Google has argued in court that the U.S. Department of Justice's proposal to break up its Chrome and Android businesses would weaken national security and harm the country's position in the global AI race, particularly against China. CNBC reports: The remedies trial in Washington, D.C., follows a judge's ruling in August that Google has held a monopoly in its core market of internet search, the most-significant antitrust ruling in the tech industry since the case against Microsoft more than 20 years ago. The Justice Department has called for Google to divest its Chrome browser unit and open its search data to rivals.

Google said in a blog post on Monday that such a move is not in the best interest of the country as the global battle for supremacy in artificial intelligence rapidly intensifies. In the first paragraph of the post, Google named China's DeepSeek as an emerging AI competitor. The DOJ's proposal would "hamstring how we develop AI, and have a government-appointed committee regulate the design and development of our products," Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, wrote in the post. "That would hold back American innovation at a critical juncture. We're in a fiercely competitive global race with China for the next generation of technology leadership, and Google is at the forefront of American companies making scientific and technological breakthroughs."

Researchers have uncovered a new supply chain attack called Slopsquatting, where threat actors exploit hallucinated, non-existent package names generated by AI coding tools like GPT-4 and CodeLlama. These believable yet fake packages, representing almost 20% of the samples tested, can be registered by attackers to distribute malicious code. CSO Online reports: Slopsquatting, as researchers are calling it, is a term first coined by Seth Larson, a security developer-in-residence at Python Software Foundation (PSF), for its resemblance to the typosquatting technique. Instead of relying on a user's mistake, as in typosquats, threat actors rely on an AI model's mistake. A significant number of packages, amounting to 19.7% (205,000 packages), recommended in test samples were found to be fakes. Open-source models -- like DeepSeek and WizardCoder -- hallucinated more frequently, at 21.7% on average, compared to the commercial ones (5.2%) like GPT 4. Researchers found CodeLlama ( hallucinating over a third of the outputs) to be the worst offender, and GPT-4 Turbo ( just 3.59% hallucinations) to be the best performer.

These package hallucinations are particularly dangerous as they were found to be persistent, repetitive, and believable. When researchers reran 500 prompts that had previously produced hallucinated packages, 43% of hallucinations reappeared every time in 10 successive re-runs, with 58% of them appearing in more than one run. The study concluded that this persistence indicates "that the majority of hallucinations are not just random noise, but repeatable artifacts of how the models respond to certain prompts." This increases their value to attackers, it added. Additionally, these hallucinated package names were observed to be "semantically convincing." Thirty-eight percent of them had moderate string similarity to real packages, suggesting a similar naming structure. "Only 13% of hallucinations were simple off-by-one typos," Socket added. The research can found be in a paper on arXiv.org (PDF).

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Whisky, a gaming-focused front-end for Wine's Windows compatibility tools on macOS, is no longer receiving updates. As one of the most useful and well-regarded tools in a Mac gamer's toolkit, it could be seen as a great loss, but its developer hopes you'll move on with what he considers a better option: supporting CodeWeavers' CrossOver product.

Also, Whisky's creator is an 18-year-old college student, and he could use a break. "I am 18, yes, and attending Northeastern University, so it's always a balancing act between my school work and dev work," Isaac Marovitz wrote to Ars. The Whisky project has "been more or less in this state for a few months, I posted the notice mostly to clarify and formally announce it," Marovitz said, having received "a lot of questions" about the project status. [...] "Whisky, in my opinion, has not been a positive on the Wine community as a whole," Marovitz wrote on the Whisky site.

He advised that Whisky users buy a CrossOver license, and noted that while CodeWeavers and Valve's work on Proton have had a big impact on the Wine project, "the amount that Whisky as a whole contributes to Wine is practically zero." Fixes for Wine running Mac games "have to come from people who are not only incredibly knowledgeable on C, Wine, Windows, but also macOS," Marovitz wrote, and "the pool of developers with those skills is very limited." While Marovitz told Ars that he's had "some contact with CodeWeavers" in making Whisky, "they were always curious and never told me what I should or should not do." It became clear to him, though, "from what [CodeWeavers] could tell me as well as observing the attitude of the wider community that Whisky could seriously threaten CrossOver's viability." "Whisky may have been a CrossOver competitor, but that's not how we feel today," wrote CodeWeavers CEO James B. Ramey in a statement. "Our response is simply one of empathy, understanding, and acknowledgement for Isaac's situation."

Slashdot reader yeokm1 is the Singapore-based embedded security researcher whose side projects include installing Linux on a 1993 PC and building a ChatGPT client for MS-DOS.

He's now sharing his latest project — installing Llama 2 on DOS: Conventional wisdom states that running LLMs locally will require computers with high performance specifications especially GPUs with lots of VRAM. But is this actually true?

Thanks to an open-source llama2.c project [original created by Andrej Karpathy], I ported it to work so vintage machines running DOS can actually inference with Llama 2 LLM models. Of course there are severe limitations but the results will surprise you.
"Everything is open sourced with the executable available here," according to the blog post. (They even addressed an early "gotcha" with DOS filenames being limited to eight characters.)

"As expected, the more modern the system, the faster the inference speed..." it adds. "Still, I'm amazed what can still be accomplished with vintage systems."

Matt Asay answered questions from Slashdot readers in 2010 (as the then-COO of Canonical). He currently runs developer relations at MongoDB (after holding similar positions at AWS and Adobe).

This week he contributed an opinion piece to InfoWorld arguing that DeepSeek "may have originated in China, but it stopped being Chinese the minute it was released on Hugging Face with an accompanying paper detailing its development." Soon after, a range of developers, including the Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence (BAAI), scrambled to replicate DeepSeek's success but this time as open source software. BAAI, for its part, launched OpenSeek, an ambitious effort to take DeepSeek's open-weight models and create a project that surpasses DeepSeek while uniting "the global open source communities to drive collaborative innovation in algorithms, data, and systems."

If that sounds cool to you, it didn't to the U.S. government, which promptly put BAAI on its "baddie" list. Someone needs to remind U.S. (and global) policymakers that no single country, company, or government can contain community-driven open source... DeepSeek didn't just have a moment. It's now very much a movement, one that will frustrate all efforts to contain it. DeepSeek, and the open source AI ecosystem surrounding it, has rapidly evolved from a brief snapshot of technological brilliance into something much bigger — and much harder to stop. Tens of thousands of developers, from seasoned researchers to passionate hobbyists, are now working on enhancing, tuning, and extending these open source models in ways no centralized entity could manage alone.

For example, it's perhaps not surprising that Hugging Face is actively attempting to reverse engineer and publicly disseminate DeepSeek's R1 model. Hugging Face, while important, is just one company, just one platform. But Hugging Face has attracted hundreds of thousands of developers who actively contribute to, adapt, and build on open source models, driving AI innovation at a speed and scale unmatched even by the most agile corporate labs.

Hugging Face by itself could be stopped. But the communities it enables and accelerates cannot. Through the influence of Hugging Face and many others, variants of DeepSeek models are already finding their way into a wide range of applications. Companies like Perplexity are embedding these powerful open source models into consumer-facing services, proving their real-world utility. This democratization of technology ensures that cutting-edge AI capabilities are no longer locked behind the walls of large corporations or elite government labs but are instead openly accessible, adaptable, and improvable by a global community.
"It's Linux all over again..." Asay writes at one point. "What started as the passion project of a lone developer quickly blossomed into an essential, foundational technology embraced by enterprises worldwide," winning out "precisely because it captivated developers who embraced its promise and contributed toward its potential."

We are witnessing a similar phenomenon with DeepSeek and the broader open source AI ecosystem, but this time it's happening much, much faster...

Organizations that cling to proprietary approaches (looking at you, OpenAI!) or attempt to exert control through restrictive policies (you again, OpenAI!) are not just swimming upstream — they're attempting to dam an ocean. (Yes, OpenAI has now started to talk up open source, but it's a long way from releasing a DeepSeek/OpenSeek equivalent on GitHub.)

"Russia is automating the spread of false information to fool AI chatbots," reports the Washington Post. (When researchers checked 10 chatbots, a third of the responses repeated false pro-Russia messaging.)

The Post argues that this tactic offers "a playbook to other bad actors on how to game AI to push content meant to inflame, influence and obfuscate instead of inform," and calls it "a fundamental weakness of the AI industry." Chatbot answers depend on the data fed into them. A guiding principle is that the more the chatbots read, the more informed their answers will be, which is why the industry is ravenous for content. But mass quantities of well-aimed chaff can skew the answers on specific topics. For Russia, that is the war in Ukraine. But for a politician, it could be an opponent; for a commercial firm, it could be a competitor. "Most chatbots struggle with disinformation," said Giada Pistilli, principal ethicist at open-source AI platform Hugging Face. "They have basic safeguards against harmful content but can't reliably spot sophisticated propaganda, [and] the problem gets worse with search-augmented systems that prioritize recent information."

Early commercial attempts to manipulate chat results also are gathering steam, with some of the same digital marketers who once offered search engine optimization — or SEO — for higher Google rankings now trying to pump up mentions by AI chatbots through "generative engine optimization" — or GEO.
Our current situation "plays into the hands of those with the most means and the most to gain: for now, experts say, that is national governments with expertise in spreading propaganda." Russia and, to a lesser extent, China have been exploiting that advantage by flooding the zone with fables. But anyone could do the same, burning up far fewer resources than previous troll farm operations... In a twist that befuddled researchers for a year, almost no human beings visit the sites, which are hard to browse or search. Instead, their content is aimed at crawlers, the software programs that scour the web and bring back content for search engines and large language models. While those AI ventures are trained on a variety of datasets, an increasing number are offering chatbots that search the current web. Those are more likely to pick up something false if it is recent, and even more so if hundreds of pages on the web are saying much the same thing...

The gambit is even more effective because the Russian operation managed to get links to the Pravda network stories edited into Wikipedia pages and public Facebook group postings, probably with the help of human contractors. Many AI companies give special weight to Facebook and especially Wikipedia as accurate sources. (Wikipedia said this month that its bandwidth costs have soared 50 percent in just over a year, mostly because of AI crawlers....) Last month, other researchers set out to see whether the gambit was working. Finnish company Check First scoured Wikipedia and turned up nearly 2,000 hyperlinks on pages in 44 languages that pointed to 162 Pravda websites. It also found that some false information promoted by Pravda showed up in chatbot answers.
"They do even better in such places as China," the article points out, "where traditional media is more tightly controlled and there are fewer sources for the bots." (The nonprofit American Sunlight Project calls the process "LLM grooming".)

The article quotes a top Kremlin propagandist as bragging in January that "we can actually change worldwide AI."

Bluesky is testing a new verification system featuring blue checks issued by "Trusted Verifiers" like news organizations, rather than a centralized authority or pay-to-play model like X (formerly Twitter). "Looking at the comments on the pull request, it's clear this idea has sparked a lot of discussion and a lot of concern among the community who follow the platform's development closely," reports Neowin. "Many users voiced strong opposition to the change, arguing that the existing domain name verification is sufficient and more aligned with the decentralized ethos that Bluesky aims for." From the report: There's a general worry that adding a visual badge, especially one controlled in part by Bluesky, feels too much like the centralized systems they were trying to escape from by joining Bluesky: "Do not want. BSky is not Twitter 2.0. Do not become like Elon Musk. We came here to get AWAY from that bs." Several commenters also expressed that the current domain name system, while not perfect, is an elegant and decentralized way to build trust, and that adding this new layer feels redundant and gives too much power to centralized entities, including Bluesky itself: "Let's please not do this. Domain names as user IDs is an elegant solution as a system of trust that builds off the infrastructure of an open web."

While the majority of the initial reaction seems negative, focusing on concerns about centralization and the value of the existing domain verification, there was some support for the idea of a visual badge, making it easier to quickly identify genuine accounts. One user commented: "I support this change. I like someone to verify that the account is indeed genuine and the username field showing the domain isn't helpful that much... A badge makes it easier to just tick it off that it's genuine." The PR author, estrattonbailey, later added a description to the pull request explaining that the goal is a "stronger visual signal" for notable accounts and clarifying it's not a paid service.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from SecurityWeek: An October 2024 study by Software AG suggests that half of all employees are Shadow AI users, and most of them wouldn't stop even if it was banned. The problem is the ease of access to AI tools, and a work environment that increasingly advocates the use of AI to improve corporate efficiency. It is little wonder that employees seek their own AI tools to improve their personal efficiency and maximize the potential for promotion. It is frictionless, says Michael Marriott, VP of marketing at Harmonic Security. 'Using AI at work feels like second nature for many knowledge workers now. Whether it's summarizing meeting notes, drafting customer emails, exploring code, or creating content, employees are moving fast.' If the official tools aren't easy to access or if they feel too locked down, they'll use whatever's available which is often via an open tab on their browser.

There is almost also never any malicious intent (absent, perhaps, the mistaken employment of rogue North Korean IT workers); merely a desire to do and be better. If this involves using unsanctioned AI tools, employees will likely not disclose their actions. The reasons may be complex but combine elements of a reluctance to admit that their efficiency is AI assisted rather than natural, and knowledge that use of personal shadow AI might be discouraged. The result is that enterprises often have little knowledge of the extent of Shadow IT, nor the risks it may present. According to an analysis from Harmonic, ChatGPT is the dominant gen-AI model used by employees, with 45% of data prompts originating from personal accounts (such as Gmail). Image files accounted for 68.3%. The report also notes that 7% of empmloyees were using Chinese AI models like DeepSeek, Baidu Chat and Qwen.

"Overall, there has been a slight reduction in sensitive prompt frequency from Q4 2024 (down from 8.5% to 6.7% in Q1 2025)," reports SecurityWeek. "However, there has been a shift in the risk categories that are potentially exposed. Customer data (down from 45.8% to 27.8%), employee data (from 26.8% to 14.3%) and security (6.9% to 2.1%) have all reduced. Conversely, legal and financial data (up from 14.9% to 30.8%) and sensitive code (5.6% to 10.1%) have both increased. PII is a new category introduced in Q1 2025 and was tracked at 14.9%."

IBM is mandating that U.S. sales and Cloud employees return to the office at least three days a week, with work required at designated client sites, flagship offices, or sales hubs. According to The Register, some IBM employees argue that these policies "represent stealth layoffs because older (and presumably more highly compensated) employees tend to be less willing to uproot their lives, and families where applicable, than the 'early professional hires' IBM has been courting at some legal risk." From the report: In a staff memo seen by The Register, Adam Lawrence, general manager for IBM Americas, billed the return-to-office for most stateside sales personnel as a "return to client initiative."Citing how "remarkable it is when our teams work side by side" at IBM's swanky Manhattan flagship office, unveiled in September 2024, Lawrence added IBM is investing in an Austin, Texas, office to be occupied in 2026.

Whether US sales staff end up working in NYC, Austin, or some other authorized location, Lawrence told them to brace for -- deep breath -- IBM's "new model" of "effective talent acquisition, deployment, and career progression." We're told that model is "centered on client proximity for those dedicated to specific clients, and anchored on core IBM locations for those dedicated to territories or those in above-market leadership roles." The program requires most IBM US sales staff "to work at least three days a week from the client location where their assigned territory decision-makers work, a flagship office, or a sales hub." Those residing more than 50 miles from their assigned location will be offered relocation benefits to move. Sales hubs are an option only for those with more than one dedicated account.

[...] IBM's office policy change reached US Cloud employees in an April 10 memo from Alan Peacock, general manager of IBM Cloud. Peacock set a July 1, 2025, deadline for US Cloud employees to work from an office at least three days per week, with relocating workers given until October 1, 2025. The employee shuffling has been accompanied by rolling layoffs in the US, but hiring in India -- there are at least 10x as many open IBM jobs in India as there are in any other IBM location, according to the corporation's career listings. And earlier this week, IBM said it "is setting up a new software lab in Lucknow," India.

New research suggests Oda Ujiharu, long derided as feudal Japan's most ineffective military leader, may have been mischaracterized. The Sengoku-period daimyo, who ruled from Oda Castle in present-day Ibaraki Prefecture, lost his fortress an unprecedented nine times to rival clans -- but recaptured it eight times, often with inferior forces.

"His refusal to accept defeat and his iron will to get up and keep fighting is why many historians reject the 'weakest samurai warlord' nickname and instead refer to him as 'The Phoenix,'" notes the research published in Tokyo Weekender. While Ujiharu's battlefield decisions appear strategically baffling -- repeatedly abandoning castle defenses for open combat -- some researchers propose these actions were deliberately taken to protect peasant settlements from the devastation of prolonged sieges. From the article: Ujiharu's blind charges may actually have had a noble purpose. Japanese battles involving castles almost always turned into sieges, and those always ended the same way: with the nearby fields and peasant settlements being either destroyed to try and draw the lord out of the castle or looted to feed the occupying army. Some researchers believe that Ujiharu was trying to avoid a siege to save his subjects. Despite numerous military setbacks, Ujiharu maintained remarkable loyalty from his subordinates. Historical records indicate that after his initial campaigns, attempts to bribe or threaten his retainers to defect consistently failed.

The daimyo demonstrated considerable diplomatic acumen, forming multiple alliances with former enemies throughout his career. His downfall came only after hesitating to pledge allegiance to Toyotomi Hideyoshi during Japan's unification, resulting in his lands being confiscated.

samleecole shares a report from 404 Media and Wired: American police departments near the United States-Mexico border are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for an unproven and secretive technology that uses AI-generated online personas designed to interact with and collect intelligence on "college protesters," "radicalized" political activists, and suspected drug and human traffickers, according to internal documents, contracts, and communications 404 Media obtained via public records requests. Massive Blue, the New York-based company that is selling police departments this technology, calls its product Overwatch, which it markets as an "AI-powered force multiplier for public safety" that "deploys lifelike virtual agents, which infiltrate and engage criminal networks across various channels." According to a presentation obtained by 404 Media, Massive Blue is offering cops these virtual personas that can be deployed across the internet with the express purpose of interacting with suspects over text messages and social media. [...]

While the documents don't describe every technical aspect of how Overwatch works, they do give a high-level overview of what it is. The company describes a tool that uses AI-generated images and text to create social media profiles that can interact with suspected drug traffickers, human traffickers, and gun traffickers. After Overwatch scans open social media channels for potential suspects, these AI personas can also communicate with suspects over text, Discord, and other messaging services. The documents we obtained don't explain how Massive Blue determines who is a potential suspect based on their social media activity. Salzwedel, of Pinal County, said "Massive Blue's solutions crawl multiple areas of the Internet, and social media outlets are just one component. We cannot disclose any further information to preserve the integrity of our investigations." [...] Besides scanning social media and engaging suspects with AI personas, the presentation says that Overwatch can use generative AI to create "proof of life" images of a person holding a sign with a username and date written on it in pen.

Fraud rings using fake "bot" students have infiltrated America's community colleges, stealing over $11 million from California's system alone in 2024. The nationwide scheme, which began in 2021, targets open-admission institutions where scammers enroll fictitious students in online courses to collect financial aid disbursements.

"We didn't used to have to decide if our students were human," said Eric Maag, who has taught at Southwestern College for 21 years. Faculty now spend hours vetting suspicious enrollees and analyzing AI-generated assignments. At Southwestern in Chula Vista, professor Elizabeth Smith discovered 89 of her 104 enrolled students were fraudulent. The California Community College system estimates 25% of all applicants statewide are bots. Community college administrators describe fighting an evolving technological battle against increasingly sophisticated fraud tactics. The fraud crisis has particularly impacted asynchronous online courses, crowding real students out of classes and fundamentally altering faculty roles.

OpenAI has released Codex CLI, an open-source coding agent that runs locally in users' terminal software. Announced alongside the company's new o3 and o4-mini models, Codex CLI directly connects OpenAI's AI systems with local code and computing tasks, enabling them to write and manipulate code on users' machines.

The lightweight tool allows developers to leverage multimodal reasoning capabilities by passing screenshots or sketches to the model while providing access to local code repositories. Unlike more ambitious future plans for an "agentic software engineer" that could potentially build entire applications from descriptions, Codex CLI focuses specifically on integrating AI models with command-line interfaces.

To accelerate adoption, OpenAI is distributing $1 million in API credits through a grant program, offering $25,000 blocks to selected projects. While the tool expands AI's role in programming workflows, it comes with inherent risks -- studies show AI coding models frequently fail to fix security vulnerabilities and sometimes introduce new bugs, particularly concerning when given system-level access.

A Canadian math prodigy is accused of stealing over $65 million through complex exploits on decentralized finance platforms and is currently a fugitive from U.S. authorities. Despite facing criminal charges for fraud and money laundering, he has evaded capture by moving internationally, embracing the controversial "Code is Law" philosophy, and maintaining that his actions were legal under the platforms' open-source rules. The Globe and Mail reports: Andean Medjedovic was 18 years old when he made a decision that would irrevocably alter the course of his life. In the fall of 2021, shortly after completing a master's degree at the University of Waterloo, the math prodigy and cryptocurrency trader from Hamilton had conducted a complex series of transactions designed to exploit a vulnerability in the code of a decentralized finance platform. The maneuver had allegedly allowed him to siphon approximately $16.5-million in digital tokens out of two liquidity pools operated by the platform, Indexed Finance, according to a U.S. court document.

Indexed Finance's leaders traced the attack back to Mr. Medjedovic, and made him an offer: Return 90 per cent of the funds, keep the rest as a so-called "bug bounty" -- a reward for having identified an error in the code -- and all would be forgiven. Mr. Medjedovic would then be free to launch his career as a white hat, or ethical, hacker. Mr. Medjedovic didn't take the deal. His social media posts hinted, without overtly stating, that he believed that because he had operated within the confines of the code, he was entitled to the funds -- a controversial philosophy in the world of decentralized finance known as "Code is Law." But instead of testing that argument in court, Mr. Medjedovic went into hiding. By the time authorities arrived on a quiet residential street in Hamilton to search his parents' townhouse less than two months later, Mr. Medjedovic had moved out, taking his electronic devices with him.

Then, roughly two years later, he struck again, netting an even larger sum -- approximately $48.4-million -- by conducting a similar exploit on another decentralized finance platform, U.S. authorities allege. Mr. Medjedovic, now 22, faces five criminal charges -- including wire fraud, attempted extortion and money laundering -- according to a U.S. federal court document that was unsealed earlier this year. If convicted, he could be facing decades in prison. First, authorities will have to find him.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Figma has sent a cease-and-desist letter to popular no-code AI startup Lovable, Figma confirmed to TechCrunch. The letter tells Lovable to stop using the term "Dev Mode" for a new product feature. Figma, which also has a feature called Dev Mode, successfully trademarked that term last year, according to the U.S. Patent and Trademark office. What's wild is that "dev mode" is a common term used in many products that cater to software programmers. It's like an edit mode. Software products from giant companies like Apple's iOS, Google's Chrome, Microsoft's Xbox have features formally called "developer mode" that then get nicknamed "dev mode" in reference materials.

Even "dev mode" itself is commonly used. For instance Atlassian used it in products that pre-date Figma's copyright by years. And it's a common feature name in countless open source software projects. Figma tells TechCrunch that its trademark refers only to the shortcut "Dev Mode" -- not the full term "developer mode." Still, it's a bit like trademarking the term "bug" to refer to "debugging." Since Figma wants to own the term, it has little choice but send cease-and-desist letters. (The letter, as many on X pointed out, was very polite, too.) If Figma doesn't defend the term, it could be absorbed as a generic term and the trademarked becomes unenforceable.

Remember how last weekend Meta claimed its "Maverick" AI model (in the newly-released Llama-4 series) beat GPT-4o and Gemini Flash 2 "on all benchmarks... This thing is a beast."

And then how within a day several AI researchers pointed out that even Meta's own announcement admitted the Maverick tested on LM Arena was an "experimental chat version," as TechCrunch pointed out. ("As we've written about before, for various reasons, LM Arena has never been the most reliable measure of an AI model's performance. But AI companies generally haven't customized or otherwise fine-tuned their models to score better on LM Arena — or haven't admitted to doing so, at least.")

Friday TechCrunch on what happened when LMArena tested the unmodified release version of Maverick (Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct).

It ranked 32nd.

"For the record, older models like Claude 3.5 Sonnet, released last June, and Gemini-1.5-Pro-002, released last September, rank higher," notes the tech site Neowin.

Celebrating Git's 20th anniversary, GitHub hosted a Q&A with Linus Torvalds, writes Its FOSS News.

Among the other revelations: He says his college-age daughter sent a texting saying he's better known at her CS lab for Git than for Linux, "because they actually use Git for everything there." Which he describes as "ridiculous" because he maintained it for just four months before handing it off to Junio Hamano who's been heading up development for more than 19 years now. "When it did what I needed," Torvalds says, "I lost interest." Linus then goes on to share how Git was never a big thing for him, but a means to an end that prevented the Linux kernel from descending into chaos over the absence of a version control system. You see, before Git, Linux used BitKeeper for version control, but its proprietary licensing didn't sit too well with other Linux contributors, and Linus Torvalds had to look for alternatives. As it turned out, existing tools like CVS and Subversion were too slow for the job at hand, prompting him to build a new tool from scratch, with the coding part just taking 10 days for an early self-hostable version of Git.

In its initial days, there were some teething issues, where users would complain about Git to Linus, even finding it too difficult to use, but things got calmer as the tool developed further.
Torvalds thinks some early adopters had trouble because they were coming from a background that was more like CVS. "The Git mindset, I came at it from a file system person's standpoint, where I had this disdain and almost hatred of most source control management projects, so I was not at all interested in maintaining the status quo."

A former Facebook employee/whistleblower alleges Meta's AI model Lllama was used to help DeepSeek.

The whistleblower — former Facebook director of global policy Sarah Wynn-Williams — testified before U.S. Senators on Wednesday. CBS News found this earlier response from Meta: In a statement last year on Llama, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone wrote, "The alleged role of a single and outdated version of an American open-source model is irrelevant when we know China is already investing over 1T to surpass the US technologically, and Chinese tech companies are releasing their own open AI models as fast, or faster, than US ones."

Wynn-Williams encouraged senators to continue investigating Meta's role in the development of artificial intelligence in China, as they continue their probe into the social media company founded by Zuckerberg. "The greatest trick Mark Zuckerberg ever pulled was wrapping the American flag around himself and calling himself a patriot and saying he didn't offer services in China, while he spent the last decade building an $18 billion business there," she said.
The testimony also left some of the lawmakers skeptical of Zuckerberg's commitment to free speech after the whistleblower also alleged Facebook worked "hand in glove" with the Chinese government to censor its platforms: In her almost seven years with the company, Wynn-Williams told the panel she witnessed the company provide "custom built censorship tools" for the Chinese Communist Party. She said a Chinese dissident living in the United States was removed from Facebook in 2017 after pressure from Chinese officials. Facebook said at the time it took action against the regime critic, Guo Wengui, for sharing someone else's personal information. Wynn-Williams described the use of a "virality counter" that flagged posts with over 10,000 views for review by a "chief editor," which Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut called "an Orwellian censor." These "virality counters" were used not only in Mainland China, but also in Hong Kong and Taiwan, according to Wynn-Williams's testimony.

Wynn-Williams also told senators Chinese officials could "potentially access" the data of American users.

Military chiefs at Nato have been warned of global internet blackouts following a string of suspected Russian attacks on subsea cables. From a report: Telecoms companies including Vodafone, O2 owner Telefonica and Orange have written to UK, EU and Nato officials warning that a rise in sabotage incidents was putting critical services at risk. In an open letter, they wrote: "The repercussions of damage to subsea cables extend far beyond Europe, potentially affecting global internet and power infrastructure, international communications, financial transactions and critical services worldwide."

It comes after a spike in incidents relating to fibre optic cables on seabeds that carry huge volumes of data, voice and internet traffic between countries. More than 500 cables carry around 95pc of all international data, while their remote location makes them difficult and costly to monitor. At least 11 subsea cables have been damaged in the Baltic Sea since October 2023 and similar outages have been reported in the North Sea.

The incidents have fuelled fears of sabotage by hostile actors, with more than 50 Russian ships observed in areas of high cable density in the Baltic Sea. The UK is monitoring the Russian spy ship Yantar amid concerns that it is mapping critical underwater infrastructure. Concerns have also been raised about Chinese sabotage following a number of incidents around Taiwan.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Meta's latest whistleblower, Sarah Wynn-Williams, got a warm reception on Capitol Hill Wednesday, as the Careless People author who the company has fought to silence described the company's chief executive as someone willing to shapeshift into whatever gets him closest to power. The message was one that lawmakers on the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on crime and counterterrorism were very open to. Their responses underscore that amid CEO Mark Zuckerberg's latest pivot in cozying up to the right, his perception in Washington has not yet totally changed, even as he reportedly lobbies President Donald Trump to drop the government's antitrust case against the company.

"He's recently tried a reinvention in which he is now a great advocate of free speech, after being an advocate of censorship in China and in this country for years," subcommittee Chair Josh Hawley (R-MO) said, pointing to longtime conservative allegations that Meta has suppressed things like vaccine skepticism and the Hunter Biden laptop story. "Now that's all wiped away. Now he's on Joe Rogan and says that he is Mr. Free Speech, he is Mr. MAGA, he's a whole new man, and his company, they're a whole new company. Do you buy this latest reinvention of Mark Zuckerberg?"

"If he is such a fan of freedom of speech, why is he trying to silence me?" Wynn-Williams asked in response. Meta convinced an arbitrator to order her to stop making disparaging statements and halt further publishing and promotion of the book, which details Meta's alleged dealings with the Chinese government and claims of sexual harassment from a top executive.