Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. Physicists Trap a Single Antimatter Particle For a Month
  2. UN Says Breaching 1.5C Warming Limit Is ‘Imminent and Unavoidable’
  3. Unvetted AI Agents Are Accessing US Bank Accounts
  4. To Make Way For Data Centers, Google Will Pay Others to Use Less Power
  5. Microsoft Says October Updates Didn’t Actually Fix VPN Issues
  6. The Browser Company Retires Its Arc Browser, Pushes Users to Dia
  7. Moderna Shares Plunge After Leak of Cancer Vaccine Data
  8. Bose Is Buying Skullcandy
  9. Zoe Kleinman: PHP Is the Cyber Equivalent of an Unexploded Bomb
  10. Anthropic Takes On Muse With Claude Duet
  11. Several Linux Kernel Vulnerabilities Accidentally Posted To Public Kernel Mailing List
  12. Google Staff Resign In Backlash Over Its AI Contracts With Military
  13. Airbnb Bans Making Guests Do Dishes, Take Out the Trash
  14. America’s War Department Will Test Heat Ray Weapon For Potential Use
  15. Startup Claims To Use AI-Created Viruses To Treat a Patient

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.

Physicists Trap a Single Antimatter Particle For a Month

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Physicists at Northwestern University have successfully trapped a single positron for an entire month, allowing researchers to study its quantum properties with unprecedented precision. “Further investigations using the trap might reveal the secret of why the world around us is made of matter and not antimatter, when things could have presumably gone either way,” reports Scientific American. From the report:
Every normal particle of matter has an antimatter counterpart with equal mass but opposite charge. To build their trap, physicists started with atoms of sodium 22, a radioactive isotope with a half-life of about two and a half years. When one of these atoms decays, it emits a positron — the antimatter counterpart of the electron. “The big challenge is to persuade these positrons to slow down and then capture them,” says Gerald Gabrielse, a physicist at Northwestern University, who oversaw the project. The team reported its achievement on Wednesday in Physical Review Letters (PDF).

The first step is to send the positrons through the crystal lattice of a sliver of cold tungsten. As the particles go pinballing through the material, they slow down and lose energy. “Every time they bang into something, there’s a chance of annihilation, but it doesn’t always happen,” Gabrielse says. “If they make it to the end, they get popped out.” Next, the physicists steer the positrons along a channel using electromagnetic fields. Eventually the particles end up in a vacuum, just three tenths of a degree Celsius above absolute zero, trapped by an electric field on top and bottom and a magnetic field on the sides. “If you want to hold on to antimatter, you have to hold it in a container without walls,” Gabrielse says. This method allowed the researchers to isolate and study a solitary, lone positron for a monthâ"and could let them do so indefinitely.

The researchers intend to use their trap to make precise measurements of the positron’s magnetic moment — basically the strength and orientation of its magnetic field. To do this, they must determine two things: the energy needed to flip the direction of the positron’s spin and the energy needed to make it jump from its ground state to its first excited state. Using a similar trap setup, Gabrielse and his team have already measured the magnetic moment of an electron to a precision of one part in 10 trillion. Taking the equivalent measurement for a positron will allow them to make a crucial comparison. “We’re looking to see if they have an exactly opposite magnetic moment,” Gabrielse says. That’s the prediction of the Standard Model of particle physics. If the two have different values, however, this could help explain why our universe is made of matter instead of antimatter.

Charges must be brought

By backslashdot • • Score: 3 • Thread

Antimatter half-lives matter.

UN Says Breaching 1.5C Warming Limit Is ‘Imminent and Unavoidable’

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
For the first time, the UN has declared that exceeding the Paris Agreement’s 1.5C warming limit is “imminent and unavoidable.” “We are now saying this window has closed, but we can open it again by making the overshoot as brief as possible,” UN Environment Program Executive Director Inger Andersen said on a call with reporters. “This is about how to find a way back as shortly and as quickly as possible with as limited an overshoot as possible.” CNN reports:
Past reports have examined the distance between countries’ emissions reduction commitments and what it would take to limit global warming to 1.5 C above preindustrial levels. However, this year’s report redefines the gap. Instead, it examines new emissions overshoot scenarios, and what it would take to limit peak warming to just 1.7 to 1.8 degrees C before bringing temperatures back down to 1.5 C through emissions cuts and the use of carbon removal technologies.

The report makes clear that every additional fraction of a degree of warming above 1.5 C “raises the risk of irreversible changes including in ice sheets, permafrost carbon, ocean circulation, and coral systems, along with devastating human impacts.” Each added fraction of a degree of warming can have an “immense” impact “as measured in terms of damage, cost and loss of lives,” said climate scientist Michael Mann of the University of Pennsylvania. Mann was not involved in producing the UNEP report.

According to the UNEP, which is based in Nairobi, the lowest overshoot scenario would keep peak warming to between 1.7 and 1.8 degrees C and return global average temperatures to at or below 1.5 C by 2100. However, to follow such a pathway, global greenhouse gas emissions would need to be slashed by far more than anything currently on the table at the upcoming COP31 talks. This would require an 18% cut by 2030, 45% by 2035, and 69% by 2040, relative to 2025 levels.

Meeting this lowest-possible overshoot scenario would require a tripling of renewable electricity capacity by 2035, and dramatic cuts to fossil fuels, including the phaseout of coal by 2040, the report states. In addition, there would need to be a major scaling up of carbon removal technologies, which so far have not been proven to work at such a large scale. In stark contrast to these figures, the fulfillment of existing emissions reduction pledges would only yield a 5-to-8% emissions cut by 2030 and an 11-to-15% reduction by 2035, the report found. This would be associated with a peak warming of about 2.6 degrees C.

If countries simply follow their current policies, then warming could reach a peak of about 2.8 C. That estimate has increased since last year, in part because of the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement and retraction of its emissions reduction commitments, the report states. Even the scenario that assumes countries meet their existing reduction commitments, and nations with net-zero pledges succeed in fulfilling them, still brings warming to a peak of 2.1 C.

Fatalism

By Petersko • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

The last straw might not be denial, economic pushback, or runaway capitalism, but fatalism. Easier to reach for the apple fritter when you’ve given up on weight loss.

I can see it in my own behaviour. I believe in the science of climate change. I know things will get bad, and if nothing is done, they’ll get worse. Yet I spent the summer putting 20,000 km on my motorcycle, purely for recreation. I know it’s the wrong choice, but I also know that part of me thinks, “It’s all burning down. Denying myself this won’t change anything.

I know I could behave better, but I don’t believe the world will follow suit, thus rendering my contribution meaningless So why bother?

Fatalism.

Of course it’s… wrong, stupid, selfish, short-sighted… pick an adjective. Not defending it.

Re: Democracy on a bad day

By fluffernutter • • Score: 4, Informative • Thread
Humans need to find a source of energy that actually replaces fossil fuels instead of expecting people to change there lives.

Re: Fatalism

By Tomahawk • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
Electric bikes exists. And the grid can be made to be green.

But have you been incentivised to buy an electric bike? Have the manufacturers brought out an electric bike that suits your needs? One that can truly replace the bike you obviously love?

And how green has the grid gotten? Not as green as it could be, although it’s slowly getting there in many countries. Putting a halt on projects to make it greener, and in some cases reversing that, though… smh.

There is only so much an individual can do. The main changes are at government and large corporation levels. Us individuals have our hands tied, for the most part.

I have solar panels. I drive a PHEV (mainly as an EV). Part of my pay cheque goes towards planting trees and mangroves in Africa to offset carbon usage. But none of that matters compared to the output of corporations and countries as whole. I can be as green as I like and the benefit to anything is miniscule.

This isn’t the fault of us little people. This is the fault of the greedy, and the incompetent, and the deniers “at the top”— you know, the fuckwits who know they can fix this but don’t.

Re:Fuck Trump

By Zarhan • • Score: 4, Funny • Thread

Actually, it seems that Trump is going to be the greatest environmentalist of all time.

Just in a span of few months he has achieved such a spike in fossil fuel prices that entire societies are experiencing enough pain to start seriously getting rid of the habit of burning dead dinosaurs - either by cutting back on consumption or switching to alternative energy sources altogether.

I wonder would he accept “WWF/Greenpeace/IUCN prize for the most significant climate change management contribution in this century” instead of that Nobel peace prize?

Re: Fuck Trump

By shilly • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

We cannot let the best be the enemy of the good. We need to push ahead as fast as we can with the imperfect replacements we have, leveraging their many advantages as much as possible, mitigating and living with their various disadvantages as much as possible, while also working on improving them and finding other solutions. This is a dial situation, not an on/off switch situation. We should be turning the dial as much as possible.

Unvetted AI Agents Are Accessing US Bank Accounts

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Axios:
Major U.S. banks are detecting unauthorized third-party AI agents operating inside customer accounts, with some agents attempting to take actions that appear to be independent of user instructions, sources tell Axios. The difficulty in distinguishing between a human and an unauthorized bot is forcing banks to block the technology and rapidly rewrite their terms of service. […] This presents significant security risks: banking executives fear the steps agents with login access might take, especially if a user has granted purchase authority or the ability to shift funds. In other instances, some banks have tracked activity when agents — programmed to fulfill requests or complete tasks on a user’s behalf — contact call centers or appear to take actions independent of user instructions, the people said.

Bank executives described the situation as horrifying, with one official saying the industry has grave concerns about agents gaining access to customer accounts and taking steps that could impact user finances. The concerns are at the root of the decision by several banks to restrict third-party AI agent access, the people said. Morgan Stanley has begun blocking third-party agents from accessing its platforms, sources familiar with the decision said. JPMorgan, Bank of America and Citi are also restricting agents. […] Many banks are broadly not able to parse whether agent account activity is user-directed, sources said.

[…] On one hand, banks are best positioned to respond to the threats and opportunities of AI given their cash on hand and experience as critical infrastructure. But money isn’t necessarily enough to solve this problem, one source said, because of how quickly the technology is developing and revealing new weaknesses in real time. Banks are investing in preventing worst-case scenarios, but they are also preparing for when those could happen, including with “day after” scenario planning that would allow them to quickly secure or restore customer access, sources said.

That sounds like fun /s

By fahrbot-bot • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

agents — programmed to fulfill requests or complete tasks on a user’s behalf — contact call centers

And with companies replacing call center staff with AI agents …

Unauthorized?

By outsider007 • • Score: 3, Insightful • Thread

If they’re “operating inside” user’s accounts, they’re authorized. Does someone need to explain to banks what authorized means?

Why is this the banks problem?

By FeelGood314 • • Score: 3 • Thread
It’s my money. I’m responsible for it. If I give an entity my credentials to my money then I am accepting the risk. Even if I’m a moron and I’m trusting a crypto bro, a gambler or an AI. It is my money, not the banks. I can do with it whatever I want. If the AI, crypto investment or Magic the Gathering card collector makes me 100x return on the investment that the bank thinks I shouldn’t have made, does the bank get to keep my profit? This seems like losers wanting to not take any responsibility for the downsides of their actions but I bet they still want the upside. Or maybe the banks can offer idiot accounts that don’t let you access the money with out the banks approval for every transaction. And no buying lottery tickets.

To Make Way For Data Centers, Google Will Pay Others to Use Less Power

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Google is funding one of the nation’s largest “virtual power plants,” paying homes and businesses indirectly to reduce electricity consumption during periods of peak demand so more grid capacity can be available for data centers. Under its expanded deal with Voltus, the program could provide up to 1,070 megawatts in the Mid-Atlantic PJM grid — roughly the output of a large nuclear reactor. The New York Times reports:
That electricity won’t come from new power plants. Instead, Voltus will sign up homes and businesses and give them financial incentives to curb their usage when local power demand is high or the grid is strained. Many of these reductions could occur automatically, such as through smart thermostats that dial back air-conditioning during peak summer hours or batteries that can provide temporary on-site power.

Each of these tweaks frees up only a small amount of power on its own. But by aggregating them across thousands of businesses and homes, Voltus says it can reliably provide lots of extra capacity when it’s most needed, and do so within a few years. While tech companies will likely ultimately need to build traditional power plants if they want to keep building large data centers, this approach could be a faster, cheaper and less-polluting option in the interim.
“We really see virtual power plants as a critical short-term solution,” said Ellen Zuckerman, head of energy market development for North and South America at Google. “It’s a way to invest in our communities, really double down on our clean energy ambition, but also meet capacity at speed and scale.”

Maybe they should fund generating capacity instead

By cruff • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
We’re already having to reduce power during periods of peak demand, Google should be funding more non-carbon producing generating capacity if they want more power.

Re:Fuck I hate how stupid they think we are

By dstwins • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
They don’t have to think it.. they KNOW it.. Think about every Data Center plan that got approved.. despite what we know. People buy into the lies and in general quite stupid.. so no.. they don’t have to think it.. they have ample evidence that PROVES it.

Re:Maybe they should fund generating capacity inst

By kbrannen • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

We’re already having to reduce power during periods of peak demand, Google should be funding more non-carbon producing generating capacity if they want more power.

I was thinking of something like: why not pay for solar panels on people’s houses (or in their yards). That will lessen what those in the house need, and perhaps even more than needed will be generated to go to the grid (and them). It would also be a 1 time cost to write off not some ongoing payment. (Although I wouldn’t be surprised to find out they somehow weasel their way out of paying for electricity they make people give up for them.)

Google will walk away

By hdyoung • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
From the deal the second it becomes a burden to them, leaving both the company and the users holding the bag.

There’s a reason why critical infrastructure is run by boring, careful companies called “utilities” that are guaranteed a modest profit by the state but have legal obligations to follow extra rules that amount to not screwing their customers over, and providing service to anyone within a set geographical area. They hardly ever make the news. They never lose much money, but they don’t make much profit either. Their finances are enforced by law. If the state squeezes them too much, they go bust and the water/electricity/sewer services stop. If the companies demand too much profit, well, too bad, the state gives them access to critical infrastructure and that gives them a veto. The stable equilibrium is a boring stable company. Utilities are one of the few areas where socialism has truly been proven to be superior to capitalism.

Trust me, we do *not* want silicon valley tech-bro venture capitalist types like google poking their fingers into utilities. Its a bad idea. It will end badly.

Paying homes and businesses “indirectly”

By 93 Escort Wagon • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

Translation: The money is given to the politicians.

Microsoft Says October Updates Didn’t Actually Fix VPN Issues

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
joshuark shares a report from BleepingComputer:
Microsoft says it mistakenly flagged a bug causing Always On VPN connection issues as fixed in the October 2026 Windows 11 cumulative updates. Always On VPN replaced the legacy DirectAccess technology and supports domain-joined, non-domain-joined, and Microsoft Entra ID-joined devices running Windows 10, Windows 11, and Windows Server. It runs in the background and establishes secure tunnels back to the user’s corporate network whenever their device connects to the internet.

Microsoft first acknowledged the issue in a service alert sent to IT administrators in late September, saying it was triggered on systems running Windows 11 24H2 and later after installing the September 2026 security updates when the initial Always On VPN connection failed (e.g., when using automatic protocol selection with IKEv2 and SSTP). “When automatic protocol selection or protocol fallback was configured, affected VPN connections could remain stuck in a Connecting state or fail to connect after an initial connection attempt failed,” it said. “In some cases, subsequent connection attempts could display the error, ‘The specified port is already in use.’"

After releasing the October 2026 Patch Tuesday Windows 11 cumulative updates, Microsoft marked the bug as resolved, but in a Tuesday update it said the issues weren’t actually addressed and that a fix would ship later. “This disclosure was mistakenly updated to Resolved status on October 13, 2026. We have returned its status to Mitigated,” it said in a service alert sent to IT admins. “A resolution for this issue is planned to be included in an update to be released in the coming weeks. We apologize for any inconvenience or confusion.” While Microsoft continues working on a permanent solution, it shared a temporary fix that requires affected customers to choose one of two VPN tunneling protocols to work around the issue.

The Browser Company Retires Its Arc Browser, Pushes Users to Dia

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
The Browser Company is shutting down its Arc browser on December 22 and encouraging users to migrate to Dia, its newer AI-powered browser for Apple Silicon Macs and Windows 11 PCs. Thurrott reports:
In the message explaining why it was sunsetting Arc, The Browser Company explained that maintaining two separate browsers was difficult to justify, especially from a security perspective. “Dia was built from the ground up to meet today’s security standards, so that’s where our engineering and security teams will focus moving forward,” the company wrote.

The retirement of Arc will be gradual: While nothing changes for existing Arc users, it’s no longer possible to create new Arc accounts as of today. On November 23, tab sync, Browse for Me, and other AI features will be disabled on the iOS and Android versions of Arc. Lastly, the desktop version of Arc will stop working on December 22, and Arc accounts will be deactivated.

You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy

By pla • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

it’s no longer possible to create new Arc accounts as of today

Why does using a browser depend on an “account”? And why is an already-installed application (not tied to a single service provider) going to stop working ever? I might not have a very good time with it, but I could still run a 29 year old copy of NCSA Mosaic if I really wanted to.

Then again, both of those pretty much are the answers to my other top question, “what the hell are Arc and Dia, and why have I never heard of them”: Proprietary garbage whose continued use depends on the Chief Sociopath having a good quarter. Nope, and good riddance!

Re:You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy

By fahrbot-bot • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

it’s no longer possible to create new Arc accounts as of today

Why does using a browser depend on an “account”? And why is an already-installed application (not tied to a single service provider) going to stop working ever …

According to the Wikipedia page for Arc an account is required with an email address. I’m guessing it’s for the AI features - and to mine more information about you. This is probably also why the browser will stop working.

Users are only able to use the browser after signing up to an Arc account with an email address.

I’m imagining that Dia will also require an account and personal information for mining your data - I mean, using the AI “features”.

Another reason you never have heard them

By BitterEpic • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

Why does using a browser depend on an “account”? And why is an already-installed application (not tied to a single service provider) going to stop working ever? I might not have a very good time with it, but I could still run a 29 year old copy of NCSA Mosaic if I really wanted to.

There is another reason you have never heard of them. The other main browsers have already added the big features that made Arc unique. Things like a side tab bar, arbitrary tab ordering, ordering tabs in a grid and out-of-box handling of multiple accounts in tabs.

While I appreciated the multi-account functionality when I tried it, it just isn’t as flexible as the Firefox’s Multi-Account Containers. And yeah, having to create an account is stupid. I really hate VC and the enshittifiation it brings.

No doubt.

By Kernel Kurtz • • Score: 3 • Thread

maintaining two separate browsers was difficult to justify

Especially two browsers nobody has ever heard of.

And yet

By Bahbus • • Score: 3 • Thread

another version of Chrome that no one needs, asked for, or wants while offering nothing unique.

Moderna Shares Plunge After Leak of Cancer Vaccine Data

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Moderna shares plunged as much as 25% after partial clinical trial data leaked for its personalized cancer vaccine developed with Merck, despite the full results showing promising outcomes for melanoma patients. Analysts attribute the selloff largely to inflated investor expectations rather than disappointing clinical results. CNBC reports:
The personalized vaccine, known as intismeran autogene, paired with Merck’s immunotherapy Keytruda reduced the risk of recurrence or death in certain melanoma patients by 42% compared with Keytruda alone. The data also showed the shot along with Keytruda reduced the risk of cancer spreading to distant parts of the body or death by 38%, compared with just the immunotherapy. The companies say about 82% of patients who received the personalized cancer vaccine alongside Keytruda were alive without their melanoma returning at two years, compared with 70% of those who received Keytruda alone.

[…] Investors see the targeted vaccine as a possible breakthrough treatment, with the potential to be used in other forms of cancer in the future. It could also offer Moderna a critical additional commercial product in its pipeline, following vaccines for Covid-19, the flu and respiratory syncytial virus.
“We assert this relative reduction in recurrence/death is clinically meaningful,” said BMO Capital Markets analyst Evan Seigerman. “Such a reaction likely reflects inflated expectations into the full data release, rather than a true indictment on the efficacy of the combo therapy.”
UBS analysts said “this is overall a strong data set” and gives more confidence in upcoming studies of the vaccine in kidney and bladder cancers. They added the stock reaction may be due more to massive expectations than disappointing data.

Re:Not surprising

By jacks smirking reven • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

pushed mRNA Covid vaccine on billions of people around the world without having to pass safety trials.

Why are we still doing this? Why of god in 2026 are we still fucking doing this shit? Holy living mother of Jesus can we please stop this.

Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Published Dec 30 2020

The trial enrolled 30,420 volunteers who were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either vaccine or placebo (15,210 participants in each group).

Re:Not surprising

By smooth wombat • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread
You people like to lie, don’t you? All covid vaccines underwent trials before given to the public. Those trials are how we know of any potential side effects. The ones you people keep claiming were never known.

You must be one of those who claims there’s never been a double-blind study for vaccines even though they’ve been done. This article, published before covid hit, lays out the lies people like you put out and why they’re lies.

And here’s the results of a double-blind study on the effectiveness of the MMRV vaccine from 2016. How timely considering Kennedy lies about the measles vaccine.

Sick fucks

By drinkypoo • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

I see we have some slavery game in the audience tonight. We already knew that though, because they’re the same people as the child rape fans.

Re:Not surprising

By Whateverthisis • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread
Everyone else is calling you out for your misinformation, and they’re right to do so. I’ll add more.

mRNA vaccine research was funded for 9 years before COVID broke out, by DARPA. It turned out it was highly effective at stopping aggressive immune responses, which is what actually kills people with infectious diseases and pandemics; our body’s response to the disease.

Moderna had already done some generic testing with both animals and hundreds of human studies for years before COVID; we had nearly a decade of non-stop research that included human trials before Covid even happened. Framing it as untested and not passing safety trials is simply FUD.

Because Republican politicians have nothing

By rsilvergun • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
Republican politicians have absolutely nothing to offer voters. Especially any voter who doesn’t have some flavor of bigotry or racism.

And it’s the same thing in every single country with a right-wing party. The right wing party wants power without actually making the world a better place for anyone except a handful of Epstein Island frequenters.

So they have to invent fake issues to give people a reason to vote for them and give them money and power. Vaccine denial was one of them. Freaking out about trans girls is another one. I’m old enough to remember when heavy metal music and violent video games were on the list. For a little while there the Democrats joined in on those two but Democrats eventually join us in the real world and listen to experts that just does not happen with Republicans.

Bose Is Buying Skullcandy

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Wired:
Longtime audio giant Bose announced on Wednesday that it’s acquiring Skullcandy, the lifestyle brand known for its bass-heavy headphones. Skullcandy will remain a separate company within Bose’s Premium Consumer Audio business and will still be based in Park City, Utah.

The acquisition isn’t out of left field. Bose has lent its audio expertise to Skullcandy over the past year under its Sound by Bose licensing program. Skullcandy designs the headphones and then works with Bose on the audio front. The relationship began with the Skullcandy Method 360 ANC earbuds in 2025 and more recently, with the Crusher 1080 ANC headphones in July.

[…] This is hardly Bose’s first audio acquisition (though it may be the most mainstream). Bose acquired McIntosh Group, owners of luxury audio brands McIntosh Laboratory and Sonus Faber, back in 2024. But Bose seems to be after Skullcandy’s connection to its community. “What does the brand stand for? Does it have meaning for consumers? Is it relevant to a group of consumers that, frankly, we otherwise aren’t reaching?” Bose CEO Lila Snyder tells WIRED. “If you think about McIntosh, Sonus Faber, and Skullcandy, they all fit into that realm. Skullcandy gives us access to a customer base that we think we’re largely missing with the Bose brand.”

That’s why Bose has no plans to relocate Skullcandy from Park City, Utah, which Snyder says is the epicenter of board sports culture. “We want to make sure we’re right at the heart of it, as they always have been,” she says. Skullcandy products are also affordable, especially compared to other Bose products and Bose-owned brands, which lets Bose compete at both ends of the market.

Bose

By OverlordQ • • Score: 3 • Thread

Buy Other Stereo Equipment

Better Off Something Else

No highs no lows it must be bose

Re:Bose

By jenningsthecat • • Score: 4, Funny • Thread

My thoughts exactly. Bose knows how to do “ear-catching”, but I find listening to their stuff for any length of time gets really old really fast. Recently we had to rent a car, and it had a Bose sound system. The sound was impressive - in the same way that a freight train whizzing past with its horn blowing is impressive. I guess that’s why I tend to dub the company “Blose” …

I could not get that radio to not make my ears hurt, even after extensive fiddling with the controls. I finally settled on settings that were reminiscent of a cheap 70’s transistor radio - that was the least objectionable sound I could wrest from the thing. So the Skullcandy acquisition fits - it’s “showy” sound for people who let trends and advertising, rather than their ears, dictate how their music systems sound.

Proprietary tech has its price long after purchase

By couchslug • • Score: 3 • Thread

https://www.pcmag.com/news/bos…

“In addition, the SoundTouch app will no longer function after Feb. 18, 2026, though it will still be available for download until then in markets outside of Japan. Users’ My Bose accounts will remain active.

As for why it’s cutting support now, Bose says technology has evolved since the speakers first launched in 2013 and that it’s âoeno longer able to sustain the development and support of the cloud infrastructure that powers this older generation of products.â

This likely isn’t welcome news for audiophiles who have spent large sums of money on the SoundTouch rangeâ"particularly as units such as the SoundTouch 30 retailed for north of $1,000. One Reddit user claims he’s now sitting on âoe$4,000 worth of bricks” following the move. Meanwhile, others called the ending of support “exploitative,â shared links to a petition calling on Bose to renew support for the SoundTouch range, and asked their fellow users to send emails to Bose’s management team.”

Lifestyle brand known for bass-heavy headphone

By HannethCom • • Score: 3 • Thread
“the lifestyle brand known for its bass-heavy headphones”
Are we talking about Skullcandy, or Bose. When I think of bass-heavy headphones, I immediately think Bose.
Now I am considered kind of strange because I use studio headphones as my primary headphones. I just like the proper reproduction of sound. Most people find it jarring as they are used to processed sound. The Bose were almost twice as much at the time, and the sound was completely wrong. Way too bass heavy, which is very typical of most, if not all of the Bose products.

Zoe Kleinman: PHP Is the Cyber Equivalent of an Unexploded Bomb

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
BBC technology editor Zoe Kleinman likens the recently discovered PHP security vulnerabilities to an unexploded bomb, writing, “The PHP story feels like the cyber equivalent of an unexploded bomb — I have never seen such a dramatic, public and global response to a cyber event that hasn’t happened yet.” Although no successful attacks have been confirmed, the AI-assisted discovery of long-hidden flaws has triggered a worldwide security scramble, with websites taken offline as a precaution and administrators racing to deploy patches before attackers can exploit the vulnerabilities. From the report:
The weaknesses found in the PHP programming language, which is used by millions of websites, had been quietly resting there for years and are not easy to exploit. One cyber security researcher told me he’d been up all night trying to do it as an experiment, but it was proving very difficult. […] It was supposed to be kept quiet until everyone had a chance to fix their sites — but the news was leaked. From that point the clock started ticking.

As I write this, there are no reports that anyone or anything has succeeded in using the flaws to attack a site. “There’s a real dilemma,” said Prof Alan Woodward from Surrey University. “How do you alert people they need to be ready, and then that a patch is urgently required, whilst not alerting attackers? Basically you’re telling everyone about the problem at the same time and hoping the defenders aren’t awake enough to act as soon as the patch is out.”

But we do know from large web companies like Cloudflare and Palo Alto Networks that millions of attempts have been made. We probably won’t know for a while whether it has worked for any criminals, because the companies affected might not be aware yet either. As far as we know the unexploded bomb remains intact for now, and for some experts this is a success.
“We’ve seen how a team of people supported by the large AI company have used AI to find the problem, work for months together to solve it and get everybody ready to be safe and secure,” Gina Neff, Professor of Responsible AI at Queen Mary University, told the Today Program on BBC Radio 4. “We have enormous capability to handle these risks.”

That’s why

By Valgrus Thunderaxe • • Score: 5, Funny • Thread
I haven’t updated from PHP 3. I work for a car dealership so I don’t have any enemies that would want to attack us.

Re: PHP

By dgatwood • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

Because it embeds into html, rather than rendering the html. It makes for very fragmented code.

In my experience, most sufficiently advanced use of PHP involves rendering the HTML. You can do it either way.

And most sufficiently complex PHP uses PHP as a full-fledged language, complete with classes, etc., and to the extent templates are used, the code in them consists of tiny partial-line-long fragments of code that call some method in some other file that is basically just code.

In other words, very fragmented code isn’t caused by PHP; it’s caused by the way that the developer chose to use PHP.

Re:Nothingburger

By Nuitari The Wiz • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

I had my clanker (Qwen3.8-abliterated) try for over 10h to weaponize some of the best looking PoC with no results except crashing workers.
ASLR was the first thing that blocked it, then it tried with it disabled for that process. It did manage to reliably crash a php-fpm or apache2 process with bad input.

So yes there is a problem, bad stuff is happening in the memory management and there are bugs.

ASLR is partly to thank for making exploiting this significantly harder.
There’s also a lot of things that might be tied to the specific version of glibc and other hardening aspects.

Re:Zoe Kleinman ?! WTAF ?!?!

By Pascoea • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

people will assume that any woman hired was hired due to this bias

No, “people” in general won’t assume that, but pre-biased idiots that are looking for an excuse will.

Re: PHP

By idontusenumbers • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

It sounds like you’re talking about PHP 1.0 from 31 years ago. That’s not at all like the current PHP.

Anthropic Takes On Muse With Claude Duet

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Anthropic has launched Claude Duet, an AI agent aimed at professionals and small businesses that competes with Meta’s Muse and OpenAI’s Dots. Here’s Anthropic’s description of what it can do:
Each morning, it sends you a short brief on the most important items across your connected apps. Throughout the day, it keeps tabs on those apps and messages you only when something needs your attention. You can also hand it tasks of all shapes — from simple administrative tasks of scheduling meetings to more complex ones, such as building dashboards with dozens of tools, creating financial or sales forecasts, prototyping, and building web apps.
The Verge reports:
Claude Duet pulls in memory, skills, and connected apps from Claude, and it has a virtual machine with a browser that it can use for completing work. Before any big step, like sending a payment or deleting something, Claude Duet messages you for approval. Given that Duet may be taking action on sensitive information, it has a new “new dedicated classifier and safety system prompt” that are “designed to reject requests to share the strictest tier of information,” such as credit card numbers.

Anthropic says Claude Duet is currently an “early version” and that it “still might misread a thread or miscalibrate what’s urgent.” It’s also not “as strong” at personal errands like booking tickets.

Yup, I like giving Beta-test software full control

By Caro Cogitatus • • Score: 3 • Thread
…of everything in my life. What could go wrong?

Several Linux Kernel Vulnerabilities Accidentally Posted To Public Kernel Mailing List

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Trend Micro’s Zero Day Initiative appears to have accidentally disclosed several unpatched Linux kernel vulnerabilities on the public LKML instead of the private security list, including two CVSS 9.0 flaws that could enable remote code execution through SMB Direct and KSMBD. “This seemingly was a mistake with Linux’s second-in-command Greg Kroah-Hartman responding to each report asking about their submission to the public mailing list,” adds Phoronix. The newly-disclosed vulnerabilities include:
ZDI-CAN-33549 as a CVSS 9.0 scored vulnerability for SMB Direct remote code execution vulnerability due to integer underflow. For this one there is a patch in a Git branch of code intended for Linux v7.5 but now presumably will be expedited for getting to mainline.

ZDI-CAN-33774 as a KSMBD race condition that can lead to remote code execution. Another CVSS 9.0 rated vulnerability.

ZDI-CAN-33367 is a vulneravbility for skbuff skb_zerocopy in the network code that can lead to local privilege escalation. For this one Linux kernel developers received a security report from another source last week over the same issue and a patch is expected to be posted soon.

ZDI-CAN-34068 as a VMWGFX VMware graphics driver bug with an out-of-bounds write leading to local privilege escalation.

ZDI-CAN-34076 an uninitialized resource in the NVMET code leading to information disclosure.

ZDI-CAN-32005 was also posted to the mailing list a day prior for a search-domain TCP query stack buffer overflow leading to local privilege escalation.

Fun week

By EvilSS • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
This is turning into a fun week for anyone in cybersecurity or just IT in general. Glad I’m taking sabbatical right now.

Re:Fun week

By 93 Escort Wagon • • Score: 5, Funny • Thread

I think I’m gonna need a sabbatical after this week!

Re:This is unsettling.

By 93 Escort Wagon • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

During the most recent Patch Tuesday, Microsoft provided 1411 counterarguments to your statement.

Google Staff Resign In Backlash Over Its AI Contracts With Military

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC:
Google is facing a backlash from some staff members over the company’s deployment of its AI technology for military use. The BBC has spoken to several tech workers who have either recently resigned from Google’s AI company, Google DeepMind, or are in the process of leaving, over concerns with the tech firm’s military contracts. Sofia Liguori, a London-based research engineer, is one of them. She resigned from Google DeepMind this week and spoke about her concerns exclusively with the BBC, despite her contract restricting her from doing so.

“Realizing my company is pushing more and more for AI systems in military operations makes me feel ashamed to work at Google,” Liguori said, speaking in a personal capacity. […] After working for the company for three years, Liguori said she decided to resign over Google’s increasing work with the US and Israeli militaries. “I don’t agree with this direction and this has led me to lose faith in my company being true to its stated ethical values,” she said. Those values, according to Google’s AI Principles, include implementing AI with “human oversight” and aligning the technology with “international law and human rights.” But former and current staff at the company, and experts the BBC spoke to, said they were concerned about the level of human oversight at critical moments.

The tech workers said they are particularly worried about the AI military deals signed this year, because they greatly increase the scope of what the Pentagon can use the technology for. Andreas Kirsch, an AI researcher, also resigned from Google DeepMind earlier this month over his concerns. Kirsch told the BBC that he believes “Google’s governance and oversight are not sufficient or meaningful enough to deploy AI safely and responsibly in military and classified settings” or “to develop artificial superintelligence safely in the future.” “Google seems to have no right to control or veto how the Pentagon uses its AI and also seems to have limited visibility into how it’s being deployed,” he added.

[…] Employees at Google have told the BBC that staff are scared to speak out about AI safety and its uses in warfare because their employment contracts prohibit them from publicly criticizing the company. “In principle I’m not allowed to criticize Google for the duration of my life,” Sofia Liguori told the BBC. But she decided to do so “because I believe it’s important for these things to be known and I also think that talking about facts is not criticizing.” Liguori added that at Google “people are scared of retaliation and putting their career at risk. You feel you are being watched, you can’t speak.”

A current employee at Google DeepMind, who declined to be named for fear of retaliation, told the BBC that “a lot of motivated employees who signed up for [the company’s] original mission could leave — but there’s also a pipeline of people at the start of the careers who could fill those positions. It could be a changing of the guard.” Another Google DeepMind staff member, who also wished to remain anonymous, told the BBC: “A lot of people have left the company that feel strongly about this [how Google DeepMind has changed its ethics position].” “Some people are putting up a fight, others are thinking: ‘it’s a big company. What do you expect to change?’", the employee said.
In response, a Google spokesperson told the BBC: “We work with public sector organisations worldwide and follow a consistent process for reviewing and entering these contracts, including compliance with our acceptable use policies and AI principles.”
“We also have dedicated channels for employees to safely raise any concerns — ranging from business ethics to misconduct — and have strict workplace policies in place to prevent retaliation of any kind.”

Re: Times have changed

By walbourn • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
Your list of regimes that need changed is missing the US…

Re:Admirable

By SlashbotAgent • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

You say that and it might be accurate. But, can you survive defending against the lawsuit that they bring? Can you afford legal defense against the likes of Google for 5 or more years?

Ain’t nobody in their right mind talking about stuff that is covered by a NDA just because they quit.

Re:idealists

By Brain-Fu • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Looks like modders are modding down any post to this article that supports the military in any way.

I realize that we hate violence and that humanity’s history is rich with horrifying crimes against humanity all committed by militaries.

That doesn’t change the fact that we need them. A country without a military gets steamrolled, and that’s that. There is no present or future world in which militaries are unnecessary. That’s just practical necessity talking. We can lament this fact all day long, but, we will never escape the need for military protection. This makes militaries a "necessary evil.”

That also means that the military must be effective. A military with low-tech second-rate weapons can’t protect anyone. I didn’t create this world, I am just describing it, don’t shoot the messenger.

The article summary laments the fact that Google can’t control how the U.S. military uses its AI products. Well, ok, that means AI might get used for evil. But what are we actually proposing here? That a private business with international ties should be able to tell the military what it can and can’t do? That isn’t how any sane chain of command works. We DO need transparency and accountability in the military, but they should be accountable to voters and elected representatives, not to the wealthy CEOs of powerful international businesses.

This is a case of idealism being too extreme. A world where militaries couldn’t do evil things would be a better world than the one we have. But we won’t succeed in creating such a world by keeping military technology under the control of the private sector. That just doesn’t make any sense.

Our country’s enemies have AI available to their militaries as well. They can use it to deploy cyber attacks on a scale never before seen. We need detection and response that is equally rapid. For that, we need our own AI. It makes zero sense for us to fall behind in an arms race, and even less sense for us to give our military leaders even more bosses to answer to (thus eliminating the possibility of speedy and decisive action in a crisis).

Before modding me down, please at least try to think this through. This isn’t about feeling big and powerful or enabling evil, it’s about ensuring effectiveness in keeping us safe.

Re:idealists

By Whateverthisis • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread
I’ll reply and give you extra points; you’re absolutely right.

This is something I see a lot; people who are intelligent but not really aware of how the world works, but also completely unaware of their own lack of understanding.

The facts of the world are:

1) The US military’s enormous strength has kept the world relatively peaceful for 70 years. Yes there have been wars and other conflicts; you can’t solve every problem. But compared to the World Wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the Franco Prussian Wars, the Seven Years’ War (which some define as the first real World War), and the Thirty Years’ War, the back half of the 20th century by comparison was relatively quiet. That’s because the US gave the world a choice: trade with us and prosper, or challenge us and be destroyed. You can do that with a powerful military, and occasionally it has to be used, but we haven’t seen a conflict even remotely on the scale of the major World Wars until Ukraine. There are issues and problems, but the US’ military strength made going Total War again far too costly, when it was just cheaper and better all around to trade. So as much as they are taking a stand on morals, the reality is that the very strength of the US military historically has suppressed conflict.

2) That doesn’t mean people won’t try to push, again as we’ve seen in Ukraine. Almost all forms of conflict became asymmetrical; deadly, and it makes headlines, but for the most part asymmetrical warfare could not existentially threaten a nation. But, again as we’ve seen in Ukraine and now Iran, there are limits to the US military’s strength, which built a system of high efficient, high cost systems for global power projection, but are significantly challenged by middling efficient, ultra cheap systems in large numbers. And while you may not want the US military to have AI tools, all you’re doing is hobbling the one military who’s very power ensured an era of relative peace and prosperity will be unprepared when potential adversaries are empowered with those tools. And quitting Google will not stop Iran or China or Russia or anyone else from developing AI weapons.

Given that the US military’s very strength kept the world relatively peaceful when looking at the long view of human history, the moral argument against supporting the DoD falls apart pretty quickly. I could understand not wanting to support the current administration which is absolutely a warmonger, but that changes.

Missing Some Context Here in the Comments

By Bobknobber • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

I think some folks are overlooking the fact that the public is getting increasingly sick and tired of the U.S. getting involved in so many wars since, well our inception as a country. The moralizing angle does not work for a public staring down the barrel of increased cost of living while the admin keeps going around bombing people and hawking the increasingly absurd propaganda to justify it.

We come off a two decade venture in the ME that was waged for very dubious objectives, costed us a ton of money, was used to justify the passage of increasingly invasive domestic surveillance policies wrt the Patriot act, and really did not actually improve the wellbeing of the average American just to get immersed in more wars.

Now I can at least give a pardon for Ukraine, but I’m laughing at the notion that we are waging a war with Iran for what totally is not on behalf of a certain little country looking to off a regional rival while we in return get to consolidate control over a major naval trade route for energy and chemical products. Why should Americans care about what an authoritarian regime does to its own people given we have supported our share of bloodthirsty regimes wrt to the Saudis, Israelis, and the rest of the GCC, or our history in LatAM.

So yeah, I get it. There is no honor in serving an army where the leadership is full of deranged crooks who would have no qualms tossing you aside when you have outlived your usefulness for whatever questionable geopolitical scheme they are trying to accomplish. Back then they could justify it by making the public richer but so far it seems like the spoils of war go to a handful of interests while we bear more of the cost at home.

Airbnb Bans Making Guests Do Dishes, Take Out the Trash

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Airbnb is banning hosts from requiring guests to perform time-consuming checkout chores, including washing dishes, stripping beds, doing laundry, and taking trash off-site. The updated policy applies to reservations booked on or after November 20. The Verge reports:
Airbnb is displaying hosts’ requests more prominently now in a new “rules and requests” section on listings. You might see an “includes cleaning requests” warning if a host leaves chore requests in their listing after the new policy goes into effect. Hosts aren’t allowed to sneak in extra rules in messages to guests or on signs around their property, either.

Some hosts pushed back on the house rules restrictions on Airbnb’s forums, saying they pose health risks and arguing that guests can simply choose not to stay at listings with overly-strict rules. Airbnb says there can be exceptions to the limits on checkout chores, like asking guests to “dispose of trash in an animal-proof container in bear country.”

It was evolving to..

By FarField12 • • Score: 5, Funny • Thread

All guests must make substantial improvement(s) before they leave such as painting the walls, finishing the cabinet doors or resurfacing the wooden floors.
Guests that do not make such improvements may incur a $8,000 improvement fee.

Re:VRBO

By bickerdyke • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

The problem was that some hosts required guests to do it AND charge a fee for getting it done.

Re:Lazy owners.

By alcmena • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

I’m a host myself in a unit in St Croix. It can sometimes take a day or two to get a cleaner out to a unit after checkout. We never made any cleaning rules and never charged guests for not doing something. We did ask guests to take out the trash when they leave (the dumpster is about 20 feet from our reserved parking spot) and we did ask the guests to load and run the dishwasher in the unit (we provide the detergent). Those were to prevent smells and guests. We’ve never gotten pushback on those requests. I’ve found if you are reasonable with guests and your requests, they are reasonable back with what they’re willing to help with.

Re:It’s the fees

By alcmena • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

We host on AirBNB and make no money on our property. That’s never really been our motivation. Our place is in St Croix, and we can only visit it a few times a year. Renting it ensures that people cycle through it. They report back when something looks off, which often allows us to catch an issue before its a significant problem. The money it brings in helps offset the maintenance cost. Which, to be honest, is pretty significant since our condo is ocean front and the salt is highly unkind to modern materials.

We do charge $180 for cleaning. We used to charge $150, standard rates for the island, and we got highly unreliable cleaners. At $180 we’ve gotten more reliable ones since we’re paying above market rates now. We can’t keep a stable cleaner to rely on because they mostly pick up jobs when they want to but at $180 they seem to be willing to do a good job when they do pick ours up. It’s just a simple reality of having an ocean property on a small, relatively remote, island.

You’re welcome to try for a hotel when to come to STX. King Christiansted is a decent one, but typically 30-50% over our rates. Some of the others, let’s say, we’ve gotten a decent number of “emergency” bookings from people already in STX because they decided not to actually stay in their booked hotel.

Re:It’s the fees

By Fly Swatter • • Score: 4, Funny • Thread
Indifferent, thanks for the feedback.

America’s War Department Will Test Heat Ray Weapon For Potential Use

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Longtime Slashdot reader destinyland shares a report from CNN:
The Pentagon has given the Department of Homeland Security permission to test a military-grade heat ray and develop tactics to potentially use it in operations at the southern US border, according to a memo signed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last month and obtained by CNN. The heat ray, officially known as the Active Denial System, is a nonlethal weapon that shoots an invisible beam of electromagnetic waves that can reach a little more than half a mile away, according to the US military. The energy beam causes a burning sensation when it comes into contact with the human skin — which Pentagon officials have previously compared to feeling a blast of heat when opening a hot oven. Military officials have said the resulting “tingling effect” lasts between 10 and 15 minutes but also generates “an instinctive and irresistible urge to run from the effect.”

It’s DEFENSE department

By Rosco P. Coltrane • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

War department is Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth doing their fascist circle-jerk.

Havana syndrome

By caseih • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

Ironic they are developing this weapon while at the same time denying that Havana syndrome is real and accusing the victims in the diplomatic core of mass hysteria. Not that long ago they bought a weapon on the black market from the Russians. I’m sure they have been testing it extensively while they make their own version of it.

Re:Microwave beam is not a “heat ray”

By ArchieBunker • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

If you want to be sloppy and put all immigrants in the same bucket. 100% of illegal aliens are criminals. Even if they committed no crime after spitting in our faces and wiping their asses on our laws by breaking in.

If you left your house today I guarantee you were breaking some law in one form or another. Did you drive exactly the speed limit or fail to come to a complete stop? You also broke the law. So get down off your high horse. In the grand scheme of things someone being here illegally and working construction is about last on my list of priorities. You’re being taken advantage of by propaganda so you don’t see the people in charge robbing you blind.

If someone broke into my house and claimed a room, I wouldn’t care if they didn’t do anything else to hurt me. What they already did was enough for their asses the be dragged out and whooped in the street.

You don’t own the country.

Re:Microwave beam is not a “heat ray”

By drinkypoo • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

If someone broke into my house and claimed a room

Good news! That didn’t happen! Instead, they moved in down the street, paid more in taxes than it costs to support them, and committed fewer crimes than the ICE agents you want to do them harm.

You are factually pro-crime and pro-higher taxes, whether you understand that or not.

Re:“An irressistable urge to run”

By Local ID10T • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Yes. Soldiers shooting people with bullets see and hear what they are doing, and to whom. They should see and hear the dead and the dying crying out at the base of the wall they are defending, not just assume that what they are doing is harmless because it is invisible.

If you are going to be brutal, you should bear the emotional cost of that brutality. Every American should know how brutal you are being in their name so that they can decide honestly if they want it done.

We are cruel to others because we are insulated from the cruelty done on our behalf.

Startup Claims To Use AI-Created Viruses To Treat a Patient

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times:
For the first time, scientists say they have used viruses designed by artificial intelligence to treat a human patient. Researchers announced on Tuesday that they had administered the virus, known as a phage, to a patient suffering from a deadly bacterial infection. Phages attack bacteria, and the hope is that this one will kill the microbes causing the infection. Radical Numerics, the start-up that created the viruses, posted a technical report about them on its website. But the company declined to provide information about the patient or the doctors running the trial, citing confidentiality requirements.

[…] In 2025, researchers at the Arc Institute in Palo Alto, Calif., created an A.I. model called Evo 2, which they trained on millions of DNA sequences, including phage genes. They prompted Evo 2 to make new genomes similar to those in a group of phage species. The A.I. generated 700,000 virus genomes. The team synthesized DNA molecules from 285 genomes and inserted them into bacteria. The researchers found that 16 of the genomes gave rise to viable viruses. Three members of the Evo team, including Dr. Nguyen, left to found Radical Numerics. In June, the company unveiled a new A.I. model, called Omnii, based on some of the same principles as Evo.

Omnii can be trained not just on DNA but also on other aspects of biology, such as the structures of proteins and molecules that keep genes turned on or off. The company is now using Omnii to tackle a range of challenges, including designing cancer vaccines and recognizing the risk that a virus may cause a pandemic. Among these efforts is the first trial of A.I.-designed phage therapy. The researchers created variations of a phage called T7. The virus, which only infects E. coli, looks like a microscopic Apollo lunar lander: a ball-shaped protein shell that holds its DNA atop six leglike protrusions. To infect a bacterium, T7 lands on its surface, using its legs to anchor in place. It then injects its DNA into the cell.

Omnii generated new viral genes altering the shapes of T7’s legs, according to Dr. Nguyen and his colleagues. While some of the new legs were significantly different from natural ones, Omnii’s phages could still infect bacteria. Once the researchers were confident their strategy had worked, they partnered with doctors treating a patient with a stubborn E. coli infection. The bacteria had resisted not just antibiotics but all the available phages. The researchers said they had trained Omnii with information about the resistant strain and told it to design T7 phages with legs that could grab onto the bacteria. Once the A.I. generated genomes for new viruses, the scientists said they produced the corresponding DNA molecules and inserted them in bacteria. The bacteria became infected and produced T7 phages that could successfully infect, and kill, other microbes. After running tests to make sure the phages were safe, Radical Numerics presented them to the doctors. The F.D.A. authorized a trial.
While the trial was authorized by the FDA, it’s worth noting that the research has not yet been peer-reviewed in a scientific journal and there’s no guarantee the AI-designed phages will work.
However, if it does prove successful, it could help speed phage therapy by cutting down the time it takes to create a new virus tailored to each patient’s infection. “We think we can get it done in days,” said Dr. Eric Nguyen, the chief executive officer of Radical Numerics.

Re: Do it in space

By ArmoredDragon • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

Bacteriophages aren’t even remotely equipped to infect animal cells, so it’s really not even relevant.

Re:Startup Claims (insert vaporware here)

By NotEmmanuelGoldstein • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
It shows us what the technology is capable of: Sure, “Can it scale?” and “Can production be automated?” are questions that must be answered before it is an everyday medicine at the hospital. But those questions also inform the next corporation what it needs to invent, to create a new medicine.

Fascinating phages

By wickerprints • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

So I only remembered a little bit of the virology of phages from what I learned in school—namely, that they infect bacteria and that they are everywhere. And when I saw some of the early comments posted here that were big on knee-jerk reactions and scarcasm but small on actual science, I decided to read the Wikipedia article.

Phages don’t infect eukaryotes; they only infect bacteria. And phage therapy has been successfully used to combat antibiotic resistance in humans, although the problem of resistance in general remains. This makes sense: bacteria replicate rapidly and have relatively little in the way of proofreading mechanisms, so when there is selection pressure, they mutate and develop resistance very easily, even to phages. So engineering a phage to target an antibiotic-resistant bacterial strain might work in the short term, but unless there’s a way to cultivate phages that are able to adapt in response to (and not simply target) that strain, the strategy is intrinsically self-limiting.

To those comments drawing ill-informed comparisons to engineering viruses that infect humans, know this: phages are literally everywhere on this planet. They are far, far more abundant than bacteria, and most people can appreciate how ubiquitous bacteria are. You already have phages inside of you, and in fact, they form an entire ecosystem. Same thing with bacteria—you have bacteria all over and inside your body. You have more bacterial cells coexisting on and inside you than you have your own cells. And what’s more interesting is that these phages seem to be protective by helping to maintain a balanced microbiome.

The concern I have with engineered phages is not that they would be harmful to the environment or to us, or that they could mutate to be harmful. That is extremely, extremely unlikely, because such a concern doesn’t reflect an understanding of how phages actually function in real life and how they co-evolve with the bacteria they infect. If anything I would be concerned about spreading bacteria that become extensively resistant to antibiotics and phages. Thus we need better education about what phage therapy is, and to ensure that study participants are adequately informed of the potential risks and benefits. The direction such therapy would most likely need to take is quite similar to CRISPR and other gene therapies, in that it would need to be a form of personalized medicine. If we can develop computer models to help perform this personalization more efficiently, then I’m for it; such an approach may also prove useful for treating cancer.

Might finally solve the issues around using Phages

By BrightCandle • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread
We have been trying to use Bacteriophages for treatment of bacterial infections for about 50 years. The Russians have gotten the closest they have a giant bank of phages available and a variety of mixed phage products. The issue is phages are highly particular about the bacteria they attack there are thousands of different ones for just Staph Aureus for example and getting the right one involves culturing the bacteria and then seeing if the phages help. The problem is patients with such infections don’t have the many days this process takes. Antibiotics that destroy a lot of different bacteria have been used in preference because its something you can take right away. With chronic issues however phages are used, but mostly just in Russian medicine, they are the only people to have access to a big bank of the biologics are a reasonable safe process for making and testing them. If we can identify which phage will help or even better print one on an RNA/DNA printer then we might be able to use these to treat serious concerning conditions like sepsis with them. This has real potential as an approach, phages have been very interesting for a long time and there is little concern about biological impact here because every bacteria has phages in nature already and they inert in animal cells they only go after the bacteria they are designed to deal with. Being able to create them as needed will eliminate the need for big banks of storage of phages and identifying the right one solves the speed of treatment. This could unlock a new way of dealing with problematic infections that only destroy the bacteria that are a problem leaving your various microbiomes alone. Most western people have lost some key bacteria in their gut due to the use of antibiotics so we definitely need something better than the generic antibiotics we have today.

Re: Do it in space

By ArmoredDragon • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

You’re talking about not only penetrating the cell wall (where that’s even relevant), plasma membrane, etc, but you’re also talking about having the wrong set of tools once you’ve figured that out. Bacteria are prokaryotic, which means an entirely different mechanism is required for splicing in nucleotides (whether RNA or DNA) and other mechanisms like transcription work differently, etc.

Moreover, where this would see common use is really an emergency situation. SpaceX has the shortest logistical chain to get a payload to orbit of anybody in the world by a landslide, yet you’re still looking at least a few days out, assuming the weather cooperates. Really not ideal for patient care. And then the more sci-fi bits you’re asking about need an even bigger payload.

It’s unfounded fears like this that have literally set entire continents back decades on research. Look at Europe: When GM crops were first introduced, they got out their pitchforks and torches and moved fast to ban it. It’s because of this that they’re literally way behind the rest of the world in biotech. Even China makes them look like a podunk redneck village. Did I mention, by the way, that the scientific consensus on GMO being safe is actually stronger than the consensus on climate change? And they even have American progressives, who look at Europe as this ideal model of everything, shouting “Look! They banned it in Europe! Clearly we need to ban it here!” even though Europe is finally starting to second guess its decisions. The US has made similar mistakes on drug research, namely putting shit on schedule 1 when it doesn’t belong there, but fortunately that list is short (should be gone entirely IMO)

I’m not an expert on this at all, nor have I ever claimed it, rather, unlike most of slashdot, I strongly believe in taking the time to learn the subject matter at least a little bit before boarding the technology lynch mob. Don’t be like Europe or the American DEA: Think first, then act.