It’s not surprising why the US would devote more money to these efforts. US Chief Technology Officer Michael Kratsios stressed that the country needed to be “winning and leading” not just in present-day technology, but also that which would “define our future.” It’s concerned that countries like China might claim an edge, and the extra spending theoretically helps.

The White House ultimately aims to boost AI spending to over $2 billion by 2022, with quantum science funding reaching $860 million.

Whether or not the administration reaches its goals isn’t clear. The 2021 budget still has to clear both sides of Congress, and that’s not guaranteed when many other issues could be under dispute. The November election could also affect long-term plans — a new administration wouldn’t necessarily cut funding, but there could easily be a change in direction.

There are still some concerns about the safety of the data. If someone steals your card, can they access and manipulate your info? For that matter, the move also raises questions about the security of the database and the potential difficulties if you don’t have your card in an emergency.

There wasn’t a mention of a timeframe for when the cards would be ready.

The move comes just as India wants every village in the country to be connected with fiber optic cable in the next 1,000 days.

There’s certainly pressure to rethink data. India has been hard-hit by the COVID-19 pandemic, with tens of thousands of new infections per day. Health ID cards won’t necessarily be ready in time to meaningfully address COVID-19, but they could help contain similar diseases by ensuring consistent treatment and vaccine delivery. However, this assumes the card system works as well as promised — and with nearly 1.4 billion people, that’s a daunting challenge.

National Digital Heath Mission – a revolution in health sector in India, starts today;

Every Indian will get a health ID which will be a repository of all health related information of a person: PM @narendramodi#AatmaNirbharBharat #IndependenceDay #IndiaIndependenceDay pic.twitter.com/iQIpSx2bd9

— PIB India (@PIB_India) August 15, 2020

A bank spokesperson said the company had since poured “significant” resources into bolstering its security and otherwise addressing orders from both the OCC and the Federal Reserve.

The payout isn’t small, but it might not make many victims happy. The breach exposed sensitive details like addresses, reported income and (in some cases) account numbers and credit scores. Capital One did provide free credit monitoring and identity theft protection after the incident, but the payout still amounts to about 75 cents per person affected in North America. Like the Equifax breach, the compensation may seem small compared to the security precautions and stress inflicted on affected people.

The company hasn’t been shy about wanting Huawei’s business. In its latest earnings call, CEO Steve Mollenkopf said Qualcomm was determining how it could sell to every phone maker, “including Huawei.” However, there weren’t indications of a lobbying campaign at the time.

It also comes soon after Huawei settled a patent dispute with Huawei by paying $1.8 billion and striking a new license deal, although the two events aren’t necessarily linked.

A few companies have managed to get exceptions to the US ban through licenses, such as Intel, Micron and Xilinx. Qualcomm isn’t necessarily attempting an unrealistic feat. Even so, success is far from guaranteed. Smartphones represent a key part of Huawei’s business, and allowing a major exception like this could be seen as weakening the ban. It might also be deemed inconsistent when software companies like Google are still barred from interacting with the Chinese firm.

Initially, the labels will only cover officials from the US, UK, Russia, China and France, but Twitter says it plans to expand the feature to more countries in the future. The labels, which have already started showing up, appear in each account’s profile and within every tweet they send. 

For state-affiliated media, Twitter will label official accounts for the media organization, as well as those belonging to their “editors-in-chief, and/or their senior staff.” The company defines state media as “outlets where the state exercises control over editorial content through financial resources, direct or indirect political pressures, and/or control over production and distribution.”

Additionally, accounts with “state-affiliated media” these labels will no longer appear in Twitter’s recommendations.

The House Judiciary Committee’s big tech antitrust hearing has a new date after a delay to honor the late Rep. John Lewis. In the wake of an Axios report, the committee has confirmed that the hearing has been rescheduled to July 29th at 12PM Eastern. You’ll likely still find a livestream of the hearing on the committee’s YouTube channel, although it hadn’t been updated to reflect the new date as of this writing.

The hearing will have the CEOs of Amazon, Apple, Google and Facebook testify on their companies’ claimed dominance in online spaces. It’s the first time all four executives will testify in one hearing (albeit virtually due to the pandemic), and it will be Amazon chief Jeff Bezos’ first time testifying in Congress.

The funding for the network would come from part of the nearly $1.3 billion budget devoted to the National Quantum Initiative.

There’s already some progress toward these goals. The Wall Street Journal noted that Argonne National Laboratory and the University of Chicago built a 52-mile quantum network through unused fiber, and it should expand to 80 miles once the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory connects to the system.

The US has numerous incentives to build a countrywide quantum network, most notably security. By its very nature, a quantum network is extremely secure — you disrupt the data just by observing it, making it virtually impossible to intercept. It can also transmit large amounts of data, and might help with extremely sensitive quantum sensor networks that could better detect earthquakes or even medical conditions.

It’s still very early days for the prototype network. And much like ARPANET, the precursor to the modern internet, this would be a government research project rather than something you could use for everyday communication. However, it does hint at a future where quantum computing is a crucial part of daily life.

Facebook and the FTC have declined to comment on the reports of progress into the investigations, although Facebook did say it was eager to share its “views on the competitive landscape” when Zuckerberg testifies to Congress on July 27th.

Many details of the case are under wraps, but they’re believed to focus on whether or not Facebook broke any antitrust laws through acquisitions. The company owns social media heavyweights Instagram and WhatsApp, and has been acquiring relevant companies like Giphy. Rivals have struggled to compete, although larger examples like Snapchat have continued to survive and sometimes thrive.

A 2021 finish could significantly alter the course of the investigation. The US might elect a new president in November, and that could easily lead to a replacement for FTC chairman Joseph Simons. If so, the antitrust case could take a new direction, with a different focus and expectations. This doesn’t mean Facebook would escape a penalty — if anything, it might face pressure from politicians eager to break up tech giants.

The UK had decided in January that it would allow equipment from Huawei and other “high risk” companies in non-core parts of the nation’s 5G networks, limiting their involvement to 35 percent in networks connecting devices and other hardware to mobile masts. Reports later emerged that the UK might phase out Huawei over the space of three years.

The US has maintained that Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese companies are dangerous as they could potentially help China spy on sensitive communications. Officials have been publicly reluctant to outline just what (if anything) Huawei is capable of, however, and unofficial reports of access to carrier backdoors suggested these may have been common networking tools. Huawei has maintained its innocence.

Whoever is telling the truth, this could be a further blow to Huawei’s international plans. While Huawei’s forced exit from the US wasn’t surprising, its foothold elsewhere has been relatively safe, if sometimes limited. A UK rethink would kick it out of another major market, and it wouldn’t be surprising if other US allies followed suit.

Greater accountability would come by requiring a “defined complaint system” that handles reports and alerts users to moderation actions within two weeks while providing an appeals process. Companies would have 24 hours to remove any content deemed illegal, although smaller outlets would have more leeway for responding to requests and user complaints.

The bill would limit Section 230’s ability to to protect companies from actions by federal regulators and state attorneys general, and would have the Government Accountability Office examine the possibility of an FTC-run whistleblower program for online platforms.

If all goes well, this would hold sites to task when they’re abusing the law or are clearly aware of users’ illegal activity. A site that thrives on user uploads of pirated material would have a more difficult time avoiding legal action. This wouldn’t weaken encryption (as the EARN IT Act and other initiatives might), however, and it wouldn’t force sites to carry content.

There’s no certainty this bill and its expected House counterpart will survive Congress and become law. Schatz pointed out that this is not only a bipartisan bill, but is sponsored by both the chairman and ranking member of the Senate committee. It might gain traction where single-party bills have fallen short.