Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. Sony Boss Urges Theaters To Stop 30 Minutes of Trailers and Ads Before Movies
  2. Amazon Buys Globalstar For $10.8 Billion, Moving To Expand Its Satellite Internet Service
  3. Sony Is Removing Many Popular Features From Its Free OTA TV Options
  4. FCC Grants Netgear Conditional Approval For Routers
  5. Microsoft Reveals Major Price Increase For All Surface PCs
  6. California Ghost-Gun Bill Wants 3D Printers To Play Cop, EFF Says
  7. Audit Finds Google, Microsoft, and Meta Still Tracking Users After Opt-Out
  8. Chrome Now Lets You Turn AI Prompts Into Repeatable ‘Skills’
  9. Thousands of Rare Concert Recordings Are Landing On the Internet Archive
  10. Social Media Platforms Need To Stop Never-Ending Scrolling, UK’s Starmer Says
  11. Google Faces Mass Arbitration By Advertisers Seeking Billions
  12. A New Computer Chip Could Finally Withstand The Hellscape of Venus
  13. Air Force Pushed Out UFO Investigator
  14. WeatherBug Data Says October 8 Is the Real Perfect Date
  15. Stanford Report Highlights Growing Disconnect Between AI Insiders and Everyone Else

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.

Sony Boss Urges Theaters To Stop 30 Minutes of Trailers and Ads Before Movies

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Sony Pictures chief Tom Rothman urged theater owners to cut down the roughly 30 minutes of trailers and ads before movies. “Get off the ad crack,” Rothman told the audience at CinemaCon this week. “Get rid of the endless advertising and substantially shorten the long pre-shows.” Variety reports:
He noted that frequent moviegoers now show up a half hour late to avoid all the spots (something that reserved seating has made easier than ever before). Rothman said that means many people “don’t even see the trailers,” which results in “enticements gone to waste.” Rothman predicted that the 2026 box office, which has already benefitted from hits like “Super Mario Galaxy Movie” and “Project Hail Mary,” will rebound in a big way. But he acknowledged that attendance still trails pre-pandemic levels.

Rothman has been a vociferous defender of the big screen, pushing studios to embrace longer windows so that movies will stay in cinemas longer. That was a theme that Rothman returned to at CinemaCon, pressing exhibitors to hold strong and agree not to show movies that quickly appear on streaming services or on-demand platforms. “Enforce longer windows,” Rothman said. “Yes, even if that means you cannot play every film.”

In addition to stumping for exhibition, Rothman has practically begged Hollywood to invest in new stories along with all the franchise fare. In a recent New York Times op-ed, for instance, Rothman, the longest-serving studio chief, wrote, “For all the success of films driven by existing intellectual property, originality is essential to movies. Neither movie theaters nor the art form itself can survive without at least some originality. After all, you can’t make a sequel to nothing.”

The volume of ads

By Fudoka • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
And turn down the volume of the ads. Last time I went to the cinema I damn near walked out because the ads were downright deafening - louder that the movie soundtrack. Paying to see a movie is one thing but I strongly object to having to pay to watch a bunch of adverts.

Advertising

By ledow • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I don’t use companies that try to monetise my use of them, especially if I’m paying for their service.

On that note…

Why the fuck am I seeing huge ads on Slashdot now for “bolt.new” and other shite when I paid many years ago to “Disable Advertising”?

In other news,

By mjwx • Score: 3 Thread
Theatres tell Sony to lower their licensing fees so they can afford to run their operations without having to have 30 minutes of ads.

downward spiral

By v1 • Score: 3 Thread

it’s a classic downward spiral. Like when the local mall is losing stores, instead of enticing new stores with lower rent, they raise rent to make up for their income loss, which drives out more stores.

But here they’re getting lower attendance so instead of doing something to entice people to come to the theaters, they’re raising ticket prices and piling long ads at the start of the movie, which drives away more patrons.

Are they stupid? With the malls, it’s usually a case of the anchor stores having left, which triggers contract clauses that are going to kill the mall in a few years, so it’s just a (somewhat) understandable last-minute cash grab before the doors close. But I don’t know of any silimar issue with the theaters that would encourage them to press the self-destruct button? Anyone have any good ideas?

Not a chance

By rsilvergun • Score: 3 Thread
If Sony wants fewer ads they’re going to have to pay the theaters for fewer ads. And if consumers want fewer ads they’re going to have to stay home because it’s very very profitable to sell those ads. We see that same behavior with cheap TVs where most of the profit these days are coming from deals made by the TV manufacturers.

As a consumer though honestly you’re just going to show up 20 minutes late for showing and browse on your phone until the ads stop.

But you are still the closest to an old school captive audience and AD man can get. That’s the real problem with television ratings dropping traditional advertising is looking for a place they can just kind of force people to watch their ads for a bit. Internet ads just don’t work unless it’s a influencer pretending to be your friend.

Amazon Buys Globalstar For $10.8 Billion, Moving To Expand Its Satellite Internet Service

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Amazon is buying satellite communications company Globalstar for $10.8 billion to expand its Leo satellite-internet network and compete more directly with SpaceX’s Starlink. The deal also includes a partnership with Apple to support satellite connectivity for iPhones and Apple Watches, with Amazon planning voice, data, and messaging services starting in 2028. The New York Times reports:
Leo was Amazon’s move to enter the market for beaming high-speed internet to the ground from orbit. That is an arena dominated by Elon Musk’s SpaceX, which operates the Starlink satellite-internet service. Starlink, which has thousands of satellites in orbit, already serves several million customers around the world. This month, SpaceX filed to go public in what is shaping up to be one of the largest-ever initial public offerings. Mr. Musk has valued SpaceX — which has landed contracts with federal agencies such as NASA and the Department of Defense — at more than $1 trillion. Other companies are racing to catch up to what Mr. Musk has built for space.

Globalstar, founded in 1991, is a Louisiana-based global telecommunications company. It operates networks of low-Earth orbiting satellites to provide internet connectivity to customers. Paul Jacobs, Globalstar’s chief executive, said in a statement that together, the two companies “will advance innovations in digital connectivity.”

Stop M&A for big companies

By bradley13 • Score: 3 Thread

M&A is a disease. Behemoths like Alphabet, Meta, Google and Amazon should be broken up. They certainly should not be allowed to buy up other companies, thus eliminating competition while making themselves even bigger. Remember 2008? “Too big to fail”? These companies are bigger than any banks ever were.

Set two thresholds for annual, global turnover. Exceed the first, lower threshold and M&A is forbidden. Exceed the second, higher threshold and divestment or break-up is mandatory. Violating either rule results in criminal charges. No long, drawn-out anti-trust cases. Just simple numbers that lead to automatic consequences.

Sony Is Removing Many Popular Features From Its Free OTA TV Options

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Cord Cutters News:
Sony has notified owners of its recent BRAVIA television models that significant changes to the built-in TV Guide for its OTA TV antenna users and related menu features will take effect starting in late May 2026. The update affects a range of premium sets released between 2023 and 2025, marking another instance of feature adjustments for older smart TV hardware as manufacturers shift focus toward newer product lines. The changes primarily target the program guide functionality for over-the-air antenna TV channels received via the ATSC tuner. After the cutoff date, program information may fail to display on certain channels, limiting the guide’s usefulness for planning viewing schedules. Users will often see listings only for channels they have recently watched, rather than a comprehensive overview of available broadcasts. Additionally, channel logos that previously appeared in the guide will disappear, and any thumbnail images accompanying program descriptions will no longer load or show.

Further modifications will appear in the television’s menu system. For users relying on connected set-top boxes, the dedicated Set Top Box menu option will be removed entirely. In its place, a simpler Control menu will surface, streamlining access but eliminating some specialized navigation previously available. Program thumbnails, which provided visual previews in various menu sections, will also cease to appear across affected interfaces. These adjustments stem from Sony’s ongoing efforts to manage backend services and data feeds that support enhanced guide features on its Google TV-powered BRAVIA lineup. As television ecosystems evolve rapidly with advancements in processing power, artificial intelligence integration, and cloud-based content delivery, companies periodically retire select capabilities on prior-generation hardware to optimize resources. The 2023 through 2025 models, while still offering excellent picture quality through advanced OLED and LCD panels with features like XR processing, now fall into the category of devices receiving scaled-back support.
These are the models impacted:
2025 models: Bravia 8 II (XR80M2), Bravia 5 (XR50)
2024 models: Bravia 9 (XR90), Bravia 8 (XR80), Bravia 7 (XR70)
2023 models: Bravia A95L series

Another reason to not buy Sony kit

By Alain Williams • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

The message seems clear: If you want these features you must buy more recent models. But I ask myself: how long before these new models have features removed to get me to buy even newer stuff ?

Presumably these TVs were marketed as having these features - so, in some jurisdictions at least, this would be illegal.

Re:Sony TV enshittifiaction

By jonsmirl • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

It is because the directory info comes from a US company with a monopoly and they charge exorbitant amounts of money for it and then use copyright to shutout competitors. Tribune Corp used to own it (Chicago Tribune the Wriggly family, those monopolists).

I only use the power button

By ukoda • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
My Sony circa 2020 has got so bad I only use the power button on it, and even that is from a non-Sony remote. When I got it was great, loaded Kodi on it and could do everything I wanted. Then it got flaky to the point Kodi would no longer run. I moved to a couple of set top boxes thru a couple of the HDMI ports and ignored all the ‘smart’ features. Then it decided change HDMI port was too difficult so I moved to an external HDMI switch. So everything works great on a Sony if you only use the power on/off feature.

If the power on/off becomes to hard for it I will save the Sony for the guest room when I have guest staying who I don’t want over staying their welcome.

Yet another example…

By YuppieScum • Score: 3 Thread

…of why never to buy a product that costs the manufacturer money for you to continue to use it.

We’ve seen this time and again, whether in video games, appliances, IoT devices or anything else - as soon as it makes economic sense, and/or they think they can get away with it, manufacturers will stop spending the money on whatever it is that makes your product work.

It happens even if there’s a subscription model - at some point an MBA will look at the cost/benefit analysis and end users will always be SOL.

The only solution I can see, beyond legislation, is to vote with your wallet. However, good luck when asking the salesdroid in your local big box store “Does this [device] cost the maker money for me to use it?”

Data Source Issue?

By rsmith-mac • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Per TFA:

These adjustments stem from Sony’s ongoing efforts to manage backend services and data feeds that support enhanced guide features on its Google TV-powered BRAVIA lineup.

It sounds like Sony is losing (or is not renewing) the contracts with their data brokers who providing the listing services for their TVs? In which case this is not necessarily expected, but it is par for the course.

There is no truly free source of OTA TV listings and other metadata in the US. The stations themselves do not provide this data over the air as an adjacent data stream (which is what a rational person would expect), so the only way to get listings is from third party providers such as Gracenote. Which as a technical solution works, but it means someone is always on the hook for paying for that service. And no one wants to pay for OTA metadata services, since the hallmark attribute of OTA TV is that it’s free.

This is a problem that goes back to the earliest days of TiVo. Someone needs to pay for TV listings, but TVs and other STBs last too long; hardware manufacturers eventually tire of paying for an ever-increasing bill - it costs them money they don’t get to make back if they give away the listings for free. And thus you eventually end up with required a monthly subscription just to have an OTA DVR.

The eventual death of linear TV should finally put an end to this nonsense. But until then we’re all going to keep experiencing the same non-free listings issues we’ve had since the late 90s.

FCC Grants Netgear Conditional Approval For Routers

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
The FCC has granted (PDF) Netgear the first exemption from its foreign-made router ban, allowing the company to keep selling new consumer router models made outside the U.S. through Oct. 1, 2027. PCMag reports:
The Defense Department reviewed Netgear’s application for an exemption and found that its products “do not pose risks to US national security.” The FCC’s order doesn’t elaborate on why. Netgear is based in San Jose, California, although its products are made in Asia. The exemption, known as a conditional approval, lasts until Oct. 1, 2027. It covers a large range of future Wi-Fi models from Netgear, spanning the R, RAX, RAXE, RS, MK, MR, M, and MH series, the Orbi consumer mesh, mobile, and standalone routers under the RBK, RBE, RBR, RBRE, LBR, LBK, and CBK series, as well as cable gateways and cable modems under the CAX and CM series.

The exemption isn’t a full green light for the future product models from Netgear. The FCC says the company still needs to go through the normal Commission-regulated equipment authorization process for each device. The Oct. 1, 2027 date effectively amounts to a deadline for Netgear to receive FCC certification for the router models; each certification is also permanent, enabling the product to be sold in the US on an ongoing basis. This also suggests that Netgear has an 18-month period to receive FCC certifications for future products.

NSA Backdoors?

By dotslashdot • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Does this mean they have installed NSA backdoors? Lol.

Re:NSA Backdoors?

By EvilSS • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
If “NSA Backdoor” is innuendo for “wrote a big check” then yea, probably.

Netgear lobbied for this

By r1348 • Score: 5, Informative Thread

It’s only fair they’d be the first ones to profit from it: https://www.nasdaq.com/article…

Re:NSA Backdoors?

By ArchieBunker • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

No it means the check cleared. I checked his shitcoins but no activity today besides that long decline.

I wonder how many bribes are getting paid

By rsilvergun • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
It’s painfully obvious this is just a shake down and I’m wondering how the money is going to change hands and who gets it besides Trump.

I’m sure Papa Nurgel will get his cut but I wonder who else is going to get in on the action.

Assuming we managed to get rid of the Republican party the way the hungarians managed to get rid of Victor orban we are going to have so many years of cleaning up this mess. And the worst thing is is the majority of old farts that put us in this mess are going to drop dead before they have to deal with the consequences.

Microsoft Reveals Major Price Increase For All Surface PCs

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Microsoft has sharply raised prices across its Surface lineup as RAM and component costs keep climbing. “Both its midrange and flagship Surface lines are now significantly more expensive than they were just a few weeks ago, with the flagship Surface Laptop 7 and Surface Pro 11 now starting at $500 more than they launched at in 2024,” reports Windows Central. From the report:
The Surface Pro 12-inch, which was previously Microsoft’s cheapest modern Surface PC at $799, now starts at $1,049. The flagship Surface Pro 13-inch, which originally launched for $999, now starts at an eyewatering $1,499. It’s the same story for the Surface Laptop lines, with the entry-level 13-inch model originally priced at $899, now starting at $1,149. The 13.8-inch flagship Surface Laptop launched at $999, but now costs $1,499, with the 15-inch model now starting at $1,599. This means that Microsoft’s midrange devices now cost more than the flagships did when they launched in 2024.

[…] Microsoft has raised prices for all SKUs on offer, meaning the high end models are now more expensive too. A top end Surface Laptop 15-inch with Snapdragon X Elite, 64GB RAM and 1TB SSD storage now costs a staggering $3,649. To compare, the 16-inch MacBook Pro with an M5 Pro, 64GB RAM, and 1TB SSD is $3,299, and that comes with a significantly better display and much more power under the hood.

Re:Wow, Macs are so expensive

By hcs_$reboot • Score: 4, Informative Thread
MacBook Neo, fyi.

Oh no

By hcs_$reboot • Score: 5, Funny Thread
That’ll probably drive away the last 10 people who were still considering buying one.

That’s not the problem

By rsilvergun • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Even if Microsoft didn’t do any AI crap whatsoever they would still have to jack up prices because the bubble is devouring all the ram. Storage is also up quite a bit in price though not as bad as RAM.

The price of ram has quadrupled. And it’s not going to come back down in price anytime soon. Even after the AI bubble bursts and the winners are decided and demand comes back down you will not see prices come back down probably for 8 to 10 years.

That’s because like everything there will be collusion between the manufacturers and eventually there will be enough Democrats in charge of Congress and various attorney general positions that they will go after the ram producers and give them a little slap on the wrist and make them lower prices. But it’s America’s political system is so fucked up that’s going to take a long time and Europe just does not have enough weight to force something like that. If the European Union could act as a United Force they probably could but it’s too easy for one corrupt politician in one of the European Union states to screw that up. Although without Victor orban that might be a little bit harder it’s still a problem…

You have a double whammy of out of control demand and inelastic pricing caused by zero competition in any markets because we stopped enforcing antitrust law. Like out for the longest time flat panels were stupidly expensive even though the technology had come down in price until the Democrats in America got around to smacking the panel manufacturers around a little bit.

Benchmarks aren’t real world performance

By rsilvergun • Score: 5, Informative Thread
Has several people here have pointed out the way Macs get those numbers is by heavily optimizing their CPUs and the software that runs on them. That means if you’re going to run the Adobe suite on your Mac then yeah you’re in good shape because Apple built custom features into their silicon for you and Adobe wrote software to use those features.

But if you go outside of the stuff Apple made specific optimizations for things get much less Rosy very quick.

To be clear there’s nothing wrong with what apple is doing. They made a purpose-built computer for specific tasks and you get very very good performance and very good battery life if you’re doing those specific tasks. Think of the old commodore Amiga computers it’s like that. They could do all sorts of amazing things in certain spaces but they were kind of pants as general computers.

If you want a general purpose computer you’re not going to beat what AMD and Intel has on the desktop right now. You trade a little bit of battery life to performance for that though. Depending on how much money you spend and how well built the laptop you get is sometimes you trade a lot.

Of course the absolute shit show that is Windows 11 isn’t helping matters though. But that’s another matter entirely and Linux is a viable option for a lot of things.

Re:That’s not the problem

By vivian • Score: 5, Informative Thread

It is a supply and demand problem.
Since it requires such a huge amount of capital to ramp up production, manufacturers are loathe to ramp up production too quickly for what might turn out to be a bubble, so meanwhile there is excess demand.
This will eventually correct, and if it does turn out that AI was just a bubble, or even if it turns out to be useful but the rate of growth slows down, there will be an excess of memory and processors and we can enjoy cheap prices for a while.
If you want to help lower prices, invest in chip fabs, or stop using AI.

California Ghost-Gun Bill Wants 3D Printers To Play Cop, EFF Says

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
A proposed California bill would require 3D printer makers to use state-certified software to detect and block files for gun parts, but advocates at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) say it would be easy to evade and could lead to widespread surveillance of users’ printing activity. The Register reports:
The bill in question is AB 2047, the scope of which, on paper, appears strict. The primary goal is clear and simple: to require 3D printer manufacturers to use a state-certified algorithm that checks digital design files for firearm components and blocks print jobs that would produce prohibited parts. […] Cliff Braun and Rory Mir, who respectively work in policy and tech community engagement at the EFF, claim that the proposals in California are technically infeasible and in practice will lead to consumer surveillance.

In a series of blog posts published this month, the pair argued that print-blocking technology — proposals for which have also surfaced in states including New York and Washington - cannot work for a range of technical reasons. They argued that because 3D printers and other types of computer numerical control (CNC) machines are fairly simple, with much of their brains coming from the computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) software — or slicer software — to which they are linked, the bill would establish legal and illegal software. Proprietary software will likely become the de facto option, leaving open source alternatives to rot.

“Under these proposed laws, manufacturers of consumer 3D printers must ensure their printers only work with their software, and implement firearm detection algorithms on either the printer itself or in a slicer software,” wrote Braun earlier this month. “These algorithms must detect firearm files using a maintained database of existing models. Vendors of printers must then verify that printers are on the allow-list maintained by the state before they can offer them for sale. Owners of printers will be guilty of a crime if they circumvent these intrusive scanning procedures or load alternative software, which they might do because their printer manufacturer ends support.”

Braun also argued that it would be trivial for anyone who uses 3D printers to make small tweaks to either the visual models of firearms parts, or the machine instructions (G-code) generated from those models, to evade detection. Mir further argued that the bill offers no guardrails to keep this “constantly expanding blacklist” limited to firearm-related designs. In his view, there is a clear risk that this approach will creep into other forms of alleged unlawful activity, such as copyright infringement. […] Braun and Mir have a list of other arguments against the bill. They say the algorithms are more than likely to lead to false positives, which will prevent good-faith users from using their hardware. Many 3D printer owners also have no interest in printing firearm components. Most simply want the freedom to print trinkets and spare parts while others use them to print various items and sell them as an income stream.

Multiple fools errands in one

By WaffleMonster • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

It isn’t like you tell a 3D printer you want a gun and a few hours later one appears. What is printed are a series of discrete components the user assembles into a finished product.

Here are the parts for one of the 3D printed designs:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/w…

Not only is locking this down a fools errand as anyone wanting to print firearms is just going to bypass the restrictions.. even if they don’t there is no way for a computer program to discern whether or not a discrete component is part of a weapon anymore than the hardware store the bolts and springs were purchased from can discern intent to produce a weapon.

Re:Never going to happen.

By Jaime2 • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

If it does happen, it will do nothing but turn the 3D printer hobby market into a market similar to the “get free movies/TV/sports on this magic streaming stick” market. I built a CNC stepper controller from discrete components connected to a DOS computer in the 90’s. I wrote my own limited CAM software, too. Things have only gotten easier since then.

A couple of observations

By jenningsthecat • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

First, the gun problem is pretty much specific to the US. Other developed countries get along without “muh gunz” for the most part, and their societies haven’t fallen prey to dictators. Yet ironically, the “land of the free” is now a Fascist dictatorship, in spite of all those armed citizens. So much for taking up arms to dethrone tyrants! Maybe the US should just re-think this whole “guns are sacred” thing?

Second, in a country which just this year has had 21 school shootings as of today, the real problem isn’t printed guns. It’s a whole set of cultural, social, political, and governance flaws which need to be fixed. Other developed countries have nothing even close to the gun problem that Americans put up with. Citizens of other nations don’t feel a moment of panic and start scoping out shelter and escape routes when they hear some random loud bang while walking down the street.

Leave the 3D printers alone. That’s a war that can’t be won; those laws will make it more difficult and costly for individuals and businesses to print benign stuff, while doing almost nothing to prevent those serious about printing guns from doing so. Don’t hobble your 3D printers - fix your social, political, cultural, and economic shit.

Re:A couple of observations

By markdavis • Score: 5, Informative Thread

>“First, the gun problem is pretty much specific to the US”

The 2A is not a “problem”, nor is good people owning/carrying guns. There are problems with violence, both with and without guns, and that is not “specific to the USA”. There are also problems with enforcement and follow-through for existing gun laws. Worrying about 3D printers is ridiculous. But so are many other types of “gun control” like so-called “gun-free zones.”

>“Second, in a country which just this year has had 21 school shootings as of today,”

“School shootings” is a semantically-overloaded term. Most are not in the school, but on property around the school. Usually those shot are also not related to the schools and often not even during school hours. I am not saying it isn’t a problem, but the data are often twisted to make it sound far worse than it is. And that is the case with the article you cited. They hide the ACTUAL data, like category of who was shot, when, exactly where (inside, outside, field, woods, parking lot), and full circumstances. Their data INCLUDES self-defense use, for example. It INCLUDES non-school gang-related activity. It INCLUDES at night or non-operating hours. It INCLUDES a public sidewalk or edge of the woods, or parking area far away from any building.

>“the real problem isn’t printed guns. It’s a whole set of cultural, social, political, and governance flaws which need to be fixed”

Agreed.

>“Citizens of other nations don’t feel a moment of panic and start scoping out shelter and escape routes when they hear some random loud bang while walking down the street.”

Neither do perhaps 99%+ of Americans. The vast majority of the gun crime is focused in small geographical spots in the USA.

>“Yet ironically, the “land of the free” is now a Fascist dictatorship”

That is, of course, nonsense.

>“Leave the 3D printers alone”

Agreed.

Re: mill

By I kan Spl • Score: 5, Informative Thread

It is perfectly legal, even in California, to make your own firearm. That isn’t the issue here.

There are some regulations on it. You have to request a serial number from the State prior to manufacturing it, and requesting a serial number will kick off a background check to ensure that you can own it. See here:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/us…

Additionally, you would need a permit from the Federal Government (a FFL07) if you want to have a business selling firearms that you manufacture. Note the nuance here, it is legal to make firearms without the Federal permit as long as you don’t sell them after manufacturing them, and as long as you comply with all applicable state laws, which in California, involves applying for a serial number each time.

Neither of the above issues would be addressed via this legislation.

If the State wants to make it illegal to manufacture a firearm, then they should pass a law to that effect. They are instead regulating a tool such that the tool will refuse to produce an otherwise legal to make device, and they are doing so in such a way that can’t actually work from a technical standpoint.

Audit Finds Google, Microsoft, and Meta Still Tracking Users After Opt-Out

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
alternative_right shares a report from 404 Media:
An independent privacy audit of Microsoft, Meta, and Google web traffic in California found that the companies may be violating state regulations and racking up billions in fines. According to the audit from privacy search engine webXray, 55 percent of the sites it checked set ad cookies in a user’s browser even if they opted out of tracking. Each company disputed or took issue with the research, with Google saying it was based on a “fundamental misunderstanding” of how its product works.

The webXray California Privacy Audit viewed web traffic on more than 7,000 popular websites in California in the month of March and found that most tech companies ignore when a user asks to opt-out of cookie tracking. California has stringent and well defined privacy legislation thanks to its California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) which allows users to, among other things, opt out of the sale of their personal information. There’s a system called Global Privacy Control (GPC), which includes a browser extension that indicates to a website when a user wants to opt out of tracking.

According to the webXray audit, Google failed to let users opt out 87 percent of the time. “Google’s failure to honor the GPC opt-out signal is easy to find in network traffic. When a browser using GPC connects to Google’s servers it encodes the opt-out signal by sending the code ‘sec-gpc: 1.’ This means Google should not return cookies,” the audit said. “However, when Google’s server responds to the network request with the opt-out it explicitly responds with a command to create an advertising cookie named IDE using the ‘set-cookie’ command. This non-compliance is easy to spot, hiding in plain sight.”

The audit said that Microsoft fails to opt out users in the same way and has a failure rate of 50 percent in the web traffic webXray viewed. Meta’s failure rate was 69 percent and a bit more comprehensive. “Meta instructs publishers to install the following tracking code on their websites. The code contains no check for globally standard opt-out signals — it loads unconditionally, fires a tracking event, and sets a cookie regardless of the consumer’s privacy preferences,” the audit said. It showed a copy of Meta’s tracking data which contains no GPC check at all.

Well Duh!

By oldgraybeard • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
“Still Tracking Users After Opt-Out” The only deluded individuals here are the ones thinking they were not ignoring this? But never mind, it is just monopolies being monopolies!

Guessing the explanation

By fahrbot-bot • Score: 5, Funny Thread

… 55 percent of the sites it checked set ad cookies in a user’s browser even if they opted out of tracking.

Each company disputed or took issue with the research, with Google saying it was based on a “fundamental misunderstanding” of how its product works.

There are a few, simple reasons for this. We have to track you (a) so we know if we’re not suppose to track you, (b) so we know if our not tracking is working and track how well it’s working and (c) in case you change your mind we want all your data retroactively. All the tracking data from when we’re not tracking you is stored in a separate database that no one has access to, except when we track statistics on how well the non-tracking is working — pinky swear.

Obligatory..

By sit1963nz • Score: 4, Funny Thread
I am shocked…shocked I tell you.

Re:“spectre of … non-compliance”

By fahrbot-bot • Score: 5, Funny Thread

The moment you read something like “spectre of … non-compliance”, …

Really hoping that’s not the screenplay for next James Bond film.

Re:Well Duh!

By gweihir • Score: 5, Informative Thread

I have verified this a few times when doing IT security audits. Turns out when Google detects Chrome being used, they do all kinds of illegal (in the EU) stuff. Not so much with other browsers, not even chromium ones.

Chrome Now Lets You Turn AI Prompts Into Repeatable ‘Skills’

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Google is rolling out a Chrome feature called “Skills” that lets users save Gemini prompts as reusable one-click workflows they can run across multiple tabs. The feature also includes preset Skills from Google. It’s launching first for Chrome desktop users set to US English. The Verge reports:
Once you have access to the feature, it can be managed by typing a forward slash ( / ) in Gemini and clicking the compass icon. AI prompts can be saved as Skills directly from your Gemini chat history on desktop, where they’ll then be available to reuse on any other desktop devices that are signed into the same Google account on Chrome.

The aim is to spare Chrome users from having to manually retype frequently used Gemini prompts or having to copy and paste them over from a saved list. Some of the Skills made by early testers include commands for calculating the nutritional information of online recipes and creating a side-by-side comparison of product specifications while shopping across multiple tabs, according to Google.

The company is also launching a library of preset Skills that you can save and use instead of making your own. These ready-to-use Skills can also be customized to better suit your needs, providing a starting point without requiring you to create your own from scratch.

oh god

By SumDog • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Prediction: this “feature” will very rapidly be abused by people who inject instructions, probably in HTML comments or white-on-white text. Google will try to mitigate exploits for several months before finally giving up after larger and larger data breaches and finally remove it from their browser.

And they used the search key

By drinkypoo • Score: 3 Thread

I can remember to hit ^F but / was nicer.

Obligatory: You can ask it anything / Great, ask it to fuck off

Any good use case

By ZERO1ZERO • Score: 3 Thread
Im struggling to think of any prompts inwould need to re run, much less prompts built into the browser. Does anyone have any food examples? Also the whole indeterminate nature seems a but off putting. Its possible incould re run a prompt but get different results?

LLMXSS

By abulafia • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
You implemented CORS. You managed to get CSP headers to stop throwing errors. You implemented CSRFs. Get ready for the all new LLM-based Cross-Site Scripting.

Thousands of Rare Concert Recordings Are Landing On the Internet Archive

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
A Chicago concert superfan Aadam Jacobs who has recorded more than 10,000 shows since the 1980s is working with Internet Archive volunteers to digitize the collection before the cassettes deteriorate. “So far, about 2,500 of these tapes have been posted on the Internet Archive, including some rare gems like a Nirvana performance from 1989,” reports TechCrunch. From the report:
For many of these recordings, Jacobs was using pretty mediocre equipment, but the volunteer audio engineers working with the Internet Archive have made these tapes sound great. One volunteer, Brian Emerick, drives to Jacobs’ house once a month to pick up more boxes of tapes — he has to use anachronistic cassette decks to play the tapes, which get converted into digital files. From there, other volunteers clean up, organize, and label the recordings, even tracking down song names from forgotten punk bands.
The archive is available here.

More iconic when analog

By HnT • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Somehow music was so much more iconic when it was still all analog, and recording it actually mattered, you had to commit.

Cassesstts sounded way better most think

By ghinckley68 • Score: 4, Informative Thread

By the mid 80s even a mid range deck could record 30-18k no issues and had SN 70db and dynamic ranges in the 30db with dolby C you lost a little high end and got compression. But a modern DSP and software could easily fix that.
I have a deck form the 90s now that can do 20-22k on metal tape and has 78db SN and over 50db of dynamic ranges. They easly sound better than 320br MP3.

by 2000 you get a teac that would do 15-25k metal tape and 80+ and 60db of dynamic range with almost zero noise.
If you wen hi fi VHS you get et 100db and 80db of range and almost 50db channel seperation with zero noise since the singles was FM encoded on the tape with a carrier wave around 10mhz

copyright

By ghinckley68 • Score: 3, Informative Thread

A lot of bands back them allowed recording of concerts. Most had a rule you cant sell it.

Greatful dead actualy set aside space near the mixer booth and nade a feed for them to plug in.

Re:kindof irresponsible

By Zak3056 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I think the Archive can reasonably get away with this one. Unlike their “we can give away all the books because copyright is no longer a thing because covid” initiative, this effort is clearly and unambiguously archival in nature. Now, if they go and implement some kind of Pandora or Spotify type service for listening to these recordings, they’re going to have trouble, but if the recordings are made available in some kind of academic setting they should be fine.

Re:in mono?

By Anil • Score: 5, Informative Thread

I’m listening to one of this “Low” show recordings now. and it says the source was a Master DAT on the recording’s page — probably meaning it came from the sound board.
i wonder if this guy was a sound tech.

The ‘about’ section about the collection says: “He started taping shows in the early 1980s, using cassette tapes and later transitioning to DATs and digital formats. "

There’s a convenient search feature… no Kraftwerk; but I guess the original article says they are still archiving. so maybe they have it.

Social Media Platforms Need To Stop Never-Ending Scrolling, UK’s Starmer Says

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said social media platforms should remove addictive infinite-scroll features for young users as Britain considers new child-safety measures. “We’re consulting on whether there should be a ban for under 16s,” Starmer told BBC Radio. “But I think equally important, the addictive scrolling mechanisms are really problematic to my mind. They need to go.” Reuters reports:
Britain, like other countries, is considering restricting access to social media for children and it is testing bans, curfews and app time limits to see how they impact sleep, family life and schoolwork. Social media companies had designed algorithms that were intended to encourage addictive behavior, and parents were asking the government to intervene, Starmer said.

[…] More than 45,000 people had already responded to its consultation on children’s online safety, the UK government said, adding that there was still time to contribute before a deadline of May 26. “We want to hear from mums and dads who are worried about the amount of time their children spend online and what they are viewing,” Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said on Monday. “We want to hear from teenagers who know better than anyone what it is like to grow up in the age of social media. And we want to hear from families about their views on curfews, AI chatbots and addictive features.”

Re:Ban everything

By jd • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Sometimes it is the right and appropriate thing to do, but I’d hardly call it “first response”. The Snowdrop Petition circulated after Dunblane, but not Hungerford. It took the repeated failure of government to actually do anything useful that caused society to demand a ban.

After the Traveller threre-day festival in a farmer’s field, the UK government tried to ban going places for a common purpose. A man claiming to be the reincarnation of King Arthur sued on the grounds that he couldn’t join up with his knights if that was illegal. The UK courts determined that he was vastly more credible and overturned the ban.

In the 1950s, when the government restricted freedom of movement, the Mass Kinder Trespass forced a right to roam act.

In short, we don’t give a damn what the government wants, and never have. We know our rights and defend, whether that means increased freedom or introducing bans. The rules are decided by the public, the government has really no say in the matter and never has had.

Wrong Problem

By VorpalRodent • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Can we quit trying to attack UIs?

I understand that an infinite scroll can be addictive. It’s also an incredibly simple UI feature that has plenty of viable use-cases.

As long as we look at these companies in terms of what they *do*, rather than what they *are*, we’re never going to actually solve any problems.

If you ban this or that feature, they’ll use their teams of psychologists to find something else that isn’t specifically regulated and use that feature. Or they’ll have a litigation of lawyers come in and argue that the thing they’re doing doesn’t fit the particular legislation. But we need to come to the point where we all agree that artificially trying to force someone to engage beyond the point they normally would is not “making a better product”, it’s just sleazy.

I get the argument that people can make choices to do what they want. I support that. But we also shouldn’t collectively turn a blind eye to companies going out of their way to milk psychology and exploit people. Just because I accept responsibility for the fact that I spend more time on YouTube than I should doesn’t mean that YouTube gets a pass in the matter.

I 100% agree that parents need to be way more engaged, and that teens shouldn’t get unfettered access to social media. But just because some parents are less engaged than they should be doesn’t excuse bad behavior by Instagram / Tiktok.

Personal freedoms doesn’t have to be diametrically opposed to companies being responsible. I’m all for a smaller government with less stupid crap, but if a multinational conglomerate isn’t going to make right choices on its own, then oversight ends up as the only viable option.

I completely went off course with my argument, but as a curmudgeon, I stand by it.

Re:Wrong solution

By dgatwood • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

The addictive nature of social media is a serious problem, but it is not the fault of social media companies.

A lot of it really is the social media companies’ fault. When I look at Facebook, my feed used to be 99% stuff posted by my friends and family. Now, it is only about 20% stuff posted by my friends and family. The rest is a combination of groups that I’m in (20%), random influencers and groups and pages that are being promoted (50%), and straight-up ads (10%). There is more garbage than content. And there’s no good way to get the trash out, no matter how hard you try.

And yet, that steaming pile of garbage is being shown because for some subset of the population, seeing things that drive interactions, rather than things that genuinely deeply interest the user, causes those users to come to the site more and stay on the site more.

Meta, realizing that they have hit peak user count and can’t realistically grow much bigger, have to find a way to keep the stock price from cratering because of zero growth potential, so they are abusing users to try to gain more eyeball time instead. They deliberately feed the addiction of those who have short attention spans and need continuous input to stimulate them.

The moment they started chasing engagement instead of users was the point when they became a net harm to society. And all of this social media addiction stems from that. Very nearly all of the harm that they cause stems from that. It stems from sites designed to continuously route you towards content that will be more engaging to keep you on the site longer. This is not to say that there is not room for some of that on a broad scale, but doing it too narrowly leads to rabbit holes, which are a net negative.

Fixing this requires keeping companies small, and requiring that big social media companies make their networks available to smaller companies (federation) so that there is actual competition in the marketplace. But the fact that governments should have intervened decades ago doesn’t mean that it isn’t still the fault of the companies. They had a choice. They could have continued to do business the way they did before, knowing that their stock price would never grow. They chose to seek revenue over user happiness.

Re:Wrong Problem

By dgatwood • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

Can we quit trying to attack UIs?

I understand that an infinite scroll can be addictive. It’s also an incredibly simple UI feature that has plenty of viable use-cases.

No, it really doesn’t. What it does is:

There is literally never a situation where this is inherently the right thing to do (except for the company’s ad-driven bottom line), because the quantity of data available is always finite. And the very design of infinite scrolling creates a perverse incentive to fill the feed with garbage and ads and padding and boosted posts and groups you might like and everything else under the sun, rather than telling you that none of your actual friends have posted anything new since you last looked.

More to the point, it disguises how much less actual use people are making of Facebook. And as people use it less, it requires padding the content with more and more garbage to hide the reduction in organic content, which reduces the production of organic content even more, eventually turning in a death spiral. But they’ll hide that for as long as they can by packing in more and more fake engagement opportunities.

But we need to come to the point where we all agree that artificially trying to force someone to engage beyond the point they normally would is not “making a better product”, it’s just sleazy.

Agreed. Where we disagree is that I think infinite scroll inherently leads to that abuse. :-)

Re:Ban everything

By thegarbz • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

The UK’s first response always seems to ban things.

In what way? The UK has thousands of pages of law regulating addictive behaviour, especially when its directed at under 16s. Additionally the UK has enacted and threatened to expand regulations on social media platforms to such an extent that Zuckerberg has repeatedly and publicly complained.

It very much seems like this is the *last* response from the UK, not the first.

Google Faces Mass Arbitration By Advertisers Seeking Billions

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg:
Alphabet’s Google is facing billions of dollars in potential damage claims as part of mass arbitration tied to the company’s online search and advertising technology businesses, which courts have ruled were illegal monopolies. Advertisers are banding together to seek payouts through mass arbitration proceedings. While many companies that displayed ads purchased through Google — including USA Today Co. and Advance Publications — have sued for damages since the rulings in 2024, advertiser contracts with the search giant require mandatory arbitration over legal disputes.

In arbitration, legal disputes are handled by a mediator, a process that tends to favor companies in individual claims. Mass arbitration — where 25 or more claims against the same company are pooled together — have become more common and provide a greater likelihood of settlement awards for claimants. Ashley Keller, a Chicago lawyer whose firm has handled mass arbitrations against DoorDash, Postmates and TurboTax-maker Intuit, said he’s already signed up a “significant number” of advertisers to participate in claims against Google. The first of those are expected to be filed this week.

“Two federal judges have already adjudicated Google to be a monopolist,” Keller said in an interview with Bloomberg. “It seems sensible to seek redress.” Keller, who is also representing Texas and other states in a lawsuit against Google for monopolization of advertising technology, estimates potential claims for online search and display ads could reach $218 billion or more, based on calculations from an economist his firm has hired. Similar mass arbitrations have lasted 12 to 24 months between the filing of claims and resolution, he said.
“Given the nature of these matters, we cannot estimate a possible loss,” Google said in a recent corporate filing. “We believe we have strong arguments against these open claims and will defend ourselves vigorously.”

“Mass Arbitration” vs “Class Action Lawsuit”

By david.emery • Score: 3 Thread

In a Class Action Lawsuit, the law firms cash out big-time if they win. The law firm gets a percentage (often 1/3) of the total settlement, so that’s a strong incentive to bring these suits and make them as broad as possible.

BUT, I don’t know if arbitration proceedings have the same financial advantages for the arbitrator. That could be a Very Important distinction. I strongly suspect the reason this is in arbitration is the contract terms between the advertisers and Google force arbitration to settle contract disputes.

(IANAL)

Chipotle

By SumDog • Score: 3 Thread
I’m reminded of the case where Chipotle was facing a class action and had a few hundred people removed from the lawsuit since they had signed arbitration agreements. Turns out this was a really bad move as every single one of them filing for arbitration carried a minimal legal fee. The judge refused to let them out of their own fuckup:

https://www.latimes.com/busine…

Re:“Mass Arbitration” vs “Class Action Lawsuit”

By tlhIngan • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

In a Class Action Lawsuit, the law firms cash out big-time if they win. The law firm gets a percentage (often 1/3) of the total settlement, so that’s a strong incentive to bring these suits and make them as broad as possible.

BUT, I don’t know if arbitration proceedings have the same financial advantages for the arbitrator. That could be a Very Important distinction. I strongly suspect the reason this is in arbitration is the contract terms between the advertisers and Google force arbitration to settle contract disputes.

Arbitration is to try to prevent class action lawsuits. Basically class actions are costly because of numbers - if you steal $1 from many people, 99.9999% of them will not do a thing about it because a lawsuit will cost more than $1. Class actions solve this - because if you know a million people, suddenly a million dollar payday is a lot more worth it to pursue as a lawsuit than a million $1 lawsuits. Of course, it would probably cost $250K to do, so you’ll get 75 cents on the dollar. Though usually you want punitive damages so the company doesn’t try it again, so you might get $2 after getting ripped off $1.

And lawyers are often not part of the compensation - if they reach a $200M settlement, that $200M is almost all going to people of the class - the lawyers getting another $50M (remember they have to front all the costs upfront) is outside the settlement. Then the lawyers need to make arrangements to distribute the payout which is a lot harder than it is - whether it’s printing cheques, or doing digital deposits.

That’s why companies went with arbitration instead - because now if they screw you out of $5, you’re not likely to bring in a case for that and if you’re not doing that, they can keep that money.

The way around this was accidentally discovered a few years ago - they realized that companies were relying on the fact that consumers weren’t going to bring cases against them with arbitration, but suddenly if you can get a sizeable group, the arbitration fees can be exorbitant. And since the company has to pay for it, this can be rather expensive.

So some lawyers started specializing in mass arbitration where you can get thousands or more clients together to individually argue their case. If it costs the company $100 per case, suddenly they can be out thousands in arbitration fees in the span of a month. And if you do it right, the arbitration company might get slammed because they probably are to handle maybe 10 cases a day per arbitrator, and suddenly having 2000 cases presented presents a huge issue.

A New Computer Chip Could Finally Withstand The Hellscape of Venus

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Researchers at the University of Southern California say they’ve developed a memristor memory device that continued operating at 700 degrees Celsius. “And crucially, 700 degrees was not the limit, it was simply as hot as their testing equipment could go,” adds ScienceAlert. “The device showed no signs of failing.” From the report:
The device is called a memristor and it’s a nanoscale component that can both store information and perform computing operations. Think of it as a tiny sandwich with two electrode layers on the outside and a thin ceramic filling in the middle. The team built theirs from tungsten, the metal with the highest melting point of any element, combined with a ceramic called hafnium oxide, and with a layer of graphene at the bottom. Each material can withstand enormous heat. Together, they turned out to be extraordinary.

What makes graphene the key ingredient is the way it interacts with tungsten at the atomic level. In a conventional device, heat causes metal atoms to drift slowly through the ceramic layer until they bridge the two electrodes, short circuiting everything and leaving the device permanently broken. Graphene stops that process dead. Its surface chemistry with tungsten is … almost like oil and water. Tungsten atoms that drift toward the graphene find they simply cannot take hold, no anchor, no short circuit, no failure. The team used advanced electron microscopy and quantum level computer simulations to understand exactly why, turning a single lucky result into a repeatable principle.
The findings have been published in the journal Science.

Analog also works!

By cusco • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

There is already a model for a rover to operate on Venus, but of course the herd of technophobic lawyers in Congress won’t fund development. The joys of letting lawyers run what should be an engineering program.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/jpl-…

Memristors are (potentially) awesome

By Baron_Yam • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

They can be processor, they can be storage, they can be combined to create more efficient transistors, they can handle more than binary states. They’re essentially a hardware-implemented neural net node and I am still waiting to see someone manage to use them for that.

I suppose a Venus-tolerant surface probe would be pretty impressive too. Or a home computer that didn’t fry itself if the cooling fan seized.

NetBurst

By bill_mcgonigle • Score: 5, Funny Thread

I had a Pentium IV that operated at 700C.

Other uses

By HotNeedleOfInquiry • Score: 3 Thread
These would be very useful in geothermal well data loggers. The current technology uses 100 degree C parts inside a thermos container. I presume there are deep oil wells that can also use high temperature data loggers.

Air Force Pushed Out UFO Investigator

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
J. Allen Hynek started as an Air Force consultant brought in to help explain away early UFO reports, but over time he grew frustrated with what he saw as the government’s effort to minimize unexplained cases rather than seriously investigate them. Longtime Slashdot reader schwit1 shares an article from Popular Mechanics, in collaboration with Biography.com, that argues Hynek’s shift from skeptic to advocate helped shape modern ufology, and that the Air Force’s attempts to control the narrative may have deepened the public distrust and conspiracy thinking that followed. From the report:
Do you think the U.S. government is hiding, and possibly reverse-engineering, extraterrestrial technology? Think again. Or better yet, don’t think about it at all. Nothing to see here. That’s the underlying message of a report released in 2024 by the Department of Defense. The 63-page "Report on the Historical Record of U.S. Government Involvement with Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) " concludes that the DoD’s All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) “found no evidence that any [U.S. Government] investigation, academic-sponsored research, or official review panel has confirmed that any sighting of a UAP represented extraterrestrial technology.”

The AARO, as The Guardian summarizes, is “a government office established in 2022 to detect and, as necessary, mitigate threats including ‘anomalous, unidentified space, airborne, submerged and transmedium objects.’" This report came on the heels of, and in contradiction to, what was arguably the most high-profile hearing on UAPs — formerly known as unidentified flying objects, or UFOs — in decades: the August 2023 testimony of “whistleblower” Dave Grusch.

[…] The 2024 AARO report stated that during the time Hynek was working with Project Blue Book [the U.S. Air Force’s best-known UFO investigation program], “about 75 percent of Americans trusted the [US government] ‘to do the right thing almost always or most of the time.’" But, the report noted, since 2007, that number has never risen above 30 percent. “This lack of trust probably has contributed to the belief held by some subset of the U.S. population that the USG has not been truthful regarding knowledge of extraterrestrial craft.”

Ultimately, the Air Force’s efforts to stifle Hynek — pressuring him to offer the public standard responses to questions he wasn’t even allowed to ask — appears to have backfired. Ironically, the Air Force’s attempts to quiet suspicions only fueled them, leading to more conspiracy theories and distrust. People came to believe that the government was hiding the truth, contrary to Hynek’s actual revelation: that, in reality, the people at the top may not care much about finding the answers after all.

Well what would you do

By DarkOx • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Imagine you are a manager or a CO and you have an employee who keeps spending an enormous amount of time working one something you know is pointless.

You’d tell them to find a more productive use of their time, and if they can’t you might tell them to find other employment.

Re:No UFOs. It’s American Paranoia.

By thogard • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Ireland and Italy and Spain have its share of people who see angels. Oddly the number of UFO sightings and angel sightings are highly concentrated around areas with geological pressure Peltier related electrical oddities. Oddly New England has ghost issues around the similar geology.

Disinfo

By JBMcB • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
I think it has less to do with that, and more to do with using UFOs as a disinformation campaign.

Want a cheap way to flush out spies? Leak that we have alien technology, say it’s in a warehouse in the desert, and wait to see who starts poking around.

Want a cheap way to test air defense radar? Make a weirdly shaped mylar balloon that has been profiled using your own radar. Fill it up with helium and launch it downstream from a sensitive military site. Wait to see how long it takes for them to scramble fighters to check it out. All you need is a balloon, a tank of helium, and a radio you can buy online for $50.

Re:Failure to understand != proof of pet theories

By arglebargle_xiv • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
It does seem to be a very conspiracist explanation, one man’s “evil gummint trying to control the narrative” is another man’s “government doesn’t understand why it should be employing a crackpot who spends his time creating a lot of work for everyone around them”.

Re:No UFOs. It’s American Paranoia.

By PsychoSlashDot • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Wake up guys. Maybe if you locked your nutcases up.......

That’s one take, but I don’t think it’s the most helpful one.

People want to believe (reassuring) fantasies. Religion, for instance. The fantasy that aliens are walking among us is an appealing one. It comes with a side-order of “and some day they may help us with our woes.” It comes with a side-order of “we are interesting and valued.” It comes with a side-order of “I have figured out things the government is hiding from me.”

It’s not - in most cases - anything to do with mental illness. It’s about the human condition, feeling things like inadequacy and being uncomfortable with responsibility and helplessness. Emotions are not insane, in most cases.

Lock up jihadists (of all sects, not just the ones whose primary languages that word comes from) way before worrying about UFO believers.

WeatherBug Data Says October 8 Is the Real Perfect Date

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
BrianFagioli shares a report from NERDS.xyz:
For years pop culture has treated April 25 as the "perfect date,” thanks to the famous Miss Congeniality line about needing only a light jacket. But new analysis from WeatherBug suggests that idea does not actually hold up when you look at the numbers. After reviewing U.S. weather data from 2018 through today, the company concluded that October 8 delivers the most reliable combination of comfortable temperatures and low rainfall nationwide. According to the analysis, the average conditions on that day land around 66F with just 0.0573 inches of precipitation.

The study used population weighted weather data drawn from roughly 20 million daily WeatherBug users across the United States. When the company compared all days of the year, April 25 ranked only 80th, averaging about 60F and roughly 0.1297 inches of rain. The broader dataset also shows July dominating the hottest days of the year while January owns the coldest, with January 20 averaging just 33F nationally. While no single date guarantees perfect weather everywhere in a country as large as the U.S., the numbers suggest early October may quietly offer one of the most reliable windows for comfortable outdoor conditions.

OK

By BadgerStork • Score: 4, Funny Thread

but which day has the nicest weather indoors?

Describe your perfect date

By devslash0 • Score: 3 Thread

“I’d have to say April 25th, because it’s not too hot, not too cold. All you need is a light jacket,â

Re:OK

By BadgerStork • Score: 4, Informative Thread

Someone here told me I shouldn’t use windows

Really?

By msauve • Score: 3 Thread
>weather data from 2018

Less than 10 years of data? Why did this make it to /.?

Stanford Report Highlights Growing Disconnect Between AI Insiders and Everyone Else

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch:
AI experts and the public’s opinion on the technology are increasingly diverging, according to Stanford University’s annual report on the AI industry, which was released Monday. In particular, the report noted a growing trend of anxiety around AI and, in the U.S., concerns about how the technology will impact key societal areas, such as jobs, medical care, and the economy. […] Stanford’s report provides more insight into where all this negativity is coming from, as it summarizes data around public sentiment of AI across various sources. For instance, it pointed to a report from Pew Research published last month, which noted that only 10% of Americans said they were more excited than concerned about the increased use of AI in daily life. Meanwhile, 56% of AI experts said they believed AI would have a positive impact on the U.S. over the next 20 years.

Expert opinion and public sentiment also greatly diverged in particular areas where AI could have a societal impact. Indeed, 84% of experts, the report authors noted, said that AI would have a largely positive impact on medical care over the next 20 years, but only 44% of the U.S. general public said the same. Plus, a majority (73%) of experts felt positive about AI’s impact on how people do their jobs, compared with just 23% of the public. And 69% of experts felt that AI would have a positive impact on the economy. Given the supposed AI-fueled layoffs and disruptions to the workplace, it’s not surprising that only 21% of the public felt similarly. Other data from Pew Research, cited by the report, noted that AI experts were less pessimistic on AI’s impact on the job market, while nearly two-thirds of Americans (or 64%) said they think AI will lead to fewer jobs over the next 20 years.

The U.S. also reported the lowest trust in its government to regulate AI responsibly, compared with other nations, at 31%. Singapore ranked highest at 81%, per data pulled from Ipsos found in Stanford’s report. Another source looked at regulation concerns on a state-by-state level and concluded that, nationwide, 41% of respondents said federal AI regulation will not go far enough, while only 27% said it would go “too far.” Despite the fears and concerns, AI did get one accolade: Globally, those who feel like AI products and services offer more benefits than drawbacks slightly rose from 55% in 2024 to 59% in 2025. But at the same time, those respondents who said that AI makes them “nervous” grew from 50% to 52% during the same period, per data cited by the report’s authors.

clear conflict of interest

By Tom • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

So called “AI insiders” are almost exclusively people for whom AI is either an active research subject or a business opportunity. There is almost no money to be made from being sceptical about AI. Of course these people feel positive about AI.

The common sense opinion here is more reliable, even if it is less informed.

Re:People are easily swayed

By Tom • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

There is, however, another market that moves faster than that one: The CEO market.

Any CEO who said “we don’t do AI here, that’s all bullshit” will find himself on the job market pretty fast in the current mood. So, everyone does AI. Not because it works as a business decision, but because it works as a job security decision.

see also: “Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM”

“AI” is today’s asbestos

By Brandano • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

It works great for a multitude of uses and experts are ready to extol its virtues… I can see a parallel.

Continual gaslighting..

By Junta • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Issue is that the “AI insiders” are constantly gaslighting, and offering a different face to different audiences.

You are a software developer? Oh, well, you need to pay us money for the tooling and also pay more money for ‘education’, because you need a whole new skillset to use LLM, it’s hard to use and you can still leverage your expertise but need to give us money to be competitve.

You pay software developers to do stuff? Oh, well you can lay off those losers because any rando can just prompt up a fully working piece of software with zero skill… “real soon now”.

That is before the GenAI tendency to Gaslight people day to day on accident (and also be gaslit, sometimes by itself).

Based on my real life experience, it’s not the GenAI in and of itself that is the trouble, it’s just that all the most obnoxious people are more empowered by it. Busybodies that love to tell people how to do their jobs without actually knowing how that job is done can be more specific and verbose as they still don’t know what is going on. Clickbait types that made slop before now make more slop than ever. Of course there’s the “AI insiders” that want to suck up all investment and all the attendant ego problems related (especially Musk, Altman, and Zuckerberg are just even more insufferable than usual).

Re:AI is useful but

By arglebargle_xiv • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Cory Doctorow sums it up pretty well:

I’m worried about AI psychosis. Specifically, I’m worried about the psychosis that makes our “capital allocators” spend $1.4T on the money-losingest technology in the history of the human race, in pursuit of a bizarre fantasy that if we teach the word-guessing program enough words, it will take all the jobs. That’s some next-level underpants-gnomery