Twitter user Kevin Bradley discovered a Lightning port hidden in the Apple TV 4K's ethernet port. There's a number of theories for why the port exists, but one of the more logical explanations is that it's simply there for Apple to use for debugging. 9to5Mac reports: While earlier Apple TV models had Micro USB and USB-C, the Apple TV 4K dropped all outwardly-facing ports other than Ethernet and HDMI. Under the hood, however, there's a hidden Lightning port, as Bradley discovered. The Lightning port is hidden in the ethernet connector on the Apple TV 4K. Bradley teased on Twitter: "None of us looked THAT closely to the hardware of the AppleTV 4K and the magic locked in the ethernet port until fairly recently."

As for getting the Lightning port itself to work, Steven Barker said in a tweet that this is proving to be "difficult." The Lightning port is stuck at the very back of the ethernet port. Ultimately, it's not really clear what the Lightning port discovery could mean. One thing it could lead towards is the expansion of jailbreak capabilities for the Apple TV 4K, though Bradley cautions: "Just because we know it's lightning doesn't mean anything past that. Just because we find a way in doesn't mean anything will DEFINITELY be released due to what we discover. The barrier for entry might be way too high."

MarketWatch just published an interesting analysis by the head of automotive industry consulting at one of America's top business advisory firms. It argues that a strike by the United Auto Workers (UAW) union at General Motors is really about the future of the electric car: UAW members' anxieties and uncertainties are actually shared by General Motors (GM) and most other automakers, which know that it's no longer a question of when internal combustion engine cars will be replaced by electric vehicles, but how quickly the changeover will take place. The shift to electric means a fundamental transformation of what workers will do and how many are needed to do it.

Electric cars have far fewer parts, which means far fewer people are needed to put them together. When one analyst took apart a Chevrolet Bolt and Volkswagen Golf, he found that the Golf had 125 more moving parts than its electric counterpart. What's more, the electric vehicles' parts are often easier to put in place using automated machines. The UAW's own estimates that the move to electrification may cause 35,000 members to lose their jobs may not be the most scientific study ever done, but it's also probably not far off.

GM has attempted to appease the UAW with specific promises, including the construction of an electric battery plant in one of the Ohio cities hit hardest by recent factory closings. But even this tactic has only confirmed the UAW's worst fears: The battery plant won't need as many workers, and GM would prefer to pay them less than what other workers make at plants that require more complicated assembly.
The article concludes that "None of this is anyone's fault. GM is trying to respond to a global trend that it needs to follow in order to stay relevant. The UAW is trying to protect its members."

But he argues that the U.S. is already at risk of falling behind foreign auto-makers, and "it would just make a lot more sense if the people that we need to compete globally were working together as a team, rather than fighting each other."

France is poised to become the first European country to use facial recognition technology to give citizens a secure digital identity -- whether they want it or not. From a report: Saying it wants to make the state more efficient, President Emmanuel Macron's government is pushing through plans to roll out an ID program, dubbed Alicem, in November, earlier than an initial Christmas target. The country's data regulator says the program breaches the European rule of consent and a privacy group is challenging it in France's highest administrative court. It took a hacker just over an hour to break into a "secure" government messaging app this year, raising concerns about the state's security standards. None of that is deterring the French interior ministry. "The government wants to funnel people to use Alicem and facial recognition," said Martin Drago, a lawyer member of the privacy group La Quadrature du Net that filed the suit against the state. "We're heading into mass usage of facial recognition. (There's) little interest in the importance of consent and choice." The case, filed in July, won't suspend Alicem.

At the start of 2018, Wag looked like tech's next Big Thing. From a report: In January, the founders of the dog-walking startup announced they had landed a $300 million investment from SoftBank's Vision Fund. The world's largest tech investor, SoftBank had $93 billion at its disposal and a network of global connections second to none. Unlike almost any other venture capital firm, it was capable of single-handedly supercharging businesses and shaking up entire industries. Launched in 2015 at the height of the on-demand boom, Wag was founded by brothers Joshua and Jonathan Viner, along with Jason Meltzer, who previously ran a traditional dog walking business. Together, they followed Uber's playbook: connect pet owners with Wag's network of dog walkers, who work as independent contractors. The startup attracted endorsements from celebrities including singer Mariah Carey and actress Olivia Munn, who is also an investor. By the time of the SoftBank deal, Wag had reached 100 US cities. With SoftBank's backing, and the appointment of a veteran CEO around the same time, Wag looked primed to become a global pet care services leader.

More than a year and a half later, SoftBank and Wag have fallen short. Wag has gone through multiple rounds of layoffs, endured management changes, and shuttered its customer service hub in the Hollywood Hills, according to interviews with 17 former employees who've recently left Wag, some as part of layoffs. Most spoke with CNN Business on condition of anonymity, citing non-disclosure agreements or fears of retaliation. Some of the former employees claim that Hilary Schneider, a veteran tech executive who joined Wag as CEO in January 2018, has yet to get a handle on fundamental issues facing the business -- including growth, safety of pets, and customer service.

On Tuesday Purism announced their first Librem 5 smartphones were rolling off the assembly line and heading to customers. "Seeing the amazing effort of the Purism team, and holding the first fully functioning Librem 5, has been the most inspirational moment of Purism's five year history," said their founder and CEO Todd Weaver.

On Wednesday they posted a video announcing that the phones were now shipping, and Friday they posted a short walk-through video. "The crowdsourced $700 Linux phone is actually becoming a real product," reports Ars Technica: Purism's demand that everything be open means most of the major component manufacturers were out of the question. Perhaps because of the limited hardware options, the internal construction of the Librem 5 is absolutely wild. While smartphones today are mostly a single mainboard with every component integrated into it, the Librem 5 actually has a pair of M.2 slots that house full-size, off-the-shelf LTE and Wi-Fi cards for connectivity, just like what you would find in an old laptop. The M.2 sockets look massive on top of the tiny phone motherboard, but you could probably replace or upgrade the cards if you wanted...

[Y]ou're not going to get cutting-edge hardware at a great price with the Librem 5. That's not the point, though. The point is that you are buying a Linux phone, with privacy and open source at the forefront of the design. There are hardware kill switches for the camera, microphone, WiFi/Bluetooth, and baseband on the side of the phone, ensuring none of the I/O turns on unless you want it to. The OS is the Free Software Foundation-endorsed PureOS, a Linux distribution that, in this case, has been reworked with a mobile UI. Purism says it will provide updates for the "lifetime" of the device, which would be a stark contrast to the two years of updates you get with an Android phone.

PureOS is a Debian-based Linux distro, and on the Librem 5, you'll get to switch between mobile versions of the Gnome and KDE environments. If you're at all interested in PureOS, Purism's YouTube page is worth picking through. Dozens of short videos show that, yes, this phone really runs full desktop-class Linux. Those same videos show the dev kit running things like the APT package manager through a terminal, a desktop version of Solitaire, Emacs, the Gnome disk utility, DOSBox, Apache Web Server, and more. If it runs on your desktop Linux computer, it will probably run on the Librem 5, albeit with a possibly not-touch-friendly UI. The Librem 5 can even be hooked up to a monitor, keyboard, and mouse, and you can run all these Linux apps with the normal input tools...

Selling a smartphone is a cutthroat business, and we've seen dozens of companies try and fail over the years. Purism didn't just survive long enough to ship a product -- it survived in what is probably the hardest way possible, by building a non-Android phone with demands that all the hardware components use open code. Making it this far is an amazing accomplishment.

Initial results from NASA's InSight lander suggest that Mars' magnetic field wobbles in inexplicable ways at night, hinting that the red planet may host a global reservoir of liquid water deep below the surface. National Geographic reports: In addition to the odd magnetic pulsations, the lander's data show that the Martian crust is far more powerfully magnetic than scientists expected. What's more, the lander has picked up on a very peculiar electrically conductive layer, about 2.5 miles thick, deep beneath the planet's surface. It's far too early to say with any certainty, but there is a chance that this layer could represent a global reservoir of liquid water.

On Earth, groundwater is a hidden sea locked up in sand, soil, and rocks. If something similar is found on Mars, then "we shouldn't be surprised," says Jani Radebaugh, a planetary scientist at Brigham Young University who was not involved with the work. But if these results bear out, a liquid region at this scale on modern Mars has enormous implications for the potential for life, past or present. So far, none of these data have been through peer review, and details about the initial findings and interpretations will undoubtedly be tweaked over time. Still, the revelations provide a stunning showcase for InSight, a robot that has the potential to revolutionize our comprehension of Mars and other rocky worlds across the galaxy.

CIStud writes Barry Sonnenfeld, director of the "Men in Black" series, "Get Shorty" and most recently Netflix's "Series of Unfortunate Events", says 8K is "only good for sports" and High Dynamic Range (HDR) is "stupid" and "a waste."

Sonnenfeld, speaking with actor Patrick Warburton at the CEDIA Expo last week in Denver, called for a "filmmaker mode" on all TVs that can turn off unwanted HDR. He says Netflix's insistence everything be shot in HDR altered the cinematography on "Series of Unfortunate Events" to his disliking.
Sonnenfeld said Netflix and other streaming services feel HDR makes them appear "next level" from a technology perspective, according to the article, then conceded that "HDR is the future... but it shouldn't be. It's great for watching sports, like hockey, but nothing else... "

He also said today's cinematographers are actually using older lenses and filters on digital cameras to make them look like they weren't shot with a 4K or 8K camera. "The problem with 8K and even 4K is that all it is doing is bringing us closer to a video game aesthetic. It just looks more and more 'not real.' I can't watch any Marvel movies because none of the visual effects look real."

And both Sonnenfeld and Patrick Warburton believe that subscribers to streaming services should be able to watch first-run movies at home the same day the films are released in theaters.

A man named Roger was surprised to hear from an old college friend after all these years, reports the Philippine Daily Inquirer -- and even more surprised to find out why. What she wanted to know was why he gave her number to an online lending company that was hounding him at that time. The company told her that he was in debt and needed to pay up. Roger took out a loan using the company's app back in May, after seeing an ad on Facebook. His payment had been overdue for a week when the company contacted his college friend. But in fact he didn't give the company her number. The company tapped his contact list, then messaged his college friend to get him to make good on his debt. The company also called his wife and threatened to report him to his boss so he would lose his job. Roger, 26, has since paid back the loan. And he vowed to never use the app again...

Roger is not alone. The National Privacy Commission (NPC) has reported receiving 921 formal complaints since July 2018 about online lending companies who publicly shame borrowers to get them to pay up... Three companies are facing cases filed by the NPC for violating the Data Privacy Act of 2012... Privacy Commissioner Raymund Enriquez Liboro earlier released copies of the investigators' fact-finding reports, which recommended criminal prosecution of the board members of the three companies. "The investigation determined that their business practice specifically targets the privacy of persons, practically making a profit out of people's fear of losing face and dignity. These unethical practices simply have no place in a civilized society and must stop," Liboro then said...

In an affidavit sent to the NPC, one complainant said Fast Cash threatened to post her selfies on Facebook. Another said the CashLending app changed her profile picture on Facebook to an obscene picture... None of these would have happened unless the users gave permission to these apps. But many users backed into a corner by circumstance didn't have a choice. Roger, for one, said he could not use the app unless he agreed that the company could access his contacts... [T]he NPC argued that although the users gave their approval, the lack of easily understandable and clear information, among other factors, meant that it was not a "valid" consent... Among the charges filed against the companies are noncompliance with the legal requirements of processing personal data, as well as malicious and unauthorized disclosure. Their operators may face imprisonment of up to seven years and fines of not more than P5 million [about $97,000 U.S. dollars] under the Data Privacy Act of 2012.
One person who filed a formal complaint with the government later received a discouraging text message from the company in question. "Before you sue us, we already [sent] a text blast to all of your contacts. We know your home address, your office and even your ugly face. Good luck with your privacy law."

Plant-based/meat-free entrees are coming to major fast-food chains including White Castle, KFC, Del Taco, the Cheesecake Factory, and Subway. There's just one problem, argues an opinion piece by a certified nutritionist at NBC News: "these offerings aren't actually any healthier." The Impossible Whopper, for instance, not only has comparable caloric and fat levels as its meat-based counterpart, but it has more salt per serving; the Del Taco options are comparable. White Castle's Impossible Slider has more calories, more fat and more sodium than the meaty original (before you add cheese to either).

In fact, when you start to compare all of these offerings to their meat-based counterparts, you realize it's the same story no matter what brands you're talking about -- you might possibly save a few calories or carbs, but you'll probably get way more salt. Switching from meat-based fast foods to meat-free, then, isn't likely to help your health.
The article acknowledges that plant-based burgers may also be better for the environment, since 14.5% of all global greenhouse gas emissions are estimated to be coming from livestock. (And it also acknowledges plant-based substitutes may be better than red meat for people fighting heart disease or type 2 diabetes.) In addition, both the Beyond Burger and the Impossible Burger do have zero cholesterol -- while a high-cholesterol diet could lead to heart attacks and strokes.

But "If eating more realistic fake meat was about health, the offerings would be far lower in salt content, contain fewer calories and have a bit less dietary fat. None of them do..."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Scraping a public website without the approval of the website's owner isn't a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, an appeals court ruled on Monday. The ruling comes in a legal battle that pits Microsoft-owned LinkedIn against a small data-analytics company called hiQ Labs. HiQ scrapes data from the public profiles of LinkedIn users, then uses the data to help companies better understand their own workforces. After tolerating hiQ's scraping activities for several years, LinkedIn sent the company a cease-and-desist letter in 2017 demanding that hiQ stop harvesting data from LinkedIn profiles. Among other things, LinkedIn argued that hiQ was violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, America's main anti-hacking law.

This posed an existential threat to hiQ because the LinkedIn website is hiQ's main source of data about clients' employees. So hiQ sued LinkedIn, seeking not only a declaration that its scraping activities were not hacking but also an order banning LinkedIn from interfering. A trial court sided with hiQ in 2017. On Monday, the 9th Circuit Appeals Court agreed with the lower court, holding that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act simply doesn't apply to information that's available to the general public. [...] By contrast, hiQ is only scraping information from public LinkedIn profiles. By definition, any member of the public has authorization to access this information. LinkedIn argued that it could selectively revoke that authorization using a cease-and-desist letter. But the 9th Circuit found this unpersuasive. Ignoring a cease-and-desist letter isn't analogous to hacking into a private computer system. "The CFAA was enacted to prevent intentional intrusion onto someone else's computer -- specifically computer hacking," a three-judge panel wrote. The court notes that members debating the law repeatedly drew analogies to physical crimes like breaking and entering. In the 9th Circuit's view, this implies that the CFAA only applies to information or computer systems that were private to start with -- something website owners typically signal with a password requirement.

The court notes that when the CFAA was first enacted in the 1980s, it only applied to certain categories of computers that had military, financial, or other sensitive data. "None of the computers to which the CFAA initially applied were accessible to the general public," the court writes. "Affirmative authorization of some kind was presumptively required."

YouTube's $170 million fine for illegally collecting data on children "shows the US government is not serious about a Big Tech crackdown," argues an article at CNBC: The FTC's new settlement with YouTube over alleged violations of child privacy rules is just a fraction of the revenue its parent company generates in a single day. Shares of Google parent company Alphabet were up following news of the settlement, just like shares of Facebook after its record FTC fine. The action shows the U.S. government is not prepared for a Big Tech crackdown that will fundamentally alter the business.

Momentum is building in Washington to crack down on Big Tech's most free-wheeling practices: the Department of Justice is conducting a broad review of tech companies in addition to a reported antitrust investigation of Google, and Facebook disclosed a new antitrust probe by the Federal Trade Commission in July. But the meager penalties imposed on these companies in recent years, when compared with their size, shows the U.S. government is not yet prepared to take actions that will fundamentally alter the industry...

Wednesday's announcement marks the third agreement the FTC has reached with Google since 2011, when it charged the company with using "deceptive" privacy practices at the launch of its now-defunct social network. In 2012, the agency hit Google with a $22.5 million penalty, its highest ever for a violation of a commission order at the time, over charges that it misrepresented its ad-targeting practices to consumers. But in 2019, Google appears none the worse for wear. Google's stock price has grown more than 260% since the time of its historic 2012 FTC penalty and the company's now worth more than $800 billion. Revenue and profits have both more than doubled.
The article also notes that "Despite the penalties and noise from politicians about cracking down, Facebook's stock is up more than 40% so far this year," arguing that "the agencies that have so far had the power to force Big Tech to make real changes have opted for more incremental adjustments."

A long-time Slashdot reader has another suggestion: Stop the madness of fines. Just sentence the leadership to jail and prison time... Don't fine the companies. That just hurts the stockholders who really don't know whats going on in the board room...

According to a new study, those who drink more than two glasses of soda or any soft drink per day have a high risk of dying. From a report: Experts studied more than 450,000 people from 10 European countries for up to 19 years and found that those who had more than two glasses of soda per day had a higher risk of dying than people who drank less than one glass per month. The study, published Tuesday in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine, stated that men or women who drank two or more glasses a day of sugar-sweetened soft drinks had a higher risk of dying from digestive disorders, while those who drank the same amount of diet drinks had higher risks of dying from cardiovascular disease. The findings note that none of the subjects had cancer, diabetes, heart disease or stroke prior to the study.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Fast Company: In spring 2018, Facebook announced that it was launching its own version of Tinder -- but designed for people who are interested in meaningful relationships. Now, after rolling out in 19 countries including Colombia, Thailand, and Canada, Facebook's dating service is available in the United States. Instead of the rapid-fire swiping found in many dating apps like Tinder and Bumble, Facebook Dating users have to tap into each profile before they can "pass" on someone or express interest by sending them a message (there is no mutual interest necessary for someone to start a conversation, which could cause problems for women who already face harassment and unsolicited messages on dating apps). The company's algorithm selects matches for you based on location -- which you verify using location services on your phone -- along with your stated preference and interests that you've indicated on Facebook. The service is entirely opt-in, for people ages 18 and over, and you won't ever be matched with your friends.

A key element of helping people get to know potential matches is Instagram. For the U.S. launch, Facebook Dating will enable you to include photos from your Instagram feed inside your dating profile, and by the end of the year, users will be able to directly add Instagram stories to Dating as well, allowing potential future matches and people you're already conversing with to be able to get a sense of the slightly less filtered version of your life. "We think it's incredibly important to go where people are and allow them to bring all of these different networks and types of content to help them get the things they're trying to do done," says Fidji Simo, a vice president at Facebook and head of the Facebook app. Even though Dating is integrated directly into Facebook's app, the company has worked to create an entirely separate experience, including a separate profile and separate message thread.

"Facebook also says that none of your activity on Dating will be used for advertising, based on people's feedback about privacy (something Facebook has historically failed to provide)," reports Fast Company. "Facebook does put that data to use though: Information the company collects on you will be used to inform future matches that it shows you."

An anonymous reader quotes CNN: Stewart Goodwin tried to put a stop to the constant flow of scooters into the plaza he oversees. He spoke to the government and scooter companies, but to no avail. "We still find scooters in our fountains," Goodwin, executive director of the Indiana War Memorials in Indianapolis, told CNN Business. "We find them in the canal. We find them strewn all over the sidewalks."

In the Wild West of transportation, no one knows what to do about scooters. They appeared suddenly in many cities, triggering complaints of clutter and blocked sidewalks. When ridden, scooters emerged as sidewalk bullies -- fast enough to unsettle pedestrians and create safety issues. But force scooters into the streets and they are slow and vulnerable amid two-ton vehicles, not to mention potholes that can swallow small tires.

Now, governments, communities and businesses -- even the scooter companies themselves -- are playing catchup on finding the right rules for scooters, and how to enforce them....

None of this is what was supposed to happen.
CNN notes that this summer Atlanta banned nighttime riding "following a string of scooter deaths," while other cities have totally banned scooters, "with lingering memories of how Uber stormed onto their streets and created long-lasting challenges for local governments."

Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes: For nearly 20 years," writes WIRED's Alex Davies in How Anthony Levandowski Put Himself at the Center of an Industry, "the French-American Levandowski has played a kind of purposeful Forrest Gump for the world of autonomous driving. Rather than stumbling into the center of one momentous event after another, Levandowski has put himself there. And he has left a mixed trail in his wake: Former colleagues have described him as brilliant, engaging, motivating, fast-charging, inconsiderate, a weasel, and just plain evil. None, though, deny that whether for good or ill, the benefit of society or himself, Levandowski has played a propulsive role in the development of self-driving tech."

But that's of little comfort to Levandowski, who was charged by the Feds earlier this week with stealing driverless-vehicle technology from Alphabet Inc.'s Waymo unit, prompting the New Yorker's Charles Duhigg to explain How the Anthony Levandowski Indictment Helps Big Tech Stifle Innovation in Silicon Valley. The Economic Espionage Act of 1996, Duhigg notes, "was mostly intended to be used against overseas saboteurs, but it has largely been directed at American citizens -- and, in effect, has made federal prosecutors into heavies operating on behalf of disgruntled tech firms."

The definition of a 'trade secret' in the statute, Duhigg adds, is so broad that it could very well mean anything. Daniel Olmos, an attorney who has represented individuals accused of stealing trade secrets, once told Duhigg, "I get calls all the time from scared engineers, who once put some work stuff on their home computer so they could work on it after dinner, and now they're worried if they try to jump to another firm they're gonna get sued. And you know what? They're right to be worried.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Now, researchers have used carbon nanotubes to make a general purpose, RISC-V-compliant processor that handles 32-bit instructions and does 16-bit memory addressing. Performance is nothing to write home about, but the processor successfully executed a variation of the traditional programming demo, "Hello world!" It's an impressive bit of work, but not all of the researchers' solutions are likely to lead to high-performance processors. The new processor was made by a collaboration between MIT researchers and scientists at Analog Devices, Inc., who figured out a way to work around all the issue with carbon nanotubes.

The key insight by the researchers behind the new chip was that certain logical functions are less sensitive to metallic nanotubes than others. So they modified an open source RISC design tool to take this information into account. The result was a chip design that had none of the gates that were most sensitive to metallic carbon nanotubes. The resulting chip, which the team is calling the RV16X-NANO, was designed to handle the 32-bit-long instructions of the RISC-V architecture. Memory addressing was limited to 16-bits, and the functional units include instruction fetching, decoding, registers, execution units, and write back to memory. Overall, over 14,000 individual transistors were used for the RV16X-NANO, and the manipulations of the carbon nanotubes to make them resulted in a 100% yield. In other words, every single one of those 14,000 gates worked. It was also what's considered a 3D chip, in that the metal contacts below the nanotube layer were used for routing signals among the different transistors, while a separate layer of metal contacts layered above the nanotubes was used to supply power within the chip. The report has been published in the journal Nature.

Former Uber engineer Anthony Levandowski was charged with stealing driverless technology from Alphabet's Waymo unit, resurrecting the intrigue of the biggest legal battle to grip Silicon Valley in recent memory. From a report: The 33-count indictment announced Tuesday by federal officials in San Jose, California, adds a new criminal chapter to the saga that hung over Waymo's civil claims of trade-secret theft against Uber. Even after the companies abruptly settled the litigation in the middle of a high-stakes trial last year, questions remained about the mysterious engineer at the center of the turmoil. "All of us have the right to change jobs," San Francisco U.S. Attorney David Anderson said at a press conference in San Jose. "None of us has the right to fill our pockets on the way out the door. Theft is not innovation." Levandowski, 39, voluntarily surrendered to authorities and faces a maximum of 10 years in prison if he's convicted. Anderson said the government's investigation is ongoing, but he declined to discuss the probe further. Levandowski "didn't steal anything from anyone," his lawyer, Miles Ehrlich, said in a statement. The indictment "rehashed claims discredited in a civil case that settled more than a year and a half ago."

"While many users are abandoning Facebook, fed up with what seems like a never-ending series of privacy violations, a small cohort find themselves in the opposite position," reports New York Times enterprise reporter Kashmir Hill. [Alternate source here.] "They've been kicked off the platform, and no matter how hard they try -- and they try really, really hard -- they can't get back on..." In Facebook's version of a justice system, users are told only that their accounts have been disabled for "suspicious activity." If they appeal -- via a terse form that will accept only a name, contact information and an image of an ID -- a mysterious review process begins. The wait can be endless, and the inability to contact a Facebook employee maddening. Increasingly agitated, Facebook castaways turn for help to Twitter, Reddit, Quora, message boards and, well, me. Because I have a history of writing about (and sometimes solving) people's troubles with the platform, profoundly addicted Facebook users have found their way to my inbox, emailing multiple times a day for updates about their cases, which I do not have...

With more than 2 billion active members, Facebook has long been criticized for allowing bad actors to proliferate on its platform, from violent extremists to identity thieves. In May, the company announced that it disabled more than 3 billion "fake accounts" over a six-month period. "Our intent is simple: find and remove as many as we can while removing as few authentic accounts as possible," wrote Alex Schultz, Facebook's vice president for analytics, in an accompanying post... But the number of people complaining about disabled Facebook accounts has been going up for years, according to data from the Federal Trade Commission, which tracked three such complaints in 2015, 12 in 2016, and more than 50 in each of the last two years.

Once Facebook disables an account, Mr. Schultz wrote, it keeps the person behind it from rejoining by deploying "advanced detection systems" that look for "patterns of using suspicious email addresses, suspicious actions, or other signals previously associated with other fake accounts we've removed...." When Facebook reviewed 14 disabled accounts belonging to users contacted by The New York Times, the company said that just five had been banned with cause. Facebook suggested that the others should simply go through the appeals process again; most did, but none of their accounts have been reactivated so far.
According to the article, Facebook's voicemail system tells callers to press one for phone support -- then plays a recording saying "Thank you for calling Facebook user operations. Unfortunately, we do not offer phone support at this time." Then it hangs up.

Companies are constantly patenting strange things they have no intention of developing. From a report: Amazon is putting humans in cages to protect them from machines! Facebook is selling your face to advertisers so it can CGI you into ads! Sony has a system where you can skip ads if you stand up and yell the brand's name! None of these things are technically true -- they're headlines driven by patents filed by these companies. In each case, the company has not developed these technologies. And it's likely that they never will. And yet, head-scratching and sometimes hilarious patents continue to populate the patent office and generate headlines. So why are there so many strange, somewhat terrifying patents that companies will likely never act on?

There are lots of reasons to patent something. The most obvious one is that you've come up with a brilliant invention, and you want to protect your idea so that nobody can steal it from you. But that's just the tip of the patent strategy iceberg. It turns out there is a whole host of strategies that lead to "zany" or "weird" patent filings, and understanding them offers a window not just into the labyrinthine world of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and its potential failings, but also into how companies think about the future. And while it might be fun to gawk at, say, Motorola patenting a lie-detecting throat tattoo, it's also important to see through the eye-catching headlines and to the bigger issue here: Patents can be weapons and signals. They can spur innovation, as well as crush it.

Late Christmas Eve, 1966, a retired British army major named Paddy Roy Bates piloted a motorboat seven miles off the coast of England to an abandoned anti-aircraft platform "and declared it conquered," writes Pulitzer Prize-winning author Ian Urbina.

Bates used it as a pirate radio station, sometimes spending several months there while living on tins of corned beef, rice pudding, flour, and scotch. But then he declared it to be the world's tiniest maritime nation, writes Urbina, adding that in the half-century to come, "Sealand" was destined to become "a thumb in the eye of international law." Though no country formally recognizes Sealand, its sovereignty has been hard to deny. Half a dozen times, the British government and assorted other groups, backed by mercenaries, have tried and failed to take over the platform by force. In virtually every instance, the Bates family scared them off by firing rifles in their direction, tossing gasoline bombs, dropping cinder blocks onto their boats, or pushing their ladders into the sea. Britain once controlled a vast empire over which the sun never set, but it's been unable to control a rogue micronation barely bigger than the main ballroom in Buckingham Palace.... In recent years, its permanent citizenry has dwindled to one person: a full-time guard named Michael Barrington...

In the decades since its establishment, Sealand has been the site of coups and countercoups, hostage crises, a planned floating casino, a digital haven for organized crime, a prospective base for WikiLeaks, and myriad techno-fantasies, none brought successfully to fruition, many powered by libertarian dreams of an ocean-based nation beyond the reach of government regulation, and by the mythmaking creativity of its founding family. I had to go there.
The article also acknowledges the Seasteading Institute founded by Google software engineer Patri Friedman and backed by Peter Thiel -- as well as the idea of offshore-but-online services in Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon and Google's real-world plans for offshore data centers cooling their servers with seawater.

Urbina also tells the story of HavenCo, a grand plan for a Sealand-based data empire which ultimately had trouble powering their servers, alienating their gambling-industry customers with frequent outages. And in addition, one of the Bates' family says that "we also didn't see eye to eye with the computer guys about what sort of clients we were willing to host" -- and they objected to plans to illegally rebroadcast DVDs.

"For all their daring, the Bates family was wary of antagonizing the British and upsetting their delicately balanced claim to sovereignty."

The article is adapted from Urbina's upcoming book The Outlaw Ocean: Journeys Across the Last Untamed Frontier (to be released Tuesday).