*Social media and online video firms are conducting "vast surveillance" on users, FTC finds.*

I am sure this is true, but the FTC has missed much of the problem by defining "surveillance" too narrowly. They presume that collecting data about people only becomes "surveillance" when the platform makes the data available somehow to unrelated companies.

See

The FTC also made the typical pernicious assumption that unjust treatment of adult users is not important.

I am not sure whether the report included allowing other companies to target categories of users in the category of "surveillance". In that practice, the other companies do not actually receive data about individual users, but do get to exploit them.

Musk refuses to pay Brazil's fines on ex-Twitter and challenges the state to stop Brazilians from accessing that site. So the court imposed a bigger fine, around 1.5 billion dollars per year, for ex-Twitter's circumvention of the ban.

The court also ordered that Starlink, likewise owned by Musk, be required to pay the fines if ex-Twitter does not; Starlink is very widely used in Amazonia where there is not much communications infrastructure, and I think it makes a lot of profit in Brazil.

The muskrat has the support of Bolosonaro, the fascist-leaning ex president who, after losing the last election, launched an attack on the main government buildings in Brasilia.

As I recall, he faces trial for this. Can anyone tell me where that trial stands? Why isn't Bolsonaro in prison?

Some US states will report parents to the Parent Gestapo ("Child Welfare Services") for "neglect" if they don't pay the bill for their child's school lunch.

That isn't neglect of the children, it is neglect of the state. But I think it is the state's fault anyway, not the parent's that that parent is too poor to pay for the child's lunch. It ought to do that.

In reality, what is the usual cause of parents' neglecting children? I expect it is poverty — what a child needs costs a lot of money and many parents can't get that much money. Growing up in poverty may result in real neglect, but punishing the parent(s) won't help them get more money.

Taking the child away from the parent(s) and giving per to a foster parent might help per, by making more money available; but if the state is willing to provide that extra money, it can just as well give that to the child's parent(s).

Thus, the only case in which to consider taking a child away from per parent(s) is when the cause is something other than poverty.

The Federal Election Commission decided to take no action to against fraudulent political deepfakes.

If there is any effective method to deter, prevent or delete them, the FEC should have done so. I don't know what methods might be effective.

Kamala Harris formerly campaigned for limiting hidden campaign donations from the rich, but she isn't advocating that this year.