Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. Voters Aren’t Waiting For November to Try Ousting Officials Over Data Centers
  2. Does Using AI to Edit an Op-Ed on Students’ Math Skills Undermine the Argument?
  3. YouTube Offers Creators Millions of Dollars to Stay Off Netflix
  4. Reverse-Lookup Service Exposed Millions of Photos of People’s Faces
  5. FCC Abolishes Gigabit Speed Goal, Suggesting It Is Unfair To Slower Technologies
  6. Japan to Require AI Firms to Disclose Training Data
  7. New Study Challenges Common Assumptions About Screen Time For Kids
  8. Rescue Mission Is Called Off For NASA’s Aging Swift Space Telescope
  9. Whistleblower Arturo Bejar Leads Testimony In Landmark Trial Against Meta
  10. PINE64 Halts Linux Device Production Amid DRAM and EMMC Shortages
  11. Stripe Buys AI Startup OpenRouter For $7.5 Billion
  12. Amazon’s Drones Will Soon Deliver to Nearly 500 US Cities and Towns
  13. Music Publisher Round Hill Files $1 Billion Copyright Infringement Suits Against Suno, Anthropic
  14. CISA: Medusa Ransomware Hit Over 500 Critical Infrastructure Orgs
  15. Moderna, Merck Say mRNA Vaccine Prevents Melanoma From Returning

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.

Voters Aren’t Waiting For November to Try Ousting Officials Over Data Centers

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
A growing backlash against AI data centers is spilling into local politics, with residents in more than a dozen communities pushing recall elections against officials who approved projects. “People are standing up and saying, ‘Sorry, we don’t want these data centers in our communities for a number of reasons,’" Senator Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent, said in an interview. "‘If you can’t have the guts to stand up to some large corporation, you should not continue serving in office.’" The New York Times reports:
In Festus, Mo., critics of a local data center project gathered enough signatures in May to force a vote to remove the mayor and City Council members who had approved a $6 billion data center, though the effort is tied up in legal wrangling. In Mason, Mich., residents will vote in November over whether to recall a City Council member over a vote to create zoning rules for data centers. Voters in Yukon, Okla., will also decide in November whether to recall their mayor after the town moved to sell land to a data center developer. And residents of Independence, a city of 121,000 that is 10 miles from Kansas City, will vote on whether to remove Mr. Perkins on Sept. 1.

Some local officials have already lost their jobs in the face of data center concerns in regularly scheduled elections. Last year, two members of the Georgia Public Service Commission lost their seats amid concern about data centers’ driving up electricity prices. A Virginia state delegate, Geary Higgins, also lost his job last year after his opponent branded him “Data Center Geary.” […] Independence would be one of the first municipalities to hold a data-center-motivated recall election. A judge this month rejected a legal challenge by Mr. Perkins and others, who argued the recall violated Missouri’s Constitution.

Good

By strike6 • Score: 3 Thread
Not specific to data centers, but too often legislators ignore the will of the people who voted them in. We could use more of this type of accountability.

Does Using AI to Edit an Op-Ed on Students’ Math Skills Undermine the Argument?

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian:
A math professor at the University of California, Berkeley, criticizing a “severe” math deficiency among students in an op-ed for the San Francisco Standard, admitted to using artificial intelligence to help edit the piece. The Standard published a 2,000-word piece by Zvezdelina Stankova last week, in which the professor said some of her math students were “five to eight years” behind and lacked a “middle school” education on fractions and basic algebra. Stankova said the UC system’s test-blind admissions were to blame, suggesting that students who weren’t sufficiently prepared for the rigor of Berkeley’s mathematics program were admitted because a longstanding benchmark like the SAT had disappeared.

Over the weekend, journalists at Berkeley’s student newspaper, the Daily Californian, noticed the op-ed’s language sounded like AI. According to Berkeley sophomore Francis Luo, they ran it through AI-detection software Pangram, which claimed 33% of the op-ed had been generated or assisted by AI. In response, Stankova admitted she had used AI software to “help edit the piece” but that the article was “the result of several hundred person-hours of intensive human work, of which about 80 hours are my own.”

Stankova said by email she had used AI to locate “numerous documents and articles related to the initiative” but that “all analysis is the result of the team members.” When asked about their AI usage policy, the Standard — which published the op-ed — shared this statement by email: “While AI may assist, our expectation is that humans are behind every article we publish and take responsibility for every word. Our understanding in working with the author of this op ed was — and continues to be — that this piece reflects her and her colleagues’ extensive original analysis, research and expertise.”
Should the op-ed have been entirely written without artificial assistance or is the use of AI a distraction from the argument at hand? That’s the question at the heart of the debate playing out online.

According to the op-ed, Stankova and her peers found that the number of students with a “severe deficit” in their readiness for a calculus I class had tripled after the University of California adopted test-blind admissions. Some students were allegedly five to eight years behind and struggling with basic algebra and fractions, among other concepts.

Much of that decline, Stankova argues, is from the removal of standardized tests like the SAT and ACT, which served as important benchmarks for identifying whether applicants were prepared for Berkeley-level coursework.

Well of course they are focusing on AI.

By sarren1901 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Because we sure as fuck aren’t going to focus on the poor mathematics skills of our youth. Much much easier to attack the messenger then actually debate the salient points being made by the Op-Ed.

Now I personally enjoy writing so I’m not likely to invoke AI for a template or setup piece to edit. I would however allow AI to assist me in research. Sure, I’d need to verify that, but that’s true regardless. You always need to verify your sources when you are writing anything. Well, real journalist and academics would anyway. Just a couple years ago I was finishing a degree and I had a end of year project to build. It required I list all my sources to backup what I was ultimately submitting. Shame we have a lot of lazy frauds that would rather just cheat.

So yes, I’m quite sure the Internet is attacking this person’s AI assisted Op-Ed because they know it’s correct but don’t want to face the music that we’re doing a major disservice to our youth by letting them slide on Math. IE letting them slide on critical thinking and logic. Who needs logic when we can just appeal to emotion, like Trump!

Completely different

By strike6 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Can’t believe this is even a story. Of course it doesn’t matter. There are differences between what the Professor is complaining about and using A.I. to help write her opinion piece: 1) It’s a completely different subject area. She’s a math teacher, not an English teacher. But even an English teacher might use A.I. to assist in writing an opinion piece that has nothing to do with his/her academic life. 2) It wasn’t coursework. If she was doing it in an English CLASS maybe there would be a point. 3) She was writing an opinion piece for wide distribution. It makes sense to get some assistance in doing so, and/or helping do the research to support the piece. That’s exactly the type of thing A.I. is actually useful for.

This is a bit extreme

By Whateverthisis • Score: 4, Informative Thread
First, I haven’t seen any articles yet claiming that these “AI detection tools” don’t have a high false positive rate anyways, so those tools alone are controversial.

Second, if AI’s job, like any tool, is to make our lives easier, then editing something seems like a good use of the technology. When i write stuff, I often will get all my thoughts down as best as I can, but then use AI to evaluate if the message can come across in a more impactful way with fewer words, which helps to make it clearer for my intended recipient. In that the AI isn’t generating the information at all, it’s doing what it’s actually good at, ie looking at text and recommending changes based on what people who are better writers might do. Particularly someone like this professor whom, just by judging based on her name, English is likely her second language so she may not be the best at communicating in writing. If that’s what we’re talking about here, this seems like a non-controversy.

Wait

By fropenn • Score: 3 Thread
It took hundreds of person hours AND help from AI to say: “today’s students aren’t prepared to take Calculus 1…now get off my manicured lawn!”?

Regardless, most students at Berkeley don’t need Calculus 1. And if students do need it, but aren’t ready, then send them to the next class down until they are ready.

And complaining about not having the SAT or ACT…? Just do your own math placement test, Berkeley, it’s not difficult. Seems like a problem that Berkeley could solve, rather than whining about it in an op-ed. Sheesh.

Strawman / Ragebait

By Zelucifer • Score: 3 Thread

The Professor in question barely mentioned AI. Instead The Guardian ran a hit-piece on her that doesn’t even properly engage with her points until more than halfway through.

This is the only mention of AI in the whole piece:

General learning loss would lower the entire distribution. It would not hollow out the middle while piling students up at exactly zero. Something else appears to be compounding the problem. Whatever the mix of causes, the problems at UC accelerated precisely when the system discarded the one standardized baseline it once had. Without standardized tests, admissions officers are flying blind, especially as grade inflation has made transcripts a weaker indicator of readiness, and artificial intelligence has made admissions essays a weaker signal of students’ work.

And as The Guardian article says “Stankova, in her email, said “the issue of how AI was used is orthogonal to and a distraction from the thousands of hours our team has put into the initiative” of reinstating standardized tests in admission.”

YouTube Offers Creators Millions of Dollars to Stay Off Netflix

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Bloomberg reports that YouTube is offering major creators millions of dollars to keep some content exclusive to its platform as Netflix increasingly signs YouTube-native talent to non-exclusive deals. YouTube has also warned that creators who simultaneously publish on Netflix could lose marketing support, event opportunities, and access to revenue from certain brand campaigns. Quartz reports:
Bloomberg described two categories of payment: funding directed at specific programs, and a portion of the revenue YouTube brings in through large advertiser partnerships. No agreements have been finalized, but YouTube is close to deals with several partners, citing people familiar with the negotiations who declined to be identified. Creators who sign with Netflix face consequences. YouTube has warned creators that those who simultaneously publish videos on Netflix risk being sidelined from the platform’s marketing campaigns and events, and would lose access to a share of proceeds from certain major brand deals.

Netflix has been signing YouTube creators to non-exclusive deals that allow them to post the same content on both platforms simultaneously. Creators including Alan Chikin Chow and Nick DiGiovanni have already signed such agreements, and Netflix remains in active conversations with dozens of other channels and programs, including the celebrity talk show Hot Ones. Netflix’s pitch is straightforward: creators receive a substantial additional payday for content they have already produced, and their work reaches an audience that numbers more than 325 million subscribers.

YouTube Chief Executive Officer Neal Mohan had previously held that creators who work with competitors tend to drive viewers back to YouTube. But Bloomberg reported that Mohan and his team decided in recent weeks that the growing number of creators posting simultaneously on both platforms had become a problem that needed to be addressed. The concern is that when a video runs on both platforms simultaneously, YouTube’s ability to convince advertisers of that video’s exclusive value is undermined.

Time for another anti-trust investigation Google.

By MikeDataLink • Score: 3 Thread

Do no evil. We all know why you removed it. Couldn’t be more obvious.

Could be a good thing.

By Randseed • Score: 3 Thread
If this means that the Netflix versions aren’t censored to the point of absurdity, then I’m all for it. Heaven forbid in something like a podcast about the Duke Lacrosse case someone mention the words “sexual assault,” or “rape.” Or in a story about a celebrity suicide someone say “suicide” instead of “unalive.” Or the word “fuck” come out without an asterisk in the middle of it for no identifiable reason.

Re:Time for another anti-trust investigation Googl

By dgatwood • Score: 5, Informative Thread

as evil is almost always necessary when the stated goal of your business is to maximize shareholder value at all costs

Don’t interpret this as me having an opinion on this specific article (I don’t), but that’s a gross misrepresentation of what the law requires. As someone running a business, you *do* have a fiduciary duty to the stockholders, but that’s not the same thing as requiring you to maximize shareholder value at all costs. Doing what is best for the company and the shareholders does not strictly mean more dollars.

For example, if a company had a choice whether to make a drone that would make a lot of money by selling to militaries, but would be used to annihilate the shareholders, no rational person would claim that the fiduciary duty requires them to build the drone.

More broadly, companies have a responsibility to behave ethically, for two reasons:

In other words, behaving unethically is how companies find themselves massively regulated in ways that negatively impact long-term profits. Every antitrust suit is an example of this, as the only reason those laws exist is because some company previously behaved unethically.

Reverse-Lookup Service Exposed Millions of Photos of People’s Faces

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Security researcher Jeremiah Fowler found that people-search service ClarityCheck left more than 9 million image files accessible in an unsecured Amazon S3 bucket, despite advertising its reverse-image search as “private and secure.” A separate misconfiguration also exposed email addresses, phone numbers, and other personal information. Wired reports:
Overall, according to findings from independent security researcher Jeremiah Fowler, the exposed ClarityCheck database contained roughly 450 GB of images, including what appeared to be profile images, screenshots, and other photographs of adults, teenagers, and children. All of the images were stored in an unsecured Amazon S3 bucket, with files in folders named “faces” and “profiles,” which could be accessed by anyone online through a URL included in the company’s publicly available website code.

ClarityCheck is one of a number of so-called people-finder tools that have appeared online in recent years. These websites broadly claim to be able to search the web, public records, and other databases to identify individuals. ClarityCheck’s website says it can run searches on phone numbers, email addresses, vehicle identification numbers, and names. Its photo-search page says it can help “identify anyone in a photo” and find social media profiles “in seconds.” While ClarityCheck secured the giant image database after WIRED contacted the company in July, Fowler warns that it was seemingly exposed for months, and his initial efforts to flag the problem to the company were unsuccessful. Accidental data exposures create risk for any personal information, but particularly for sensitive and unchangeable biometric data like face images.

[…] In addition to the face data, ClarityCheck had also misconfigured its APIs such that its website URLs could be manipulated to reveal data about people simply by entering names; anyone using any consumer browser could have done this. Entering a name into one of the URLs would return multiple potential email addresses, physical addresses, and phone numbers for people with that name. After WIRED contacted the company, the URLs were secured. The ClarityCheck spokesperson said in the statement that the details displayed were “sourced from publicly available information and licensed third-party data providers.”
A spokesperson for ClarityCheck said in a statement: “Once this was drawn to the attention of the appropriate teams, we acted immediately to restrict access.” The company disputed any characterization that the data was “exposed,” saying that an “ordinary member of the public” would not have come across it.
“We do not accept that data in the temporary storage location was ‘publicly exposed,’ which implies large-scale public access,” the spokesperson says. “Access required knowledge of a specific, unindexed URL that was not discoverable through ordinary use of the ClarityCheck service or a general web search.”

Collecting photos of random children?

By ebunga • Score: 3 Thread

Millions of photos of children? Why would they want that?

What difference does it make?

By sarren1901 • Score: 3 Thread

Whether this site was insecure or not matters not at all. If I can just pay for access then it’s no different then if access was free. The end results are precisely the same for privacy. These assholes very likely just bought up a shit ton of personal data congregated by Meta and the like.

So ohh my, the site that lets people look people up was insecure. The fact the site exist at all is the actual problem.

FCC Abolishes Gigabit Speed Goal, Suggesting It Is Unfair To Slower Technologies

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica:
The Federal Communications Commission last week eliminated the gigabit speed goal established during the Biden administration and declared that current levels of broadband deployment in the US are acceptable. Though fiber networks have routinely offered such speeds for years, the FCC said the gigabit speed goal is not “technologically neutral,” suggesting that it isn’t fair to other, slower technologies.

In 2024, the FCC raised its broadband benchmark to 100Mbps downstream and 20Mbps upstream, setting the new standard by which to judge whether deployment is reasonable and timely. The FCC at the time also set a long-term speed goal of 1Gbps download speeds paired with 500Mbps upload speeds, saying it would use the goal “as a guidepost for evaluating our efforts to encourage deployment.” Republican Brendan Carr, who is now the FCC chairman, never liked that long-term goal. He proposed abolishing it last year, and the change was finalized on August 14 in the FCC’s latest broadband deployment report. The reports are mandated by Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act.

“As part of our return to following the plain language of Section 706, we adopt our proposal from the Notice [of Inquiry] to abolish without replacement the long-term goal of 1,000/500 Mbps established in the 2024 Report,” the order said. “A long-term goal is not mentioned in Section 706 and could appear to violate our obligation to conduct our analysis in a technologically neutral manner. At present, it is impossible to predict long-term technological developments and the evolution of consumer preferences.” The FCC said that comments submitted by cable industry group NCTA and wireless industry group CTIA “support our reasoning for abolishing the long-term goal.”
Last year, the Brendan Carr-led FCC said (PDF) that the gigabit goal “may be unreasonably prejudicial to technologies such as satellite and fixed wireless that presently do not support such speeds.” However, last week’s report contradicts that stance.

“We disagree with commenters arguing that our concern about technological neutrality merely serves to accommodate technologies that may currently offer slower speeds,” the FCC said. “At present, we do not know the nature of future consumer preferences and, considering that the goal is not required by the statute and does not serve any positive purpose (as discussed herein), we believe it prudent to abolish it.”

Not sure I disagree

By alta • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I recently downgraded from Cable 800MB to starlink. Simply because for some reason at 2pm EVERY SINGLE DAY my ping times with charter would go from around 30/ms to 100-1000/ms and it lasted for a few hours. I work from home and that was unusable. The only other “broadband” available was starlink. So now I’m much slower in the 100-200MB range, but overall we haven’t noticed much difference.

So I’d say, yeah, you don’t have to go all the way up to gigabit to be considered broadband.

Just another grift

By Berkyjay • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Now the question to ask is which of these poor technologies, that has been treated so unfairly, does Trump and his buddies have money invested in?

Re:Just another grift

By drinkypoo • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

99.44% chance that this is about sending more tax money to ol’ musky.

Re:Just another grift

By kqs • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Honestly, I suspect that it’s more that telecom companies are supposed to improve their service, but that would cut into their profits, so they want to continue selling turds and calling it chocolate. We can all agree that wireless internet will not work the same as wired, but the only reason that so many people have terrible wired internet is because the companies would make less profit if they fixed it. So the FCC is saying “No worries! Customers are not important, your profits are!”

I hope everyone is having the day they voted for.

Re:Just another grift

By Junta • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

This is exactly what it is, Starlink can’t do gigabit, can’t do low latency, but *can* reach random places easily. Musk and Trump seemingly have made up relatively recently and I am certain this favor is a consequence.

So with this Starlink gets access to funds that are generally made available to give *quality* access to especially rural places. Money to make up for the relatively high incremental cost of wiring up an area compared to the revenue. Except Starlink has effectively zero incremental cost to serve these areas, so they get to collect the same money as a provider would have had to spend to actually run real wires.

Japan to Require AI Firms to Disclose Training Data

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Japan is preparing a nonbinding “comply or explain” code that would urge generative AI companies, including foreign firms operating in Japan, to disclose what models they use, what training data they rely on, and how that data was collected. The proposal would also let rights holders ask whether specific webpages were included in training datasets. The Japan Times reports:
The draft code comprises three principles. The first principle requires businesses to disclose the generative AI models they use, their training data and methods for collecting such data on their websites and make the information publicly accessible. Meanwhile, disclosure of sensitive information will not be mandatory. The second principle calls for businesses to disclose whether certain webpages are included in training data when requested by copyright holders and other rights holders who allege infringement. The third principle states that businesses will respond to requests for information from system and service users concerned about copyright infringement.

New Study Challenges Common Assumptions About Screen Time For Kids

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
bryanandaimee shares a report from ScienceDaily:
A Finnish study has found an unexpected association between screen use and cognitive performance. Children who accumulated more screen time as they grew up tended to show better cognitive processing during adolescence. One of the researchers cautions against viewing screen time as entirely harmful and says the goal should be to balance physical activity with screen use that encourages active thinking. […] “The findings suggest that screen time can support children’s and adolescents’ cognitive processing. Presumably, the essential point here is what kind of things they do in their screen time. Teachers and parents should encourage children to use devices and screens in such ways that promote active thinking, problem-solving, creativity and learning,” states Doctoral Researcher Petri Jalanko from the University of Jyvaskyla.

Digital activities that involve learning, creativity, problem-solving, or other forms of active mental engagement could potentially help explain the association observed in the study. “We should not regard screen time solely as harmful but seek balance between physical activity and screen time that promotes active thinking,” Jalanko summarizes. The relationship between physical activity and cognition was more complicated. Among girls, greater amounts of light intensity physical activity since childhood were associated with better working memory during adolescence. Among boys, greater participation in guided physical activity from childhood through adolescence was linked to better working memory.

The researchers also found an unexpected pattern involving unsupervised exercise. Lower levels of self-reported unsupervised physical activity were associated with better cognitive processing in adolescence. By contrast, physical activity and sedentary time measured using a device that tracked heart rate and movement were not associated with cognitive processing. One possible explanation is that these sensors can measure movement and physiological activity but cannot determine exactly what a person is doing during periods of activity or inactivity.
The findings have been published in the journal Pediatric Exercise Science.

It’s conditioning during development

By Baron_Yam • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Whatever you focus on, you will get better at. You can play piano obsessively and never be Beethoven, but you will (eventually) acquire competence unless you have a significant mental impairment.

So why would we expect anything else from obsessive focusing during childhood and adolescence? Use your screens to watch interesting, thoughtful, or informative things and you’re conditioning your brain with those things. Use them to indulge your worst social instincts on social media and you’re going to get ‘better’ at that, which unfortunately means turning yourself into a miserable person.

Doing this as a kid, when you don’t have a couple of decades of other experiences under your belt to soften the impact makes it worse.

Finland provides far superior schools

By cosmicl • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
Just search it up. Finland provides really really good public primary and secondary schools and teachers for their kids. From Wiki… " All primary and secondary teachers must hold a master’s degree, and teaching is one of the most prestigious and selective professions in the country.” Kids in Finland learn how to learn. Most likely they are using more of their screen time for that.

Re:Its eggs the of 90s

By phantomfive • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

For individuals there really is only one reasonable course here. Ignore the sensational studies and news.

Man, if you’re getting your science information from news stories, the problem is you.

We live in a world where the actual study is a click away. At least read the abstract.

This is not difficult!

By CEC-P • Score: 3 Thread
They have known this for decades. If you’re watching Tik Tok, you’re becoming an A.D.D. dopamine addict. If you’re playing puzzle games and building systems in a sim game, you’re getting smarter. There is no such thing as “screen time.” That’s like saying “going outside” is a category. Yeah, and doing what?!

Re:Paid for by the Mark Zuckerberg Election Commit

By zlives • Score: 4, Funny Thread

screen time includes porn… right? right!!

Rescue Mission Is Called Off For NASA’s Aging Swift Space Telescope

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
NASA has called off a $30 million mission to rescue its aging Swift space telescope after Katalyst Space’s Link spacecraft developed persistent control and positioning problems. The Associated Press reports:
Katalyst said Link will not attempt to capture Swift and boost it to a higher orbit because of problems with controlling the spacecraft. NASA said this means the telescope will plunge through the atmosphere after more than 20 years of tracking some of the biggest explosions in the universe like gamma ray bursts and exploding stars. Its demise is not expected before October.

NASA paid $30 million to Katalyst in an attempt to raise the telescope to a safer, longer-lasting orbit. Intense solar activity caused it to lose altitude faster than expected. The rescue spacecraft went into an uncontrollable spin a few weeks after its liftoff in early July. While flight controllers managed to slow Link’s tumble, issues continued to plague its pointing and positioning in orbit.

“This is not the outcome we were working toward, but it does not change why this mission was worth attempting,” NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman said in a statement. As a consolation prize, Katalyst will continue to operate Link in proximity with the telescope to demonstrate capabilities for future rescue operations. Katalyst CEO Ghonhee Lee said it was an ambitious mission on an aggressive timeline that was thrown together in under a year. “We took on this high-risk, high-reward challenge and are proud of the milestones we reached along the way,” Lee said in a statement. “We have already learned a tremendous amount.”

A Contributor to Science

By LondoMollari • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Here’s a glass of port to Swift: its discoveries so sweet, results so intoxicating. You shall be missed but not forgotten.

Space telescopes will soon be much cheaper

By greytree • Score: 3, Informative Thread
Starship will soon be flinging stuff into space for pennies, which will also mean weight optimizations will be less necessary, so we can get better telescopes into orbit for much cheaper.

Re: Space telescopes will soon be much cheaper

By dargaud • Score: 5, Informative Thread
Haven’t you seen all the recent deep cuts to NASA science missions? And science in general. In some cases it will take over a generation to recover.

Re: Space telescopes will soon be much cheaper

By LindleyF • Score: 4, Funny Thread
Please don’t fling billions in of pennies into space.

Whistleblower Arturo Bejar Leads Testimony In Landmark Trial Against Meta

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from NPR:
Meta was infused with a culture in which employees obsessed over user numbers and consistently pushed safety to the side, according to Arturo Bejar, a former employee turned whistleblower, who testified today in the landmark child safety trial against the social media company. Only one man had the ability to change that, Bejar said: CEO Mark Zuckerberg. But he didn’t. “At the end of the day, it was the company culture that Mark had created that made it so that it was practically impossible to deliver features that addressed the wellbeing and safety issues that we’ve been talking about,” he said.

Bejar is a linchpin witness for a consortium of states led by California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey that sued Meta, alleging violations of consumer and child data protection laws, and that the company lied to the public about risks its platforms posed. The attorneys for the states say Meta designed Facebook and Instagram to hook young users and to keep them on site longer thanks to features such as infinite scrolling and the “like” button. Meta has denied the allegations. In his opening statement on Tuesday, attorney Paul Schmidt argued that the company was sensitive to the risks to teens, sought to address them and did not deceive the public about them. The state attorneys have not yet said if they will call Zuckerberg as a witness.

Testifying in federal court in Oakland, California, for a second day on Wednesday, Bejar, who worked on safety issues at Meta for eight years, said he interacted with Zuckerberg dozens of times, and charged that Zuckerberg was not telling the truth when he made public denials that the company put profits over safety. In particular, Bejar addressed a widely-shared Facebook post Zuckerberg made in 2021 after another whistleblower, Frances Haugen, shared internal documents with The Wall Street Journal that highlighted risks to the mental health of teens. In the post, Zuckerberg said it’s “just not true” that Meta prioritizes profit over safety and wellbeing. “Based on my experience at Meta, that is not an accurate statement,” Bejar said. […] Bejar testified, at almost every turn the company chose policies that boosted usership and revenue over safety. Safety was “not a meaningful priority,” he said.

Surprised

By commodore73 • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
Surprised he didn’t “suicide” before the trial. More power to people like this!

Good for Bejar

By dskoll • Score: 5, Informative Thread

People like this witness are the heroes we need. I hope he has security, though. With this much at stake, I wouldn’t put anything past Meta or its political buddies.

Re:Good for Bejar

By CommunityMember • Score: 4, Informative Thread

Financial security on the other hand…I wouldn’t put it past them to do whatever they could to make sure he can’t find another job or penalize any tech company that hires him somehow, of course for other ostensible reasons.

In one of his interviews, he stated that he never expects to be able to find employment in his field ever again. Advocacy roles (in various non-profits), on the other hand, may be his future.

Why would anyone believe…

By WillyWanker • Score: 3 Thread

…that a malignant narcissistic sociopath would give a shit about people’s mental health and wellbeing?

CEO sets the culture

By toxonix • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Zuckerburg is entirely responsible for all evils Meta creates and propagates - he’s the founder, CEO and chairman of the board. Whatever the results are, ultimately the buck stops with Zuck.

PINE64 Halts Linux Device Production Amid DRAM and EMMC Shortages

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
BrianFagioli writes:
PINE64 has some very bad news for Linux hardware fans. PINE64 says it has no plans to produce additional Linux devices in the near future because of the ongoing DRAM and eMMC shortage. Future production will depend on component pricing after mid 2027, while existing PineNote and PineTab2 inventory could run out in roughly three months. The company says PineTime, PineVoice, and Pinecil production will continue as usual, but the outlook for its Linux hardware is much less certain.
“That’s it for this post, all in all it’s a bit bleak for the Linux devices, but in the meantime PineStore still have a great lineup of MCU powered devices which will continue to expand with more exciting devices,” the company said.

Oh no!

By drinkypoo • Score: 5, Funny Thread

Where will I get a SBC that fails after three months now?

Re:Isn’t capitalism supposed to fix this?

By Valgrus Thunderaxe • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Because building more manufacturing capacity is a large expenditure and nobody wants to get stuck holding the cards if the AI boom turns into a bust.

The communists aren’t building any faster, either.

PINE64 products are not that great

By dskoll • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

I had a Pinebook PRO and it was… meh. Way too slow and underpowered for modern web browsing. Also shipped with Manjaro, but I’m a Debian fan. I installed Armbian instead; PINE64 doesn’t offer much in the way of hardware documentation and so I spent a fair bit of time getting Armbian to work. I had to munge the device tree files based on the ones in Manjaro. I ended up selling the laptop.

In retrospect, I probably should have hung on to it. I could probably sell it for more now!

Re:Isn’t capitalism supposed to fix this?

By caseih • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Nope that’s not it either. Companies have found out that if they collude and control the entire supply of something, they can make more money by not meeting demand, indefinitely. The free market basically no longer exists and definitely no longer discovers prices by matching supply and demand. Covid fundamentally broke it all. Even without collusion in markets with high barriers to entry, reducing supply, or at least not meeting demand maximizes shareholder profits.

Don’t mistake heavy criticism of our present failing system for endorsement of any other system such as CCP China. Saying all other systems are even more horrible is not a valid reason for blindly accepting the many problems we now face.

Re:Isn’t capitalism supposed to fix this?

By UnknowingFool • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

We have a massive shortage why is nobody stepping up to make more supply?

There were really only 3 DRAM manufacturers before this crisis. AI bought out nearly all of the production capacity to make HBM instead of DDR5. Some Chinese companies are now starting to make DRAM but they simply do not make enough. It turns out making even DRAM is hard.

And it’s not a short-term shortage everyone knew this was coming and we have known for a couple of years and we knew that was going to get worse and the absolute best case scenario is that it starts to get better sometime around 2029 or 2030.

All you have to do is start a chip foundry plant and start cranking out DRAM. It’s just that easy.

Stripe Buys AI Startup OpenRouter For $7.5 Billion

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Stripe is acquiring AI model marketplace OpenRouter as it pushes beyond payments into the infrastructure behind AI applications. According to The New York Times, the deal is reportedly valued at about $7.5 billion, with $1.5 billion allocated to OpenRouter’s founders. Less than three months ago the company was valued at about $1.3 billion. CNBC reports:
OpenRouter has become popular with developers seeking to use AI models, particularly those considered non-proprietary and available for free. Many of these so-called open-weight AI models stem from Chinese labs like DeepSeek and Z.ai, which have gained steam among developers for generally being more cost-efficient relative to proprietary AI models from U.S. companies like OpenAI and Anthropic.

In a blog post about the deal, Stripe noted that it’s been working with companies to “optimize their token costs and route tokens efficiently,” referring to a kind of metric used to measure AI model usage. Stripe said it’s difficult to manage AI costs relative to performance because of the rapid “pace at which models are released and repriced.” […]

OpenRouter said in a blog post that combining with Stripe will help with its overall vision of “a healthy AI ecosystem where many models thrive, where AI neurodiversity is a strength, where a lab or an inference provider with a breakthrough can reach millions of developers, and where no single model becomes the default by inertia.”
“Stripe is building the economic infrastructure for AI, and together with OpenRouter we’ll help businesses maximize profitability by routing their requests intelligently and spending their tokens efficiently,” Stripe CEO Patrick Collison said in a statement.

A company buying another company

By rsilvergun • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
For well over a billion dollars should be something you read once or twice in your lifetime not daily news.

Market consolidation is killing us all. And we’re too much of a bunch of pussies and or idiots to do anything about it.

Closed-source software outlets called Open-yada

By Rujiel • Score: 3 Thread
are a plague on this earth

This isn’t a comical bubble at all

By zeeky boogy doog • Score: 3 Thread
According to The New York Times, the deal is reportedly valued at about $7.5 billion, with $1.5 billion allocated to OpenRouter’s founders. Less than three months ago the company was valued at about $1.3 billion. CNBC reports:

This is normal, non-insane valuation in a market that is definitely not a bubble more inflated that the Bootes supervoid.

Used them a few times

By ZipNada • Score: 3 Thread

I have a couple of projects that need raw access to an appropriate AI model and OpenRouter can get that for you. And they do make it very convenient. You put some cash in your account with them and use their API to get access to whichever model you happen to choose at the time. It shows the prices clearly, so you can experiment to find one that works well for your purposes and is as inexpensive as possible. I didn’t bother to write the code that interfaces with OpenRouter of course, I used AI for that.

I am frankly amazed at the $billions that were spent to buy this thing. It’s really just a router for AI prompts and a convenient way to pay for the service, and they take a little cream off the top like a credit card agency. But I guess this is what attracted Stripe, which acts as a payment intermediary for all kinds of things. Stripe probably had very little expertise in the AI arena and this was an easy though expensive way in to the modern paradigm of paying for AI as a commodity.

Amazon’s Drones Will Soon Deliver to Nearly 500 US Cities and Towns

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Amazon says its Prime Air drone delivery service will expand sixfold to nearly 500 U.S. cities and towns by the end of 2026, including metro areas around Chicago, Syracuse, Cleveland, Atlanta, and Boise. According to Amazon Prime Air vice president David Carbon, the service has already delivered “hundreds of thousands of packages to customers” this year, typically within about an hour. The Verge reports:
These will join 11 locations across the US where Amazon already offers drone deliveries, with each Prime Air site serving an area of approximately 175 square miles. The service aims to quickly deliver packages of up to 5 pounds or less […]. Amazon reiterated its drone safety features alongside these expansion plans, including Prime Air’s “industry-leading Detect-and-Avoid system.” That’s likely an attempt to minimize any concerns raised by the communities where the service is expanding, given these drones have already been scrutinized for crashing into cranes, internet cables, gardens, and an apartment building.

cnbc also reporting

By stabiesoft • Score: 3 Thread
the same but what caught my eye was “will make 1 million drone deliveries this year.” https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/1… Well that sounds great, except even at 10 bucks/delivery that is only 10M/year. Which seems pretty low for a project that has cost this much. And is 1M deliveries even a blip on their daily deliveries? I could believe they deliver 10M pkgs per day and this is 1M pkgs per year.

Re:Cities?

By dgatwood • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

When companies throw around terms like “cities and towns” for drone logistics, they are usually talking about sprawling suburban developments with neat, wide-open lawns, not dense urban cores.

Well, yeah, but those are still cities. Almost twice as many people live in parts of cities that are not “dense urban cores”.

And the dense areas involve apartment complexes with hundreds or thousands of units and interior halls, so they’re not delivering one package to the building; they’re delivering a hundred. It wouldn’t make sense to send drones for that.

But if you can handle the suburban sprawl with drones, that’s a huge logistics win, because that’s where all the time is spent — not by somebody going to an urban-core building and dropping a hundred packages in the mail room, but by somebody going to a hundred individual houses and dropping off a hundred packages one at a time.

Air density and wind

By michael_cain • Score: 3 Thread
I live along the Colorado Front Range. The Goodyear blimps don’t fly here because of the elevation (reduces lift) and number of wind events with gusts to 60 mph. I will be curious to see if drone delivery is practical.

Tokyo

By hadleyburg • Score: 3 Thread

The other day, I was riding my bike along a street in Tokyo, when I heard a sound. I turned around, and noticed a small delivery robot. It wasn’t Amazon - It was Rakuten, but it was one of those robots which deliver small parcels. It was trundling along the street. But then I noticed that it was approaching a robot colleague. The sound I heard appeared to be some sort of greeting, or request for attention. They stopped at the crossing, facing each other. I briefly recalled that scene in Ex Machina (2014), when we see two robots communicating with each other for the first time.

Diverse hazards

By dsgrntlxmply • Score: 3 Thread
I happen to live across the road from a 115 kV power line, large trees, and the battlefields of inter- and intra- species crow wars. These crows have a very particular set of skills.

Music Publisher Round Hill Files $1 Billion Copyright Infringement Suits Against Suno, Anthropic

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Independent music publisher Round Hill is suing Suno and Anthropic for allegedly using hundreds of copyrighted songs without permission to train their AI systems. The company says potential damages could exceed $1 billion, arguing there is “nothing fair” about building multibillion-dollar AI businesses on copyrighted material while rights holders receive nothing. From The Hollywood Reporter:
Round Hill is a prominent music publisher whose copyrights include the Goo Goo Dolls’ “Iris,” Bonnie Tyler’s “Total Eclipse of the Heart,” the Kinks’ “Lola” and Dio’s “Holy Diver.” The company provided a list of 500 songs that the defendants had infringed upon. Round Hill said in the suits that the company plans to “amend to list potentially ten thousand or more of their musical compositions,” with those damages potentially exceeding $1 billion. “While in other cases for copyright infringement, Defendant has waxed poetic about the necessity of progress and AI’s value to society, there is simply no reason — other than rote expediency — to have that progress come at the cost of copyrights holders,” prominent music attorney Richard Busch, representing Round Hill, wrote in the suits.

Round Hill further argued that the latter "‘expediency’ arguments completely falter” when taking into account Suno and Anthropic’s significant cash valuations they’ve earned while “exploiting illicit copies of copyrighted works, including the Round Hill Works.” “There is simply nothing fair about a company using theft to build for purely commercial purposes a multi-billion dollar business while those from which they steal receive nothing,” Round Hill said.
Suno also faces a lawsuit from Universal Music Group and Sony Music Group.

Any way for both sides to lose?

By pla • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
Can someone explain how this is a copyright issue? And I don’t mean that in the angsty teen “everything should be free” sense, I sincerely don’t get how this involves “copying” whatsoever.

AI companies may be playing fast and loose with IP, but using music for training is at worst a private performance for educational purposes. Or is the recording industry back to the good old days of claiming playing a CD is “copying” it into the air, and then our ears are “copying” into our brains? Because that’s functionally what the likes of Anthropic are doing with it.

To be clear, I’m neither an AI apologist or fanboy. I find it extremely useful at work, while still fearing it will eventually put us all in a zoo for our own protection (and that’s the good outcome).

Re:Standing on the shoulders of giants

By Pinky’s Brain • Score: 4, Informative Thread

Copyright is about reproduction, no distribution necessary.

Fair use is their only defence in the US.

Re:Standing on the shoulders of giants

By gweihir • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Training is analogous to learning.

No. Stop pushing that utterly stupid statement. It has neither factual nor legal merit.

Re: Standing on the shoulders of giants

By drinkypoo • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

We don’t know how the brain works so no it isn’t modeled on the brain.

We don’t know how learning works but the brain does things with what you’ve learned that LLMs can’t do, so it’s surely not working in the same way.

Re:Standing on the shoulders of giants

By Local ID10T • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Copyright is about reproduction, no distribution necessary.

That distinction is a recent invention. Copyright originally came about as a response to the invention of the printing press, and the subsequent publishing (for sale) of books without compensation to the authors. It was expressly about distribution for profit.

Fair use is their only defence in the US.

When we in the US created our copyright laws, we expressly stated the purpose as “to promote the progress of science, art, and useful knowledge.” Building on what was done before was the core of US copyright law. …which is where the idea of “fair use” comes from.

CISA: Medusa Ransomware Hit Over 500 Critical Infrastructure Orgs

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
CISA says the Medusa ransomware operation has breached more than 500 U.S. critical infrastructure organizations since 2021, up from more than 300 reported last year. The group has targeted healthcare, government, defense, manufacturing, IT and financial organizations, evolving into a ransomware-as-a-service operation that recruits initial-access brokers and uses stolen data to pressure victims into paying. BleepingComputer reports:
The three federal agencies recommended that network defenders secure their networks against the ransomware group’s attacks by mitigating security vulnerabilities to protect operating systems, software, and firmware from exploitation attempts. Security teams are also advised to segment networks to block lateral movement after compromise and to block access from untrusted origins to remote services on internal systems.

[…] “Medusa developers typically recruit initial access brokers (IABs) in cybercriminal forums and marketplaces to obtain initial access to potential victims,” the advisory says. “Potential payments between $100 USD and $1 million USD are offered to these affiliates with the opportunity to work exclusively for Medusa.”

This Is What I Expect For My Tax Dollars

By SlashbotAgent • Score: 4, Informative Thread

The three federal agencies recommended that network defenders secure their networks against the ransomware group’s attacks by mitigating security vulnerabilities to protect operating systems, software, and firmware from exploitation attempts.

Patch your shit. That’ll be $1 billion, please.

Moderna, Merck Say mRNA Vaccine Prevents Melanoma From Returning

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot
Moderna and Merck say their personalized mRNA melanoma vaccine significantly reduced both cancer recurrence and spread in a late-stage trial. The treatment could reach patients as soon as next year if regulators approve it. Reuters reports:
Moderna developed the vaccine with Merck and tested it together with immunotherapy drug Keytruda, a widely used treatment for melanoma. […] This is the first positive late-stage trial result for an mRNA cancer vaccine, which trains a patient’s immune system to fight tumors by targeting specific mutations in those cells and the first such study to show that adding a treatment to Keytruda worked better than that therapy alone. Similar approaches are being tested against lung, breast and pancreatic cancers.

[…] The cancer treatment combines Merck’s Keytruda with a made-to-order mRNA vaccine from Moderna that is based on an analysis of mutations found in the patients’ own tumors. The trial enrolled 1,137 high-risk patients with stage IIB-IV melanoma that had been surgically removed. Volunteers were randomized to receive up to nine doses of Keytruda plus the personalized vaccine or Keytruda alone for about one year. The companies said no new safety signals have emerged in the trial. In January, the companies announced results of a mid-stage trial of the treatment showing that it reduced the risk of recurrence or death by 49% after five years.
Karen Knudsen, CEO of the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, said the Moderna results could signal a new era for treating solid-tumor cancers. “The positive hit here leads us into truly this next phase in immunotherapy,” Knudsen said. “This is an auspicious start — this is where things begin.”
Moderna shares more than doubled on the news, adding about $30 billion to its market value.

Sad that a company that actually does something

By ebunga • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

I think it’s sad that once again we have a company that is providing a direct benefit to the world and they’re worth only $30b when you have shitty AI companies that make the world a worse place that are worth many times that.

How this may play out

By JoshuaZ • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
If this works well, similar methods will likely work for other cancers also. Unfortunately, since it requires an individual design for a specific person, it likely is going to not benefit much from economies of scale, so it may remain very expensive. Also, given that it uses mRNA, it is likely that parts of the US right will either refuse to use it or will try to block it. Given RFK Jr. being in the Secretary of Health, what should be a slam dunk may end up becoming an uphill battle. On the bright side, some of the anti-vaxxers seem to be ok with mRNA systems once someone already has a disease.

This is amazing news!

By 93 Escort Wagon • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

… or would be, under any other presidential administration.

Still, the rest of the world can certainly benefit from it.

Re:Sad that a company that actually does something

By quantaman • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

This is why a lot of chronic diseases will NEVER have cures. It’s more profitable to treat than to cure. Treat someone over a lifetime and milk 100k out of them. Treat someone once and present them with a 100k price tag to pay all at once and the consumer or insurance company will balk at the cost.

It’s a fun conspiracy theory, but this is actually just how biology works.

There’s basically four kinds of things that can go wrong with our bodies. Infections, mechanical issues, system errors, and cancer.

Infections we can cure by helping the body to kill off the infection, it’s only some rare stubborn ones like AIDS that are chronic like you describe.

Mechanical issues we can fix with surgery.

System errors? That’s stuff like genetic disorders where our body creates too much of hormone A or doesn’t create the proper form of protein B. The problem is in our DNA and you can’t cure it without rewriting our DNA (which we’re getting to).

And then there’s cancers, which are similar to infections, where we try to kill it (as they’re doing here), though weirdly, some research suggests treating it as a chronic issue might be better for the patients.

In either case, it’s not the fact that pharma is deciding "don’t make a pill to cure it, just find a lifetime treatment!". It’s only in the past few years that we’re reaching the point where we can actually cure things that were traditionally chronic.

Re:How this may play out

By dgatwood • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

I don’t think that’s correct? Possibly I’m misreading this, but it looks like the study involved giving two things, both the Keytruda, and a separate personalized vaccine.

You’re not misreading it. It is individualized. Different cancers express different antigens, and the mRNA vaccine needs to construct something that expresses those same antigens to train the immune system to attack them.

The nice thing about mRNA, is that it is potentially relatively cheap to synthesize mRNA strands and replicate them. It won’t be hundreds of dollars, but it won’t be millions, either. Right now, I think it’s hundreds of thousands per patient, but that will go down over time as they streamline the process of taking a sample of the tumor and determining an mRNA gene sequence that matches said cancer. And economies of scale on the equipment will also probably help.

It may also be the case that it becomes less individualized over time. At some point, we might reach the point where they have a bunch of pre-sequenced antigens that are all ready to go, and someone just keys in a list of antigens, and a piece of software spits out the mRNA sequence. At that point, it is still individualized, but with a much, much more streamlined process for generating it.

Note that I don’t work in this field, so take all of this as the opinion of an educated layperson observer. :-)