Jim Acosta, the former CNN chief White House correspondent who now hosts an independent show on YouTube, has interviewed an AI-generated avatar of Parkland shooting victim Joaquin Oliver. The late teen's parents created the avatar to preserve his voice and advocate for gun reform. Oliver's parents "granted Acosta the first 'interview' with the recreated version of their son on what would have been his 25th birthday," notes Variety. "Oliver was one of 17 people killed in the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School." From the report: Acosta asked AI Oliver about his solution for gun violence, to which the avatar responded: "I believe in a mix of stronger gun control laws, mental health support and community engagement. We need to create safe spaces for conversations and connections, making sure everyone feels seen and heard. It's about building a culture of kindness and understanding." The avatar added, "Though my life was cut short, I want to keep inspiring others to connect and advocate for change." Acosta then asked AI Oliver about his personal life, such as his favorite sport and favorite basketball team. The two discussed the movie "Remember the Titans" and their favorite "Star Wars" moments.

After a five-minute chat with the AI, Acosta then connected with Oliver's father, Manuel Oliver. "I'm kind of speechless as to the technology there," Acosta said. "It was so insightful. I really felt like I was speaking with Joaquin. It's just a beautiful thing." Manuel, who has been an outspoken voice in the push for gun control, said he believed bringing "AI Joaquin to life" would "create more impact." According to Manuel, the avatar is trained on information on the internet as well as things Oliver wrote, said and posted online. He said he wanted to make it clear to viewers that he is under no illusions about reviving his son. "I understand that this is AI. I don't want anyone to think that I am, in some way, trying to bring my son back," he said. "Sadly, I can't, right? I wish I could. However, the technology is out there." [...]

Manuel said he is excited about the future of the project and what it means for his son's legacy. "What's amazing about this is that we've heard from the parents, we've heard from the politicians. Now we're hearing from one of the kids," Acosta said. "That's important. That hasn't happened." Manuel said he plans to have AI Oliver "on stage in the middle of a debate," and that "his knowledge is unlimited." You can watch the full interview on YouTube.

In a report published Monday, Cloudflare accused Perplexity of deploying undeclared web crawlers that masquerade as regular Chrome browsers to access content from websites that have explicitly blocked its official bots. Since then, Perplexity has publicly and loudly announced that Cloudflare's claims are baseless and technically flawed. "This controversy reveals that Cloudflare's systems are fundamentally inadequate for distinguishing between legitimate AI assistants and actual threats," says Perplexity in a blog post. "If you can't tell a helpful digital assistant from a malicious scraper, then you probably shouldn't be making decisions about what constitutes legitimate web traffic."

Perplexity continues: "Technical errors in Cloudflare's analysis aren't just embarrassing -- they're disqualifying. When you misattribute millions of requests, publish completely inaccurate technical diagrams, and demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of how modern AI assistants work, you've forfeited any claim to expertise in this space."

Longtime Slashdot reader SonicSpike shares a report from TechCrunch: Sarah Murray recalls the first time she saw an artificial model in fashion: It was 2023, and a beautiful young woman of color donned a Levi's denim overall dress. Murray, a commercial model herself, said it made her feel sad and exhausted. The iconic denim company had teamed up with the AI studio Lalaland.ai to create "diverse" digital fashion models for more inclusive ads. For an industry that has failed for years to employ diverse human models, the backlash was swift, with New York Magazine calling the decision "artificial diversity."

"Modeling as a profession is already challenging enough without having to compete with now new digital standards of perfection that can be achieved with AI," Murray told TechCrunch. Two years later, her worries have compounded. Brands continue to experiment with AI-generated models, to the consternation of many fashion lovers. The latest uproar came after Vogue's July print edition featured a Guess ad with a typical model for the brand: thin yet voluptuous, glossy blond tresses, pouty rose lips. She exemplified North American beauty standards, but there was one problem -- she was AI generated.

The internet buzzed for days, in large part because the AI-generated beauty showed up in Vogue, the fashion bible that dictates what is and is not acceptable in the industry. The AI-generated model was featured in an advertisement, not a Vogue editorial spread. And Vogue told TechCrunch the ad met its advertising standards. To many, an ad versus an editorial is a distinction without a difference. TechCrunch spoke to fashion models, experts, and technologists to get a sense of where the industry is headed now that Vogue seems to have put a stamp of approval on technology that's poised to dramatically change the fashion industry. Amy Odell, a fashion writer and author of a recently published biography on Gwyneth Paltrow, put it simply: "It's just so much cheaper for [brands] to use AI models now. Brands need a lot of content, and it just adds up. So if they can save money on their print ad or their TikTok feed, they will."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from NPR: Patrick Schlott often finds himself in a cellular dead zone during his drive to work. "You go down the road, you turn the corner and you're behind a mountain and you'll lose cell coverage pretty fast," he says. The 31-year-old electrical engineer says poor reception is a common frustration for residents of Vermont's Orange County. To address this issue, he's providing his community with a new way to stay connected.

Schlott has taken old pay phones, modified them to make free calls, and set them up in three different towns across the county. He buys the phones secondhand from sites like eBay and Craigslist and restores them in his home workshop. With just an internet connection, these phones can make calls anywhere in the U.S. or Canada -- no coins required. And Schlott covers all the operating costs himself. "It's cheap enough where I'm happy just footing the bill," he says. "You know, if I'm spending $20 a month on, say, Netflix, I could do that and provide phone service for the community. And to me, that's way more fun." Hundreds of calls have been made since the first phone was installed back in March last year. "I knew there would be some fringe cases where it would be really helpful," says Schlott. "But I never expected it to get daily use and for people to be this excited about it."

"One of the cornerstones that I want to stick to is, no matter what happens on the backend, the calls will always be free," he says. "And I will figure out a way to make that happen."

AI startup Perplexity is deploying undeclared web crawlers that masquerade as regular Chrome browsers to access content from websites that have explicitly blocked its official bots, according to a Cloudflare report published Monday. When Perplexity's declared crawlers encounter robots.txt restrictions or network blocks, the company switches to a generic Mozilla user agent that impersonates "Chrome/124.0.0.0 Safari/537.36" running on macOS, the web infrastructure firm reported.

Cloudflare engineers tested the behavior by creating new domains with robots.txt files prohibiting all automated access. Despite the restrictions, Perplexity provided detailed information about the protected content when queried, while the stealth crawler generated 3-6 million daily requests across tens of thousands of domains. The undeclared crawler rotated through multiple IP addresses and network providers to evade detection.

Started in 1984, it's been described as the internet's longest-running contest. And yesterday 2025's International Obfuscated C Code Contest concluded — with 23 new winners announced in a special four-and-a-half-hour livestreamed ceremony!

Programmers submitted their funniest programs showcasing C's unusual/obscure subtleties while having some fun. (And demonstrating the importance of clarity and style by setting some very bad examples...) Among this year's winners were an OpenRISC 32-bit CPU emulator, a virtual machine capable of running Doom, and some kind of salmon recipe that makes clever use of C's U"string" literal prefix...

But yes, every entry's source code is ridiculously obfuscated. ("Before you set off on your adventure to decode this program's logic, make sure you have enough food, ammo, clothes, oxen, and programming supplies," read the judge's remarks on the winner of this year's "diabolical logistics" prize. "You'll be driving for 2170 miles through a wild wilderness inspired by Oregon Trail...") And one entrant also struggled mightily in adapting a rough port of their program's old Atari 2600 version, but was never gonna give it up...

Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader achowe for bringing the news (who has submitted winning entries in four different decades, starting in 1991 and continuing through 2024)...

Including a 2004 award for the best abuse of the contest's guidelines. ("We are not exactly sure how many organisations will be upset with this entry, but we are considering starting an IOCCC standards body just to reign in the likes of Mr Howe....")

A Brussels court has issued an unusually broad site-blocking order targeting Internet Archive's Open Library alongside shadow libraries including Anna's Archive, Libgen, and Z-Library. The order, requested by publishing and author organizations, directs an unprecedented range of intermediaries to take action beyond traditional ISP blocks.

Search engines, DNS resolvers, advertisers, domain name services, CDNs, hosting companies, and payment processors -- including Google, Microsoft, Cloudflare, Amazon Web Services, PayPal, and Starlink -- must restrict access to the targeted sites. The court found "clear and significant infringement" in the ex parte proceeding.

BrianFagioli writes: Google is changing its mind about killing off all goo.gl short links. The company had originally planned to shut them down entirely by August 25, 2025. That decision sparked concern among developers, educators, journalists, and everyday users who rely on these links across the web.

Now, just weeks before the deadline, Google is taking a softer approach. It turns out the company is only going to disable goo.gl links that haven't seen any activity since late 2024. If your link is still being used or clicked, it should keep working. This adjustment comes after what Google describes as community feedback.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: It's a strange glimpse into the human mind: If you filter search results on Google, Bing, and other search engines to only include URLs from the domain "https://chatgpt.com/share," you can find strangers' conversations with ChatGPT. Sometimes, these shared conversation links are pretty dull — people ask for help renovating their bathroom, understanding astrophysics, and finding recipe ideas. In another case, one user asks ChatGPT to rewrite their resume for a particular job application (judging by this person's LinkedIn, which was easy to find based on the details in the chat log, they did not get the job). Someone else is asking questions that sound like they came out of an incel forum. Another person asks the snarky, hostile AI assistant if they can microwave a metal fork (for the record: no), but they continue to ask the AI increasingly absurd and trollish questions, eventually leading it to create a guide called "How to Use a Microwave Without Summoning Satan: A Beginner's Guide."

ChatGPT does not make these conversations public by default. A conversation would be appended with a "/share" URL only if the user deliberately clicks the "share" button on their own chat and then clicks a second "create link" button. The service also declares that "your name, custom instructions, and any messages you add after sharing stay private." After clicking through to create a link, users can toggle whether or not they want that link to be discoverable. However, users may not anticipate that other search engines will index their shared ChatGPT links, potentially betraying personal information (my apologies to the person whose LinkedIn I discovered). According to ChatGPT, these chats were indexed as part of an experiment. "ChatGPT chats are not public unless you choose to share them," an OpenAI spokesperson told TechCrunch. "We've been testing ways to make it easier to share helpful conversations, while keeping users in control, and we recently ended an experiment to have chats appear in search engine results if you explicitly opted in when sharing."

A Google spokesperson also weighed in, telling TechCrunch that the company has no control over what gets indexed. "Neither Google nor any other search engine controls what pages are made public on the web. Publishers of these pages have full control over whether they are indexed by search engines."

Reddit wants to become a full-fledged search engine, leveraging its vast repository of human-generated content and expanding its AI-powered Reddit Answers tool. In its latest note (PDF) to investors, CEO Steve Huffman says the company is "concentrating our resources on the areas that will drive results for our most pressing needs," including "making Reddit a go-to search engine." The Verge reports: Huffman says that "every week, hundreds of millions of people come to Reddit looking for advice, and we're turning more of that intent into active users of Reddit's native search." Reddit's core search has more than 70 million weekly active unique users -- Reddit overall averages 416.4 million weekly active unique users -- and Reddit Answers, the platform's AI search tool that it launched in December, has 6 million weekly users, up from 1 million weekly users in the first quarter of this year. To continue to build out search, Reddit is "expanding Reddit Answers globally, integrating it more deeply into the core search experience, and making search a central feature across Reddit," Huffman says.

Hackers from the group UNC2891 attempted a high-tech bank heist by physically planting a 4G-enabled Raspberry Pi inside a bank's ATM network, using advanced malware hidden with a never-before-seen Linux bind mount technique to evade detection. "The trick allowed the malware to operate similarly to a rootkit, which uses advanced techniques to hide itself from the operating system it runs on," reports Ars Technica. Although the plot was uncovered before the hackers could hijack the ATM switching server, the tactic showcased a new level of sophistication in cyber-physical attacks on financial institutions. The security firm Group-IB, which detailed the attack in a report on Wednesday, didn't say where the compromised switching equipment was located or how attackers managed to plant the Raspberry Pi. Ars Technica reports: To maintain persistence, UNC2891 also compromised a mail server because it had constant Internet connectivity. The Raspberry Pi and the mail server backdoor would then communicate by using the bank's monitoring server as an intermediary. The monitoring server was chosen because it had access to almost every server within the data center. As Group-IB was initially investigating the bank's network, researchers noticed some unusual behaviors on the monitoring server, including an outbound beaconing signal every 10 minutes and repeated connection attempts to an unknown device. The researchers then used a forensic tool to analyze the communications. The tool identified the endpoints as a Raspberry Pi and the mail server but was unable to identify the process names responsible for the beaconing.

The researchers then captured the system memory as the beacons were sent. The review identified the process as lightdm, a process associated with an open source LightDM display manager. The process appeared to be legitimate, but the researchers found it suspicious because the LightDM binary was installed in an unusual location. After further investigation, the researchers discovered that the processes of the custom backdoor had been deliberately disguised in an attempt to throw researchers off the scent.

[Group-IB Senior Digital Forensics and Incident Response Specialist Nam Le Phuong] explained: "The backdoor process is deliberately obfuscated by the threat actor through the use of process masquerading. Specifically, the binary is named "lightdm", mimicking the legitimate LightDM display manager commonly found on Linux systems. To enhance the deception, the process is executed with command-line arguments resembling legitimate parameters -- for example, lightdm -- session child 11 19 -- in an effort to evade detection and mislead forensic analysts during post-compromise investigations. These backdoors were actively establishing connections to both the Raspberry Pi and the internal Mail Server."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: Efforts to introduce pirate site blocking to the United States continue with the introduction of the "Block BEARD" bill (PDF) in the Senate. The bipartisan proposal, backed by Senators Tillis, Coons, Blackburn, and Schiff, aims to create a new legal mechanism to combat foreign piracy websites. Block BEARD is similar to the previously introduced House bill "FADPA", but doesn't directly mention DNS resolvers. [...] The site-blocking proposal seeks to amend U.S. copyright law, enabling rightsholders to request federal courts to designate online locations as a "foreign digital piracy site". If that succeeds, courts can subsequently order U.S. service providers to block access to these sites.

Pirate site designation would be dependent on rightsholders showing that they are harmed by a site's activities, that reasonable efforts had been made to notify the site's operator, and that a reasonable investigation confirms the operator is not located within the United States. Additionally, rightsholders must show that the site is primarily designed for piracy, has limited commercial purpose, or is intentionally marketed by its operator to promote copyright-infringing activities. If the court classifies a website as a foreign pirate site, rightsholders can go back to court to request a blocking order. At this stage, the court will determine whether it is technically and practically feasible for ISPs to block the site, and consider any potential harm to the public interest. The granted orders would stay in place for a year with the option to extend if necessary. If blocked sites switch to new locations, the court can also amend blocking orders to include new IP addresses and domain names.

The Block BEARD bill broadly applies to service providers as defined in section 512(k)(1)(A) of the DMCA. This is a broad definition that applies to residential ISPs, but also to search engines, social media platforms, and DNS resolvers. Service providers with fewer than 50,000 subscribers are explicitly excluded, and the same applies to venues such as coffee shops, libraries, and universities that offer internet access to visitors. Unlike the FADPA bill introduced by Representative Lofgren earlier this year, the Senate bill does not specifically mention DNS resolvers. Block BEARD does not mention VPNs, but its broad definition of "service provider" could be interpreted to include them. The proposal states that providers have the option to contest their inclusion in a blocking order. Once an order is issued, they would have the freedom to choose their own blocking techniques. There are no transparency requirements mentioned in the bill, so if and how the public is informed is unclear.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Australia said on Wednesday it will add YouTube to sites covered by its world-first ban on social media for teenagers, reversing an earlier decision to exempt the Alphabet-owned video-sharing site and potentially setting up a legal challenge. The decision came after the internet regulator urged the government last month to overturn the YouTube carve-out, citing a survey that found 37% of minors reported harmful content on the site, the worst showing for a social media platform.

"I'm calling time on it," Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said in a statement highlighting that Australian children were being negatively affected by online platforms, and reminding social media of their social responsibility. "I want Australian parents to know that we have their backs." The decision broadens the ban set to take effect in December. YouTube says it is used by nearly three-quarters of Australians aged 13 to 15, and should not be classified as social media because its main activity is hosting videos. "Our position remains clear: YouTube is a video sharing platform with a library of free, high-quality content, increasingly viewed on TV screens. It's not social media," a YouTube spokesperson said by email.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Google is fond of saying its mission is to "organize the world's information," but who gets to decide what information is worthy of organization? A San Francisco tech CEO has spent the past several years attempting to remove unflattering information about himself from Google's search index, and the nonprofit Freedom of the Press Foundation says he's still at it. Most recently, an unknown bad actor used a bug in one of Google's search tools to scrub the offending articles.

The saga began in 2023 when independent journalist Jack Poulson reported on Maury Blackman's 2021 domestic violence arrest. Blackman, who was then the CEO of surveillance tech firm Premise Data Corp., took offense at the publication of his legal issues. The case did not lead to charges after Blackman's 25-year-old girlfriend recanted her claims against the 53-year-old CEO, but Poulson reported on some troubling details of the public arrest report. Blackman has previously used tools like DMCA takedowns and lawsuits to stifle reporting on his indiscretion, but that campaign now appears to have co-opted part of Google's search apparatus. The Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) reported on Poulson's work and Blackman's attempts to combat it late last year. In June, Poulson contacted the Freedom of the Press Foundation to report that the article had mysteriously vanished from Google search results.

The foundation began an investigation immediately, which led them to a little-known Google search feature known as Refresh Outdated Content. Google created this tool for users to report links with content that is no longer accurate or that lead to error pages. When it works correctly, Refresh Outdated Content can help make Google's search results more useful. However, Freedom of the Press Foundation now says that a bug allowed an unknown bad actor to scrub mentions of Blackman's arrest from the Internet. Upon investigating, FPF found that its article on Blackman was completely absent from Google results, even through a search with the exact title. Poulson later realized that two of his own Substack articles were similarly affected. The Foundation was led to the Refresh Outdated Content tool upon checking its search console. The bug in the tool allowed malicious actors to de-index valid URLs from search results by altering the capitalization in the URL slug. Although URLs are typically case-sensitive, Google's tool treated them as case-insensitive. As a result, when someone submitted a slightly altered version of a working URL (for example, changing "anatomy" to "AnAtomy"), Google's crawler would see it as a broken link (404 error) and mistakenly remove the actual page from search results.

Ironically, Blackman is now CEO of the online reputation management firm The Transparency Company.

Brian Krebs writes via KrebsOnSecurity: Fraudsters are flooding Discord and other social media platforms with ads for hundreds of polished online gaming and wagering websites that lure people with free credits and eventually abscond with any cryptocurrency funds deposited by players. Here's a closer look at the social engineering tactics and remarkable traits of this sprawling network of more than 1,200 scam sites. The scam begins with deceptive ads posted on social media that claim the wagering sites are working in partnership with popular social media personalities, such as Mr. Beast, who recently launched a gaming business called Beast Games. The ads invariably state that by using a supplied "promo code," interested players can claim a $2,500 credit on the advertised gaming website.

The gaming sites all require users to create a free account to claim their $2,500 credit, which they can use to play any number of extremely polished video games that ask users to bet on each action. At the scam website gamblerbeast[.]com, for example, visitors can pick from dozens of games like B-Ball Blitz, in which you play a basketball pro who is taking shots from the free throw line against a single opponent, and you bet on your ability to sink each shot. The financial part of this scam begins when users try to cash out any "winnings." At that point, the gaming site will reject the request and prompt the user to make a "verification deposit" of cryptocurrency -- typically around $100 -- before any money can be distributed. Those who deposit cryptocurrency funds are soon asked for additional payments. However, any "winnings" displayed by these gaming sites are a complete fantasy, and players who deposit cryptocurrency funds will never see that money again. Compounding the problem, victims likely will soon be peppered with come-ons from "recovery experts" who peddle dubious claims on social media networks about being able to retrieve funds lost to such scams. [...]

[T]hreat hunting platform Silent Push reveals at least 1,270 recently-registered and active domains whose names all invoke some type of gaming or wagering theme. Here is a list of all domains that Silent Push found were using the scambling network's chat API.