![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://linux.community/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Flemmy.ml%2Fpictrs%2Fimage%2Fh1ChnLuBHr.png)
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In communications with a federal confidential informant, the pair allegedly planned to “coordinate to get multiple [substations] at the same time.” Clendaniel pleaded guilty to conspiring to damage or destroy electrical facilities in May of this year.
But in a court filing, the ACLU attorneys say Russell has “reason to believe” that the government “intercepted his communications” and subjected him to a warrantless “backdoor search” by querying the Section 702 databases.
And less than a month after that initial query, we disrupted that US person who, it turned out, had researched and identified critical infrastructure sites in the US and acquired the means to conduct an attack.” The defense’s motion to compel the federal government to provide notice of use of Section 702 surveillance of Russell includes both the Politico report and Wray’s speech as exhibits.
The ACLU’s response, filed this Monday, notes that the government “does not dispute that Mr. Russell was subject to warrantless surveillance under Section 702” but instead claims it has no legal obligation to turn over FISA notice in this instance.
Legislators’ attempts to rein in the controversial surveillance authority failed, and multiple amendments requiring the FBI to obtain warrants to search or access Americans’ communications under Section 702 were voted down.
“Especially as recently expanded and reauthorized by Congress, this spying authority could be further abused by a future administration against political opponents, protest movements, and civil society organizations, as well as racial and religious minorities, abortion providers, and LGBTQ people.”
The original article contains 915 words, the summary contains 246 words. Saved 73%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
Mustafa Suleyman, the CEO of Microsoft AI, said this week that machine-learning companies can scrape most content published online and use it to train neural networks because it’s essentially “freeware.”
Shortly afterwards the Center for Investigative Reporting sued OpenAI and its largest investor Microsoft “for using the nonprofit news organization’s content without permission or offering compensation.”
Also, in 2022, several unidentified developers sued OpenAI and GitHub based on claims that the organizations used publicly posted programming code to train generative models in violation of software licensing terms
Most people posting content online as individuals will have compromised their rights in some way by accepting the Terms of Service agreements offered by major social media platforms.
The fact that OpenAI and others making AI models are striking content deals with major publishers shows that a strong brand, deep pockets, and a legal team can bring large technology operations to the negotiating table.
People will stop making work available online, they predict, if it just gets used to power AI models that reduce the marginal cost of content creation to zero and deprive creators of the possibility of any reward.
Saved 74% of original text.