On Wednesday, acting FAA Administrator Chris Rocheleau told the House Appropriations Committee that the Federal Aviation Administration plans to replace its aging air traffic control systems, which still rely on floppy disks and Windows 95 computers, Tom's Hardware reports. The agency has issued a Request For Information to gather proposals from companies willing to tackle the massive infrastructure overhaul.

"The whole idea is to replace the system. No more floppy disks or paper strips," Rocheleau said during the committee hearing. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy called the project "the most important infrastructure project that we've had in this country for decades," describing it as a bipartisan priority.

Most air traffic control towers and facilities across the US currently operate with technology that seems frozen in the 20th century, although that isn't necessarily a bad thing—when it works. Some controllers currently use paper strips to track aircraft movements and transfer data between systems using floppy disks, while their computers run Microsoft's Windows 95 operating system, which launched in 1995.

Read full article

Comments

On Thursday, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei argued against a proposed 10-year moratorium on state AI regulation in a New York Times opinion piece, calling the measure shortsighted and overbroad as Congress considers including it in President Trump's tax policy bill. Anthropic makes Claude, an AI assistant similar to ChatGPT.

Amodei warned that AI is advancing too fast for such a long freeze, predicting these systems "could change the world, fundamentally, within two years; in 10 years, all bets are off."

As we covered in May, the moratorium would prevent states from regulating AI for a decade. A bipartisan group of state attorneys general has opposed the measure, which would preempt AI laws and regulations recently passed in dozens of states.

Read full article

Comments

The FDA has launched the generative AI tool, Elsa, agency-wide to help its employees with everything from clinical reviews to investigations. Sure, we're living in a time of widespread disinformation and pushbacks against science, but why not rush things through with AI?

Elsa — yes, weirdly like the snow queen from Frozen — completed a "very successful pilot program with FDA’s scientific reviewers." According to the FDA, the AI tool can help with reading, writing and summarizing everything from adverse events to assessments. Elsa can also do label comparisons and generate code. It's already being used to speed up clinical protocol reviews and scientific evaluations, along with finding "high-priority inspection targets."

Elsa should be a secure platform, the FDA states. It's not clear how exactly the agency trained Elsa, but the FDA claims it's not through "data submitted by regulated industry." The information exists in Amazon Web Services' GovCloud that, again, should keep all information internal.

The FDA calls Elsa the first step in its AI journey. "Today marks the dawn of the AI era at the FDA with the release of Elsa, AI is no longer a distant promise but a dynamic force enhancing and optimizing the performance and potential of every employee," said FDA Chief AI Officer Jeremy Walsh. "As we learn how employees are using the tool, our development team will be able to add capabilities and grow with the needs of employees and the agency."

NASA's next mission will be to find a new agency leader, following a dramatic reversal from President Donald Trump. In a post made on Truth Social, the president withdrew his nomination of Jared Isaacman as the head of NASA. As first reported by Semafor, the pullback comes just a few days before Isaacman was due in front of the US Senate for a confirmation vote.

Trump detailed in the post that he will soon announce another nominee who is more aligned with the president's mission and will "put America First in Space." Liz Huston, a White House spokesperson, said in a statement that it was "essential that the next leader of NASA is in complete alignment with President Trump’s America First agenda." According to The New York Times, unnamed sources attribute the withdrawal to Isaacman's previous donations to "prominent Democrats."

Besides his role as CEO of payment processing company Shift4, Isaacman has been venturing into the world of commercial space travel. The billionaire businessman has been to space twice now, even serving as the mission commander of the Polaris Dawn mission that was operated by SpaceX and saw the first commercial spacewalk. Isaacman was known as a close ally of Elon Musk, who is the CEO of SpaceX and recently left his White House role as an adviser to the president.

Nebraska is the latest state to crack down on how kids can use social media. The state's governor, Jim Pillen, recently signed into law a package of bills aimed at restricting certain social media features that keep kids hooked on the platform. The final bill signed, called the Age-Appropriate Online Design Code Act, will require companies to offer time limits on usage, restrict certain categories of content and provide chronological feeds instead of algorithmic ones that promote infinite scrolling.

The Age-Appropriate Online Design Code Act, also known as LB504, details that social media companies can only collect the minimum amount of personal data from younger users, and offers parents more tools to limit how their children use their accounts. Along with those restrictions, the law prohibits any ads related to gambling, alcohol, tobacco or drugs from reaching kids on social media. 

Alongside LB504, the signed package of bills includes LB140 that limits student use of smartphones in schools, LB383 that requires social media companies to verify the age of its users and require parental consent for creating accounts, and LB172 that creates criminal penalties for AI-generated pornography.

"Collectively, all these bills have an incredible impact on helping our teachers and giving our schools the opportunity to teach our kids, instead of being disrupted in the classroom," Pillen said in a press release. "They also provide parents with the tools they need to protect our kids from big tech online companies and predators."

The law is set to go into effect January 1, 2026, and any companies that violate these new regulations will face civil penalties. Nebraska is the latest state to restrict social media usage for minors, but Texas is also trying to pass a similar ban. With more efforts to regulate social media, NetChoice, an Internet advocacy organization whose members include Google, Meta and X, has voiced criticism of these states' efforts, arguing that they infringe on First Amendment rights and user privacy. In 2022, California signed a similar law meant to protect underage users, but it has since been in a legal battle following a lawsuit filed by NetChoice that claims a violation of free speech rights.

The Federal Trade Commission has finally given up the ghost on challenging Microsoft's $68.7 billion purchase of Activision Blizzard. "The Commission has determined that the public interest is best served by dismissing the administrative litigation in this case," the agency said in an order issued today.

The federal regulator had attempted to block Microsoft's acquisition of Activision Blizzard both before and after the deal closed back in October 2023. The FTC just lost out on its latest appeal against the merger earlier this month. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the FTC had not successfully argued several points of its case for a preliminary injunction against the merger, which is one of the biggest acquisitions in the video game industry.

"Today’s decision is a victory for players across the country and for common sense in Washington, D.C. We are grateful to the FTC for today’s announcement," Microsoft President and Vice Chair Brad Smith posted on X about the dismissal.

The United States Senate voted 51-44 mostly across party lines on Wednesday to repeal a waiver granted by the Biden administration's Environmental Protection Agency, allowing the state of California to enact its Advanced Clean Cars II Regulations. ACC II requires that 80 percent of new passenger vehicles sold in California by 2035 be zero-emission.

Notably, the legitimacy of the vote itself was dubious, as the Senate parliamentarian — a nonpartisan staffer who helps the Senate understand its own rules — had warned that the waiver did not fall under the Senate's purview. The parliamentarian noted that the EPA waiver wasn’t a formal rule but an administrative order. This means the waiver is not subject to the Congressional Review Act (CRA), the law Senate Republicans used to justify the vote. The CRA only became law in 1996, and had seen little use until recently — it has been used to overturn federal rules a total of 20 times, 16 of which occurred during the previous Trump administration.

The measure will now go to President Trump's desk for signature, as the House already passed legislation to repeal the waiver earlier this month.

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a DC lobbying group that represents a number of automakers including GM, Toyota, Volkswagen and Hyundai, celebrated the vote. "These EV sales mandates were never achievable," said John Bozzella, president and CEO of the lobbying group. He argued, "Meeting the mandates would require diverting finite capital from the EV transition to purchase compliance credits from Tesla."

While these automakers rejoiced, environmental protection advocates struck a concerned tone. "It’s deeply disappointing that the Senate used the Congressional Review Act to block states from implementing air pollution standards to improve air quality. This illegitimate move poses threats to public health, the economy and states’ rights." said Steven Higashide, director of the Clean Transportation Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

As reported in the L.A. Times, Will Barrett, senior director at the American Lung Association and a clean air advocate said, “This is a major blow to the decades-long public health protections delivered under the Clean Air Act.” Highlighting the importance of these waivers he said “It is more important than ever that California and all other states that rely on Clean Air Act waivers continue to cut tailpipe pollution through homegrown, health-protective policies."

This is just the latest in continued efforts by the current administration to curtail or end legislation that supports or encourages wider adoption of electric vehicles and environmental protection.

The US House of Representatives just narrowly passed a budget bill, which has been referred to by President Trump and others as "one big, beautiful bill." Hidden amongst the cuts to health care, debt add-ons and tax breaks for the rich is a ten-year ban of state AI laws. You read that right. States would be banned by the federal government from enforcing laws that regulate AI for the next decade.

The vote fell largely along party lines, with nearly every Republican member of the House approving the bill. This marks one of the most significant federal actions on technology policy in decades and it was buried in a budget bill that has nothing to do with AI.

This isn't law just yet. The budget bill has to pass through the Senate and it could have a difficult road. It's expected that Democratic lawmakers will challenge the AI regulation ban under what's called the Byrd Rule, which prohibits "extraneous" provisions to the federal budget during the reconciliation process.

Even some Senate Republicans seem wary of the ban. Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee expressed concern that it would override state legislation that protects artists from deepfakes in her state. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri has also pushed back on the idea on the grounds that it could "tamp down on people's efforts to address" issues posed by AI.

Supporters of the ban argue that it would stop a potentially confusing patchwork of differing state AI laws until Congress can craft its own federal legislation. This is pretty odd coming from the "states' rights" crowd, but whatever.

Opponents, like many Democratic lawmakers and advocacy organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation, call it a dangerous giveaway to big tech firms, as these companies stand to benefit the most from a completely unregulated market. They also say it poses a serious danger to Americans, as it would leave the citizenry unprotected from any associated risk. Current state laws address issues including deepfakes and discrimination in automated hiring.

“Make no mistake, the families who have come to this committee and begged for us to act won't benefit from this proposal,” said Democratic Rep. Lori Trahan during a subcommittee hearing on the matter. “But you know who will? The big tech CEOs who are sitting behind Donald Trump at his inauguration."

The budget bill, as passed by the House, also includes cuts to Medicaid totaling an estimated $625 billion and cuts to SNAP, otherwise called food stamps, totaling $300 billion. It could also force $500 billion in cuts to Medicare, which serves senior citizens, as a byproduct of adding nearly $4 trillion to the national deficit. It also ends the EV tax credit. All of this pays for an extension and expansion of previous tax cuts that disproportionately favor high-income earners.

X has once again been accepting payments from people associated with terrorist groups and other entities subject to US sanctions, according to a new report from the Tech Transparency Project (TTP). According to the report, X has not only accepted payments in exchange for its premium service, but in some cases has provided an "ID verified" badge.

The report once again questions whether X is complying with US sanctions that restrict companies' ability to do business with individuals and entities that have been deemed a security threat. Last year, the TTP published a similar report that identified more than two dozen verified accounts that were affiliated with sanctioned groups, including leaders of Hezbollah and accounts associated with Houthis in Yemen. Many of those checkmarks were subsequently revoked, with X promising to "maintain a safe, secure and compliant platform."

But some of those accounts simply "resubscribed" to X's premium service or created fresh accounts, according to the report, which is based on research between November 2024 and April 2025. "TTP’s new investigation found an array of blue checkmark accounts for U.S.-sanctioned individuals and organizations, including several that appeared to simply re-subscribe to premium service or create new accounts after their old ones were restricted or removed by X," the report says. "Moreover, some of the accounts were 'ID verified,' meaning X conducted an additional review to confirm their identity."

The report once again highlights verified accounts associated with members of Hezbollah, including one of its founders, as well as Houthi officials who "are making heavy use of X for messaging and propaganda." The son of Libyan dictator Muammar Gadhafi, whose account was previously suspended, also currently has a blue check, as does Raghad Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti, one of Saddam Hussein's daughters. Both have been under sanctions for more than a decade.

X didn't respond to a request for comment on the report. In response to last year's report, the company said it would "take action if necessary." However, it's unclear if the company changed any of its practices regarding who can pay for premium subscriptions.

“If a small team can use X’s public facing search tools to identify these accounts, it’s unclear why a multi-billion-dollar company cannot do the same,” Michelle Kuppersmith, the executive director for Campaign for Accountability, the watchdog group that runs TTP said in a statement. “It’s one thing to allow terrorists to have a voice on the platform; it’s another entirely to allow them to pay for a more effective megaphone.”

TikTok may have run afoul of European regulators over advertising transparency, in the latest bout between EU regulators and big tech companies. The European Commission has formally warned TikTok that its advertising transparency tools don’t go far enough, falling short of EU rules requiring online platforms to maintain a publicly available repository of all paid ads being shown to users.

Regulators are taking issue with the data, or lack thereof, being provided in the repository that TikTok has curated. They claim that TikTok has failed to provide information on who paid for ads, what audiences they are targeting and the precise product or service those ads are promoting.

This information is all used by regulators and researchers to help weed out harmful content like scams, disinformation or coordinated influence campaigns. These rules fall under the Digital Services Act (DSA), an EU regulation adopted in 2022 that governs illegal content, transparent advertising and disinformation. Enforcement for Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) like TikTok began in the summer of 2023, and the Commission opened formal proceedings to assess whether TikTok had violated the DSA in February of 2024.

In a statement, European Commission Tech VP Henna Virkkunen said, “Transparency in online advertising — who pays and how audiences are targeted — is essential to safeguarding the public interest.Whether we are defending the integrity of our democratic elections, protecting public health or protecting consumers from scam ads, citizens have a right to know who is behind the messages they see.”

In a statement to the press, a TikTok spokesperson disagreed with the findings, saying "While we support the goals of the regulation and continue to improve our ad transparency tools, we disagree with some of the Commission's interpretations and note that guidance is being delivered via preliminary findings rather than clear, public guidelines." This isn't the first time that TikTok has found itself in hot water with internet safety regulators in Europe.

Under the rules of the DSA, TikTok parent company ByteDance could be fined as much as 6 percent of its total worldwide revenue and be subjected to an enhanced supervision period where regulators ensure that any required changes are being made.

Ministers in the UK House of Commons have blocked an amendment to a data bill that would require AI companies to disclose their use of copyrighted materials, according to The Guardian. This transparency amendment was stripped out of the text by invoking something called financial privilege, an arcane parliamentary procedure that suggests that any new regulations would require a new budget.

The official site of the UK parliament says this procedure "may be used by the Commons as grounds for overruling any House of Lords proposal that has cost implications." It looks like that's exactly what happened here, with those in favor of removing the amendment bringing up the cost of a potential regulatory body. There were 297 MPs who voted in favor of removing the amendment, with 168 opposing.

Chris Bryant, data protection minister, said that he recognized that this could feel like an "apocalyptic moment" for the creative industries, but that he thinks the transparency amendment requires changes "in the round and not just piecemeal."

The amendment was passed in the House of Lords earlier this week. Baroness Beeban Kidron of the Lords responded to today's move by saying that "the government failed to answer its own backbenchers who repeatedly asked ‘if not now then when?’" She also said it was "astonishing that a Labour government would abandon the labor force of an entire section," referring to the plight of creative workers whose jobs have been or at risk of being replaced by AI. Lady Kidron went on to accuse the government of allowing "theft at scale" and cozying up "to those who are thieving."

“Across the creative and business community, across parliament, people are gobsmacked that the government is playing parliamentary chess with their livelihoods," she concluded.

As expected, Kidron will introduce a rephrased amendment before the bill's return to the Lords next week. This sets up yet another showdown when the bill returns to the Commons for another pass.

Owen Meredith, the chief executive of the News Media Association, told The Guardian that it's "extremely disappointing that the government has failed to listen to the deep concerns of the creative industries, including news publishers who are so fundamental to uploading our democratic values." He accused the government of using parliamentary procedure to "dismiss industry concerns, rather than taking this timely opportunity to introduce the transparency that will drive a dynamic licensing market for the UK’s immensely valuable creative content."

The government's preferred plan includes the reliance on an opt-out clause. This would give AI companies free rein over any and all content, except in the cases when a creator has explicitly opted out.

Last week, hundreds of artists and organizations banded together to urge the government not to "give our work away at the behest of a handful of powerful overseas tech companies." The artists involved in this campaign included Paul McCartney, Elton John and Dua Lipa, among others.

America is set to host its own version of the "give everything to AI companies" game show. Republicans have snuck in a provision to the budget bill that would ban regulation on the AI industry for ten years. That'll end well.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has revealed that it's making some big changes to the first nationwide drinking water standard set by the Biden administration. Last year, the agency had finalized the standard, which aims to regulate the presence of "forever chemicals" called perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water across the country. There are thousands of different types of PFAS, but the rules specifically set limits for five: PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA. Now, the agency has revealed that it was only going to keep the Biden-era nationwide limits for PFOA and PFOS.

Exposure to forever chemicals has been linked to a variety of health issues, including cancer, liver damage and asthma. Under the rules set by the US government last year, the maximum levels of PFOA and PFOS in drinking water should be 4 parts per trillion only. PFNA, PFHxS and HFPO-DA (also known as GenX chemicals) were supposed to have a max limit of 10 parts per trillion. However, the agency is rescinding the regulations for those last three chemicals. To be fair, PFOA and PFOS are the two most common types of PFAS. The agency said that its "actions are designed to reduce the burden on drinking water systems and the cost of water bills" while still "continuing to protect public health."

In addition to rescinding the limits for three out of the five forever chemicals, the EPA said it also intends to extend water utilities' compliance deadline from 2029 to 2031 in order to give them more time to develop a plan that would allow them to meet the standard. This extension "will support water systems across the country, including small systems in rural communities, as they work to address these contaminants," said EPA Administrator Zeldin.

Ireland has pitched a law to force tech companies to vet ads before publishing them, according to reporting by Financial Times. This is part of a larger push by the EU Commission to make tech entities responsible for financial fraud that occurs on their platforms. It also comes as President Trump has begun pushing the EU to scale back regulation of big American tech companies.

While a proposal by the EU Commission would indeed put companies on the hook for financial fraud, Ireland’s plan hopes to get ahead of all that. It looks to stop fraudulent ads before they are even published. The Irish finance ministry submitted an amendment to the current EU proposal that would force tech platforms to check the legitimacy of advertisers before posting their ads.

The amendment would also make it so only registered financial service providers could post these types of ads. The Bank of Ireland says that more than 75 percent of losses last year came from investment fraud that were often linked to ads placed on social media. These ads can be posted at any time and, more importantly, taken down at any time. This allows the publishers to avoid legal scrutiny after the damage has been done. Data indicates that online scammers defrauded Europeans out of nearly $5 billion in 2022.

"We can’t leave glaringly obvious holes in legislation that are allowing criminals to defraud people of their life savings," said Regina Doherty, an Irish lawmaker.

Google has declined to discuss this measure, but told FT that it fights "financial fraud in ads through our tools, people and policies." It is true that it operates a financial services certification program to help combat fraud. Meta has declined to comment. We’ve pinged both companies and will update this post if we hear back.

Around half of EU countries have expressed support for Ireland’s proposed amendment, though there is a hurdle to overcome. The EU Commission already has a provision in the Digital Services Act that says that tech companies aren’t required to broadly monitor content, though proponents of the Irish initiative have countered that the requirement to vet advertisers could be designed in such a way that conforms with current law.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has warned the National Weather Service of possible attacks from an armed conspiracy group targeting Doppler radar stations, according to a report from CNN. The group, Veterans on Patrol, is going after government radars because it believes they're being used as "weather weapons."

CNN learned of the possible attacks through NOAA emails warning NWS staff that Veterans on Patrol was planning to conduct "penetration drills on NEXRAD sites to identify weaknesses," with the ultimate goal of destroying NEXRAD. Despite its cooler-than-average name, the NWS uses NEXRAD or "Next Generation Weather Radar" for a fairly mundane purpose: detecting precipitation in the atmosphere. NEXRAD plays a vital role in locating thunderstorms and tornados, making it easier to evacuate vulnerable communities before disaster strikes. 

It's not clear what Veterans on Patrol sees as threatening about radar — the group was previously focused on white nationalism and Pizzagate-style government conspiracies — but concern over the effects of being exposed to radio waves is a common bugbear for conspiracy-types. For example, groups set fire to cell towers early in the COVID-19 pandemic because of a belief that 5G somehow spread the virus. Viewing radar as a weapon could originate from some similar misconceptions.

NWS staff have been advised to use the buddy system when working at remote radar sites and report anything suspicious to the authorities. Even without the threat of physical violence, though, the NWS and NOAA at large have already been devastated in 2025. Hundreds of weather forecasters were fired because of the cuts made by the Trump administration, just one of many attempts to dismantle government services.

"We welcome the addition of body-worn cameras and appreciate the enhanced transparency and assurance they provide," a then-DEA official wrote in a 2021 press release. So much for that. ProPublica published an investigative report on Tuesday that details how the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) under the Trump administration has abandoned its bodycam program.

The DEA announced the change internally through an email, viewed by ProPublica. However, the agency never made a formal announcement or any public acknowledgment of its about-face.

The DEA's email said it made the change to be "consistent" with Trump's "Initial Rescissions Of Harmful Executive Orders And Actions" order, signed on Inauguration Day. The action rescinded 78 Biden-era executive orders, including the one that expanded federal law enforcement's use of body cameras.

ProPublica notes that the "consistent" rationale for bailing on the program is questionable. Although Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) beat the DEA to the punch in abandoning bodycams — shocker! — other DOJ agencies still use them. These include the US Marshals Service and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).

Axon

The common sentiment is that bodycams' sole purpose is to keep law enforcement officers from abusing power. But that's only part of the equation. It also protects them. "The vast majority of times I viewed body camera footage is based on allegations from a defense attorney about what a cop did," David DeVillers, a former US attorney for the Southern District of Ohio, told ProPublica. "And I would say 95 percent of the time it absolves the cop of wrongdoing."

Studies have consistently found that body cameras correlate with reduced complaints against officers. However, it isn't clear whether that's from people filing fewer frivolous complaints or because officers with cameras behave better. Regardless, the DEA's positive framing of the devices from four years ago is backed by data.

The DOJ began requiring federal agents to wear bodycams in 2021. At that time, George Floyd's murder and the resulting protests were still fresh on people's minds. "Law enforcement is at its most effective when there is accountability and trust between law enforcement and the community," then-Attorney General Merrick Garland wrote that September.

Meanwhile, a lucrative contract suggests the DEA's abandonment flies in the face of one of the Trump administration's stated priorities. In 2021, the DOJ inked a $30.4 million deal with Axon to use its cameras and software for the federal program. Axon says the contract is still active, and around five-sixths of the sum is still due. Funny how selective one can be in pursuing "government efficiency."

• Amazon Web Services recently issued guidance to staff on tariffs and data sovereignty concerns.
• AWS aims to reassure customers amid uncertainty over tariffs and other geopolitical issues.
• Amazon previously hinted that third-party sellers might raise prices on its site due to tariffs.

As tariffs spark growing uncertainty across Amazon's retail operations, the company's cloud division is quietly moving to head off similar concerns from business customers.

According to an internal document obtained by Business Insider, Amazon Web Services has issued new guidance to frontline sales and technical staff, instructing them on how to respond to customer questions about tariffs, data sovereignty, and potential restrictions tied to US government policy.

Among the talking points: If an AWS customer asks about possible price increases due to tariffs, employees are told to avoid direct answers and instead reaffirm pricing terms for those covered under existing Private Pricing Agreements (PPAs).

"In the event that AWS does increase prices, these increases will not change any agreed upon discounts, credits or service-specific rates in your PPA," the internal document stated.

While AWS may be less directly impacted by tariffs than Amazon's e-commerce business, the document reveals the company is concerned enough to prep staff with answers to potential tough customer questions.

The document covers questions ranging from potential price hikes and data-privacy concerns. It even broaches the possibility that US President Donald Trump might ban foreign companies from using AWS.

In a recent CNBC interview, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy acknowledged the situation remains fluid and emphasized efforts by the company's e-commerce business to keep consumer prices low. Still, he hinted that some third-party sellers might raise prices in response to tariffs. He also noted that, despite the uncertainty, Amazon continues its data center expansion.

Amazon, whose stock has dropped about 15% this year, is set to report first-quarter earnings on Thursday.

A spokesperson for the company referred BI to a statement from the internal document:

"We're closely monitoring the situation, and we are working to assess the impact on our business. As we navigate the evolving trade policy landscape, our focus remains on delivering value to our customers and innovating on their behalf."

Do not 'speculate'

Tariff-driven price hikes have already become a flashpoint in Amazon's retail division.

As BI previously reported, internal teams have struggled with forecasting, and vendors say Amazon has offered cost relief in exchange for strict margin guarantees. Meanwhile, third-party sellers say they're being forced to raise prices due to rising import costs.

What this means for AWS pricing remains unclear. Internal guidance tells employees not to "speculate," citing the rapidly evolving nature of trade policy.

Some cloud industry experts suggest tariffs could squeeze AWS more than the company lets on.

AWS relies heavily on high-end computing gear, much of it manufactured in China or Taiwan. While some semiconductor components were recently exempted from tariffs, other critical data center parts may still be affected. Trump has paused most new tariffs for 90 days, but a 145% tariff on Chinese goods remains in effect.

"AWS and other hyperscalers could choose to absorb the cost or pass it on to customers," said Travis Rehl, CTO of cloud consultancy Innovative Solutions. "I'm unsure which direction they'd take."

Ben Schaechter, CEO of cloud cost optimization firm Vantage, said tariffs could force AWS to tighten future discounts or slow infrastructure growth due to higher hardware costs.

The bigger threat, some say, is reduced cloud spending.

Randall Hunt, CTO of cloud advisory firm Caylent, told BI that customers are already cutting back in broad spending in anticipation of slower growth and rising costs.

Data sovereignty and Trump-era fears

The growing uncertainty over Trump's actions has pushed Amazon to prepare for even more extreme scenarios, including potential US government demands for cloud customer data or a move to block non-US users from accessing AWS.

Those concerns over privacy and data access have grown recently as Trump's tariff-driven trade war increased tensions between the US and European countries.

If asked about potential US government data requests, Amazon instructed employees to emphasize that AWS does not disclose customer information unless legally required and that all requests are thoroughly reviewed.

The guidance also clarifies AWS's position on the CLOUD Act, or Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act. The CLOUD Act, passed in 2018, gives US law enforcement agencies the authority to access data held by US-based companies, even if stored abroad.

AWS has not provided enterprise or government customer data stored outside the US since at least 2020 and it will challenge any "over-broad" or unlawful requests, the document stated.

"The CLOUD Act does not provide the U.S. government with unfettered access to data held by cloud providers," the document added.

On the question of whether Trump could block foreign access to AWS, the document stops short of addressing whether the president has the authority, but notes there's no indication such action is imminent.

In fact, it argues that doing so would contradict the administration's stated goal of supporting US tech companies abroad.

"AWS is closely plugged into US policy and this Administration's efforts, and can confirm we have heard nothing about restricting cloud services to non-US customers in response to addressing trade imbalances or unfair trade barriers, and expect their focus to continue to be on tariffs as the 'rebalancing' mechanism," the document said.

Sanctions and 'Buy Canada'

AWS also addresses fears that US sanctions could restrict access to its services in certain countries. The guidance notes that full country-wide sanctions are rare and that in the past, companies have been given time to wind down operations when sanctions do occur.

"US country-wide sanctions or services restrictions are exceedingly rare," the document said. "But in the theoretical case that such sanctions ever came to pass, AWS would do everything practically possible to provide continuity of service."

Finally, AWS is preparing for patriotic backlash in some markets, such as a potential "Buy Canada" movement. Employees are told to clarify that AWS's Canada office is a registered Canadian corporation headquartered in Toronto, and that customers can choose to store their data locally and encrypt it.

Still, the guidance urges caution. Employees should be careful framing AWS as a "Canadian business," given the complexity of the term.

"Whether AWS is a 'Canadian business' will depend on how that is defined in particular circumstances," the document concludes.

Have a tip? Contact this reporter via email at [email protected] or Signal, Telegram, or WhatsApp at 650-942-3061. Use a personal email address and a nonwork device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.

The Trump administration has announced plans to eliminate the Energy Star program, as originally reported by The Washington Post. This announcement occurred during an all-hands meeting of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Atmospheric Protection, in which the department was shuttered. 

As for Energy Star, this program started all the way back in 1992 under the first Bush administration. This is the department that’s responsible for the iconic yellow stickers on home appliances. The long-standing public-private partnership certifies energy efficient appliances and helps consumers find tax credits for these fixtures.

Data indicates that the program has helped Americans save more than $500 billion in energy costs in the past 33 years. The organization states that the average American saves about $450 per year on energy bills by choosing appliances that have been Energy Star-certified.

The EPA hasn’t said when this would go into effect and when consumers would stop seeing Energy Star certifications on home appliances. It’s technically illegal for a presidential administration to end this program without Congress, but the same goes for many of Trump’s pronouncements and executive orders.

"Eliminating the Energy Star program would directly contradict this administration’s promise to reduce household energy costs," Paula Glover, president of the nonprofit coalition Alliance to Save Energy, told CNN. "For just $32 million a year, Energy Star helps American families save over $40 billion in annual energy costs. That’s a return of $350 for every federal dollar invested."

A hacker has exploited a vulnerability in TeleMessage to breach the service and steal data, according to reporting by 404 Media. TeleMessage is an Israeli company that provides modded versions of encrypted messaging apps like Signal and Telegram.

It was revealed last week that former US National Security Adviser Mike Waltz used TeleMessage’s modified version of Signal to archive messages. Today's report indicated the presence of other high-ranking government officials in archived chats on the app, including Marco Rubio, Tulsi Gabbard and Vice President JD Vance.

The unnamed hacker was able to access archived chats, but it doesn’t look like they got into any of Waltz's conversations. The hack does, however, prove that the app’s message archiving service is not end-to-end encrypted. 

The hacker also accessed contact information of government officials, login credentials for TeleMessage and data pertaining to the US Customs and Border Protection agency. Some businesses who use the service, like Coinbase and Scotiabank, were also hacked. 404 Media spoke to the anonymous hacker, who said the whole thing only "took about 15-20 minutes" and that it "wasn’t much effort at all." TeleMessage's parent company Smarsh has yet to comment on the matter.

All of this happened after Waltz accidentally revealed he used TeleMessage during a cabinet meeting last week. This led people to question what kind of information was being shared on the app and how it was being secured. Now we know it wasn’t secured all that well.

TeleMessage gave a statement to Reuters saying that it was "investigating a potential security incident" and suspending its services "out of an abundance of caution." 

Of course, it’s only been a few weeks since Signalgate, in which it was revealed that top US officials were using the messaging app Signal to discuss active combat operations. Prior to the Trump administration, government officials typically avoided consumer-grade messaging apps to hash out military plans. Instead, they used Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIFs) and in-house encrypted communication channels.

Update, May 5, 2025, 3:38PM ET: Added a statement from TeleMessage to confirm they are investigating a security incident. 

Top executives from Wargaming and Lesta Games, the joint developers of World of Tanks, could have their stakes in their respective companies seized by the Russian government, according to reports from Russian news organizations RIA and RBC.

Malik Khatazhaev, the head of Lesta Games, and Viktor Kisly, the head of Wargaming, are reportedly being accused of extremist activities by Russia's Prosecutor General (the country's equivalent of the US Attorney General) because of Wargaming's support of Ukraine, RIA reports. The Prosecutor General is looking to seize all of the executives' shares in their respective companies.

Development of World of Tanks was split in 2022 when Wargaming left its offices in Russia and Belarus, and transferred development of the Russian version of the game to Lesta Games. Russia began a full-scale invasion of Ukraine that same year. In response, Wargaming ran a campaign in World of Tanks raising money for medical aid in Ukraine in 2023. The Russian government has decided to interpret that pro-Ukrainian fundraising as anti-Russian extremist activity. Why Lesta Games is being accused of the same thing isn't entirely clear, but it is the company that's technically still under the Prosecutor General's jurisdiction.

Neither Lesta Games nor Wargaming have released an official statement, but Lesta Games did comment in a company Telegram channel, RBC reports. "The company works in full compliance with the legislation of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, so we have no grounds for any concerns or concealment of information," Lesta Games writes. "We have not violated anything and we have nothing to fear."