 |
|
|
|||||
A growing number of Amazon employees have signed onto an open letter issuing some dire warnings about the companys sprint toward AI. The letter, signed by more than 1,000 workers and published this week, calls out Amazon for pushing its AI investments at the expense of the climate and its human workforce. The letters supporters come from a wide array of roles at the company, including many software engineers, and even employees focused on building AI systems. We believe that the all-costs-justified, warp-speed approach to AI development will do staggering damage to democracy, to our jobs, and to the earth, the letters authors wrote. Were the workers who develop, train, and use AI, so we have a responsibility to intervene. In the letter obtained by The Guardian, the Amazon employees argue that their employer is throwing out its climate promises in the scramble to win the AI race. Amazon has pledged to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2040, pointing to efficiencies from electric delivery vehicles and reduced plastic packaging in its climate commitment. In spite of its stated promise to reduce its carbon footprint, Amazons carbon emissions rose last year, a trend tied to pollution from its ubiquitous fleet of delivery vehicles and its major push into data center construction.Resource intensive data centers like the ones Amazon is pouring billions into building out are a hot topic in 2025. The buildings, built to power tech giants AI ambitions, pump in loads of electricity to keep servers humming and suck up water to cool off all of that energy use. Data centers, usually placed well beyond urban hubs, promise rural communities a boom of steady local jobs for many of the worlds most valuable companies, but the reality is often less inspiring. In spite of their massive footprint and a short term burst of work during construction, very few people are actually necessary to keep things up and running. In light of the downsides, rural communities around the country are beginning to reject big techs big AI buildout. AI at all costs Climate isnt the only concern among the Amazon workers who signed onto the open letter. The group of anonymous employees accuses the company of forcing AI on its workforce while openly plotting to get rid of human workers as soon as technologically possible. In the meantime, the letters authors say that timelines are getting shorter and output demands are on the rise as the company tries to squeeze every last drop of productivity out of its employees. Last month, Amazon announced that it would lay off 14,000 employees, a massive round of cuts focused on its corporate workforce. In a memo to employees, Amazons Senior Vice President of People Experience and Technology Beth Galetti said that the cuts were aimed at reducing bureaucracy, removing layers, and shifting resources to ensure were investing in our biggest bets namely the companys enormous spending on AI. The world is changing quickly, Galetti wrote. This generation of AI is the most transformative technology weve seen since the Internet, and its enabling companies to innovate much faster than ever before (in existing market segments and altogether new ones). Amazons AI spending this year has topped $125 billion and the company plans to invest that much and more into artificial intelligence in 2026. A call for guardrails The letter also points to Amazons major lobbying push against AI regulation and its role in spreading surveillance and military technology as major areas of concern. To address the worries it raises, the letter calls on Amazon to abandon dirty energy in order to recommit to its climate goals, loop non-manager employee voices into AI decision making and reject surveillance and deportation applications of its technology. The letter only represents a tiny sliver of Amazons more than 1.55 million employees, but that hasnt deterred a thousand people at the company from voicing their concerns, and potentially risking their jobs. Beyond Amazons own workforce, around 2,400 people including students and workers at other major tech companies issued their own letter of support. All of this is daunting, but none of it is inevitable, the Amazon letters authors wrote. A better future is still very much within reach, but it requires us to get real about the costs of AI and the guardrails we need.
Category:
E-Commerce
In the latest sign that the Trump administration isnt so concerned about asbestos, the Food and Drug Administration this week withdrew a proposed rule that would have required testing for the toxic asbestos in talc-based cosmetics. The rule, which was proposed by the Biden administration less than a year ago, would have required manufacturers to test cosmetics for asbestos and keep records demonstrating compliance. Exposure to asbestos has been linked to lung cancer, mesothelioma, ovarian cancer, and laryngeal cancer, which is why various health agencies have determined theres no safe level of exposure to this natural mineral. Johnson & Johnson has been the subject of numerous lawsuits related to reports that the company knew about the risk of asbestos in the talc found in its baby powder. Talc is found in many cosmetics because it can be used to absorb moisture, prevent caking, and create a silky feel for these products, according to information on the FDA website. But the current administration seems to have yielded partly to the highly scientific and technical issues addressed in the 49 comments received during the mandatory public comment period, according to a legal notice posted to the federal registry and signed by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Good cause exists to withdraw the proposed rule at this time, the order stated. We are withdrawing the proposed rule to reconsider best means of addressing the issues covered by the proposed rule and broader principles to reduce exposure to asbestos, and to ensure that any standardized testing method requirements for detecting asbestos in talc-containing cosmetic products help protect users of talc-containing cosmetic products from harmful exposure to asbestos. The FDA didnt immediately respond to a request for comment from Fast Company. WITHDRAWING FROM BIDENS BANS Withdrawing from this proposed rule doesnt necessarily mean that manufacturers will suddenly start adding asbestos to cosmetics, but rather a guardrail for ensuring the deadly toxin isnt present in these products is now being reconsidered. The FDA plans to issue a proposed rule related to the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022. A spokesperson for the agency confirmed as much to The New York Times, saying that the FDA will submit a new proposed rule that offers a more comprehensive approach to reducing exposure to asbestos and reducing asbestos related illness, including identifying safer additives as alternatives, especially when they are less costly. But both Trump administrations have demonstrated some willingness to walk back protections from this deadly carcinogen, allowing asbestos to make a comeback. By contrast, the Biden administration finalized a ban on ongoing uses of chrysotile asbestos in 2024 and also proposed the aforementioned rule for detecting and identifying asbestos in cosmetics. The current Trump administration has now taken a swipe at both of these efforts to ban asbestos. In June, the Environmental Protection Agency in June planned to withdraw a proposed ban on chrysotile asbestos, before reversing course less than one month later. OUTRAGE AT ROLLBACK The U.S. continues to be out-of-step with much of the rest of the world, where asbestos is completely outlawed in more than 50 countries. Notably, asbestos is not outlawed in China, where many cosmetics are manufactured. This latest move by the FDA is both baffling and troubling to some consumer advocates. Nothing could make America less healthy than having a cancer causing product in cosmetics, Scott Faber, vice president of government affairs with the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit thats lobbied for stricter regulations around talc, told The Guardian. Its hard to understand why we would revoke a rule that simply requires companies to test for asbestos. And it marks another horrific rollback that should outrage consumers, Linda Reinstein, president and chief executive of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, told The New York Times. It puts the onus on Americans to have to try to identify consumer products that might be contaminated, and the average person cant do that because you cant know without testing, she said.
Category:
E-Commerce
No one can deny that the internet, especially social media, can pose significant dangers. Now, a new survey has found that about one in five parents and carers knowand have supporteda child who has experienced online blackmail. The survey, from the U.K.s National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), also showed that one in ten of these individuals own children have experienced blackmail online. According to the NSPCC, bad actors often start communicating with young people on public platforms before actively moving the conversation to end-to-end encrypted messaging servicesmaking it more challenging for them to be tracked. Only 43% of parents and carers found tech companies or platforms effective in preventing online blackmail, and just 37% thought the same of the government. These findings show the scale of online blackmail that is taking place across the country, yet tech companies continue to fall short in their duty to protect children, NSPCC policy manager Randi Govender said in response to the report. Some participants blamed online platforms for failing to care about childrens welfare. As one said, They have no interest whatsoever. As long as they get their money from marketing, thats good enough for them. Another individual pointed to AIs role: I personally dont feel like they do enough to remove the damaging content fast enough and rely too heavily on AI rather than humans. The NSPCC also pointed to the role of AI in online blackmail, with bad actors sometimes using generative AI to create compromising deepfakes of children using regular photos of them on social media. Online blackmailing of young people is a global problem While the survey was of 2,558 U.K. parents and carers, online blackmailing of children is also running rampant in the U.S. In 2024, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) reported 29.2 million separate child sexual exploitation incidents sent to its CyberTipline. The FBI also reports an increase in financial sextortion cases, in which a blackmaileroften posting as a young personconvinces a child to send sexually explicit images and then demands the child send compensation or they will release the images. Oftentimes, they publish it whether theyve received a payment or not. Instances of online blackmail can lead to young people attempting suicide. The role of parents in preventing online blackmailing The NSPCC survey highlights a shortfall in discussions between parents and children about online blackmail. About two in five parents and carers said theyve rarely or never talked about the subject with their children. They want and need more resources about online blackmailing, but also point to schools as another place children should learn about its dangers.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||