Connect with us

Published

on

Hate speech continues to flourish on the messaging service formerly known as Twitter, according to the Center for Countering Digital Hate.

The CCDH said Wednesday that X fails to remove posts that contain hate speech despite being notified that the content violates the company’s current hateful conduct guidelines.

The CCDH’s report comes a little after one month after X sued the nonprofit over allegations that some of the group’s previous research was derived from unscrupulous methods, including the use of illegally scraped Twitter data.

CCDH CEO Imran Ahmed declined to comment about the specifics of the lawsuit, but said the CCDH did not use data-scraping tools to conduct its latest research and instead “simply went in and had a look.”

For this report, the CCDH collected 300 posts spread from 100 accounts that contained hateful content, such as posts urging people to “stop race mixing” and messages stating that Black people are intrinsically violent. About 140 of those 300 posts contained antisemitic content, including images of Nazi swastikas, messages supporting Holocaust denial and notes promoting conspiracy theories related to Jews.

The CCDH said it reported the posts to X via the company’s user-reporting tools on Aug. 30 and 31. When the researchers followed up a week later, they found that X had only taken down 41 posts, meaning that 259 posts containing hateful content were still active, including one that that referred to Adolf Hitler as “A hero who will help secure a future for white children!” Additionally, 90 of the 100 accounts that were responsible for sending the posts were still active.

Major companies like Apple and Disney ran online ads on X that appeared next to the hateful content, the CCDH report said. One ad from Walt Disney World ran below a post that insulted Black Americans while an Apple ad was displayed above a post insinuating Holocaust denial. Another ad from the corporate server company Supermicro was sandwiched between two pro-Nazi posts that contained images of a swastika.

“What this shows is that it takes out any excuses of this being about capacity to detect problematic content,” CCDH’s Ahmed told CNBC. “We’ve done the detection for you, and here’s how you responded, or here’s how we can see that you responded.”

Ahmed added, “Leaving up content like this is a choice, and that invites the question: Are you proud of the choices you’re making?”

While X’s process for users to report hateful content is “straightforward,” Ahmed said, “the problem is that people on the other end of the alarm bell either aren’t listening, they’ve got earplugs in and they’re ignoring everything, or they are being incredibly selective in what they choose to respond to.”

X did not respond to a request for comment, and instead pointed to a post saying that “based on the limited information we’ve seen, the CCDH is asserting two false claims – that X did not take action on violative posts and that violative posts reached a lot of people on our platform.”

“We either remove content that violates our policies or label and restrict the reach of certain posts,” the company said in the X post, adding that it would review the report when it is released and “take action as needed.”

While he didn’t comment on the specifics, Ahmed told CNBC that he believes X’s lawsuit was intended to place a financial burden on the CCDH, and that he estimates it will cost the nonprofit “half a million just to defend it.”

X attorneys have previously said that the CCDH’s prior research was an attempt to “to drive advertisers off Twitter by smearing the company and its owner.”

Last week, Elon Musk said that he was considering filing a defamation lawsuit against the Anti-Defamation League, which he claimed was “trying to kill this platform by falsely accusing it & me of being anti-Semitic.” Musk attributed a 60% decline in X’s U.S. advertising revenue to a pressure campaign from the ADL.

ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt soon responded by saying that Musk was merely issuing a “threat of a frivolous lawsuit” and said that the billionaire’s behavior was “flat out dangerous and deeply irresponsible,” referring to Musk engaging with “a highly toxic, antisemitic campaign” that helped foster the #BanTheADL campaign to trend on the messaging service.

Last Friday evening, X CEO Linda Yaccarino wrote a post on X saying that “X opposes antisemitism in all its forms” and that “Antisemitism is evil and X will always work to fight it on our platform.” Yaccarino’s post also pointed to a corporate blog post detailing the ways X is addressing antisemitic content on its platform, including improving automatic enforcement and providing training support for its “frontline moderators.”

Watch: If you don’t have the whole cloth of Musk you won’t get the innovation

Continue Reading

Technology

Apple and Broadcom shares keep hitting records. Why each have more room to run

Published

on

By

Apple and Broadcom shares keep hitting records. Why each have more room to run

Continue Reading

Technology

Workday shares sink on subscription revenue guidance concerns

Published

on

By

Workday shares sink on subscription revenue guidance concerns

The Workday Inc. pop-up pavilion ahead of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, on Saturday, Jan. 19, 2025.

Hollie Adams | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Shares of software maker Workday dropped as much as 10% on Wednesday as analysts lowered their price targets, citing a lack of a upside after the company revised its full-year subscription revenue forecast.

Many software stocks have been under pressure in 2025 as commentators have worried that generative artificial intelligence tools that can quickly write lines of code might pose risks to incumbents.

This year, Workday has announced the launch of several AI agents and expanded its offerings through startup acquisitions. Earlier this month, Workday completed the $1.1 billion purchase of AI and learning software company Sana.

Despite those moves, Workday’s third-quarter earnings report on Tuesday failed to impress Wall Street.

The company called for $8.83 billion in subscription revenue for the fiscal year that will end in January 2026, implying 14.4% growth, but the figure was up just $13 million from the company’s guidance in August. The new number includes contributions from Sana and a contract with the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, Workday finance chief Zane Rowe told analysts on a conference call.

“Investors were likely looking for more of a beat-and-raise quarter,” Cantor Fitzgerald analysts Matt VanVliet and Mason Marion wrote in a note to clients. They have the equivalent of a buy rating on Workday stock. The new number, they wrote, “borders on a slight guide down.” The analysts held their 12-month price target on Workday stock at $280.

Stifel, with a hold rating on the stock, lowered its Workday target to $235 from $255.

“It does not appear that the underlying momentum of the business is showing any signs of stabilization,” Stifel’s Brad Reback and Robert Galvin wrote in a note.

Reback and Galvin said Workday implied that growth from its 12-month subscription revenue backlog will continue to slow when removing impact from acquisitions. They expect the trend to continue even as customers sign up for Workday’s AI products, they wrote.

The outcome was “like turkey without the gravy,” Evercore analysts, with the equivalent of a buy rating on the stock, wrote in the title of their note.

Analysts at RBC, which also has the equivalent of a buy rating on Workday shares, lowered their price target to $320 from $340. Despite the mixed guidance, they wrote in a note to clients, results for the fiscal third quarter did exceed consensus. Plus, AI products contributed over 1.5 percentage points of annualized revenue growth, Workday CEO Carl Eschenbach said on Tuesday’s conference call.

‘”We remain encouraged by early AI momentum,” the RBC analysts wrote.

WATCH: AI will drive the market higher in 2026, says Citizens’ Mark Lehmann

AI will drive the market higher in 2026, says Citizens’ Mark Lehmann

Continue Reading

Technology

MIT study finds AI can already replace 11.7% of U.S. workforce

Published

on

By

MIT study finds AI can already replace 11.7% of U.S. workforce

AI can already replace 11.7% of the U.S. workforce, MIT study finds

Massachusetts Institute of Technology on Wednesday released a study that found that artificial intelligence can already replace 11.7% of the U.S. labor market, or as much as $1.2 trillion in wages across finance, health care and professional services.

The study was conducted using a labor simulation tool called the Iceberg Index, which was created by MIT and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The index simulates how 151 million U.S. workers interact across the country and how they are affected by AI and corresponding policy.

The Iceberg Index, which was announced earlier this year, offers a forward-looking view of how AI may reshape the labor market, not just in coastal tech hubs but across every state in the country. For lawmakers preparing billion-dollar reskilling and training investments, the index offers a detailed map of where disruption is forming down to the zip code.

“Basically, we are creating a digital twin for the U.S. labor market,” said Prasanna Balaprakash, ORNL director and co-leader of the research. ORNL is a Department of Energy research center in eastern Tennessee, home to the Frontier supercomputer, which powers many large-scale modeling efforts.

The index runs population-level experiments, revealing how AI reshapes tasks, skills and labor flows long before those changes show up in the real economy, Balaprakash said.

The index treats the 151 million workers as individual agents, each tagged with skills, tasks, occupation and location. It maps more than 32,000 skills across 923 occupations in 3,000 counties, then measures where current AI systems can already perform those skills.

What the researchers found is that the visible tip of the iceberg — the layoffs and role shifts in tech, computing and information technology — represents just 2.2% of total wage exposure, or about $211 billion. Beneath the surface lies the total exposure, the $1.2 trillion in wages, and that includes routine functions in human resources, logistics, finance, and office administration. Those are areas sometimes overlooked in automation forecasts.

The index is not a prediction engine about exactly when or where jobs will be lost, the researchers said. Instead, it’s meant to give a skills-centered snapshot of what today’s AI systems can already do, and give policymakers a structured way to explore what-if scenarios before they commit real money and legislation.

The researchers partnered with state governments to run proactive simulations. Tennessee, North Carolina and Utah helped validate the model using their own labor data and have begun building policy scenarios using the platform.

Amazon layoffs hit engineers, gaming division, ad business

Tennessee moved first, citing the Iceberg Index in its official AI Workforce Action Plan released this month. Utah state leaders are preparing to release a similar report based on Iceberg’s modeling.

North Carolina state Sen. DeAndrea Salvador, who has worked closely with MIT on the project, said what drew her to the research is how it surfaces effects that traditional tools miss. She added that one of the most useful features is the ability to drill down to local detail.

“One of the things that you can go down to is county-specific data to essentially say, within a certain census block, here are the skills that is currently happening now and then matching those skills with what are the likelihood of them being automated or augmented, and what could that mean in terms of the shifts in the state’s GDP in that area, but also in employment,” she said.

Salvador said that kind of simulation work is especially valuable as states stand up overlapping AI task forces and working groups.

The Iceberg Index also challenges a common assumption about AI risk — that it will stay confined to tech roles in coastal hubs. The index’s simulations show exposed occupations spread across all 50 states, including inland and rural regions that are often left out of the AI conversation.

To address that gap, the Iceberg team has built an interactive simulation environment that allows states to experiment with different policy levers — from shifting workforce dollars and tweaking training programs to exploring how changes in technology adoption might affect local employment and gross domestic product.

“Project Iceberg enables policymakers and business leaders to identify exposure hotspots, prioritize training and infrastructure investments, and test interventions before committing billions to implementation,” the report says.

Balaprakash, who also serves on the Tennessee Artificial Intelligence Advisory Council, shared state-specific findings with the governor’s team and the state’s AI director. He said many of Tennessee’s core sectors — health care, nuclear energy, manufacturing and transportation — still depend heavily on physical work, which offers some insulation from purely digital automation. The question, he said, is how to use new technologies such as robotics and AI assistants to strengthen those industries rather than hollow them out.

For now, the team is positioning Iceberg not as a finished product but as a sandbox that states can use to prepare for AI’s impact on their workforces.

“It is really aimed towards getting in and starting to try out different scenarios,” Salvador said.

WATCH: Amazon targets middle managers in mass layoffs, memo suggests more cuts coming as AI thins Big Tech

Amazon targets middle managers in mass layoffs, memo suggests more cuts coming as AI thins Big Tech

Continue Reading

Trending