An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Guardian: When Google and Amazon negotiated a major $1.2 billion cloud-computing deal in 2021, their customer -- the Israeli government -- had an unusual demand: agree to use a secret code as part of an arrangement that would become known as the "winking mechanism." The demand, which would require Google and Amazon to effectively sidestep legal obligations in countries around the world, was born out of Israel's concerns that data it moves into the global corporations' cloud platforms could end up in the hands of foreign law enforcement authorities.

Like other big tech companies, Google and Amazon's cloud businesses routinely comply with requests from police, prosecutors and security services to hand over customer data to assist investigations. This process is often cloaked in secrecy. The companies are frequently gagged from alerting the affected customer their information has been turned over. This is either because the law enforcement agency has the power to demand this or a court has ordered them to stay silent. For Israel, losing control of its data to authorities overseas was a significant concern. So to deal with the threat, officials created a secret warning system: the companies must send signals hidden in payments to the Israeli government, tipping it off when it has disclosed Israeli data to foreign courts or investigators.

To clinch the lucrative contract, Google and Amazon agreed to the so-called winking mechanism, according to leaked documents seen by the Guardian, as part of a joint investigation with Israeli-Palestinian publication +972 Magazine and Hebrew-language outlet Local Call. Based on the documents and descriptions of the contract by Israeli officials, the investigation reveals how the companies bowed to a series of stringent and unorthodox "controls" contained within the 2021 deal, known as Project Nimbus. Both Google and Amazon's cloud businesses have denied evading any legal obligations.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Politico: Sen. Tom Cotton wasn't fast enough in 2022 to block Senate passage of legislation that would make daylight saving time permanent. Three years later, he wasn't about to repeat that same mistake. The Arkansas Republican was on hand Tuesday afternoon to thwart a bipartisan effort on the chamber floor to pass a bill that would put an end to changing the clocks twice a year, including this coming Sunday. [...] A cross-party coalition of lawmakers has been trying for years to make daylight saving time the default, which would result in more daylight in the evening hours with less in the morning, plus bring to a halt to biannual clock adjustments.

President Donald Trump endorsed the concept this spring, calling the changing of the clocks "a big inconvenience and, for our government, A VERY COSTLY EVENT!!!" His comments coincided with a hearing, then a markup, of Scott's legislation in the Senate Commerce Committee. It set off an intense lobbying battle in turn, pitting the golf and retail industries -- which are advocating for permanent daylight saving time -- against the likes of sleep doctors and Christian radio broadcasters -- who prefer standard time. "If permanent Daylight Savings Time becomes the law of the land, it will again make winter a dark and dismal time for millions of Americans," said Cotton in his objection to a request by Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) to advance the bill by unanimous consent. "For many Arkansans, permanent daylight savings time would mean the sun wouldn't rise until after 8:00 or even 8:30am during the dead of winter," Cotton continued. "The darkness of permanent savings time would be especially harmful for school children and working Americans."

Samsung has officially launched the Galaxy XR, the first Android headset powered by Google's new Android XR platform. Priced at $1,800 without controllers, the device features dual 4.3K Micro-OLED displays, a Snapdragon XR2+ Gen 2 chip, extensive camera tracking, and deep Gemini AI integration. Ars Technica reports: Galaxy XR is a fully enclosed headset with passthrough video. It looks similar to the Apple Vision Pro, right down to the battery pack at the end of a cable. It packs solid hardware, including 16GB of RAM, 256GB of storage, and a Snapdragon XR2+ Gen 2 processor. That's a slightly newer version of the chip powering Meta's Quest 3 headset, featuring six CPU cores and an Adreno GPU that supports up to dual 4.3K displays. The new headset has a pair of 3,552 x 3,840 Micro-OLED displays with a 109-degree field of view. That's marginally more pixels than the Vision Pro and almost three times as many as the Quest 3. The displays can refresh at up to 90Hz, but the default is 72Hz to save power.

Like other XR (extended reality) devices, the Galaxy XR is covered with cameras. There are two 6.5 MP stereoscopic cameras that stream your surroundings to the high-quality screens, allowing the software to add virtual elements on top. There are six more outward-facing cameras for headset positioning and hand tracking. Four more cameras are on the inside for eye-tracking, and they can scan your iris for secure unlocking and password fill (in select apps). Samsung says the Galaxy XR has enough juice for two hours of general use or two and a half hours of video. That's not terribly long, but you may not want to wear the 545 grams (1.2 pounds) headset for even two hours. That's even a little heavier than the Quest 3, which has an integrated battery. However, both pale in comparison to the 800 g (1.7 pounds) second-generation Vision Pro.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: AI content has proliferated across the Internet over the past few years, but those early confabulations with mutated hands have evolved into synthetic images and videos that can be hard to differentiate from reality. Having helped to create this problem, Google has some responsibility to keep AI video in check on YouTube. To that end, the company has started rolling out its promised likeness detection system for creators. [...] The likeness detection tool, which is similar to the site's copyright detection system, has now expanded beyond the initial small group of testers. YouTube says the first batch of eligible creators have been notified that they can use likeness detection, but interested parties will need to hand Google even more personal information to get protection from AI fakes.

Currently, likeness detection is a beta feature in limited testing, so not all creators will see it as an option in YouTube Studio. When it does appear, it will be tucked into the existing "Content detection" menu. In YouTube's demo video, the setup flow appears to assume the channel has only a single host whose likeness needs protection. That person must verify their identity, which requires a photo of a government ID and a video of their face. It's unclear why YouTube needs this data in addition to the videos people have already posted with their oh-so stealable faces, but rules are rules.

After signing up, YouTube will flag videos from other channels that appear to have the user's face. YouTube's algorithm can't know for sure what is and is not an AI video. So some of the face match results may be false positives from channels that have used a short clip under fair use guidelines. If creators do spot an AI fake, they can add some details and submit a report in a few minutes. If the video includes content copied from the creator's channel that does not adhere to fair use guidelines, YouTube suggests also submitting a copyright removal request. However, just because a person's likeness appears in an AI video does not necessarily mean YouTube will remove it.

On Cloudflare's blog, a senior research engineer shares a plan for "improving the trustworthiness of JavaScript on the web."

"It is as true today as it was in 2011 that Javascript cryptography is Considered Harmful." The main problem is code distribution. Consider an end-to-end-encrypted messaging web application. The application generates cryptographic keys in the client's browser that lets users view and send end-to-end encrypted messages to each other. If the application is compromised, what would stop the malicious actor from simply modifying their Javascript to exfiltrate messages? It is interesting to note that smartphone apps don't have this issue. This is because app stores do a lot of heavy lifting to provide security for the app ecosystem. Specifically, they provide integrity, ensuring that apps being delivered are not tampered with, consistency, ensuring all users get the same app, and transparency, ensuring that the record of versions of an app is truthful and publicly visible.

It would be nice if we could get these properties for our end-to-end encrypted web application, and the web as a whole, without requiring a single central authority like an app store. Further, such a system would benefit all in-browser uses of cryptography, not just end-to-end-encrypted apps. For example, many web-based confidential LLMs, cryptocurrency wallets, and voting systems use in-browser Javascript cryptography for the last step of their verification chains. In this post, we will provide an early look at such a system, called Web Application Integrity, Consistency, and Transparency (WAICT) that we have helped author. WAICT is a W3C-backed effort among browser vendors, cloud providers, and encrypted communication developers to bring stronger security guarantees to the entire web... We hope to build even wider consensus on the solution design in the near future....

We would like to have a way of enforcing integrity on an entire site, i.e., every asset under a domain. For this, WAICT defines an integrity manifest, a configuration file that websites can provide to clients. One important item in the manifest is the asset hashes dictionary, mapping a hash belonging to an asset that the browser might load from that domain, to the path of that asset.
The blog post points out that the WEBCAT protocol (created by the Freedom of Press Foundation) "allows site owners to announce the identities of the developers that have signed the site's integrity manifest, i.e., have signed all the code and other assets that the site is serving to the user... We've made WAICT extensible enough to fit WEBCAT inside and benefit from the transparency components." The proposal also envisions a service storing metadata for transparency-enabled sites on the web (along with "witnesses" who verify the prefix tree holding the hashes for domain manifests).

"We are still very early in the standardization process," with hopes to soon "begin standardizing the integrity manifest format. And then after that we can start standardizing all the other features. We intend to work on this specification hand-in-hand with browsers and the IETF, and we hope to have some exciting betas soon. In the meantime, you can follow along with our transparency specification draft,/A>, check out the open problems, and share your ideas."

"My boss thinks AI will solve every problem and is wildly enthusiastic about it," complains a mid-level worker at a Fortune 500 company, who considers the technology "unproven and wildly erratic."

So how should they navigate the next 10 years until retirement, they ask the Washington Post's "Work Advice" columnist. The columnist first notes that "Despite promises that AI will eliminate tedious, 'low-value' tasks from our workload, many consumers and companies seem to be using it primarily as a cheap shortcut to avoid hiring professional actors, writers or artists — whose work, in some cases, was stolen to train the tools usurping them..." Kevin Cantera, a reader from Las Cruces, New Mexico [a writer for an education-tech compay], willingly embraced AI for work. But as it turns out, he was training his replacement... Even without the "AI will take our jobs" specter, there's much to be wary of in the AI hype. Faster isn't always better. Parroting and predicting linguistic patterns isn't the same as creativity and innovation... There are concerns about hallucinations, faulty data models, and intentional misuse for purposes of deception. And that's not even addressing the environmental impact of all the power- and water-hogging data centers needed to support this innovation.

And yet, it seems, resistance may be futile. The AI genie is out of the bottle and granting wishes. And at the rate it's evolving, you won't have 10 years to weigh the merits and get comfortable with it. Even if you move on to another workplace, odds are AI will show up there before long. Speaking as one grumpy old Luddite to another, it might be time to get a little curious about this technology just so you can separate helpfulness from hype.

It might help to think of AI as just another software tool that you have to get familiar with to do your job. Learn what it's good for — and what it's bad at — so you can recommend guidelines for ethical and beneficial use. Learn how to word your wishes to get accurate results. Become the "human in the loop" managing the virtual intern. You can test the bathwater without drinking it. Focus on the little ways AI can accommodate and support you and your colleagues. Maybe it could handle small tasks in your workflow that you wish you could hand off to an assistant. Automated transcriptions and meeting notes could be a life-changer for a colleague with auditory processing issues.

I can't guarantee that dabbling in AI will protect your job. But refusing to engage definitely won't help. And if you decide it's time to change jobs, having some extra AI knowledge and experience under your belt will make you a more attractive candidate, even if you never end up having to use it.

An anonymous reader shared this report from Gizmodo: It's been over a year since OpenAI cofounder Andrej Karpathy exited the company. In the time since he's been gone, he coined and popularized the term "vibe coding" to describe the practice of farming out coding projects to AI tools. But earlier this week, when he released his own open source model called nanochat, he admitted that he wrote the whole thing by hand, vibes be damned.

Nanochat, according to Karpathy, is a "minimal, from scratch, full-stack training/inference pipeline" that is designed to let anyone build a large language model with a ChatGPT-style chatbot interface in a matter of hours and for as little as $100. Karpathy said the project contains about 8,000 lines of "quite clean code," which he wrote by hand — not necessarily by choice, but because he found AI tools couldn't do what he needed.

"It's basically entirely hand-written (with tab autocomplete)," he wrote. "I tried to use claude/codex agents a few times but they just didn't work well enough at all and net unhelpful."

Math teachers across American schools are contending with a classroom disruption that has proven impossible to contain. The numbers six and seven now trigger instant pandemonium among students. They scream the phrase and perform a palms-up seesaw hand gesture whenever the numbers appear in equations or instructions.

Teachers have begun avoiding breaking students into groups of six or seven or asking them to turn to page 67. The meme has no meaning, reports WSJ. That absence of meaning is the point. The phenomenon traces back to late last year when Philadelphia rapper Skrilla released "Doot Doot (6 7)," a song referencing 67th street where his friends grew up. The phrase spiraled into youth culture in March through a viral video of a boy with forward-swept hair lurching toward a camera to deliver an animated "six seven." Skrilla is now touring venues where audiences wait for the six-seven line. Some teachers have attempted to neutralize the meme by saying it themselves.

"I'm here to say we have to give these AI bubble predictions a rest," says Yahoo Finance executive editor Brian Sozzi. First of all, AI is a real technology being deployed in real ways inside of Corporate America. Second, this technology is requiring more physical assets in the ground — which are being built to support AI's real-world application. What Zach Dell (son of Michael Dell) is working on at startup Base Power (which just raised $1 billion) impressed me this week. It's addressing a key issue — power availability and costs in part because of rising stress on the grid due to AI development.

Next, the spending on AI infrastructure doesn't strike me as reckless. I talk to CFOs and they walk me through their thinking, which seems logical. They aren't foaming at the mouth with wild-eyed predictions of grandeur similar to the late '90s. Plus, the tech giants making the biggest AI investments are fueling their ambitions by cash on hand — not loading up balance sheets with debt. The upstarts in AI are well funded, not being 100% stupid in their organizational build-outs. They're working on tangible technology that has actual orders behind it...

Lastly here in my scolding of the AI worrywarts is that valuations don't support the warning calls. According to new research out of Goldman Sachs this week, the median forward P/E ratio across the Magnificent Seven is 27 times, or 26 times if excluding Tesla (TSLA), which has a much higher multiple than the other companies. This is roughly half the equivalent valuation of the biggest seven companies in the late 1990s, while the dominant companies in Japan (mostly banks) traded at higher valuations still. What's more, the current enterprise-to-sales ratios are also much lower than those of the dominant companies in the late 1990s.

"So it is true that valuations are high but, in our view, generally not at levels that are as high as are typically seen at the height of a financial bubble," said Goldman Sachs strategist Peter Oppenheimer.

The Register reports: Over the past two years, the open source curl project has been flooded with bogus bug reports generated by AI models. The deluge prompted project maintainer Daniel Stenberg to publish several blog posts about the issue in an effort to convince bug bounty hunters to show some restraint and not waste contributors' time with invalid issues. Shoddy AI-generated bug reports have been a problem not just for curl, but also for the Python community, Open Collective, and the Mesa Project.

It turns out the problem is people rather than technology. Last month, the curl project received dozens of potential issues from Joshua Rogers, a security researcher based in Poland. Rogers identified assorted bugs and vulnerabilities with the help of various AI scanning tools. And his reports were not only valid but appreciated. Stenberg in a Mastodon post last month remarked, "Actually truly awesome findings." In his mailing list update last week, Stenberg said, "most of them were tiny mistakes and nits in ordinary static code analyzer style, but they were still mistakes that we are better off having addressed. Several of the found issues were quite impressive findings...."

Stenberg told The Register that about 50 bugfixes based on Rogers' reports have been merged. "In my view, this list of issues achieved with the help of AI tooling shows that AI can be used for good," he said in an email. "Powerful tools in the hand of a clever human is certainly a good combination. It always was...!" Rogers wrote up a summary of the AI vulnerability scanning tools he tested. He concluded that these tools — Almanax, Corgea, ZeroPath, Gecko, and Amplify — are capable of finding real vulnerabilities in complex code.
The Register's conclusion? AI tools "when applied with human intelligence by someone with meaningful domain experience, can be quite helpful."

jantangring (Slashdot reader #79,804) has published an article on Stenberg's new position, including recently published comments from Stenberg that "It really looks like these new tools are finding problems that none of the old, established tools detect."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CBC News: The study by a team from Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children (also known as Sick Kids) and St. Michael's Hospital was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. It found that children who spent more time on screens before age eight scored lower on standardized tests. Child psychiatry researchers say handing kids digital devices, like iPads, every time they have a tantrum could lead to future issues. One new study links too much screen time to emotional and anger management problems.

The study followed more than 3,000 kids in Ontario over a 15 year span from 2008 to 2023, tracking how much time they spent watching TV or DVDs, playing video games, using the computer or playing on handheld devices like iPads, as reported by their parents. That data was compared to their EQAO standardized test scores, which are used to assess the reading and math skills of kids across Ontario in grades 3 and 6. The findings point to a "significant association," between screen use and lower test scores, according to Dr. Catherine Birken, a pediatrician and senior scientist at Sick Kids and lead author of the study.

"For each additional hour of screen use, there was approximately a 10 percent lower odds of meeting standards in both reading and mathematics ... in Grade 3 and mathematics in Grade 6," said Dr. Catherine Birken, a pediatrician and senior scientist at Sick Kids and lead author of the study, in an interview with CBC News. The study didn't differentiate between different types of screen time -- for example, whether a child was playing a game on their iPad versus FaceTiming a relative in another city, or watching an educational video. It was also an observational study that relied on parents answering questionnaires about how much time their kids spent in front of screens. The study authors note that this means the research can't be taken as definitive proof that screen time causes lower grades, just that the two things tend to go hand in hand.

The New York Times: John Clarke, Michel H. Devoret and John M. Martinis were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics on Tuesday in Sweden for showing that two properties of quantum mechanics, the physical laws that rule the subatomic realm, could be observed on a system large enough to see with the naked eye. They will share a prize of 11 million Swedish kroner, or around $1.17 million.

"There is no advanced technology today that does not rely on quantum mechanics," Olle Eriksson, chairman of the Nobel Committee for Physics, said during the announcement of the award. The laureates' discoveries, he added, paved the way for technologies like the cellphone, cameras and fiber optic cables.

It also helped lay the groundwork for current attempts to build a quantum computer, a device that could compute and process information at speeds that would not be possible with classical computer. Martinis worked at Google from 2014 to 2020 to build a quantum computer and led the quantum supremacy experiment in 2019. Devoret is cited in Google's recent breakthrough where its Willow quantum chip solved a problem in five minutes that the world's most advanced supercomputer could never solve.

The three laureates conducted experiments with electrical circuits that demonstrated quantum mechanical tunneling and quantized energy levels in systems large enough to hold in the hand. Clarke is a professor at the University of California, Berkeley. Devoret joined his research group in the 1980s and is now at Yale University and UC Santa Barbara. Martinis also joined the group in the 1980s and is currently at UC Santa Barbara and co-founded Qolab, a startup developing utility-scale superconducting quantum computers.

The director of a tour operation remembers two tourists arriving in a rural town in Peru determined to hike alone in the mountains to a sacred canyon recommended by their AI chatbot. But the canyon didn't exists — and a high-altitude hike could be dangerous (especially where cellphone coverage is also spotty). They're part of a BBC report on travellers arriving at their destination "only to find they've been fed incorrect information or steered to a place that only exists in the hard-wired imagination of a robot..."

"According to a 2024 survey, 37% of those surveyed who used AI to help plan their travels reported that it could not provide enough information, while around 33% said their AI-generated recommendations included false information." Some examples? - Dana Yao and her husband recently experienced this first-hand. The couple used ChatGPT to plan a romantic hike to the top of Mount Misen on the Japanese island of Itsukushima earlier this year. After exploring the town of Miyajima with no issues, they set off at 15:00 to hike to the montain's summit in time for sunset, exactly as ChatGPT had instructed them. "That's when the problem showed up," said Yao, a creator who runs a blog about traveling in Japan, "[when] we were ready to descend [the mountain via] the ropeway station. ChatGPT said the last ropeway down was at 17:30, but in reality, the ropeway had already closed. So, we were stuck at the mountain top..."

- A 2024 BBC article reported that [dedicated travel AI site] Layla briefly told users that there was an Eiffel Tower in Beijing and suggested a marathon route across northern Italy to a British traveller that was entirely unfeasible...

- A recent Fast Company article recounted an incident where a couple made the trek to a scenic cable car in Malaysia that they had seen on TikTok, only to find that no such structure existed. The video they'd watched had been entirely AI generated, either to drum up engagement or for some other strange purpose.
Rayid Ghani, a distinguished professor in machine learning at Carnegie Melon University, tells them that an AI chatbot "doesn't know the difference between travel advice, directions or recipes. It just knows words. So, it keeps spitting out words that make whatever it's telling you sound realistic..."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Indonesia has suspended TikTok's registration to provide electronic systems after it failed to hand over all data relating to the use of its live stream feature, a government official said on Friday. The suspension could in theory prevent access to TikTok, which has more than 100 million accounts based in Indonesia.

Alexander Sabar, an official at Indonesia's communications and digital ministry, said in a statement some accounts with ties to online gambling activities used TikTok's live stream feature during national protests. [...] Sabar said the government had asked the company for its traffic, streaming and monetization data. The company, owned by China's ByteDance, did not provide complete data, citing its internal procedures, Sabar said without giving further detail.

Paris-based AI giant Mistral "is pushing to improve its models," reports the Wall Street Journal, "by looking inside legacy enterprises that hold some of the world's last untapped data reserves...." Mistral's approach will be to form partnerships with enterprises to further train existing models on their own proprietary data, a phenomenon known as post-training... [At Dutch chip-equipment company ASML], Mistral embeds its own solutions architects, applied AI engineers and applied scientists into the enterprise to work on improving models with the company's data. [While Mistral sells some models under a commercial license], this co-creation strategy allows Mistral to make money off the services side of its business and afford to give away its open source AI free of charge, while improving model performance for the customer with more industry context...

This kind of hand-holding approach is necessary for most companies to tackle AI successfully, said Arthur Mensch [co-founder and chief executive of Mistral]. "The very high-tech companies [and] a couple of banks are able to do it on their own. But when it comes to getting some [return on investment] from use cases, in general, they fail," he said. Mensch attributes that in part to a mismatch between expectations and reality. "The curse of AI is that it looks like magic. So you can very quickly make something that looks amazing to your boss," but it doesn't scale or work more broadly, he said. In other cases, enterprises simply might not know what to focus on. For example, it is a mistake to think equipping all employees with a chatbot will create meaningful gains on the bottom line, he said. Mensch said to fully take advantage of AI, companies will have to rethink organizational structures. With information flowing more easily, they could require fewer middle managers, for example.

There is a lot of work yet to do, Mensch said, but in a large sense, the future of AI development now lies inside the enterprise itself. "This is a pattern that we've seen with many of our customers: At some point, the capabilities of the frontier model can only be increased if we partner," he said.

An anonymous reader shared this report from Computer Weekly: Policing data hosted in Microsoft's hyperscale cloud infrastructure could be processed in more than 100 countries, but the tech giant is obfuscating this information from its customers, Computer Weekly can reveal. According to documents released by the Scottish Police Authority (SPA) under freedom of information (FoI) rules, Microsoft refused to hand over crucial information about its international data flows to the SPA and Police Scotland when asked...

The tech giant also refused to disclose its own risk assessments into the transfer of UK policing data to other jurisdictions, including China and others deemed "hostile" in the DPIA documents. This means Police Scotland and the SPA — which are jointly rolling out Office 365 — are unable to satisfy the law enforcement-specific data protection rules laid out in Part Three of the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA18), which places strict limits on the transfer of policing data outside the UK. The same documents also contain an admission from Microsoft — given while simultaneously refusing to divulge key information about data flows — that it is unable to guarantee the sovereignty of policing data held and processed within its O365 infrastructure. This echoes the statements senior Microsoft representatives made to the French senate in June 2025, in which they admitted the company cannot guarantee the sovereignty of European data stored and processed in its services generally.

The revelation that Microsoft may access customer data from more than 100 countries is a result of the correspondence previously disclosed under Freedom of Information and reported on by Computer Weekly... All in all, an analysis of Microsoft's distributed documentation — conducted by independent security consultant Owen Sayers and shared with Computer Weekly — suggests that Microsoft personnel or contractors can remotely access the data from 105 different countries, using 148 different sub-processors. Despite technically being public, Sayers highlighted how this information is not transparently laid out for Microsoft customers, and is distributed across different documents contained in non-indexed webpages.... "[A]ny normal amount of due diligence — even if it is conducted by skilled persons will likely fail to see the full scope of offshoring in play," he said...

Microsoft did not contest the accuracy of the remote access location figures cited by Computer Weekly in this story.

It's not just glitches at the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display smart glasses... The New York Times remains skeptical of its market share: [Meta's] smart glasses remain a niche. As of February, Meta had sold about two million of its $300 Ray-Ban Meta camera glasses since their 2023 debut, and it hopes to sell 10 million annually by the end of 2026, which is a tiny amount for a company this size. In the last decade, Meta has spent over $100 billion on its virtual and augmented reality division, which includes its smart glasses and is not profitable. Last quarter, the division reported a $4.5 billion loss, nearly the same as a year ago.
"Meta's Smart Glasses Might Make You Smarter. They'll Certainly Make You More Awkward," joked a recent Wired headline.

But the Wall Street Journal does report there's "a growing group of blind users... finding the devices to be more of a life-enhancing tool than a cool accessory." Jonathan Mosen, executive director at the nonprofit National Federation of the Blind said he'd like to see Meta continue to invest in the glasses. "It's giving significant accessibility benefits at a price point people can afford." He has used them a few times to record video of ride-share drivers refusing to give him and his wife a ride because she travels with a guide dog. Denying rides to people with service animals is illegal in many countries, including the U.S.

Another concern for blind users is that AI assistants in general are prone to making errors, or so-called hallucinations, which may not be apparent. Aaron Preece, who is blind and editor in chief of American Foundation for the Blind's AccessWorld magazine, said Meta's glasses recently failed to correctly read the number on the door to his home. "I just can't trust it," he said. "It's more of a novelty than something I'd use on a day-to-day basis."
When it comes to innovative technology, CNET seems more excited about Meta's display-controlling "neural wristband" accessory. Instead of camera-based hand tracking, these muscle-sensing bands "can register gestural moves like pinches, taps, thumb swipes, and maybe even typing over time..."

Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes: Over at the Communications of the ACM, Bard College CS Prof Valerie Barr explains why she's Feeling Cranky About AI and CS Education. Having seen CS education go through a number of we-have-to-teach-this moments over the decades — introductory programming languages, the Web, Data Science, etc. — Barr turns her attention to the next hand-wringing "what will we do" CS education moment with AI.

"We're jumping through hoops without stopping first to question the run-away train," Barr writes...

Barr calls for stepping back from "the industry assertion that the ship has sailed, every student needs to use AI early and often, and there is no future application that isn't going to use AI in some way" and instead thoughtfully "articulate what sort of future problem solvers and software developers we want to graduate from our programs, and determine ways in which the incorporation of AI can help us get there."
From the article: In much discussion about CS education:

a.) There's little interest in interrogating the downsides of generative AI, such as the environmental impact, the data theft impact, the treatment and exploitation of data workers.

b.) There's little interest in considering the extent to which, by incorporating generative AI into our teaching, we end up supporting a handful of companies that are burning billions in a vain attempt to each achieve performance that is a scintilla better than everyone else's.

c.) There's little interest in thinking about what's going to happen when the LLM companies decide that they have plateaued, that there's no more money to burn/spend, and a bunch of them fold—but we've perturbed education to such an extent that our students can no longer function without their AI helpers.

When Meta finally unveiled its newest smart glasses, CEO Mark Zuckerberg "drew more snickers than applause," wrote the New York Times. (Mashable points out a video call failing onstage followed by an unsuccessful recipe demonstration.)

Meta chief technology officer Andrew Bosworth later explained the funny reason their demo didn't work, reports TechCrunch, while answering questions on Instagram: "When the chef said, 'Hey, Meta, start Live AI,' it started every single Ray-Ban Meta's Live AI in the building. And there were a lot of people in that building," Bosworth explained. "That obviously didn't happen in rehearsal; we didn't have as many things," he said, referring to the number of glasses that were triggered... The second part of the failure had to do with how Meta had chosen to route the Live AI traffic to its development server to isolate it during the demo. But when it did so, it did this for everyone in the building on the access points, which included all the headsets. "So we DDoS'd ourselves, basically, with that demo," Bosworth added... Meta's dev server wasn't set up to handle the flood of traffic from the other glasses in the building — Meta was only planning for it to handle the demos alone.

The issue with the failed WhatsApp call, on the other hand, was the result of a new bug. The smart glasses' display had gone to sleep at the exact moment the call came in, Bosworth said. When Zuckerberg woke the display back up, it didn't show the answer notification to him. The CTO said this was a "race condition" bug... "We've never run into that bug before," Bosworth noted. "That's the first time we'd ever seen it. It's fixed now, and that's a terrible, terrible place for that bug to show up." He stressed that, of course, Meta knows how to handle video calls, and the company was "bummed" about the bug showing up here... "It really was just a demo fail and not, like, a product failure," he said.
Thanks to Slashdot reader fjo3 for sharing the news.

Just days after federal data revealed average reading, math and science scores dropped among certain grades since before the coronavirus pandemic, a U.S. Senate panel on Thursday picked apart the root causes and methods for students' academic improvement. From a report: The hearing in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions centered on the "state of K-12 education" -- which GOP members on the committee described as "troubling" -- in light of recent data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP.

NAEP, regarded as the gold standard for tracking students' academic performance, showed that average science scores for eighth-graders decreased by 4 points since before the pandemic, in 2019. Average math and reading scores for 12th-graders also fell 3 points between 2019 and 2024. The assessments were administered between January and March of 2024. Results also showed that just one-third of 12th-graders are considered academically prepared for college in math -- a drop from 37% in 2019.

The committee's chair, Sen. Bill Cassidy, said "it should concern us that children's reading, math and science scores have yet to recover to pre-pandemic levels." The Louisiana Republican added that "success in education is not determined by how much we spend, but by who makes the decision and how wisely resources are directed," and "when states and local communities are empowered to tailor solutions to meet the unique needs of students, innovation follows." On the other hand, Sen. Bernie Sanders, ranking member of the panel, said that "while we focus on education -- as important as that is -- we also have to focus on the conditions under which our children are living."