#Fact Check: Viral Video Falsely Claims Israel Launched Nuclear Attack on Iran

Introduction 

In the ever-evolving world of technological innovation, a new chapter is being inscribed by the bold visionaries at Figure AI, a startup that is not merely capitalising on artificial intelligence rage but seeking to crest its very pinnacle. With the recent influx of a staggering $675 million in funding, this Sunnyvale, California-based enterprise has captured the imagination of industry giants and venture capitalists alike, all betting on a future where humanoid robots transcend the realm of science fiction to become an integral part of our daily lives.

The narrative of Figure AI's ascent is punctuated by the names of tech luminaries and corporate giants. Jeff Bezos, through his firm Explore Investments LLC, has infused a hefty $100 million into the venture. Microsoft, not to be outdone, has contributed a cool $95 million. Nvidia and an Amazon-affiliated fund have each bestowed $50 million upon Figure AI's ambitious endeavours. This surge of capital is a testament to the potential seen in the company's mission to develop general-purpose humanoid robots that promise to revolutionise industries and redefine human labour.

The Catalyst for Change 

This investment craze can be traced back to the emergence of OpenAI's ChatGPT, a chatbot that caught the public eye in November 2022. Its success has not only ushered in a new era for AI but has also sparked a race among investors eager to stake their claim in startups determined to outshine their more established counterparts. OpenAI itself, once mulling over the acquisition of Figure AI, has now joined the ranks of its benefactors with a $5 million investment.

The roster of backers reads like a who's who of the tech and venture capital world. Intel's venture capital arm, LG Innotek, Samsung's investment group, Parkway Venture Capital, Align Ventures, ARK Venture Fund, Aliya Capital Partners, and Tamarack—all have invested their lot with Figure AI, signalling a broad consensus on the startup's potential to disrupt and innovate.

Yet, when probed for insights, these major players—Amazon, Nvidia, Microsoft, and Intel—have maintained a Sphinx-like silence, while Figure AI and other entities mentioned in the report have refrained from immediate responses to inquiries. This veil of secrecy only adds to the intrigue surrounding the company's prospects and the transformative impact its technology may have on society.

Need For AI Robots 

Figure AI's robots are not mere assemblages of metal and circuitry; they are envisioned as versatile beings capable of navigating a multitude of environments and executing a diverse array of tasks. From working at aisles of warehouses to the bustling corridors of retail spaces, these humanoid automatons are being designed to fill the void of millions of jobs projected to remain vacant due to a shrinking human labour force.

The company's long-term mission statement is as audacious as it is altruistic: 'to develop general-purpose humanoids that make a positive impact on humanity and create a better life for future generations.' This noble pursuit is not just about engineering efficiency; it is about reshaping the very fabric of work, liberating humans from hazardous and menial tasks, and propelling us towards a future where our lives are enriched with purpose and fulfilment.

Conclusion 

As we stand on the cusp of a new digital world, the strides of Figure AI serve as a beacon, illuminating the path towards machine and human symbiosis. The investment frenzy that has enveloped the company is a clarion call to all dreamers, pragmatists and innovators alike that the age of humanoid helpers is upon us, and the possibilities are as endless as our collective imagination.

Figure AI is forging a future where robots walk among us, not as novelties or overlords but as partners in forging a world where technology and humanity work together to unlock untold potential. The story of Figure AI is not just one of investment and innovation; it is a narrative of hope, a testament to the indomitable spirit of human ingenuity, and a preview of the wondrous epoch that lies just beyond the horizon.

References 

• https://cybernews.com/tech/openai-bezos-nvidia-fund-robot-startup-figure-ai/
• https://www.thedailystar.net/business/news/bezos-nvidia-join-openai-funding-humanoid-robot-startup-3551476
• https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-23/bezos-nvidia-join-openai-microsoft-in-funding-humanoid-robot-startup-figure-ai
• https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/bezos-nvidia-join-openai-in-funding-humanoid-robot-startup-report/articleshow/107967102.cms?from=mdr

‍

Introduction

In 2019 India got its bill on Data protection in the form of the Personal Data Protection Bill 2019. This bill focused on digital rights and duties pertaining to data privacy. However, the bill was scrapped by the Govt in mid-2022, and a new bill was drafted, Successor bill was introduced as the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2022 on 18th November 2022, which was made open for public comments and consultations and now the bill is expected to be tabled at the parliament in the Monsoon session.

What is DPDP, 2022?

Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, is the lasted draft regulation for data privacy in India. The bill has been essentially focused towards data protection by companies and the keep aspect of Puttaswamy judgement of data privacy as a fundamental right has been upheld under the scope of the bill. The bill comes after nearly 150 recommendations which the parliamentary committee made when the PDP, 2019 was scrapped.

The bill highlights the following keen aspects-

• Data Fiduciary- The entity (an individual, company, firm, state, etc.) which decides the purpose and means of processing an individual’s personal data.
• Data Principle- The individual to whom personal data is related.
• Processing- The entire cycle of operations that can be carried out concerning personal data.
• Gender Neutrality- For the first time in India’s legislative history, “her” and “she” have been used to refer to individuals irrespective of gender.
• Right to Erase Data- Data principals will have the right to demand the erasure and correction of data collected by the data fiduciary.
• Cross-border data transfer- The bill allows cross-border data after an assessment of relevant factors by the Central Government.
• Children’s Rights- The bill guarantees the right to digital privacy under the protection of parents/guardians.
• Heavy Penalties- The bill enforces heavy penalties for non-compliance with the provisions, not exceeding Rs 500 crore.

Data Protection Board

The bill lays down provisions for setting up a Data Protection Board. This board will be an independent body acting solely on the factors of data privacy and protection of the data principles and maintaining compliance by data fiduciaries. The board will be headed by a chairperson of essential and relevant qualifications, and members and various other officials shall assist him/her under the board. The board will serve grievance redressal to the data principles and can conduct investigation, inquiry, proceeding, and pass orders equivalent to a Civil court. The proceeding will be undertaken on the principle of natural justice, and the aggrieved can file an appeal to the High Court of appropriate jurisdiction.

Global Comparison

Many countries have data protection laws that regulate the processing of personal data. Some of the notable examples include:

• European Union: The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is one of the world’s most comprehensive data protection laws. It regulates public and private entities’ processing of personal data and gives individuals a wide range of rights over their personal data.
• United States: The US has several data protection laws that apply to specific sectors or types of data, such as health data (HIPAA) or financial data (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act). However, there is no comprehensive federal data protection law in the US.
• Japan: Japan’s Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA) regulates the handling of personal data by private entities and gives individuals certain rights over their personal data.
• Australia: Australia’s Privacy Act 1988 regulates the handling of personal data by public and private entities and gives individuals certain rights over their personal data.
• Brazil: Brazil’s General Data Protection Law (LGPD) regulates the processing of personal data by public and private entities and gives individuals certain rights over their personal data. It also imposes heavy fines and penalties on entities that violate the provisions of the law.

Overall, while there are some similarities in data protection laws across countries, there are also significant differences in scope, applicability, and enforcement. It is important for organisations to understand the data protection laws that apply to their operations and take appropriate steps to comply with these laws.

Parliamentary Asscent

The case of violation of the privacy policy by WhatsApp at the Hon’ble Supreme Court resulted in a significant advocacy for Data privacy as a fundamental right, and it was held that, as suggested otherwise in the privacy policy, Whatsapp was sharing its user’s data with Meta. This massive breach of trust could have led to data mismanagement affecting thousands of Indian users. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has taken due consideration of data privacy and its challenges in India and asked the Govt to table the bill in Parliament. The bill will be tabled for discussion in the monsoon session. The Supreme Court has set up a constitutional bench to check the bill’s scope, extent and applications and provide its judicial oversight.  The constitution bench of Justices KM Joseph, Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and CT Ravikumar has fixed the matter for hearing in August in order to enforce the potential changes and amendments in the act post the parliamentary discussion.

Conclusion

India is the world’s largest democracy, so the crucial aspects of passing laws and amendments have always been followed by the government and kept under check by the judiciary. The discussion over bills is a crucial part of the democratic process, and bills as important as Digital Personal Data Protection need to be discussed and analysed thoroughly in both houses of Parliament to ensure the govt passes a sustainable and efficient law.

Introduction

The Indian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has proposed a new legislation. On the 10th of November, 2023, a draft bill emerged, a parchment of governance seeking to sculpt the contours of the nation's broadcasting landscape. The Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023, is not merely a legislative doctrine; it is a harbinger of change, an attestation to the storm of technology and the diversification of media in the age of the internet.     

The bill, slated to replace the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act of 1995, acknowledges the paradigm shifts that have occurred in the media ecosystem. The emergence of Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), over-the-top (OTT) platforms and other digital broadcasting services has rendered the previous legislation a relic, ill-suited to the dynamism of the current milieu. The draft bill, therefore, stands at the precipice of the future, inviting stakeholders and the vox populi to weigh in on its provisions, to shape the edifice of regulation that will govern the airwaves and the digital streams.

Defining the certain Clauses of the bill

Clause 1 (dd) - The Programme 

In the intricate tapestry of the bill's clauses, certain threads stand out, demanding scrutiny and careful consideration. Clause 1(dd), for instance, grapples with the definition of 'Programme,' a term that, in its current breadth, could ensnare the vast expanse of audio, visual, and written content transmitted through broadcasting networks. The implications are profound: content disseminated via YouTube or any website could fall within the ambit of this regulation, a prospect that raises questions about the scope of governmental oversight in the digital realm.

Clause 2(v) - The news and current affairs 

Clause 2(v) delves into the murky waters of 'news and current affairs programmes,' a definition that, as it stands, is a maelstrom of ambiguity. The phrases 'newly-received or noteworthy audio, visual or audio-visual programmes' and 'about recent events primarily of socio-political, economic or cultural nature' are a siren's call, luring the unwary into a vortex of subjective interpretation. The threat of potential abuse looms larger, threatening the right to freedom of expression enshrined in Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. It is a clarion call for stakeholders to forge a definition that is objective and clear, one that is in accordance with the Supreme Court's decision in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, which upheld the sanctity of digital expression while advocating for responsible content creation.

Clause 2(y) Over the Top Broadcasting Services 

Clause 2(y) casts its gaze upon OTT broadcasting services, entities that operate in a realm distinct from traditional broadcasting. The one-to-many paradigm of broadcast media justifies a degree of governmental control, but OTT streaming is a more intimate affair, a one-on-one engagement with content on personal devices. The draft bill's attempt to umbrella OTT services under the broadcasting moniker is a conflation that could stifle the diversity and personalised nature of these platforms. It is a conundrum that other nations, such as Australia and Singapore, have approached with nuanced regulatory frameworks that recognise the unique characteristics of OTT services.

Clause 4(4) - Requirements for Broadcasters and Network Operators 

The bill's journey through the labyrinth of regulation is fraught with other challenges. The definition of 'Person' in Clause 2(z), the registration exemptions in Clause 4(4), the prohibition on state governments and political parties from engaging in broadcasting in Clause 6, and the powers of inspection and seizure in Clauses 30(2) and 31, all present a complex puzzle. Each clause, each sub-section, is a cog in the machinery of governance that must be calibrated with precision to balance the imperatives of regulation with the freedoms of expression and innovation.

Clause 27 - Advisory Council

The Broadcast Advisory Council, envisioned in Clause 27, is yet another crucible where the principles of impartiality and independence must be tempered. The composition of this council, the public consultations that inform its establishment, and the alignment with constitutional principles are all vital to its legitimacy and efficacy.

A Way Forward 

It is up to us, as participants in the democratic process and citizens, to interact with the bill's provisions as it makes its way through the halls of public discourse and legislative examination. To guarantee that the ultimate version of the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023, is a symbol of advancement and a charter that upholds our most valued liberties while welcoming the opportunities presented by the digital era, we must employ the instruments of study and discussion.

The draft bill is more than just a document in this turbulent time of transition; it is a story of India's dreams, a testament to its dedication to democracy, and a roadmap for its digital future. Therefore, let us take this duty with the seriousness it merits, as the choices we make today will have a lasting impact on the history of our country and the media environment for future generations.

References 

• https://scroll.in/article/1059881/why-indias-new-draft-broadcast-bill-has-raised-fears-of-censorship-and-press-suppression#:~:text=The%20bill%20extends%20the%20regulatory,regulation%20through%20content%20evaluation%20committees.
• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1976200
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/new-broadcast-bill-may-also-cover-those-who-put-up-news-content-online-101701023054502.html