An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Independent: Human-level artificial intelligence is close to finally being achieved, according to a lead researcher at Google's DeepMind AI division. Dr Nando de Freitas said "the game is over" in the decades-long quest to realize artificial general intelligence (AGI) after DeepMind unveiled an AI system capable of completing a wide range of complex tasks, from stacking blocks to writing poetry. Described as a "generalist agent," DeepMind's new Gato AI needs to just be scaled up in order to create an AI capable of rivaling human intelligence, Dr de Freitas said.

Responding to an opinion piece written in The Next Web that claimed "humans will never achieve AGI," DeepMind's research director wrote that it was his opinion that such an outcome is an inevitability. "It's all about scale now! The Game is Over!" he wrote on Twitter. "It's all about making these models bigger, safer, compute efficient, faster at sampling, smarter memory, more modalities, innovative data, on/offline... Solving these challenges is what will deliver AGI."

When asked by machine learning researcher Alex Dimikas how far he believed the Gato AI was from passing a real Turing test -- a measure of computer intelligence that requires a human to be unable to distinguish a machine from another human -- Dr de Freitas replied: "Far still." [...] Fielding further questions from AI researchers on Twitter, Dr de Freitas said "safety is of paramount importance" when developing AGI. "It's probably the biggest challenge we face," he wrote. "Everyone should be thinking about it. Lack of enough diversity also worries me a lot." DeepMind describes Gato in a blog post: "The agent, which we refer to as Gato, works as a multi-modal, multi-task, multi-embodiment generalist policy. The same network with the same weights can play Atari, caption images, chat, stack blocks with a real robot arm and much more, deciding based on its context whether to output text, joint torques, button presses, or other tokens.

Electronic Arts and Middle-earth Enterprises "announced on Monday an upcoming free mobile game called The Lord of the Rings: Heroes of Middle-earth," reports CNET: With the role-playing game, Lord of the Rings fans can look forward to experiencing the iconic universe in a whole new way.... The game will feature immersive storytelling with iconic plot lines, turn-based combat and a selection of characters from both The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit to battle the evils of Middle-earth.

"The team is filled with fans of The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit and each day they bring their tremendous passion and talents together to deliver an authentic experience for players," Malachi Boyle, vice president of mobile RPG for Electronic Arts, said in a statement. "The combination of high-fidelity graphics, cinematic animations, and stylized art immerses players in the fantasy of Middle-earth where they'll go head-to-head with their favorite characters."

Red Hat's CEO/president Paul Cormier assessed the last two years in a speech at this week's Red Hat Summit. "Globally we saw nearly every industry go to 100% remote working overnight." Regardless of industry and size, organizations learned to operate virtually and on-demand. Companies needed to deliver goods and services to customers without a set brick-and-mortar footprint. We saw new tech hubs emerge in unlikely places because workers we no longer bound by needing to be based in specific cities. Newly-remote workers realized that they didn't have to be tied to a physical office, and organizations focused on hiring new talent based on skill and not location.

These are not insignificant achievements, and while this way of working was unfamiliar to those who were forced to adapt during the pandemic, to the open source world, it was just another day.

Every open source project is worked on remotely and has been since their inception. Just look at the Linux Foundation, which supports more than 2,300 projects. There were more than 28,000 active contributors to these projects in 2021, adding more than 29 million lines of code each week and with community participants coming from nearly every country around the globe. Most of these contributors will never meet face to face, but they are still able to drive the next generation of open technologies.

Whether we realized it or not, our accomplishments during the pandemic brought us closer to the open source model, and this is why open source innovation is now driving much of the software world. Through this new way of working, we saw new revenue streams, found new ways to become more efficient, and discovered new ways to engage with our customers. As we approach what, hopefully, is the tail end of an incredibly difficult few years, it's time to accelerate. It's time to take the lessons that we learned and applied as we transformed to digital-first and use them to improve our businesses, cultures and global communities.

The term "new normal" is now used like it's pre-determined and static. It isn't. You get to define your new normal. What do you want your business to look like? How do you want to embrace the next generation of IT?

An anonymous reader quotes a report from ZDNet: Securing the open-source software supply chain is a huge deal. Last year, the Biden administration issued an executive order to improve software supply chain security. This came after the Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack shut down gas and oil deliveries throughout the southeast and the SolarWinds software supply chain attack. Securing software became a top priority. In response, The Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) and Linux Foundation rose to this security challenge. Now, they're calling for $150 million in funding over two years to fix ten major open-source security problems.

The government will not be paying the freight for these changes. $30 million has already been pledged by Amazon, Ericsson, Google, Intel, Microsoft, and VMWare. More is already on the way. Amazon Web Services (AWS) has already pledged an additional $10 million. At the White House press conference, OpenSSF general manager Brian Behlendorf said, "I want to be clear: We're not here to fundraise from the government. We did not anticipate needing to go directly to the government to get funding for anyone to be successful."

Here are the ten goals the open-source industry is committed to meeting:

1. Security Education: Deliver baseline secure software development education and certification to all.
2. Risk Assessment: Establish a public, vendor-neutral, objective-metrics-based risk assessment dashboard for the top 10,000 (or more) OSS components.
3. Digital Signatures: Accelerate the adoption of digital signatures on software releases.
4. Memory Safety: Eliminate root causes of many vulnerabilities through the replacement of non-memory-safe languages.
5. Incident Response: Establish the OpenSSF Open Source Security Incident Response Team, security experts who can step in to assist open source projects during critical times when responding to a vulnerability.
6. Better Scanning: Accelerate the discovery of new vulnerabilities by maintainers and experts through advanced security tools and expert guidance.
7. Code Audits: Conduct third-party code reviews (and any necessary remediation work) of up to 200 of the most-critical OSS components once per year.
8. Data Sharing: Coordinate industry-wide data sharing to improve the research that helps determine the most critical OSS components.
9. Software Bill of Materials (SBOMs): Everywhere Improve SBOM tooling and training to drive adoption.
10. Improved Supply Chains: Enhance the 10 most critical open-source software build systems, package managers, and distribution systems with better supply chain security tools and best practices.

Twitter is shaking up its top leadership. The first move came as consumer product leader Kayvon Beykpour announced on Twitter that current CEO Parag Agrawal "asked me to leave after letting me know that he wants to take the team in a different direction." From a report: Bruce Falck, the general manager of revenue and head of product for its business side, confirmed in a (now deleted) tweet that he was also fired by Agrawal. Now Jay Sullivan, who we spoke to in March about Twitter's plans to add 100 million daily users, will take over as both the head of product and interim head of revenue. These moves are occurring at the same time Elon Musk moves forward with his $44 billion purchase of Twitter, although he hasn't taken ownership of the company yet. In a memo to employees obtained by The Verge, Agrawal wrote, "At the beginning of the pandemic in 2020, the decision was made to invest aggressively to deliver big growth in audience and revenue, and as a company we did not hit intermediate milestones that enable confidence in these goals."

According to figures from trade group IAB and PwC, the podcast advertising business in the United States is expected to grow to an estimated $4.2 billion in 2024. Variety reports: The sector hit $1.45 billion in 2021, representing 72% annual growth, according to the report. In 2021, U.S. podcast advertising revenue grew twice as fast as the total internet advertising market, which was up 35% last year, according to the 2021 PwC/IAB Internet Advertising Revenue Report. Still, U.S. podcast advertising revenue is poised to continue double-digit growth, growing more than 100% over the next two years to an estimated $4.2 billion in 2024, per the report.

According to the latest IAB/PwC podcast report, three key factors are driving podcast ad revenue growth: the ongoing increase in listeners and content; increased use of automated ad tech, as ad revenue served via dynamic ad insertion (DAI) has almost doubled in two years to take 84% share in 2021 (versus ads embedded in podcast audio); and growth of ad spending in categories that historically had lower spend volumes like sports and true crime. "Everything right now is aligned to drive growth," said Chris Bruderle, IAB's VP of research and insights. "There's more engaging and diverse podcast content than ever, and that is translating into larger, more attractive audiences. But more than anything, podcasting has proven that it can deliver beyond direct-to-consumer advertising to support brand-building and drive business outcomes."

Matter is a new open-source, interoperability smart home standard that's been created by over 200 companies to allow all of your devices to communicate with each other locally, without the need for a cloud. The Verge sat down with Michele Turner, the senior director of Google Smart Home Ecosystem, to hear how the company plans to implement Matter when it finally arrives later this year. Here's an excerpt from the interview: Matter has evolved substantially from that first meeting, and there have been delays and setbacks. Do you still feel confident in that original vision, that it's being carried through and is on track to achieve what you set out to do at that Woodside dinner three years ago?

Michele Turner: I do. And, in fact, I think it's exceeding our original vision in some ways. It's been incredibly heartening to see the enthusiasm and the adoption and the number of companies that have joined the CSA and the Matter workgroup. We're at 200 companies -- it's amazing.

How is Matter going to change the smart home experience for the Google Home user?

Michele Turner: "For the Google Home user, I think the bigger areas of Matter where they'll see change first is in getting your devices set up. I just set up some lights at my mother-in-law's house, and it still took me 45 minutes to set up four lights. It shouldn't have been so hard. The first thing is going to be that significantly simpler setup. The second piece is the speed and the reliability of the local network. This has been a big pain point for users. My team spent a lot of time working with partners on improving reliability and reducing latency. Because in our mind, if it's not as fast as a light switch, what's the point? We believe Matter's going to drive down those latency numbers significantly and improve the overall reliability of devices in the home. Then, I think interoperability for users is going to be a big piece. As much as we love having everybody using the Google Assistant, the reality is people have iPhones and Android phones in their homes. Some of them want to use HomeKit. We just don't have that kind of compatibility today for users. And I think that's hard. Being able to have multi-admin really work well between these ecosystems is going to be a big benefit for users.

Then, our long-term goal is to build out what we call the proactive home. Instead of having a whole bunch of connected devices, how do we build that truly proactive home that works for the benefit of users? ... Matter is going to be absolutely foundational to that. It's the architecture behind the proactive home. If we don't have a home that's reliable, if we don't have things running locally, if it doesn't work consistently, we cannot deliver on that promise. The proactive home is really that intelligence layer, whether it's being able to predict that I'm going upstairs, it's 10 at night, and I always go into my bedroom at that time, so turn on the lights for me; or, I'm watching TV, it's 9:30PM, the kids are in bed, and I get a notification on my phone that the lights just went on in the kid's bedroom. Is somebody sick? Are they watching YouTube? Being able to do anomaly detection. Now, Matter doesn't do that. But it's foundational to be able to enable the rest of that. Because if that core foundation of the home -- of the smart home -- isn't solid, the rest of it just doesn't work."

As you've said, Matter is complicated. And there's a lot of expectation that's been placed on its shoulders. What would you say is the biggest misconception right now with Matter?

Michele Turner: "I think the biggest misconception is that Matter is going to solve every problem in IoT. It doesn't have a native intelligence layer that's going to automatically give you the proactive home. In my mind, it's solving three very foundational things. It's solving making setup easier for the majority of the devices that people put in their homes. Not the majority of device types, necessarily, but the majority of devices people put in their homes. It's making the IoT more reliable and faster. And then it's going to solve this multi-admin problem. It's going to provide that device interconnectivity that we don't have today that is really great for users. While it's going to be a lot more than that, it's not today. But it's solving what we believe are really the core problems that have challenged adoption by mainstream users in the past." The report notes that all of Google's existing Nest branded smart speakers and displays will be upgraded to support Matter, "allowing you to use Google's voice assistant to control any Matter-enabled device in your home, no matter who made it."

Intel announced seven new mobile processors for the 12th Gen Intel Core mobile family at its Intel Vision event today. From a report: The 12th Gen Intel Core HX processors use desktop-caliber silicon in a mobile package to deliver high levels of performance for professional workflows like CAD, animation and visual effects. The HX processors are unlocked out of the box and available in Core i5, Core i7 and Core i9 models. The 12th Gen Intel Core HX processors enable mobile workstation platforms by providing 65% more performance in multithreaded workloads with more cores, more memory and more I/O while utilizing Intel Thread Director technology to leverage high-power Performance-cores and Efficient-cores so pros can create, program, render and work with maximum efficiency in the office, at home or on the go. In addition to being a commercial workhorse, 12th Gen Intel Core HX processors provide a gaming powerhouse platform that will give enthusiast gamers higher frame rates. The processors have up to 16 cores (8 Performance-cores and 8 Efficient-cores) and 24 threads running at a processor base power of 55 watts. More than 10 workstation and gaming designs powered by 12th Gen Intel Core HX processors are expected to be launched by major computer makers this year, including systems from Dell, HP, Lenovo and others.

The start-up has had a meteoric rise, thanks to its charismatic co-founder, Ryan Breslow. But he sometimes stretched the truth to get there. From a report: In just over three years, Bolt has soared in valuation to $11 billion from $250 million, making it a Valley success story. But Bolt's meteoric rise has been fueled at least in part by a pattern of stretching the truth, according to interviews with over 50 former and current employees, clients, investors and others with whom Bolt discussed partnerships and fund-raising, as well as a lawsuit filed recently by a big customer. Most of them sought anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak publicly. In a rush to show growth, Bolt often overstated its technological capability and misrepresented the number of merchants using its service, some of the people said. In presentations to investors, it included the names of customers before verifying whether those merchants were able to use its technology. For a time, a fraud detection product it was pitching to merchants was more dependent on manual review than Mr. Breslow implied, according to a former employee. Mr. Breslow, 27, abruptly stepped down as chief executive in January, blindsiding some investors who, just weeks earlier, had put money into Bolt at an $11 billion valuation.

Now, Bolt's troubles are mounting. Some investors are looking to sell their stakes, while customers are questioning Bolt's technology. One of Bolt's biggest customers, Authentic Brands Group, which owns and licenses brands like Brooks Brothers, is suing the company for having "utterly failed to deliver on the technological capabilities that it held itself out as possessing." At an all-hands staff meeting last month, Bolt -- which has around 800 employees -- announced a three-month hiring freeze. Although it has cash to keep operating for a while, Bolt has talked to prospective investors about raising more funds, according to people with knowledge of the outreach. The implosion last month of Fast, a direct competitor, has only heightened investor scrutiny.

[...] The race to add merchants often meant that Bolt's sales team signed deals without always verifying that the merchant's payments technology would be able to integrate with Bolt. Ms. Neve said it was standard industry practice to include both prospective clients and those who had signed, even if they weren't using the service. Guess, for instance, was listed on Bolt's website as a "won" customer but never went live and was later removed, she said. An internal document viewed by The Times laid out what to do if a merchant asked whether Bolt's technology could integrate with its e-commerce platform. "If it's a big merchant, you probably want to act like our integration is already underway, not lie about it being done, but act as if it's close," the document said. "If it's a smaller merchant, gauge how much we want them vs how excited they are. If we want them a lot and they're not absolutely ecstatic, then act as if we'll build it." Ms. Neve said the company couldn't locate the document, but that it does not reflect "the practices or policies of Bolt." Bolt's business tactics raised questions from at least one big potential investor. As part of its due diligence, Tiger Global, a fund known for investing in hundreds of young start-ups, had talked to clients that Bolt said it had signed on. Based on those conversations, Tiger executives weren't so sure those merchants would use Bolt beyond a trial, according to two people involved in the conversations. To Tiger, Bolt's revenue projections seemed overly bullish and exaggerated, the people said. Tiger passed.

The Federal Trade Commission today said it "has moved to stop Internet service provider Frontier Communications from lying to consumers and charging them for high-speed Internet speeds it fails to deliver." From a report: Frontier was sued by the FTC in May 2021, and on Thursday, it agreed to a settlement with the FTC and district attorneys in Los Angeles County and Riverside County who represented the people of California. Frontier must pay $8.5 million to California "for investigation and litigation costs" and another $250,000 that will be distributed to Frontier customers who were harmed by Frontier's alleged actions. Frontier must also make changes, such as letting customers cancel service at no charge and "discount[ing] the bills of California customers who have not been notified that they are receiving DSL service that is much slower than the highest advertised speed," the FTC said.

technology_dude shares a report from Ars Technica: As part of its Artemis program to return humans to the Moon this decade, NASA has a minimum requirement that its "human landing system" must be able to deliver 865 kg to the lunar surface. This is based on the mass of two crew members and their equipment needed for a short stay. However, in selecting SpaceX's Starship vehicle to serve as its human lander, NASA has chosen a system with a lot more capability. Starship will, in fact, be able to deliver 100 metric tons to the surface of the Moon -- more than 100 times NASA's baseline goal.

"Starship can land 100 tons on the lunar surface," said Aarti Matthews, Starship Human Landing System program manager for SpaceX. "And it's really hard to think about what that means in a tangible way. One hundred tons is four fire trucks. It's 100 Moon rovers. My favorite way to explain this to my kids is that it's the weight of more than 11 elephants." Matthews made her comments last week at the ASCENDxTexas space conference in Houston. She was responding to a question from an audience member, Jeff Michel, an engineer at Johnson Space Center. [...] "NASA specified a high-level need, but we, industry, are taking away one of your biggest constraints that you have in designing your payloads and your systems," she said. "It's significantly higher mass. It's essentially infinite volume for the purposes of this conversation. And the cost is an order of magnitude lower. I think that our NASA community, our payload community, should really think about this new capability that's coming online."

"We all need to be thinking bigger and better and really inspirationally about what we can do," Matthews said. "Anyone who has worked on hardware design for space application knows you're fighting for kilograms, and sometimes you're fighting for grams, and that takes up so much time and energy. It really limits ultimately what your system can do. That's gone away entirely." [...] "If you, as an engineer, are developing an in-situ resource utilization system, what does your system look like when you have no mass constraint?" she asked. "What about when you have no volume constraint? That would be the exciting thing that I would like to hear from NASA engineers, what they can do with this capability." "The engineer says NASA is not thinking big enough," adds Slashdot reader technology_dude. "I think it's pretty obvious what the payload should be, a nuclear powered boring machine. With flamethrower weapons just in case! Leave a comment for my resume. Maybe I'll call."

Investor Warren Buffett addressed the annual shareholder meeting today for his multinational holding company Berkshire Hathaway — and said he still wouldn't buy bitcoin. But this time he gave a detailed explanation why. CNBC reports: "Whether it goes up or down in the next year, or five or 10 years, I don't know. But the one thing I'm pretty sure of is that it doesn't produce anything," Buffett said.... "If you said... for a 1% interest in all the farmland in the United States, pay our group $25 billion, I'll write you a check this afternoon," Buffett said. "[For] $25 billion I now own 1% of the farmland... Now if you told me you own all of the bitcoin in the world and you offered it to me for $25 I wouldn't take it because what would I do with it? I'd have to sell it back to you one way or another. It isn't going to do anything... The farms are going to produce food...."

"Assets, to have value, have to deliver something to somebody. And there's only one currency that's accepted. You can come up with all kinds of things — we can put up Berkshire coins... but in the end, this is money," he said, holding up a $20 bill. "And there's no reason in the world why the United States government... is going to let Berkshire money replace theirs."
Later Saturday Berkshire Hathaway's vice chairman Charlie Munger had an even harsher appraisal of bitcoin. "In my life, I try and avoid things that are stupid and evil and make me look bad in comparison to somebody else — and bitcoin does all three," Munger said.

"In the first place, it's stupid because it's still likely to go to zero. It's evil because it undermines the Federal Reserve System... and third, it makes us look foolish compared to the Communist leader in China. He was smart enough to ban bitcoin in China."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The US Postal Service is facing lawsuits from 16 states and several environmental groups challenging its decision to buy tens of thousands of gasoline-powered delivery vehicles instead of electric vehicles. As previously reported, the Environmental Protection Agency says the gas-powered trucks being ordered by the USPS "are expected to achieve only 8.6 miles per gallon (mpg), barely improving over the decades-old long-life vehicles that achieve 8.2 mpg." The USPS countered that the vehicles get 14.7 mpg when air conditioning isn't being used and that the trucks' size will make it possible to deliver the same amount of mail in fewer trips. The USPS plan is to buy 50,000 to 165,000 vehicles over 10 years. Of those, at least 10 percent are slated to be battery-electric vehicles (BEV). [...]

A lawsuit filed by California and 15 other states on Thursday said the USPS failed "to follow a process mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)," continuing: "Instead, the Postal Service first chose a manufacturer with minimal experience in producing electric vehicles, signed a contract, and made a substantial down payment for new vehicles. Only then did the Postal Service publish a cursory environmental review to justify the decision to replace 90 percent of its delivery fleet with fossil-fuel-powered, internal combustion engine vehicles, despite other available, environmentally preferable alternatives. In doing so, the Postal Service failed to comply with even the most basic requirements of NEPA."

The lawsuit seeks an injunction forcing the USPS to stop the vehicle purchases "until it has complied with NEPA." It was filed against the USPS and Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who was appointed by the USPS Board of Governors in 2020 under then-President Donald Trump. All 16 states involved in the lawsuit have Democratic attorneys general. They allege that the USPS "violated well-established legal precedent prohibiting 'an irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources' before completing the NEPA process by signing contracts with a defense company (Oshkosh Defense, LLC) to procure vehicles six months before even releasing its draft environmental review and a year prior to issuing the Final Environmental Impact Statement ('Final EIS') and Record of Decision." The states also claim the USPS failed to consider and evaluate reasonable alternatives. "Specifically, the Postal Service did not properly evaluate several environmental impacts of its action, including air quality, environmental justice, and climate harms, by simply assuming that any upgrade to its vehicle fleet would have positive impacts on the environment," the complaint said. States also alleged the USPS "failed to ensure the scientific integrity of its analysis by relying on unfounded assumptions regarding the costs and performance of electric vehicles, infrastructure, and gas prices, and refusing to identify the source of the data relied upon in the Final EIS." "The Postal Service conducted a robust and thorough review and fully complied with all of our obligations under NEPA," a USPS spokesperson told Ars.

The statement continues: "The Postal Service is fully committed to the inclusion of electric vehicles as a significant part of our delivery fleet even though the investment will cost more than an internal combustion engine vehicle. That said, as we have stated repeatedly, we must make fiscally prudent decisions in the needed introduction of a new vehicle fleet. We will continue to look for opportunities to increase the electrification of our delivery fleet in a responsible manner, consistent with our operating strategy, the deployment of appropriate infrastructure, and our financial condition, which we expect to continue to improve as we pursue our plan."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Phys.Org: Don't be fooled by the name. While 3D printers do print tangible objects (and quite well), how they do the job doesn't actually happen in 3D, but rather in regular old 2D. Working to change that is a group of former and current researchers from the Rowland Institute at Harvard. [...] The researchers present a method to help the printers live up to their names and deliver a "true" 3D form of printing. In a new paper in Nature, they describe a technique of volumetric 3D printing that goes beyond the bottom-up, layered approach. The process eliminates the need for support structures because the resin it creates is self-supporting.

The key component in their novel design is turning red light into blue light by adding what's known as an upconversion process to the resin, the light reactive liquid used in 3D printers that hardens into plastic. In 3D printing, resin hardens in a flat and straight line along the path of the light. Here, the researchers use nano capsules to add chemicals so that it only reacts to a certain kind of light -- a blue light at the focal point of the laser that's created by the upconversion process. This beam is scanned in three dimensions, so it prints that way without needing to be layered onto something. The resulting resin has a greater viscosity than in the traditional method, so it can stand support-free once it's printed.

"We designed the resin, we designed the system so that the red light does nothing," Congreve said. "But that little dot of blue light triggers a chemical reaction that makes the resin harden and turn into plastic. Basically, what that means is you have this laser passing all the way through the system and only at that little blue do you get the polymerization, [only there] do you get the printing happening. We just scan that blue dot around in three dimensions and anywhere that blue dot hits it polymerizes and you get your 3D printing." The researchers used their printer to produce a 3D Harvard logo, Stanford logo, and a small boat, a standard yet difficult test for 3D printers because of the boat's small size and fine details like overhanging portholes and open cabin spaces.

Bolt, the payments startup known for its founder's inflammatory Twitter threads claiming Silicon Valley is run by "mob bosses," is being sued by its most prominent customer. From a report: The complaint by Authentic Brands Group alleges that Bolt not only failed to deliver promised technology but that during Bolt's integration with Forever 21, the clothier lost out on more than $150 million in online sales. The complaint also states that Bolt raised funding at increasingly high valuations by "consistently overstating" the nature of its integration with ABG's brands to suggest it had more customers than it did and to convince investors to bankroll additional growth for the startup. Because Bolt's business relies on having a large network of consumers, the allegations create major new uncertainty for the controversial payments startup, which investors most recently valued at $11 billion. In a filing, Bolt responded to the complaint saying that ABG's claims are without merit, and are "a transparent attempt" to renegotiate the terms of the companies' agreements.

Sam Bankman-Fried, chief executive and founder of Bahama-based crypto-exchange FTX and one of the most influential people in crypto, offered his insights into yield farming, projects that deliver tokens to buyers for staking. An excerpt from the podcast: Bloomberg's Levine: Can you give me an intuitive understanding of farming? I mean, like to me, farming is like you sell some structured puts and collect premium, but perhaps there's a more sophisticated understanding than that.

Sam Bankman-Fried: Let me give you sort of like a really toy model of it, which I actually think has a surprising amount of legitimacy for what farming could mean. You know, where do you start? You start with a company that builds a box and in practice this box, they probably dress it up to look like a life-changing, you know, world-altering protocol that's gonna replace all the big banks in 38 days or whatever. Maybe for now actually ignore what it does or pretend it does literally nothing. It's just a box. So what this protocol is, it's called 'Protocol X,' it's a box, and you take a token. You can take ethereum, you can put it in the box and you take it out of the box. Alright so, you put it into the box and you get like, you know, an IOU for having put it in the box and then you can redeem that IOU back out for the token.

So far what we've described is the world's dumbest ETF or ADR or something like that. It doesn't do anything but let you put things in it if you so choose. And then this protocol issues a token, we'll call it whatever, 'X token.' And X token promises that anything cool that happens because of this box is going to ultimately be usable by, you know, governance vote of holders of the X tokens. They can vote on what to do with any proceeds or other cool things that happen from this box. And of course, so far, we haven't exactly given a compelling reason for why there ever would be any proceeds from this box, but I don't know, you know, maybe there will be, so that's sort of where you start.

And then you say, alright, well, you've got this box and you've got X token and the box protocol declares, or maybe votes by on-chain governance, or, you know, something like that, that what they're gonna do is they are going to take half of all the X tokens that were re-minted. Maybe two thirds will, two thirds will offer X tokens, and they're going to give them away for free to whoever uses the box. So anyone who goes, takes some money, puts in the box, each day they're gonna airdrop, you know, 1% of the X token pro rata amongst everyone who's put money in the box. That's for now, what X token does, it gets given away to the box people. And now what happens? Well, X token has some market cap, right? It's probably not zero. Let say it's, you know, a $20 million market.

Levine: Wait, wait, wait, from like first principles, it should be zero, but okay.

SBF: Uh, sure. Okay. Completely reasonable comments. [...] Describe it this way, you might think, for instance, that in like five minutes with an internet connection, you could create such a box and such a token, and that it should reflect like, you know, it should be worth like $180 or something market cap for like that, you know, that effort that you put into it. In the world that we're in, if you do this, everyone's gonna be like, 'Ooh, box token. Maybe it's cool. If you buy in box token,' you know, that's gonna appear on Twitter and it'll have a $20 million market cap. And of course, one thing that you could do is you could like make the float very low and whatever, you know, maybe there haven't been $20 million dollars that have flowed into it yet. Maybe that's sort of like, is it, you know, mark to market fully diluted valuation or something, but I acknowledge that it's not totally clear that this thing should have market cap, but empirically I claim it would have market cap.

On April 15th Americans filed their taxes with the Internal Revenue Service (or IRS). But on the same day ProPublica was reporting a difference between "the rich and the rest of us" — that their wealth just isn't easily defined: For one, wages make up only a small part of their earnings. And they have broad latitude in how they account for their businesses and investments. Their incomes aren't defined by a tax form. Instead, they represent the triumph of careful planning by skilled professionals who strive to deliver the most-advantageous-yet-still-plausible answers to their clients. For them, a tax return is an opening bid to the IRS. It's a kind of theory....

We counted at least 16 other billionaires (along with hundreds of other ultrawealthy people, including hedge fund managers and former CEOs) among the stimulus check recipients. This is just how our system works. It's why, in 2011, Jeff Bezos, then worth $18 billion, qualified for $4,000 in refundable child tax credits. (Bezos didn't respond to our questions.) A recent study by the Brookings Institution set out with a simple aim: to compare what owners of privately held businesses say they earn with the income that appears on the owners' tax returns. The findings were stark: "More than half of economic income generated by closely held businesses does not appear on tax returns and that ratio has declined significantly over the past 25 years."

That doesn't mean business owners are illegally hiding income from the IRS, though it's certainly a possible contributor. There are plenty of ways to make income vanish legally. Tax perks like depreciation allow owners to create tax losses even as they expand their businesses... "Losses" from one business can also be used to wipe out income from another. Sometimes spilling red ink can be lots of fun: For billionaires, owning sports teams and thoroughbred racehorses are exciting loss-makers. Congress larded the tax code with these sorts of provisions on the logic that what's good for businesses is good for the economy. Often, the evidence for this broader effect is thin or nonexistent, but you can be sure all this is great for business owners. The Brookings study found that households worth $10 million or more benefited the most from being able to make income disappear....

In the tax system we have, billionaires who'd really rather not pay income taxes can usually find a way not to. They can bank their accumulating gains tax-free and deploy tax losses to wipe out whatever taxable income they might have. They can even look forward to a few thousand dollars here and there from the government to help them raise their kids or get through a national emergency.
This system also means it's much harder to catch underreported income on the tax returns of the wealthy, the article points out. And with so many legal deductions, it's also hard to prove the low incomes really exceed what the law allows. Even then, the wealthy can still hire an army of the best tax lawyers to make their case in court.

And now thousands of auditors have left the agency — and have not been replaced. The end result? "Audits of the wealthy have plummeted.

"Business owners have still more reason to be bold...."

Amazon will let other online merchants piggyback on its Prime service to deliver goods quickly to their customers. From a report: The company on Thursday launched a new service, Buy with Prime, that lets third-party merchants use Amazon's vast shipping and logistics network to fulfill orders on their own sites, while also appealing to Amazon's 200 million-plus Prime customers. These web sites will be able to put the Prime badge on their websites next to items that are eligible for free two-day or next-day delivery. Prime members will use the payment and shipping information stored on their Amazon account to place an order. Buy with Prime won't be free for sellers, and pricing will vary depending on payment processing, fulfillment, storage and other fees. To start, the service will only be available by invitation to sellers who use Fulfillment by Amazon, or FBA. With that service, merchants pay to have their inventory stored in Amazon's warehouses and to make use of the company's supply chain and shipping operations. Eventually, it will be extended to other merchants, including those not selling on Amazon.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Polygon: The parent company of Dungeons & Dragons developer Wizards of the Coast, Hasbro, announced Wednesday it is acquiring D&D Beyond, one of the franchise's most popular officially licensed digital toolsets and online storefronts. Wizards said on its official website it has "no plans to stop supporting D&D Beyond," and all purchases made by consumers will be honored going forward.

D&D Beyond is the creation of Curse, and launched in 2017. The platform is, at its core, a web application and mobile app that provides players and Dungeon Masters (DMs) with the tools they need to play D&D in person or online. Features include a character builder, a character sheet, and a digital dice-rolling function. For DMs, it allows users to purchase official campaign books and other materials digitally for use inside the app. Prices for D&D books are traditionally more or less the same on D&D Beyond as they are on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and at your local game store. D&D Beyond was purchased by Fandom in 2018 and, according to Hasbro, the relationship has been very lucrative since that time.

"Over the last three years, the royalty paid to Hasbro by D&D Beyond has represented a significant contribution to the fastest growing source of revenue for Dungeons & Dragons," Hasbro said. That is undoubtedly true, as financial disclosures show that Wizards -- and its attached digital properties, including Magic: The Gathering Arena -- earned more than $1 billion for the first time in 2021. [...] Wizards' new president, Cynthia Williams, has bigger goals in mind. "The strategic acquisition of D&D Beyond will deliver a direct relationship with fans, providing valuable, data-driven insights to unlock opportunities for growth in new product development, live services and tools, and regional expansions," Williams said in a news release. "As part of Wizards, the brand's leadership will soon be able to drive a unified, player-centric vision of the world's greatest role-playing game on all platforms."

Mark Zuckerberg has a grandiose vision for the metaverse, and he hopes that you'll one day see the same thing, too -- quite literally, through a pair of augmented reality glasses. The Verge reports: Still, Zuckerberg has ambitious goals for when his high-tech glasses will be a reality. Employees are racing to deliver the first generation by 2024 and are already working on a lighter, more advanced design for 2026, followed by a third version in 2028.ââ The details, which together give the first comprehensive look at Meta's AR hardware ambitions, were shared with The Verge by people familiar with the roadmap who weren't authorized to speak publicly. A spokesperson for Meta declined to comment for this story.

If the AR glasses and the other futuristic hardware Meta is building eventually catch on, they could cast the company, and by extension Zuckerberg, in a new light. "Zuck's ego is intertwined with [the glasses]," a former employee who worked on the project tells me. "He wants it to be an iPhone moment." Meta's CEO also sees the AR glasses, dubbed Project Nazare, as a way to get out from under the thumb of Apple and Google, which together dictate the terms that apps like Facebook have to abide by on mobile phones. The first version of Nazare is designed to work independently from a mobile phone with the assistance of a wireless, phone-shaped device that offloads parts of the computing required for the glasses to operate. A marquee feature will be the ability to communicate and interact with holograms of other people through the glasses, which Zuckerberg believes will, over time, provide people with a more immersive, compelling experience than the video calling that exists today.