Tech On Me: What Disney's leak tells us about tension over gen AI

This week's focus 

An anonymous hacking group called Nullbulge leaked internal Disney Slack communications, exposing discussions about ad campaigns, studio technology, and interview candidates. The leak, claimed to include data from thousands of Slack channels, features computer code and details about unreleased projects. 

The group advocates for artist rights and criticises Disney's handling of artist contracts and AI use. Nullbulge released the data without making demands, fearing Disney's immediate countermeasures.

The hack was allegedly done by compromising a Disney software manager's computer. This breach is similar to the 2014 Sony hack. Disney is currently investigating the incident.

My take: What strikes me most is the dual nature of this hack. On one hand, it highlights the critical issue of data security within major corporations. If a behemoth like Disney can be infiltrated, it raises questions about the robustness of cybersecurity measures in place at other companies.

Beyond Disney’s cybersecurity protection, this hack touches on broader industry concerns about the fair use of creative work regarding generative AI. The increasing use of generative AI in creative industries has sparked ethical and intellectual property debates, focusing on issues like copyright, ownership, and the originality of AI-generated works. 

Legal experts, policymakers, and creators are actively discussing how to appropriately credit AI-generated content and safeguard the rights of human creators and AI developers. Additionally, while generative AI provides various benefits, it raises concerns about its impact on traditional employment in creative fields. 

Despite fears of AI replacing human jobs, I believe it will enhance rather than replace human creativity.

In other news

Loophole in TikTok puts minors at risks

A flaw in TikTok's system is enabling teenagers to access the TikTok Shop feature, which is supposed to be restricted to users aged 18 and above. This problem occurs when teens initially lie about their age during sign-up and later have their accounts linked to a parent's account using TikTok’s Family Pairing feature. Despite these parental controls, the Shop tab remains available.

The Family Pairing feature on TikTok allows parents to manage their teen’s screen time, content, and privacy settings. However, even with these controls, the Shop tab, which includes adult products like sex toys, lingerie, and vape pens, continues to be accessible to teens who falsify their age during registration.

TechCrunch tested this by creating an account with a fake age over 18, pairing it with an adult account, and confirming that the Shop tab remained accessible despite parental controls. The only way to restrict access was by enabling Restricted Mode, which required uninstalling and reinstalling the app—a cumbersome process.

TikTok asserts that the Shop feature is intended for users 18 and older and expects users to provide accurate age information. They also offer tools to report accounts suspected to belong to underage users. This gap means teens who lied about their age can still use age-restricted features, even under parental supervision.

My take: As a parent of a two-year-old daughter, I find the situation with TikTok's loophole quite concerning. Even though my daughter is currently too young to use social media, the issue highlights broader problems with digital safety and age verification on popular platforms. 

As my daughter ages, she will inevitably become interested in using social media platforms like TikTok. The current loophole allowing underage users to access adult content underlines the need for more robust safeguards to ensure children's safety online.

Furthermore, the reliance on self-reported age information is insufficient. Platforms like TikTok must implement more reliable age verification methods to prevent minors from accessing adult-only features and content. 

TikTok's current stance on this issue suggests a need for greater transparency and accountability. As a parent, I would appreciate clear communication from the platform about how they plan to address and fix such loopholes. 

Ultimately, this situation also highlights the importance of educating children and parents about the potential risks of social media. Teaching children to be honest about their age online and informing parents about the limitations of parental controls can help mitigate some of these risks.

Is the Chinese government stifling AI innovation?

The Wall Street Journal published a piece which looks at how China is mobilising state resources to remain competitive in the global AI race. However, its stringent regulatory environment, especially concerning political content, hinders its AI ambitions. 

Initially, China made headway in AI, particularly in computer vision for surveillance. However, the launch of OpenAI’s ChatGPT caught the country off guard, pushing Chinese firms to catch up.

Chinese developers like Baidu and SenseTime now claim their AI products rival or surpass those of OpenAI’s GPT-4, supported by government subsidies and data resources. China has also seen rapid adoption of generative AI, driven by a national campaign. However, heavy regulation requires AI models to pass rigorous political safety checks, stifling creativity and innovation.

My take: I have mixed feelings about China's approach to advancing its AI capabilities. 

On one hand, I appreciate the strategic mobilisation of state resources to push AI development forward. It’s impressive how the government provides significant funding, data, and computing power to support its tech companies. This top-down approach can drive advancements and large-scale adoption, giving China a competitive edge in advanced manufacturing, robotics, and supply chain management.

However, I am concerned about the heavy regulatory oversight, especially political content. Innovation thrives in environments where freedom of thought and expression are encouraged. The stringent political controls in China might stifle creativity and limit the potential of AI technologies. Developers may self-censor to avoid crossing political red lines, which could hinder true innovation.

Another worry I have is the efficiency of resource allocation. While the government's investment in AI, including subsidies and state-run data centres, is substantial, the top-down approach may not always align with market needs. The abundance of large-language models in China, coupled with a price war, might further dilute efforts and undermine the financial sustainability of AI firms.

Access to quality, unbiased training data is also critical. China's restrictive environment on information flow and censorship can limit the diversity and quality of data, leading to potential biases in AI systems. Moreover, the US export restrictions on advanced semiconductors present a significant challenge. Although local governments are attempting to mitigate this through subsidies and pooling resources, relying on smuggled chips indicates a potential vulnerability in China’s tech infrastructure.

In the long run, I urge China to balance control with innovation and address technological and data challenges, which is crucial for China to achieve its AI ambitions sustainably.

Who does Prime Day benefit?

A US Senate investigation has found that Amazon's Prime Day significantly increases injury rates among warehouse workers. The report cited internal Amazon data indicating that injury rates spike during Prime Day and the holiday season. The report criticised Amazon for prioritising speed over safety, pressuring employees to work long hours, and neglecting safety procedures.

Amazon has faced scrutiny over worker treatment for years. The company, however, claims employee safety is a top priority and accused the Senate committee of presenting a misleading view of its safety record. 

Prime Day, a major sales event for Amazon, generated $12.7 billion in US sales in 2023 and is expected to surpass $14 billion this year. The report highlighted that during Prime Day 2019, Amazon’s injury rate was over double the industry average, with nearly 45 injuries per 100 workers. The report also accused Amazon of discouraging workers from seeking outside medical care to lower injury statistics.

Amazon disputes these claims, stating it has reduced its recordable incident rate by 28% since 2019. Despite recent safety investments, the Senate report argues that Amazon still has significant work to ensure worker safety.

My take: The findings are deeply concerning and highlight significant issues within Amazon's workplace culture. They expose a troubling disregard for worker safety in pursuit of profit and efficiency.

Worker safety should be a priority, not an afterthought sacrificed for corporate gain. While the company points to a reduction in incident rates, the investigation suggests that these improvements are minimal compared to the company’s enormous profits. 

This discrepancy indicates a need for a more substantial commitment to worker safety and a more transparent approach to reporting and addressing workplace injuries.

I believe that Amazon must take more aggressive steps to ensure its workers' safety and fair treatment. This includes implementing effective safety protocols and creating a workplace culture that genuinely values and prioritises the health and well-being of all employees. 

Amazon’s immense resources position it uniquely to lead by example of how a successful business can and should operate without compromising the dignity and safety of its workforce.

Buying lifestyle services on TikTok 

TikTok is expanding its local lifestyle business, starting in Southeast Asia, with initial operations in Indonesia and Thailand. 

Still in its beta phase, this new venture offers group purchase packages primarily for catering businesses. Some Thai accounts have already promoted "TikTok Local Services" (TTLS) as a business opportunity.

TikTok's recruitment website lists several job openings related to this business in Singapore, Jakarta, and Bangkok. The openings cover ecological governance, strategic analysis, product management, and business development roles. 

For instance, Jakarta's business development director role will focus on expanding industries like catering and tourism and providing integrated marketing solutions.

My take: I find TikTok's expansion into the local lifestyle business in Southeast Asia both intriguing and ambitious. 

On one hand, the move leverages TikTok's massive user base and proven success in ecommerce, as seen with Douyin in China. The platform's ability to generate significant GMV demonstrates its potential to revolutionise local commerce. 

However, this expansion is not without its challenges. The logistical and infrastructural limitations in Southeast Asia could significantly hinder the smooth rollout of TikTok Local Services. 

The region’s underdeveloped transportation and supply chain systems and inconsistent hygiene and safety standards in catering present formidable obstacles. The necessity for a robust local supply chain infrastructure cannot be overstated, and TikTok’s success hinges on addressing these foundational issues.

In addition, regulatory risks loom large, like the ban on TikTok in Indonesia. The local lifestyle business involves extensive data collection tied to actual locations, intertwining with the local economy more intimately than content or e-commerce. 

Navigating the regulatory landscape in different countries will be crucial for TikTok to avoid potential pitfalls.

Looking ahead

British regulators are investigating the rising use of digital wallets by major tech companies such as Apple Pay, Google Pay, and PayPal. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR) are seeking input on these payment methods' benefits and potential risks. 

They aim to assess the impact of digital wallets on competition, consumer protection, and market integrity. Over half of UK adults now use digital wallets, which have become a significant interface between tech companies and consumers.

This move aligns with ongoing examinations by regulators in Europe and the United States regarding Big Tech's involvement in financial services. Last year, the U.S. consumer watchdog proposed regulations for payments and smartphone wallets, facing industry criticism. 

The British regulators' review builds on previous work regarding contactless mobile payments and the role of Big Tech in financial services. Their findings will be updated by the first quarter of 2025.

My take: In APAC, digital wallets have become ubiquitous in daily transactions. Platforms like WeChat Pay and Alipay in China, Paytm in India, and GrabPay in Southeast Asia have revolutionised how people handle their finances, blending seamlessly into the fabric of commerce and everyday life. 

The British regulators' concerns about competition, consumer protection, and market integrity mirror the debates happening here. The rapid adoption of digital wallets in Asia has brought tremendous convenience and financial inclusion. However, it has also raised questions about data privacy, market monopolies, and potential misuse.

The outcome of this review could set a precedent that influences global standards, including those in APAC. It will be crucial for Asian regulators to monitor these developments and consider similar measures to ensure that the growth of digital wallets benefits consumers and maintains market fairness.