Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. DuckDuckGo’s Browser Now Blocks Most YouTube Ads
  2. Orbital Datacenter Plans Need an Environmental Review, FCC Told
  3. This Factory Was Severely Short On Workers. Then It Offered Flexible Work.
  4. China’s AI Companies May Be ‘Distilling’ America’s AI Models
  5. EFF Celebrates 36th Anniversary, Says ‘We Need You in the Fight’
  6. Meta Says US States Seek $1.4 Trillion In Penalties In August’s Youth Safety Trial
  7. How Flock Cameras Wrongly Tracked a Journalist for Days, Then Sent Police to Arrest Him
  8. FCC Approves Reflect Orbital’s Space Mirror Satellite That Astronomers Hate
  9. China Lands Rocket During an Orbital Launch For First Time
  10. Apple Sues OpenAI, Accusing It of Stealing Company Secrets
  11. Brown Professor Suspects Majority of His Class Used AI To Cheat
  12. Russia Hacks Doorbell Cameras To Spy On NATO Bases
  13. Feds Demand Autonomous Vehicle Companies Stop Interfering With First Responders
  14. NYC To Become First In US To Ban Deceptive Subscription Practices
  15. Disable Autoplay and Infinite Scroll Or Risk Massive Fines, EU Tells Meta

Alterslash picks up to the best 5 comments from each of the day’s Slashdot stories, and presents them on a single page for easy reading.

DuckDuckGo’s Browser Now Blocks Most YouTube Ads

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Nerds.xyz reports:
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.
Slashdot reader BrianFagioli argues that the feature raises questions about how creators are compensated when ad revenue is bypassed.

In the beginning

By Baron_Yam • Score: 3 Thread

In the beginning, websites hosted their own ads. Then they farmed them out to someone else to manage, then that was (almost instantly) abused to deliver malware, then people started using adblockers and websites started implementing adblocker detection and refusing to serve people with such protections enabled.

Nobody seems to be willing to route both the original video and the ads through the same server to seamlessly splice the ads in and make ad detection and suppression more or less impossible.

Orbital Datacenter Plans Need an Environmental Review, FCC Told

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Environmental groups want America’s FCC “to slam the brakes on orbital datacenters,” writes The Register.

They’re arguing for an environmental impact assessment for what could be 1 million satellites:
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.

This Factory Was Severely Short On Workers. Then It Offered Flexible Work.

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“Flexible, app-based scheduling lets large pools of part-time workers choose four-hour shifts and even select the type of work they prefer,” writes long-time Slashdot reader Tony Isaac. While the system started during the pandemic when factories faced severe labor shortages, the model is now “supplying hundreds of trained workers each week… while giving people — from retirees to sidejob hustlers to longtime employees — control over their hours.”

NPR says it’s attracting “people who may not be seeking a traditional career in the industry or even a 40-hour workweek,”
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.

So Not Shocking

By plstubblefield • Score: 3 Thread

So US management is *finally* learning that the 5-day, 40-hour workweek was not bestowed from upon high? That given a choice, many people would prefer work/life balance to higher wages? Color me unsurprised…

So, a factory gig system?

By Mr. Dollar Ton • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

With low pay, no benefits and no commitment? Sounds like the magic that will attract and keep high-quality, skilled labor that will create an yuge competitive advantage.

A story that is truly hard not to take at face value, lol.

Gig economy replacing traditional labour

By Baron_Yam • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

That factory will stop looking for full time workers now that they’ve discovered the desperate will take underpaid part time slots that don’t require benefits.

We should be looking at this story with horror, not admiration.

Re:Gig economy replacing traditional labour

By Art Challenor • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
Few things are universally good or bad - despite the desire of the press and politics to simplify. For someone looking to pick up a little extra income (school hours, evening, weekend) it’s probably good thing (almost certainly better than any of the driving gigs). For anyone who is doing this because they just can’t get full-time, with benefits, work this truly sucks.

A significant part of the problem is that the US, pretty much alone amongst first world countries, ties benefits, particularly health care to employment. Break that connection and this doesn’t suck quite as badly.

Death of the unions

By Local ID10T • Score: 3 Thread

This is the death of Unions being played out in real-time. Low wages, no benefits, no promises of tomorrow, everyone for themself.

China’s AI Companies May Be ‘Distilling’ America’s AI Models

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
In March, Anthropic’s Claude “quietly deployed software to spy on China-based customers,” reports the Washington Post — apparently to unmask Chinese rivals “suspected of hijacking its technology to make their own AI tools smarter.” Last week Anthropic removed the spyware “after a software developer revealed its existence and privacy advocates criticized Anthropic, saying it had surveilled its own users.”
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.
The article also notes that Anthropic “said it has banned nearly 700,000 accounts that were using Claude in China.” But the article includes this quote from Kyle Chan, a fellow at the Washington-based Brookings Institution’s China Center. “Anthropic’s framing is that this is a geopolitical contest for basically the future of the world and freedom and democracy. It’s that this is not just undercutting the U.S. commercially, but undercutting American strategic advantage in the most powerful technology we know today.”

And?

By OverlordQ • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

American AI companies ‘distilled’ millions of works from the original authors, they dont like it? Tough.

And?

By liqu1d • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
The American companies distilled everyone else’s stuff without asking. Difference is anthropic actually got paid by the Chinese.

Anthropic is using…

By MpVpRb • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

…every dirty trick in the book to secure their monopoly.
They spread fear and claim that only they can ensure safety.
They refuse to release a powerful model, claiming it’s too dangerous.
They invite government restrictions.
They attack open source projects.
Classic monopolist behavior.

EFF Celebrates 36th Anniversary, Says ‘We Need You in the Fight’

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
"We need you in the fight,” says the American legal expert in privacy, surveillance, AI, and Internet freedom of speech who became the EFF’s new executive director in March.

As EFF celebrates the anniversary of its founding 1990, “Each headline is different, but they tell one story: Many of the threats that once seemed hypothetical are now reality, and EFF’s work to ensure technology supports rights, justice, freedom, and innovation for all people has never been more critical.”
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?
Major battles the executive director sees on the horizon”

“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.”

Disillusioned with EFF

By swillden • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

I had some interactions with EFF a few years ago that left me sad. They definitely do a lot of good work, but I had thought they would be pretty good at understanding complex technical issues and their nuanced interaction with social and political issues, but my experience was quite the opposite. They’re a pretty blunt hammer, mostly focused on rejecting any technological change regardless of its benefits. Even that would be okay if they were at least able to articulate sound objections, but that also didn’t seem to be the case.

I was working on Android and participating in the ISO 18013-5 mobile driving license standardization process. I thought it would be a good idea to consult with ACLU and EFF, partly to get their buy-in, but mostly to get their feedback. I thought they might have concerns that I could help to address either in the standard (though, honestly, the European members of the ISO committee were already going above and beyond with privacy protection and abuse protection — the Germans in particular are incredibly paranoid about such things — and that’s good!) or in the Android infrastructure I was building.

ACLU was great, at least for a while. The reason it was great was because the ACLU representative I was working with was Jon Callas (former. CTO of Silent Circle and PGP Corp, Chief Scientist of PGP Inc.). Jon is brilliant, with a deep and abiding interest in privacy. He was generally impressed with the approach we were taking, and had some good insights for tweaks we could make to tighten it up. Unfortunately Jon only worked with the ACLU for a couple of years, and we struggled to find anyone to engage at all after his departure. I’m not sure he wants to share publicly his reasons for separating, so I won’t go into that (though I will point out Jon’s article, linked above, is not an official ACLU position).

EFF… not so much. The EFF folks seemed not even to be able to understand what we were building. They kept comparing it to e-Verify (which they think is unambiguously bad) but were unable to articulate precisely what the problems with e-Verify were, or how those might translate to mDLs. I was actively seeking feedback on concerns that I could try to mitigate through good design and implementation. Their response was just a blanket “no, this is all bad” with no thought behind it, and no consideration for the individual privacy improvements that electronic delivery with selective disclosure provide as compared to plastic cards that just lay all of your personal information out there.

My discussions with police were actually far more productive than my discussions with EFF. The cops recommended pro-privacy tweaks that I incorporated — their concern wasn’t actually privacy, mind you, but liability, both financial and legal. The chiefs I spoke with were very concerned that there not be any circumstance in which a police officer might need to touch your phone, because they didn’t want to deal with the crap that would ensue when phones were broken, or illegally searched. They were significantly more tech savvy than you might expect, too, and of course they deeply understood highway stops and other police interactions.

But EFF was just frustrating and useless. Which is too bad because I had always had a lot of respect for them and the work they do. I still do, I guess… I just understand now that they have morphed into a typical lawyer-based civil rights organization. Which is good! We absolutely need those! But they lack the technical sophistication I understand they had when founded.

Meta Says US States Seek $1.4 Trillion In Penalties In August’s Youth Safety Trial

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Meta “said in a court filing on Monday that four states were seeking $1.4 trillion in penalties,” reports Reuters, “over accusations the company designed its Facebook and Instagram platforms to addict young users and misled the public about their safety.”
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.
“A further 14 states have brought claims under their own laws, which will be heard at a separate trial in February…”

Thanks to Slashdot reader Sparkatron for sharing the article.

Unprecedented

By dskoll • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

“A sanction of that size has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement,”

The incredible harms done worldwide by Meta’s business model also have no analog in the history of shitty company behavior. Next up: Go after their copycats like TikTok and other toxic social media platforms.

Re:Unprecedented

By thecombatwombat • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

They do though.

The whole basis of the case was similar to tobacco, that’s the simplest.

Monsanto wasn’t gutted nearly this hard.

Plenty of people would argue fossil fuel companies have done at least as much damage, and known it, and they’ve been arguing it for decades.

Hell, Coca Cola has arguably done as much damage globally, and has also been caught knowing it. There was this scandal about five years ago when Coca Cola got caught funding dicey research minimizing how much ultra calorie dense things like Coke contribute to obesity. If Meta is on the hook for a trillion dollars for this, I’d say Coca Cola is truly at least as guilty.

We could do more. This would be a huge step, it’s not just a matter of Meta being unprecedentedly guilty.

Give Trump a cut

By sziring • Score: 3 Thread

This can all be cleared up if they agree to give a portion to Trump and his buddies. Maybe even donate an arch to him.

How Flock Cameras Wrongly Tracked a Journalist for Days, Then Sent Police to Arrest Him

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“Are you armed?!” the police officer screamed. “Get out of the car!”

A writer for the car-news site The Drive describes how “a technological chain linking surveillance cameras, AI, and law enforcement… led to me and my wife being surrounded by police, hands on their guns, in a Kohl’s parking lot in suburban Minnesota.”
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.”
Ironically, even the original license plate wasn’t stolen either, the article points out. It was reported misplaced during a Los Angeles photo shoot, and “The corporation had to report the plate as lost to law enforcement,” according to the police report — and even then, the plate “was reported as NJ 34DTM instead of NJ 3403DTM.”

The author’s conclusion? “Once these systems have you in their crosshairs, there’s pretty much only one way it can go… A simple data-entry error, magnified and broadcast nationwide by a growing surveillance network operated through an opaque partnership between a private company and public agencies, led police to identify me as a car thief and set up a sting to take me down. I mean, they even had a drone flying overhead during the ‘bust’…

“Thank God our kids weren’t with us.”

Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader sinij for sharing the article.

Cops were actually well behaved, shockingly.

By MikeDataLink • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

I just watched the bodycam footage from this, and to my surprise these cops were very well behaved. They never cuffed the guy, or in any way escalated the situation. They figured out very quickly it was a mistake and let him on his way.

This is rare in the world of today’s policing. So you gotta give credit to these guys. Everyone involved kept cool heads.

Re:Cops were actually well behaved, shockingly.

By ArchieBunker • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Probably because he’s a middle aged white guy. Swap him out for a black guy and I suspect the outcome would be a bit less cordial.

3 points

By gurps_npc • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

1) The cops in Minneapolis appear to have the reputation for being psychotic morons. Suspects are not always guilty, as shown in this case and Car theft is most often kids joy riding (75%). Yes, 25% of the time it is organized crime (to steal a car for anything more than a joy ride you need good connections to large organizations to either chop it up or ship it out of the country). It is totally unreasonable to draw a gun on people joy riding.

2) The cops appear to be illiterate. The theft report said 34 DTM. While the flock cameras did not see it was 34 10 DTM, the cops SHOULD have seen the 34 10 DTM and realized something was off before they stopped the vehicle They should still have questioned them, but should have realized before hand that the license plate was not identical to the theft report and gone in more subtely.

3) Flock is incompetent and should be banned.

Re:3 points

By Registered Coward v2 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

1) The cops in Minneapolis appear to have the reputation for being psychotic morons. Suspects are not always guilty, as shown in this case and Car theft is most often kids joy riding (75%). Yes, 25% of the time it is organized crime (to steal a car for anything more than a joy ride you need good connections to large organizations to either chop it up or ship it out of the country). It is totally unreasonable to draw a gun on people joy riding.

A pro also isn’t going to HD with his wife. Thefts by pros disappear quickly because, well, they are pros and want to avoid getting caught.

2) The cops appear to be illiterate. The theft report said 34 DTM. While the flock cameras did not see it was 34 10 DTM, the cops SHOULD have seen the 34 10 DTM and realized something was off before they stopped the vehicle They should still have questioned them, but should have realized before hand that the license plate was not identical to the theft report and gone in more subtely.

The problem, as shown in TFA, is the 10 are 2 small numbers stacked vertically between the 34 and DTM, so they get overlooked. Should the police looked closer, sure, but I can also see why the made the error because the 34 DTM is in much larger font size.

3) Flock is incompetent and should be banned.

Yes, and should be legally liable for damages in cases like this. At. minimum, if there system catches 34 DTM in multiple areas at the same time, that’s signs of a problem, and the art of pattern a computer should be good at detecting. The inability to report a tag as lost also means for this edge case it gets a stolen marker. You could tag it as lost and inform the tag owner not to reuse it if found, and if the correct number was entered if it shows up on a vehicle again mark it as stolen. That of course, would require work and changing a system.

Re:GIGO

By ArchieBunker • Score: 4, Funny Thread

The cops all had to coordinate their days off so this bust could be used for overtime.

FCC Approves Reflect Orbital’s Space Mirror Satellite That Astronomers Hate

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
The FCC has approved (PDF) Reflect Orbital’s Earendil-1 test satellite, which will use a 60-by-60-foot mirror to reflect sunlight back to Earth after dark. “The reflected light from the satellite is supposed to span an area about 3 miles wide on the ground,” reports PCMag. It comes despite objections from astronomers and environmental groups who are concerned that the satellites will unleash intrusive light pollution. From the report:
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.

Oooo

By liqu1d • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
Space lasers about time we got there.

Barely more than moonlight…

By Vario • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

If we assume a best case scenario, that is all sunlight is captured by the 60 x 60 feet reflector and then send down to earth in a 3 mile diameter circle this would correspond to a light intensity of approximately 0.02 W / m2 or 2 Lux.

This is barely brighter than the light from a full moon. Probably not even enough for any color vision. So in which scenario does that help? And that already entails that a full satellite is only dedicated to you. Someone with more economical knowledge than me might want to give an estimate what the hourly rate of a satellite of that size might be.

The whole idea then goes brr by assuming thousands of satellites (1000 Lux would be bright office lighting) which is still not enough for any photovoltaic usage. So this is only an investment vehicle for people that dream without basic math.

Again

By Ol Olsoc • Score: 5, Informative Thread
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…

Russians tried this in the 1990s. Seriously underwhelming, and not likely to be much better this time around.

How Much Power?

By SlashbotAgent • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

I think that they should do this experiment. Launch it test it. And, within a year, burn it up on re-entry.

Knowing the results of this experiment are good.

The idea of putting 50,000 of these to power a massive PV array and heat the Earth is a dog shit idea. It’s bad on too many levels.

Re:copyright trolls to the rescue!

By spire3661 • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
Anduril, Palantir, Mithril Capital, Valar Vantures, Erebor Capital, Rohan AI, Rivendell One, Lembas LLC, Sauron Systems......All in open use today. The worst part is its all racist/classist dog whistles. They use this framing to indicate they are fighting to save ‘the Western World’ and all the shittiness that entails.

China Lands Rocket During an Orbital Launch For First Time

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
China successfully recovered an orbital rocket booster for the first time, landing the Long March 10B’s first stage into a net-equipped sea platform after its maiden launch. “This mission marks my country’s first successful controlled recovery of a launch vehicle and the world’s first network-based recovery of a launch vehicle,” the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC) announced via social media shortly after the launch. (Translation by Google.) “It signifies a historic breakthrough for my country in the field of reusable rocket technology and will lay a solid foundation for accelerating the improvement of my country’s space access capabilities.” Space.com reports:
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.”

Re:phrasing, subby.

By dinfinity • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Is that better or worse? I was under the impression that most people find the catching of a rocket booster like SpaceX does with those little arms to be more awesome than just landing the booster.

I also thought that outside of having to land on Mars it is the preferred approach because it is more efficient.

Finally: Caught it in a net conjures up the wrong image. If you look at the video the ‘net’ is much more like the mechazilla arms and not some fishing net they plop the booster into: https://www.youtube.com/watch?…

Re:phrasing, subby.

By AmiMoJo • Score: 5, Informative Thread

It’s mostly better. While the barge has to be a bit more complex because it has to have the lattice of ropes (it’s not a net), it means that the booster doesn’t have to have landing struts. That’s a significant weight saving, which means less propellant needed too.

It likely also means that the system is less dependent on good weather, and better able to recover from small issues that would tip self supporting boosters over. IIRC the Blue Origin system actually welds itself to the deck when it lands to help with that, which obviously makes the legs disposable.

The only real downside is that it does require that barge to land, so to land on the moon you would need to first land a landing station. That won’t be an issue for the first manned trips, and longer term it may have advantages because the vehicle’s engine can be shut off at higher altitude and kick up less regolith.

Exciting times and another technique added to the list of options. We will see which becomes the preferred one, but competition in this area is going to be good for getting costs down.

Re:phrasing, subby.

By greytree • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
Worse, IMHO, they quote without correction this phrase “the world’s first network-based recovery of a launch vehicle” where it is clear that “network” is a mistranslation.

Re:Cool!

By bill_mcgonigle • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

The idea is probably from 1950’s comic books but the tech seems brand new since they don’t need any landing legs and use a net-on-frame architecture.

People should pay attention because they didn’t have orbital technology thirty years ago and now they have a space station, reusable rockets, and are about to have a Moon base.

And possibly ultra-long flighttime ‘drones’ that can fly over Picatinny Arsenal unimpeded; that much is uncertain. We have no explanation for their energy budget (at least white-world).

Having a country run by engineers rather than professional thieves who hire engineers to justify pillage has certain advantages (and disadvantages).

Let’s not get too overconfident.

Re:Cool!

By Enigma2175 • Score: 4, Informative Thread

they didn’t have orbital technology thirty years ago

According to wiki they launched their first orbital satellite in 1970, more than 30 years ago.

Apple Sues OpenAI, Accusing It of Stealing Company Secrets

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times:
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.

No this is not possible

By phantomfive • Score: 5, Funny Thread
Sam Altman is a fine, upstanding young man with not a hint of deception in his bones. He would never lie, cheat, steal, infringe copyright, engage in corporate espionage, abuse his sister, lie to the board, or anything remotely unethical. When Aaron Schwartz said that Sam Altman couldn’t be trusted, of course he was being sarcastic.

Re: No this is not possible

By xgerrit • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
I worked for a startup that was building a fitness app, and Apple asked our marketing team to pitch ideas for an Earth Day promotion to promote us in the App Store. Our team had a pretty unique idea that we all were excited about, but after the pitch our Apple contact stopped answering messages about the promo. Sure enough, 3 months later Apple took the exact idea and used it in a promo for one of their own products on the App Store. At the time I thought this was some weird one-off thing that happened, but it turns out it wasn’t.. it’s exactly how they operate. Make no mistake, OpenAI is no saint, but Apple is a ruthless mega-corporation that’s been stealing ideas for years. There’s no one to root for in this one.

Re: No this is not possible

By evanh • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Sadly, that’s more likely the individual people at Apple, rather than Apple per se. Same story at M$ and every other corporation. The internal fighting for higher pay means the individuals are stealing and backstabbing each other within.

source without paywall

By jarkus4 • Score: 4, Informative Thread

https://www.reuters.com/legal/…

OpenAI is run by Morons

By locater16 • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
Morons with a capital M. As I’ve heard it direct from big tech company employees there are perfectly established ways to skirt trade secret laws, you sit there and ask the employees in question “how we might go about accomplishing” X thing that their previous employer did, and in a roundabout way they tell you what direction to take, and pretty soon your to the same place and that’s it, you’re free and clear. On the other hand directly asking “share secret project”, “bring prototypes”, and such directly seems to contradict all established trade secret law I know about.

Which is to say: Apple seems to have a fantastically clear and straightforward case and are 100% going to win an enormous settlement. OpenAI has to be the company with highest liabilities, maybe in all of history. Like holy fuck are they in the deepest hole I’ve seen since The South Seas Trading Company, the world first stock scam that was so big it almost bankrupted England. I can’t wait for the podcasts and books and movie(s?, probably) all about the collapse. It’ll be so much fun.

Brown Professor Suspects Majority of His Class Used AI To Cheat

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Longtime Slashdot reader schwit1 shares a report from Inside Higher Ed:
For the first time since he started teaching Welfare Economics and Social Choice Theory nearly two decades ago, Brown University economics professor Roberto Serrano gave his students a take-home midterm this spring. Quite a few students had expressed anxiety about being in a classroom after a gunman killed two students and injured nine in a December mass shooting at Brown, and so “it was appropriate,” he said, to allow students to take their exams at home. But by the end of the semester, Serrano regretted the decision. Dozens of students in the class likely used artificial intelligence to cheat and earn perfect or near-perfect scores on their midterm, he said. Serrano in turn made the final exam in-person, which led more than a dozen students to drop the course and even more to fail it.

Administrators’ response to the widespread cheating event has been “meek,” he said, and the incident has raised questions about how universities can — and should — respond to AI-enabled cheating at scale. “I am not declaring [the midterm] void for now. I am going to give the class a chance to prove me wrong,” he wrote. “That is, if the distribution of the final exam is roughly similar to the distribution of the midterm, I will count the midterm. Otherwise, which is of course what I expect to happen, I will declare the midterm void and reweigh the final accordingly.” Serrano heard crickets from his students, but 18 of them subsequently dropped the class. Nine students remained enrolled but did not take the final exam. And Serrano said the results proved him right; three students earned a zero, and the average score on the final was 48.6 percent — by far a historic low, he said. Previously, the average final exam score had never dropped below 65 percent. Only a few students scored similarly to how they did on the midterm.

Part of a bigger crisis in education

By thecombatwombat • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

There is a fundamental crisis going on in colleges that has nothing to do with AI.

The professor wants a classroom full of students who actually care about what he has to teach. The administration wants those students, their paying customers, to keep paying.

Universities have had this crisis brewing for a long time:

We made a college degree necessary for most desirable jobs. Universities loved this, college degrees grew at a massive rate, the cost of them grew even more.

Then all at once they realize that hey, the students who are there, don’t actually *want* to be there. They just want to buy their diplomas and get out, and act accordingly.

They can’t have it both ways, this tension has been a thing for a long time.

Something fundamental has to give.

Re:The death of homework

By Local ID10T • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Homework is for practice. It is for students to exercise the knowledge they have gained. To fix it in their minds as more than a passing thought. To enhance retention of the materiel. Listen to the lecture, read the book, practice the exercise… retain the knowledge.

There is no point to grading homework. Except as a feedback loop for the students. So that they know what they thought they understood -but did not.

In class time is for lectures, discussions, and Q&A. Don’t waste the interactive time doing things that can be done solo.

Re:“Welfare Economics and Social Choice Theory”

By quenda • Score: 5, Informative Thread

I must admit, the title of the course sounds a bit political, but I thought best to look it up before leaping wildly to conclusions:

While the words “welfare” and “social choice” might sound like political buzzwords to a layperson, in academia they refer to highly formal, mathematical subfields of standard microeconomic theory.
Taught for decades by Professor Roberto Serrano, it is known as a rigorous, proof-heavy class rather than a political forum. If you recently heard about the class in the news, it is likely due to an academic integrity controversy involving a take-home exam and suspected student use of generative AI, rather than anything related to politics.

Re: not really

By Brain-Fu • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

I remember being a college student....many years ago....

I was really into computer science, and also philosophy. I took those classes with great eagerness. Oh and foreign language too.

I couldn’t care less about the other crap they required me to take in order to make my education well-rounded. Physics just didn’t do it for me. I was a native English speaker already and learned nothing from the lit and creative writing classes. There was Art appreciation, mythology, some phys ed…all blow off classes that I took only because they were required. I am sure those professors found me unmotivated. Oh, economics was tolerable, but I never would have taken it without having been forced, and learned nothing useful beyond the high-school level economics I had already taken.

It’s all different now. I read up on all kinds of brainy topics just for fun, including the stuff I blew off in college. I realize I am just one data point, but it seems consistent with available evidence: college-age kids are, by and large, sick of school and only motivated to chase their specific passions. Forcing well-roundedness on them is mostly just a way of forcing them to spend more money on elements of an education that they won’t retain or use in their chosen career paths. Offer well-rounded educations only to those who seek it, and we will see engagement increase across the board.

If we are truly worried about people being unprepared to face the adult world, we should be teaching classes in investing and personal finance management, nutrition, only the most basic phys ed (how to jog and lift weights), maybe some household maintenance. These are all practical skills that we are supposed to learn from our parents, but often don’t. Maybe some schools teach some of this these days, but they didn’t when I was in school. Well they did teach phys ed but way over did it. Forcing kids who don’t like sports to play sports is not helping them. Teaching people why aerobic exercise is good and how to lift weights with proper form absolutely is helping them.

Re:Cheating is too easy

By Charlotte • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I honestly don’t see the problem here. They did homework, cheated. Then they got the real test and failed.

So the system worked!

Russia Hacks Doorbell Cameras To Spy On NATO Bases

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Dutch intelligence agencies say Russian hackers have been hijacking unsecured internet-connected cameras, including likely doorbell and security cameras, to spy on NATO military bases and transport routes used to move weapons to Ukraine. “Organisations with IP [internet protocol] cameras on these routes have now been warned so that they could take action,” said the AIVD domestic security and MIVD military intelligence agencies. Targeted NATO member states include the Netherlands and Ukraine. The Telegraph reports:
While the intelligence agencies did not specify the type of cameras hacked, the doorbell systems are frequently used by people to monitor their property from mobile phones. Hackers then use readily available apps to scan for devices that might be accessible. The Dutch investigation found that many of the cameras were unsecured, and “often have standard passwords, outdated firmware and standard configurations.” They said: “When the IP camera is identified, the malicious party can attempt to access the IP camera via the internet. This is often relatively easy, because many IP cameras connected to the internet are insufficiently secure.”

[…] The practice is now considered easier and cheaper than using drones and satellites to gather intelligence. It also aids operational surprise because most camera owners are blissfully unaware their devices have been penetrated by hackers. Ground-based cameras offer a unique perspective on the terrain, which isn’t the case with conventional aerial-based spy kit.

Fact check

By r1348 • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Targeted NATO member states include the Netherlands and Ukraine.

Ukraine is not a NATO member state. If you know anything about the conflict, you’d know that’s kinda the whole point.

Seriously, who writes these summaries?

Re:Oh no the Russians!

By Registered Coward v2 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

If it is possible to walk into cameras on NATO bases like that, honestly they deserve it. This shit should be locked behind seven layers of impossible.

Per TFA,it’s civilian cameras on transit routes, so what it sounds like is they look for cameras along major roads and hack into them to follow shipments. It would not surprise me if they were trying to hack phones/watches/fitness bands or anything that can track individual then look at data to try to find the drivers by correlating the data with traffic data.

That;s why i work on EU CRA

By 4wdloop • Score: 4, Informative Thread

As much as it sucks to comply to it, EU CRA that will be in full force on Dec’27 is supposed to combat these problems.

Feds Demand Autonomous Vehicle Companies Stop Interfering With First Responders

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
NHTSA is ordering autonomous vehicle developers to explain by the end of the month how they will stop driverless cars from interfering with police, firefighters, and paramedics. TechCrunch reports:
[NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison] noted in the letter (PDF) that the agency has “identified a clear pattern of driverless AVs interfering with law enforcement and other first responders,” citing instances in which these vehicles drove into active emergency scenes, blocked the paths of ambulances and firefighters, or failed to recognize and respond to basic safety conditions like flashing lights, flares, smoke, fire, and traffic cones. The agency has demanded that AV developers present their “solutions” to this problem by the end of the month.

“Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency,” Morrison’s letter reads. “Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme ‘edge cases.’ As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue.” The agency doesn’t explicitly call out any particular company in the letter; however, the details suggest it is directed at robotaxi operators like Waymo.

[…] The agency’s letter to AV developers doesn’t say what the consequences would be if the request is ignored. Nor does it outline what the acceptable solutions would be. But the agency does imply it would hold companies accountable, just as it does human drivers who impede law enforcement. “Every second matters when law enforcement officers, firefighters, or paramedics are answering a call because lives are on the line,” the letter states. “That is why human drivers who impede these operations are subject to fines and even jail time.”

The agency also noted in a press release accompanying the letter that it’s making progress on updating Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars. The agency has already proposed rules that would eliminate the need for windshield wipers, sun visors, defogging systems, and tire placards. The agency released a new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda last week, outlining its proposals.

Easy part’s done

By abulafia • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
They made them capable of easy-mode driving.

Now the engineers need to work on exception handling.

I mean that sincerely. These things only work when things are normal. Power failures, unmapped blockages, a roman candle in the street, even crowds turn them in to traffic blockages themselves.

Just wait until there’s an actual mass casualty event - earthquake, terror, something like that, and these all things go comatose in intersections like they did in SF last year.

Re:Good luck with that

By PsychoSlashDot • Score: 5, Informative Thread

So the problem with these things is they Don’t really work. Google admitted that at a congressional hearing.

I’m going to go ahead and ask what - specifically - Google “admitted” in said hearing. I doubt it’s “don’t really work” but leave open the possibility that’s what was admitted, so please provide quotes.

They’re basically remote controlled cars with really really fancy driver assist features.

Really? It’s my understanding that they’re autonomous the vast majority of the time, remote-controlled in very rare circumstances, and driver-assist never. Passengers in these cars aren’t permitted to manually drive them, so driver-assist isn’t a thing. I grant that I may be misinformed, but again, I invite you to provide details for your assertion.

Frighteningly

Well, yes. The media - be it traditional or social - is rather good at that, regardless of objective statistics.

it appears that they are sometimes piloted from the Philippines.

That feels like an odd thing to be frightened of. It’s not Mars where there are minutes of latency. Why would the Philippines - specifically - be any more (or less) concerning than if the drivers were in a building a kilometer away from the vehicle?

Publicly Google will tell you that’s not true but that’s not what they told Congress when they were under oath…

That’s not been a secret for ages now. In complicated situations the autonomous system can’t cope with, it can call in human assistance. I’ve not heard that’s a common or nominal mode of operation, but maybe I’m lacking in some facts. Which - unsurprisingly - you are invited to provide.

The obvious problem with all this is that they’re going to have problems with ambulances and such.

That’s the obvious problem? I’d’ve thought there are plenty, but fine. We’ve all know there are a lot of refinements and adjustments needed, both for the car operators and the rest of us outside of them.

And that’s the waymo ones that are the best and most functional. The ones from Tesla which are so bad even Tesla doesn’t really want them on the roads are a disaster waiting to happen. It does however keep their stock price up…

Sure.

Frankly these things shouldn’t be on the road with us but it’s not like we have any say in anything anymore

Okay, I’m no fan of these things and wouldn’t volunteer to ride in one but really, this is exaggeration. The actual safety records have shown they’re marginally better than human drivers. Sure, there are outliers, exceptions and downright frustrating things like what this article is about but as far as I’ve had any information, they’re just that… outliers. Human drivers are the ones I really worry about, personally.

Priorities

By mccalli • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
Years back I was interviewing people for a coding position. We went through the standard tech stuff and then did a bit of project to see how they thought. We said (this is circa 2009’ish I think) - imagine you’re on a team creating a new phone. You don’t have time to test all the functions, so which would be your top two functions to ensure working?

All a bit Kobayashi Maru - obviously you can’t release a phone testing only two functions, but we wanted to see what they’d prioritise. The very best answer we received was this one: “I would make sure it has the ability to call emergency services.” Their thinking was that this was likely the most critical feature of a phone for both a user, and also for the manufacturer to avoid being sued. Absolutely great answer.

And yet here we are, with the post above. Taking the thinking of this interviewee - the ability to work with emergency services is important for general society, for the user of the vehicle (so they don’t get in trouble) and for the manufacture of the vehicle (so they don’t get fined/sued/both). Absolutely critical.

Re:Good luck with that

By dgatwood • Score: 4, Informative Thread

So the problem with these things is they Don’t really work. Google admitted that at a congressional hearing.

Citation needed.

They’re basically remote controlled cars with really really fancy driver assist features. Frighteningly it appears that they are sometimes piloted from the Philippines. Publicly Google will tell you that’s not true but that’s not what they told Congress when they were under oath…

Google doesn’t even have self-driving cars. Maybe you’re thinking about Waymo (which is part of Alphabet, not Google).

Regardless, no, to the best of my understanding, they cannot be driven remotely at all, at least by any normal person’s definition of the word “drive”. When intervention is required, the remote operators get a dump of camera images to review, and then they draw a proposed path on a map. The car then tries to follow it, and aborts if doing so would result in hitting anything. This may have to be done more than once to get it out of the problem situation. When the vehicle says that it is comfortable proceeding on its own, the remote operator tells it to go ahead, and it takes over path planning again.

At no point is any remote operator in direct control over the vehicle. All they can do is propose an alternative path when the vehicle’s path planner gets stuck trying to figure out how to safely extricate itself from some situation. At all times, the vehicle’s software is the driver. The remote operator is just hinting that it should go to the left of safety cone A, to the right of cone B, etc. (or whatever the situation happens to be). This is why it takes so long to extricate a stuck car. If there were an actual remote driver that could take real-time control, it would take just a few seconds.

The obvious problem with all this is that they’re going to have problems with ambulances and such.

From what I’ve read, when a Waymo car sees emergency lights, it stops driving and gets out of the way. I do see one (presumably) recent video where a Waymo stopped in a place that actually delayed an ambulance from getting past it on a narrow street, so unless that’s an old video, I’m guessing there’s still a bit more tweaking required in terms of recognizing whether the right choice is to stop or to move out of the way. I’d imagine someone is already working on making sure that particular edge case doesn’t happen again.

What I’m not seeing is evidence of some widespread problem with autonomous vehicles in general. There’s an edge case here or an edge case there where something didn’t work as expected. And they’ll complain about it, and the AV company in question will figure out why the car did the wrong thing, update their training sets, and that specific scenario won’t happen again.

(This, of course, ignores Tesla, because the emergency vehicle drivers can’t tell if the vehicle is being driven by the car or by a human, making any sort of reporting problematic at best.)

So realistically, I suspect that the answer to a vague demand from a government agency demanding to know what AV companies will do to prevent bad interactions with emergency vehicles will always be “exactly what we’re already doing”, because apart from coming up with new simulated situations to test (which they’re always doing), there’s really nothing they can do to prevent the car from behaving the wrong way in some vague unspecified future situation that nobody has thought of yet. And the answer to what they’re doing to prevent a specific situation will usually be “We’ve already updated our training sets and that won’t happen again.”

To that end, I’m really not sure what they’re trying to accomplish with sending a letter like that. Seems more like political posturing than any actual attempt at solving a problem. *shrugs*

Re:Good luck with that

By XXongo • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

You got Google you can look up what I wrote and confirm it.

In my experience, when a person asks for a citation to some purported fact somebody posted and the guy posting it responds “Google it”, this almost always means “I don’t have a citation”, which usually translates “I heard it on the internet somewhere, not sure where.”

Oddly, I was prepared to believe you right up to the moment you posted this.

NYC To Become First In US To Ban Deceptive Subscription Practices

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
On October 1st, New York City will become the first U.S. city to ban deceptive subscription practices, requiring companies to offer simple cancellation options or face fines of $525 per user subscription, back fees, and additional penalties. The Mamdani administration is also proposing a junk-fee rule requiring sellers, landlords, hotels, and other businesses to “advertise the total price for any good or service, including all mandatory additional charges and fees, up front.” The Guardian reports:
“People shouldn’t have to wait on hold for half an hour or send a certified letter or show up to a store in person in order to cancel” a subscription, said Samuel AA Levine, the city’s commissioner of consumer and worker protection, in an interview. The new measures are expected to be announced in a press conference on Friday morning.

The proposed fee rule could have an especially wide impact, sending ripples through New York’s expensive housing market, where about 70% of residents rent. Apartment renters in the US face a rising tide of add-on fees such as “boiler management” and “lifestyle” charges from management companies, which make true rental costs hundreds of dollars higher than the price stated on real-estate company websites.

If the proposed renters rule passes after public comment and hearing, any mandatory fees, including annual ones, would need to be included in the stated monthly rental price, Levine said. The current situation creates “a scenario where rather than competing on price, companies are competing on their ability to hide the true price. That’s the worst kind of incentive” — and one that deeply distorts the market, Levine said.

Re:Didn’t The FTC Do This Two years ago?

By ArchieBunker • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Republicans gutted all authority from federal agencies because it made the mega corps unhappy.

Interesting

By ArchieBunker • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

So it turns out politicians can pass legislation that helps people.

It’s too bad…

By PhantomHarlock • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

…that it’s just New York City. Hopefully the idea will spread.

Laissez faire capitalism is great if everyone is honest. But in this reality there are a lot of incredibly dishonest people who will do anything for a buck. A modicum of base regulation is desirable to keep consumers from getting swindled at every turn. I applaud efforts like these.

Sounds good

By cosmicl • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
so why just NYC? How about for all of the US? Oh, wait. elections have consequences.

Re:Didn’t The FTC Do This Two years ago?

By jacks smirking reven • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Also to be extra clear the 8th circuit struck it down for procedure, the FTC was supposed to have done a certain type of economic impact analysis for the rule and it could not go into effect before that happened. The court did not actually make a ruling on the rule itself and in fact were sympathetic to what the law was trying to do.

The FTC can re-implement the rule after that analysis is complete and it can go through the process after that but with the current admin they have chosen not to and generally Republicans were opposed to the rule.

If Lina Khan was still at FTC I imagine it would have been done but Sarah Ferguson who voted against the rule initially now runs it. But both parties are the same of course.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-p…

Disable Autoplay and Infinite Scroll Or Risk Massive Fines, EU Tells Meta

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica:
The European Union is ramping up pressure on Meta to make big changes to Facebook and Instagram after the European Commission preliminarily found that features like autoplay, infinite scroll, and highly personalized content recommendations were addictive. On Thursday, the EC said its investigation indicated that “Meta did not adequately assess the risks of its addictive design on the physical and mental wellbeing of users, including minors and vulnerable adults.” “These features fuel the user’s urge to keep scrolling and shift the brain into ‘autopilot mode,’ contributing to unhealthy habits and compulsive use,” the commission said. Over the next few months, Meta will have an opportunity to dispute the claims, and it has already taken a defensive stance. Meta’s spokesperson, Ben Walters, told Reuters that Meta disagrees with the commission’s preliminary findings, which supposedly “don’t accurately take into account the significant steps we’ve taken to protect teens.”

“Since this investigation began, we rolled out Teen Accounts that automatically protect teens and put parents in control — allowing them to block access to Instagram at night and cap daily screen time at just 15 minutes,” Walters said. However, the EC emphasized that Meta’s current mitigation efforts, including time management tools activated by default for teens, “failed to effectively tackle the risks stemming from its addictive design.” Additionally, parental controls were deemed “only effective if parents and guardians possess adequate technical expertise” and dedicated “effort and time to understand them effectively.” “This undermines the efficiency of such measures in addressing the inherent risks posed by Instagram and Facebook’s addictive design,” the EC said, particularly for minors.

At this stage, the EC recommended that Meta consider “disabling key addictive features such as ‘autoplay’ and ‘infinite scroll’ by default, implementing effective ‘screen time breaks,’ and adapting its recommender system to make it less engagement-oriented.” If Meta fails to make changes to comply with the EU’s Digital Services Act, the company risks fines up to 6 percent of its global annual turnover when the EC makes its final decision in the coming months. “Our starting point is that, based on our findings, this design is too addictive and changes need to be made,” Henna Virkkunen, the EU’s tech chief, told Reuters. “The next step is either that Meta changes its design or a non-compliance decision will follow,” she said, noting in the press release that the EU’s priority is “protecting the physical and mental health of Europeans.”
“The Digital Services Act provides a clear framework to hold platforms accountable for the addictive design and effects of their services,” Virkkunen said. “We are fully committed to enforcing our legislation in Europe.”
The report also notes that the EC will share findings from experts on Monday that “could help pave the way for a Europe-wide social media ban for teenagers.” It’s not looking much better for Meta in the U.S., either. The company faces a lawsuit from 29 states that claim Meta’s platforms addict kids. “That trial begins in August, and states may seek up to $1.4 trillion in penalties if Meta is found guilty,” reports Ars.

Re:Leave Meta alone or face embargoes on all trade

By hawguy • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

There is no limit to is escalation tactics.

That’s all the more reason to not try to appease him, because there’s no limit to reasons he’ll think of to retaliate against perceived grievances. He could wake up one morning and fart crosswise and impose sanctions on the EU.

So the EU (and rest of the world) should just go about their lives, do what they need to do, and not worry about trade sanctions, because even trade agreements signed by Trump himself won’t prevent sanctions.

Social Fixer

By EnsilZah • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

I managed to get Facebook to behave almost the way I want it to using the Social Fixer extension.
Chronological order, no ads, only posts from people and pages I’m actually following, no autoplay, no stories. But as a side effect it seems to reload the page multiple times and sometimes stalls for a while, so it ends up too much of a hassle to check it more than a couple times a day anyway.

Re:People are sheep and can’t help themselves

By Powercntrl • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I think there’s a middle ground between the libertarian view of it’s your own damn fault if you didn’t realize buying Snicker bars in bulk and stuffing your face with them will make you fat!” or “People lack the self control to snack responsibly, so we’re locking the junk food behind the counter and placing purchase limits on it.” IMHO, that middle ground should be educating and informing people of the risks, but ultimately leaving the final decision up to them (assuming they’re an adult, obviously).

Yeah, I know we’re discussing social media and not unhealthy food, but there’s a common thread with lawmakers believing they can make people healthier (mentally/physically) in spite of themselves.

Re:Leave Meta alone or face embargoes on all trade

By allo • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

But are they convenient features?

Autoplay: Is there anyone who wants a random video to start catching their attention while reading their feed? That’s totally an advertiser feature.
Endless scroll: Just consider the alternative. With pagination you can bookmark where you stopped scrolling, so you can continue later.

Endless scroll forces you to read until the gap between the top and where you left off last time is closed, otherwise you never will find the position of where you stopped reading again. Chronological ordering would help a bit, but you still have to jump around between positions you can only find by scrolling and not by page numbers.

They are selling your attention and so they are optimizing how much content gets your attention. They are not optimizing for you to use the app effectively, they optimize for the ads to catch your attention.

Re:People are sheep and can’t help themselves

By thegarbz • Score: 4, Informative Thread

So let’s all blame the scapegoat.

The “scapegoat” literally employed people from the gambling industry in an attempt to make their product as addictive to possible to the sheep, and openly admitted doing so under oath in front of congress.

Let’s not blame the “scapegoat”. Let’s outright slaughter it and grill it, and then wear it’s coat as a warning to others. That’s what the “scapegoat” deserves.