Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. OpenAI Acquires Chat.com
  2. Anthropic’s Haiku 3.5 Surprises Experts With an ‘Intelligence’ Price Increase
  3. German Firms’ 4-Day Workweek Trial Slashes Stress, Keeps Productivity High
  4. ‘A New Gaming CPU King’: AMD’s New Ryzen 7 9800X3D Reviewed
  5. Facebook Asks US Supreme Court To Dismiss Fraud Suit Over Cambridge Analytica Scandal
  6. UK Will Legislate Against AI Risks in Next Year, Pledges Kyle
  7. Detroit Is Turning Lampposts Into Internet-Connected EV Chargers
  8. Corning’s Gorilla Glass Under EU Antitrust Investigation
  9. AI Workers Seek Whistleblower Cover To Expose Emerging Threats
  10. Google Has No Duty To Refund Gift Card Scam Victims, Judge Finds
  11. AI’s Huge Power Needs Give Oil Majors Incentive To Invest in Renewables, Says Adnoc Boss
  12. Trump Wins US Presidency For Second Time
  13. China Reveals a New Heavy Lift Rocket That Is a Clone of SpaceX’s Starship
  14. Google CEO Forbids Political Talk After Firing 28 Over Israeli Contract Protest
  15. Bitcoin Hits All-Time High

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.

OpenAI Acquires Chat.com

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
OpenAI has acquired the chat.com domain name, likely for well over $10 million. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman posted a one-word tweet this morning, simply stating, “chat.com.” Domain Name Wire reports:
The chat.com domain name has changed hands for the third time in two years. HubSpot founder Dharmesh Shah kicked off the buying last year, plunking down over $15.5 million for the domain name. He turned around and sold the domain shortly thereafter for a profit.

Anthropic’s Haiku 3.5 Surprises Experts With an ‘Intelligence’ Price Increase

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica:
On Monday, Anthropic launched the latest version of its smallest AI model, Claude 3.5 Haiku, in a way that marks a departure from typical AI model pricing trends — the new model costs four times more to run than its predecessor. The reason for the price increase is causing some pushback in the AI community: more smarts, according to Anthropic. “During final testing, Haiku surpassed Claude 3 Opus, our previous flagship model, on many benchmarks — at a fraction of the cost,” Anthropic wrote in a post on X. “As a result, we’ve increased pricing for Claude 3.5 Haiku to reflect its increase in intelligence.”

“It’s your budget model that’s competing against other budget models, why would you make it less competitive,” wrote one X user. “People wanting a ‘too cheap to meter’ solution will now look elsewhere.” On X, TakeOffAI developer Mckay Wrigley wrote, “As someone who loves your models and happily uses them daily, that last sentence [about raising the price of Haiku] is *not* going to go over well with people.” In a follow-up post, Wrigley said he was not surprised by the price increase or the framing, but saying it out loud might attract ire. “Just say it’s more expensive to run,” he wrote.

The new Haiku model will cost users $1 per million input tokens and $5 per million output tokens, compared to 25 cents per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens for the previous Claude 3 Haiku version. Presumably being more computationally expensive to run, Claude 3 Opus still costs $15 per million input tokens and a whopping $75 per million output tokens. Speaking of Opus, Claude 3.5 Opus is nowhere to be seen, as AI researcher Simon Willison noted to Ars Technica in an interview. “All references to 3.5 Opus have vanished without a trace, and the price of 3.5 Haiku was increased the day it was released,” he said. “Claude 3.5 Haiku is significantly more expensive than both Gemini 1.5 Flash and GPT-4o mini — the excellent low-cost models from Anthropic’s competitors.”

The bills are due

By ebunga • Score: 4, Informative Thread

They have to start showing some real revenue other than more rounds of VC money. The novelty is wearing off. AI winter is coming.

German Firms’ 4-Day Workweek Trial Slashes Stress, Keeps Productivity High

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
A six-month German pilot of a four-day workweek across 45 companies demonstrated that most employees experienced reduced stress and maintained productivity, with some companies adopting optimized processes and digital tools to enhance efficiency. The report says 70% of the firms plan to continue the model. DW News reports:
Earlier this year, some 45 German firms launched a 4-day workweek project to find out if such a fundamental change to how we work can achieve positive results for employers and employees. For six months, and closely watched by researchers from Munster University in Germany, the volunteer companies allowed their employees to work fewer hours without reducing their salaries. The pilot run was initiated by Berlin-based management consultancy, Intraprenor, in collaboration with the nonprofit organization 4 Day Week Global (4DWG). […]

Julia Backmann, the scientific lead of the pilot study, says employees generally felt better with fewer hours and remained just as productive as they were with a five-day week, and, in some cases, were even more productive. Participants reported significant improvements in mental and physical health, she told DW, and showed less stress and burnout symptoms, as confirmed by data from smartwatches tracking daily stress minutes. According to Backmann’s findings, two out of three employees reported fewer distractions because processes were optimized. Over half of the companies redesigned their meetings to make them less frequent and shorter, while one in four companies adopted new digital tools to boost efficiency. “The potential of shorter working hours seems to be stifled by complex processes, too many meetings, and low digitalization,” said Carsten Meier from Intraprenor.

The study has also shown that participants were more physically active during the 4-day workweek, and they slept an average of 38 minutes more per week than those in the five-day control group. However, monthly sick days only dropped slightly, a statistically insignificant difference compared to the same period a year ago. Marika Platz from Munster University, who analyzed the data, said she was surprised at the number of sick days because similar studies in other countries showed a significant reduction. Another surprise, she told DW, was the lack of environmental benefits from reduced working hours during the German test as other countries reported a positive impact from offices that could be shut down completely for one day, and fewer commutes to work that resulted in higher energy savings. The reason for this was probably that some German employees took advantage of the long weekends to travel, she said, which reduced any potential energy savings.
Study director Backmann stressed that the study was not about advocating for a blanket rollout of the 4-day workweek across all sectors, but rather exploring “an innovative work-time model and its effects.”
Carsten Meier from the Intraprenor consultancy added that the positive results of the trial cannot be “automatically translated” into similar gains for every company in Germany.

Interesting, but…

By Nrrqshrr • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Much like with UBI trials, there is an inherent fault in these studies because the employees know that it’s just an experiment.

The only way to know if this, and UBI, can actually work in a “real world” scenario, is to try them in a real world scenario with no strings attached.

Too soon to tell

By Local ID10T • Score: 3 Thread

A six month test while closely monitored for performance changes… is not indicative of reality.

Do it for a few years without closely monitoring everyone, and then measure the productivity change. If it holds up over time, without someone looking over their shoulders constantly, then it is real.

Umlauts are a problem.

By Sique • Score: 3 Thread
It’s Muenster University though, not Munster University. If you don’t have umlauts available, don’t just omit them, as this might change the meaning of a word. According to German spelling rules, you can always replace them by adding an e behind the vowel to indicate the umlaut: Ü -> UE.

Soon in the US

By ugen • Score: 3 Thread

Meanwhile, in the US soon to have a 7 day workweek (none of which is overtime) to make up for all the immigrants we are about to send back.

‘A New Gaming CPU King’: AMD’s New Ryzen 7 9800X3D Reviewed

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
“AMD’s Ryzen 7 9800X3D debuts with impressive performance gains, powered by advanced 3D V-Cache technology and improved thermal efficiency,” writes Slashdot reader jjslash. “While the CPU shines as a top choice right out of the gate, AMD’s history of quick price cuts suggests waiting could yield even better value for savvy buyers.” TechSpot reports:
Today we’re finally able to show you how AMD’s new Ryzen 7 9800X3D performs, and spoiler alert — it’s a real weapon that solves the issues we encountered with the non-3D Zen 5 chips before this. Without question, this is the best CPU released since the 7800X3D, making this launch particularly exciting. […] For now, the 9800X3D is mighty impressive, the undisputed king of gaming, and it marks a historic milestone. We don’t think AMD has ever been this dominant over Intel, certainly not in the last 15 years.

Facebook Asks US Supreme Court To Dismiss Fraud Suit Over Cambridge Analytica Scandal

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian:
The US supreme court grappled on Wednesday with a bid by Meta’s Facebook to scuttle a federal securities fraud lawsuit brought by shareholders who accused the social media platform of misleading them about the misuse of user data. The justices heard arguments in Facebook’s appeal of a lower court’s decision allowing the 2018 class action suit led by Amalgamated Bank to proceed. The suit seeks unspecified monetary damages in part to recoup the lost value of the Facebook stock held by the investors. It is one of two cases coming before them this month — the other one involving artificial intelligence chipmaker Nvidia on 13 November — that could lead to rulings making it harder for private litigants to hold companies to account for alleged securities fraud.

At issue is whether Facebook broke the law when it failed to detail the prior data breach in subsequent business-risk disclosures, and instead portrayed the risk of such incidents as purely hypothetical. Facebook argued in a supreme court brief that it was not required to reveal that its warned-of risk had already materialized because “a reasonable investor” would understand risk disclosures to be forward-looking statements. “When we think about these questions, we’re not looking only to lies or complete false statements,” the liberal justice Elena Kagan told Kannon Shanmugam, the lawyer for Facebook. “We’re also looking to misleading statements or misleading omissions.” The conservative justice Samuel Alito asked Shanmugam: “Isn’t it the case that an evaluation of risks is always forward-looking?” “It is. And that is essentially what underlies our argument here,” Shanmugam responded.

The plaintiffs accused Facebook of misleading investors in violation of the Securities Exchange Act, a 1934 federal law that requires publicly traded companies to disclose their business risks. They claimed the company unlawfully withheld information from investors about a 2015 data breach involving British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica that affected more than 30 million Facebook users. Edward Davila, a US district judge, dismissed the lawsuit but the San Francisco-based ninth US circuit court of appeals revived it. The supreme court’s ruling is expected by the end of June.

UK Will Legislate Against AI Risks in Next Year, Pledges Kyle

Posted by msmash View on SlashDot Skip
The UK will bring in legislation to safeguard against the risks of AI in the next year, technology secretary Peter Kyle has said, as he pledged to invest in the infrastructure that will underpin the sector’s growth. From a report:
Kyle told the Financial Times’ Future of AI summit on Wednesday that Britain’s voluntary agreement on AI testing was “working, it’s a good code” but that the long-awaited AI bill would be focused on making such accords with leading developers legally binding. The legislation, which Kyle said would be presented to MPs in the current parliament, will also turn the UK’s AI Safety Institute into an arms-length government body, giving it “the independence to act fully in the interests of British citizens.”

At present, the body is a directorate of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. At the UK-organised AI safety summit last November, companies including OpenAI, Google DeepMind and Anthropic signed a “landmark” but non-binding agreement allowing partner governments to test their forthcoming large language models for risks and vulnerabilities before they were released to consumers. Kyle said that while he was “not fatalistic” about advancements in AI, “citizens need to know that we are mitigating the potential risks.”

Kyle’s mom

By fjo3 • Score: 3 Thread
is a b.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?…

Detroit Is Turning Lampposts Into Internet-Connected EV Chargers

Posted by msmash View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader shares a report:
Curbside EV charging in Michigan should become easier in the coming months thanks to a new collaboration between telecom giant AT&T and lamppost EV charging startup Voltpost. The two have joined forces to bring internet connectivity to EV charging posts across Michigan and the Metro-Detroit area-this way, the operator knows immediately if a stall has gone offline and can send a team to fix it faster. Better uptime benefits both the company and the EV drivers who choose to top up their cars’ batteries while parked.

Voltpost’s lamppost charging solution essentially turns existing street lights into EV chargers. The startup claims the installation of a single stall takes anywhere from one to two hours and that the costs are much lower than a conventional EV charging station. However, the caveat here is that the charging speeds are limited to what one would experience with a home charger. The AC Level 2 lamppost chargers are powered by the street lighting grid, which was never designed to sustain high loads, so expect to keep the car plugged in for hours. That said, the system can still come in handy when the owner of an EV goes to work and parks the car on the street. Or during a lengthy shopping trip topped off with an evening movie. It’s no DC fast charger, but it doesn’t claim to be one.

What is the rating for salt spray, Marine Grade?

By nevermindme • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
The city of chicago spent a few thousand dollars each on fiberglass add on decorative covers for the bottom of lampposts along Roosevelt Road east of Halsted. What would have been fine in Tucson, was a expensive mistake in Chicago. What these fiberglass pieces did was expand the corrosion season to 365 days and had light posts failing inspections or just falling over in stiff breeze just 3 years later. The entire sidewalk and walkway is a bridge bringing Roosevelt up to chicago downtown street level, any cathodic protection was wiped out by a sweatbox full of salt and moisture 24x7x365. This is a city that day to day maintenance within the downtown sector is second to none.

This is my concern with anything mounted outside in Michigan along a road, how is protected from the elements from -30F to 120F with 65F daily swings on spring days? Can it be repaired without a 100 day service ticket? What is the contract to get the next great thing in the spot when this company falls out of favor of the politicians or the stock market.

What about charge port location?

By sirket • Score: 3 Thread

This is one case where I think Tesla made a big mistake. Unless it’s a one way street- the Tesla charge port is on the wrong side for curbside charging (and for anyone else who also uses the driver’s side like the Ford Mach-E). For EVs to become ubiquitous in cities (where they are the most beneficial), we need solutions like this that allow charging at the curb, and moving the charge port to the passenger side would make that a lot easier with no real downside.

Re:What odds are we giving....

By shilly • Score: 4, Informative Thread

Lamp-post chargers don’t have any built-in cords! They look like this:
https://ubitricity.com/en/char…
There’s nothing to steal

Re:What is the rating for salt spray, Marine Grade

By hey! • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

We have telephone pole mounted chargers in my town. We definitely have tons of salt used on our roads, but it’s not a problem because everything is mounted about fifteen feet in the air. You scan a QR code with the app, and the charger reels out enough cable until the plug is hanging within reach. You then push a button on the plug to pay out enough cable to reach your charger port. When you unplug the charger the cable automatically reels back up.

The system has been working flawlessly for several years, and weather doesn’t cause any problems at all. The main problem with is that there are a limited number of chargers installed and the spaces are usually taken up by ICE vehicles. The system needs to be expanded, and there probably needs to be some kind of reservation system to allow predictable access. But aside from the economic and logistic challenges, this physical design is certainly practical for a location with severe weather.

The Detroit design looks a lot more vulnerable, with the plug located about four feet above sidewalk level I would think snowbanks would pose a problem. I’d have put them at least a foot higher, but perhaps there were wheelchair accessibility concerns. Mounting the system higher and having the plug descend is much better for protecting the installation from weather mishaps and vandalism.

Corning’s Gorilla Glass Under EU Antitrust Investigation

Posted by msmash View on SlashDot Skip
The European Commission has opened a formal investigation into Corning to determine whether it has broken antitrust rules with its dominant Gorilla Glass product. From a report:
Corning’s Alkali-aluminosilicate glass is used to protect most of the top phones and tablets, with both Samsung and Apple using it extensively across their range of devices. The EU is concerned that Corning has used a variety of exclusivity contracts to exclude rival glass makers from the phone market. “It is very frustrating and costly experience to break a mobile phone screen. Therefore, strong competition in the production of the cover glass used to protect such devices is crucial to ensure low prices and high-quality glass,” says outgoing EU competition chief Margrethe Vestager.

“We are investigating if Corning, a major producer of this special glass, may have tried to exclude rival glass producers, thereby depriving consumers from cheaper and more break-resistant glass.” The Commission’s concerns are centered on the agreements with mobile device makers and companies that produce raw glass. The EU is looking into exclusive sourcing obligations that have required device makers to source “all of nearly all” of their glass from Corning, enabled rebates for exclusivity deals, and forced device makers to report on competitive offers and only accept them if Corning failed to price match.

I think …

By PPH • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

.. the EU is correct here. In spite of a need for governments to stand aside and stay out of private contracts, exclusive agreements aren’t (or shouldn’t) recieve the protection of civil law. Contracts are an agreement to provide some defined consideration in return for the delivery of some defined good or service. “All your stuff” isn’t really a definition of quantity or performance and should invalidate a contract. While volume discounts are OK, they need to be defined in terms of fixed quantities.

Investigating what exactly?

By SmaryJerry • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
I’m not sure how Corning has any power here? An exclusivity contract is typically for a period of time and simply locks in pricing for a buyer. How could the company providing the glass have any power whatsoever over their buyers? Unless the argument is that their glass is so good that other companies are forced to sign exclusive agreements - which sort of defeats the entire argument this is hurting competition. Maybe they are saying that because they are doing the phone screen glass they also have to do the phone back glass? Its still a stretch that Corning would be in the wrong here.

Can’t help but notice…

By krisbrowne42 • Score: 3, Informative Thread
…That the only companies the EU investigates are foreign. Example - Spotify seems to have a clear monopoly on free streaming music, which it uses to maintain outright abusive relationships with artists, but they’re more often given protected status against other companies than investigated for the harm they do.

Re:Investigating what exactly?

By rocket rancher • Score: 4, Informative Thread

I’m not sure how Corning has any power here?

The article explains that the European Commission is investigating Corning’s potential use of exclusivity contracts to exclude rival glass makers. Power in this context doesn’t necessarily mean forcing buyers but rather creating market conditions that restrict competition. If Corning’s contracts effectively block other suppliers, it could limit choices for phone manufacturers and, ultimately, for consumers.

An exclusivity contract is typically for a period of time and simply locks in pricing for a buyer.

The Commission’s investigation is focused on whether these exclusivity contracts go beyond just locking in prices. According to the article, Corning’s contracts may require phone makers to source “all or nearly all” of their glass from Corning, potentially leaving competitors out of the market. The issue here is not just about pricing but about restricting access for other glass manufacturers.

How could the company providing the glass have any power whatsoever over their buyers?

Corning’s market dominance in smartphone glass means that it may hold significant leverage over device makers. The article suggests that Corning’s exclusivity agreements may limit the ability of device makers to consider alternative suppliers. This power stems from Corning’s strong market position and the quality reputation of Gorilla Glass, which gives it an advantage in negotiations that smaller competitors might lack.

Unless the argument is that their glass is so good that other companies are forced to sign exclusive agreements - which sort of defeats the entire argument this is hurting competition.

The quality of Gorilla Glass isn’t in question here. The concern is that Corning may be leveraging its market position to lock out competition, not because of the product’s quality but through restrictive contracts. Even if Gorilla Glass is high-quality, other suppliers should have a fair chance to compete. The investigation aims to ensure that consumers benefit from lower prices and higher-quality products driven by real competition, not by one supplier’s dominance.

Maybe they are saying that because they are doing the phone screen glass they also have to do the phone back glass?

There’s no indication in the article that the investigation concerns only the type of glass, like screen vs. back glass. Instead, it’s about whether Corning’s exclusivity agreements have constrained competition across all smartphone glass applications, regardless of where the glass is used.

Its still a stretch that Corning would be in the wrong here.

Corning’s own statement acknowledges the importance of regulatory compliance, and the EU’s investigation is standard procedure in cases of potential antitrust violations. The Commission’s role is to ensure fair competition, and exclusivity contracts that lock in nearly all purchases from one supplier are a valid area for scrutiny. The investigation doesn’t imply guilt—it simply seeks to clarify whether Corning’s business practices have unlawfully restricted competition.

AI Workers Seek Whistleblower Cover To Expose Emerging Threats

Posted by msmash View on SlashDot Skip
Workers at AI companies want Congress to grant them specific whistleblower protection, arguing that advancements in the technology pose threats that they can’t legally expose under current law. From a report:
“What people should be thinking about is the 100 ways in which these companies can lose control of these technologies,” said Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard law professor who represented OpenAI employees and former employees raising issues about the company. Current dangers range from deepfake videos to algorithms that discriminate, and the technology is quickly becoming more sophisticated. Lessig called the argument that big tech companies and AI startups can police themselves naive. “If there’s a risk, which there is, they’re not going to take care of it,” he said. “We need regulation.”

Hm

By byronivs • Score: 4, Informative Thread

Gonna have to frame that as a liberal scourge or pay some lawmakers. Sorry kids, new rules. Labor laws are gonna be shunted to “state’s-rights” and we’ll see results after a pattern illustrated by the struck Roe v Wade. “Chevron” is dead, is the pathway. The king live forever!

Lessig is right…we need a legislative shield

By rocket rancher • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Given the rapid advancements in AI and its potential impacts on society, it makes sense to consider specific protections for workers who raise concerns about potentially harmful deployments. Existing whistleblower protections cover areas like fraud and foreign bribery, but AI brings unique challenges that could directly affect public safety, privacy, and even democracy itself.

A legislative shield for AI whistleblowers could follow a few basic principles:

        Protected Disclosures: Employees should be allowed to disclose concerns about AI systems that could impact public well-being without fear of retaliation. These disclosures should focus on significant issues, such as safety risks, ethical violations, or misuse of personal data, that could harm the people the AI interacts with.

        Confidentiality Exceptions: While protecting trade secrets is essential, this shield could carve out exceptions for disclosures that prioritize public interest, much like whistleblower protections for environmental or health risks. This would ensure that workers aren’t muzzled by NDAs when genuinely dangerous AI practices are involved.

        Clear Guidelines for Whistleblowers: Providing clear guidance on what qualifies as a protected disclosure would empower workers to act responsibly without the risk of guessing whether their protections apply. This clarity is essential for creating an environment where transparency around AI risks can thrive.

        Anti-Retaliation Measures: To prevent isolation and retaliation, the law should ensure whistleblowers are safeguarded from losing their livelihoods for bringing critical issues to light.

A framework like this wouldn’t solve all issues around AI, but it could start by fostering a culture of accountability, giving voice to those on the inside who understand the stakes. Just as whistleblower protections helped address financial and environmental crises, similar protections could help AI develop more safely, in the public’s interest rather than solely in pursuit of profit.

Google Has No Duty To Refund Gift Card Scam Victims, Judge Finds

Posted by msmash View on SlashDot Skip
A federal judge in California has dismissed most claims in a class-action lawsuit against Google over its handling of gift card scams, ruling the tech giant is not liable for millions in consumer losses. U.S. District Judge Beth Freeman found Google bears no responsibility for scam victims’ losses since third-party fraudsters, not Google, induced the purchases.

The ruling came in a suit filed by Judy May, who lost $1,000 to scammers demanding Google Play gift cards for a fake government grant. The lawsuit cited Federal Trade Commission data showing Google Play gift card scams comprised 20% of reported gift card fraud between 2018-2021, totaling over $17 million in losses. Google earns 15-30% commission on gift card purchases but denies refunds, citing industry-standard policies. Freeman ruled Google had no duty to investigate reported scams or refund victims.

Why should they?

By HornyBastard • Score: 3 Thread
The 2 most popular scams are
  1. 1. The classic nigerian prince (419) type scam, where the scammer will give you a lot of money if you pay a processing fee.
    This has been around since the first moron got an e-mail address.
  2. 2. The guy calling “from the government, and you owe us money” type scam, where you can pay in gift cards before they send somebody to arrest you.
    No legitimate government has ever accepted gift cards as a payment method.

If you are stupid enough to fall for any of this, then you deserve to lose your money.

Did Google know?…like pawn shop stolen goods

By Somervillain • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

It’s hard to sympathize with someone who is this gullible.

Did these organizations know their product was being used in a crime is the real question. If someone buys a Google Play Gift Card in a Wisconsin WalMart, but redeems it in the Emirates, to an account known to be involved with past scams, then that’s pretty suspicious. You can make fun of the victim all you like, but remember, soon Generative AI will make it a lot harder to identify scams. They’re going to unleash the full power of AI to generate perfect marketing materials and flood Google search with articles stating they’re legit and flood reddit with discussions saying a site is legit. Scams are going to get a lot harder to identify in the near future.

Imagine Google was a pawn shop. Some young man comes in with lots of gold that a wealthy elderly lady would wear that was clearly burglarized…including a watch inscribed with someone else’s name and a quick google shows that person’s home was recently robbed. What would the law do?

I don’t think companies should have fully liability for all scams, but if they know a scam is going on and fail to prevent action, yes, I think they should have to repay every cent of profit.

Scam victims are still innocent

By omnichad • Score: 3 Thread

It looks like I’m going against the grain here, but the US simply doesn’t have robust enough consumer protection laws.

As people age, there are changes in the grey matter of the brain that cause them to be more trusting and more susceptible to scams. It’s not just unhealthy people - it’s all. It is not an inability to think. It’s a physiological change. It has social advantages when someone is too old to take care of themselves and need help, but it happens even if you don’t.

Google can make those cards worthless and still not be out the money. They are aiding in a crime the same as a pawn shop selling stolen merchandise and they are letting greed get ahead of good. If they were the company of “don’t be evil” we wouldn’t have this problem. If they’re legally in the clear, this is a loophole that didn’t exist before digital goods and needs to be closed.

Why should Google be responsible?

By Todd Knarr • Score: 5, Informative Thread

I have to agree with the judge here. As far as Google can tell the purchase is legitimate: the person buying the card intends to buy it, their payment method is valid and legitimate, Google is giving a card worth the amount purchased to the person buying it. Google can’t know what the person buying it’s going to do with it after they receive it. They may suspect the person who finally redeems it is involved in something sketchy, but the card itself is perfectly legitimate.

It’s the same as if you fall for a scam and send a check to the scammer before you realize it. You may have been scammed, but the check itself isn’t fraudulent (you wrote it yourself, signed it and it’s the person the check was written to who’s cashing it). If the bank’s already paid it it has no duty to credit your account back (unless the payee is on one of the government lists of people the bank isn’t supposed to do business with).

If you’re a grown adult and get scammed, that doesn’t automatically make it someone else’s responsibility to fix it.

What was you first clue?

By 0xG • Score: 3 Thread

The ruling came in a suit filed by Judy May, who lost $1,000 to scammers demanding Google Play gift cards for a fake government grant.

That is one dumb Judy. It may be victim shaming, but she deserves it.
And then it is Google’s fault? The mind reels…

AI’s Huge Power Needs Give Oil Majors Incentive To Invest in Renewables, Says Adnoc Boss

Posted by msmash View on SlashDot Skip
Surging AI demand could push major oil companies to reinvest in renewable energy [non-paywalled link], Abu Dhabi National Oil Company CEO Sultan al-Jaber said this week. Al-Jaber’s comments came as oil executives from Shell, BP and TotalEnergies met with Microsoft and other tech leaders in Abu Dhabi to discuss AI’s growing energy needs and its applications across the sector.

ADNOC announced plans to deploy autonomous AI agents across its operations through EnergyAI, developed with Microsoft and UAE’s G42. The system will analyze seismic data and model underground carbon storage potential. The state oil giant committed $23 billion to low-carbon technology development using AI. Tech companies have pledged to power their AI data centers with renewable energy to meet climate targets. “We need a model that integrates all forms of energy,” said al-Jaber, citing needs for renewable power, battery storage, natural gas, and nuclear energy in some locations.

Trump Wins US Presidency For Second Time

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Major media outlets are beginning to declare former President Trump the winner of the 2024 presidential election, having secured 270 electoral votes. “He becomes the first president in more than 120 years to lose the White House, and then to come back and win it again, after President Grover Cleveland in 1892,” notes The Hill. As with previous election announcements on Slashdot, this is your chance to talk about it and what it means for the future of our nation.

In a victory speech, Trump said that he was the leader of “the greatest political movement of all time.” He said: “We overcame obstacles that nobody thought possible,” adding that he would take office with an “unprecedented and powerful mandate.” President Trump has vowed a radical reshaping of American government, tasking SpaceX and Tesla chief executive Elon Musk “with conducting a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government and making recommendations for drastic reforms.”

UPDATE 12:30 PM PST: Vice President Kamala Harris has officially conceded the 2024 presidential election, calling former President Trump to offer her congratulations. She’s expected to make a concession speech at Howard University at 4:00 PM EST. You can stream the speech here.

Re:The near future

By dfghjk • Score: 5, Informative Thread

The President is not bound by law. The President cannot be “prevented” from doing anything. Have you been keeping up with the Supreme Court?

The irony is that the office itself only exists “by law” as defined in the Constitution. Without “law”, the Presidency does not even exist. Without law, there are no “duties” by which to judge if there is “absolute immunity” as literally anything is an “official duty”. The constitutional crisis has already occurred, it came and went without incident. Now we simply wait for the newly elected destroyer of our country. He will get sworn in by the very Justice who has authorized him to become a permanent dictator.

Re: I don’t understand

By drinkypoo • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Funny, those of us normal folks who lived in the US during Trump’s administration enjoyed rising wages, lower taxes, with affordable groceries and housing at that time. We voted for more of that.

You factually voted for less of that. The only one of those things that Trump delivered was lower taxes, and he only gave you that for two years. Everything else on that list was a result of Obama’s presidency and it had all conclusively ended by the end of Trump’s.

Re: I don’t understand

By edwdig • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Conflating illegal immigration with legal is a red herring. No one is against legal immigration, except maybe those affected by the H1B program.

Don’t try to pretend that’s true.

We just had about a month of Trump and Vance complaining non stop about legal Haitian immigrants. They made it clear they know they’re legal immigrants, but they don’t care and want to deport them anyway. They don’t like that they were able to get here legally and want to get rid of them anyway.

It’s all about hate, and making excuses to try to justify it.

Re: I don’t understand

By narcc • Score: 5, Informative Thread

In the 30 something states that do NOT require ID to vote…it’s hard to stop them.

Bullshit. Have you ever voted? They’d have to know the name of someone registered to vote at that particular polling location, who hasn’t already voted and won’t vote, and be able to convincingly forge their signature.

This “the illegals are voting” is the biggest load of shit I’ve ever heard. Get a fucking clue.

Re: I don’t understand

By ClickOnThis • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Harris promised to end Trump tax cuts, which included a huge increase in standard deductible, because their bumper sticker tax policy declared it “tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires” and no analysis was needed.

The Trump tax-cuts were a giant middle-finger to the middle class in regions of the country that didn’t vote for him. Sure, the standard deduction was increased, but itemized deductions were reduced substantially more than the standardized deductions were increased for many people. People like me and my spouse.

Under Trump, our taxes went up. And that’s despite doing all the “good things” that reduce your tax bill, like contributing to retirement, structuring your investments to be tax-efficient, and hiring an expert to do your returns. Even so, our taxes went up.

The Ds called it a tax-cut for millionaires and billionaires because that’s exactly what it was. Marginal rates in the upper-income brackets were reduced. You don’t think anyone analyzed this?

China Reveals a New Heavy Lift Rocket That Is a Clone of SpaceX’s Starship

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger reports:
When Chinese space officials unveiled the design for the country’s first super heavy lift rocket nearly a decade ago, it looked like a fairly conventional booster. The rocket was fully expendable, with three stages and solid motors strapped onto its sides. Since then, the Asian country has been revising the design of this rocket, named Long March 9, in response to the development of reusable rockets by SpaceX. As of two years ago, China had recalibrated the design to have a reusable first stage. Now, based on information released at a major airshow in Zhuhai, China, the design has morphed again. And this time, the plan for the Long March 9 rocket looks almost exactly like a clone of SpaceX’s Starship rocket.

Based on its latest specifications, the Long March 9 rocket will have a fully reusable first stage powered by 30 YF-215 engines, which are full-flow staged combustion engines fueled by methane and liquid oxygen, each with a thrust of approximately 200 tons. By way of comparison, Starship’s first stage is powered by 33 Raptor engines, also fueled with methane and liquid oxygen, each with a thrust of about 280 tons. The new specifications also include a fully reusable configuration of the rocket, with an upper stage that looks eerily similar to Starship’s second stage, complete with flaps in a similar location. According to a presentation at the airshow, China intends to fly this vehicle for the first time in 2033, nearly a decade from now.
Last week, Chinese space startup Cosmoleap announced plans to develop a fully reusable “Leap” rocket with the next few years. “An animated video that accompanied the funding announcement indicated that the company seeks to emulate the tower catch-with-chopsticks methodology that SpaceX successfully employed during Starship’s fifth flight test last month,” reports Ars.

Clone?

By Freischutz • Score: 3 Thread

China Reveals a New Heavy Lift Rocket That Is a Clone of SpaceX’s Starship

Clone? Last time I looked ‘clone’ meant an exact component for component copy. That does not look like an exact slavish copy unless Musk has obtained an insanely broad patent on cylindrically shaped launch vehicles with a rounded pointy nose section fins on sides and rocket engines at the back end and if somebody wants to point at the canards as evidence of ‘cloning’, the concept of canard control surfaces have been around since the Wright Flyer in 1903 which was literally the first aircraft capable of sustained flight.

Re:Clone?

By v1 • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Well it is a bit like the Buran, russia’s “clone” of the space shuttle. It certainly had its differences, but it’s impossible to look at it and not see the similarity. Calling it a “copy” or a “clone” is probably too harsh, but it’s definitely a ripoff of mos of the major design elements. It’s hard to blame them - rocket science is expensive and time-consuming. Taking advantage of the hard work and expense that the Other Guy has invested is somewhere between extremely tempting and the obviously right choice.

BUT after getting the whole “china copies everything” out of the way… I still approve of it. Expanding space exploration isn’t an american or chinese thing, it’s a human thing, and it’s something we all need to be working together on. And not polluting space with junk is a HUGE deal. So I have no problem at all with them copying design elements from a successful reusable rocket. Anything that keeps trash out of LEO gets my thumbs up.

Good.

By nightflameauto • Score: 3 Thread

We could use a nice space race again. And with all the anti-China sentiment we’ve been stirring over the past decade and some change, even the public might get on board with, “WE MUST BEAT CHINA TO THE MOON, TO MARS, TO $space_body.” I hope they manage to get successful flights out of their design to stir up that competitive spirit in our space industry. It might just give us something to cheer for other than identity politics and shit-sandwiches of public discourse.

Google CEO Forbids Political Talk After Firing 28 Over Israeli Contract Protest

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Fortune:
Google CEO Sundar Pichai has weighed in on the debate over the relative values of political expression and workplace coexistence by ordering employees to leave their political opinions at home. A day after firing 28 workers for participating in a sit-in protest of the tech giant’s cloud contract with Israel, Pichai warned staff that the office is not a place “to fight over disruptive issues or debate politics” in a company blog post.

Although Pichai didn’t specifically mention the protests or the Israel-Hamas war, he concluded that the $1.92 trillion company “is a business, and not a place to act in a way that disrupts coworkers or makes them feel unsafe, to attempt to use the company as a personal platform.” “We have a duty to be an objective and trusted provider of information that serves all of our users globally,” Pichai continued. “When we come to work, our goal is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful. That supersedes everything else and I expect us to act with a focus that reflects that.”
The sit-in protest was staged against Google’s involvement in Project Nimbus, a $1.2 billion cloud contract with the Israeli government. During the nearly 10-hour protest, employees wore “Googler against genocide” T-shirts and occupied the office of Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian.
The report notes how tech companies, “previously famed for their progressive culture where nap pods and abortion benefits were welcome,” are increasingly restricting political discussions to avoid internal conflict. Pichai notes in his memo that Google has previously enjoyed “a culture of vibrant, open discussion that enables us to create amazing products and turn great ideas into action.”

Re: Excellent!

By MrNaz • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Ask and ye shall receive!

Hostages:
BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/world…
HRW: https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/…
NPR: https://www.npr.org/2023/12/01…

Mass rape:
CBS: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/i…
The Intercept: https://theintercept.com/2024/…
NBC: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/w…

Murder / Deliberate targeting of civilians:
B’Tselem: https://www.btselem.org/topic/…
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/co…
UN: https://www.un.org/unispal/doc…

Among those links is this golden nugget of a quote:

When an 11-year-old Palestinian girl from Nablus was killed by settlers in 1983, in their defense, the chief rabbi of the Sephardic community reportedly cited a Talmudic text justifying killing an enemy on occasions when one may see from a child’s perspective that he or she will grow up to become your enemy. Rabbis have been asked by settler militants to provide rulings to justify acts that are aimed to block peace with, or the return of land to, Palestinians. The theft of Palestinian olive harvests has been justified by some rabbis. Former chief rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu stated that: “Since the land is the inheritance of the People of Israel, planting on this land by gentiles is planting on land that does not belong to them. If someone puts a tree on my land, both the tree and the fruit it yields belongs to me.”

So… that’s the side you’re on is it? It figures. Americans are retards who mindlessly swallow whatever the red/blue media channel they favour feeds them. Facts be dammed.

Re: Excellent!

By quonset • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

a third of progressives categorically hate Jews while pretending that it’s all about Israel

Stop with the bullshit. It’s not about “hating” Jews, it’s about hating Israeli genocidal policies, the most recent of which is to put Palestinians in an enclosed camp. Sound familiar? If people are okay with this, then there was nothing wrong with the Holocaust.

At this point, Jews are doing to others that which was done to them. If it’s supposed to be wrong then, it’s wrong now.

Re:Good

By phantomfive • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

The arguments about this war are uniquely one-sided because one side is easy to argue (and prone to using deceptive talking points), while the other side is fighting for the future of its civilization without a five second sound bite that demonstrates it.

I legitimately can’t tell which side is which here.

Re:Excellent!

By dargaud • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
And yet Google gives millions to politicians. So they can do activism but the peons can’t ? Gotcha.

Re: Excellent!

By VeryFluffyBunny • Score: 5, Informative Thread
Well collated list. Thanks!

This is also under conditions in western media where unsubstantiated claims made by the IDF & Israeli spokespersons are treated at fact & strong evidence of abuses & crimes committed by them are routinely either dismissed or not reported at all.

The IDF are also deliberately targeting journalists in an attempt to reduce reporting & documenting of their crimes.

Bitcoin Hits All-Time High

Posted by msmash View on SlashDot
Bitcoin surged over 9.2% to an all-time high of over $74,200 on Tuesday evening as early results showed favorable outcome for Republican candidate Donald Trump, who has promised crypto-friendly policies if he wins.

Oh. Yay.

By Barny • Score: 3 Thread

Rich cunts get richer. I am so happy for them.

When the value of a thing is predicted on Trump

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

that should tell you something of the true value of that thing.

Rug

By dohzer • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Remember to get out before the rug is pulled.

Re:Oh. Yay.

By DrMrLordX • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

There was nothing stopping you from buying in when it was cheaper. That’s been a major appeal of crypto: high risk investing for the everyman. Stuff this high risk (outside of obvious traps like lotto and sports book) is usually restricted to accredited investors.

XAUBTC

By bill_mcgonigle • Score: 3 Thread

Not really; the Dollar continues to tank as 23% of tax money is now only spent on Federal interest. That number will tick ever higher on a polynomial curve no matter who is elected.

You can buy 1/3 the number of Happy Meals with BTC today than at its last ATH.

Follow XAUBTC as a proxy.

https://www.tradingview.com/sy…