Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. UK Scientists See Little Evidence for Claims Smartphones Are Rewiring Kids’ Brains
  2. As ‘Disclosure Day’ Premieres, Steven Spielberg Says He Believes Aliens Really Have Visited Earth
  3. Will Meta’s $14 Billion Bet on AI Ever Pay Off?
  4. Vintage AMD R600 Graphics Driver Sees Code Cleanups Thanks To GitHub Copilot
  5. How America’s Energy Department is Building a National Platform for Doing Science with AI
  6. Blizzard Sues To Take Down Another Private World of Warcraft Server, Project Ascension
  7. Bitcoin Has Lost Nearly Half Its Value in 11 Months
  8. Four LTS Java Versions Get End-of-Support in a Three-Year Window (2029-2032)
  9. UK Police Officer Accused of Using AI to Fake Evidence
  10. How Author Dave Eggers Avoids Smartphones, Internet Access, and Flock Cameras
  11. Amazon CEO’s Talks with U.S. Officials Triggered Crackdown on Anthropic Models
  12. Shutterstock ‘Evolves’ Into ‘Human-Led, AI-Powered Creative Platform’
  13. GM Updates 250,000 EVs with Vehicle-to-Grid Firmware, Announces Grid-Scale Sodium-Ion Batteries
  14. Vim Classic 8.3 Launched as an AI-Free Vim Fork
  15. Arch Linux Malware Incident: Malicious Commits Found in 1,579 Packages

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.

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: 3 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: 3 Thread

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

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.”

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: 3, 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.

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.”

No

By gweihir • Score: 3, Interesting Thread

None of the large LLM “investments” will pay off. They tried token-based pricing, at significantly below what they have to charge to only break even, and it was far too expensive for the value it provides. And there is absolutely no reason to expect cost to come down anytime soon. Optimizing AI implementations has been going on for 70 years. They would need a fundamentally new idea, but these cannot be forced.

Never held accountable

By jacks smirking reven • Score: 4, 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…

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: 4, 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.

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

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.

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.

Nothing backs it

By localroger • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
There is no reason bitcoin can’t slide back to being worth a dollar a coin. There no guarantee of value behind it. You can argue about whether fiat money is any better once the US went off the gold standard, but there is still a bit of irreplaceable value there; “the full faith and credit” means you can use it to transact business with the government, both by contracting to do public works for which the government pays you, and paying taxes and fees which are used to perform government functions and give you tokens such as licenses which show that you’ve contributed your share. Money’s very liquidity for these purposes is a source of value, even if you can’t redeem your picture of a President for precious metal. By contrast, Bitcoin literally isn’t worth anything unless you can find someone (for some reason the phrase “bigger fool” comes to mind) to trade you something for it that does have value.

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: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.

So you really think

By Tomahawk • Score: 3 Thread
that most organisations are even using a somewhat up-to-date release of those LTS versions? Or will be bothered to upgrade for any legacy apps?

We still have code running on Java 6!

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: 4, Interesting 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 Skip
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.

Shutterstock ‘Evolves’ Into ‘Human-Led, AI-Powered Creative Platform’

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Slashdot reader BrianFagioli writes:
Shutterstock has unveiled what it calls a “human-led, AI-powered” creative platform that combines its massive library of [human] contributor-created content with AI image and video generation, AI editing, conversational search, prompt enhancement, and automated model selection tools. The company says the goal is to help creators move from idea to finished work faster [in a single application] while maintaining commercial licensing protections and contributor royalty payments… While Shutterstock repeatedly emphasizes human creativity, much of the platform’s future appears centered on AI-generated and AI-modified content.
An article at Nerds.xyz suggests Shutterstock’s AI tools let users “transform existing content into something new,” while noting Shutterstock’s repeated references to human creativity “almost feel defensive.”

But it points out other companies including Adobe and Canva “and countless startups are all racing to integrate AI into creative workflows.”

Also known aw a “slop fest”…

By gweihir • Score: 3 Thread

I don’t think they are making themselves any friends here.

“human-washing”

By BeaverCleaver • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Human-washing is the new green washing. Release a bunch of PR platitudes about how important humans are, while stealing and reselling all their work.

It’s just like fossil fuel companies pretending to be “green” because they slap their logo on some reusable coffee cups, or use solar power to light up a sign at their refinery. Or McDonalds pretending they don’t generate piles of garbage because they print the “recycling arrow” logo on their packaging

GM Updates 250,000 EVs with Vehicle-to-Grid Firmware, Announces Grid-Scale Sodium-Ion Batteries

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“Battery breakthroughs will lessen AI’s demand on the electricity grid,” argues The Washington Post’s editoral board, arguing that GM’s latest moves “offer a fresh reminder that resource constraints can be solved by innovation.”

Or As Fortune put it, “America’s electric grid is buckling under extreme weather, aging infrastructure, and an AI build-out that is quietly rewriting U.S. power demand — and General Motors wants to turn that crisis into a business.” They describe GM’s plan as offering itself “as a distributed utility in disguise… stitching together hundreds of thousands of battery-powered cars, new grid-scale storage, and a unified charging platform into what amounts to a virtual fleet of power plants.”
The bet puts GM on a collision course with Ford’s newly branded Ford Energy unit as both Detroit rivals race to repurpose underused EV capacity for a more urgent problem: keeping the lights on in the AI era. GM’s case rests on three planks. The first is its existing fleet. GM says more than 250,000 of its EVs on U.S. roads can already charge bidirectionally — pulling electricity from the grid and sending it back. “Every evening, a quiet transformation occurs across the American landscape,” GM Energy vice president Wade Sheffer writes in an open letter to utilities and regulators, describing the EVs sitting in driveways as “a massive opportunity to aggregate energy storage capacity.”

A firmware update is rolling out to customers with GM Energy’s vehicle-to-home hardware, converting those systems into full vehicle-to-grid assets with no new hardware and turning home backup systems into grid resources when utilities need them. GM is piloting the idea in Michigan with DTE Energy at 30 employee homes, and has sketched a 2030 vision with Pacific Gas & Electric in which more than 52,000 GM EVs help balance the grid out of a projected 130,000 vehicles in the area.
GM is also “seeking partnerships with utility companies nationwide to assist in offering such vehicle-to-grid services for customers,” reports CNBC, noting it’s one of two moves “meant to address concerns about rising energy costs amid an artificial intelligence boom.”

Forbes reports that GM’s second goal “is to leapfrog the dominant battery cell tech used for energy storage packs right now” — right past the LFP (lithium-iron phosphate) stage, “which is dominated by China.”
Sodium batteries are cheaper to use than LFP because they don’t need an additional cooling system. They also have a 20-year usable life and are made from materials that can be sourced from within the U.S., the company said at a briefing in San Francisco on Tuesday. “Sodium-ion actually is the better chemistry for that application. And when I say sodium-ion is better, I mean GM’s version of sodium-ion,” Kurt Kelty, GM’s battery chief and a long-time Tesla battery executive, told Forbes. He said GM is seeing great results from its prototypes, even at scorching temperatures of 55 Celsius (131 Fahrenheit).
“Sodium-ion-powered energy storage systems have the potential to operate without active cooling and with much less system complexity,” Kurt Kelty, GM’s vice president of battery and sustainability, said Tuesday in a blog post. “In large energy storage systems, that matters.” Not having to cool the battery cells could lead to lower upfront costs as well as operating costs, the automaker said.

TechCrunch reports on GM’s big new partnership with energy-storage startup Peak Energy to develop GM’s sodium-ion battery chemistry for grid-scale deployments:
GM wouldn’t share with TechCrunch how much money it is investing in this energy-storage effort. But we do know the company has committed $900 million to commercialize new battery chemistries, an investment that includes a new battery-development center. .. The first GM cells are expected to enter trial production at the company’s Battery Cell Development Center in 2028.
“Our next-generation sodium-ion cell development will drive energy density higher,” promises GM’s blog post, arguing they’re extending the company’s battery expertise and technical infrastructure “into the electrical grid itself. If we get this right, we will not just build better batteries. We will help create a more resilient, more affordable and more flexible energy future… Every improvement we make strengthens the development stack that supports both EVs and energy storage.”

“The message: GM isn’t just selling cars into a stressed grid; it’s supplying the batteries to stabilize it,” argues Fortune.

And GM also announced they’re augmenting their apps with an “Energy Pass” offering “seamless access to Tesla Supercharger, IONNA, Electrify America, and soon, ChargePoint and EVgo networks.” Their goal is to simplify the charging experience with an app “that covers nearly 70% of all DC fast chargers in the United States, plus many Level 2 chargers, all through one app.”

expectations

By fortunatus • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
I think I would be pretty dismayed to hop in my car to head out for work in the morning and discover that it dumped half it’s charge for datacenters… and that GM took profit out of that, to boot!

Re:I dont want to waste car charge cycles

By AmiMoJo • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

It all depends on what the warranty is. IIRC VW limit the number of lifetime kWh you can use for this, and then the car just refuses to do it anymore.

If you don’t drive the car regularly it might actually help to cycle the battery a bit regularly. Also, not all cycles are equal - 70-60-70% is not the same as 100-90-100, and not 1/6th of 80-20-80.

It also depends how much you get paid for it. The battery will probably outlast the car anyway, so it might be worth doing to extract more value from your asset.

Re:expectations

By XXongo • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I think I would be pretty dismayed to hop in my car to head out for work in the morning and discover that it dumped half it’s charge for datacenters…

My car has a range of 300 miles, and I have a commute of ten miles. The average American car is driven about 35 miles per day. I wouldn’t mind if I hopped in the car to head for work and discovered half of the range miles that I don’t use had been sold.

As long as I can turn off that feature when I have a long trip scheduled the next day, I wouldn’t mind buying electricity at low rates and selling it back at high rates.

and that GM took profit out of that, to boot!

All of the discussions say that the utilities pay for the electricity they buy.

Dispersed power can be more robust.

By couchslug • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Fire easily destroys or disables concentrated “force loss multiplier” fratricidal storage designs. Not just accidents, but terrorist-style attacks can take them out easily via drones using simple electric triggers.

https://theconversation.com/wh…

Disperse batteries far and wide and they’ll be much more difficult to interfere with if they’re designed to function without grid power during emergencies. A controlled, graceful shutdown is better than abrupt power interruption.

Re:expectations

By AmiMoJo • Score: 4, Informative Thread

This tech has been in use in Europe for years, and the way it works is to tell the car you need X% by Y time, and the system makes sure you have it. Typically the amount sent to the grid is maximum about 10% of the battery anyway.

There is a similar system where you get lower charging costs by allowing the energy company to decide when you car charges. Again, you tell it you need X% by Y time, and it selects charging slots to make sure you have that in the morning. You can also override it manually whenever you want, although you don’t get the lower rate energy if you do.

And if you are really into it, you can have your own system using open source software to play the market and charge when energy is cheapest, even negatively priced, with a minimum of X% by Y time. People with solar often do it because they get paid more to export the solar than it costs to charge from the grid overnight.

Vim Classic 8.3 Launched as an AI-Free Vim Fork

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
This month saw the release of Vim Classic 8.3, the first stable version of a new long-term support fork of Vim maintained without generative AI tools. Linuxiac reports:
The release is based on Vim 8.2.0148 and includes selected bug fixes and patches backported from later upstream Vim releases. Vim Classic was first announced by [SourceHut’s CEO/founder] Drew DeVault in March 2026 after he objected to LLM-assisted development in Vim and Neovim. In his announcement, DeVault said he no longer wanted to use software developed with LLM assistance and introduced Vim Classic as a fork for users who want to continue using Vim without that involvement… Vim Classic follows Vim’s charityware model and continues to direct users toward Bram Moolenaar’s long-running support for children in Uganda. The release is distributed as a signed source tarball from SourceHut, while future important announcements are expected through the project’s mailing list.
“Vim is important to me…” DeVault wrote in March. (DeVault even tattooed “hjkl” on his right arm.) "[A]lmost every word I have ever committed to posterity, through this blog, in my code, all of the docs I’ve written, emails I’ve sent, and more, almost all of it has passed through Vim.”

But DeVault wrote that he also cares about AI’s impact on air pollution, fresh water supplies, global supply chains, and the working conditions of miners in African companies:
And at a moment when the climate demands immediate action to reduce our footprint on this planet, the AI boom is driving data centers to consume a full 1.5% of the world’s total energy production in order to eliminate jobs and replace them with a robot that lies… All this to enrich the few, centralize power, reduce competition, and underwrite an enormous bubble that, once it bursts, will ruin the lives of millions of the world’s poor and marginalized classes.

I don’t think it’s cute that someone vibe coded “battleship” in VimScript. I think it’s more important that we stop collectively pretending that we don’t understand how awful all of this is. I don’t want to use software which has slop in it. I do what I can to avoid it, and sadly even Vim now comes under scrutiny in that effort as both Vim and NeoVim are relying on LLMs to develop the software… To keep my conscience clear, and continue to enjoy the relationship I have with this amazing piece of software, I have forked Vim…

Since forking from this base, I have backported a handful of patches, most of which address CVEs discovered after this release, but others which address minor bug fixes. I also penned a handful of original patches which bring the codebase from this time up to snuff for building it on newer toolchains…

I invite you to use Vim Classic, if you feel the same way as me, and to maintain it with me, contributing the patches you need to support your own use cases.

Say

By rossdee • Score: 3 Thread

Is there a list of other text editors that don’t have AI ?

Different tools for different skills

By MpVpRb • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

I have talents and handicaps
When I took my first programming class, I learned faster and deeper than any of the other students.
Evidently, I have a strong talent for code.
I can’t touch type. I tried to learn and failed. I also failed to learn to play the piano.
If I was forced to use vi, I would have failed as a software engineer.
But, with an IDE, I have done very well over a 40+ year career.

How a compiler differs from an LLM

By tepples • Score: 5, Informative Thread

His hand written “artisan” code is being turned into machine code by a computer anyway.

A compiler is a deterministic process that runs locally on a modest home computer in reasonable time without needing an expensive NVIDIA GPU, doesn’t regurgitate memorized copyrighted code from its training set, and doesn’t boil the oceans in a datacenter for training plus use.

Re:Different tools for different skills

By caseih • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

When I was a young college student I watched a professor working on some code in his office one day and saw how fast he was able to manipulate the text, cutting pasting, duplicating, all without hardly moving his hands. Ad hoc macros with the ".” command were so powerful. I was very impressed and learned vi and never regretted it. vi definitely doesn’t require touch typing! In fact I think it was designed for non-touch typers.

Now I have used vim for 30 years and am handicapped without it. I don’t care if it’s vim class, regular vim, neovim, or some IDE binding mode. I’m no vim expert and I really only use a small set of commands and keystrokes, but I appreciate the efficiency. The editor doesn’t cause me to succeed or fail as a software engineer, but it does make my life more pleasant.

Arch Linux Malware Incident: Malicious Commits Found in 1,579 Packages

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot
More than 1,500 user-contributed packages in the Arch Linux User Repository “AUR” were infected with malware, reports Phoronix:
The last message in the thread over this security incident is noting that Arch Linux developers have deleted all the malicious commits they are aware of. Cited was this list that puts the number of malware-affected packages at 1,579…

Even at 1,579 packages listed, that final updated noted, it’s a "list containing many (but not all) of the affected packages".
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader couchslug for sharing the report.

AUR

By julian67 • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

AUR has been a rest home for abandoned and insecure packages for years. A lot of years. It makes Ubuntu’s Universe and PPAs look like Fort Knox. Of course whenever anyone makes any less than positive comment about Arch the fanboys descend as a self-righteous, angry, stupid mob so stuff like this goes mostly undiscussed until the shit has hit the fan and been liberally distributed.

Coding AI vs “Many Eyes”

By drnb • Score: 3 Thread
“Many Eyes” is a good thing, but it’s been oversold. Having coding AI’s scan everything will probably work out better in the long run. We’re only at the early days, coding AI are also oversold in they own way, but it’s a safe bet they will get better over time.

Many eyes

By CustomBuild • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
Are blind when everyone is indoctrinated into the same cult.