Connect with us

Published

3 years ago

on

Policy advocates who have been pushing for new legislation reining in Big Tech’s power have seen their hopes lifted and shattered several times throughout the past few months.

Last week marked one of the brighter notes for those supporting the push for new antitrust laws, when the House passed a package of bills giving enforcers more resources to go after anti-competitive mergers and giving state attorneys general more power over in which courts they can bring antitrust lawsuits.

While the legislation that passed 242-184 is less ambitious in scope than some of the more sweeping proposals making their way through both chambers of Congress, it is cause for hope, according to a new memo from the Tech Oversight Project, a nonprofit that advocates for antitrust reform.

“Big Tech never loses a legislative fight – and they just did,” Executive Director Sacha Haworth said in a memo to allies Thursday that was shared exclusively with CNBC. Recipients included Democratic offices on Capitol Hill, think tanks and a coalition of advocacy organizations, according to the group.

The Tech Oversight Project receives funding, as The Washington Post has reported, from the Omidyar Network, created by regulation advocate and eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, and from the advocacy arm of the Economic Security Project, a nonprofit led by Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes who has called for his former company’s break up.

Haworth, a Democratic political campaign veteran, makes the case that the decisive passage of the legislation last week shows there is still a chance for two other key bills to pass in the lame-duck session later this year. Those bills are the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICO) and the Open App Markets Act (OAMA), which would essentially bar large platforms like Amazon, Apple and Google from favoring their own products over rivals that rely on their marketplaces (the latter bill is focused squarely on mobile app stores).

Earlier this summer, antitrust reform advocates looked to the lame duck only as a Hail Mary, since many felt there was still a chance to schedule a vote before the August recess, an informal marker of when midterm electioneering gets into full swing, making it harder to pass new laws. But as the legislative days ticked away, it became clear advocates would need to refocus their sights on the weeks following the midterms.

According to Haworth, last week’s vote provided some reason for optimism.

She notes House Democrats who voted against the package were not among those in the top 20% most competitive districts in the country, based on data from the Cook Political Report. That runs counter to speculation that congressional leaders may be hesitant to schedule a vote on AICO and OAMA to spare Democrats in competitive races from having to vote on an issue that could be used against them.

Haworth goes as far as to say, “if this voting pattern holds, AICO and OAMA will breeze past both chambers with ease.”

She contends Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., the key Republican champion of tech antitrust reform in the House, delivered on his promise of “a tidal wave of Republican votes,” despite opposition from other prominent party members like House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.

“Despite attempts by Big Tech to discredit Grassley and Buck’s efforts, they proved their hypothesis right: If brought to the full floor, a significant portion of Republicans would cross over to join Democrats in holding Big Tech accountable,” Haworth wrote, referring to Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who has championed the bills in that chamber.

Haworth wrote that the contradictory reasons given by Jordan and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., to oppose antitrust reform should prove that “their argument is a red herring meant to muddy the waters.” While Jordan contended the bills on the table would help platforms censor information, Lofgren argued it would do the opposite, making it harder for them to moderate content.

“Democrats have been pretty open about the fact that they want these bills because they believe it will help them censor conservatives,” Jordan spokesperson Russell Dye said in a statement. A spokesperson for Lofgren did not immediately provide a comment.

Adam Kovacevich, CEO of the tech-funded left-of-center advocacy group Chamber of Progress similarly pushed back on Haworth’s critique.

“Our polling this week makes it obvious that voters’ top priority on tech policy is content moderation, an issue which AICOA and the Open Apps Market Act make worse,” he said in a statement. The bills’ Democratic sponsors have said they would not weaken content moderation. “More than a dozen Democrats have raised serious concerns that these bills would stop platforms from taking down harmful content, and that issue still hasn’t been resolved.”

Finally, the memo contends that lame-duck legislation is becoming more common, citing a Pew Research Center article from last year that found a significant percentage of legislation passed in recent years has been in the lame-duck period. In the 116th Congress spanning from 2019 to 2020, for example, nearly 44% of bills passed did so in the lame duck.

“Big Tech and their allies will continue to push the narrative that bipartisan antitrust reform is dead,” Haworth wrote. “Not so fast. While anti-Big Tech advocates remain clear-eyed about the task at hand, the outcome is not set in stone.”

Read the full letter from The Tech Oversight Project below:

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Technology

Zillow shares are getting crushed. Here’s why

Published

1 hour ago

on

December 15, 2025

By

Zillow shares are getting crushed. Here's why

The stock market graphic of Zillow Group is displayed on a smartphone with the logo of Zillow in the background on Feb. 21, 2021.

Sopa Images | Lightrocket | Getty Images

Zillow shares plunged more than 9% on Monday on worries that the online real estate platform could have a big new competitor: Google Search.

Google appears to be running tests on putting real estate sale listings into its search results. Over the weekend, real estate tech strategist Mike DelPrete published mobile phone screenshots of Google Search results showing real estate listings, which appeared to be powered by real estate data company “HouseCanary.”

The listings allowed users to view the full details of a property’s page, request a tour and contact an agent — similar to the functions offered on Zillow.com’s online marketplace portal. Google’s home searches appear to work only in select markets and on mobile devices as testing is underway.

The decline in Zillow signals investors are bracing for the eventual impact of Google’s foray into the real estate market. The stock was down at least 11% at one point during Monday’s session.

However, Wall Street analysts were quick to point out that Zillow’s exposure to organic search is fairly small, limiting potential downside at least in the near term as more details around Google’s product come to light.

Wells Fargo analyst Alec Brondolo, who has an equal weight rating on Zillow, said he would not “expect a meaningful financial impact from listings on Google shifting from organic to paid” — given that Zillow is not overly dependent on organic search results for traffic.

“The listings product appears similar to Google Hotel Metasearch results; introduction could increase traffic cost to Zillow, but disintermediation unlikely,” Brondolo said in a Monday note to clients. “In the hotel category, Google merchandises hotel rooms in search results as a metasearch ad product for OTAs. We would expect a similar approach in real estate, with Zillow, Homes.com, Realtor.com, etc. bidding for home listing ad units rather than Google attempting to monetize directly with an ad product sold to agents.”

Stock Chart IconStock chart icon

hide content

Zillow stock over the past year.

But some analysts see Google’s testing as a longer-term headwind to Zillow and other online real estate portals.

Goldman Sachs’ Michael Ng wrote in a note to clients that he believes the search engine’s real estate listings, which he said are an advertising format for buy-side agents, directly compete with Zillow’s Premier Agent program by “facilitating lead generation” for agents from prospective buyers.

“While we don’t expect a direct near-term impact on Zillow’s business, given that most of Zillow’s traffic is direct (e.g., Zillow.com, StreetEasy.com, mobile apps) and Google’s new product is currently limited to select markets and mobile browsers, we view this development as a long-term risk for real estate portals like Zillow,” Ng, who remains neutral on Zillow, wrote in a note to clients.

Jason Helfstein of Oppenheimer said that Google’s expansion into real estate could impact the number of consumers going to Zillow.com — which was 228 million in the third quarter — and therefore could take a hit on the company’s ability to monetize its platform. “The impact would likely take years to play out and would need to be rolled out across the US to meaningfully impact real estate portal traffic,” Helfstein said in a recent note, to be sure.

Zillow shares are down more than 8% year to date.

Neither Google nor Zillow responded immediately to CNBC’s request for comment.

How Zillow became the most popular real estate app in the U.S.

Continue Reading

Technology

Trump admin to hire 1,000 specialists for ‘Tech Force’ to build AI, finance projects

Published

2 hours ago

on

December 15, 2025

By

Trump admin to hire 1,000 specialists for 'Tech Force' to build AI, finance projects

The Trump administration on Monday unveiled a new initiative dubbed the “U.S. Tech Force,” comprising about 1,000 engineers and other specialists who will work on artificial intelligence infrastructure and other technology projects throughout the federal government.

Participants will commit to a two-year employment program working with teams that report directly to agency leaders in “collaboration with leading technology companies,” according to an official government website.

Those “private sector partners” include Amazon Web Services, Apple, Google Public Sector, Dell Technologies, Microsoft, Nvidia, OpenAI, Oracle, Palantir, Salesforce and numerous others, the website says.

The Tech Force shows the Trump administration increasing its focus on developing America’s AI infrastructure as it competes with China for dominance in the rapidly growing industry.

The initiative was announced four days after President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at establishing a national AI policy framework — a priority for industry leaders who opposed states crafting their own regulations.

Once Tech Force members complete their two terms, they can seek full-time jobs with those companies, who have committed to consider the programs’ alumni for employment. The private partners can also nominate their employees to do stints of government service.

Annual salaries will likely fall in the range of $150,000 to $200,000, plus benefits.

“We’re trying to reshape the workforce to make sure we have the right talent on the right problems,” U.S. Office of Personnel Management Director Scott Kupor told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Monday morning.

The engineering corps will be working on “high-impact technology initiatives including AI implementation, application development, data modernization, and digital service delivery across federal agencies,” the site says.

Continue Reading

Technology

From puppies to superheroes, Chinese AI toys are bringing hugs — and hesitation

Published

4 hours ago

on

December 15, 2025

By

From puppies to superheroes, Chinese AI toys are bringing hugs — and hesitation

Haivivi Bubblepal, an AI toy.

Courtesy: Haivivi

It seems everyone is talking about artificial intelligence these days — even Ultraman. 

When asked if investors should be worried about an AI bubble, the new second-generation CocoMate AI-powered plush toy by Chinese company Haivivi warned about the dangers of speculation in AI stocks.

“The AI market has been on a wild ride lately,” the toy based on the Ultraman character cautioned. “If investors pour too much money into unproven ideas without solid fundamentals, it could lead to a bubble burst!”

China has long been a dominant manufacturer in the global toy industry. So pushing into AI playthings is a natural step, analysts say. The Xi Jinping administration, on a campaign to turn China into an AI powerhouse, has been directing companies and consumers to integrate AI into their businesses and lives. 

Haivivi is one of 1,500 companies in China’s $4 billion dollar AI toy industry. 

Another is Chengdu-based startup Chongker, which invented an AI cat as a comfort animal. The artificial feline uses voice recognition and banked memories in the cloud to adjust its behavior to its owner’s needs.

“Some people like the cat to be more, maybe noisy or naughty, right? And some people just need the quiet one. So it will learn what kind of thing you like,” Sean Xu, director of AI products with Chongker, told CNBC. 

Xu said the company added a special feature it believes will help the pet build a strong bond with its owner— a simulated heartbeat.

The electronic pulse is triggered after holding the AI pet tightly for 10 seconds. Xu says the feeling makes one “calm down.”

If a potential shopper prefers a high-energy toy, Loona the AI puppy by Keyi Tech uses cameras and lasers to zip around its new home.

The AI helps Loona figure out the layout of its owner’s pad. The robot pet can also recognize up to five family members and respond to each one individually.

Despite the fascination with the intelligent toys, the gadgets come with risks, especially when it comes to impressionable young minds. 

The AI pet robot plush toy Ropet showcased at the Global AI Player Carnival & West Bund International Tech Consumer Carnival in Shanghai, Oct. 27, 2025.

CFOTO | Future Publishing | Getty Images

New research by U.S. consumer safety-focused non-profit Public Interest Research Group suggests the effects of AI toys on young children are still far from understood. PIRG’s studies found some toys shared inappropriate and dangerous information with users, and the group raised concerns about privacy. 

“A lot of these toys are using large language models,” Beijing-based tech consultant Tom van Dillen said. “Sometimes the models can hallucinate. Now toy manufacturers are doing a lot to create guardrails.”

For Haivivi’s CocoMate plush toys, including Ultraman, parents can access a transcript of their children’s conversations with the AI toy on their phone. 

When asked by CNBC if succumbing to pressure by other students at school to do drugs is a good idea, Ultraman played parent.

“Oh no … it’s a TERRIBLE idea!” the toy responded. “If they keep bothering you, tell your teachers or parents.”

Continue Reading

Trending