University of Leicester in the United Kingdom.

Total smartphone shipments in emerging Southeast Asia came to about 100 million last year, according to the market research firm IDC.

In parts of the subcontinent, people rely on Facebook as an easy, free means to share news and images with family or friends across long distances, said Lam Nguyen, country manager with IDC.

App sharing in the Philippines

Filipinos worry that Cambridge Analytica’s parent company crunched the results of the personality quiz app to grasp voter psychology for targeted advertising on behalf of political campaigns, Reyes said. It may have taken the Philippine 2016 election as a “laboratory” for the U.S. presidential race later that year, he said.

Cambridge Analytica says independent research contractor GSR “licensed data” from no more than 30 million users and that no information was used for the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The organization took legal action against GSR.

“The use of personal data in order to influence the outcome of elections is really a cause for concern,” Reyes said.

The Philippine National Privacy Commission has required Facebook to give updates on controlling against any further risk, the commission said Friday. Any data leaked would have arisen from use of University of Cambridge academic psychologist Aleksandr Kogan’s personality quiz app, it said.

Facebook rage in Vietnam

In Vietnam, Facebook took off about 11 years ago along with emerging wealth, including access to other foreign goods and services.

A lot of people use Facebook to show off travel photos, said Phuong Hong, communications director with an app developer in Ho Chi Minh City. Such elaborate public posting exposes users to information harvesting, she said.

“In Vietnam, people (are) more open and they don’t as much realize the impact if they publish all their information on social channels,” she said.

“Just some highly well educated people who already know about the after effects will try to limit it by themselves, but most of young, from 14 to 25, and even older people 25 to 40, they just go to that site, create an account and just follow to what Facebook asks for to fill in the information,” she added.

Facebook users in Vietnam may remember a breach four years ago that let phone numbers and e-mails find their way to marketers, Nguyen said.

“When the (Cambridge Analytica) story came to light, I think a lot of Facebook users here in Vietnam were kind of like ah, OK, so now it comes to light, but we already know our personal data have been breached a couple of years ago already,” he said.

Vietnam’s national defense and diplomatic officials met last week to discuss “internet security” with an eye toward Facebook, VnExpress International said.

Indonesia, Facebook discuss ‘abuse’

In Indonesia, the communications minister met the Indonesian Facebook public policy head April 5 to discuss any “abuse” of user data, the Ministry of Communication and Informatics said on its website.

The number of Indonesian Facebook users had reached 130 million in January, 6 percent of the world total.
…

Apple on Monday said it had achieved its goal of powering all of the company’s facilities with renewable energy, a milestone that includes all of its data centers, offices and retail stores in 43 countries.

The iPhone maker also said nine suppliers had recently committed to running their operations entirely on renewable energy sources like wind and solar, bringing to 23 the total number to make such a pledge.

Major U.S. corporations such as Apple, Wal-Mart and Alphabet have become some of the country’s biggest buyers of renewable forms of energy, driving substantial growth in the wind and solar industries.

Alphabet’s Google last year purchased enough renewable energy to cover all of its electricity consumption worldwide.

Costs for solar and wind are plunging thanks to technological advances and increased global production of panels and turbines, enabling companies seeking to green their images to buy clean power at competitive prices.

“We’re not spending any more than we would have,” Lisa Jackson, Apple’s vice president for environment, policy and social initiatives, said in an interview. “We’re seeing the benefits of an increasingly competitive clean energy market.”

Renewable energy projects that provide power to Apple facilities range from large wind farms in the United States to clusters of hundreds of rooftop solar systems in Japan and Singapore. The company has also urged utilities to procure renewable energy to help power Apple’s operations.

Encouraging suppliers to follow suit in embracing 100 percent renewable energy is the next step for Apple. The suppliers that pledge to use more clean energy know they will have “a leg up” against competitors for Apple’s business, Jackson said.

“We made it clear that, over time, this will become less of a wish list and more of a requirement,” she said.
…