Facewatch, a facial recognition system used by more than 100 businesses including Sainsbury’s, B&M and Spar to monitor thieves, said it was launching a UK-first feature to “alert police instantly when the most serious offenders trigger a live facial recognition match”. Facewatch’s chief executive, Nick Fisher, said the “unique technical development” would be launched in autumn and would warn police in an average of four seconds when the “worst offenders” were flagged on its network… Charlie Whelton, the policy and campaigns officer at [civil liberties nonprofit] Liberty, said it was concerned about this “untested, opaque development” and the way facial recognition technology had been allowed to “proliferate without anything to govern it”.

“It’s not against the law to walk into a shop even if you’ve committed crimes in the past,” he said. “The idea of calling the police on somebody who hasn’t committed a crime, but there’s a concern they might, is really upending the way we do things. And of course, it’s not infallible. These systems do make mistakes, and it’s very hard to argue with that when it happens to you.” A number of people have been forced to leave shops after being falsely identified by Facewatch technology as a shoplifter, with some describing it as “Orwellian” and saying they felt as though they were “guilty until proven innocent”…

The use of the Facewatch technology looks set to quickly expand, with Sainsbury’s recently announcing plans to increase its use from 55 stores to more than 200 by the end of the year. Facewatch said it alerted retailers almost 300,000 times that a “known repeat offender” had entered a store during the first six months of 2026, and that its system allowed staff to intervene “before theft, abuse or violence could occur or escalate”… [E]xperts argue the use of facial recognition technology in shops to catch shoplifters is disproportionate. Nuala Polo, the UK public policy lead at the Ada Lovelace Institute, which studies the impact of AI on society, said: “There are other, much less intrusive means that you can use to catch shoplifters where you don’t need to be scanning millions of faces every day, virtually without consent....”

The campaign group Big Brother Watch has criticised police for “inserting themselves into this cowboy operation” and said people would be matched against “a secret blacklist compiled by unaccountable businesses and private security guards”.

An islandwide blackout struck Cuba on Friday for the second time this week as the nation of nearly 10 million people grapples with a crumbling power grid and fuel shortages stemming from a U.S. energy blockade…

Authorities reported that they have already begun restoring power to some areas. On Monday, another massive blackout affected nearly 10 million people nationwide. Authorities reported during the week that service was gradually being restored from that outage.

The feature, which wasn’t designed to alert a user if their photos were used in this way, prompted immediate backlash… The company issued a blog post Friday announcing that it was removing the feature. Puck News founding partner Dylan Byers was the first to share the company’s decision… Byers notes that the decision to do away with the feature came “amid scrutiny from users and talent agencies, including CAA.”

The long-vacant site has become a magnet for so-called urban explorers, who prowl abandoned malls, hospitals, power plants, amusement parks, factories and any other disused structure they can breach… [I]t’s been turbocharged by artsy videos on Instagram and TikTok that spur others to create their own posts, luring still more curiosity seekers… In Somers, social-media images of the old IBM campus — a sprawling, pyramid-studded 1980s complex designed by the late I.M. Pei’s firm — show dystopian scenes: busted windows, tossed rooms and graffitied walls. But they also give eerie glimpses of conference rooms and cubicles unchanged since IBM left a decade ago, as if employees had fled the daily grind one day and never returned…

One man in his mid-20s faces felony charges; police allege he had a loaded 9mm gun and took a Sony camera and power strip among other souvenirs. Andrew Proto, a defense lawyer, said “a 15-second clip” isn’t worth a criminal record… Proto said he has represented or advised several minors arrested on the campus. The Somers town court clerk said some defendants received a 6-month “adjournment in contemplation of dismissal,” meaning charges will be dropped and their arrest sealed if they avoid trouble. Some explorers who have posted about the IBM site say they follow an observe-and-preserve ethos and reject vandalism. They say they’re driven by curiosity, the thrill of roaming forbidden spaces and a zeal to document discoveries — and that they’re careful and know their limits.

“It actually gives me hope when I hear that kids are out there getting into trouble,” says Bradley Garrett, a cultural geographer and author of the book “Explore Everything: Place-Hacking the City,” about his own urbex adventures. He sees urban exploration as “a gateway drug in a good way, sometimes, into intellectual curiosity about history and culture.” But Garrett said popular spots can be “loved to death” online — and then shut down, looted or set ablaze.

We noticed patterns in the scrapers that were abnormal, which gave us material for writing regular expressions. Searching for the regular expression then gave us a large lists of IP addresses. Looking up the origin of those IP addresses revealed that some of the crawlers were using botnets of residential IP addresses to scrape faster and avoid detection. We looked for what kinds of botnets might be generating the kind of traffic that we were seeing, and one that we suspected was called the “Vo1d” botnet, comprised of smart TVs running some sort of compromised app… We got confirmation that at least some of the botnet traffic hitting GNU Savannah was originating through the Vo1d/Popa botnet.

We placed our regular expressions in fail2ban, and found that we were hitting the maximum rules that could be added to UFW firewall rules on our systems which showed degradation around 65,000 rules… We learned about ipset and configured fail2ban to add IP addresses that it found to IP sets. Using ipset, we kept building larger IP sets and did not find instability with as large as five million rules…

We eventually found a promising project on Framasoft’s forge Framagit called reaction written by ppom… After we ran into scaling issues with our initial implementation, we developed a much faster implementation where the reaction shutdown process would export the IP sets to disk and the reaction startup process would restore the IP sets. This allowed us to have nearly instantaneous restarts of the service to apply new rules. We published both of our configurations upstream to reaction’s wiki so that everyone can benefit from it. reaction’s getting started documentation now leads to the method that we proposed…

Many sysadmins know about fail2ban, but not enough people know about reaction. I am very grateful to ppom for the help they have provided and for the tremendous project they have released to the world with reaction. We have implemented other defenses as well, but reaction is doing the majority of the automated work keeping our sites online.

DuckDuckGo just gave its browser a feature that a lot of people have been waiting for. The privacy-focused browser can now block most video ads on YouTube, letting users watch videos without sitting through the pre-roll and mid-roll interruptions that have become part of everyday life on the platform. The feature is already enabled by default for iPhone, Windows, and Mac users running the latest version of the browser. Android users can turn it on manually… with DuckDuckGo planning to enable it by default in a future update…

To make it work, DuckDuckGo relies on the same community-maintained filter lists used by uBlock Origin, along with some of its own compatibility rules. The company says you might notice a bit of extra buffering before a video starts, but once playback begins, most ads should be gone.

Earthjustice, acting on behalf of DarkSky International, Environment America, and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), filed a petition this week… The filing doesn’t target any single company. Instead, it asks the regulator to put the entire emerging orbital datacenter sector on hold while it assesses the cumulative effects of proposals from SpaceX, Starcloud, Blue Origin, Cowboy Space, and any similar applications that follow. According to the petition, those proposals collectively seek “well over a million datacenter satellites” in low Earth orbit.... " increasing the existing volume of satellites in low-earth orbit by multiple orders of magnitude.”

The groups argue that the FCC is trying to apply licensing rules written for much smaller satellite constellations to an entirely new class of infrastructure. “If ever a situation warranted a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement [PEIS], it is this one,” the petition says. It argues that a single review would allow the agency to examine “the risks, alternatives, needs, costs, and impacts of this sudden transformation of Earth’s exosphere” before deciding whether any of the projects are in the public interest. The petition raises concerns about rocket launch emissions, pollutants released as satellites burn up during atmospheric reentry, depletion of the ozone layer, orbital debris, light pollution, impacts on wildlife, and interference with astronomy.

It also argues that the combined effects of these constellations cannot be understood by evaluating applications one at a time.... “It is difficult to imagine a better example of multiple projects presenting essentially identical impacts and risks that compound synergistically and cumulatively than the present proposals…” The petition argues that the FCC’s current approach, which generally treats satellite licenses as categorically excluded from detailed environmental review, is no longer fit for proposals measured not in dozens or thousands of spacecraft but in hundreds of thousands and, potentially, millions.

If the FCC agrees, orbital datacenter operators will have a mountain of paperwork to clear before sending their hardware skyward.

It’s a change that manufacturers including Stanley Black & Decker and Georgia-Pacific are embracing… Today, in any given week, about 450 flexible workers — roughly half the pool — pick up shifts at the [GE Appliances] plant, with workers putting in an average of 24 hours a week. Their contributions have been key to GE Appliances’ $180 million expansion of the Georgia plant, completed last year, which added 600 new jobs… [Darcy Duvall, the plant’s director of human resources operations] has also come to see that many workers prize flexibility despite the significant trade-offs — like lower pay and almost no benefits. MyWorkChoice employees can opt into their own group healthcare plan, but few do… The flexible work option has also helped GE Appliances keep longtime employees with decades of experience on the job.

Anthropic’s tracking code was designed in part to catch Chinese firms “distilling” its AI models, a technique that involves pressing a large, expensive AI system to serve as a tutor to a smaller, cheaper one. Asking the larger system huge numbers of questions — hundreds of thousands or more — generates responses that can be used to upgrade the power of the smaller one on the cheap. Distillation isn’t illegal, and it has been used for years in the AI industry. But distillation without permission is against AI companies’ rules, and, used effectively, is giving Chinese AI companies a major leg up, American AI companies say… Anthropic and ChatGPT-maker OpenAI have both accused Chinese AI companies of using this technique to build copycat AI models of their own.

In a May blog post, Anthropic said that Chinese companies’ use of distillation, along with evading U.S. export controls on high-end computer chips, has allowed them to “trail closely” behind U.S. models. But if these techniques can be blocked, it might be possible for the United States to “lock in a 12-24 month lead” on Chinese capabilities, the company said… This month, Anthropic said in a letter to U.S. senators that was obtained by The Post that it uncovered a campaign in which Chinese tech giant Alibaba’s Qwen AI team used roughly 25,000 fraudulent accounts to generate more than 28.8 million exchanges with Claude to improve its own technology. In February, Anthropic made similar accusations against the Chinese firms Deepseek, Moonshot and MiniMax and said the campaigns were “growing in intensity and sophistication....” Anthropic and OpenAI have appealed to the U.S. government, arguing that distillation amounts to intellectual property theft that harms the U.S. in the geopolitical AI contest....

That Chinese AI labs are using U.S. models to improve their own technology appears beyond dispute. In a February 2025 study, researchers from China’s Peking University and the state-funded Chinese Academy of Sciences developed methods to detect signs of distillation in leading large language models. They concluded that, with the exception of ByteDance’s Doubao, most domestic models they tested showed substantial evidence of distillation, mostly drawing from U.S. models… In one set of intensive tests, a Qwen model misidentified itself as Claude nearly a third of the time, the Chinese researchers found.

U.S. firms have also used distillation to piggyback on AI systems made by others. In 2024, OpenAI released a tool to make it easier for customers to distill its own models and produce data sets for AI training. SpaceX founder Elon Musk said in court testimony in May that his AI company xAI used distillation to train its models and that the technique is common throughout the industry.

Governments and large corporations possess surveillance capabilities that were unimaginable just a few years ago. Ever greater concentrations of power are shaping speech, creativity, markets, and democratic institutions. Governments are increasingly seeking to control the internet and people’s ability to access information and communicate freely. Our community’s work is fundamental to the future of our countries, our livelihoods, and literally our lives…

These are perilous times. It is also a moment of extraordinary possibility. The future of AI has not been written and we can work together to get it right. We can make sure our laws reflect the needs of the modern digital age. We can build the technologies that empower rather than marginalize communities. For me, the work starts with recognizing that digital rights are not a siloed policy issue. We must fight and win on the digital terrain to organize, speak freely, access healthcare, find work, receive an education, and participate fully in democracy. We can and must reject a false choice between innovation and civil liberties, and build power across movements to make sure technology truly works for people…

EFF’s founders understood something remarkably prescient: Technology and civil liberties would become inseparable. Now we all live digital lives, and the important digital rights issues that EFF has worked on since 1990 have become kitchen-table issues all around the world. EFF’s founders understood that how technology is built, developed, used, and controlled deeply intersects with rights, justice, freedom, and democracy. EFF’s unique combination of world-class lawyers, activists, and public interest technologists pursue change simultaneously in the courts, legislatures, companies, and our communities, and pierce through false choices. This integrated, intersectional approach, grounded in deep legal, policy, and technical expertise, is a linchpin in fighting and winning against some of the most powerful forces in the world — both governments and trillion-dollar companies.

We defend people against unlawful government data collection and challenge license plate and face surveillance in our communities. We shape AI law and policy to protect civil liberties and support creativity and innovation. We push companies to strengthen encryption, fight to ensure you have the right to own what you buy, and build public interest technologies like Privacy Badger and Certbot that millions of people rely on every day. This work matters because it all answers the same question: Will technology empower or control us?

• “Challenge increasingly sophisticated government and corporate surveillance systems that endanger our rights, democracy, safety and security.”

• “Preserve strong encryption and online anonymity.”

• “Ensure AI is developed and used in ways that respect fundamental rights and works for those who build it, use it, and are affected by it.”

• “Confront the concentrations of power that limit access to new creativity and defend the rights of developers to build and innovate.”

“To meet these challenges, we must not only utilize the powerful levers of successful litigation, smart policy interventions, and effective public interest technology tools. We must also build a broader movement that recognizes that fights on the digital terrain are integral to all our fights for rights and justice… Together, our EFF community can help broaden the public conversation about technology’s role in society and continue building the collective power necessary to shape the future rather than react to it....

“I’m looking forward to meeting more of you at my first EFFecting Change livestream on August 12 with Cory Doctorow, and hope this conversation is just the beginning of finding new ways to work together…”

The blog post ends by noting that “We need you and others in the fight. Please renew your membership, become a recurring monthly supporter, and introduce someone new to EFF by snagging them a gift membership.

“Everything we accomplish — every lawsuit, every policy victory, every public interest technology tool, every campaign — is possible because people like you are committed to ensuring technology strengthens freedom, privacy, creativity, and opportunity for everyone.

“The future we want and need will be built by people and movements working together to ensure technology empowers rather than oppresses.

“Let’s build that future together.”

Meta put forward the figure in its response to the attorneys general’s filings on how penalties should be calculated if the states prevailed at trial. The number, which has not previously been disclosed and is close to Meta’s market capitalization of around $1.5 trillion, comes ahead of an August trial in Oakland, California, over the claims brought by California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey against the company. Meta said the amount was unsupported by the evidence. “A sanction of that size has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement,” the company said in the filing. “The plaintiffs’ outlandish calculations have no basis in fact or law,” the company said in a statement, adding that it would continue to defend itself against the states’ demands.

A spokesperson for California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement the lawsuit “alleges Meta has prioritized profits over the safety of kids and fueled the mental health crisis we see impacting a generation of American children. The California Department of Justice looks forward to holding Meta fully accountable at trial in August....”

Meta has denied the allegations, saying the attorneys general have no evidence it misled consumers about its platforms’ alleged addictiveness because “social media addiction” is not an established psychiatric condition, and therefore statements that its platforms were not addictive could not be false… Last month, [U.S. District Judge] Rogers rejected Meta’s bid to cancel the trial, saying there remained factual disputes over whether its social media platforms were addictive, whether Meta falsely denied it designed them that way, and whether it “partially” directed the platforms at children.

After dropping off our Amazon returns, we’d just gotten back in the Range Rover and reversed maybe two feet out of the spot when four cop cars came flying out of nowhere and boxed us in… The Plymouth Police Department had been tracking me for days using Flock license plate cameras, waiting for the right moment to strike, because they thought I’d stolen the Range Rover. And the reason I was ID’d as a dangerous car thief was a simple data error made 2,000 miles away in California, creating an edge case within an edge case that Flock’s AI camera network was unable to handle… “The plates on this car are stolen,” Officer Ganshyn said…

This made absolutely no sense. Car companies keep meticulous track of the fleets they loan out to the media. The vehicles all have special manufacturer or dealer plates that are logged every time one enters or exits… The New Jersey plates that were allegedly stolen from the LA dealer were 34 03 DTM, not 34 10 DTM. But when the police report was created and the plate was entered into Flock’s system, it was just recorded as 34 DTM. Just the five large characters, no little number in the middle…

Flock’s AI tech wasn’t registering that non-standard little number when it began picking up the Range Rover around town… I connected the final dot. A lot of vehicles in [Range Rover manufacturer] JLR’s media fleet have a New Jersey manufacturer plate with the same alphanumeric structure — 34 ## DTM — and Officer Ganshyn observed that meant it was now a nationwide issue. Anywhere a police department has a partnership with Flock, any other JLR-owned car with the same plate structure is going to get flagged as stolen. In fact, four other 34 ## DTM cars were being tracked around Minnesota that week, according to Officer Ganshyn. I was just the first one to get nabbed.

The only way to stop it would be for the LAPD to correct their initial report and update Flock’s system, which Jaguar Land Rover was now racing to make happen following the phone call. Still, he warned me to drive straight home, park the Range Rover, and leave it there. If I were to cross into the neighboring town, I’d probably get flagged again and go through this entire ordeal again with a different set of officers. His parting words were ominous: “You’re lucky we’re in Plymouth. If you were in Minneapolis, they definitely would’ve come at you with guns drawn.”

The approval is only for one satellite, dubbed Earendil-1, which is meant to test Reflect Orbital’s technology for shining sunlight back to Earth. The satellite will boast a steerable thin-film reflector measuring about 60 feet by 60 feet, with the goal of powering solar farms at night or illuminating disaster-struck areas after dark to help rescue teams. Reflect Orbital envisions operating over 50,000 satellites by 2035, effectively surrounding the Earth with a fleet of mirrors. The proposal has faced stiff pushback from environmental groups and astronomers who are concerned that the satellites will unleash intrusive light pollution. The opposition has been so strong that the FCC received over 1,800 public comments on the application, many of them objecting to Reflect Orbital’s plan for Earendil-1.

[…] [T]he FCC approved the satellite, noting the grant is only “for a single demonstration satellite” to test an innovative technology that could advance American leadership in space. “The Communications Act states that it is the policy of the United States to ‘encourage the provision of new technologies and services to the public,’ and Reflect Orbital’s demonstration satellite is an example of a potentially groundbreaking technology that the Commission has found is in the public interest to support,” the order says. But on the most controversial aspect of the satellite, the FCC said the concerns around Reflect Orbital’s solar reflector are “unrelated to the Commission’s role in authorizing use of radiofrequency spectrum, and even if the Commission had authority to review and condition these operations (which it does not), these harms are unlikely to occur.

In addition, the commission said that U.S. courts have blocked the FCC from using “a generalized public interest requirement beyond its statutory authority in regulating communications. Accordingly, the operations of a solar reflector in space would not be reviewed as part of the Bureau’s public interest analysis.” The regulator also noted that conducting an environmental review for the satellite went beyond its authority. Even if the FCC did have the power, the commission emphasized that the grant is for a single satellite, not 50,000. “The majority of these comments focus on a hypothetical plan to deploy tens of thousands of satellites, and those who argue the single satellite will harm the human environment do not demonstrate with specificity the potential harm will be caused by the single satellite, but rather rely on the same studies as the commenters objecting to a larger constellation,” the FCC adds.

The Long March 10B is a two-stage rocket that stands about 207 feet (63 meters) tall, according to the state-owned CASC, the main contractor for China’s space program. The vehicle’s first stage burns kerosene and liquid oxygen (LOX) propellants, whereas the second stage uses LOX and liquid methane. In reusable mode, the Long March 10B can loft about 16 tons of payload to low Earth orbit.

And the rocket flew with a payload on its debut liftoff — a satellite that successfully reached “its predetermined orbit,” according to the CASC update. That post did not provide any details about the spacecraft or its orbit. It did give a brief rundown of the first-stage recovery, however. “Approximately 6 minutes after the first and second stages separated, the first stage returned vertically and was successfully recovered at a sea-based recovery platform using a net system,” CASC officials wrote, noting that launch occurred from the Hainan Commercial Space Launch Site on Friday at 12:15 a.m. EDT (0415 GMT; 12:15 p.m. Beijing time.) “The launch and first-stage recovery missions were a complete success.”

Apple on Friday accused OpenAI of stealing secrets about products still in development, setting up a legal face-off between two of the world’s biggest tech companies. In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the consumer tech giant said that OpenAI, a leader in artificial intelligence that has a new hardware business, had asked job candidates from Apple to share details about secret projects and to bring device components and prototypes to their interviews. Apple also accused an OpenAI employee of downloading internal documents from a laptop owned by the iPhone maker. OpenAI used the confidential information to approach Apple’s manufacturing partners, including asking one partner to demonstrate Apple’s technique for finishing metal on its devices, the lawsuit says. Apple sent a letter to OpenAI in February to raise concerns that confidential information could be “making its way to OpenAI’s business improperly,” according to the suit. OpenAI did not respond, Apple said. “OpenAI’s nascent hardware business now rests on the shakiest of foundations, rotten to its core by its illegal reliance on misappropriated trade secrets,” Apple wrote in its lawsuit.

[…] In its lawsuit Friday, Apple accused Tang Tan, OpenAI’s chief hardware officer and a former Apple executive, of coaching his hires from Apple on how to evade Apple’s security processes for departing employees. Apple accused another former employee, Chang Liu, of using a former colleague’s Apple-owned laptop to access and download technical documents while working at OpenAI. Mr. Liu told that Apple employee what information about unannounced products she should study before job interviews, Apple said. Mr. Liu also planned to access internal documents through an Apple-owned laptop that he didn’t return when he left the company, according to the lawsuit. OpenAI had misled the manufacturing company it approached to learn about the metal finishing technique to believe it had Apple’s permission to view it, according to the lawsuit. Apple is seeking an injunction that would prevent OpenAI from possessing, using or sharing Apple’s trade secrets, as well as an order requiring OpenAI to return Apple’s intellectual property.