Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. IT Workers Are Now Struggling to Find Work, as ‘Picky’ Companies Demand AI Skills
  2. US-Iran Peace Agreement Prompts Stock Rally, Leaves Some Investors Skeptical and Questions on Speed of Resuming Oil Production
  3. Workers Spend As Much Time ‘Botsitting’ AI As Producing Useful Work, Survey Finds
  4. Microsoft Updates Six Windows Apps. ‘Photos’ Gets Watermarks for Copilot Images (Off by Default)
  5. UK Scientists See Little Evidence for Claims Smartphones Are Rewiring Kids’ Brains
  6. As ‘Disclosure Day’ Premieres, Steven Spielberg Says He Believes Aliens Really Have Visited Earth
  7. Will Meta’s $14 Billion Bet on AI Ever Pay Off?
  8. Vintage AMD R600 Graphics Driver Sees Code Cleanups Thanks To GitHub Copilot
  9. How America’s Energy Department is Building a National Platform for Doing Science with AI
  10. Blizzard Sues To Take Down Another Private World of Warcraft Server, Project Ascension
  11. Bitcoin Has Lost Nearly Half Its Value in 11 Months
  12. Four LTS Java Versions Get End-of-Support in a Three-Year Window (2029-2032)
  13. UK Police Officer Accused of Using AI to Fake Evidence
  14. How Author Dave Eggers Avoids Smartphones, Internet Access, and Flock Cameras
  15. Amazon CEO’s Talks with U.S. Officials Triggered Crackdown on Anthropic Models

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.

IT Workers Are Now Struggling to Find Work, as ‘Picky’ Companies Demand AI Skills

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“Battered by years of mass layoffs, California tech workers were hoping the job market would rebound this year,” reports the Los Angeles Times. “But things are getting worse.”
The class divide is widening in Silicon Valley as a tiny group of employees is landing unprecedented packages for AI skills, while many others struggle to find work. The have-nots are doing everything that used to guarantee great jobs — refreshing resumes, optimizing LinkedIn profiles and doing interviews — but companies are much more picky these days. The tech jobless are rethinking their lives. Some are taking pay cuts, others are leaving tech. Some are going back to study or launch startups. Some have retired....

Since 2022, more than 815,500 tech workers have been laid off, according to Layoffs.fyi, a website that tracks job cuts. The tsunami of pink slips surged in 2023, when companies that had gone on hiring sprees during the COVID-19 pandemic began to cut back. From January to April, U.S. tech employers announced 85,411 job cuts this year, up 33% from the same period last year, according to global outplacement and executive coaching firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas. The Public Policy Institute of California estimates that the number of information jobs — which includes jobs in hard-hit Hollywood as well as tech — tumbled 17% between the middle of 2022 and this February. The San Francisco Bay Area has been hardest hit, the institute said in a recent report, with the number of jobs declining by 0.4%, compared with 7.5% growth over a similar time span before COVID-19 slammed into the U.S. economy.

Tech layoffs are also spilling over into other industries. Automaker General Motors laid off roughly 600 workers in its information technology department, and Walmart is reportedly laying off or relocating roughly 1,000 workers in its technology and products teams. Recruiters say companies have become much more selective, requiring AI skills, combining different positions and interviewing more people for each job. “You’re seeing elongated hiring cycles,” said Robert Lucido, senior director of strategic advisory at Magnit, a California company that helps tech giants and other businesses manage contractors, freelancers and other contingent workers. “There’s more opportunity to fill the need that they truly want.”

Paul Flaharty, district president at staffing firm Robert Half in Los Angeles, said companies are laying off workers, but also creating new roles tied to AI initiatives. “For individuals that are displaced, it’s really important that they find ways to upskill themselves so that they can make themselves as attractive as possible for these new jobs that are being created,” he said. Kira Martins was already taking on more work in a small team at Snap — the parent company of disappearing messaging app Snapchat — when she was laid off in April. The company said the layoffs were to cut costs as it focuses on profitability, noting how employees are using AI to “reduce repetitive work, increase velocity, and better support our community, partners, and advertisers....” Martins, a 36-year-old Los Angeles resident, views AI as a tool and is optimistic about finding her next role. People still need to decide how to use AI and check the work it generates, she said. “In tech, you want to be a first adopter, because if you don’t move quickly, it’s very easy to become irrelevant,” she said. “Everyone’s kind of hopping on the AI train.”
A former Google worker (laid off more than a year ago) says he’s still job hunting, according to the article, and “he’s learned it’s not enough to just apply in this competitive market. Workers really need to network and leverage their connections to get seen by hiring managers and stand out.”

But when 64-year-old product manager Bruce Bowers lost his job at Oracle — along with thousands of others — he just started his retirement early.

20 years experience for new tech

By ebunga • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I remember back in 1997 seeing countless job postings that needed 20+ years of Cisco experience, and have seen the same sort of insanity repeated with every new tech fad that comes along. Why would the biggest tech fad of all be any different?

Yeah, I Noped Out

By Sarusa • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

The company I was working for went out of business in March because stupid spending crap (like AI!).

I took a look at the state of the software industry and am just horrified. There’s just no room for someone who can just engineer solutions, knows about resource constraints (like disk and RAM and bandwidth - this may be hard to believe but those are not infinite!), and knows that what LLM coding produces is fast, fragile, insecure solutions with massive technical debt. I have played around it with (know the enemy or possible tool) and saw this at the last place! We had a junior guy spend six months trying to vibe code a network utility app that would have been very useful. ‘Oh let me just have Claude do it!’ Of course the VP was all over that s#$% and the guy’s only ‘job’ at that point was coaxing Claude to make the app.

Except… every time he had a candidate it was broken. So he’d go back and tell Claude to fix it. And it would. And it would break two other things. And since this guy has no idea what the code Claude wrote does he can’t just go in and fix things himself, he has to round trip. So I told him about unit tests… and he had Claude generate the unit tests [lawl]. Which are just abysmally bad. So every iteration was still broken. When the company went under he was still trying to make it work. This whole generation joining the industry is just lost. Most of them will be unable to do anything except produce slop. But in the mean time they sure look cheaper than us guys with the institutional knowledge.

So I said eff that, I don’t want to work in this industry any more. I am still doing consulting here and there, hand picked, for sane stuff like embedded firmware which is (for now) mostly free of slop code. But basically I just retired way early, will see where the dust settles. And let me tell you it is GLORIOUS. I have never been busier than I am now when every day is free, I can (and do) work on all my spare projects as I want, and I don’t have mentally deficient sociopath executives to deal with, and no slop. So congrats, AI, you beat me.

Re:Yeah, I Noped Out

By Sarusa • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Oh yeah, sorry to reply to my own post, but I could have written that network app he spent six months trying to do with Claude in a week (leaving plenty of room) - give another week (not full time) for testing and feedback and changes and it’s totally done in two weeks, one actual week of work at the outside. Woulda cost way less and it would be secure, upgradable, and maintainable. But we can’t have nice things in the hellscape of 202x.

Re:comms

By Parsiuk • Score: 4, Informative Thread
There’s much more than just writing the promp here. I believe knowing how to use external tools, MCP servers, skills, md-files, etc. and how to integrate agents into your workflow goes a long way these days. It’s not about “vibecoding”, it’s about getting sh*t done faster.

Re:comms

By outsider007 • Score: 4, Informative Thread

I believe knowing how to use external tools, MCP servers, skills, md-files, etc. and how to integrate agents into your workflow goes a long way these days.

I feel like nowadays you can just go: “Claude, add a mcp-server”. Or “Claude, add a skill to do so and so”

US-Iran Peace Agreement Prompts Stock Rally, Leaves Some Investors Skeptical and Questions on Speed of Resuming Oil Production

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“Asian stocks rallied Monday while oil prices tumbled,” reports CNBC, “after the U.S. and Iran agreed to a peace deal aimed at ending nearly four months of conflict…”
The strongest reaction was seen in energy markets. U.S. crude oil futures for July delivery were down 4.77% to $80.83 per barrel by 8:27 p.m. ET. Brent futures, the international benchmark, for August delivery traded about 4% lower to $83.77 per barrel. Asian equities surged. South Korea’s Kospi jumped 5.1%, Japan’s Nikkei 225 climbed 3.6%, and the broader Topix advanced 2.6%… The U.S. dollar index weakened 0.32% to 99.483, while the yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note fell 5 basis points to 4.423%, suggesting that investors were dialing back inflation concerns on easing energy prices. “The most immediate implication is a repricing of the inflation risk premium that markets have been carrying since the Strait closed,” said Billy Leung, investment strategist at Global X ETFs…

Besides safe-haven Treasurys, gold also rose. “Gold is the interesting outlier here,” Leung said. “In a clean risk-on trade, gold should be selling off as the geopolitical premium unwinds, but it is holding bid around $4,300, which tells you the market is not fully trusting the deal yet.” Spot gold prices were up almost 2% at $4,302.19 per ounce. That skepticism reflects lingering uncertainty around the agreement, which remains unsigned and subject to implementation risks. [Josh Gilbert, lead Asia Pacific analyst at trading platform eToro] cautioned that “the deal isn’t actually signed until June 19th, the details are still thin, and this conflict has shown more than once that headlines can turn on a dime.”

Analysts at Commonwealth Bank of Australia also stressed that the oil outlook hinges on how quickly shipping and production can normalize. Vivek Dhar, head of commodities and sustainability research at CBA, expects Brent to fall to around $80 a barrel by year-end, assuming the Strait remains open and exports recover. However, he warned that damage to refining infrastructure, the presence of sea mines and uncertainty over tanker traffic could slow the return to normal operations. Even so, he said markets are likely to take comfort from the prospect that oil flows need only recover to around 60%-70% of pre-war levels to restore expectations of a global supply surplus.

For investors, the biggest implication will likely be what cheaper energy means for inflation and central banks. Lower oil prices ease pressure on households and businesses while reducing the risk of a broader inflation resurgence just as major central banks enter a busy week of policy meetings.
UPDATE: “A US official is rejecting Iran’s assertion that it will receive billions of dollars in frozen funds before a planned 60-day negotiating period begins following Friday’s signing of an agreement,” reports CNN:
The pushback came after Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, said the next phase of talks would depend on Washington first fulfilling several obligations, including releasing Iranian funds frozen abroad. The differing accounts underscore a significant gap between how the United States and Iran are describing what must happen before the next round of negotiations can move forward.

Glorious success!

By fuzzyfuzzyfungus • Score: 5, Funny Thread
Not only do we have the concept of a plan for negotiations for a peace agreement; the current level of disagreement between the agreeing parties suggests that we actually have at least three distinct concepts of a plan for negotiations for a peace agreement! Where a lesser leader might myopically interpret having a single agreed-upon set of terms as essential to a treaty; Great Leader understands that American Greatness requires more.

What deal

By phantomfive • Score: 5, Informative Thread
At this point, they haven’t even agreed on what they’ve agreed on.

Netanyahu is trying to drag America

By rsilvergun • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
Into a forever War with Iran. That would be very advantageous to his political party. And it would let him grab a shitload of land in the meantime. Some of which could be given to members of the current American administration as a reward.

The problem with that is it requires boots on the ground and it almost certainly will require a draft. Iran is too large and American birth rates are too low to supply enough cannon fodder through a volunteer army. The Republican party has not consolidated its power enough and it hasn’t got enough voter suppression in place yet that they can just do what Russia does and force people to the front lines.

I suspect Israel will try to do a few more strikes and get a few more hand slaps from the Trump administration. As long as I ran doesn’t take the bait and so far they haven’t been then they’ve won. They now have control of the strait of Hormuz and with it they can shut down 20% of the global economy anytime they want. That’s way more valuable than a nuclear weapon.

The great negotiator has basically given Iran everything and got nothing. All this because his base desperately needed him to show up a black man…

Meanwhile inflation is 4.2% and even with the War ending it’s going to go up more. Despite that Trump is still pulling in 37%.

who’s the stooge?

By unixisc • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Then they need to look up what “stooge” means. Had Trump been the stooge of Netanyahu, then by now, the State Department would already have greenlighted the annexation of Judea and Samaria, and given a carte blanche for Israel to do anything it wanted to in Iran

The fact that Israel hasn’t been able to do a lot of things that it wanted shows that it’s Trump calling the shots, not Bibi

What about neither?

By rsilvergun • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
So Trump isn’t calling any shots because Trump is an 80 year old man who falls asleep during cabinet meetings.

There are limits to what netanyahu can get away with. But that is not the same as Trump calling shots. Netanyahu has continuously ignored Trump and attacked Lebanon and Iran. They have kept the fighting going for some time when it could have stopped.

If anyone is calling the shots here it’s Iran. They control 20% of the global economy because they control the straight. America does not have the troops for a serious war with Iran and dropping bombs was never going to get us regime change. We would need to do a draft and put boots on the ground and that isn’t politically feasible for trump. At least not yet.

I suspect Trump was hoping for a large scale terrorist attack and Iran didn’t take the bait. Trump had significantly cut resources to American to American anti-terrorism right before starting a war with the nation known to use proxies and put a 22-year-old kid in charge of the largest American anti-terrorism department. So I think it’s safe to say he was up to something. A second 911 could have gotten him a blank check to do whatever he wanted in Iran. But again they didn’t take the bait

Workers Spend As Much Time ‘Botsitting’ AI As Producing Useful Work, Survey Finds

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“As the use of artificial intelligence spreads across companies worldwide, it is relieving workers of tedious old chores but creating new ones,” reports the Los Angeles Times.

“Most people don’t realize the amount of time that they’re spending working on the tools to get the time savings that they’re professing,” said Paul Leonardi, Duca Family professor of technology management at UC Santa Barbara.”
Leonardi is one of the co-authors of the new study published by the Work AI Institute, whose contributors include academics from Stanford University and UC Berkeley. The institute is sponsored by AI company Glean… The research surveyed 6,000 digital workers across the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia between December and January. The report found that we are in a phase of significant personal productivity gains, but few companies are translating these gains into revenue and business growth. While 75% of individuals reported a boost in productivity, only 13% of the organizations say they have seen significant business gains as a result of AI adoption, the survey found…

The reason the boost in productivity sometimes leads to waste, Leonardi said, is the time people spend correcting the bot’s work and gathering the right files, documentation, and tacit knowledge required for it to produce high-quality output. “It’s pretty striking the amount of time and effort people are spending,” Leonardi said. Most employees now spend over six hours a week of their workday babysitting their work chatbots, the survey said. There is a “thick, mostly invisible layer of human labor holding the whole thing together,” the report said. The survey found that for every hour a worker spends getting useful output from AI, they spend roughly another hour making it usable. Of the total time workers spend interacting with AI each week, 37% goes to botsitting, 36% to actually using the tool to produce work.

Part of the reason so much time disappears into botsitting is how often the tools fall short: Workers report that more than a third of AI sessions fail outright, requiring a full restart or substantial rework. Paradoxically, as more workers hand over bigger parts of their jobs to AI, they are offloading personal judgment and responsibilities to the bots. The survey found 41% of workers say they sometimes deliver AI-generated work they couldn’t explain if asked… “I think what’s happening with a lot of these Gen AI tools right now is we’re essentially expecting individual contributors to act as managers,” Leonardi said. “They’re just managing these AI tools, AI agents, and we’re expecting that they’ll be able to produce way more, but we’re not taking into account all of the work that actually goes into managing.”

This problem isn’t likely to go away.

Re:Not bot sitting

By Anonymous Coward • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

That would be true if the technology followed the fabled narrative that the epstein island class want it to.

It actually doesn’t work like that though, and no amount of Peter Thiel building a device to justify his childish paranoia will change the fact that inference is not deduction. The false positives will become too hard to hide soon… and when that happens the narrative is going to be pretty hard to control.

It’s entirely possible that the class of people they are trying to distract and keep in denial is themselves. They don’t build the tech, and they don’t run it. They just have stories about how it works.

Starting with the assumption that AI is faster

By thesjaakspoiler • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

and then I always realize afterwards that I did spent a lot of time making it actually work.
Not to talk about the nasty bugs and the lack of error handling.

Re:Starting with the assumption that AI is faster

By Tony Isaac • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Exactly. Executives are *so* sure that AI is 5x to 10x faster, that any measurements to the contrary are disbelieved.

After all, these executives have *all* seen how well Claude can spit out a PowerPoint that looks great, they think it *must* be just as good at coding! Never mind that those PowerPoints they just generated, are usually not effective at communicating their points because they have so much fluff that doesn’t matter. And never mind that if the PowerPoint is wrong in some small way, it doesn’t actually matter, while with code, you can have disastrous consequences for a small error.

“tedious old chores”

By karmawarrior • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

> it is relieving workers of tedious old chores but creating new ones

If it were relieving workers of tedious old chores, it’d probably be more popular.

From what I can see it’s doing the fun parts and leaving the shit parts - us checking it did it correctly - to us.

I went into programming because I enjoyed programming. I would imagine that’s true of 99% of programmers. You know what’s boring? Checking the code afterwards.

Maybe if the genAI companies found ways to use their technology to automate actual chores, like washing up, cleaning the house, or even (not always!) doing the cooking when we come home exhausted, and driving when our idiot bosses force us to do work at an office, instead of programming, making “art”, and stealing shit and rewriting it 100 different ways, it’d be more popular and actually a net positive for the world. People might even spend money on it!

If genAI is truly as intelligent as its addicts claim, that ought to be easy, right?

Definitely #2

By Somervillain • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
Of your options, if #1 was the correct answer, we’d see a gap between those who have experience and mastery and those who don’t. Sure…some suck at AI…but not everyone would…unless it was the AI that sucked. Like all tools/frameworks…if they’re valuable, those who embrace it well reap the benefits, outpacing those who don’t. A great example was cloud or big data. Startups came out of nowhere to overtake established players by leveraging these technologies.

To date, there’s no AI success story, outside of pick and shovel vendors. No startup has leveraged AI to disrupt an existing market and become a household name. Netflix famously leveraged the internet to disrupt Blockbuster’s stranglehold on home movies....first with DVD by mail and then with streaming. Salesforce, love them or hate them, disrupted many established players.

If AI ACTUALLY improved productivity, smaller companies would come out of nowhere and eat the lunch of more established players by out-innovating them. Some obvious examples are entertainment. Some game studio from some surprising location would come out with AMAZING AAA games at twice the speed and half the cost. Various business platforms would take on the many fat targets: Microsoft, SAP, Oracle, etc…leveraging AI to out-innovate larger competitors.

You and I may suck at AI and improve with experience…but someone out there is waaaay ahead of us....waaaay more gifted and would theoretically be leveraging AI to build massive projects with tiny teams. But for now, the only people making money are selling tools or computer chips or building data centers for this circular AI economic bubble.

Microsoft Updates Six Windows Apps. ‘Photos’ Gets Watermarks for Copilot Images (Off by Default)

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Microsoft dropped “massive” updates for six stock Windows apps, reports the “Microsoft enthusiast” site Neowin.

Here’s some of their more interesting highlights for Clock, Media Player, Calculator, Voice Recorder, Photos, and Paint:

The Photos app (version 2026.11060.2004.0):

Calculator (version 11.2605.9.0):

The Clock app (version 11.2605.9.0):

Media Player (version 11.2605.14.0).


“massive”

By TheMiddleRoad • Score: 5, Funny Thread
“massive” my “assive”.

UK Scientists See Little Evidence for Claims Smartphones Are Rewiring Kids’ Brains

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
UK’s Members of Parliament (MP) were “looking for proof that smartphones and social media are rotting children’s brains,” writes The Register — but they got “a less satisfying answer from neuroscientists on Wednesday: nobody can really prove it.”
Appearing before the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee this week, three researchers spent much of the session explaining that concern and evidence are not quite the same thing. Asked what evidence exists on the impact of digital devices on infants and young children, Professor Denis Mareschal, director of the Centre for Brain and Cognitive Development at Birkbeck, replied: “There is very little, if any, causal research in the early years. Almost everything is correlational.”

MPs kept coming back to the question — and the experts kept coming back to the same answer. When questioned about social media’s impact on adolescents, Professor Sarah-Jayne Blakemore of the University of Cambridge was equally cautious. “What evidence do we have of the impact of digital devices or social media on the adolescent brain?” she asked. “Almost nothing. There are a few small studies, but they haven’t been replicated, and they’re purely correlational....”

MPs also wanted to know whether neuroscience could settle one of the liveliest arguments in the debate: how old a child should be before they’re allowed onto social media. “What neuroscience can’t do is pinpoint a precise age,” Blakemore said. “The individual differences in brain development are vast....” If there was a takeaway from the hearing, it was that concern about digital childhood is running well ahead of the evidence needed to settle the argument.

Asked and…(wait for it)…answered.

By geekmux • Score: 5, Funny Thread

“What evidence do we have of the impact of digital devices or social media on the adolescent brain?”

* stare-buffering *

* stare-buffering *

* stare-buffering *

(GenZ) “Wait..wut?”

Credit where due.

By PseudoThink • Score: 4, Funny Thread

The researchers would like to thank Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, and Netflix for their generous support and funding.

I am pissed off at seeing

By rsilvergun • Score: 3 Thread
The damage from covid being blamed on cell phones.

We had a period of 4 years during which everything in a kid’s life got completely upended and we wonder why we’re having problems with academics.

There’s also a nasty little bit of business that we don’t think or talk about. We spent the last 45 years automating every blue collar job we possibly could. Massive amounts of factory automation. And what we couldn’t automate which was about 30%, we either shipped it overseas or we brought in cheap labor for it.

This means if you aren’t cut out for college you don’t really have a lot of options. Yeah everyone will talk about how much money you can make in Blue collar but the thing is those jobs are brutal on your body and you can really only do them until you’re late 30s or early 40s at best. You can of course find the occasional genetic freak that can just keep going, I’ve known some. They are genetic freaks and they are not the norm. Meaning that you’re going to be killing yourself for two decades and then suddenly have a large drop in your pay.

And that’s best case scenario if you’re not somebody who can hack one of those brutal jobs like working on an oil rig or diesel mechanic and you’re not one of the handful of people that blenders into one of the really sweet gigs that are few and far between like the guys who maintain elevators or large industrial cooling and heating systems then they’re just isn’t anything for you.

So we’ve been taking those kids and basically forcing them to stay in school longer and longer because we just don’t have anything to do with them and if nothing else while they’re in school we don’t have to face facts that there aren’t any jobs for them.

What this means is that even though class sizes keep going up per capita spending on students is also going up. Those two things shouldn’t be compatible in theory if you’re spending more on each individual student your class sizes should be shrinking but my kid when they graduated high school had 45 students in their math class. Some of the kids had the stand in the back because there weren’t enough chairs for fucksake.

You end up having to spend a lot more money because you have all these kids that normally would be on their way to trade schools but we just don’t need them to do that work. I mean we could be fixing our infrastructure and rapidly switching the wind and solar power but fuck that. Elon Musk needs to be the first trillionaire because he invented the electric car and the rocket.

None of this is sustainable and the Epstein class knows it so they’re moving to shut down elections and put a dictator in charge. And we are well on our way to letting them do that because fuck those trans kids in sports or whatever the fuck we’re currently panicking about instead of anything that actually fucking matters. Because we didn’t learn what a moral panic was when motherfucking He-Man was being attacked by Evangelical rapist assholes…

Re:Utter Shit

By Bahbus • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

And as Professor Denis Mareschal said, these are all correlational, not causational. Smartphones do not *cause* any of that, otherwise they wouldn’t even need the studies because millions, if not billions, would be affected - and there are plenty of smartphone users who don’t have any of those issues. It’s most likely the other way around, people with those issues are more likely to spend more time on their smartphones, which might even feedback into their issue - but the base issue was not caused by a smartphone.

Crime is linked to lower education, but lower education does not *cause* crime nor does increasing education completely eliminate crime. Taking away the smartphones won’t fix people’s BMI or sleep troubles, it won’t bring back their executive functions, and it won’t force people outside or to be better at socializing. People’s screen time will go down as their underlying issues are solved.

Re:Credit where due.

By Valgrus Thunderaxe • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
This is the new Satanic Panic. It’ll look as silly in 20 as the hysteria over Ozzy and D&D.

As ‘Disclosure Day’ Premieres, Steven Spielberg Says He Believes Aliens Really Have Visited Earth

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Steven Spielberg grants that his 1977 UFO film Close Encounters was “speculative,” writes the Associated Press, but "Disclosure Day, he insists, is the real deal.”
“It’s my first film that will be considered science fiction that I do not consider to be science fiction,” Spielberg said in a recent interview. “It’s much more reflective of the world as it is evolving and discoveries that are being made as we speak.” Spielberg, at 79, is trying to revive and reconsider the alien wonder that’s long lingered in his mind, from “E.T.” to “War of the Worlds.” “Disclosure Day,” Spielberg’s first summer movie in a decade, is already being hailed as one of his best in years. But this time, Spielberg is testing whether he can conjure some of his trademark movie magic less with imagination than with conviction. “I’ve been a believer since I made ‘Close Encounters’ 50 years ago,” Spielberg says. “But I would always say: Until I’ve seen a UAP or a UFO with my own eyes, I’m not going to categorically state that life from out there has come here. But I’ve changed that,” he adds. “I’m now willing to change my mind because of the circumstantial evidence which is overwhelming…”

Spielberg, having long followed reports of alleged alien encounters, was inspired by the 2023 House Subcommittee on National Security hearing on UAPs: Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena. Among the witnesses was whistleblower and former Air Force intelligence officer David Grusch, who testified that the government concealed a program investigating UAPs. The Pentagon then denied it… Those 2023 testimonies and others so fueled Spielberg that he produced a 50-page treatment on what would become “Disclosure Day.” During the writing process with Koepp, he texted him more notes, he says, “than I’ve ever sent to anyone in my life.”

“There was a period in there where I believe he re-read the script every single day for a year,” Koepp says. “We’d be in different time zones and I would wake up to 30 or 35 texts from his most current reading of the script. When the leader of the project has that level of commitment, it tends to bring along everyone. You up your game.”
The article calls it “a grand bookend for one of the most cosmically-minded moviemakers of our time.” But the man who filmed some of the world’s first summer blockbusters also shared his thoughts on the future of movies. “Even though the numbers are still not pre-COVID level numbers for any films being released now, it’s more robust than it has been for many years. The audience gives me belief that people still want to congregate in a dark space in the company of strangers to share an experience of a film made by storytellers. And that gives me faith to continue making films.”

Rolling Stone wrote that "There’s a lot to love in Disclosure Day.” Though they also offer this pithy summary of its plot. “Remember when Steven Spielberg digitally replaced the guns in the hands of government agents for the 20th anniversary of E.T., then expressed regret about the decision? Imagine that he not only restored the weapons but crafted an entire two-and-a-half-hour feature around that one sequence as a mea culpa. That’s Disclosure Day.”
The filmmaker may be staging a pulpy campaign with this sci-fi throwback, but he sincerely seems to believe the truth is out there — and will set us free… [W]hile the quality of his output can vary wildly when you look at the big picture of his career, there’s still a baseline of love — for filmmaking, for storytelling through images, for giving people an experience that pushes emotional buttons and taps adrenal glands — that gives his work a sense of vitality and displays the sensibility of an artist at work…

There’s also a weird full-circle feel to it, and not just because he’s returning to the fertile ground of Close Encounters and his other science fiction spectacles. You can see traces of everything from Duel to Minority Report show up, to the point where this almost doubles as a career retrospective in miniature… Yes, Spielberg does believe that we are not the only game running in the cosmos. But he also believes that our better angels have not left the building, and that movies still have the power to communally blow minds and open hearts.
The Associated Press calls it “a grand bookend for one of the most cosmically-minded moviemakers of our time” and “a distant answer to the final notes of Close Encounters.”

K, but no… no

By jhoegl • Score: 3 Thread
Odd that they keep saying “we will release” and never do.
Odd that people keep putting up video that constantly gets debunked. Not one valid “Alien UFO” has come up.
Everything related to this is fake.
And it is likely “alien life” has visited earth via meteoroids/asteroids/space debris as it has been proven and shown life will survive in space.
But intelligence of alien origin visiting us? No… no…
People now use “Alien” as a way to discount or disparage peoples actual contributions to humanity. Pyramids, computers, stealth tech, radar, etc. It seems more a lack of understanding of these things and a lack of care to understand them than it is anything else.

Disclosure!

By Randseed • Score: 3 Thread
Soon we will discover that “covfefe” is the Grey’s greeting that is the equivalent of Vulcan’s “life long and prosper.”

Everything we know about physics

By RightwingNutjob • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

says ftl isn’t a thing and the answer to Fermi’s paradox is that everyone is out there but too far away to hear.

Alienz! would imply necessarily that there is quite a bit about the way of things that we don’t even know that we don’t know.

Possibly it is discoverable in the foreseeable future or just as possibly it requires an inordinate amount of dumb luck to stumble on the conditions of time and place in space where such a discovery (if it even exists) is possible.

Whole lot of very big ifs. Not a whole lot of reason to just believe the way one might just believe that a better chatbot is just around the corner or a vaccine for the common cold is sitting in a test tube somewhere just waiting to be tested and commercialized.

The latter extrapolates within the known unknowns. The former is predicated on the existence of specific unknown unknowns.

No reason to keep it secret

By gurps_npc • Score: 3 Thread

Keeping aliens secret is political suicide. People do not trust the government already, you just declare yourself to be an untrustworthy liar - worse than Trump (who if we were keeping aliens secret would immediately tweet it out).

The claim is we do this to.... prevent panic?????

Mankind has never ‘panicked’. Not the way this stupid conspiracy myth implies. We created nuclear weapons and there was no panic. We created and used nasty poison gas and nobody panicked.

You know what get people in the street and calling for the government to resign?
Slavery (Sparticus, Civil War, etc.)
Preventing women from Voting (multiple times in multiple countries)
Kicking black women off a bus because she took a seat
Treating civilians so badly they set themselves on fire (Jasmine Revolution)

While I am sure a few morons will panic on hearing aliens exist, but no one cares when a few MORE lunatics buy all the guns and dig a bunker.

Re:For real or for the marketing?

By Powercntrl • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Most referenced is Star Trek from the 1960s. how much of that is real now in some form or another?

Transporters? Nope.
FTL space travel? Nope.
Post-scarcity society where people work to better themselves rather than in the pursuit of personal profit? Definitely nope.
Food replicators? Nope.
Energy-based weapons? Mostly still not practical, and the real-world versions (lasers, masers) predate Star Trek.
Androids? We’re pretty close.
VR addiction? Has been known to happen. If extended to addiction to any technology in general (smartphone addiction, doomscrolling, etc.), widely common.
People falling in love with AI characters? Rare, but does happen.

Will Meta’s $14 Billion Bet on AI Ever Pay Off?

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“A year after spending over $14 billion to bring in Alexandr Wang and a group of his top Scale AI engineers to revamp its artificial intelligence efforts, Meta is at least back on the map in AI,” reports CNBC, “though it’s still far behind OpenAI, Anthropic and Google in the market.”
Wang’s big accomplishment was the delivery of the Muse Spark AI model in April, marking Meta’s first jump into proprietary foundation models and away from a strict adherence to open source, or open weight as it’s more commonly called in AI… “Meta needs to provide more proof points of both adoption and commercialization,” said Ralph Schackart, an analyst at William Blair who recommends buying the stock. “Investors are looking for Meta to monetize a new AI-first product, beyond the substantial positive impact AI is having on enhancing the advertising models.” Wall Street, at least so far, is unimpressed. Meta’s stock is down 18% over the past 12 months, the worst performer in the megacap group, along with Microsoft, which has its own challenges in AI. That’s even after Meta reported 33% revenue growth in the first quarter, the fastest rate of expansion for any period since 2021.

For Meta, the problem started with what some industry experts called, in hindsight at least, a strategic blunder. The company jumped into AI with its Llama family of models, offering an open-source approach that allowed developers to freely tinker, while the other big model makers charged for access. In April of last year, Meta’s release of Llama 4 fell flat, failing to captivate developers and leading Zuckerberg to reconsider his company’s approach to AI development… Since the release of Muse Spark, Meta has unveiled new AI and business-related subscription plans as part of an effort to expand its business beyond online ads. Historically, it hasn’t worked. Meta still counts on ads for 98% of revenue. Schackart said he wants to see “tangible evidence of a growing list of new, AI-first products created by Muse Spark, even if monetization lags.” He said that’s “what investors are looking for.”

No matter how good Wang’s model may be, Zuckerberg has a high hill to climb with developers coming off the Llama debacle. “I think the AI community largely ignores Meta at this point,” said Rob May, CEO of the startup Neurometric, which works in the realm of token engineering.... Krish Subramanian, the CEO of consulting firm KOI AI and former product head at IBM Consulting, said developers are more excited about Google’s AI models than what Meta is offering. The appeal of Llama was that it specifically targeted developers wanting open-weight alternative models, while with Muse Spark, Meta has made little effort in that direction, he said. “The lack of developer trust will come back to hit them if they don’t focus on third-party developers,” Subramanian said, noting that it took years for Microsoft to regain trust from open-source coders during the early days of Azure. “To just focus on a walled-garden kind of an ecosystem and ad revenue as the main source of income, they probably will never become the big player,” he said.

A Meta spokesperson pointed to Wang’s recent comments about the company’s continued support for the open-source ecosystem, and said Meta still plans to offer outside developers access to Muse Spark’s underlying technology via an API, as it previously announced. “We’re already testing with some early partners, and look forward to releasing it this month,” the spokesperson said.
“That Zuckerberg’s metaverse and virtual reality ambitions have generated over $80 billion in total losses since late 2020 makes the AI pitch a tougher sell,” the article points out, citing this observation from Howard Yu, business professor at Switzerland’s International Institute for Management Development.

“He’s running out of the space for his credibility to last,” Yu said. “I think the virtual reality foray may have burned up a lot of his goodwill in front of investors.”

Never held accountable

By jacks smirking reven • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

The fact Zuckerberg is still at the head of this company is an indictment against our economy, our culture and the entire problem people have with the wealthy: once you are wealthy you can fuckup seemingly an infinite number of times and not suffer any consequences.

First the general social issues with Facebook with it’s corrosive algorithms. That should have sunk him. Then sinking how many billions into the metaverse, so much so that you renamed the company? Could any of us make that scale of mistake and not only keep our job but even make more money?

And now this, another failed billion dollar loss and even if he is removed from the CEO role he’ll get a multi million exit package, keep all the stock, remain on the board and probably be able to swing more venture capital to new companies.

I don’t support what Luigi Mangione did by any stretch but I also find it incredulous when people act perplexed about people who do support his action and like, when you see shit like this…

AI investments may not be meant to “pay off”

By ffkom • Score: 3 Thread
Of course those currently investing other people’s money into AI infrastructure cannot say that part out loud just yet, but there may be no intention to make AI investments “profitable” in the classical sense. If you are convinced that AI will perform thinking better and cheaper than humans, and Robots will perform physical work better and cheaper than humans, then trying to collect money from “customers” becomes obsolete at some point. As soon as the army of robots can produce what their owners need, including more robots, there is no reason to pay back any original investors, or to try to become “profitable”.

We have already seen how normal “consumers” have become irrelevant as customers, we have seen how “retail brokerage” customers have become irrelevant as “investors”, and the next stage has already begun, where the world economy is shaped to address the needs of AI/robots, not the needs of puny humans.

Has Meta ever done anything that paid off?

By thecombatwombat • Score: 3 Thread

I don’t mean this as an easy dunk, I really want to know if anyone can think of any counterpoints. I mean they have to exist right?

It really seems to me that Meta, and by extension Zuck, are the worst tech company and CEO of all time, propped up by a money machine they arguably fell into by accident.

But think about it, their only successes since Facebook itself, are just having cash first and buying their competitors.

Otherwise:
- their mobile efforts were basically a failure, but they bought Instagram
- their “pivot to video” was a money losing joke
- within that, remember when they wanted to be Twitch? That was a thing for a while.
- their messaging never really succeeded despite basically starting with the market cornered, but they bought WhatsApp
- where’s Farmville today? they were supposed to become an app platform. That was a thing.
- they were going to be the world’s ISP for a while, seriously, does anyone even remember that? Starlink broke them.
- and of course, The Metaverse is arguably the single biggest failure any big tech company has ever done

So seriously, am I missing any? Like Google is similar, but they birthed Chrome, gmail, Android, there are big wins among their failures. Meta . . . only misses.

Even if there are AI winners, it’s just really difficult to imagine Zuck ultimately doing anything other than taking billions from his ad business and setting them on fire. But maybe the next $100 billion they burn will pay off, it kind of feels like they have to succeed eventually.

Re:Never held accountable

By SoftwareArtist • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

When someone has created a successful product, they usually think it’s because they’re smarter than other people, and they’re usually wrong.

Facebook is the only really successful product Zuckerberg has ever created. It succeeded because he was in the right place at the right time, and that doesn’t happen very often. All of Meta’s other major products are things they bought instead of building themselves. His attempts to build other things from scratch have mostly failed.

He decided “the metaverse” was the future of computing, just as everyone else was embracing AI as the future of computing. If he weren’t the founder and single largest shareholder, that would have gotten him fired.

Ironically, Quest is actually the most popular platform for VR gaming. If he’d been content just to create a gaming platform, it would be considered a success. Instead he blew $80 billion trying to turn it into the future of computing, making it a massive failure.

Re:No

By allo • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Time is on their side, if they survive for long enough.

Hardware gets better. Models still get smaller. Inference gets optimized. Overall the cost per token (measure it how you want, dollar, electricity, compute, they are all proportional) is going down. The cost the usual customer who wants to ask the AI for a cake recipe is willing to pay stays the same and also the cost the high-paying customers (science, etc.) are willing to pay stays the same when the model quality keeps increasing at the current pace.

So currently they are not competing for dollars per token, but for building a customer base, which will pay off the investment later when it becomes easier to amortize model training. That’s a bet that can fail for some companies, but can be subsided for others (like GAFAM). The big question is what happens with OpenAI and Anthropic. OpenAI will be bought by Microsoft before they fail (Microsoft already announced such things). For Anthropic it isn’t that clear, but on the other hand they are currently in a good position not to fail. I would also not bet against OpenAI, if they don’t do something stupid.

The third thing is API integration. You already names the per-token pricing schemes. While the “Once per week a cake recipe” customer paying $20 is fine, the website paying $20,000 per week in API tokens is more important to keep as customer. The website owner on the other hand is best kept by providing them a free or cheap plan for asking for cake recipes so they don’t test the competition’s model.

Vintage AMD R600 Graphics Driver Sees Code Cleanups Thanks To GitHub Copilot

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Phoronix reports:
The AMD R600 Gallium3D driver saw 59 commits [last] Sunday to Mesa 26.2. Making this code restructuring and code cleaning all the more notable is that the improvements to this old AMD Radeon graphics driver was done in part by GitHub Copilot.

Gert Wollny has been among the few open-source developers left working on the AMD R600g driver that covers from the Radeon HD 2000 series through Radeon HD 6000 series graphics cards… [T]he old open-source GPU driver support is being assisted by AI long after the upstream vendor has stopped working on this driver — the Radeon HD 2000 “R600” series launched in 2007.

AI has no value my ass!!!

By williamyf • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Linus Torvalds, Greg H-K and the Mozilla team are singign the praises on AI for software maintenance. And now a 19 year old FOSS grapghics driver is still getting software improvements thanks to AI!

And yet some zealots are saying that AI has no use whatsoever…

You know what? More than one thing can be true at once.

Yes, is true that AI is not a panacea that will replace every single coder/white collar job.

Yes, is true that judiciously used, AI can be extremely useful for many task inside many a job description, including sw development.

The world is not black and white, or even shades of gray, at least for an electronics engineer like me is not only in technocolor, but in even more wavelenghts, and polarized horizontally, vertically and elliptically to boot :-P

Re:Who’s running this hardware

By leonbev • Score: 4, Informative Thread

If you’re not gaming, those old Radeon HD graphics cards are perfectly functional as a basic display adapter. You really don’t need more than that if you’re spending all your time in Firefox doing basic web browsing, office work, and watching stuff on the Tube sites.

So the newest GPUs run LLMs instead of graphics…

By ffkom • Score: 3 Thread
… while the people interested in better graphics cannot afford to buy a newer GPU to do so, because the newer GPUs are busy improving the driver for their old GPUs. What an irony!

How America’s Energy Department is Building a National Platform for Doing Science with AI

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
America’s Energy Department “wants to build a single national platform for doing science with AI,” reports Communications of the ACM:
It is called the Genesis Mission, and the idea is to connect the country’s 17 national laboratories, their supercomputers, scientific datasets, and a growing layer of AI models and agents into one system researchers can access. The DOE has taken to calling it ‘a national operating system for science.’ That means treating compute, data, and AI models the way the country treats power lines and highways, as shared national plumbing everyone else builds on top of.

If it works, Genesis will change how scientific work gets organized, checked, and scaled, with AI helping run the whole pipeline from hypothesis to simulation to experiment and back. The pitch is that this is better understood as infrastructure policy than as another research program. Genesis is now moving from announcement into execution. President Trump signed the executive order launching it in November 2025. This past February, the DOE published 26 science and technology challenges for the program, and in March it opened a $294-million call for research teams in fields like nuclear energy, quantum information science, semiconductors, and biotechnology.

The program is also beginning to reach beyond U.S. borders. In June 2026, Japan moved to become Genesis’s first international partner. The two governments plan to invest a combined $1 billion over five years, with Japan contributing $500 million toward joint work in quantum technology, nuclear fusion, and biotechnology. The stated goal is staying ahead of China in the fields where AI is advancing fastest. The open question is whether a federated platform this big can actually work, or whether it ends up as one more expensive coordination exercise.

the problem with a single AI platform

By david.emery • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

“When everyone is thinking alike, no one is thinking.”
https://quoteinvestigator.com/…

Explanation for Republicans.

By gurps_npc • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

1) Science works.
2) Republicans hate government science, so they cut funding for it.
3) Democrats realize points 1 and 2 so they realize they have to get sneaky: Democrats take parts of the government the Republicans like and get THEM to fund science.

Which is why the Department of Energy is doing this rather than one of the several actual Science based agencies (for example: Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer)

Note, we used to do this with the military all the time. The GOP refused to fund any computer technology, but they gave a crap ton of money to the Department for Defense. Which is why the internet was created by DARPA.

Man those republicans were easy to fool!

Oh no, we are not doing science, this is all about guns and bombs and shields. Yeah, this is not economic stuff, it is essential MILITARY defense.

This will be very effective

By Sloppy • Score: 4, Funny Thread

One of the problems America currently faces, is that we’re still getting far too much science done, it’s not costing us enough money, and the money it does cost is being wasted on paying the salaries of scientists instead of personally paying whoever contracts to kick back the most to political appointees.

I believe this will help solve all three problems.

Re:This will be very effective

By gtall • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

No, it won’t. It is merely a way of getting government to own all the science in the country so that only “approved” science gets funded. You can read that as “Christian science”.

Grift

By jythie • Score: 3 Thread

Researchers within the DoE (and pretty much everywhere else) have been using machine learning in their work for decades. This kinda sounds more like a handout to various companies and reducing the number of tools researchers have access to.

Blizzard Sues To Take Down Another Private World of Warcraft Server, Project Ascension

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“Blizzard Entertainment is continuing its crusade against private World of Warcraft servers,” reports the gaming news site Aftermath:
The company filed a new lawsuit on Friday in a California court against the makers of Project Ascension, alleging copyright infringement, Digital Millennium Copyright Act violations, and other claims. Blizzard Entertainment claims that Project Ascension is a “lucrative way to exploit and profit from the popularity of the WoW game experience,” according to the complaint, obtained by Aftermath. Blizzard Entertainment’s lawyers say in the complaint that Project Ascension purports to have “over a million players.” Lawyers write that the developers have “distributed (and are continuing to distribute) millions of pirated copies of Blizzard’s copyrighted WoW game software.”

They also allege that Project Ascension‘s servers are hosted on Russian “bulletproof” servers with Aeza Group, a company that was sanctioned in 2025 “for its role in supporting cybercriminal activity targeting victims in the United States and around the world,” per a U.S. Department of Treasury press releaseProject Ascension lets players combine pieces of World of Warcraft‘s different classes to build unique characters. It’s free-to-play, but players can purchase in-game currency, Donation Points, to buy things in-game, such as cosmetics and experience boosts. Blizzard Entertainment’s lawyers assert that Project Ascension has made “millions of dollars from the sale of Donation Points....”

Blizzard Entertainment successfully sued a popular World of Warcraft server called Turtle Wow last year. The project had been running since 2018, taking donations from players for the free-to-play server. Both sides announced in April 2026 that they’d reached a settlement after Blizzard Entertainment was awarded a permanent injunction to shut down Turtle WoW. The details of the settlement were not made public. Turtle WoW was shut down for good shortly after May 15; players gathered online to mourn the end of the server.

Goes back far…

By SumDog • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
This goes back really far with Blizzard. I think it was 2000 or 2001 when they sent a cease and desist to an open source project called bnetd. It let you host your own Warcraft I/II and Starcraft games. It could also allow people to use pirated betas of Warcraft 3 in multiplayer mode on a local network. Back in this year, Counterstrike was still a mod and everyone hosted games locally using the free Half-Life server Valve provided (that could run on Linux).

Gamers should have turned away from games that didn’t allow local hosting, but not enough did and here we are.

Re:Goes back far…

By StormReaver • Score: 4, Informative Thread

…but not enough did and here we are.

I stopped buying and playing all Blizzard games at that point.

Ridiculous

By s0nicfreak • Score: 3 Thread
People that want to play on these custom servers (those that don’t also play on the official servers, because some do) aren’t going to pay to play on the official servers because the custom servers are taken away.

Sure, they’re not paying Blizzard. But they’re also not using any of Blizzard’s resources (by not being on Blizzard’s servers). So it takes nothing away from Blizzard.

People should be able to play how they want. It’s ridiculous that the laws are against this.

Re:Complexity

By angel’o’sphere • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

I applied for a job at Ascension, as C++ developer.
Unfortunately I am not on the team yet: so I do not know about the backend.

While Blizzard clearly has a case … their arguments are false. The game is cost free, and 100 times better than everything Blizzard offered after Burning Crusade or Wrath of the Lich King.

What they probably want is an agreement to give them access to the code and art work, because they are to stupid to progress their own game in a way that OLD players want.

They thought they can replace dropping old players with new kids and earn money … however making a kids game makes old players drop out faster than new kids hop on the game.

I played WoW classic for a year … until it got clear they go into the Pandora shit hole … so no idea how current wow looks like, and since I played Ascension (and some other private servers): absolutely not interested at all to play Blizz games again.

Bitcoin Has Lost Nearly Half Its Value in 11 Months

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
The price of bitcoin dropped 13% down to $64,394 just in June — but there’s more bad news, reports CNBC.” “Bitcoin has lost nearly half its value since reaching a record high above $123,000 in July 2025.”
While previous bitcoin selloffs were often followed by large rebounds in price, the latest decline may prompt some investors to revisit why they own bitcoin in the first place, [says Daniel Sotiroff, associate director of ETF and Passive Strategies Research at Morningstar]. Here’s what he and other experts have to say about the case for holding crypto, and how much exposure is appropriate for the average investor…

Not all financial professionals agree bitcoin belongs in a portfolio. Bitcoin differs from stocks, bonds and real estate because it doesn’t generate earnings, interest payments or rental income that investors can use to estimate its value, says Robert Johnson, a finance professor at Creighton University. Instead, its price is largely determined solely by investor demand. “You cannot invest in Bitcoin, you can only speculate,” he says.

Sotiroff agrees that bitcoin is difficult to value using traditional financial metrics. “The best analogy I’ve heard is that it’s more like a collectible, because it’s basically worth what other people are going to pay for it,” he says.
Sotiroff told CNBC the recent selloff was a reminder that bitcoin’s gains can be accompanied by equally dramatic declines — one reason many financial planners recommend limiting exposure to a small portion of a broader portfolio. “You just really can’t make a call on what direction it’s going to go,” says Sotiroff.

How’s El Salvador and Bukele Doing?

By SlashbotAgent • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Remember El Salvador in 2021? Moving to Bitcoin they were. It’s gonna be yuge says Bukele and a few.

In late 2025 their congress stepped in and passed a new law to unwind all that shit as it continued to fuck over their economy and the IMF required it for yet another loan. And that was before things got really crappy in Bitcoinatopia.

I wonder if they were able to sell any reserves before a 50% crash and a total loss on their infrastructure build out($1.6B)?

HODL onto that bag!

Re:The search for the greater fool came to an end

By Rei • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

401ks have fundamentals behind them (comprised of companies that make products and services that people want to buy, generally as repeat-buys)

Governments have fundamentals (the ability to levy taxes, backed by the full force of the courts, the police, and ultimately, the military)

Bitcoin has no fundamentals. It’s a collectible. Its value is based purely how much people want that collectible. The only reason, as was stated, that people were buying it was as a lottery ticket. But there is no reason to “own” it beyond that. It’s not generating dividends or doing stock buybacks based on profits. It’s just there for those who want to collect it. And its value depends on how much people want to collect it.

(Arguably its greatest power is that its holders stand to lose so much if regulation goes against them that they tend to be very politically active, with large donations to pro-crypto candidates)

Re:Any Evidence?

By Whateverthisis • Score: 5, Informative Thread
It is actually believed that Russia has substantial Bitcoin reserves. Iran outright runs their own mining operation and mandates private Iranian miners must sell to the central bank of Iran. What they’re buying is everything else they need, as both are heavily sanctioned and they use Bitcoin to get around sanctions. North Korea does it for the same reason, to avoid sanctions, but they gain these through hacking and theft.

Re:It is a currency.

By sg_oneill • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

If it was a real currency, it losing value would generally be considered a positive. It means the sale of a good would earn more of the stuff. But this is where the bullshit hits the road. Its not a currency, nobody is using it to facilitate economic trade. Its just a shitty ponzi token. And the favor of the market has moved on from Dunning Krugerands to AI slop.

Re:Wait what

By karmawarrior • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

It’s also lost its hype operation. People who used to boost it from Marc Andreessen to Peter Thiel are now boosting AI instead. Even Slashdot now rarely has an article on crypto, instead posting breathless puff pieces about genAI. Of course it’s going to lose value without the same group of idiots, nutters, and con-artists boosting it.

Four LTS Java Versions Get End-of-Support in a Three-Year Window (2029-2032)

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Simon Ritter joined Sun Microsystems in 1996 and spent time working in both Java development and consultancy. He’s now written an opinion piece for InfoWorld warning that “Between 2029 and 2032, every currently supported long-term support (LTS) version of Java will reach end-of-support within a single three-year window.”

That’s Java 17 in 2029, Java 8 in 2030, Java 21 in 2031, and Java 11 in 2032…
On paper, this looks like a manageable upgrade cycle. In practice, it creates a collision of timelines that most enterprises have failed to forecast. Organizations attempting to modernize incrementally — moving application by application, version by version — are operating on a model that the calendar has already rendered obsolete… [W]hen every major Java version expires in the same compressed window, sequential planning collapses. By the time this becomes obvious, organizations will be forced into reactive mode, making rushed decisions under extreme pressure.

For organizations planning traditional stepwise upgrades — Java 8 to Java 11 to Java 17 to Java 21 — this convergence elevates a routine maintenance task into a structural crisis. Enterprises with large Java estates will be forced to upgrade multiple applications across multiple versions simultaneously to maintain security compliance and business continuity.
“Parallel modernization requires parallel capacity — something most organizations haven’t budgeted for,” he points out. “This explains why traditional approaches struggle to scale.”

Re:Upgrading multiple Java versions at once is eas

By ls671 • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Not true anymore, this was very through from java 1 to java 8 although.

and most existing Java 8 code would continue to work unchanged in Java 25.

No, you will almost need refactoring in 95% of cases. I spent quite a bit of time on that.

Sun stopped supporting and providing the javax.* packages and they’ve been replaced by the jakarta.* packages. Java finally started to remove deprecated packages, classes and methods after java 8 so refactoring is not only a matter of renaming the imports. You will also need to upgrade most of the external libraries you use for that reason and they have their own specific changes too.

Re:I’m wetting my pants now

By Mr. Barky • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Money. It costs money to hire a developer, understand what needs to be done, etc. Many of these projects probably haven’t had a developer look at them in 10 years. Also, inevitably a developer assigned to upgrade such a project will say “we need to upgrade library X, Y, Z”… adding to the costs and the risks of regression.

Maybe there are security risks, but many of these programs are also on private networks, reducing (not eliminating, of course) the potential for exploitation. You don’t fix what isn’t broken.

Re:Upgrading multiple Java versions at once is eas

By El_Muerte_TDS • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Those javax -> jakarta packages were not part of the JRE. However, those common interfaces are extremely popular. So you probably use a framework or library which uses them and has transitioned to the newer packages. But you could still use the old frameworks or libraries in a newer JRE, assuming they do not use a library that messes with JVM bytecode (which is commonly used to create more advanced class proxies). Javaassist, OW2 ASM, and the likes are the problematic parts for moving on to a newer JRE. These libraries are used a lot. In most cases you cannot simply drop in a new bytecode manipulating library. That’s where you run into the part where you have to move your software to newer frameworks and libraries which then also mean you need to change some of your code to go to the jakarta packages. And then you need to hope your software didn’t abused some undocumented behavior/features, or internals, of those frameworks.

Yes, there is a high probability that your (enterprise) software will need code changes in order to run on newer JREs.

Go back to COBOL

By silvergig • Score: 4 Thread
Use COBOL. It doesn’t receive frequent updates. Duh.

Re:Go back to COBOL

By david.emery • Score: 5, Informative Thread

See https://www.iso.org/standard/7… And for the history of COBOL language standardization, see the table here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…

Programming languages managed buy ISO committees change slowly. That’s a FEATURE. I worked a bit on the Ada standard. Each proposed change was carefully weighed for its impact on existing code, as well as the value for new code. The standard was updated roughly every 10 years.

UK Police Officer Accused of Using AI to Fake Evidence

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
The Sunday Times reports:
A criminal investigation has begun after a police officer allegedly used AI to create evidential material in a “number of cases”. Derbyshire Constabulary said an officer was being investigated over an allegation of suspected perverting the course of justice. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) confirmed it was engaging with defence lawyers and the courts over potentially affected cases…

It is the first known allegation of AI misuse by police in a criminal case in the UK, but it follows an incident last year in which West Midlands police relied on AI-generated material that fabricated a match involving Maccabi Tel Aviv. The material was used in intelligence supporting a proposed ban on away fans at the club’s match against Aston Villa.

How about a link to the same article

By spazmonkey • Score: 3, Informative Thread

Just not behind a paywall?
https://www.bbc.com/news/artic…

Another honest job lost to the AI machine

By T34L • Score: 4, Funny Thread

Back in my day being a corrupt cop required imagination, ingenuity and guts. Also racism. Now it’s all just baked into the machine. Before you know it, AI will be beating your wife for you, too. Absurd.

Not *that* new

By toutankh • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Police was already faking evidence (for example planting drugs). This is a new technical mean to do it more easily and more convincingly. The issue until now is underwhelming accountability.

Re:Wait what..

By eneville • Score: 4, Informative Thread

In general UK police have a higher standard, somewhere around medium. Other bits of Europe are much better, Norway have a higher bar for entry. US is one of the very worst.

https://worldpopulationreview....

Training doesn’t equal standards, but is a reasonable indicator of results expectation.

Every new technology makes good and evil easier

By Tony Isaac • Score: 3 Thread

The industrial revolution enabled corrupt governments to spread their corruption far more massively than before.
The computer itself enabled people to commit crimes more quickly and cheaply.
The internet enabled thieves to pick your pocket without ever getting physically close to you.
AI lets scammers become far more convincing at a larger scale.

Each of these technologies (in my opinion) was a net good for humanity, but each brough with it new evils that we had to learn to combat.

How Author Dave Eggers Avoids Smartphones, Internet Access, and Flock Cameras

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
A few weeks ago on a bike ride “inspiration struck” for Dave Eggers, reports SFGate
Without a pen and paper handy, he was stuck texting the idea to himself. The problem? Eggers doesn’t own a smartphone. “It takes 20 minutes to write a sentence,” Eggers said… It’s a funny predicament for Eggers, given that he’s arguably the city’s biggest proponent of the written word… Now age 56, Eggers’ latest book is called "Contrapposto"…

On writing days, Eggers bikes to his sailboat docked near the Golden Gate Bridge. He writes using a hefty 1998 Mac that has never been connected to the internet. On the boat, he keeps “banker’s hours,” working 9 to 5 without any meetings or interruptions except for the occasional wildlife visit. “You’re there with the cormorants and the occasional porpoise and sea lions and seals, and when you want to take a break, you walk around and you’re in the thick of it, one of the most beautiful spots on Earth,” he said. “Especially coming from the Midwest, it never gets old.”

Given Eggers’ decidedly low-tech existence, it’s not surprising that the current state of San Francisco gives him pause, but there’s a streak of hope that underlies his concerns. He abhors the growing surveillance technology that’s gripping the city, refusing to get into Ubers that use recording devices, but he feels a well-written ballot measure about Flock cameras could potentially save our dwindling privacy. ChatGPT’s effects on the art of writing are demoralizing, but he welcomes that teachers are re-embracing pencil and paper, with cursive making a big comeback. The wave of artificial intelligence ads blanketing bus stops imploring companies to stop hiring humans are so over the top, they’d sound cliché if he were to include them in one of his dystopian tech industry novels like “The Circle” or “The Every,” but tech philanthropy has helped many of his projects flourish.

Case in point, Art + Water, a new art space scheduled to open next year on Pier 29 funded largely by art world donations… Co-founded with the artist JD Beltran, the space is slated to operate as an old-school apprenticeship system, hosting 10 artists in residence mentoring 20 students, all free of charge… The ultimate goal is to break down the financial barriers that keep students from pursuing art.
Thanks to Slashdot reader destinyland for sharing the article.

Banker’s hours…

By HotNeedleOfInquiry • Score: 4, Informative Thread
Are 9-3, not 9-5. Traditionally, this gave the staff 2 hours between 3 and 5 to balance the books before going home.

Does the world need more starving artists?

By Powercntrl • Score: 3 Thread

If you’ve ever visited Disney World, one of the things you might’ve noticed is that there are quite a few talented individuals working for theme park wages (which if you weren’t aware, are fairly low). Very, very few people make what could be considered a good living drawing, dancing, and/or singing for their supper.

There tends to be more than a bit of a survivorship bias among those who’ve “made it” in any sort of creative endeavor. Yes, if you’re one of the lucky few, it is true that you wouldn’t have succeeded if you’d given up on your dreams. Thing is, that’s like a lottery winner saying they’d never have won if they didn’t purchase their ticket. While it’s technically true, it completely ignores the millions who, despite also purchasing their tickets, did not win.

self punishment

By markdavis • Score: 3 Thread

>“Without a pen and paper handy, he was stuck texting the idea to himself. Eggers doesn’t own a smartphone. “It takes 20 minutes to write a sentence,” Eggers said… It’s a funny predicament for Eggers,”

Um, if he has a “dumb” cell phone at all that is on, it is tracking his location, essentially the same as a smartphone with GPS off.

He could carry a computer tablet with no cell modem and save stuff to internal storage or SD. It will enable a large on-screen keyboard and with option to voice type/edit off-line. Or a smart phone with no SIM card/data plan and GPS off. There are options.

Wait for it....

By msauve • Score: 3 Thread
Read the summary. Some guy wants to be an urban hermit. Where’s the news for nerds?

Re:Does the world need more starving artists?

By wickerprints • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

I don’t think that’s a meaningful question to ask, since it seems to be based on the flawed premise that there should only be a limited market for creative work, and that the forces of supply and demand ought to dictate how we as a society should value such work.

And what the developments in generative AI have shown us is that those same market forces have no problem trying to replace the underappreciated, underpaid work of countless artists and creative industry employees with a neverending firehose of AI slop.

The human desire to create and the desire for imaginative self-expression is extremely deep seated. To be told that this is economically worthless, easily replaceable, and undeserving of recognition, while at the same time the very means for automated generation of AI slop are stolen from and built upon centuries of handcrafted, human-imagined labor, is the height of hypocrisy.

So, to answer your useless question, no. The world does NOT need more starving artists. What the world needs is to properly recognize the value of human art and creative expression. And to the extent that technology is being used to suppress the worth of others, I say artists have every right to reject it. I hate the panoptic, uneducated society we have become. I detest how creative people are being forced to choose between bringing something new into this world, versus preventing some tech oligarch from training a LLM model on it. I despise the fact that mega-corporations routinely wield their vast financial and legal resources to protect the enormously profitable intellectual property that they pay slave wages to artists to create.

I don’t know this Eggers guy. I haven’t read his books. Whatever he wants to do with his time and money is up to him. But wanting to give more people a pathway to create, and to do it without having it stolen by the Zuckerbergs and Musks and Altmans and Bezoses of this world so that they can turn around and claim that the same things they’ve stolen are not really worth anything after all, is, in my opinion, better than sitting behind a computer asking whether the market for art is saturated.

Amazon CEO’s Talks with U.S. Officials Triggered Crackdown on Anthropic Models

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot
The Wall Street Journal reports:
The Trump administration’s decision to halt all foreign use of Anthropic’s most capable AI models was prompted by conversations between Amazon Chief Executive Andy Jassy and U.S. officials including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, people familiar with the matter said.

Researchers at Amazon had used a series of prompts to get Anthropic’s Fable 5 model to provide them with information that could be used to aid cyberattacks and was supposed to be off limits, Jassy told the officials, according to people familiar with the matter. Tech industry executives have been in regular touch with the administration about the power of cutting-edge AI tools. Shortly afterward, White House officials held a meeting to discuss how to respond and security researchers began testing Amazon’s claims. The officials asked Anthropic to fix the vulnerabilities or take down the model, according to administration officials. The officials decided that the most direct way to address that risk was by preventing foreign governments, companies and individuals from accessing the tool, the people said. President Trump later signed off on the action despite reservations about it hindering innovation, a senior White House official said.

The administration had long felt that Anthropic, one of the leaders in America’s AI race, couldn’t be trusted to manage the security risks its new model presented. Friday’s call between some administration officials and Anthropic Chief Executive Dario Amodei reinforced that feeling, the people said…

Anthropic has said that the vulnerabilities like those flagged by Amazon are relatively basic. The company has said that other publicly available models are capable of discovering them and that they don’t represent a full so-called jailbreak, a point of view shared by some security researchers familiar with Amazon’s research.
The article points out that Amazon is “a big investor in Anthropic, supply Anthropic with chips for data centers.

Brides

By rsilvergun • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
You can just say bribes. We all know it’s bribes so you can just say bribes. Bezos out bid Amodei.

It’s going to be weird if we ever become a democracy again not seeing a headline involving an obvious quid pro quo bribe every day. There are Latin American dictatorships that would take a look at what Trump’s doing and say hey buddy, tone it down a bit.

I would take this admins

By hdyoung • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
concerns about AI safety far more seriously if they were equally concerned about the risks that Grok poses because of its tendency to spew nazi propoganda and it’s world-class capability at generating revenge porn.

Re:Random ass “decisions”

By evanh • Score: 5, Informative Thread

The story is pure spin. If there was any truth in what’s being said then all LLMs would be banned. The real story is one of pick-on-Anthropic.

Re:Random ass “decisions”

By arglebargle_xiv • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
It’s not random at all, you just need to rephrase the headline as “Company that paid $40 million movie bribe to Trump gets competitor’s AI partially shut down”.

Amazon cut down Anthropic…

By ElderOfPsion • Score: 3 Thread

…in its Prime.