Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. Americans of All Ages Are Spending Less Time Socializing
  2. Fines Doubled As Teens Outsmart Australia’s Social Media Ban
  3. Google Ordered to Pay $2 Billion For Anti-Competitive Practices By Swedish Court
  4. Is Big Tech Now Backpedaling on the AI Jobs Wipeout Scenario?
  5. How Tech Scammers Conned Four People Out of $673,000 in Three Days
  6. Hundreds Support Legal Defense for Engineer Charged with Destroying Flock Surveillance Cameras
  7. Go-based TypeScript 7.0 Finally Reaches Release Candidate Stage
  8. Meta is Quietly Launching Pocket, an App for Vibe-coding and Scrolling Small ‘Gizmos’
  9. Big Companies That Invest Heavily in AI Also Hire More People, Report Suggests
  10. Microsoft and Amazon Commit Billions to New AI Implementation Units for Businesses
  11. Ask Slashdot: Which Apps Aren’t Available on Linux?
  12. Windows 11 Identifier Code Used to Arrest 19-Year-Old Over Alleged Ransomware Spree
  13. Short Story Accused of Being AI-written Goes on to Win Contest’s First Prize
  14. GoDaddy Warns India’s Crackdown on Fake Site Registrars Could Upend Internet Privacy Everywhere
  15. EV Batteries Defy Expectations, Last Hundreds of Thousands of Miles

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.

Americans of All Ages Are Spending Less Time Socializing

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Americans now spend an average of 35 minutes a day socializing, down from 45 minutes two decades ago, according to American Time Use Survey data. The decline spans all age groups but is sharpest among 15- to 24-year-olds, whose daily socializing has fallen from about an hour to 35 minutes. Axios reports:
Sociologists and psychologists point to several trends driving this phenomenon, which Substack writer Derek Thompson dubbed “The Anti-Social Century” in the Atlantic last year. We’re all on our smartphones, often interacting through screens instead of face to face — even though social media is no substitute for spending time together in person.

Teens, in particular, spend an average of 4.8 hours a day on apps like TikTok, Instagram and Snapchat, according to Gallup. The shift to remote work — and life — during the pandemic has persisted, keeping more of us homebound. Longer-term trends are reshaping daily life in ways that make isolation easier. Homes are bigger and more comfortable, with larger TVs. Virtually every restaurant is on a food delivery app, making it easier than ever to stay in.

Also contributing to the trend is the decline of gathering spaces, Axios’ Avery Lotz writes. A 2025 report from CU Boulder researchers uncovered widespread closures of all kinds of hangout spots — from libraries to coffee shops to museums — in the last decade or so. Churches are also shuttering at unprecedented rates, Axios’ Russell Contreras reports.

Looking at it the other way.

By alvinrod • Score: 3 Thread
Look at this from the opposite direction. How much excess socializing was done in the past because people didn’t have anything else or didn’t own a personal time-occupying device that didn’t require sharing?

All this shows is that when given the choice, people choose their own interests over shared socialization. If previous generations had phones and tablets they wouldn’t have talked to their uncle about mundane shit on Thanksgiving either. I don’t think people have changed all that much, we just have more options now and this is identifying our actual preferences.

Fines Doubled As Teens Outsmart Australia’s Social Media Ban

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Australia plans to double fines for social media platforms that fail to keep under-16s off restricted services, after regulators found 70% of children with accounts remained active three months after the ban took effect. The government says the changes will also give the eSafety Commissioner more power to demand information from platforms and age-assurance providers as teens continue finding ways around the law. Euronews reports:
The government said Sunday it would introduce draft legislation this week doubling the maximum penalty to 99 million Australian dollars (63 million euros) for platforms — including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok — that do not take reasonable steps to comply with the ban, which became law on 10 December. Communications Minister Anika Wells blamed the platforms directly. “We can all agree we would like the scheme to work better than it is currently, but that is on Big Tech taking the Mickey,” she said, speaking to the Australian Broadcasting Corp on Monday. Wells added that she had received monthly updates from the online safety regulator since March and “we are not seeing improvements.”

The amendments would also expand the powers of eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant to demand information and documents from platforms — and from third parties such as age assurance technology providers — to test claims made by companies about how under-16s continued to circumvent the ban. The government had initially reported more than 5 million children had accounts removed, deactivated or restricted after the legislation passed. But eSafety found in March that 70% of children who held accounts on restricted platforms on the day the ban took effect remained active on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok.

Inman Grant said in April she was considering court action against those platforms and YouTube, alleging they were not taking reasonable steps to exclude children. She said she was satisfied with progress made by the remaining restricted platforms: X, Kick, Reddit, Threads and Twitch. Senior opposition lawmaker Jane Hume said her party would consider supporting the reforms, but pinned blame on the original legislation. “The legislation was clearly undercooked in the first place. The eSafety Commissioner wasn’t given the powers to be able to pursue these Big Tech companies,” she said.

Predictable

By gurps_npc • Score: 3 Thread

Surprise surprise.

The foolish attempt to save the children by taking away everyone’s privacy and the children’s freedom is thwarted by the children subverting their laws.

If you want to save the children, do not try to save them, instead protect us ALL by changing the algorithms to push people toward truth rather than the shocking.

This just further isolates kids

By flink • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

My experience is the US, mind, not AU, so things are probably somewhat different there. But with that caveat in mind: At least on school days, the ONLY social interaction my 10 year old son gets with his peers is online through “social media”. I’ve sent him outside to “bike around the neighborhood and find someone to play with” and he reported that there wasn’t anyone. I walked around with him and sure enough, the streets were deserted @ 3:00 on a weekday afternoon. All the kids are kept inside or at some structured after school activity. If I want him to go to a friend’s house that is not in walking distance my wife or I have to take time off to drive him there and pick him up. In my day you could just hop on your friend’s bus and get off at his stop with him, but they don’t allow that anymore (even with a not from the parents: I checked with the school).

Now that it is summer, everyone is in “camp”, so again, no playmates if you don’t also send your kid to “camp”. I guess no one fucks around in each other’s yard, plays pickup baseball, or goes fishing anymore. I’ve tried to raise my kids to have active independent childhoods, but without the network effect of other parents giving their kids the same freedoms, it just ain’t happening.

So his friend group mostly coordinates through discord on their iPads to play minecraft and other online activities together as their main form of play. I understand that a lot of these social media platforms are not healthy for kids, but for many it is their ONLY outlet. To the extent social media gets regulated, it should be to curb predatory practices by the platform. That plus good parenting and supervision should be sufficient. But an outright ban is overkill.

Fines can’t stop…

By MpVpRb • Score: 3 Thread

..creative and motivated kids.
Kids find workarounds and governments are living in a fantasy world

Re:Surely

By DarkOx • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Have you tried it?

Parenting in a world where kids face unlimited temptation to consume things that you believe are harmful to them paired with near instance access all over the damn place is pretty hard.

In ever previous era, with every previous vice society has agreed to put at least some barriers in front of children and to do so in a mostly if not perfect way. Most 8 year olds cannot simply go get a case a beer anytime they want, and if they do there is ample opportunity for parents to find out about. You know if your two young child is running with inappropriate people and you either do something or don’t.

Same thing with other things like smoking, hazardous materials, etc. The book shop won’t let your kid into the adults only section…
but here is the important but, you CAN still let your child take their bicycle and pocket money and go to the c-store, bookstore, etc and get some candy and comics/pokemon cards etc. They can go an interface with the world in a safe way.

Now try this online… At best you get parental controls on the platform, which may or may not reflect what YOU the parent feels is or is not fit for your child, but rather what someone at Meta decided was fine. Things like youtube-kids, ok but nothing stops them from just watching as a guest. Sure you can lock down their phone, but you have control over the library PC, their friend bobby’s tablet, etc. Thanks to ‘privacy and security’ which we all know is really just about DRM you can’t implement your own parental controls without entirely breaking the web and apps, and smart devices.

You are left with accepting mega corps get to put whatever they want in front of your kids eyes, infantalizing them entirely and/or never letting them touch anything electronic without your shoulder surfing.

The status quo is an should be treated as unacceptable. The privacy and expression concerns should be the problems to solve rather than reasons to toss our hands up. Anyone just saying ‘parent harder’ should should get busted in the teeth!

This felony screams for hard punishment

By yanestra • Score: 3 Thread
Hard and harsh punishment was always the solution - without it, Australia wouldn’t even be populated.

Google Ordered to Pay $2 Billion For Anti-Competitive Practices By Swedish Court

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Google was ordered to pay almost $2 billion this week to Pricerunner, reports Bloomberg:
The Patent and Market Court in Stockholm, which issued the judgment on Wednesday, dismissed most parts of the claim in which Pricerunner sought 80 billion Swedish kronor, or roughly $8.2 billion, in the wake of a European Union antitrust crackdown… The Swedish price-comparison website argued that Google has been abusing its dominant position as a search engine by favoring its own comparison shopping service over competing portals for more than a decade. Wednesday’s award compensates for lost revenue caused by Google’s preferential treatment of its own comparison-shopping service over independent price-comparison services, conduct that also drives up costs for consumers, [Pricerunner owner] Klarna said in a statement after the judgment…

A Google spokesperson said the company doesn’t agree with the court’s decision and will consider its legal options. [The ruling can be appealed.] Changes implemented in 2017 to Google’s platform are working and generating growth and jobs for hundreds of comparison shopping services operating more than 1500 websites across Europe, according to the statement.

The litigation is linked to a 2017 decision by the European Commission to fine Google €2.4 billion for illegally leveraging its search dominance to give its own shopping service an edge. The EU decision unleashed a wave of so-called follow-on suits, which were delayed for years as Google appealed the EU fine. Two years ago the EU’s top tribunal confirmed that the company did violate antitrust laws — meaning EU-based plaintiffs no longer have to prove that in court. A Berlin court last year ordered the tech giant to pay €573 million in damages to two German price-comparison websites, a ruling Google appealed. Similar cases are pending across Europe.

Re:Joke’s on them

By GuB-42 • Score: 4, Informative Thread

It is. They have offices all over the world, including in Sweden. It gives them access to local businesses, but it also means that they are bound by local laws.

Kinda Funny

By Ol Olsoc • Score: 3 Thread
These countries appear to have the pecuniary extraction model. Go after the deepest pockets, and come up with some way to take some of their money, because reasons.

Here in the US, we see something like that in the class action suits, where a million or two who “suffered” from some indignity might sign up for a class action suit.

The lawyers get almost all the awards, and upon winning, the people “wronged” get checks for 5 dollars.

I suppose the difference is that in Sweden, the 2 billion will go elsewhere. Or will the Swedish citizens get checks?

Re:Kinda Funny

By r1348 • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

No, we simply still enforce laws, including competition ones.
On the other side, it looks like in the US you just decided to hand them over the control of your country.

Re:Kinda Funny

By _merlin • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

It isn’t a fine. They’re being sued for damages. The money goes to the litigant, not to “Sweden”. If Google want to avoid constantly paying damages, they should consider not constantly doing illegal things. It’s ironic that you’re accusing Europeans of wanting to be anti-competitive when this whole thing is about (American) Google’s anti-competitive practices.

Is Big Tech Now Backpedaling on the AI Jobs Wipeout Scenario?

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“A year ago, the message from many business leaders was that AI was going to wipe out jobs,” remembers the Wall Street Journal.But “For the past month or so, tech CEOs have been striking a more optimistic tone.”
In late May, OpenAI Chief Executive Sam Altman — who has long predicted that AI will lead to seismic shifts in the workforce — said during a conference, “We’ve been roughly right on technological predictions and pretty wrong on the social and economic implications.” Soon after, he told CNBC, “Our industry underestimated how much we’re going to be able to keep people at the center of everything.”

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, who warned in May 2025 that artificial intelligence could eliminate half of entry-level jobs, a year later highlighted more positive scenarios for AI-adopting businesses: “They can do the same thing with less resources, and that leads to things like layoffs, or they can do more with the same amount of resources. But that requires creativity....”

Is the sunnier outlook a move to win back customers and the public who are souring on AI’s world-upending promise? Or is the role of AI in the workplace now just better understood…?

Collectively, the narrative has shifted from worker-light doomsday scenarios caused by AI to a future in which workers keep their jobs — and get a productivity boost. The sentiment change isn’t limited to tech leaders: A survey by EY-Parthenon found that the percentage of CEOs who believe AI investments will result in significant reductions in head count fell from around 46% in January 2025 to just 20% this May. “They may have noticed that the labor market is genuinely not changing (i.e., imploding) as rapidly as they expected,” said David Autor, a professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “They may have realized it was simply bad business to say that your great new product will destroy the economy.”
The article notes Amazon founder Jeff Bezos “has a history of predicting that AI will create new jobs,” and in June said AI could even lead to a labor shortage. “When asked on CNBC in May about people being afraid of AI taking jobs, he said the reason they’re afraid is because ‘all these smart people keep saying that.’"

The article then adds that “Fewer people are saying it now.”

I see potential in AI CEO agents…

By Lavandera • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Profits should be huge…

Replacing 7 or 8 figures CEO with $2k AI agent…

Bull Hockey

By gtall • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

The only reason they are changing their tune is because of the backlash to them putting data centers in our backyards and vacuuming up the cash we’ll be spending on electricity bills. Do not trust them, they do not deserve it.

“Our industry overestimated how much of”

By Growlley • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
our own bullshit we believed.

Not In My Industry

By DewDude • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Our clients are losing customers because they’re ditching humans for AI. There’s still plenty of people who are anxious to eliminate as many human positions as possible.

Big Tech can say whatever it wants…when every other business is sitting there saying “we’re going to go to the company with AI that’s 80% cheaper”....well…big tech doesn’t control those jobs. Those jobs are getting wiped out.

Adding more computers only ever adds more jobs.

By Fly Swatter • Score: 3 Thread
Computers are high maintenance, even if the hardware is fine the software side is always creating more work because it always needs fixing.

All AI does is add more software maintenance and more people running around putting out it’s fires.

How Tech Scammers Conned Four People Out of $673,000 in Three Days

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
USA Today reports on a Facebook post from a Washington state sheriff’s office:
Four residents of Clallam County, a coastal region west of Seattle along northern Washington’s peninsula, lost more than $673,000 in just three days, according to the Clallam County Sheriff’s Office… The smallest amount lost was $3,500, which someone purchased in Apple gift cards for a scammer posing as an employee with Microsoft technical support, the sheriff’s office wrote. Another person lost $50,000 after they clicked on a malicious email and unwittingly granted the scammers access to their financial accounts.
The local Peninsula Daily News reports another scam involved a 64-year-old resident who attempted to contact Coinbase after seeing their account displayed shown as closed:
“Believing they were speaking with a legitimate Coinbase representative, the victim was told there was fraudulent activity on the account and was instructed to download a ‘rescue’ application,” the [sheriff’s] release states. “The application allowed the scammer to remotely access the victim’s phone.” They then convinced the victim to transfer approximately $200,000 worth of cryptocurrency to what was described as a secure wallet. The funds were instead transferred to the scammer and could not be recovered…

In one scam, reported Monday, an 84-year-old Clallam County resident believed they had received an email from their daughter with a photo. After opening the email, a fake Microsoft security alert appeared on the computer directing the victim to call a support number, according to the release. “The victim was transferred to someone claiming to represent the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and was falsely told they were under investigation in a child pornography and money laundering case,” the release states. “The scammers instructed the victim not to contact local law enforcement and claimed local banks were also under investigation. The victim was told their bank accounts were in danger of being seized and was instructed to purchase gold to protect their assets.” In three separate transactions, the victim purchased approximately $420,000 worth of gold and gave it to an unknown man waiting at the end of their driveway.

“Only after speaking with bank officials did the victim realize they had been defrauded,” the release states.
USA Today offers this advice from the sheriff’s press release. “These criminals are professional manipulators who prey on fear, trust and urgency. We encourage everyone to pause before sending money, purchasing gold or gift cards, or transferring cryptocurrency. A simple phone call to a trusted family member, your bank or local law enforcement can prevent a life-changing financial loss.”

hard to relate

By phantomfive • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

In three separate transactions, the victim purchased approximately $420,000 worth of gold and gave it to an unknown man waiting at the end of their driveway.

I don’t understand the confusion that can result in someone doing this three separate times.

Re:hard to relate

By pjt33 • Score: 4, Informative Thread

I think it’s three separate purchases of gold and one handover to the scammer.

Booking.com

By pjt33 • Score: 3 Thread

I got a phishing message in the last week from a WhatsApp business account claiming to be the hotel company that I’m going to be staying with in a couple of days. They wanted me to do some kind of confirmation process and warned that if I didn’t do it within 24 hours I might lose the reservation. There were a couple of things that were odd, but it’s not the first time that a hotel company has made me jump through hoops to do a pre-check-in. It was only when I saw that the link they sent me (which I opened in a private browsing session, of course) was to a page which had a booking.com header but wasn’t a booking.com URL that I got suspicious, and they had a UI for card details with no clear explanation of what they wanted them for. At that point I opened the actual booking.com and sent a message to the hotel to double-check, and after sending that message I remembered reading a few months ago that booking.com had a data leak, but I bet the phishers who wrote to me have had some successes.

Don’t blame the victims

By EldoranDark • Score: 3 Thread
As hard as it might be to relate to someone carrying six digits in cash, crypto or gold… Or as easy it is to point and laugh at someone losing money in crypto… I think we should celebrate these guys coming forward and reporting it. Most scam victims feel too ashamed to confess to being fooled, and it makes it easier for scammers to get away with it and target us.

Hundreds Support Legal Defense for Engineer Charged with Destroying Flock Surveillance Cameras

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“Hundreds of freedom lovers are rallying behind a US Air Force engineer” who’s been accused of damaging over a dozen AI-integrated surveillance cameras last year and even knocking down their poles. Long-time Slashdot reader schwit1 shares this article from Futurism:
According to local channel WAVY, Virginia-based Air Force engineer and mechanic Jeffrey Sovern is facing 13 counts of destruction of property, as well as six counts of both petit larceny and possession of burglary tools related to the destruction of Flock license plate cameras… [Wavy reports the cameras were sometimes pointed in the wrong direction or thrown to the street.]

Armed with garbage bags, spray paint, and even chainsaws, a not insignificant number of privacy vigilantes have taken the fight to Flock, using any means to free their neighborhoods of the ominous surveillance poles. On a GoFundMe page to raise money for his legal defense, the 41-year-old Sovern explained that this kind of privacy-minded vandalism has far more support than would outwardly appear…

Sovern kicked off the campaign late in December of 2025, where he encouraged his supporters to “reach out to the local governments and demand that these systems are taken down.” The Virginia resident initially set his funding goal to $8,500. As news of his case has spread across the web, the amount of support has far outpaced those already-hopeful aspirations. [Two hours ago the legal fund stood at $23,326 from over 680 donors].

Re:I agree, but do it legally

By oic0 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Generally speaking, the city councils don’t care what you have to say. They approve data centers and flock cameras by default for some reason.

Re:I agree, but do it legally

By ArchieBunker • Score: 5, Funny Thread

If you raise the issue with the city, then the objection becomes a matter of public record.

Oh thank god for the public record.

Re:I agree, but do it legally

By Fly Swatter • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
The would work, 40 or 50 years ago - our government has outgrown the need for citizens. We don’t need vigilantes, we don’t need crying at the circus (council meetings), we need to change the fundamental way our government responds to citizen concerns by making corporations legally powerless to interfere with all aspects of government.

Re:I agree, but do it legally

By ArchieBunker • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

It takes seconds to permanently ruin the camera. Eventually it becomes economically unsound to pay a person to come out and install another thousand dollar device time after time.

Re:I agree, but do it legally

By tlhIngan • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

You can do what one guy did in Washington - do a FOIA request. The photos and data are public records after all.

Don’t make it a big FOIA request, just make it something targeted like an intersection on a date between two times, an hour apart. You travelled through it and want to see what information the camera got about you.

And maybe do more FOIA requests for other intersections as well.

The reason for the targeting is highly focused FOIA requests are less likely to be rejected as over broad requests and thus you are more likely going to get your images and data you requested.

What happened in Washington was the city councils got worried because the courts have started saying the FOIA request was perfectly valid and they have no reason to withhold the information requested. Councils were worried that the requests could contain information that stalkers might want. The courts kept saying to release the information, council kept pushing back, and then council cancelled the agreements because they saw they were going to have to release the information and they could not restrict who got a hold of it.

In other words, having the information available turned it into a liability for council because they had to release it as public records and there would be plenty of people like stalkers who would just love to get their hands on the information. So the only solution was to not collect the data in the first place.

Go-based TypeScript 7.0 Finally Reaches Release Candidate Stage

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
It was more than two years ago that TypeScript’s creator Anders Hejlsberg announced plans to rewrite its compiler in Go. This week Microsoft announced its first Go-based release candidate for TypeScript 7.0, reports InfoWorld:
TypeScript 7.0 is often about 10 times faster than TypeScript 6.0, Microsoft said, thanks to native code speed and shared memory parallelism… Unlike TypeScript 6.0, TypeScript 7.0 performs many steps in parallel, including parsing, type checking, and emitting, Microsoft said. Some of these steps, such as parsing and emitting, can mostly be done independently across files. For that reason, parallelization automatically scales well with larger codebases with relatively little overhead. However, not every step in a TypeScript build is easily parallelizable, Microsoft said.
Microsoft plans to release TypeScript 7.0 within the next month, the article points out, but developers can try the new compiler by installing it from the typescript package on npm: npm install -D typescript@rc

Emitting?

By 93 Escort Wagon • Score: 3 Thread

Is that anything like squirting? I ask because Microsoft used to be really big on that…

Re:But why?

By malice • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Because TypeScript is just JavaScript once the types are stripped out… and JavaScript has the superpower of running on the largest platform in the world: the web browser.

WebAssembly cannot directly access the browser DOM, cannot directly handle network requests, and requires JavaScript to act as a bridge for almost all web interactions

Meta is Quietly Launching Pocket, an App for Vibe-coding and Scrolling Small ‘Gizmos’

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“Mozilla shut down the well-loved read-it-later Pocket app last year, and now Meta is launching an app called Pocket with an entirely different, AI-focused pitch,” writes The Verge.

While it’s not available for downloads in most locations, Meta’s Pocket will allow people “to generate small, interactive apps and games using AI prompts,” writes TechCrunch. They’re called “gizmos”, and Pocket “also offers a scrollable feed where you can play with gizmos others have made.”

Some context from The Verge:
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is all in on AI as the new social media, and he’s previously described a vision of how users could use AI to make interactive experiences and share them with people. The launch of Pocket appears to be one manifestation of that idea… It follows Meta hiring engineers from a company called Atma Sciences Inc., which made an app called Gizmo, as Business Insider reported in March.

On a help center page, Meta also describes a gizmo as a “playable AI-generated experience,” and when you post one, Meta says you can choose to let other people remix them.
“Based on the app’s screenshots in Google Play, there are many similarities to Gizmo’s original app, which is still listed,” notes TechCrunch.

“Pocket is another example of Meta’s push to make AI creation tools more mainstream, extending its earlier efforts, which included AI-generated images created via its Meta AI app and AI videos created with its app called Vibes. It has also added AI features across its social platforms… "
Given that Meta has not officially announced Pocket’s debut, it’s likely that Pocket is still in its initial experimentation phase. Its counterpart Gizmo, however, had generated 635,000 lifetime installs across both iOS and Google Play, according to Appfigures, which noted it had a 98% positive sentiment.

Admiral Ackbar says “It’s a trap!”

By SeaFox • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I don’t have much faith in the safety of the apps being vetted by Meta before they get posted. Can’t wait for the malware Gizmos to start appearing and getting shared in the social like some new STD getting passed around at parties.

Of course, this is effectively theft

By jenningsthecat • Score: 3 Thread

I’m sure the TOS will give Meta the rights to everything its suc… er, customers develop. And the name Pocket must be tongue-in-cheek. A couple of things come immediately to mind:
— When somebody hands you money, you take the money and you put it in your (Meta) Pocket. Expect never to retrieve it though
— If you have a valuable idea that you develop using Meta’s tools, Meta will be happy to pick your Pocket
— Data breach? Obviously you must have a hole in your Pocket
— Playing Pocket pool? There’s an app for that, and Meta will be happy to Zuck you off when you’re done
Gah, the jokes just write themselves!

I wonder if this will get big enough that some FOSS devs will write Pocket Protector software…

FB is farming intent, not monetizing vibe code

By rocket rancher • Score: 3 Thread

What Meta is almost certainly farming is user intent.

Prompts. Edits. Remixes. Likes. Abandonment. Which tiny games get played, which ones get shared, which mechanics make people tilt the phone, which ones ask for camera/mic access, which ones train the next interaction model, and which ones can be shoved into a feed until the dopamine lever squeaks. Pocket looks less like vibe coding in the programmer sense and more like TikTok plus Roblox plus a telemetry tap directly into Meta’s AI stack.

So yes, be suspicious of Meta. That part is just good hygiene. But “AI bad” is the lazy Slashdot version of thinking. The real critique is more specific: Meta is trying to turn user creativity, user attention, and user interaction traces into training data and engagement inventory. The gizmo is the bait. The behavioral graph is Meta’s real target.

Big Companies That Invest Heavily in AI Also Hire More People, Report Suggests

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“Companies spending heavily on AI are growing headcount faster, even in the entry-level roles that many fear are doomed,” writes TechCrunch. That’s the conclusion of new report tracking AI spending from Ramp’s corporate card/bill pay data as well as Revelio Labs’ workforce records from 21,599 U.S. firms:
According to the report, “high-intensity adopters” — firms that spend on average $30 per employee per month on AI in the first three months — saw headcount increase 10.2%. Headcount also rose across functions, including engineering, sales, administration, customer service, finance, marketing, and scientist roles. The strongest job growth among high-intensity adopters was in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms.

Despite these positive signals, the data isn’t as rosy as it seems. It skews heavily toward tech-forward, knowledge-work firms — ones that might have VC-backing and are growing fast anyway, making it difficult to say whether AI is contributing to the hiring or just showing up at companies that are expanding anyway. “This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs,” the paper’s authors admit, “but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses.”

It also counters claims that AI is killing all junior jobs. Recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Gen Z and entry-level workers taking the brunt of the burden. But in tech-forward firms, the report finds that entry-level headcount actually rose by 12%… “For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development,” the report reads. “Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team.”

But companies that buy subscriptions and run pilots, yet did not go on to make sustained investments, don’t tend to see any gains in headcount, per the report. That sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms that have the resources — like capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth — to turn AI adoption into actual business gains and those that are stuck experimenting with subscriptions. In other words, this report suggests that firms that already have the resources are the ones that will see the largest gains.
CNBC argues another AI “narrative” was challenged this week: that open source can’t make money. “The assumption was that giving your model away for free meant no business. That’s breaking too, as open-model companies start posting real revenue and enterprises move from renting AI to running their own.”

That leaves the problem that LLM may not stay…

By gweihir • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

First, this is good, because it means companies have realized (well, some of them), that the “review” and “prompt with actual insight” parts of LLM use are non-optional for reasonable (not clear yet whether they will be “good”, that will take some time) outcomes.

But it still does not look like LLMs will be a long-term thing, because it seems they will not be able to get the cost down. There are now several findings that LLMs with current token prices (which are still too low to cover cost) are not cost-effective compared to humans doing the full job. This does not (!) take into account external costs, like having to feed people that are unemployed because of LLM use. TCO is a thing for societies, because they, unlike individual enterprises, cannot escape it.

Sure, much simpler LLMs and, in particular, specialist LLMs will probably remain a thing, but the general ones? Does not look like it. Hence, as all previous AI hypes, 95% hot air, 5% actual substance. No surprise. Sure, that 5% substance has value, but why always the 95% crap?

Re:That leaves the problem that LLM may not stay..

By ShanghaiBill • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Or this could be an example of Jevons Paradox .

As AI makes employees more productive, and thus more profitable, would you fire them or hire more?

Let me point out…

By 93 Escort Wagon • Score: 4, Informative Thread

This report is being touted on "PR Newswire” (emphasis mine). And the “study” was done by Ramp, whose primary business is selling AI-supported tools to businesses.

Microsoft and Amazon Commit Billions to New AI Implementation Units for Businesses

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Microsoft is investing $2.5 billion in a new group “assisting clients with AI implementations,” reports CNBC:
[Microsoft] said Thursday that 6,000 employees will be embedded with clients, in a practice that’s become known as forward deployed engineering [or FDE]… The announcement comes two days after cloud rival Amazon said it was putting $1 billion behind an FDE initiative to support fast-paced AI engagements. Leading AI labs Anthropic and OpenAI both established FDE groups in May, partnering with private equity firms, banks and consulting firms.

Alongside its technology peers, Microsoft has sunk tens of billions of dollars into building data centers that run generative AI models. Microsoft has also released a variety of AI services, with mixed results. The Microsoft 365 Copilot AI assistant has yet to gain anything approaching ubiquity in the business world, and the GitHub Copilot coding agent has ceded market share to newer players. Microsoft’s stock has slumped 21% this year, by far the worst performance among the mega-cap tech companies. One concern on Wall Street is that AI models that quickly compose code might threaten mature software companies…

Microsoft has for years provided support and implementation services to customers. The company generated about $2.1 billion in revenue from enterprise and partner services in the March quarter, up 2.5% from a year earlier.

“6,000 employees will be embedded”

By oldgraybeard • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
might be just me but this looks more like infestation than implementation assistance. Something tells me these employees will choose the tools in their approved tool box and not the best tools for the customers job.

Microsoft wants eyes into your business.

By Mirnotoriety • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
They’re embedding thousands of engineers inside client organizations not just to “help” with AI implementations, but to hoover up proprietary data, workflows, and problems then repackage those insights as shiny new “MICROS~1 innovations.”

It’s the same game Google played with search: results ranked by how many links pointed to a site. Now with AI, the answers you get are mostly remixed from other people’s conversations and data, creating a convincing illusion of intelligence on the other end.

Forward-deployed engineering? More like forward-deployed surveillance with a consulting invoice attached.

Ask Slashdot: Which Apps Aren’t Available on Linux?

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
Have you ever needed a Linux application which only exists in the Windows world? Long-time Slashdot reader BrendaEM writes:
Windows does have a lot of useful app (but smaller than “power apps”). Some of these are closed source, some are open, but they’re not all available in Linux yet.

My list would have to contain Gimp Tookit versions of: IrfanView image manager, which I think is unequaled in Linux (though it does work to some extent under Wine). I also miss the full version of 7-Zip, because of its better compression settings, which File-Roller does not provide, though the Linux port p7zip is available (though unnoticed by common distributions). Lastly, I think that Notepad++ would be a good addition to Linux.
That last one drew some pushback from long-time Slashdot reader jesco. “If there’s one area where Linux shines, then it’s the availability of high-quality text editors. Last time I looked Kate was still pretty nice, and there’s Emacs, Vim and Neovim” if you’re partial to command lines. But are there any daily-drive apps you still find yourself needing? Share your own thoughts in the comments.

Which apps aren’t available on Linux?

I hate to say it…

By Anonymous Coward • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
… but Microsoft Word and Powerpoint really have no FOSS equivalent, if you actually know how to use them to make things that look nice and need to interoperate with the commercial and government sectors.

Second that for IrfanView

By williamyf • Score: 5, Informative Thread

I have two anecdotes from my use of IrfanView, and why it is so well regarded to this day:

1.) In 2006 I was using a Pentium 1 300Mhz (in not a type, there was a mobile versions of the P1 that reached 300Mhz) with Win2000. Windows media player would take close to 100% of the processor to play an MP3, Clasic Media player would tale 50%, IrfanView + an MP3 player Plug-in would take only 30%, a true lifesaver.

2.) In 2022 I fell of a roof and broke my scapula. IrfanView 32 bit with a suitable plug-in was the only SW that could see the DICOM medical images of my Rx and CAT CDs. Alas, the medical Images plug-in is not available in the 64 bit version…

Plenty small, plenty fast, plenty fleible. Hurray for IrfanView.

Geany is similar to Notepad++

By parityshrimp • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Geany is a nice text editor with similar functionality to Notepad++. https://www.geany.org/

Re:Video editor?

By echo123 • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Da Vinci Resolve runs on all platforms, is free, and will do everything a non-professional could ever dream of doing. Da Vinci Studio is the $300 one-time payment for the pro version that dominates Hollywood.

Pro-tip: If you think you need Da Vinci Resolve Studio ask yourself if you need new photo gear too, then see if there’s anything in Black Magic’s product line that suits you. Buying a Black Magic camera gives you Da Vinci Studio for free — or $300 off your new camera if you look at it that way.

The latest version of Resolve can even replace Adobe Lightroom.

Photoshop

By Arnonyrnous Covvard • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

GIMP is a serious case of not-invented-here leading to abysmal usability. It can’t even compete with Photoshop from more than a decade ago. It’s embarrassing. Copy the good stuff.

Windows 11 Identifier Code Used to Arrest 19-Year-Old Over Alleged Ransomware Spree

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
America’s Justice Department and FBI teamed joined Finland’s National Bureau of Investigation to arrest a teenager they say is part of one of the world’s biggest cybercrime syndicates, reports Tom’s Hardware. The “Scattered Spider” syndicate has extorted over $100 million in ransom payments, according to Department of Justice figures:
19-year-old Peter Stokes is a dual U.S.-Estonian citizen who was trying to board a flight to Japan from Helsinki, when law enforcement caught up with him. [T]he main criminal complaint against Stokes stems from a May 2025 attack on a luxury jewelry dealer based in the United States. The attackers apparently called the company’s IT helpdesk using Google Voice, posing as employees. They were able to convince the help desk into resetting their credentials, which allowed them to infiltrate three accounts, two of which had admin privileges. From there, the group, allegedly including Stokes, stole important data and held the jeweler at ransom, demanding an $8 million payment in crypto. The company ultimately regained access to their infrastructure and avoided paying the ransom, but the operational disruption still caused a purported $2 million in losses. This served as the spark that led to Stokes’ eventual arrest in Helsinki, as the prosecutors slowly followed the paper and digital trail laid by the attackers.

Microsoft played a key role in the process by providing GDID [Global Device Identifier] data to the FBI to help them apprehend the alleged criminal… [I]t’s a unique identifier assigned to every Windows install that tracks device-specific telemetry. It’s the reason why sometimes changing a major component in your PC can revoke your Windows license… [T]he court documents from the case reveal that Stokes used Windows, from which investigators were able to link his physical hardware to specific internet activity and locations… Stokes’ web activity, videogame history, IP addresses, tool usage (including Ngrok), Azure status, and more were logged with timestamps, and were provided to the investigators by Microsoft…

Stokes was carrying two hard drives full of incriminating evidence with him when boarding his flight to Japan… His real identity has actually been known since 2024, but since he was a minor living across Estonia and the UAE at the time, he could only be monitored until the time was right.
The official criminal complaint even includes a selfie photo that Stokes posted on Snapchat (hiding his face behind dozens of hundred dollar bills). It then notes that behind Stokes the wallpaper, carpet, and furniture match New York’s Empire Hotel — and that Stokes had visited the hotel’s web site in Germany before then flying to New York…

“Following the arrest, Stokes was extradited to the U.S., where he appeared in front of a federal court in Chicago for the first time on June 30, 2026, and he remains in custody,” adds Tom’s Hardware.

“The accused is now awaiting trial, having been charged with conspiracy, cyber intrusion, and fraud…”

Another win for Linux!

By Anonymous Coward • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

The moral of the story is use Linux to make money. His mistake was using Windows, highly traceable. This would have never happened if he’d used a proper OS for this business.

Re:Another win for Linux!

By nuckfuts • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
It’s not a win for anybody. Would you actually be cheering if he was using Linux and had gotten away with his ransomware spree?

Re:Another win for Linux!

By Charlotte • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

If you’re going to be a criminal, at least make an effort and try to be the best criminal you can be!

Re:GUID =/= unique

By znrt • Score: 5, Informative Thread

guid = “globally unique identifier”, microsoft name for uuid, a standard (rfc4122) 128 bit identifier for all sorts of objects, keys, components, etc.

gdid = “global device identifier”, a non-standard (windows) 128 bit identifier for devices generated from serial numbers on install.

in both cases the chance of collision is nearly zero, but not zero. guids however are generated on the fly, in the millions daily. fun times ahead?

In custody for now.

By fahrbot-bot • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Following the arrest, Stokes was extradited to the U.S., where he appeared in front of a federal court in Chicago for the first time on June 30, 2026, and he remains in custody, …

Until he complains he was treated unfairly, ponies up some $$$, and gets a pardon from Trump. Maybe get a discount if he tries to blame his treatment on Biden or Obama. Trump’s okay with white collar crimes, especially if he gets a cut.

Short Story Accused of Being AI-written Goes on to Win Contest’s First Prize

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“A story widely accused on social media of being written using AI has gone on to win the overall Commonwealth short story prize,” reports the Guardian.

In mid-May the story had been selected as a regional winner, but with critics on X and Bluesky "claiming it showed ‘obvious markers’ of AI use.”
In the wake of the controversy, the Commonwealth Foundation conducted a review of the regional winners, which it said involved looking at drafts, time-stamped documents and notes. “We are satisfied with the testimonies of our writers and their confirmation that AI was not used in their writing,” said foundation director-general Razmi Farook… Judging chair Louise Doughty described Nazir’s piece as “an original, poetic and deeply moving story....” In a film released by the Commonwealth Foundation on Tuesday, Nazir… adds that he wrote six or seven drafts of his prize-winning story, and also speaks about his use of speech-to-text software, explaining that he could only see three or four lines of text on his phone screen at any one time, so he would perfect each line before moving on, which is how his story ended up being “highly polished”…

Initial social media reactions to the Commonwealth Foundation’s announcement of Nazir’s win were negative, with one X user writing: “immensely disappointing and disheartening. it feels like they wanted to stick to their guns after the entire GenAI uproar. I might think twice now before submitting my stories here”. After Nazir was announced as the regional winner in May, some social media users reported running his story through AI-detection software. “Pangram flags at 100% but also, come on, if you know you know”, said Wharton professor Ethan Mollick. However, the reliability of AI-detection software has been called into question.

In a statement to the Guardian, Farook said that “rather than surrender our judgment to AI-detection software, we asked our winners to show their working drafts, outlines, the evidence of an artistic journey. That software, it must be said, is not infallible: it returns inconsistent verdicts and, in doing so, corrodes the very trust on which a prize depends.”

“When the machine’s default voice is the metropolitan one, the writer who does not fit the expected mould is the first to fall under suspicion,” she added. “The more startling her gift, the more her unfamiliar brilliance unsettles, the more readily she is accused of being a machine. A young writer in Kingston or Kolkata, in Kuala Lumpur or Kigali, must now prove not only her talent but her very humanity.”
Nazir’s story beat 7,806 other stories, the video points out (adding that their prize “demonstrates that in a world increasingly driven by algorithms, the human voice still matters.”)

The Guardian notes that the winning story “includes multiple ‘not x, but y’ constructions and lists of three, which some consider to be signs of AI use,” and that critics also drew attention to particular lines like “Sun on galvanise is a cruel instrument” and “Marsha lived two bends down.”

In a new interview with the Times of India Nazir says “Now I’m frightened about publishing new work because the attacks haven’t stopped.”
Q: Which passages attracted the most criticism, and why do you think they were misunderstood?

Nazir: People criticised a line where I wrote: ‘She had the kind of walking that made benches become men.’ That’s magical realism. Think Salman Rushdie or Gabriel Garcia Marquez. It’s a literary technique. In my story, the character ‘Zoongie’ believes she is so beautiful that even when no men are around, she imagines the benches becoming men who admire her. It exists only in her imagination. People interpreted it literally. There was another line about light reflecting from a sink. That came directly from my childhood. Our kitchen faced east, and my mother liked to keep everything spotless. We used to polish the sink, and when the morning sun hit it, it glittered brightly. People claimed that the image must have been AI-generated. But it’s from my lived experience…

I’ve lived with diabetes for 62 years, which has damaged the nerves in my fingers and feet, and I’m currently undergoing chemotherapy. That’s why I began using speech-to-text on my Android phone… I hope this episode leads to a better understanding of the difference between assistive technology and AI-generated writing…

Q: Many acclaimed writers like Ursula K Le Guin, Mary Shelley, and JRR Tolkien have also been falsely flagged by AI detectors. Where does this leave writers?

Nazir: What these AI detectors are saying is that if a piece of writing is too polished, it must have been written by AI. I refuse to accept that. AI was trained on human writing. Large language models, to me, are tools, much like a word processor. They don’t replace the human spirit behind creative writing. Ask an AI to write a prize-winning story on its own and see what it produces. You still need human imagination and judgment to create literature.
Nazir added, “What I don’t understand is why people continue to question the judges’ decision.”

I feel like with AI there will be no winners

By Zolmarchus • Score: 3, Insightful Thread

Only losers. Some writing talent will be lost because they would be too timid to be accused of cheating (or simply too jaded). And many readers (myself likely included) will be very suspicious towards anything written after about 2020, however well-reviewed it might be.

Luckily there is already too much good literature written in the last 300 years that even a lifetime will not be sufficient to read it all.

Detectors Grossly Overestimate Their Ability

By SlashbotAgent • Score: 5, Funny Thread

There’s no way to reliably determine whether something was written by AI or not. They can think it’s AI. They can point out similarities between a text and typical AI slop. But those “markers” are circumstantial and don’t prove anything. Furthermore, as AI is trained to avoid the tells of the past, it has become near impossible to say that something was written by AI with even vague certainty. And companies that use AI to “accurately detect AI” are liars, thieves, and 100% full of shit.
These are some of the reasons why no one can say whether this comment was written by AI, William Shakespeare, a Yemenese moron, a room full of monkeys with shit splattered typewriters.

Good story?

By Spazmania • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Was it a good story? If it was an engaging read then why care whether AI was used to help write it.

Re: Good story?

By Aristos Mazer • Score: 4, Informative Thread

Assume it was AI generated. It was prompted by a human and a human chose to share it. Curation is a human artwork. The choice to share is the human connection.

We know how to solve an AI problem.

By trelanexiph • Score: 3 Thread
We must subject all authors to Voight-Kampff tests to ensure they are not replicants.

We are going to need more electric sheep.

GoDaddy Warns India’s Crackdown on Fake Site Registrars Could Upend Internet Privacy Everywhere

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot Skip
“The internet is filled with fakes,” writes Gizmodo. “A court in India is setting out to address the problem by requiring more transparency from domain registrars to make it easier to crack down on fraud. And while the intentions might be good, Reuters is reporting that major American domain registrar GoDaddy is sounding the warning bells that the court’s decision could fundamentally reshape the internet well beyond India’s borders.”

GoDaddy argues the move would even make the internet less safe, reports Reuters :
[Online fraud] is a key challenge for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, which last year received 2.4 million complaints of alleged cyber fraud amounting to $2.4 billion. Starting in 2019, lawsuits were brought by dozens of Indian and global firms — Amazon against fake shopping sites trading on its name and McDonald’s complaining against bogus sites offering franchises. [More than 20 companies filed a complaint, the article notes, including Microsoft.] In December, an Indian court blocked more than 1,100 such websites. The New Delhi judge however went further, ordering sweeping new measures that tech experts say have rewritten rules of internet governance: Domain sellers should not offer buyers free privacy protection by default, the buyer’s details should be released to anyone with a “legitimate interest” within 72 hours, and website addresses that are variations of protected brand names must be prohibited.

U.S.-based GoDaddy has challenged the directives before a larger bench of judges at the Delhi High Court, according to a Reuters review of non-public filings. It says the ruling will affect legitimate businesses that have names similar to big brands. Stopping privacy-by-default features, GoDaddy said, will result in public disclosure of name, address, telephone and email of legitimate website owners, exposing them to “foreseeable privacy and security risks” such as stalking and harassment.

As domain names operate globally, not locally, the order could force GoDaddy to regulate website addresses across the world, it said. On the court’s order imposing a 72-hour deadline on companies to provide registration details to anyone with “legitimate interest”, GoDaddy argues it has no wherewithal to assess who has legitimate interest or not. The “commercially destabilising” directives may force domain name companies to “exit India”, said one of GoDaddy’s appeal documents that ran into 5,121 pages… GoDaddy rivals, Arizona-based Namecheap and Netherlands-based Hosting Concepts, have also challenged the New Delhi ruling, court records show, although Reuters could not ascertain details of their appeals…

GoDaddy argues that diluting the privacy feature will run contrary to India’s data protection law and the European Union GDPR law which mandates a “privacy by default” approach. Farzaneh Badii, a New York-based researcher on internet governance, criticised the New Delhi ruling, noting that Europe redacted such details because publishing them had been abused by harassment and targeted phishing. “The people exposed will be journalists, activists, small business owners, and private individuals. The brand impersonators will not,” she said…

While the sweeping December directives were issued by a court, they followed government’s submissions, documents showed… The judges will hear the appeals on July 16.
GoDaddy manages 80 million domains and serves over 20 million users, the article points out, with annual revenue over $5 billion.

GoDaddy’s just worried about its profits

By jaa101 • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

U.S.-based GoDaddy has challenged the directives before a larger bench of judges at the Delhi High Court, according to a Reuters review of non-public filings. It says the ruling will affect legitimate businesses that have names similar to big brands.

I bet GoDaddy makes tons more money from typo-squatters and scammers than from legitimate businesses with similar names.

Re:Fuck GoDaddy. No website owner should be hidden

By Charlotte • Score: 5, Informative Thread

I run a website. It is not politically active or controversial in any way, but I don’t want my name, phone and address details out there in the public domain simply because I publish information online.

I live in Europe and we have laws about this… Once I make a bank/debit card payment to register the domain I am traceable by the police if they have a warrant. Why would my name need to be out in public just because bad people register fake names?

Re:GoDaddy’s just worried about its profits

By PPH • Score: 4, Informative Thread

Not just GoDaddy. There’s an entire ecosystem of “used domain name” traders out there*. For a small fee, they will “administrate” a domain for you. As if that’s a difficult job. Next thing you know, the reassigned administrator contact in the DNS record will be sold off to a squatter. Not typo. They actually have your domain. Now you have to buy it back.

Microsoft was in this business a while back. But they were buying up entire hosting companies and then informing cusomers that their domain was no longer “your_name.com” but “your_name.msn.com”. They sold original domains off to squatters that refused to let them go (front companies?) and were sued to recover and return the original names.

*That’s on India. I own a domain. The fact of which isn’t concealed. I get numerous e-mails and phone calls offering management services. Most of them sounding like the “Do not redeem!” guy.

“foreseeable privacy and security risks” such as stalking and harassment.

It’s great having customers secured by guard gates and sentries with M16s. All I can say to the nastier callers is “bring it on”.

Re:Fuck GoDaddy. No website owner should be hidden

By Himmy32 • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Apparently you didn’t experience the blessings of owning a domain before WHOIS privacy features. It’s not the news reporters and whistle blowers, it’s the marketers, scammers, and malcontents.

This would have a huge effect on use of vanity domains for email, blogs, or personal websites, since using your domain will be doxxing yourself. Remember that this is the era of swatting and slow descent of civility online, only Gmail and Medium/Substack otherwise someone will be sending you a crew of angry police or a box of manure to your door for your opinion online.

Finally a solution to internet fakery!

By GrahamJ • Score: 3 Thread

Who knew it would be easy to rid the internet of fakes? Just ask them to please put their name and address on their WHOIS and the problem will be solved forever!

Thanks India, now I can sleep well knowing I’ll never come across a fake on the Internet again!

EV Batteries Defy Expectations, Last Hundreds of Thousands of Miles

Posted by EditorDavid View on SlashDot
247,000 miles on an EV battery? So says the owner of a U.K.-based used-car sales company that specializes in Evs, who tells the Wall Street Journal EV batteries keep performing well even after several hundred thousand miles. “They are proving themselves to be exceptionally reliable.”
After five years on the road, the average EV will still be able to drive up to 95% of its original range, according to Recurrent, a data-science company that provides a battery-monitoring tool for EVs — better than many in the auto industry expected…

Potential new car buyers’ fear of having to pay for a battery replacement is the number one reason they choose to steer clear of EVs, according to a 2025 survey from industry research firm AutoPacific. When early EVs hit the market, buyers’ concerns were well-founded. Roughly one in 12 EVs built from 2011 to 2016 have had to have battery replacements. But new data shows that more modern EVs are doing better so far. Among EVs built from 2022 on, 0.3% have had battery replacements, according to a 2025 study from Recurrent. As battery technology has advanced, EVs have avoided problems like the ones that plagued the original Nissan Leaf when it hit the market in 2010, for example. Those cars lacked the battery-cooling technology that is in newer EVs, and they made headlines for wearing down quickly. Buyer perception hasn’t quite caught up, according to Scott Case, co-founder and chief executive of Recurrent…

The newest battery-powered EVs have lifespans comparable to internal-combustion-engine vehicles, even when driven more miles, according to Viet Nguyen-Tien, a research officer at the London School of Economics who focuses on Evs. Improvements in car batteries’ chemical contents, battery-management systems and thermal regulation have been the difference in making batteries last longer and cost less, Nguyen-Tien said. Battery prices have fallen more than 90% since 2010, according to a BloombergNEF report from late last year. Industry analysts say battery-replacement costs are also improving as more EVs are designed for repairability in the long-haul. An out-of-warranty battery replacement can cost anywhere from $5,000 to $16,000, depending on the manufacturer, according to Recurrent. But many EV manufacturers have shifted to allow smaller components of their battery packs to be repaired, which can allow owners to avoid the full costs of a battery replacement, Case said.

EV batteries aren’t without their challenges, though. A battery that is frequently fast-charged with high power loses its range, on average, at twice the rate of a battery charged at a lower power, according to telematics company Geotab. Frequently charging a battery to 100%, or letting it rest at 0% for extended periods, can also reduce range long-term. And EVs regularly deliver less range in extreme cold or heat.
The article also includes two new projections on EV adoption:

Defy FUD, Meet Expectations

By crow • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I don’t know what expectations these are defying unless they’re from those created by anti-EV FUD. I thought it was pretty clear that EV batteries usually last longer than the cars themselves. If 250K is exceeding expectations, then the expectations are wrong and haven’t been supported by the data for a long time.

Re: If this were true…

By markdavis • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

>“Leaf were a special case. I think they were air cooled as didn’t like fast charging”

The Leaf has been around a long, long time, so it used the oldest tech. The Ariya, and now the new (2026+) Leaf use a slightly different chemistry (high nickel), coupled with battery cooling (liquid to air AND liquid to active HVAC) and heating (standard). They are going to last a LOT longer (and charge faster).

One strange quirk is that the Ariya had no percent charge limiter, at all. Very annoying. I believe it was a marketing thing, trying to raise confidence that you can charge to 100% every time without worrying about battery wear. The reality is that it might not matter as much as in the past, but it is still a very valid factor. More annoying is they added the charge percent limiter in the new Leaf, but didn’t software update the Ariya with that ability (yet, but nobody is holding their breath).

In any case the batteries will wear much less if:

1) Charge is limited to around 70-80% or so, max, when possible/convenient.
2) Charge is not allowed to go very low (like 20% or less).
3) Rapid DC charging is avoided. And if used, charge only to 80%
4) Frequent narrow charging is always better (like 45%-70% or 60%-80%) than less-frequent wider charging (like 30%-80%).
5) Never allow vehicle to sit in hot weather for many days at or near 100% charge (even Nissan does relay this info).

And that holds for all Lithium Ion batteries, in all devices. And most of it also applies to Lithium phosphate as well. Much of the above is not possible (or practical) unless you do at-home charging, which is why that is an important component in EV satisfaction. There is probably no need now to “baby” the batteries. But just some simple guidelines to consider/perform when convenient and when you don’t need the range, can probably greatly extended the battery life.

As a side note, people were critical of the Aryia’s maximum DC/fast charge amperage (130kW), only to find that the systems are so improved over older vehicles, that the actual charge time ended up being about the same or even faster (in some cases) than older vehicles with much higher maximum amperage.

Re:If this were true…

By Smidge204 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Aside from the early LEAF packs being notoriously bad with degradation - both due to early tech AND bad thermal design - it’s also worth noting that the main reasons EV batteries enter the secondary market is because the vehicle they were installed in got totaled.

=Smidge=

Re: If this were true…

By markdavis • Score: 4, Informative Thread

>“This isn’t good advice.”

Actually, yes it is, for the majority of EV’s. Although it is less relevant for LFP.

>“Know your battery’s chemistry”

For sure.

>“and what the manufacturer advises”

Keep in mind (as I pointed out in my post) that sometimes marketing will get in the way of good advice.

It’s going to upend the used car market

By shilly • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Historically, cars decayed mechnically, which led to churn, which created the used car market volume. A car might come off finance after 3 or 4 years, then be sold once again after another five or six years for a lot less money, then have one or two cycles more before ending up as a beater or as scrap.

But in an EV world, cars may decay technologically, but they’re going to remain mechanically (ahd chemically) robust for much longer. That will cut failure-driven churn, and is likely to stabilise mid-tier pricing, cut transaction velocity and volumes, etc. The beater market may disappear. Here’s what I mean: an EV with a 300 mile LFP pack (or sodium, in 2027 or 2028) may have essentially the same range after 30 years, because that’s “only” 400,000 or so miles of driving, and the chemistry probably gets you to more like 900,000. The drivetrain is so much simpler that nothing on it is likely to have broken. So at what point do you *need* to sell it because it doesn’t do the original job?