Technology

As Google’s antitrust trial wraps, DOJ seeks sanctions over missing messages

Published

2 years ago

May 4, 2024

As Google’s antitrust trial wraps, DOJ seeks sanctions over missing messages

The fate of Google’s search business is now in the hands of Judge Amit Mehta, as closing arguments concluded in the landmark trial on Friday.

The Department of Justice and plaintiff states made their last arguments Thursday on Google’s alleged anticompetitive conduct in the general search market, and on Friday focused on its allegedly illegal conduct in search advertising. Google was also under fire (separately) for failing to retain chat messages that the DOJ believes could have been relevant to the case.

The government is trying to show that Google locked up key distribution channels for the general search engine market, so that would-be rivals could not grow into significant threats. It says it did so through contracts with phone manufacturers and browser companies to be their exclusive default search engine. If the judge agrees that Google successfully foreclosed competition in that market, he can consider the government’s arguments about the search advertising market as evidence of anticompetitive conduct.

In his summary, DOJ attorney Kenneth Dintzer said that the last major tech monopoly decision, US v. Microsoft, “fits like a glove” on Google. Google’s lead litigator in the case, John Schmidtlein, disagreed. In Microsoft, he said, manufacturers were coerced into deals and customers were spoon-fed an inferior product they didn’t want. “Google has won with a superior product,” he said.

“The importance and significance of this case is not lost on me,” Mehta said as he concluded Friday’s court proceedings. “Not only for Google, but for the public.”

An adequate substitute for Google ads

If Google charges higher prices for advertising, are there suitable substitutes that advertisers would flee to? The answer to that question can say a lot about whether or not Google has the monopoly power that the DOJ alleges it has created through the contracts it has to be the default search engine on various browsers and devices. Google says there’s plenty of alternatives for advertisers; the government disagrees.

Mehta seemed sympathetic to the government’s arguments, though he acknowledged that alternatives to Google are robust ad companies in their own right. Amazon, for instance, isn’t exactly an inferior substitute to Google for ads, said Mehta. Unlike wrapping a sandwich in newspaper instead of cellophane, Mehta said, “If you move your ad money from Google to Amazon, you’re not wrapping your ad in newspaper.”

But Mehta later differentiated ad platforms like Facebook and TikTok from Google. Users searching on Google come with a strong idea of what they’re looking for, pretty much spelling it out in the query. Social media platforms often have to infer that intent from indirect signals.

In 2017, Google ran an experiment over several weeks and found it could increase prices five to 15 percent while still growing revenue

In 2017, Google ran an experiment over several weeks and found it could increase prices five to 15 percent while still growing revenue. “Google is able to decide on what the margin that they are going to acquire is. And that’s why they’re running experiments to say, ‘well if we up it by 15 percent, how much are we going to lose in revenue?’” Mehta said to Schmidtlein. “That’s something that only a monopolist could do, right?” Schmidtlein disagreed, saying it’s fair to run pricing experiments to figure out if they’re charging the right price.

Mehta pointed out that there was “no evidence that Google ever looks at a competitors’ pricing” for that purpose. Schmidtlein responded it wasn’t that simple. Because ads are sold through a complicated auction, not even Google has total insight into the pricing mechanism behind it. It simply isn’t the same as a Coca-Cola rep walking through a grocery store to see Pepsi’s prices.

Sabotaging ads on Bing

The plaintiff states — the attorneys general for 38 states led by Colorado and Nebraska that brought the suit alongside the DOJ — are also arguing that Google intentionally dragged its feet when building certain features for SA360, its search engine marketing tool. SA360 helps advertisers manage ads through different platforms — not just Google, but competitors like Microsoft’s Bing.

The states say that Google lagged behind in building a SA360 feature for Bing ads when it had already implemented it for Google search ads.

“The evidence here is a little bit tricky for Google,” Mehta said, noting the significance of Google having said rather publicly at the start that it was “not going to play favorites” when it came to SA360. While Google could have chosen to exclude Microsoft from the tool at the outset, “that’s not the choice they made,” Mehta said.

The tool was not delivered for nearly five years after Microsoft asked for it. “How can that not be at least inferred to be anticompetitive?” Mehta asked.

Deleted chats

Hanging over the whole case is an issue about whether Google intentionally deleted or failed to retain documents that might have been used as evidence in this trial.

Google had a policy of having “history off” on its chats by default, leaving it to employees to determine when to turn it on for relevant conversations. DOJ’s Dintzer called the alleged destruction of documents “unequivocal and honestly breathtaking.” He added that “there’s no question” executives “intentionally had conversations with history off.”

“Google’s retention policy leaves a lot to be desired,” said the judge, adding disapprovingly that it was “surprising to me that a company would leave it to their employees to decide when to preserve documents.”

“Google’s retention policy leaves a lot to be desired”

Soon after, Dintzer’s slide deck paused on a slide that simply read “This is Wrong,” as the DOJ attorney pointed out Google never apologized for the unretained documents nor promised not to do it again in the future. He said it’s imperative that the court impose sanctions that show the risk of destroying documents is not worthwhile. The DOJ is asking Mehta to make an adverse inference about Google for any element of the case where he doesn’t think plaintiffs have sufficient evidence. That would mean the judge would assume that any deleted chats would have been bad for Google and showed their anticompetitive intent behind their contracts with manufacturers and browsers. The DOJ also wants Mehta to take the destroyed chats as a signal of its anticompetitive intent.

Google attorney Colette Connor said the company’s lawyers had informed the state of Texas (one of the plaintiffs) early on about their retention policies. Dintzer said even that disclosure came months after the litigation hold and that the DOJ “clearly” would have acted had they known.

Mehta didn’t seem to buy Google’s defense. “It’s interesting to me that Google has been very deliberate — and perhaps after seeing what’s happened with Microsoft – very deliberate in advising employees in what not to say,” he said. In a training for employees, the company advised avoiding terms like “market share.” (Bloomberg Law has noted this is a common practice in large companies.)

It’s now up to Mehta to decide how those absent chats should be accounted for. He hasn’t provided a timeline for his decision, but in the meantime, Google and the DOJ will be preparing for their second antitrust face-off over advertising technology in the fall.

Technology

Samsung’s Digital Home Key lets you use your phone as your key

Published

2 hours ago

March 2, 2026

Press Room

Samsung’s Digital Home Key lets you use your phone as your key

Just days after showing off the Galaxy S26, Samsung is finally rolling out the ability for users to unlock their home with a tap of their phone or by simply approaching their door. The new feature, called Digital Home Key, will live inside Samsung Wallet and is powered by the Aliro smart home standard.

Samsung first teased its Digital Home Key feature in 2024 and said the feature would be available in 2025. That didn’t pan out, as the CSA’s Aliro standard — which will let users unlock smart locks with any phone — only arrived in February of this year. The new standard uses near-field communication (NFC) for its tap-to-unlock technology. It also supports ultra-wideband (UWB), giving users the ability to unlock their door as they approach and without pulling out their phone.

To add a Digital Home Key to your wallet, you’ll need to set up a compatible smart lock through SmartThings using Matter. Only some Galaxy smartphones support both NFC and UWB, including the Galaxy Z Fold 4 and up, as well as the Galaxy S22 Ultra and up. You can view the full list of compatible devices on Samsung’s website.

Technology

China’s ultrasound brain tech race heats up

Published

3 hours ago

March 2, 2026

Press Room

China’s ultrasound brain tech race heats up

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

When you hear “brain-computer interface,” you probably picture surgery, wires and a chip in your head. Now picture something quieter. No implant. No incision. Just sound waves directed at the brain.

That is the approach behind a new wave of ultrasound brain-computer interface companies in China. One of the newest is Gestala, founded in Chengdu with offices in Shanghai and Hong Kong. The company says it is developing technology that can stimulate and eventually study brain activity using focused ultrasound.

Yes, the same basic technology is used in medical imaging. But this time, it targets neural circuits.

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts, and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

Brain imaging highlights the regions researchers study as companies explore noninvasive ultrasound brain-computer interface technology. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

What is an ultrasound brain computer interface?

Most brain-computer interface systems rely on electrodes that detect electrical signals from neurons. Neuralink is the most visible example. It places tiny threads inside the brain to record activity. Ultrasound works differently.

Instead of measuring electrical signals directly, it uses high-frequency sound waves. Depending on intensity and focus, those waves can:

Create images of internal tissue
Destroy abnormal tissue such as tumors
Modulate neural activity without open surgery.

Focused ultrasound treatments are already approved for Parkinson’s disease, uterine fibroids and certain tumors. That clinical history gives companies like Gestala a foundation to build on. However, studying or interpreting brain signals with ultrasound is far more complex than delivering targeted stimulation.

WHAT TRUMP’S ‘RATEPAYER PROTECTION PLEDGE’ MEANS FOR YOU

Unlike implant-based systems such as Neuralink, ultrasound brain computer interface research focuses on stimulating the brain without surgery. (Neuralink)

How Gestala plans to treat chronic pain with focused ultrasound

Gestala’s first product is focused on chronic pain. The company plans to target the anterior cingulate cortex, a brain region linked to the emotional experience of pain. Early pilot studies suggest that stimulating this area can reduce pain intensity for up to a week in some patients. The first-generation device will be a stationary system used in clinics. Patients would visit a hospital for treatment sessions. Later, the company plans to develop a wearable helmet designed for supervised use at home. Over time, Gestala says it wants to expand into depression, other mental health conditions, stroke rehabilitation, Alzheimer’s disease and sleep disorders. That is an ambitious roadmap. Each condition involves different brain networks and clinical hurdles.

Can ultrasound read brain activity without implants?

Like other brain tech startups, Gestala is also exploring whether ultrasound could help interpret brain activity. The long-term concept is straightforward in theory. A device could detect patterns linked to chronic pain or depression, then deliver stimulation to specific regions in response.

Unlike traditional brain implants, which capture electrical signals from limited areas, an ultrasound-based system may have the potential to access broader regions of the brain. That possibility is one reason researchers are paying attention. Still, translating that concept into reliable data is a major engineering challenge.

The global race to build noninvasive brain interfaces

China is not alone in exploring ultrasound brain-computer interface systems. Earlier this month, OpenAI announced a significant investment in Merge Labs, a startup cofounded by Sam Altman along with researchers linked to Forest Neurotech.

Public materials from Merge Labs mention restoring lost abilities, supporting healthier brain states and deepening human connection with advanced AI. That language signals long-term ambitions. Yet experts caution that real-world applications are still years away.

GOOGLE DISMANTLES 9M-DEVICE ANDROID HIJACK NETWORK

Researchers use MRI guidance to precisely target the anterior cingulate cortex with focused ultrasound during chronic pain studies. (Gestala)

The technical limits of ultrasound brain interfaces

Ultrasound faces technical limits. First, the skull weakens and distorts sound waves. That makes it harder to obtain precise signals. In research settings, detailed readouts of neural activity have required special implants that allow ultrasound to pass more clearly than bone.

Second, ultrasound measures changes in blood flow. Blood flow shifts more slowly than electrical firing in neurons. That delay may limit applications that require fast, detailed signal decoding, such as real-time speech translation. In short, stimulation is one challenge. Accurate readout is another level entirely.

What this means to you

Right now, this technology is experimental. You are not about to buy a brain helmet at your local electronics store. Still, the direction matters. If noninvasive ultrasound devices can reduce chronic pain or support mental health treatment, more patients may consider therapy without facing brain surgery.

At the same time, devices that analyze brain states introduce new privacy questions. Brain-related data is deeply personal. Regulators, hospitals and companies will need clear rules about how that data is stored, shared and protected. Finally, the link between AI companies and brain interface startups shows how closely digital intelligence and neuroscience are becoming intertwined. That connection could reshape medicine, wellness, and even how we interact with technology.

Take my quiz: How safe is your online security?

Think your devices and data are truly protected? Take this quick quiz to see where your digital habits stand. From passwords to Wi-Fi settings, you’ll get a personalized breakdown of what you’re doing right and what needs improvement. Take my Quiz here: Cyberguy.com.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Kurt’s key takeaways

Brain-computer interfaces used to feel far off and experimental. Now they are a serious focus of global research and investment. China’s push to develop an ultrasound-based brain-computer interface adds momentum to a field already shaped by companies like Neuralink and new ventures backed by OpenAI. Progress is steady but measured. The potential is significant. The technical hurdles are real. What happens next will depend on whether researchers can turn promising lab results into safe, reliable treatments people can actually use.

If sound waves could one day interpret your mental state, who should decide how that information is used? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson is an award-winning tech journalist who has a deep love of technology, gear and gadgets that make life better with his contributions for Fox News & FOX Business beginning mornings on “FOX & Friends.” Got a tech question? Get Kurt’s free CyberGuy Newsletter, share your voice, a story idea or comment at CyberGuy.com.

Technology

This Windows gaming handheld has a screen that folds in half

Published

14 hours ago

March 1, 2026

Press Room

This Windows gaming handheld has a screen that folds in half

Lenovo put a foldable display on a gaming handheld. The Legion Go Fold Concept is a Windows-based handheld with a flexible POLED display, detachable Joy-Con-like controllers, and a folio case to turn the whole thing into a mini laptop.

You can use it as a standard Steam Deck-esque handheld with the display folded down to 7.7 inches and controllers attached at its sides, or you can unfold it for a bigger experience. When unfolded, the controllers can be repositioned to all four sides, allowing you to play with the screen in vertical or horizontal orientations.

In vertical splitscreen mode, you can put your game on one half of the screen and a second window (like your chat or game guide) on the other half. Horizontal fullscreen mode gives your game the full 11.6 inches of real estate in a 16:10 aspect ratio. To go into laptop mode, you remove the controllers and mount the handheld into a folio case with a stand, built-in keyboard, and trackpad. The controllers can be put into a separate grip mount to unify them as one gamepad.

There are a lot of ways you can use this folding handheld, including turning one of its controllers into a vertical mouse like on other Legion Go handhelds, but there’s one thing it doesn’t do: fold down to close and protect its screen. The Go Fold only folds outwards, so don’t expect a Nintendo DS or GameBoy Advance-like clamshell that closes for portability. Instead, it’s all about getting bigger than your average gaming handheld and offering more. (Though we’ve tried bigger before.)

The Legion Go Fold has some formidable specs: an Intel Core Ultra 7 258V Lunar Lake processor, 32GB of RAM, 1TB of storage, and a 48Whr battery. The plastic-covered OLED has a resolution of 2435 x 1712 and 165Hz refresh rate. And there’s even a second, circular toushscreen on the right controller, under the face buttons. It doubles as a touchpad and can be a support display, allowing you to swipe between extracted UI elements from a game (which I wouldn’t expect to be widely supported), a clock, system monitoring, or an animated GIF (just for fun).

During my brief in-person demo I didn’t get to play any graphically-intense games — just Balatro, which can practically play on a potato. The screen looked plenty sharp, but like any foldable there’s a crease down the middle; it’s very visible, but you learn to look past it and ignore it after just a bit. The build and feel of the whole thing felt a little fragile, and detaching and reattaching the controllers was definitely janky. Build quality will hopefully be improved if this device ever actually makes it to market.

The laptop mode was a pleasant surprise for me though. I did not expect a gaming handheld to double as a conventional computer you could get work done on. The Legion Go Fold’s case took quite a bit of fumbling before I set it up correctly, but it shouldn’t take too long to get used to if you actually lived with it.

Then again, I don’t know if anyone is going to be able to live with this thing — ever. I’d love for the Legion Go Fold to go from concept to real product like other out-there Lenovo ideas, but I shudder to think what it might cost. The Legion Go 2 is already priced well over $1,000. And with the ongoing RAMageddon crisis we’re living through, there’s no telling how much more expensive an actual Legion Go Fold would be if it came out in a year or more.

But even if it’s not the kind of foldable I expected, and even though it may never come out, it’s certainly cool. Now somebody please make a folding PC handheld that goes from kinda-big to really small. I think that’d be the one for me.

Photography by Antonio G. Di Benedetto / The Verge