Wickr, the encrypted messaging app founded in 2012, has been purchased by Amazon, the company announced today. The terms of the deal were not disclosed.
“We’re excited to share that AWS has acquired Wickr, an innovative company that has developed the industry’s most secure, end-to-end encrypted, communication technology,” Stephen Schmidt, Amazon Web Services’ vice president, wrote. With a nod to the company’s ever-deepening relationships with the military, and Washington in general, Schmidt added that Wickr’s features give “security conscious enterprises and government agencies the ability to implement important governance and security controls to help them meet their compliance requirements.” Schmidt himself has a background in this space: his LinkedIn profile notes he spent a decade at the FBI.
Wickr’s app — like secure messaging competitor Signal — has been popular with journalists and whistleblowers; it’s also been a go-to for criminals, Motherboard notes. It’s unclear if the proximity to the tech monolith will impact the app’s popularity for free users.
In Amazon’s case, Schmidt indicates the acquisition was at least partially influenced by the need to preserve information security while working remotely. “With the move to hybrid work environments, due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic, enterprises and government agencies have a growing desire to protect their communications,” he wrote.
Schmidt says AWS will be offering Wickr services effective immediately. Current Wickr users shouldn’t see significant changes for the time being.
]]>In fits and starts, the US is reopening — in many cases to the chagrin of office workers who have settled into work-from-wherever setups they’ve had the past 16-ish months to perfect. And given the willingness of many of those same workers to quit rather than go back to full-time cubicle life, many companies have offered some form of “hybrid” arrangement as a compromise.
It seems that benefit isn’t being extended to all workers, though. Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft were short on concrete answers as to which contingent workers — which comprise sizable, sometimes majority portions of their workforce, and perform functions from hospitality and security to content moderation and coding — if any would be allowed to work remotely.
Are you a contractor with one of these companies? Send an email to bgmwrites@gmail.com and let me know if you’ve been given guidance on remote work
Each of these tech giants appear to be instituting some version of partial remote work for corporate employees, with some minor variations. Amazon, Google, and Microsoft each announced these changes publicly on their corporate blogs, while internal memos to the same effect within Facebook and Apple were reported on by the Wall Street Journal and The Verge, respectively. All instituted a future of what Microsoft hazily described as “working from home part of the time (less than 50%) as standard for most roles,” and its competitors as some variation of requiring three days per week in the office. Apple took the extra step of mandating which three days — Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday.
There are of course, caveats in both directions. Some roles were flagged by Facebook and Amazon as not being remote work-applicable: jobs like hardware engineers and data center workers. On the other hand, nearly all of these companies noted that eligible employees could remain fully remote if they were granted that permission by their manager. Google even developed a tool that will show remote workers how much it plans to shave off their salaries if they go the remote option and move somewhere with a lower cost of living. (Thanks?)
Missing from any of these memos or announcements, though, was any mention of whether remote work options were available to the legions of contractors that help these companies function. Spokespeople for most of these companies sidestepped the question. “When it comes down to our contractors and partners, I wouldn’t be able to speak on their behalf or how they would implement our policy,” an Amazon spokesperson told The Verge. Facebook provided a similar answer. Facebook’s spokesperson did not respond to a request for a list of which agencies they used for contract labor so that we could ask each company about its remote work policies, while Amazon declined to provide one citing “confidentiality reasons.”
A spokesperson with Google stated that temporary staff would likely be required to come in the same days as the teams of employees that oversee them, while the companies that employ its contingent “vendors” had already determined which jobs could or could not perform their work remotely. The same spokesperson was not able to provide an approximate percentage for how many of these vendors would have that benefit extended to them.
Through an external communications agency, a spokesperson for Microsoft wrote that aforementioned corporate blog was “all the company has to share.” Apple did not respond to multiple requests for information.
It’s logical to defer to these external agencies, but it also belies how much leverage tech companies have in these relationships. Microsoft has previously required firms it works with provide paid childcare leave for its contractors; Google too has mandated contractors receive at least $15 per hour, healthcare, and parental leave. Facebook has also instituted “well-being and resiliency training” for its contractor moderators.
It’s also a bit hard to believe — especially in instances where these workers would be reporting to these companies’ facilities — that these companies lack any direct oversight over who is coming into their offices at a time when indoor capacity limits are not only a matter of corporate policy, but often a matter of state mandate too.
The issues of remote work for contractors is also not a new one — and much earlier in the pandemic it caused quite a bit of bad PR for several of these companies. Facebook took heat from having some of those same content moderators working from the office back in November, a month where the US was seeing around 100,000 new cases of covid daily — and from awarding monetary bonuses to employees but not to contractors. Google was requiring some contractors to report to work in person in March of 2020, sparking internal backlash from its own employees; it also rescinded job offers to around 2,000 contractors — citing the economic downturn — while apportioning $1,000 each for employees to purchase desks and other items for their from-home workspaces. Around the same time, hundreds of contractor jobs with Apple were reportedly suspended without pay — only to be restored after a contingent of unionized janitors and the Wall Street Journal began asking questions. Most of this barely holds a candle to what Amazon’s considerably more frontline delivery contractors experienced, as a whole country, trapped inside, dramatically increased its online purchasing.
This is all relevant insofar as it illustrates that the two-tiered system of employment within these companies is alive and well, but also that these very big, very wealthy companies, supposedly staffed by the best and brightest, had many, many months to consider a return to office plan that would be transparent and comprehensible. Contractors themselves, and a news media willing to report on them, has been asking how tech companies will handle this disparity in benefits essentially since the pandemic began. A year and a half later, there’s still no clear answer.
]]>Deals. Bargains. Sales. Discounts. I don’t know how else to tell you that Steam is selling games for less money, but it’s currently happening. The Steam summer sale will continue through July 8th, with quite a few beloved titles well below market rate.
Which ones? Glad you asked. Halo: The Master Chief Collection, Sea of Thieves, Supergiant’s beloved roguelike Hades, From Software’s punishing ninja game Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, recently PC-ported Horizon Zero Dawn, Mortal Kombat 11, and open-world coffee-drinking simulator Red Dead Redemption 2 are all at least 30 percent off. Battlefield V is less than $13. Unsettling cinematic platformer Inside is only $4.99.
This sale also features a micro text adventure called Forge Your Fate (and by micro, I truly mean micro — each subsection has only two choices) that will net you some free digital stickers, if you’re into that sort of thing. The cosmetics continue with new profile bundles of backgrounds, avatars, and the like, purchasable with Steam Points.
Did I mention Disco Elysium is 35 percent off? Because it is. Just wanted to make sure you knew.
]]>After several rounds in court, Amazon-backed food delivery service Deliveroo has won the right to continue classifying its couriers as self-employed, CNBC reports.
The case concerned the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain’s attempt to unionize a portion of the service’s delivery riders operating around Camden. While law obviously differs between the US and UK, a similar throughline in these types of cases is proving (or disproving) the amount of direct control the platforms have over their contractors — the more meddling into how, where, and when generally translates to a stronger case that these workers are, in fact, misclassified employees.
The UK Court of Appeals, however, was convinced that a newer version of the Supplier’s Agreement, which Deliveroo pushed out to couriers a few weeks before the initial case hearing in 2017, allowed enough latitude that workers could still be considered self-employed. Even still, “it is reasonable to infer that Deliveroo’s reason for making the change was to strengthen its position in the context of IWGB’s claim for recognition,” the court wrote in its opinion, since the earlier Supplier’s Agreement “involved much more control and direction by Deliveroo –strict uniform requirements, a different attitude to substitutes and in other significant respects.”
Eleventh hour terms of service changes in the face of a legal challenge are par for the course with many gig economy companies, as Uber’s own “project Luigi” rather infamously demonstrated.
What cinched the win for Deliveroo, in this case, was it’s hands-off approach to riders subcontracting the deliveries they accepted. Even this, though, comes with a litany of caveats, as the court enumerated, including:
A lower court also previously found that “in practice substitution is rare as there is no need for a Rider to engage a substitute.”
Nevertheless, Deliveroo had its day in court and has seemingly come out the victor, in spite of similar upsets in the UK with regard to Uber.
After a protracted court battle, Uber drivers were ruled to be eligible for minimum wage, holiday time, and other benefits earlier this year; two months later, those same drivers were able to obtain collective bargaining rights and join a union — although in both cases, these wins were not extended to couriers with Uber’s Eats program. Strangely, that ruling did not seem to have any bearing on the plight of Deliveroo’s riders. The judges in the Deliveroo appeal even went so far as to say they were unaware of any “cases where persons who were not in an employment relationship had been found to fall within the scope of the trade union freedom right.”
As with many gig economy jobs, Deliveroo has been criticized for an opaque system of payments, which led many riders to earn well below minimum wage in the UK. As The Guardian previously reported, documents related to Deliveroo’s initial public offering revealed the company had set approximately $150 million aside as a war chest to continue fighting for non-employee status for its couriers.
]]>Clubhouse — which inadvertently sent every other tech platform from Spotify to Facebook scrambling to build out copycat functionality — seems to be taking its first steps away from pure live audio experiences. How do we know this? The company appears to have accidentally leaked a messaging feature, called Backchannel, to some users late last week.
Based on several tweets circulating on Friday (including the below screen recording), Backchannel is an apparent means for users to chat via text instead of audio. Apparently the feature was not referenced whatsoever in the app’s release notes of the version, and what was rolled out looks blatantly unfinished. It’s not clear how long this version of Backchannel existed out in the wild, but Clubhouse seemingly removed it in a hurry.
Reached for comment, a company spokesperson would only tell The Verge that, “as part of our product building process, Clubhouse regularly explores and tests potential features. These functions sometimes become part of the app, sometimes they don’t. We do not comment on potential features.” They said Clubhouse founders sometimes discuss the product roadmap during weekly Sunday Town Halls.
It’s unclear the scale of the rollout because, again, the feature seemed to only be public for a brief window of time, making it hard to gauge if it was merely spotted by a few users who happened to have the app open at the time, or if it was only intended to go out as a limited beta. In either case, naming a feature Backchannel and then very unsubtly dumping it in the lap of the entire world? That’s comedy, folks.
]]>Facebook’s Clubhouse competitor, Live Audio Rooms, is making its way stateside. The company announced today that some US-based public figures, as well as certain groups, can start hosting rooms through the main Facebook iOS app. (People can join, however, from both iOS and Android.) Anyone can be invited up as a speaker with up to 50 people able to speak at once. There’s no cap on the number of listeners allowed in — a major shot at Clubhouse, which imposes room size limitations.
It’s also introducing other nifty features, like notifications when your friends or followers join a room, as well as live captions. There will be a “raise a hand” button to request to join the conversation, and reactions will be available to to interact throughout the chat. Twitter Spaces, Twitter’s live audio feature, includes captions, but Clubhouse still does not.
Within groups, admins can control who’s allowed to create a room: moderators, group members, or other admins. Public group chats will be accessible both in and outside the group, but private group chats will be restricted to members. Additionally, hosts can also select a nonprofit or fundraiser to support during their conversation with a button to directly donate showing up on the chat. Again, this feels like a feature directly built to address a key Clubhouse use case and make it frictionless. (Many Clubhouse creators have hosted fundraisers on the app but have to direct people to outside links in order to facilitate donations.)
Additionally, Facebook is making podcasts available on the platform, confirming earlier Verge reporting. People will be able to listen to podcasts through either a mini-player or a full-screen player with various playback controls, including the ability to listen while the screen is off. They’ll be able to find shows on specific podcast creators’ Pages, as well as in the News Feed, and they can react to, comment, bookmark, and share their favorites. The Facebook team says it plans to roll out automatic captioning later this summer, as well as a clips feature where listeners can create and share their favorite clips.
All these features come just days after Spotify debuted its own live audio app, Greenroom; three months since Stage Channels came to Discord; four months after Reddit Talk; roughly seven months after Twitter launched Spaces; and about 15 months after Clubhouse first launched. LinkedIn and Slack are, reportedly, working on their own versions of an audio product, even as downloads of and buzz around Clubhouse itself have waned considerably.
Unlike Clubhouse, which drew in early listeners by giving them auditory access to Silicon Valley hot shots, Facebook is hoping to cast a broader net of influencers with Live Audio Rooms. Among the named public figures who will have access to the feature on launch will be musicians (TOKiMONSTA, D Smoke, Kehlani); media figures (Joe Budden, DeRay Mckesson); and athletes (Russell Wilson, Omareloff). Joe Budden will also distribute his podcast through Facebook.
Audio rooms may or may not be a feature with real staying power, but Facebook seems intent on investing broadly in the space.
]]>Nielsen, the nearly century-old research firm which produces the eponymous gold standard for television ratings, is taking a more serious look into how much Americans are streaming. The result of its labors: an ominously named rating system it calls The Gauge.
While Nielsen has tried to calculate the popularity of various streaming programs before (through audio analysis), The Gauge seems to hew closer to the ways Nielsen has measured TV viewership in the past: via a device which, according to The New York Times, “observes internet traffic that passes through a router.” Presumably, this device is attached directly to the televisions of the roughly 14,000 homes from which The Gauge currently gathers data, as the Times once again reports that the measurement does “not count what is watched on phones or laptops.”
The initial findings for May 2021, perhaps unsurprisingly then, skew in favor of regular old network and cable TV, which Nielsen predicts we spend about 64 percent of our living room screentime watching. Streaming, in total, racked up just 26 percent, with YouTube and Netflix making up 6 percent each, followed by Hulu, Amazon Prime, and Disney Plus with 3, 2, and 1 percent, respectively. But again, this is only measuring TV screen usage — not what’s happening on laptop, desktop, phone, or tablet screens — and even these metrics are difficult to put into perspective.
Without much information on how Nielsen’s device works, it’s impossible to say if The Gauge is counting streams that might come through a streaming set-top box or gaming console that has its own internet connectivity and a physical connection to the TV — or, for that matter, streams from a secondary device that are cast to a TV. (We’ve reached out to Nielsen for additional details.)
Still, streaming services have shown themselves to be guarded where audience metrics are concerned, releasing next to no data on how many eyeballs their in-house shows or the content they pay to license receive. Netflix in particular has a reputation for being extremely selective in which titles it presents audience data for, and even then rarely providing more granular information such as whether viewers actually finished watching the damn thing. In that sense, The Gauge is a welcome change for an industry that’s enjoyed a very long stretch without transparency.
]]>MacKenzie Scott, whose estimated fortune stands somewhere around $60 billion, announced via a Medium post today that she would be parting with a $2.7 billion portion of that wealth and distributing it to 286 groups, all of which are painstakingly named and linked at the end of her note.
This third and latest gift brings Scott’s total charitable contributions to society to around $8.5 billion in the past year alone — making her one of the planet’s most generous billionaires. The amount puts her well ahead of the lifetime gifts doled out by the likes of Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg ($2.7 billion), Michael Dell of his eponymous computer corporation ($2.25 billion), Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer ($1.4 billion), or eBay’s Pierre Omidyar ($1.3 billion), according to Forbes.
Jeff Bezos, currently the world’s richest man, has rarely appeared on similar lists of the most charitable donors. He topped the list in 2020 by pledging $20 billion toward a climate change-focused fund named after himself but has, based on the most recent reports, distributed less than 4 percent of that amount.
Scott was married to Bezos from 1993 to 2019. She left the relationship with a significant portion of Amazon’s stock.
“We encouraged them to spend it however they choose”
Scott, who “likely set a record for the largest annual distribution by a living person” last year, according to Bloomberg, is also known for her no-strings-attached approach to donations. “We believe that teams with experience on the front lines of challenges will know best how to put the money to good use,” Scott, and her husband Dan Jewett, a science teacher, wrote, “we encouraged them to spend it however they choose.”
Like some other wealthy notables, Scott has signed onto the Giving Pledge, which — though not legally binding — is a public commitment for at least half of one’s wealth to be distributed to charity, either during their lifetime or at the time of their death. Though in Scott’s case, her more pressing issue might be figuring out how to give her riches away fast enough (while being thoughtful and responsible to divest it). “It would be better if disproportionate wealth were not concentrated in a small number of hands,” Scott wrote in her Medium post.
While Scott continues to invest in making the planet better for humans to live on, an increasing number of her peers seems intent to escape the place altogether.
]]>Internet access is, according to New York’s Eastern District Judge Dennis R. Hurley, a “modern necessity.” Unfortunately, Judge Hurley wrote those words in an injunction, filed today, to stall a piece of progressive legislation which would have mandated affordable internet availability to all living in New York State — and which would have come into effect early next week.
The bill, known as the Affordable Broadband Act, would have required ISPs serving more than 20,000 households to offer two low-cost plans: one offering speeds of 25 Mbps down for no more than $15 per month, and another offering 200 Mbps down at no more than $20 monthly. It was passed by the state legislature and signed by Governor Cuomo back in April, and would have gone into effect on June 16th.
According to state Assembly member Amy Paulin, the average monthly cost of internet access for New Yorkers is $50; in general, Americans can pay about double what Europeans do for broadband access.
Of course, no sooner was the bill signed then telecom lobbies sued to stop it from being enacted. According to Axios, NY Governor Cuomo was quoted as saying the lawsuit was “nothing more than a transparent attempt by billion-dollar corporations putting profit ahead of creating a more fair and just society.” And, love or hate the guy, he has a point there.
The ABA isn’t dead in the water, but Judge Hurley’s eleventh-hour injunction doesn’t bode well. In his determination, he found its enactment is likely to cause “irreparable harm” to telecom companies — either because they’re hit with civil penalties for failing to meet the requirements of the ABA, or loss of revenue by charging less for services — among other, base-level findings that allowed the injunction to be found valid.
One particularly interesting arrow in Judge Hurley’s quiver, however, was to weaponize other existing programs that help make internet access affordable, specifically the FCC’s Emergency Broadband Benefit:
While the stated purpose of the ABA is to expand access to broadband internet, that is not to say it is the sole legislative effort doing so. Plaintiffs discuss several federal programs allocating billions of dollars to achieve that same end […] While Defendant argues that the New York Legislature determined these federal benefits were insufficient, that determination was made prior to the FCC’s April 29, 2021 announcement that the Emergency Broadband Benefit would become on effective May 12, 2021.
The Emergency Broadband Benefit is critically different from the ABA in several ways. It does not cap the cost of internet access in any way, and unlike the ABA it’s means-tested: applicants need to qualify by showing they meet specific economic criteria. Those who do can receive $50 off their monthly bill.
So: for now, like the ABA itself, New Yorkers who were hoping for reliable broadband at a reasonable price point are stuck in limbo. While the injunction casts a large shadow over the future of the law, it is, at the end of the day, essentially just a judge saying “look, I need more time to sort all this out.” Hopefully, with some careful consideration, New York can still put a dent in the almost comically consolidated telecommunications sector.
]]>The Fastly content delivery network (CDN) — a major middleman in internet traffic — took a nap for around an hour early Tuesday morning, and effectively knocked a huge number of major websites offline in the process. The company is now claiming the issue stemmed from a bug and one customer’s configuration change.
“We experienced a global outage due to an undiscovered software bug that surfaced on June 8 when it was triggered by a valid customer configuration change,” Nick Rockwell, the company’s SVP of engineering and infrastructure wrote in a blog post last night. “This outage was broad and severe, and we’re truly sorry for the impact to our customers and everyone who relies on them.”
Apparently, whatever the request was, it triggered a bug that had only been introduced to Fastly’s systems by an update in mid-May. Clearly the fault lies with Fastly for not catching that it borked its own code, but we have to ask: Who did it? Valid change or no, some specific, unnamed customer triggered the bug. It’s obvious why Fastly has not named the customer or the exact set of circumstances that created this undesirable outcome, but we just want to know: What does it feel like to take down half the internet by accident?
And on the off chance it wasn’t an accident… please spare The Verge next time.
]]>