Shocking as it may seem, it’s been nearly a decade since the first Apple Pencil was announced, way back in 2015. The stylus hasn’t seen much in the way of updates since then. The most significant arrived in 2018, bringing magnetic charging to the line. Last year, meanwhile, saw the arrival of a less expensive […]
© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.
Meta’s tracking ads business could be facing further legal blows in the European Union: An influential advisor to the bloc’s top court affirmed Thursday that the region’s privacy laws limits on how long people’s data can be used for targeted advertising.
In the non-legally binding opinion, Advocate General Athanasios Rantos said use of personal data for advertising must be limited.
This is important because Meta’s tracking ads business relies upon ingesting vast amounts of personal data to build profiles of individuals to target them with advertising messages. Any limits on how it can use personal data could limit its ability to profit off of people’s attention.
A final ruling on the point remains pending — typically these arrive three to six months after an AG opinion — but the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) often takes a similar view to its advisors.
The CJEU’s role, meanwhile, is to clarify the application of EU law so its rulings are keenly watched as they steer how lower courts and regulators uphold the law.
Per AG Rantos, data retention for ads must take account of the principle of proportionality, a general principle of EU law that also applies to the bloc’s privacy framework, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) — such as when determining a lawful basis for processing. A key requirement of the regulation is to have a legal basis for handling people’s information.
In a press release the CJEU writes with emphasis: “Rantos proposes that the Court should rule that the GDPR precludes the processing of personal data for the purposes of targeted advertising without restriction as to time. The national court must assess, based inter alia on the principle of proportionality, the extent to which the data retention period and the amount of data processed are justified having regard to the legitimate aim of processing those data for the purposes of personalised advertising.”
The CJEU is considering two legal questions referred to it by a court in Austria. These relate to a privacy challenge, dating back to 2020, brought against Meta’s adtech business by Max Schrems, a lawyer and privacy campaigner. Schrems is well known in Europe as he’s already racked up multiple privacy wins against Meta — which have led to penalties that have cost the tech giant well over a billion dollars in fines since the GDPR came into force.
An internal memo by Meta engineers, obtained by Motherboard/Vice back in 2022, painted a picture of a company unable to apply policies to limit its use of people’s data after ingestion by its ads systems as it had “built a system with open borders”, as the document put it. Although Meta disputed the characterization, claiming at the time the document “does not describe our extensive processes and controls to comply with privacy regulations”.
But it’s clear Meta’s core business model relies on its ability to track and profile web users to operate its microtargeted advertising business. So any hard legal limits on its ability to process and retain people’s data could have big implications for its profitability. To wit: Last year, Meta suggested around 10% of its worldwide ad revenue is generated in the EU.
In recent months, European Union lawmakers and regulators have also notably been dialling up pressure on the adtech giant to ditch its addiction to surveillance advertising — with the Commission explicitly name-checking the existence of alternative ad models, such as contextual advertising, when it opened an investigation into Meta’s binary “consent or pay” user offer last month, under the market power-focused Digital Markets Act.
A key GDPR steering body, meanwhile, also put out guidance on “consent or pay” earlier this month — stressing that larger ad platforms like Meta must give users a “real choice” about decisions affecting their privacy.
In today’s opinion, AG Rantos has also opined on a second point that’s been referred to the court: Namely whether making “manifestly” public certain personal information — in this case, info related to Schrems’ sexual orientation — gives Meta carte blanche to retrospectively claim it can use the sensitive data for ad targeting.
Schrems had complained he received ads on Facebook targeting his sexuality. He subsequently discussed his sexuality publicly but had argued the GDPR principle of purpose limitation must be applied in parallel, referencing a core plank of the regulation that limits further processing of personal data (i.e. without a new valid legal basis such as obtaining the user’s consent).
AG Rantos’ opinion appears to align with Schrems’. Discussing this point, the press release notes (again with emphasis): “while data concerning sexual orientation fall into the category of data that enjoy particular protection and the processing of which is prohibited, that prohibition does not apply when the data are manifestly made public by the data subject. Nevertheless, this position does not in itself permit the processing of those data for the purposes of personalised advertising.”
In an initial reaction to the AG’s views on both legal questions, Schrems, who is founder and chairman of the European privacy rights nonprofit, noyb, welcomed the opinion, via his lawyer for the case against Meta, Katharina Raabe-Stuppnig.
“At the moment, the online advertising industry simply stores everything forever. The law is clear that the processing must stop after a few days or weeks. For Meta, this would mean that a large part of the information they have collected over the last decade would become taboo for advertising,” she wrote in a statement highlighting the importance of limits on data retention for ads.
“Meta has basically been building a huge data pool on users for 20 years now, and it is growing every day. EU law, however, requires ‘data minimisation’. If the Court follows the opinion, only a small part of this pool will be allowed to be used for advertising — even if have consented to ads,” she added.
On the issue of further use of sensitive data that’s been made public, she said: “This issue is highly relevant for anyone who makes a public statement. Do you retroactively waive your right to privacy for even totally unrelated information, or can only the statement itself be used for the purpose intended by the speaker? If the Court interprets this as a general ‘waiver’ of your rights, it would chill any online speech on Instagram, Facebook or Twitter.”
Reached for its own reaction to the AG opinion, Meta spokesman Matthew Pollard told TechCrunch it would await the court ruling.
The company also claims to have “overhauled privacy” since 2019, suggesting it’s spent €5BN+ on EU-related privacy compliance issues and expanding user controls. “Since 2019, we have overhauled privacy at Meta and invested over five billion Euros to embed privacy at the heart of our products,” wrote Meta in an emailed statement. “Everyone using Facebook has access to a wide range of settings and tools that allow people to manage how we use their information.”
On sensitive data, Pollard highlighted another claim by Meta that it “does not use sensitive data that users provide us to personalise ads”, as the statement puts it.
“We also prohibit advertisers from sharing sensitive information in our terms and we filter out any potentially sensitive information that we’re able to detect,” Meta also wrote, adding: “Further, we’ve taken steps to remove any advertiser targeting options based on topics perceived by users to be sensitive.”
In April 2021, Meta announced a policy change in this area — saying it would no longer allow advertisers to target users with ads based on sensitive categories such as their sexual orientation, race, political beliefs or religion. However, in May 2022, an investigation by the data journalism nonprofit, The Markup, found it was easy for advertisers to circumvent Meta’s ban by using “obvious proxies”.
A CJEU ruling back in August 2022 also looks very relevant here as the court affirmed then that sensitive inferences should be treated as sensitive personal data under the GDPR. Or, put another way, using a proxy for sexual orientation to target ads requires obtaining the same stringent standard of “explicit consent” as directly targeting ads at a person’s sexual orientation would need in order to be lawful processing in the EU.
Nothing today announced a pair of refreshes to its earbud line. The naming conventions are a touch convoluted here, but the Nothing Ear is an update to the Nothing Ear (2), while the Nothing Ear (a) is more of a spiritual successor to the Nothing Ear Stick.
The most notable bit of today’s news, however, is probably Nothing’s embrace of ChatGPT this time out. As the “AI smartphones” of the world are battling with devices like Humane’s Ai Pin and the Rabbit R1 for mindshare, the London-based mobile company seems to have skipped a step by integrating the tech into their new earbuds.
More specifically, if you have the ChatGPT app installed on a connected Nothing handset, you’ll be able to ask the generative AI program questions with a pinch of the headphones’ stem. Think Siri/Google Assistant/Alexa-style access on a pair of earbuds, only this one taps directly into OpenAI’s wildly popular platform.
“Nothing will also improve the Nothing smartphone user experience in Nothing OS by embedding system-level entry points to ChatGPT, including screenshot sharing and Nothing-styled widgets,” the company notes. The feature will be available exclusively for both of the new earbuds.
Preorders for both buds start today. Nothing says the Ear buds bring improved sound over their predecessors, courtesy of a new driver system. That, meanwhile, has allowed for more space for the battery, with up to 25% more life than the Ear (2). A “smart” active noise-canceling system adapts accordingly to environmental noise and checks for “leakage” between the buds and the ear canal.
The Ear (a) also brings noise-canceling improvements, but what Nothing really seems to be pushing is the bright yellow colorway, which bucks the black and white aesthetic that has defined its devices.
The Ear and Ear (a) are both reasonably priced at $149 and $99, respectively. Shipping starts April 22.
Many startups are hoping that the gradual opening of an IPO window and the prospect of interest rate cuts later this year will finally encourage VCs to be less stingy with their capital.
But it’s unlikely that startups’ fundraising slog will become much easier soon, mostly because of venture capitalists’ own capital-gathering challenges.
In Q1, U.S. VC funds raised only $9.3 billion, according to PitchBook data. At this pace, VC fundraising will end 2024 at just above $37 billion, the lowest capital raised since 2013 and a 54% decline from last year.
Just like startups, VCs are struggling to attract new capital from their backers, known as limited partners, such as endowments, foundations and pension funds. The drastic decline in IPO and M&A activity over the last couple years meant that LPs had meager cash distributions from their investments in VC funds.
“We’re coming out of a 2020 to 2021 period when [LPs] had the fear of missing out and were rushing into venture,” said Kirsten Morin, co-head of venture capital at HighVista Strategies, an asset manager that invests in venture funds. “Now they are licking their wounds and saying, ‘Oh, no, I invested at the top of the market. It will be a while before I see any distributions.’”
Other limited partners say that they will be extremely cautious with their investments until startup IPOs pick up considerably. Reddit‘s and Astera Labs‘ successful offerings aren’t nearly enough to get LPs excited about venture again.
Brand-name firms will continue to raise funds, but they may have less capital to invest in startups than they did in the past. Take IVP, for instance. The 43-year-old venture firm closed a $1.6 billion fund last month, a more than 11% decrease from the $1.8 billion vehicle it raised in 2021.
But attracting new capital from LPs won’t be as easy for smaller and newer venture firms. “I think a lot of people may fall out of the business over the next few years,” said Chris Douvos, a managing director at Ahoy Capital, which invests in funds and startups.
While this is not great news for existing startups, it’s not all doom and gloom, either. PitchBook estimates that dry powder, the amount of capital VCs still have to invest from previous funds, remains high.
However, that amount will dwindle unless LPs open up their coffers again.
“One low fundraising quarter is not going to make or break the future of VC,” said Kyle Stanford, lead venture capital analyst at PitchBook. “But if this continues, it will be a hit on deal making.”
Few people get as excited about wastewater as Thomas Fudge. He has good reason: He and his colleagues believe they have figured out how to turn sludge into gold.
Wastewater from places like breweries and food processing plants can’t be dumped down the drain; it has to be specially treated, a costly endeavor that often happens offsite. Fudge’s company, Wase, is offering them an alternative: treat the water on site, and get some free energy to boot.
Harvesting methane from organic waste and using it to produce electricity or heat is nothing new. Companies do this not only to wring some value out of the sludge, but also to reduce their carbon footprint since it can be a source of greenhouse gases when left to decompose on its own. Sending it through an anaerobic digester and burning the resulting methane can cut a company’s carbon footprint.
What Wase is building isn’t a typical anaerobic digester, though. The U.K.-based startup says its system is significantly smaller and can squeeze about 30% more methane from the sludge. The organic waste that can’t be digested is 30% to 50% smaller in volume.
The company’s secret is electro-active microbes.
“They’re absolutely everywhere,” Fudge, Wase’s founder and CEO, told TechCrunch. “They’re in the soil in the ground, they’re in wastewater sludge, they’re in anaerobic digestion systems, but they don’t have the environment where they can really thrive.”
Basically, Wase built a contraption to make these bacteria happy.
Inside one of Wase’s systems, stacks of electrically charged fins called electrodes provide a home for the electro-active bacteria to grow. On one electrode, some species cleave hydrogen ions off the sludge. On another, methane-producing bacteria take that hydrogen and use excess electrons to attach it to a carbon atom stripped from carbon dioxide. The system needs to provide a small amount of electricity to keep things flowing in the right direction. “It’s more or less like a traffic light,” Fudge said. The end result is biogas.
Once the gas is generated, it is drawn off and can be burned to produce heat and electricity.
Because Wase uses microbes that are broadly distributed, and because it’s supplying them with the electrons they need, the bacteria are happier under a wider range of conditions, Fudge said. Compared with the anaerobic digesters normally used to do the job, Wase’s system can work at lower temperatures and a wider range of acidic (or basic) conditions, Fudge said.
“They grow much faster so they can rapidly break down organic compounds much more effectively.”
The colonies that form on the electrodes constantly rejuvenate. As old bacteria die, they become food for the living. Each colony contains a diversity of species and strains, and they evolve over time as they grow accustomed to the particular sludge they’re processing.
Wase is developing a control system that will maintain wastewater flow through the system to keep the bacteria at their best. Because the bacteria draw electrons from the electrodes, the control system can monitor the current to determine how happy they are.
“You can get real-time optimization,” Fudge said, which can be used to determine maintenance schedules, automate feeding and monitor overall system performance. “It gives operators a way to communicate with the biology and the bacteria,” he said.
The startup recently closed an £8.5 million ($10.74 million) seed round, TechCrunch has exclusively learned. The round was led by Extantia Capital with participation from Elbow Beach Capital, Empirical Ventures, Engie New Ventures, Hitachi Ventures and WEPA Ventures.
Wase will be installing a pilot system on a dairy farm in Wales this spring. The company is also working with two breweries.
Wase’s approach may reduce the overall carbon footprint of the wastewater treatment process, though the company has yet to perform a full accounting. For now, the methane its system produces will be burned on site, which is a smart move because it limits the distance the gas has to travel. Providing it to the natural gas grid would make the climate benefit a little murkier, as methane leaks along the way have become a significant source of greenhouse gases, research shows.
Still, it’s likely the methane will be transported in some way or another. The EU has set a target of 35 billion cubic meters of biogas by 2030, which means that however it’s used, this young startup will have plenty to chew on.
Founded in 2017, Atoms Lanka Solutions is a provider of IT consulting and software development services. Throughout the company’s history, we have worked with over 160 customers from 5+ countries..
