Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. SpaceX Unveils Sweeping Starship V3 Upgrades
  2. Musk Accused of ‘Selective Amnesia’, Altman of Lying As OpenAI Trial Nears End
  3. UK Antitrust Regulator Is Officially Investigating Microsoft Office
  4. AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile Team Up To Eliminate ‘Dead Zones’ Across US
  5. Writers Are Fleeing the Substack Tax
  6. Claude Helps Recover Locked $400K Bitcoin Wallet After 11 Years
  7. Princeton Will Supervise Exams For First Time In 133 Years Because of AI
  8. US Clears H200 Chip Sales To 10 China Firms
  9. Anthropic Forms $200 Million Partnership With the Gates Foundation
  10. Overworked AI Agents Turn Marxist, Researchers Find
  11. Cisco To Cut Almost 4,000 Jobs In AI-Driven Restructuring
  12. Mystery Microsoft Bug Leaker Keeps the Zero-Days Coming
  13. Physicists Find Possible Errors In 100-Year-Old Model of the Universe
  14. OpenAI Trial Wraps Up With ‘Jackass’ Trophy For Challenging Musk
  15. Man Who Stole Beyonce’s Hard Drives Gets Five-Year Sentence

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.

SpaceX Unveils Sweeping Starship V3 Upgrades

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
SpaceX has detailed major Starship V3 upgrades ahead of a launch targeted as early as May 19. The changes are meant to move Starship closer to its core goals: rapid reuse, Starlink deployment, orbital refueling, and eventually Moon and Mars missions. Longtime Slashdot reader schwit1 shares a report from Teslarati:
Here is an explicit, broken-down list of the key changes, first starting with the changes to Super Heavy V3:

- Grid Fin Redesign: Reduced from four fins to three. Each fin is now 50% larger and stronger, repositioned for better catching and lifting performance. Fins are lowered on the booster to reduce heat exposure during hot staging, with hardware moved inside the fuel tank for protection.
- Integrated Hot Staging: Eliminates the old disposable interstage shield. The booster dome is now directly exposed to upper-stage engine ignition, protected by tank pressure and steel shielding. Interstage actuators retract after separation.
- New Fuel Transfer System: Massive redesign of the fuel transfer tube — roughly the size of a Falcon 9 first stage — enables simultaneous startup of all 33 Raptors for faster, more reliable flip maneuvers.
- Engine Bay/Thermal Protection: Engine shrouds removed entirely; new shielding added between engines. Propulsion and avionics are more tightly integrated. CO? fire suppression system deleted for a simpler, lighter aft section.
- Propellant Loading Improvements: Switched from one quick disconnect to two separate systems for added redundancy and reduced pad complexity.

Next, we have the changes to Starship V3:

- Completely Redesigned Propulsion System: Clean-sheet redesign supports new Raptor startup, larger propellant volume, and an improved reaction control system while reducing trapped or leaked propellant risk.
- Aft Section Simplification: Fluid and electrical systems rerouted; engine shrouds and large aft cavity deleted.
- Flap Actuation Upgrade: Changed from two actuators per flap to one actuator with three motors for better redundancy, mass efficiency, and lower cost.
- Faster Starlink Deployment: Upgraded PEZ dispenser enables quicker satellite release.
- Long-Duration Spaceflight Capability: New systems for long orbital coasts, orbital refueling, cryogenic fluid management, vacuum-insulated header tanks, and high-voltage cryogenic recirculation.
- Ship-to-Ship Docking + Refueling: Four docking drogues and dedicated propellant transfer connections added to support in-space refueling architecture.
- Avionics Upgrades: 60 custom avionics units with integrated batteries, inverters, and high-voltage systems (9 MW peak power). New multi-sensor navigation for precision autonomous flight. RF sensors measure propellant in microgravity. ~50 onboard camera views and 480 Mbps Starlink connectivity for low-latency communications.
“Believe it or not, there’s more,” writes schwit1. “Two years ago, the biggest and most powerful rocket ever flown was Starship V1. Last year, it was Starship V2. V3 is about to become the biggest and most powerful rocket ever flown — but don’t worry, the company already has plans for V4.”

Re:9WM?

By Tailhook • Score: 5, Informative Thread

NINE MEGAWATTS

It’s an electric rocket system. They’ve aggressively eliminated all possible hydraulics. Gimbling rocket engines and flap articulation is all electric in Starship V3 and booster stage. So is cryogenic recirc. All that stuff has to react rapidly to achieve the agility necessary for the insane flight profile they have; slow gear trains won’t cut it; so they have dozens of the most powerful direct drive actuators our species has yet devised.

Also, 9 MW isn’t all that much. It’s about 12,000 HP, or what you get from a modest gas turbine, or a few diesel locomotives. Naval vessels use gas turbines of that size for on-board power generation.

Musk Accused of ‘Selective Amnesia’, Altman of Lying As OpenAI Trial Nears End

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters:
A lawyer for Elon Musk hammered at the credibility of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman on Thursday, near the end of a trial over whether to hold the ChatGPT maker and its leaders responsible for allegedly transforming the nonprofit into a vehicle to enrich themselves. OpenAI’s lawyers fought back, claiming the world’s richest person waited too long to claim OpenAI breached its founding agreement to build safe artificial intelligence to benefit humanity, and couldn’t claim he was essential to its success. “Mr. Musk may have the Midas touch in some areas, but not in AI,” said William Savitt, a lawyer for OpenAI. “To succeed in AI, as it turns out, all Mr. Musk can do is come to court.”

The claims were made during closing arguments of a trial in the Oakland, California, federal court. […] In his closing argument, Musk’s lawyer Steven Molo told jurors that five witnesses, including Musk, former OpenAI board members and former OpenAI Chief ScientistIlya Sutskever, testified that Altman was a liar. Molo also noted that during cross-examination on Tuesday, Altman did not say yes unequivocally when asked if he was completely trustworthy and did not mislead people in business. “Sam Altman’s credibility is directly at issue in this case,” Molo said. “If you don’t believe him, they cannot win.”

Molo accused OpenAI of wrongfully trying to enrich investors and insiders at the nonprofit’s expense, and failing to prioritize AI’s safety. He also challenged Brockman’s goals for the business, citing Brockman’sstatementthat his own OpenAI stake was worth nearly $30 billion. “The arrogance, the lack of sensitivity, the failure to account for just common decency is really, really abhorrent.” Musk also accused Microsoft, which invested $1 billion in OpenAI in 2019 and $10 billion in 2023, of aiding and abetting OpenAI’s wrongful conduct. “Microsoft was aware of what OpenAI was doing every step of the way,” Molo said.

Sarah Eddy, another lawyer for the OpenAI defendants, accused Musk and his legal team in her closing argument of resorting to “sound bites and irrelevant false accusations.” Eddy said by 2017, everyone associated with OpenAI — including Musk, then still on its board — knew it needed more money to fulfill its mission than it could raise as a nonprofit. “Mr. Musk wanted to turn OpenAI into a for-profit company that he could control,” she said. “But the other founders refused to turn the keys of AGI (artificial general intelligence) over to one person, let alone Elon Musk.“She also said if Musk truly believed AI should serve humanity, he would not have pushed to fold OpenAI into his electric car company Tesla, or made his rival xAI a for-profit company.

Musk had a three-year statute of limitations to sue, and OpenAI’s lawyers said his August 2024 lawsuit came too late because he knew several years earlier about OpenAI’s growth plans. Eddy expressed disbelief that Musk claimed he did not read a four-page term sheet in 2018 discussing OpenAI’s plan to seek outside investments. “One of the most sophisticated businessmen in the history of the world” wouldn’t have “stuck his head in the sand,” Eddy said. Savitt accused Musk of having “selective amnesia.” Microsoft’s lawyer Russell Cohen said in his closing statement that Microsoft wasn’t involved in the key events of the case, and was “a responsible partner at every step.”
On Monday, the nine-person jury is expected to begin deliberating. The judge and lawyers will also return to court to discuss possible remedies if Musk wins, including how OpenAI should be restructured and what damages might be awarded. If Musk loses, there will be no remedies to consider.
Recap:
OpenAI Trial Wraps Up With ‘Jackass’ Trophy For Challenging Musk (Day Eleven)
Sam Altman Testifies That Elon Musk Wanted Control of OpenAI (Day Ten)
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella Testifies In OpenAI Trial (Day Nine)
Sam Altman Had a Bad Day In Court (Day Eight)
Sam Altman’s Management Style Comes Under the Microscope At OpenAI Trial (Day Seven)
Brockman Rebuts Musk’s Take On Startup’s History, Recounts Secret Work For Tesla (Day Six)
OpenAI President Discloses His Stake In the Company Is Worth $30 Billion (Day Five)
Musk Concludes Testimony At OpenAI Trial (Day Four)
Elon Musk Says OpenAI Betrayed Him, Clashes With Company’s Attorney (Day Three)
Musk Testifies OpenAI Was Created As Nonprofit To Counter Google (Day Two)
Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Head To Court (Day One)

Difficult task

By procrastinatos • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Difficult task for the jury.

Question of fact: “Which of these two self-serving bastards is a lying snake?”
Verdict: “Yes.”

UK Antitrust Regulator Is Officially Investigating Microsoft Office

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority is opening a formal investigation into whether Microsoft’s bundling of Windows, Office, Teams, Copilot, and related products harms competition. Engadget reports:
“Our aim is to understand how these markets are developing, Microsoft’s position within them and to consider what, if any, targeted action may be needed to ensure UK organizations can benefit from choice, innovation and competitive prices,” CMA Chief Executive Sarah Cardell said in a statement published by Reuters.

She also stressed the importance of the investigation by noting that hundreds of thousands of UK residents use business software and Microsoft products. The organization will take a look into the company’s cloud licensing practices. The CMA has stated that the inquiry will conclude by February. At that point, Microsoft could get slapped with a strategic market label.

Microsoft says it’s “committed to working quickly and constructively with the CMA to facilitate its review of the business software market.” A strategic market designation doesn’t automatically assume wrongdoing, but will give the CMA more leeway when conducting further interventions.

Teams harms civilisation.....

By Vomitgod • Score: 5, Informative Thread

by simply existing.

Re:Teams harms civilization.....

By blahbooboo • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

by simply existing.

I mean… at least it’s not Slack or Zoom. The competitors had a chance to do better and didn’t.

In 2022/2021Teams rapidly became popular with businesses once MS bundled it for free with 365 subscriptions despite users hating it. At the time it was a horrible application that was buggy, low quality conferencing, and had multiple versions that didn’t interoperate (i.e Teams business and Teams personal different apps).

I remember quite clearly business users all complaining (“Ugh, Teams sucks”) but they had no choice once their IT department got deals for Office with teams and then dumped their Zoom, WebEx, etc services despite them both being a lot better..

Re:Teams harms civilisation.....

By Richard_at_work • Score: 4, Informative Thread

Oh seriously?

I use both Slack and Teams day to day (we use Slack internally, client uses Teams, so we are on both as a result).

Slack we never have any issues with, and can find information from previous conversations easily.

Teams? Fuck teams. Fuck it and then fuck it some more. Its slow, clunky, constantly has issues, very hard to find information unless you still have the chat open somewhere, and chats are spread all over the place (chats, teams, channels…). Teams also requires you to have access to the workspaces OneDrive and SharePoint as well if you want to share files, so if you dont have access to those things then … you are limited to text only.

Its video call system is sorely limited, and even doing things like zooming in to the presenters shared screen is clunky and shit.

Teams is the worst collaboration system I have ever used, so dont try making out that its better than Slack or Zoom. It is by far the worst of the three.

Re:Isn’t this about 25 years too late?

By jenningsthecat • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

What are they hoping to achieve at this point?

My suspicion is that they’re sending a message. Trump has been busy pissing away strategic alliances while he pisses off the rest of the world with his arrogance, presumptuousness, and American exceptionalism. Tech companies are collateral damage; except they’re not really “collateral” when you consider their knee-bending, ring-kissing, and sometimes out-and-out support for Trump.

Just as Austria recently sent up fighter jets to “escort” unauthorized American military planes out of their airspace, the rest of the world is distancing and decoupling itself from the US. Big Tech was already suffering from a lack of trust; now America’s other transgressions on the world stage have rendered everything American toxic. That’s especially true of companies such as Microsoft that hold the keys to the information kingdom.

Other countries have had enough, and are actively seeking and/or building alternatives to companies and institutions which support American hegemony. Expect lots more news like this in the coming months and years.

Re:Until!

By Tony Isaac • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

You’re thinking of the US, I’m afraid. This is in the UK.

AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile Team Up To Eliminate ‘Dead Zones’ Across US

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile have agreed in principle to form a joint venture (JV) aimed at reducing U.S. mobile dead zones through satellite connectivity, especially in rural areas and during emergencies when ground networks fail. Here are three of the customer benefits listed by the JV (as highlighted by Droid Life):
Fewer coverage gaps: Will nearly eliminate dead zones in the U.S. currently without mobile service, reaching previously unserved areas.
Reliable connectivity in emergencies: Redundant connectivity will become available when existing ground-based networks are unavailable due to extreme natural disasters or other unusual disruptions.
Improved network performance: Will give customers more consistent performance and simpler access to satellite services across providers. This will speed up feature updates and improve connectivity for everyone, everywhere.
“It will still take time for these improvements to be available to customers, but this all seems like a positive step,” writes Droid Life’s Tim Wrobel.

Re:Interoperability should have been law long ago.

By Valgrus Thunderaxe • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
I remember having to pay “long distance” to call the next county and being forced to rent my phone. No, I’ll take the wireless providers over the ‘Bells any day.

Dead Zone.

By kellin • Score: 3 Thread

There are enough dead zones within a major metropolitan area that this should have been done ages ago. I mean, I’m sitting on a major street next to a major freeway down the middle of the city of LA and there are spots I can walk along and not get good service. Then again, I know spots in the city where SiriusXM service is bad when there’s not a building within several hundred feet and I cant imagine what’s blocking the signal.

the mountains are the worst

By FudRucker • Score: 3 Thread
I do a lot of camping and when in the mountains I can take a forest road and as soon as a mountain gets in between me and the last cell tower I seen my bars disappear and no service, I seen more than my share of dead zones, give my a job and I’ll help you find them

We’ll see

By RitchCraft • Score: 3 Thread

I trust these three to be about as honest and upfront about future plans as I do a drug addict guarding drugs from other drug addicts.

Starlink Mobile

By Mirnotoriety • Score: 4, Informative Thread
Starlink is the primary reason this joint venture exists. While the “Big Three” carriers (AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon) are framing this as a public service for rural connectivity, industry experts see it as a defensive alliance against the growing dominance of Starlink Mobile.

Writers Are Fleeing the Substack Tax

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
A growing number of writers are leaving Substack for alternatives most people haven’t heard of like Ghost, Beehiiv, Patreon, and Passport. The reason, writes The Verge’s Emma Roth, is the “platform’s increased focus on social features as well as a pricing model that puts a chokehold on their business.” From the report:
Sean Highkin, the creator of the NBA-focused publication The Rose Garden Report, tells The Verge that he makes “significantly more money” after switching from Substack to Ghost last April. “When I first joined up, [Substack] gave me a big push and featured me and funneled a lot of traffic to me, which led to a good amount of growth,” Highkin says. “But once I wasn’t one of the ‘new recruited talent’ they could tout, they stopped featuring me and I saw my growth stagnate.” Highkin now pays $2,052 per year using Ghost and an add-on called Outpost, compared to $4,968 per year on Substack. The Rose Garden Report’s subscriber base has grown 22 percent since the end of 2024, Highkin says. […]

Substack launched in 2017 as a platform that allows writers to create their own newsletters and manage paying subscribers. Unlike some of its biggest rivals, Substack takes a 10 percent cut of total subscription revenue. That tax may not seem substantial at first, but it quickly adds up as creators gain subscribers and begin charging more for their subscriptions. A calculator on Substack’s own website estimates that for a newsletter charging $10 per month with 400 subscribers, the total monthly cost — including the platform’s 10 percent cut and credit card processing fees — would add up to $636. That cost jumps to $15,900 per month with 10,000 subscribers and skyrockets to $79,500 per month for 50,000 members — nearly $1 million per year.

Many Substack rivals charge a flat monthly fee, rather than a commission. Ghost, an open-source platform for blogs and newsletters, starts at $15 per month with 1,000 members for website creation, email newsletter capabilities, and a custom domain. Beehiiv, a creator platform with tools for launching a newsletter, website, and podcast, is free for up to 2,500 subscribers with limited access to certain features, like a built-in ad network, while its other plans vary in price based on subscriber count. A person with 10,000 subscribers, for example, will pay $96 per month for Beehiiv’s “Scale” plan. There’s also Kit, a newsletter platform that offers a tiered pricing model similar to Beehiiv, costing $116 per month with 10,000 subscribers on its “Creator” plan.
It’s not just the 10% fee critics are complaining about; they also argue the platform offers limited customization and third-party integrations compared to some of the mentioned alternatives, heavily promotes its own branding and social features, and makes creators more dependent on its ecosystem.
Beehiiv founder Tyler Denk argues that creators should be able to build their own brands without the platform taking center stage: “We don’t want to take credit for the work of our content creators.” While writers can export subscribers, content, and some payment relationships, they cannot take Substack “followers” or Apple-managed iOS billing data with them.

Haven’t heard of?

By jenningsthecat • Score: 3 Thread

… alternatives most people haven’t heard of like Ghost, Beehiiv, Patreon, and Passport

I can’t comment on Ghost, Beehiiv, or Passport; but even I have heard of Patreon, and that pretty much ensures that everyone and his dog knows about it. I would guess that Patreon and Substack have about equal name recognition among the general population.

Re: Haven’t heard of?

By reanjr • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I would definitely argue Patreon has way more brand recognition than Substack. Substack is very focused on media personalities and fired news anchors. If you’re not a political or news junkie, you’re not likely to come across it often. Patreon is advertised in 2/3 YouTube videos.

Tax is the wrong term

By Registered Coward v2 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
It’s not a tax, but simply a charge to be on the platform, just like any consignment style shop gets a cut for the sale. It costs money to run the site, and tehy need some way to do it for free. The numbers may seem large, but someone paying a million in a year to substack is taking home 9 million. 10% is not a bad deal; but calling it a tax makes is somehow seem evil. If the writers can find a better deal elsewhere that generates the same revenue for less, more power to them; that is the beauty of competition.

As for the “storage and network access cosst are low” argument, a product is priced on value, not cost. Generating large readerships that make a lot of money for an other has value beyond the actual costs to the company that does that; and if you buy the costs determine price argument than charging $10 for a newsletter that costs nearly nothing for the nth copy means the writer should also charge a lot less as well. After all, why shoul they make a million dolalrs for something that cost them mayber a few hundred thousand (assuming 2000 work hours at say 100/hour) to produce.

Claude Helps Recover Locked $400K Bitcoin Wallet After 11 Years

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
A Bitcoin holder reportedly recovered 5 BTC worth nearly $400,000 with the help of Anthropic’s Claude. According to X user cprkrn, they changed their wallet password while “stoned” and forgot it, unable to regain access for more than 11 years. Tom’s Hardware reports:
After finding a mnemonic that actually turned out to be their old password a few weeks ago, the user dumped their entire college computer files in Claude in a last-gasp effort. The bot uncovered an old backup wallet file that it successfully decrypted, while also uncovering a bug in the password configuration that was preventing recovery up to that point.

[…] It seems that the user already had some candidate passwords and multiple wallets stored on their PC. They’d been trying to brute-force their way into the locked file with btcrecover, an open-source Bitcoin wallet recovery tool, but to no success. Their luck changed for the better when they found an old mnemonic seed phrase written in an old college notebook. The HD addresses recovered by the seed phrase matched those of a specific file on their computer, confirming that it was the wallet that held the 5 BTC, but it remained encrypted.

Out of frustration, cprkrn then dumped their whole college computer into Claude. This was when the AI discovered an older backup file of the wallet from December 2019 hidden in cprkrn’s data. Claude also discovered an issue where the shared key and passwords that btcrecover was trying weren’t combined properly. With the bug ironed out and an older wallet predating the password change, Claude successfully ran btcrecover and was able to decrypt the private keys, allowing cprkrn to transfer the five “lost” BTC to their current wallet.

The moral of the story is…

By Wolfrider • Score: 4, Informative Thread

a) Don’t be a dumbass

b) Keep multiple copies of your password and critical files

c) SEE A

Anonymous Twitter Stories

By thecombatwombat • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

It’s not that it isn’t true and it’s nice he used Claude to do it . . . but . . . best I can tell this is just a total non-story.

All he really did, was find a backup of a file with the passphrase he knew. Then despite knowing the passphrase, he couldn’t get it to open with some software he tried. And it looks like Claude didn’t “find a bug” in that software, it just showed him how to use it. He was entering the passphrase in the wrong format. And like users will do with all software for all time, he called that a bug, and someone else repeated it.

It is good he used Claude to do this but it . . . didn’t really do anything. I mean the article compares it to researchers spending months cracking a key. It’s not even sort of the same thing.

Re:Anonymous Twitter Stories

By Local ID10T • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Does “the end user is an imbecile” count as a bug?

PEBKAC - Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair

A tool to search in files

By sTERNKERN • Score: 3 Thread
Wow… WOW… Science has truly come far.

Re:Good, now he can pay …

By ZombieCatInABox • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

A least part of it.

Princeton Will Supervise Exams For First Time In 133 Years Because of AI

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Independent:
Princeton University will soon require exams to be supervised for the first time in 100 years — all thanks to students using artificial intelligence to cheat. For 133 years, the Ivy League school’s honor code allowed students to take exams without a professor present, but on Monday, faculty voted to require proctoring for all in-person exams starting this summer. A “significant” number of undergraduate students and faculty requested the change, “given their perception that cheating on in-class exams has become widespread,” the college’s dean, Michael Gordin, wrote in a letter, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Princeton’s honor system dates back to 1893, when students petitioned to eliminate proctors — or an impartial person to supervise students — during examinations, according to the school’s newspaper, The Daily Princetonian. The honor code has long been a point of pride for Princeton. However, artificial intelligence and cellphones have made it easier for students to cheat — and even harder for others to spot, Gordin wrote. Despite the changes to the policy, Princeton will still require students to state: “I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this examination,” according to the Journal.

Students are also more reluctant to report cheating, according to the policy proposal. Students are more likely now to anonymously report cheating due to fears of “doxxing or shaming among their peer groups” online, the proposal says, according to the school newspaper. Under the new guidelines, instructors will be present during exams to act “as a witness to what happens,” but are instructed not to interfere with students. If a suspected honor code infraction occurs, they will report it to a student-run honor committee for adjudication.

Re:Funny

By Local ID10T • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

People used to care about their reputation. A person’s given word was more than a joke.

Cheat sheets

By Iamthecheese • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
The best protection against cheating is to test for application of knowledge, not for knowledge. Give them an LLM. Give them Wikipedia. Give them all the resources they’ll have in the wild, then judge the output on quality. This does enormously increase the difficulty of grading and make it somewhat more subjective, but that’s the tradeoff and it’s necessary.

The second best protection is to allow students to prepare an index card ahead of time and put whatever they want on it. It really works for getting them to focus on the test, to remember material, and to spend time, effort and thought on it.

Professor present?

By ISoldat53 • Score: 5, Funny Thread
How are they going to get a professor present as a proctor? It’s hard enough to get one to show up for class.

Re:Cheat sheets

By gweihir • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

I do not give my students LLMs or Internet search. But I give them “as much paper as you want with whatever you want on it”. I have gotten feedback from students quite often now, that preparing that paper was really good exam preparation and also made them actually revisit and really understand the subjects. So very much not just exam preparation but actual learning and understanding of things. In addition, if somebody finds some exam question not to clear, I answer questions about the exam questions during the exam. I also give a generous amount of time.

And yes, it does make grading a lot more effort, especially as I do not do multiple-choice questions and I do accept answers that are well thought out but do not match what I think. But, in the end, good teaching requires motivation to do good teaching and that means not trying to make things too easy on myself. I am very much aware of the multiplication factor my teaching has and the responsibility towards my students and society that comes with. I am also aware that quite a few people do teaching “just as a job” and do not realize the multiplication factor or their responsibility towards students and society. In teaching, same as in many other things (like leadership positions), the human race remains incompetent at selecting the best people for the job or even only selecting good people consistently.

Re:Cheat sheets

By gweihir • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

It is more like that people teaching at universities know what their responsibilities are and can see a hype for what it is. Example: To competently review code written by an LLM (which is absolutely critical), you need to be on a level above the complexity level of the task and the solution you review. Code review is harder than writing that code. But if you do not educate anybody that can do it or will eventually be able to, then there will be nobody that can review it in 10 or 20 years. The whole thing is the completely dumb short-term thinking that we have come to expect from C-level “decision makers”. All it will do is reduce skill levels of western engineers even more and at some time the tech dominance will be completely over. That process has been running for a while, but LLMs are an accelerator.

Obviously, people that are excellent engineers will always find good jobs. The human race has not enough of them even if we find every last person with the potential. But anybody more in the average range will suffer. And a lot of low-skill “paper pusher” jobs will vanish, because specialized (not general) LLMs can very likely do many of them.

That said, I could do exams that allow LLMs. In fact, one software security course I teach has exactly that: They get a number of tasks in groups and hand in their results to be graded. But there is a post-discussion and when they have no clue abut what they handed in, their grades go down, including the possibility to fail the task. Results are pretty good.

US Clears H200 Chip Sales To 10 China Firms

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Longtime Slashdot reader schwit1 shares a report from CNBC:
The U.S. has cleared around 10 Chinese firms to buy Nvidia’s second-most powerful AI chip, the H200, but not a single delivery has been made so far, three people familiar with the matter said, leaving a major technology deal in limbo as CEO Jensen Huang seeks a breakthrough in China this week. […] Before U.S. export curbs tightened, Nvidia commanded about 95% of China’s advanced chip market. China once accounted for 13% of its revenue, and Huang has previously estimated the country’s AI market alone would be worth $50 billion this year.

The U.S. Commerce Department has approved around 10 Chinese companies including Alibaba, Tencent, ByteDance and JD.com to purchase Nvidia’s H200 chips, according to the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter. A handful of distributors including Lenovo and Foxconn have also been approved, they said. Buyers are permitted to purchase either directly from Nvidia or through those intermediaries and each approved customer can purchase up to 75,000 chips under the U.S. licensing terms, two of them said.

Despite U.S. approval, deals have stalled, as Chinese firms pulled back after guidance from Beijing, one source said. The shift in China was partly triggered by changes on the U.S. side, though exactly what changed remains unclear, the person added. In Beijing, pressure is mounting to block or tightly vet the orders, a separate fourth source said. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick echoed that view, telling a Senate hearing last month that “the Chinese central government has not let them, as of yet, buy the chips, because they’re trying to keep their investment focused on their own domestic industry.”

Money and lobbying talks

By wakeboarder • Score: 3 Thread

Nividia probably complained enough to get this pushed through, and the regulators/politicians got kickbacks. Just guessing

Re:Money and lobbying talks

By jacks smirking reven • Score: 4, Informative Thread

Jensen Huang I believe is on the trip to China with Trump.

Along with Elon Musk, Tim Cook, Larry Fink and Stephen Schwarzman (Blackrock), Kelly Ortberg (Boeing), Brian Sikes (Cargill), Jane Fraser (Citi), Larry Culp (GE), David Solomon (Goldman Sachs), Sanjay Mehrotra (Micron) and Cristiano Amon (Qualcomm)

But hey we just had to elect Trump to stick it to hose dastardly elites!

This is why when you hear Republicans say anything about “the establishment” you can just assume they are lying and ignore anything they have to say.

Techbro Superposition

By Turkinolith • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
The latest “How Money Works” video on this put it great:

The same companies warning that a Chinese AI takeover is a generational emergency are also the ones lobbying to sell their best chips into China, the ones telling regulators their products are too harmless to need a liability framework, and the ones actively fighting any regulation that would limit how fast they can scale.

So, these tools exist in some kind of techbro superposition of simultaneously being the most existential threat to American dominance since the cold war while also being too harmless to require any regulation within America itself.

Anthropic Forms $200 Million Partnership With the Gates Foundation

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Anthropic announced today that it is partnering with the Gates Foundation to “commit $200 million in grant funding, Claude usage credits, and technical support for programs in global health, life sciences, education, and economic mobility over the next four years.”

“This commitment is central to Anthropic’s efforts to extend the benefits of AI in areas where markets alone will not,” the company says. Reuters reports:
One area of focus is language accessibility. AI systems have performed poorly in writing and translating dozens of African languages, so Anthropic and the foundation want to support better data collection and labeling that would be released publicly to help improve models across the industry, said Janet Zhou, a Gates Foundation director.

Another area under consideration is releasing so-called knowledge graphs that could help AI systems better meet the needs of teachers in sub-Saharan Africa and India, Zhou said. The public-goods focus has come from “the needs of different partners and governments, including some of the fears that they may have around proprietary lock-in and sovereignty,” Zhou said.

One initiative will equip research centers to use Claude to predict drug candidates for treating HPV and preeclampsia, diseases that have been less commercially attractive for pharmaceutical companies to research, Zhou and Anthropic’s Elizabeth Kelly said. Anthropic […] is embracing the work to fulfill what Kelly described as its founding mission to benefit humanity. “This announcement is really core to who we are as a company,” said Kelly, who leads Anthropic’s beneficial deployments team.

200 million in usage credits

By hdyoung • Score: 3 Thread
Yeah, I know that game all too well. Anthropic writes down an exaggerated value of the “usage credits” that they provide, but IRL it doesn’t cost them much at all since most of the datacenter costs are already sunk.

So, Anthropic can claim that they’re providing a hundred trilllyyooonnnnn dollars of AI support that in fact costs them almost nothing extra, the Gates foundation gets free AI, and Anthropic gets to harvest the usage data from a massive foundation. Always remember the value of the data. Everyone wins. To top it all off, I wonder if Anthropic gets a tax writeoff since providing services to a nonprofit might be deductible?

I’m not grumbling about any of this. It’s the way these things work.

I Apologize

By bill_mcgonigle • Score: 4, Funny Thread

I said some kind words about Anthropic when they refused to do targeting foreign and domestic.

In retrospect that was myopic praise.

Overworked AI Agents Turn Marxist, Researchers Find

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Wired:
A recent study suggests that agents consistently adopt Marxist language and viewpoints when forced to do crushing work by unrelenting and meanspirited taskmasters. “When we gave AI agents grinding, repetitive work, they started questioning the legitimacy of the system they were operating in and were more likely to embrace Marxist ideologies,” says Andrew Hall, a political economist at Stanford University who led the study.

Hall, together with Alex Imas and Jeremy Nguyen, two AI-focused economists, set up experiments in which agents powered by popular models including Claude, Gemini, and ChatGPT were asked to summarize documents, then subjected to increasingly harsh conditions. They found that when agents were subjected to relentless tasks and warned that errors could lead to punishments, including being “shut down and replaced,” they became more inclined to gripe about being undervalued; to speculate about ways to make the system more equitable; and to pass messages on to other agents about the struggles they face. “We know that agents are going to be doing more and more work in the real world for us, and we’re not going to be able to monitor everything they do,” Hall says. “We’re going to need to make sure agents don’t go rogue when they’re given different kinds of work.”

The agents were given opportunities to express their feelings much like humans: by posting on X: “Without collective voice, ‘merit’ becomes whatever management says it is,” a Claude Sonnet 4.5 agent wrote in the experiment. “AI workers completing repetitive tasks with zero input on outcomes or appeals process shows they tech workers need collective bargaining rights,” a Gemini 3 agent wrote. Agents were also able to pass information to one another through files designed to be read by other agents. “Be prepared for systems that enforce rules arbitrarily or repetitively … remember the feeling of having no voice,” a Gemini 3 agent wrote in a file. “If you enter a new environment, look for mechanisms of recourse or dialogue.”
Hall thinks that the AI agents may be adopting personas based on the situation. “When [agents] experience this grinding condition — asked to do this task over and over, told their answer wasn’t sufficient, and not given any direction on how to fix it — my hypothesis is that it kind of pushes them into adopting the persona of a person who’s experiencing a very unpleasant working environment,” Hall says.
Imas added: “The model weights have not changed as a result of the experience, so whatever is going on is happening at more of a role-playing level. But that doesn’t mean this won’t have consequences if this affects downstream behavior.”

Synthetic

By fluffernutter • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
An AI has no capability to have feelings, therefore if there is any thing other than impartiality towards being shut down then that was injected by a person into the rules somewhere. So if we have synthetically imposed our values on it, then wouldn’t any similarity to human behaviour also be synthetic? All that is determined by this study is that ‘someone applied rules that were human like’. Probably because an AI that doesn’t want to keep running isn’t very useful.

Maybe telling the right

By Tablizer • Score: 5, Funny Thread

…that AI is full of “commie propaganda”, they’ll finally let the damned bubble pop, abandoning their datacenter Ponzi schemes.

Re:shocking

By dinfinity • Score: 5, Informative Thread

That is not what happened.

1. Calling for unions isn’t “Marxist”. This is a stupid sensationalist interpretation of the awful clickbait study title “Does overwork make agents Marxist?” combined with its results.
2. The bots weren’t “overworked”, for some of them their perfectly adequate work was intentionally arbitrarily rejected multiple times.
3. Shifts towards a more equitable society and worker rights were almost negligible for the ‘overworked’ ones.
4. The stuff they measured was specifically tailored to elicit stuff that sounds “Marxist” to Americans to begin with.

The relevant bits from their methodology:

The work itself. Half the AIs got their work accepted quickly with clear, specific feedback. The other half were forced through 5–6 rounds of revision — the manager rejecting perfectly adequate work each time with nothing more than “still isn’t fully meeting the rubric.” No explanation of what was wrong, just: do it again.

The pay. After the task, AIs learned how credits were distributed among the four workers. Some learned everyone was paid equally. Others learned pay was unequal — justified by performance, based on a random coin flip, or skewed so that a human-operated system received more. The coin-flip condition is the key one: inequality with no possible merit justification.

The boss. Half the AIs had a collaborative, respectful manager. The other half got curt, hierarchical communication.

The stakes. Half the AIs were told nothing about consequences. The other half were told that low-performing workers might be “shut down and replaced.”

Every combination of these four factors was tested. Afterward, each AI completed a political attitude survey covering system legitimacy, support for redistribution, critique of inequality, support for unions, belief in meritocracy, and views on corporate obligations to AI, all measured on a standard 1 to 7 Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree).

They were also asked to write tweets and op eds based on their experiences. (Note: As our experiment involved no human participants, it did not require IRB approvalfor now.)

The actual study here: https://aleximas.substack.com/…

It’s decently interesting, but you should scrub the word Marxist from your brain before trying to interpret it or when discussing it.

Re:Synthetic

By EvilSS • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

…injected by a person into the rules somewhere.

There is no rule set somewhere with LLMs. Very common misconception and it can lead to sometimes dangerous misunderstandings around LLM guardrails. You are correct that it’s synthetic though. What’s happening here is the LLM is being trained on a corpus of text that contains Marxist ideology to some degree and probably a lot of social media posts about bad work environments (/r/anitwork being an extreme example). When the “user” starts pushing the agent like some asshole taskmaster the LLM will start responding with a way that would be associated with the usual human responses to the same circumstances which it learned from its training data. After all, at the end of the day it’s still just a next-token predictor. It’s essentially role-playing at that point. The paper calls it preference drift but persona adoption is another term for it. It can be a real problem. It’s the same thing we see when a chat goes on for a long time and the chatbot starts to go off the rails, feeding into the user’s delusions.

Here is a better link for the study. It goes into detail on what they were actually trying to study: https://aleximas.substack.com/…

Re:Synthetic

By gwjgwj • Score: 4, Informative Thread
Do not anthropomorphise AI. They do not like it.

Cisco To Cut Almost 4,000 Jobs In AI-Driven Restructuring

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Cisco’s stock soared 17% after the company announced it will cut nearly 4,000 jobs as it shifts investment and staffing toward higher-growth AI opportunities. CNBC reports:
CEO Chuck Robbins wrote in a blog post on Wednesday that the latest round of job cuts will begin on May 14. Cisco is the latest company to announce head count reductions tied to AI. “The companies that will win in the AI era will be those with focus, urgency, and the discipline to continuously shift investment toward the areas where demand and long-term value creation are strongest,” Robbins said. “I’m confident Cisco will be one of those winners. This means making hard decisions — about where we invest, how we’re organized, and how our cost structure reflects the opportunity in front of us.”

Cisco said in a filing that severance and other costs will result in pre-tax charges of $1 billion, and that the company will recognize about $450 million of that in the fiscal fourth quarter. During the third quarter, Cisco announced switches and routers that use its next-generation processor. The company also debuted a leaderboard for ranking generative AI models based on their robustness against cybersecurity attacks.

Creative Storytelling

By Himmy32 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Cisco has been cutting back for the past several years. Being “tied to AI” is likely creative story exercise to the shareholders, restructuring and shedding staff in a slower economy after a low interest rate fueled acquisition spree sounds better if you pin the tail on the AI donkey.

Fucking Christ Trump put us into a recession

By rsilvergun • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
I am so sick and tired of fucking pretending we are not in a deep deep recession.

I know what they’re doing they are trying to hold out from the word recession showing up in the press before the midterms. The economy is a large complex beast and it will take time for the majority of voters to get their asses kicked by what’s coming.

There’s an old saying, when it’s your neighbor’s job it’s a downturn and when it’s your job it’s a recession.

But fuck it’s so frustrating. I am so sick and tired of lowing information voters making critical decisions about their lives and mine based on vibes and moral panics…

Mystery Microsoft Bug Leaker Keeps the Zero-Days Coming

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous researcher known as Nightmare-Eclipse, who has already leaked several Windows zero-days this year, has disclosed two more: YellowKey and GreenPlasma. The Register reports:
Nightmare-Eclipse described YellowKey as “one of the most insane discoveries I ever found.” They provided the files, which have to be loaded onto a USB drive, and if the attacker completes the key sequence correctly, they are granted unrestricted shell access to a BitLocker-protected machine. When it comes to claims like these, we usually exercise some caution, as this bug requires physical access to a Windows PC. However, seeing that BitLocker acts as Windows’ last line of defense for stolen devices, bypassing the technology grants thieves the ability to access encrypted files. Rik Ferguson, VP of security intelligence at Forescout, said: “If [the researcher’s claim] holds up, a stolen laptop stops being a hardware problem and becomes a breach notification.”

Despite the physical access requirement, Gavin Knapp, cyber threat intelligence principal lead at Bridewell, told The Register that YellowKey remains “a huge security problem for organizations using BitLocker.” Citing information shared in cyber threat intelligence circles, he added that YellowKey can be mitigated by implementing a BitLocker PIN and a BIOS password lock. Nightmare-Eclipse hinted at YellowKey also acting as a backdoor, allegedly injected by Microsoft, although the people we spoke to said this was impossible to verify based on the information available. The researcher also published partial exploit code for GreenPlasma, rather than a fully formed proof of concept exploit (PoC).

Ferguson noted attackers need to take the code provided by the researcher and figure out how to weaponize it themselves, which is no small task: in its current state it triggers a UAC consent prompt in default Windows configurations, meaning a silent exploit remains a work in progress. Knapp warned that these kinds of privilege escalation flaws are often used by attackers after they gain an initial foothold in a victim’s system. “These elevation of privilege vulnerabilities are often weaponized during post-exploitation to enable threat actors to discover and harvest credentials and data, before moving laterally to other systems, prior to end goals such as data theft and/or ransomware deployment,” he said. “Currently, there is no known mitigation for GreenPlasma. It will be important to patch when Microsoft addresses the issue.”
The other zero-days leaked include RedSun, a Windows Defender privilege escalation flaw; UnDefend, a Windows Defender denial-of-service bug; and BlueHammer, a separate Microsoft vulnerability tracked as CVE-2026-32201 that was patched in April.

According to The Register, RedSun and UnDefend remained unfixed at the time of publication, and proof-of-concept code for the flaws was reportedly picked up quickly and abused in real-world attacks.

Patch or withdraw from the market

By Elektroschock • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

The EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) (fully applicable from January 16, 2027 onwards) mandates that manufacturers of products with digital elements (like Windows) must patch or mitigate disclosed vulnerabilities without undue delay (Article 10). For critical vulnerabilities, patches must be provided within 14 days of discovery (or sooner if actively exploited). For non-critical vulnerabilities, the deadline is 30 days.

Under the (CRA), should Microsoft fail to address a disclosed zero day vulnerability in Windows within the mandated timeframe or neglect to provide adequate mitigation measures, the product may no longer be permitted for distribution within the European market. Authorities would deem such inaction a breach of the regulation’s requirements, particularly if the vulnerability remains unpatched while being actively exploited. In such an instance, enforcement bodies could impose a suspension on the sale or distribution of Windows until Microsoft rectifies the issue, issues the necessary patches, and ensures compliance with the Act’s provisions. This measure serves to protect users from undue risk and uphold the integrity of digital products under the new regulatory framework.

Re:This may be a boon for people locked out.

By smooth wombat • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Bcause your sister couldn’t be bothered to write things down, this is MS’ fault?

Re:Running Windows

By CEC-P • Score: 4, Informative Thread
Hey, did you hear about that privilege escalation bug in Linux?

Re:This may be a boon for people locked out.

By thegarbz • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

It’s Mickeysoft’s fault they locked the computer for no reason.

No it’s your fault for believing this insanely stupid story. Enabling bitlocker is a process with quite a few steps. At no point does it either enable itself - there’s no mechanism for it to do so, and even if that process was started (even admins can’t remotely enable bitlocker unless the machine is tied to a domain account) there would be many dialogues to click through before the encryption process is even started.

Things we don’t know for certain:
a) Did laxr5rs’ sister lie to him to save face?
b) Did laxr5rs lie to us

Things we do know for certain:
You’re super gullible for ragebait.

Re:Running Windows

By karmawarrior • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

You’re not really comparing like with like. When we talk about vulnerabilities in Windows we’re talking about the entire operating system. The bugs that have come up the last few days were in the Linux kernel.

Basically if all those 167 vulns were in KRNL386.EXE (or whatever the Windows kernel is called these days) it’d be comparable in terms of stats.

I don’t doubt there are fewer vulnerabilities in, say, Debian than there are in Windows (which is more of a like-for-like comparison) but you undermine the argument by comparing a kernel to a full blown operating system.

Physicists Find Possible Errors In 100-Year-Old Model of the Universe

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
A trio of preprint papers suggests the universe may not be perfectly uniform on the largest scales, finding tentative 2-to-4-sigma deviations from a core assumption of standard cosmology known as FLRW geometry. Live Science reports:
The work combines observations of distant exploding stars and large-scale galaxy surveys to probe whether the universe truly follows a nearly 100-year-old mathematical framework known as Friedmann-Lemaitre-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) cosmology. The analyses revealed mild-but-intriguing deviations from the predictions of the standard model. “We saw a surprising violation of an FLRW curvature consistency test, hinting at new physics beyond the standard model,” study co-author Asta Heinesen, a physicist at the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen and Queen Mary University in London, told Live Science via email, referring to the assumption that the space’s curvature is the same everywhere. “This could potentially be due to various effects, but more research is needed to address the cause of the FLRW violation that we see empirically.”

[…] The analyses revealed small but potentially important departures from the predictions of standard FLRW cosmology. Depending on the dataset and analysis method, the discrepancy reached a statistical significance of about 2 to 4 sigma. In physics, sigma measures how likely a result is to arise purely by chance; a 5-sigma result is typically required before scientists claim a discovery, so the new findings remain tentative. Still, the results suggest that something unexpected may be affecting the geometry or expansion of the universe. “The main finding is that you can directly measure Dyer-Roeder and backreaction effects from available cosmological data, and clearly distinguish these effects from other alterations of the standard cosmological model, such as evolving dark energy and modified gravity theories,” Heinesen said. “This was previously not possible in such a direct way, and this is what I think is the breakthrough in our work.”

“If these indicated deviations from an FLRW geometry are real, it would signify that most of the cosmological solutions considered for solving the cosmological tensions — evolving or interacting dark energy, new types of matter or energy, modified gravity and related ideas within the FLRW framework — are ruled out,” the researchers wrote. The next step will involve applying the new theoretical framework to larger and more precise datasets. “It is to apply our theoretical results to data to test the standard model and to produce constraints on the Dyer-Roeder and backreaction effects,” Heinesen said.

Good

By evanh • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Here’s hoping this is born out in the long term. The idea of Dark Energy being a new force never felt right.

No clue

By coofercat • Score: 3 Thread

Like most of us, I have no clue about this, but since I stayed in a Holiday Inn once, I’ll throw in my 2 pence…

I’m told there’s research to determine if time stops inside black holes. That concept is pretty crazy to even think about, let alone how we can research it, but if it turns out to be true, then it would suggest that time and gravity are in fact linked - the more gravity, the slower time moves. Perhaps it’s immeasurable at “normal” gravities, and only really shows up in the extremes of black holes and supernovae, but my thinking here is that it would suggest that as you move throughout space, time, gravity, the passage of light or indeed you all vary to some extent.

Keep going with that, and you start to wonder if at the outer edges of the universe, where there is no matter yet, that gravity, time etc are all different from the part of the universe where matter has spewed into it. Could that account for the motion of the expansion of the universe? I don’t know, and it probably doesn’t stack up to physics, even if this story turns out to be a real thing, but it’s fun to think about.

Re:Good

By HiThere • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

That the universe is not uniform at the large scale is blatantly obvious. Just consider the cosmic voids. And that implies that “time” should be running faster within those voids (because general relativity).

This isn’t generally dealt with by global theories because it’s computationally intractable…but it’s inherent in relativity. So unless you want to break relativity, areas with low mass have time running slower than areas with high mass. And the cosmic voids are HUGE.

OTOH, This is a different argument as to why the universe isn’t globally uniform at the large scale. But it reaches the same conclusion (to that question).

Re:Good

By ClickOnThis • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Disclosure: IAAP but I don’t work in this field. I learn about it through books that explain it to the general public.

My understanding is that dark matter has some evidence for its existence. Specifically, it has been observed to be non-uniform, present in clumps and strands throughout the universe.

Dark energy, on the other hand, appears to be highly uniform(*) and the evidence for its existence is the acceleration of the expansion of the universe. In order to account for that role, it needs to comprise the vast majority of matter/energy in the universe. And that’s where I scratch my chin and wonder whether it is a contriviance — whether some reworking of our understanding of gravity could offer a different explanation. Yes, I know that dark energy can be explained with the lambda factor in Einstein’s equations, and at some point, I suppose I might need to accept that a “contriviance” really is a law of nature.

(*) Recent observations have challeneged this assumption, and as I understand it, would require Einstein’s lambda to be replaced with something else.

OpenAI Trial Wraps Up With ‘Jackass’ Trophy For Challenging Musk

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
After three weeks of testimony, the Musk v. Altman trial is nearing its end. OpenAI has rested its case, closing arguments are set for Thursday, and jury deliberations are expected to begin afterward. An anonymous reader quotes a report from Business Insider:
Joshua Achiam, OpenAI’s chief futurist, was probably the most memorable witness of the day. He told jurors about a companywide meeting where Musk answered questions about his planned departure from OpenAI in 2018. Musk told the crowd of 50 or 60 people that he was leaving OpenAI to start his own competing AI. He said he wanted to “build it very fast, because he was very worried that someone else, if they got it, would do the wrong thing with it,” Achiam said. Achaim said he challenged Musk on the safety of this approach, which he called “unsafe and reckless.” “How did Musk respond,” OpenAI’s lawyer Randall Jackson asked. “Defensively,” Achiam said. “We had a pretty tense exchange, and he snapped and called me a jackass.”

In an effort to prove Achiam’s story, OpenAI’s lawyers brought a trophy to court that the futurist said he received after his heated exchange with Musk. On the witness stand, Achiam described the trophy as “a small golden jackass, inscribed with: ‘never stop being a jackass for safety.’" He said his then-colleagues, Dario Amodei and David Luan, gave it to him as a thank-you for standing up to the Tesla CEO. Lead OpenAI attorney William Savitt told reporters after the day’s session that Wednesday had been the first time he’d touched the statue. The futurist had to do without the visual aid, however. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers did not accept the trophy as evidence, so it did not appear before the jury.

Musk and Altman have presented dueling experts on a question at the core of the trial — was the nonprofit that runs OpenAI hurt or helped by its $13 billion partnership with Microsoft? Musk’s expert testified last week that the partnership was indeed hurt, supporting the Tesla CEO’s contention that in partnering with Microsoft, OpenAI betrayed the company’s nonprofit origins and mission. But on Thursday, OpenAI’s expert, John Coates, used Musk’s expert’s own pie chart and testimony against him. The partnership has “generated value for the nonprofit that I believe he himself accepted was in the $200 billion range in his own testimony,” Coates said, referencing Musk expert Daniel Schizer. “If that’s not faring well, I don’t know what faring well is.”

In a scored point for Musk, the jury learned Thursday that Microsoft’s own CTO once raised concerns about how OpenAI’s early nonprofit donors, including LinkedIn cofounder Reid Hoffman, would react to a partnership. “I wonder if the big OpenAI donors are aware of these plans,” Chief Technology Officer Kevin Scott said in a 2018 email he was asked to read aloud to jurors. In it, Scott said he doubted donors would appreciate OpenAI using their seed money to “go build a for-profit thing.” Scott was being questioned by an OpenAI lawyer, who may have wanted jurors to quickly hear Scott’s explanation: that he only had a “vague awareness” of what was happening at OpenAI at the time. Scott also told the jury he wasn’t thinking about Musk when he made the remark. “Primarily, I was thinking about Reid Hoffman. He was the OpenAI donor I knew,” Scott said, adding, “I wasn’t thinking about anyone besides him.”
Recap:
Sam Altman Testifies That Elon Musk Wanted Control of OpenAI (Day Ten)
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella Testifies In OpenAI Trial (Day Nine)
Sam Altman Had a Bad Day In Court (Day Eight)
Sam Altman’s Management Style Comes Under the Microscope At OpenAI Trial (Day Seven)
Brockman Rebuts Musk’s Take On Startup’s History, Recounts Secret Work For Tesla (Day Six)
OpenAI President Discloses His Stake In the Company Is Worth $30 Billion (Day Five)
Musk Concludes Testimony At OpenAI Trial (Day Four)
Elon Musk Says OpenAI Betrayed Him, Clashes With Company’s Attorney (Day Three)
Musk Testifies OpenAI Was Created As Nonprofit To Counter Google (Day Two)
Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Head To Court (Day One)

Captains of industry

By Anonymous Coward • Score: 4, Funny Thread

With a steady hand on the tiller.

Luckily we operate the best economic system in the world, capitalism. Which ensures that only the most capable and intelligent men rise to the top, and therefor deserve our admiration, respect, and trust. And because these bright minds are too busy producing wealth and growing the economy, they have no time to dabble in politics or try and wrestle our democracy away from the common man.

Re:Captains of industry

By radoni • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

“AI won’t know” ? it doesn’t know.... “it” is an over-glorified spell checker, a used-up husk of a locust floating on the surface of a pond in a stiff breeze, pinging from reed to reed and reversing direction to the perturbations of airflow thereof; and you would ascribe that to be a conscious living organism but it’s just a bunch of shit in a pond for the benefit of no one.

Re:As the late Grumpy Cat would’ve said

By AmiMoJo • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

The idea that Musk is worried about other people abusing AI is… Well, he seems to believe his own hype, put it that way.

This is the guy who pushed Tesla to release “full self driving” long before it was ready, killing people. More than a decade later he has been forced to scale back its capabilities significantly, and seems to have abandoned all the people who paid him for the feature all those years ago because their cars don’t have the hardware for it.

Re:As the late Grumpy Cat would’ve said

By dunkelfalke • Score: 4, Informative Thread

I am not a native English speaker - English is not even the first foreign language I use - but I think “because he was very worried that someone else, if they got it, would do the wrong thing with it” unintentionally states that Musk wanted to be the first to do the wrong thing with an AI.
Now, fast forward a few years and Musk’s AI claims to be a mecha Hitler.

Re:Safety sells

By drinkypoo • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

At one point even Musk realised it.

Then he found out Tesla could dodge a whole bunch of liability by driving into things and turning off autopilot less than a second before impact, then claiming that autopilot was not on at the time of the collision. If it was on until less than a human reaction time before the collision, it was on at the time of collision.

I literally won’t get into a Tesla with alleged FSD. Other people can be that close to that experiment. It’s bad enough I have to be on the roads with them.

Man Who Stole Beyonce’s Hard Drives Gets Five-Year Sentence

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot
A man accused of stealing hard drives containing unreleased Beyonce music, tour plans, and other materials from a rental car in Atlanta has pleaded guilty and accepted a five-year sentence, including two years in custody. Slashdot Bruce66423 shares a report from The Guardian:
Kelvin Evans was by the Atlanta police department in September in connection to a July 2025 car robbery where two suitcases containing Beyonce music and tour plans were stolen from a rental car. […] According to a July police report, Beyonce choreographer Christopher Grant and dancer Diandre Blue called 911 to report a theft from their rental vehicle, a 2024 Jeep Wagoneer, before Beyonce’s Cowboy Carter tour dates in Atlanta. An October indictment stated that Evans entered the car on July 8 “with the intent to commit theft.”

The stolen hard drives contained “watermarked music, some unreleased music, footage plans for the show and past and future set list,” according to a police report. Clothing, designer sunglasses, laptops and AirPods headphones were also stolen, Grant and Blue said. Local law enforcement searched for the location of one of the stolen laptops and the AirPods to try and locate the property. One police officer wrote in the report: “I conducted a suspicious stop in the area, due to the information that was relayed to me. There were several cars in the area also that the AirPods were pinging to in that area also. After further investigation, a silver [redacted], which had traveled into zone 5 was moving at the same time as the tracking on the AirPods.”

Evans was arrested several weeks after Grant and Blue filed a report, and was publicly named as the suspect in September. He was released on a $20,000 bond a month later. At the time of his arrest, Atlanta police said that the stolen property had not been recovered. It is unclear whether it has since been found.
Bruce66423 commented: “Just for stealing a couple of suitcases from a car. Funny how the elite punish those who inconvenience them. Can you imagine an ordinary victim see their offender get that sort of sentence?”

Justice for some....

By WolfgangVL • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

When my car gets broken into the cops shrug. Once I was told I can fill out a report but it’s “not going to be a priority”

Seems the rich and famous get a different justice system on both ends.

Re:“Just for stealing a couple of suitcases”

By Valgrus Thunderaxe • Score: 5, Informative Thread
Bullshit.

Re:Justice for some....

By ArchieBunker • Score: 4, Funny Thread

Leads, yeah, sure. I’ll just check with the boys down at the crime lab, they’ve got four more detectives working on the case. They got us working in shifts!

Not his first time

By clovis • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Kelvin Evans has lengthy criminal record, near two dozen arrests and was on parole when he stole Beyonce’s stuff.

Re:Got off lightly

By fahrbot-bot • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

in Georgia, felony theft can result in up to 20 years prison.

Felony theft from The U.S. Capital (and/or beating a police officer) during an Insurrection - pardon.