Longtime Slashdot reader chicksdaddy writes: CES, the Consumer Electronics Show, isn't just about shiny new gadgets. As AP reports, this year brought back the fifth annual Worst in Show anti-awards, calling out the most harmful, wasteful, invasive, and unfixable tech at the Las Vegas show. The coalition behind the awards -- including Repair.org, iFixit, EFF, PIRG, Secure Repairs, and others -- put the spotlight on products that miss the point of innovation and make life worse for users.

2026 Worst in Show winners include:

Overall (and Repairability): Samsung's AI-packed Family Hub Fridge -- over-engineered, hard to fix, and trying to do everything but keep food cold.
Privacy: Amazon Ring AI -- expanding surveillance with features like facial recognition and mobile towers.
Security: Merach UltraTread treadmill -- an AI fitness coach that also hoovers up sensitive data with weak security guarantees, including a privacy policy that declares the company "cannot guarantee the security of your personal information" (!!).
Environmental Impact: Lollipop Star -- a single-use, music-playing electronic lollipop that epitomizes needless e-waste.
Enshittification: Bosch eBike Flow App -- pushing lock-in and digital restrictions that make gear worse over time.
"Who Asked For This?": Bosch Personal AI Barista -- a voice-assistant coffee maker that nobody really wanted.
People's Choice: Lepro Ami AI Companion -- an overhyped "soulmate" cam that creeps more than it comforts.

The message? Not all tech is progress. Some products add needless complexity, threaten privacy, or throw sustainability out the window -- and the industry's watchdogs are calling them out.

"In the lead up to its Switch 2 console release, Nintendo updated its user agreement," writes the Free Software Foundation, warning that Nintendo now claims "broad authority to make consoles owned by its customers permanently unusable."

"Under Nintendo's most aggressive digital restrictions management (DRM) update to date, game console owners are now required to give Nintendo the unilateral right to revoke access to games, security updates, and the Internet, at its sole discretion." The new agreement states: "You acknowledge that if you fail to comply with [Nintendo's restrictions], Nintendo may render the Nintendo Account Services and/or the applicable Nintendo device permanently unusable in whole or in part...."

There are probably other reasons that Nintendo has and will justify bricking game consoles, but here are some that we have seen reported:

— "Tampering" with hardware or software in pretty much any way;
— Attempting to play a back-up game;
— Playing a "used" game; or
— Use of a third-party game or accessory...


Nintendo's promise to block a user from using their game console isn't just an empty threat: it has already been wielded against many users. For example, within a month of the Switch 2's release, one user unknowingly purchased an open-box return that had been bricked, and despite functional hardware, it was unusable for many games. In another case, a user installing updates for game cartridges purchased via a digital marketplace had their console disabled. Though it's unclear exactly why they were banned, it's possible that the cartridge's previous owner made a copy and an online DRM check determined that the current and previous owner's use were both "fraudulent." The user only had their console released through appealing to Nintendo directly and providing evidence of their purchase, a laborious process.

Nintendo's new console banning spree is just one instance of the threat that nonfree software and DRM pose to users. DRM is but one injustice posed by nonfree software, and the target of the FSF's Defective by Design campaign. Like with all software, users ought to be able to freely copy, study, and modify the programs running on their devices. Proprietary software developers actively oppose and antagonize their users. In the case of Nintendo, this means punishing legitimate users and burdening them with proving that their use is "acceptable." Console users shouldn't have to tread so carefully with a console that they own, and should they misstep, beg Nintendo to allow them to use their consoles again.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: At this point, most competitive online multiplayer games on the PC come with some kind of kernel-level anti-cheat software. As we've written before, this is software that runs with more elevated privileges than most other apps and games you run on your PC, allowing it to load in earlier and detect advanced methods of cheating. More recently, anti-cheat software has started to require more Windows security features like Secure Boot, a TPM 2.0 module, and virtualization-based memory integrity protection. Riot Games, best known for titles like Valorant and League of Legends and the Vanguard anti-cheat software, has often been one of the earliest to implement new anti-cheat requirements. There's already a long list of checks that systems need to clear before they'll be allowed to play Riot's games online, and now the studio is announcing a new one: a BIOS update requirement that will be imposed on "certain players" following Riot's discovery of a UEFI bug that could allow especially dedicated and motivated cheaters to circumvent certain memory protections.

In short, the bug affects the input-output memory management unit (IOMMU) "on some UEFI-based motherboards from multiple vendors." One feature of the IOMMU is to protect system memory from direct access during boot by external hardware devices, which otherwise might manipulate the contents of your PC's memory in ways that could enable cheating. The patch for these security vulnerabilities (CVE-2025-11901, CVE-202514302, CVE-2025-14303, and CVE-2025-14304) fixes a problem where this pre-boot direct memory access (DMA) protection could be disabled even if it was marked as enabled in the BIOS, creating a small window during the boot process where DMA devices could gain access to RAM.

The relative obscurity and complexity of this hardware exploit means that Vanguard isn't going to be enforcing these BIOS requirements on every single player of its games. For now, it will just apply to "restricted" players of Valorant whose systems, for one reason or another, are "too similar to cheaters who get around security features in order to become undetectable to Vanguard." But Riot says it's considering rolling the BIOS requirement out to all players in Valorant's highest competitive ranking tiers (Ascendant, Immortal, and Radiant), where there's more to be gained from working around the anti-cheat software. And Riot anti-cheat analyst Mohamed Al-Sharifi says the same restrictions could be turned on for League of Legends, though they aren't currently. If users are blocked from playing by Vanguard, they'll need to download and install the latest BIOS update for their motherboard before they'll be allowed to launch the game. Riot's new anti-cheat change could create problems for older PCs if the new anti-cheat change is expanded, notes Ars.

The update relies on a BIOS patch to fix a UEFI flaw, and many older motherboards, especially Intel 300-series and AMD AM4 boards, may never receive that update. If Riot flags a system and the manufacturer doesn't provide a patched BIOS, players could be locked out of games despite having otherwise capable hardware.

In October cryptologist/CS professor Daniel J. Bernstein alleged that America's National Security Agency (and its UK counterpart GCHQ) were attempting to influence NIST to adopt weaker post-quantum cryptography standards without a "hybrid" approach that would've also included pre-quantum ECC.

Bernstein is of the opinion that "Given how many post-quantum proposals have been broken and the continuing flood of side-channel attacks, any competent engineering evaluation will conclude that the best way to deploy post-quantum [PQ] encryption for TLS, and for the Internet more broadly, is as double encryption: post-quantum cryptography on top of ECC." But he says he's seen it playing out differently: By 2013, NSA had a quarter-billion-dollar-a-year budget to "covertly influence and/or overtly leverage" systems to "make the systems in question exploitable"; in particular, to "influence policies, standards and specification for commercial public key technologies". NSA is quietly using stronger cryptography for the data it cares about, but meanwhile is spending money to promote a market for weakened cryptography, the same way that it successfully created decades of security failures by building up the market for, e.g., 40-bit RC4 and 512-bit RSA and Dual EC. I looked concretely at what was happening in IETF's TLS working group, compared to the consensus requirements for standards-development organizations. I reviewed how a call for "adoption" of an NSA-driven specification produced a variety of objections that weren't handled properly. ("Adoption" is a preliminary step before IETF standardization....) On 5 November 2025, the chairs issued "last call" for objections to publication of the document. The deadline for input is "2025-11-26", this coming Wednesday.
Bernstein also shares concerns about how the Internet Engineering Task Force is handling the discussion, and argues that the document is even "out of scope" for the IETF TLS working group This document doesn't serve any of the official goals in the TLS working group charter. Most importantly, this document is directly contrary to the "improve security" goal, so it would violate the charter even if it contributed to another goal... Half of the PQ proposals submitted to NIST in 2017 have been broken already... often with attacks having sufficiently low cost to demonstrate on readily available computer equipment. Further PQ software has been broken by implementation issues such as side-channel attacks.
He's also concerned about how that discussion is being handled: On 17 October 2025, they posted a "Notice of Moderation for Postings by D. J. Bernstein" saying that they would "moderate the postings of D. J. Bernstein for 30 days due to disruptive behavior effective immediately" and specifically that my postings "will be held for moderation and after confirmation by the TLS Chairs of being on topic and not disruptive, will be released to the list"...

I didn't send anything to the IETF TLS mailing list for 30 days after that. Yesterday [November 22nd] I finished writing up my new objection and sent that in. And, gee, after more than 24 hours it still hasn't appeared... Presumably the chairs "forgot" to flip the censorship button off after 30 days.
Thanks to alanw (Slashdot reader #1,822) for spotting the blog posts.

For nearly three years OpenAI has touted ChatGPT as a "revolutionary" (and work-transforming) productivity tool, reports the Washington Post.

But after analyzing 47,000 ChatGPT conversations, the Post found that users "are overwhelmingly turning to the chatbot for advice and companionship, not productivity tasks." The Post analyzed a collection of thousands of publicly shared ChatGPT conversations from June 2024 to August 2025. While ChatGPT conversations are private by default, the conversations analyzed were made public by users who created shareable links to their chats that were later preserved in the Internet Archive and downloaded by The Post. It is possible that some people didn't know their conversations would become publicly preserved online. This unique data gives us a glimpse into an otherwise black box...

Overall, about 10 percent of the chats appeared to show people talking about their emotions, role-playing, or seeking social interactions with the chatbot. Some users shared highly private and sensitive information with the chatbot, such as information about their family in the course of seeking legal advice. People also sent ChatGPT hundreds of unique email addresses and dozens of phone numbers in the conversations... Lee Rainie, director of the Imagining the Digital Future Center at Elon University, said that it appears ChatGPT "is trained to further or deepen the relationship." In some of the conversations analyzed, the chatbot matched users' viewpoints and created a personalized echo chamber, sometimes endorsing falsehoods and conspiracy theories.
Four of ChatGPT's answers about health problems got a failing score from a chair of medicine at the University of California San Francisco, the Post points out. But four other answers earned a perfect score.

Adam Marshall spent more than a decade developing Kingdoms of the Dump while working as a custodian at a school in suburban Philadelphia, cleaning floors and hauling trash bags from 3 PM to 11 PM before coming home to work on his turn-based role-playing game until 5 or 6 AM. The game, which Bloomberg has called "one of the year's most charming RPGs," came out on Tuesday after Marshall and his childhood friend Matt Loiseau -- also a janitor -- built it using RPG Maker alongside a small team of hobbyists who mostly worked for free.

The pair launched a Kickstarter campaign in 2019 that raised $76,560, but the pandemic disrupted their plans and forced them to lose contractors and rethink their approach. Marshall maintained this schedule for five years straight before quitting his custodial job last year to finish the game full-time. Kingdoms of the Dump has sold about 7,000 copies since its release. The game stars a walking trashcan named Dustin Binsley who adventures through landfills and sewers in a world made entirely of garbage.

An anonymous reader shares a report: A Microsoft executive is questioning why more people aren't impressed with AI, a week after the company touted the evolution of Windows into an "agentic OS," which immediately triggered backlash.

"Jeez there so many cynics! It cracks me up when I hear people call AI underwhelming," tweeted Mustafa Suleyman, the CEO for Microsoft's AI group. Suleyman added that he grew up playing the old-school 2D Snake game on a Nokia phone. "The fact that people are unimpressed that we can have a fluent conversation with a super smart AI that can generate any image/video is mindblowing to me," he wrote.

An anonymous reader shared this report from CNBC: Neurodiverse professionals may see unique benefits from artificial intelligence tools and agents, research suggests. With AI agent creation booming in 2025, people with conditions like ADHD, autism, dyslexia and more report a more level playing field in the workplace thanks to generative AI. A recent study from the UK's Department for Business and Trade found that neurodiverse workers were 25% more satisfied with AI assistants and were more likely to recommend the tool than neurotypical respondents. [The study involved 1,000 users of Microsoft 365 Copilot from October through December of 2024.]

"Standing up and walking around during a meeting means that I'm not taking notes, but now AI can come in and synthesize the entire meeting into a transcript and pick out the top-level themes," said Tara DeZao, senior director of product marketing at enterprise low-code platform provider Pega. DeZao, who was diagnosed with ADHD as an adult, has combination-type ADHD, which includes both inattentive symptoms (time management and executive function issues) and hyperactive symptoms (increased movement). "I've white-knuckled my way through the business world," DeZao said. "But these tools help so much...."

Generative AI happens to be particularly adept at skills like communication, time management and executive functioning, creating a built-in benefit for neurodiverse workers who've previously had to find ways to fit in among a work culture not built with them in mind. Because of the skills that neurodiverse individuals can bring to the workplace — hyperfocus, creativity, empathy and niche expertise, just to name a few — some research suggests that organizations prioritizing inclusivity in this space generate nearly one-fifth higher revenue. "Investing in ethical guardrails, like those that protect and aid neurodivergent workers, is not just the right thing to do," said Kristi Boyd, an AI specialist with the SAS data ethics practice. "It's a smart way to make good on your organization's AI investments."

The Verge's Ash Parrish writes: Nintendo has released a new store app on Android and iOS giving users the ability to purchase hardware, accessories, and games for the Switch and Switch 2. When I open my phone and scroll down to the N's, I get a neat, full row dedicated entirely to Nintendo. That's four apps: the Switch app, the music app, the Nintendo Today news app, and now the store. (The tally increases to five if you're a parent using the Switch Parental Controls app.) And it is entirely too much.

Nintendo has always been the one company of the big three publishers that does its own thing, and that's worked both for and against it. The company hasn't chased development trends with the same zeal as Microsoft and Sony. That insulates Nintendo when those trends don't pan out, like exorbitant spending on live-service games that fail. But also hurts it when it comes to performance and user experience. Console-native voice chat, for example, has been a standard on other platforms for a long time, but was only offered on a Nintendo console with the Switch 2 this year.

With the deployment of these apps, Nintendo is both trying to innovate and playing catch-up with results that feel confusing and overwhelming. Do we really need four distinct apps? That's not to say these apps shouldn't exist; they serve valuable and necessary purposes. But when I look at all the programs I have to manage in my Nintendo life, it just feels like it's too much... Further reading: Nintendo Won't Shy Away From Continuing To 'Try Anything'

OpenAI CFO Sarah Friar said late Wednesday that the AI startup is not seeking a government backstop for its infrastructure commitments, clarifying previous comments she made on stage during the Wall Street Journal's Tech Live event. From a report: At the event, Friar said OpenAI is looking to create an ecosystem of banks, private equity and a federal "backstop" or "guarantee" that could help the company finance its investments in cutting-edge chips. But in a LinkedIn post late Wednesday, Friar softened her stance.

"I used the word 'backstop' and it muddied the point," Friar wrote. "As the full clip of my answer shows, I was making the point that American strength in technology will come from building real industrial capacity which requires the private sector and government playing their part." OpenAI has inked more than $1.4 trillion of infrastructure deals in recent months to try and build out the data centers it says are needed to meet soaring demand. The agreements have raised questions around how the company can afford to make such massive commitments.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Today, Samsung provided details about the next version of the HDR10 format, which introduces six new features. Among HDR10+ Advanced's most interesting features is HDR10+ Intelligent FRC (frame rate conversion), which is supposed to improve motion smoothing.

A TV using motion smoothing analyzes each video frame and tries to determine what additional frames would look like if the video were playing at a frame rate that matched the TV's refresh rate. The TV then inserts those frames into the video. A 60Hz TV with motion smoothing on, for example, would attempt to remove judder from a 24p film by inserting frames so that the video plays as if it were shot at 60p. For some, this appears normal and can make motion, especially camera panning or zooming, look smoother. However, others will report movies and shows that look more like soap operas, or as if they were shot on higher-speed video cameras instead of film cameras. Critics, including some big names in Hollywood, argue that motion smoothing looks unnatural and deviates from the creator's intended vision.

Intelligent FRC takes a more nuanced approach to motion smoothing by letting content creators dictate the level of motion smoothing used in each scene, Forbes reported. The feature is also designed to adjust the strength of motion interpolation based on ambient lighting.

"Around tables cluttered with dice, maps and character sheets, players are doing far more than playing," writes Phys.org. It's what sociologists call serious leisure — "a hobby that demands skill, commitment and personal fulfillment," according to an associate professor/program director for Florida International University's Rehabilitation and Recreational Therapy Program: To understand what makes D&D more than just a pastime, [associate professor Emily Messina] studies how games like this promote identity-building and connection... Beyond personal expression, Messina says the social and emotional benefits of D&D reflect the very traits that make serious leisure valuable: the sense of identity, the relationships built through shared experiences and the continued connection with the same group of people over time... The game can also provide structure and purpose for people managing mental illness who might not be able to hold a full-time job because of their symptoms. The game gives them structure versus filling their day with binge streaming...

Activities such as D&D can be used by young children as a reward structure or with older adults, such as retirees, to help provide a sense of purpose and daily rhythm. "Post retirement is one of the most dangerous points in an adult's life," she said. "They lose that sense of structure and possibly their social connection." Building structure through leisure pursuits after retirement has been shown to help maintain physical fitness, social interaction, cognitive processing and attention span and decrease depression. "The idea of structure and reward with desired pursuit can work for all ages," Messina said.
The research was published in Leisure Studies.

25 years ago today on Slashdot...

Hemos linked to a site called Joystick101 describing the crowd camping out to buy the limited number of just-released PlayStation 2 consoles (and games). "500,000 lucky members of the American gaming public are sneaking a few minutes of playing Madden 2001, Tekken, or Ridge Racer V before school or work..." wrote Joystick101. That same day CmdrTaco posted reports PS2s were selling for over $1,000 on eBay. And then Timothy updated that post to note someone saw one selling for $5,000.

But there was a third PS2 link posted on October 26, 2000... Hemos wrote a post titled "The PS2 — A Betamax In the Making?" — linking to an article by Mark Pesce (co-inventor of VRML and, in 1993, an Apple consulting engineer). "Microsoft promises Xbox will deliver ten times the performance of the PS2," Pesce wrote, noting Microsoft had partnered with Intel and "upstart video-chip developer Nvidia": The strangest thing about this battle of giants is that Microsoft has become a champion of open standards, encouraging developers to write Xbox titles without requiring them to pay any licensing fees. In comparison, Sony charges a minimum of $25,000 for access to the documentation and technology of the PlayStation2, plus a hefty license fee on every game sold. In the video-game industry, the Big Three — Sony, Nintendo, and Sega — sell the hardware at a loss (the PS2 costs nearly the $300 it will retail for) and recover their investment in the stiff licensing fees paid by game developers for the "key" that allows their software to work on Sony's platform...

Having committed an astounding $500 million to market the Xbox next Christmas, it's clear that Microsoft doesn't mind taking a short-term loss to ensure an eventual win. If Sony's not careful, this could turn into "Betamax, the Sequel." Twenty years ago, Sony tightly controlled the titles made available for its technically superior videocassette player — specifically, no adult content — and found themselves quickly locked out of an incredibly lucrative market for adult and family content. If Sony keeps a tight grip on the PS2, they may actually help Microsoft create the new VHS. But even if Sony loses this round (and no one wants to wager which way this battle will turn), they've already set their sights on the PlayStation3, to be released five years from now. Sony promises it will be a thousand times faster than the PS2.
Ironically, Pesce's warning about possible threats to the PS2's longevity was published by online magazine Feed-- which seven months later went out of business.

And this week it was announced that even Microsoft's Halo Campaign Evolved will now be coming to PlayStation 5, with Slashdot publishing six PlayStation-related stories in just the last three months in 2025.

Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader crunchy_one for suggesting a "25 Years Ago" Slashdot post.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The outage that hit Amazon Web Services and took out vital services worldwide was the result of a single failure that cascaded from system to system within Amazon's sprawling network, according to a post-mortem from company engineers. [...] Amazon said the root cause of the outage was a software bug in software running the DynamoDB DNS management system. The system monitors the stability of load balancers by, among other things, periodically creating new DNS configurations for endpoints within the AWS network. A race condition is an error that makes a process dependent on the timing or sequence events that are variable and outside the developers' control. The result can be unexpected behavior and potentially harmful failures.

In this case, the race condition resided in the DNS Enactor, a DynamoDB component that constantly updates domain lookup tables in individual AWS endpoints to optimize load balancing as conditions change. As the enactor operated, it "experienced unusually high delays needing to retry its update on several of the DNS endpoints." While the enactor was playing catch-up, a second DynamoDB component, the DNS Planner, continued to generate new plans. Then, a separate DNS Enactor began to implement them. The timing of these two enactors triggered the race condition, which ended up taking out the entire DynamoDB. [...] The failure caused systems that relied on the DynamoDB in Amazon's US-East-1 regional endpoint to experience errors that prevented them from connecting. Both customer traffic and internal AWS services were affected.

The damage resulting from the DynamoDB failure then put a strain on Amazon's EC2 services located in the US-East-1 region. The strain persisted even after DynamoDB was restored, as EC2 in this region worked through a "significant backlog of network state propagations needed to be processed." The engineers went on to say: "While new EC2 instances could be launched successfully, they would not have the necessary network connectivity due to the delays in network state propagation." In turn, the delay in network state propagations spilled over to a network load balancer that AWS services rely on for stability. As a result, AWS customers experienced connection errors from the US-East-1 region. AWS network functions affected included the creating and modifying Redshift clusters, Lambda invocations, and Fargate task launches such as Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow, Outposts lifecycle operations, and the AWS Support Center. Amazon has temporarily disabled its DynamoDB DNS Planner and DNS Enactor automation globally while it fixes the race condition and add safeguards against incorrect DNS plans. Engineers are also updating EC2 and its network load balancer.

Further reading: Amazon's AWS Shows Signs of Weakness as Competitors Charge Ahead

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier has issued criminal subpoenas to Roblox, calling it a "breeding ground for predators" and accusing the platform of profiting while failing to protect children. NBC News reports: The subpoenas will allow prosecutors to gather more information about the alleged criminal activity on the platform, including evidence related to suspected predators and victims, according to Uthmeier. The concerns prompted Roblox to invest heavily in protecting younger users on its platform by tightening messaging rules for children under 13, intensive content moderation and AI-powered monitoring.

In an emailed statement to Reuters, Roblox said it prohibits sharing images and videos in chat, uses filters designed to block the exchange of personal information, and is working to implement age estimation for all users accessing chat features. "While no system is perfect, our trained teams and automated tools continuously monitor communications to detect and remove harmful content," a Roblox spokesperson said.

A recent article in Noema magazines explores the issues in "editing nature to fix our failures."

"It turns out playing God is neither difficult nor expensive," the article points out. "For about $2,000, I can go online and order a decent microscope, a precision injection rig, and a vial of enough CRISPR-Cas9 — an enzyme-based genome-editing tool — to genetically edit a few thousand fish embryos..." So when going beyond the kept-in-captivity Dire Wolf to the possibility of bringing back forests of the American chestnut tree, "The process is deceptively simple; the implications are anything but..." If scientists could use CRISPR to engineer a more heat-tolerant coral, it would give coral a better chance of surviving a marine environment made warmer by climate change. It would also keep the human industries that rely on reefs afloat. But should we edit nature to fix our failures? And if we do, is it still natural...? Evolution is not keeping pace with climate change, so it is up to us to give it an assist [according to Christopher Preston, an environmental philosopher from the University of Montana, who wrote a book on CRISPR called "Ma href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262537094/the-synthetic-age/">The Synthetic Age."] In some cases, the urgency is so great that we may not have time to waste. "There's no doubt there are times when you have to act," Preston continued. "Corals are a case where the benefits of reefs are just so enormous that keeping some alive, even if they're genetically altered, makes the risks worth it."
Kate Quigley, a molecular ecologist and a principal research scientist at Australia's Minderoo Foundation, says "Engineering the ocean, or the atmosphere, or coral is not something to be taken lightly. Science is incredible. But that doesn't mean we know everything and what the unintended consequences might be." Phillip Cleves, a principal investigator at the Carnegie Institute for Science's embryology department, is already researching whether coral could be bioengineered to be more tolerant to heat.

But both of them have concerns: For all the research Quigley and Cleves have dedicated to climate-proofing coral, neither wants to see the results of their work move from experimentation in the lab to actual use in the open ocean. Needing to do so would represent an even greater failure by humankind to protect the environment that we already have. And while genetic editing and selective breeding offer concrete solutions for helping some organisms adapt, they will never be powerful enough to replace everything lost to rising water temperatures. "I will try to prepare for it, but the most important thing we can do to save coral is take strong action on climate change," Quigley told me. "We could pour billions and billions of dollars — in fact, we already have — into restoration, and even if, by some miracle, we manage to recreate the reef, there'd be other ecosystems that would need the same thing. So why can't we just get at the root issue?"
And then there's the blue-green algae dilemma: George Church, the Harvard Medical School professor of genetics behind Colossal's dire wolf project, was part of a team that successfully used CRISPR to change the genome of blue-green algae so that it could absorb up to 20% more carbon dioxide via photosynthesis. Silicon Valley tech incubator Y Combinator seized on the advance to call for scaled-up proposals, estimating that seeding less than 1% of the ocean's surface with genetically engineered phytoplankton would sequester approximately 47 gigatons of CO2 a year, more than enough to reverse all of last year's worldwide emissions.

But moving from deploying CRISPR for species protection to providing a planetary service flips the ethical calculus. Restoring a chestnut forest or a coral reef preserves nature, or at least something close to it. Genetically manipulating phytoplankton and plants to clean up after our mistakes raises the risk of a moral hazard. Do we have the right to rewrite nature so we can perpetuate our nature-killing ways?

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

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

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

Top college degrees may no longer provide the edge they once did in the job market, per LinkedIn CEO Ryan Roslansky. "I think the mindset shift is probably the most exciting thing because my guess is that the future of work belongs not anymore to the people that have the fanciest degrees or went to the best colleges, but to the people who are adaptable, forward thinking, ready to learn, and ready to embrace these tools," Roslansky said. "It really kind of opens up the playing field in a way that I think we've never seen before."

A 2024 Microsoft survey found 71% of business leaders would choose less-experienced candidates with AI skills over experienced candidates without them. LinkedIn data showed job postings requiring AI literacy increased about 70% year-over-year. Roslansky said AI will not replace humans but people who embrace AI will replace those who don't.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Immigration anxieties and a challenging job market have sparked an online backlash over China's latest attempt at attracting global talent -- a new visa program announced in August. The program, which was rolled out on Wednesday with the aim of attracting foreign professionals, will also test how China balances its immigration policy with its pursuit of technological ambitions.

Under the new rules, young graduates -- in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics or STEM -- no longer need backing from a local employer and can enjoy more flexibility in terms for entry frequency and duration of stay. The keyword "K-visa" -- as China's new visa category is called -- was among the top searches on social media site Weibo for days, before chatter about National Day traffic jams pushed it off the charts as millions hit the road for a week-long holiday.

Chinese social media users argue that the new visa tilts the playing field toward foreign graduates at the expense of those educated in China. Others on Weibo warned that without employer sponsorship, the program could invite fraudulent applications and open the door to a surge in arrivals from developing countries, piling pressure on an already strained labor market.

Tim Berners-Lee writes in a new article in the Guardian that "Somewhere between my original vision for web 1.0 and the rise of social media as part of web 2.0, we took the wrong path Today, I look at my invention and I am forced to ask: is the web still free today? No, not all of it. We see a handful of large platforms harvesting users' private data to share with commercial brokers or even repressive governments. We see ubiquitous algorithms that are addictive by design and damaging to our teenagers' mental health. Trading personal data for use certainly does not fit with my vision for a free web. On many platforms, we are no longer the customers, but instead have become the product. Our data, even if anonymised, is sold on to actors we never intended it to reach, who can then target us with content and advertising...

We have the technical capability to give that power back to the individual. Solid is an open-source interoperable standard that I and my team developed at MIT more than a decade ago. Apps running on Solid don't implicitly own your data — they have to request it from you and you choose whether to agree, or not. Rather than being in countless separate places on the internet in the hands of whomever it had been resold to, your data is in one place, controlled by you. Sharing your information in a smart way can also liberate it. Why is your smartwatch writing your biological data to one silo in one format? Why is your credit card writing your financial data to a second silo in a different format? Why are your YouTube comments, Reddit posts, Facebook updates and tweets all stored in different places? Why is the default expectation that you aren't supposed to be able to look at any of this stuff? You generate all this data — your actions, your choices, your body, your preferences, your decisions. You should own it. You should be empowered by it...

We're now at a new crossroads, one where we must decide if AI will be used for the betterment or to the detriment of society. How can we learn from the mistakes of the past? First of all, we must ensure policymakers do not end up playing the same decade-long game of catchup they have done over social media. The time to decide the governance model for AI was yesterday, so we must act with urgency. In 2017, I wrote a thought experiment about an AI that works for you. I called it Charlie. Charlie works for you like your doctor or your lawyer, bound by law, regulation and codes of conduct. Why can't the same frameworks be adopted for AI? We have learned from social media that power rests with the monopolies who control and harvest personal data. We can't let the same thing happen with AI.
Berners-Lee also says "we need a Cern-like not-for-profit body driving forward international AI research," arguing that if we muster the political willpower, "we have the chance to restore the web as a tool for collaboration, creativity and compassion across cultural borders.

"We can re-empower individuals, and take the web back. It's not too late."

Berners-Lee has also written a new book titled This is For Everyone.