Sci-fi writer Ted Chiang, writing for New Yorker: So, I would like to propose another metaphor for the risks of artificial intelligence. I suggest that we think about A.I. as a management-consulting firm, along the lines of McKinsey & Company. Firms like McKinsey are hired for a wide variety of reasons, and A.I. systems are used for many reasons, too. But the similarities between McKinsey -- a consulting firm that works with ninety per cent of the Fortune 100 -- and A.I. are also clear. Social-media companies use machine learning to keep users glued to their feeds. In a similar way, Purdue Pharma used McKinsey to figure out how to "turbocharge" sales of OxyContin during the opioid epidemic. Just as A.I. promises to offer managers a cheap replacement for human workers, so McKinsey and similar firms helped normalize the practice of mass layoffs as a way of increasing stock prices and executive compensation, contributing to the destruction of the middle class in America.

A former McKinsey employee has described the company as "capital's willing executioners": if you want something done but don't want to get your hands dirty, McKinsey will do it for you. That escape from accountability is one of the most valuable services that management consultancies provide. Bosses have certain goals, but don't want to be blamed for doing what's necessary to achieve those goals; by hiring consultants, management can say that they were just following independent, expert advice. Even in its current rudimentary form, A.I. has become a way for a company to evade responsibility by saying that it's just doing what âoethe algorithmâ says, even though it was the company that commissioned the algorithm in the first place.

International online sports broadcasting company DAZN has joined a global task force that aims to shut down pirated and unauthorized sports streaming operations worldwide. The new group is operated by the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), which counts giants like Amazon, Apple, NBC Universal, Netflix, Disney, Sony, and Warner Bros. among its members. From a report: Unauthorized streaming sources can often be the only available option for people to watch certain teams and matches subject to complicated broadcasting deals, locked into high-priced bundles, and blackouts. With more tech and entertainment companies using sports as a sweetener for their services (NFL Sunday Ticket on YouTube, MLS / MLB for Apple TV Plus, and Thursday Night Football on Amazon Prime are a few examples), they have more reasons to collectively take issue with anyone popping up a free stream.

ACE as a whole had previously taken down IPTV-based service NitroTV, which allegedly charged users $20 per month in the US for a collection of unlicensed streaming content. ACE was first formed in 2017 as the anti-piracy arm of the Motion Picture Association (formerly known as the MPAA until it dropped the second A in 2019). Now with DAZN, it consists of 53 big media companies.

The FTC is proposing to prevent Meta from monetizing children's data due to alleged violations of a 2020 privacy order. CNBC reports: According to the FTC, an independent assessor found "several gaps and weaknesses in Facebook's privacy program" that posed "substantial risks to the public." The company had agreed to independent assessments of its updated privacy program as part of the 2020 settlement, under which Facebook paid a $5 billion civil penalty following an FTC investigation around the Cambridge Analytica data scandal. The FTC alleges Facebook also violated an earlier 2012 order by continuing to allow app developers access to private user information. Facebook allowed third-party apps to access user data until mid-2020 in some cases, the FTC alleges. The FTC is also accusing Meta of violating the Children's Online Privacy Protection Rule by misrepresenting parental controls on its Messenger Kids app. The COPPA Rule requires parental consent for websites to collect personal information from kids under 13. The FTC alleged that while the company marketed that the app would only allow kids to talk with contacts their parents approved, children were able to communicate with additional contacts in group chats or group video calls in some circumstances.

As a result, the FTC is proposing to strengthen the terms of the 2020 agreement to put additional restrictions on the company, which would apply to all of Meta's services including Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Oculus. The proposed terms include a blanket ban on monetizing data from users under 18. That means any data collected from these users could only be used for security reasons and any data collected while users are under age could not be later monetized once they turn 18. The FTC also seeks to impose a pause on the company's ability to launch new or modified products or services until the independent assessor confirms in writing that Meta's privacy program is in full compliance with the terms of the agreement. Compliance with the 2020 order would also extend to any companies Meta acquires or merges with. The proposal would also require Meta to get affirmative consent from users for future use of facial recognition technology. Facebook spokesperson Andy Stone called the FTC's move a "political stunt." He said in a statement: "Despite three years of continual engagement with the FTC around our agreement, they provided no opportunity to discuss this new, totally unprecedented theory. We have spent vast resources building and implementing an industry-leading privacy program under the terms of our FTC agreement. We will vigorously fight this action and expect to prevail."

Unity announced today that it's having its third round of layoffs, with this one affecting 600 staff members. It's also reducing its number of offices from 58 to 30 or less within the next few years. Allegedly these cuts are prompted by fears of a recession. From a report: Unity CEO John Riccitiello told the Wall Street Journal that the company was cutting the number of layers within the company. He said, "It's all about setting ourselves up for higher growth." The 600 employees laid off represent 8% of the workforce, and Unity will have a staff of around 7,000 in the aftermath. The company had its last round of layoffs in January, where it lost almost 300 staff members. Before that, it laid off around 200 employees in June 2022, though Riccitiello has since claimed that many of those employees moved to new positions within the company. In all three cases, Unity has cited future planning as its reasons for doing so.

VICE's Ade Adeniji booted up The Crew 2, GTA V, GTA San Andreas, Saints Row, and Watch Dogs 2, and noticed a interesting pattern: there are no suburbs to be seen. "We are transported to major cities and vast countrysides, but nothing that really speaks to the in between -- to the suburbs," writes Adeniji. "[H]ow can open world games leave out a space that we fundamentally see as Americana? Is this about design choices and constraints, or does it speak to something deeper about how we really view American suburbs -- and how desperately we want to escape them?" Here's an excerpt from the report: I figured I would first take my suburbia question to someone who has been creating games since the early 1970s. Don Daglow, pioneer of the MMORPG genre with Neverwinter Nights, broke down his answer into three parts: scale, visual interest, and stereotypes. In terms of scale, suburbs typically have lots of smaller, more repetitive environmental elements when compared to cities. Think strip malls and identical homes versus the Statue of Liberty and the Empire State Building. "Big objects in the environment create vertical movement opportunities as well as horizontal movement in 3D spaces. You can support superhero skills, think Spider Man, and jumping, think early Assassins Creed." Daglow said. "Godzilla never attacked a small suburb on the rail line north of Tokyo. Why would he waste his time there when there's so much more to chomp downtown?"

Lazlow Jones, voice of GTA III's Chatterbox FM and a longtime director, writer, and producer at Rockstar Games, agreed. But Rockstar itself made a gradual progression from the chaotic cities of GTA to the open natural worlds of Red Dead. Then the company brought the two together in GTA V. "When I was at Rockstar, we started off focusing on open world games set in urban areas because it gave us great density," Lazlow began. "But over the years we expanded to rural environments while keeping them interesting and engaging." [...] Carly Kocurek, who teaches in the Game Design and Experiential Media program at Illinois Tech, says suburbs operate in the realm of "perceived beigeness" making it hard to imagine them as settings for the kinds of stories and worlds we see most often in open world games. To the extent that suburbia does show up strongly, these spaces often serve as a starting or transition point for a character, akin to maybe the first 10 minutes of a film, or the movie's midpoint.

There are other design reasons why suburbs don't feature prominently in video games and why sparse areas away from intriguing points of interest are often the first to get cut. "You're really trying to compress a massive space in real life, into a virtual space which is actually really small. It's like taking something and cutting it down by 10x," explained Will Harris, who led the open world design team at Light Speed LA. Harris says that in world building, one of the first steps is thinking about defining features. What makes Chicago, for instance, feel different than Washington D.C.? Huge landmarks immediately orient us in a specific space and differentiate it from others. And woe unto you if you do try to architect suburbs in large numbers. Developers could try to build out distinct houses, began Erik Villarreal, an environmental artist at Visual Concepts/2K. "But this requires a developer to create homes that stand out from each other, which can be time consuming and tie up a lot of resources," he said. Harris adds that there are only so many mechanics in sandbox gameplay and design. He calls the suburbs "interstitial spaces." But the larger these spaces become, the more unwieldy, and the more quickly the player realizes that these spaces are superficial. We've all had the frustrating experience in gaming where we reach a certain part of a map, but then discover there's nothing actually to do there. "So the Staten Island kit gets vaporized. We trim the fat." Harris says.

Long-time Slashdot reader schwit1 spotted this story in today's New York Times. (Also re-published in the Seattle Times.) In early 2020 a team of U.S. and Chinese scientists "released critical data" on the speedy spread and lethality of the coronavirus, remembers Times, "cited in health warnings around the world... Within days, though, the researchers quietly withdrew the paper, which was replaced online by a message telling scientists not to cite it...

"What is now clear is that the study was not removed because of faulty research. Instead, it was withdrawn at the direction of Chinese health officials amid a crackdown on science."

It's not the only retraction. The Times also points out a paper published on March 9 of 2020 relying on patient samples from mid-December of 2019, which "added to evidence that the virus was spreading widely before the Chinese government took action." Two months later the journal that published an update that "said that the Wuhan samples were not collected in December after all, but weeks later, in January... After Jesse Bloom of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle tweeted about the discrepancy, the journal's editors posted a third version of the paper, adding yet another timeline. This revision says the samples were collected between Dec. 30 and Jan. 1." Beijing's stranglehold on information goes far deeper than even many pandemic researchers are aware of. Its censorship campaign has targeted international journals and scientific databases, shaking the foundations of shared scientific knowledge, a New York Times investigation found. Under pressure from their government, Chinese scientists have withheld data, withdrawn genetic sequences from public databases and altered crucial details in journal submissions. Western journal editors enabled those efforts by agreeing to those edits or withdrawing papers for murky reasons, a review by The Times of over a dozen retracted papers found.

This scientific censorship has not universally succeeded: The original version of the February 2020 paper, for example, can still be found online with some digging. But the campaign starved doctors and policymakers of critical information about the virus at the moment the world needed it most. It bred mistrust of science in Europe and the United States, as health officials cited papers from China that were then retracted. The crackdown continues to breed misinformation today and has hindered efforts to determine the origins of the virus.
The article notes an international team's discovery last month of genetic sequence data collected in January of 2020 at Wuhan market, "withheld from foreign experts for three years — a delay that global health officials called 'inexcusable.'" The sequences showed that raccoon dogs, a fox-like animal, had deposited genetic signatures in the same place that genetic material from the virus was left, a finding consistent with a scenario in which the virus spread to people from illegally traded market animals... Soon after the group alerted Chinese researchers to their findings, the genetic sequences temporarily disappeared from a global database. "It's just pathetic that we're in this stage where we're having cloak-and-dagger conversations about deleted data," said Edward Holmes, a University of Sydney biologist who was part of the group that analyzed the sequences containing raccoon dog DNA.
The Times cites retracted coronavirus papers flagged by Retraction Watch, which tracks withdrawn research. Amid tighting government censorship in 2020, Chinese researchers began asking journals to retract their work, the Times reports, and "a review of more than a dozen retracted papers from China shows a pattern of revising or suppressing research on early cases, conditions for medical workers and how widely the virus had spread — topics that could make the government look bad." Journals are typically slow to retract papers, even when they are shown to be fraudulent or unethical. But in China, the calculus is different, said Ivan Oransky, a founder of Retraction Watch. Journals that want to sell subscriptions in China or publish Chinese research often bend to the government's demands. "Scientific publishers have really gone out of their way to placate the censorship requests," he said...

The journal retractions continued, and for unusual reasons. One group of authors noted that "our data is not perfect enough." Another warned that its paper "cannot be used as the basis for the origin and evolution of SARS-CoV-2." A third said its findings were "incomplete and not ready for publication." Several scientists promised in retraction notices to update their findings but never did.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: On Monday, Microsoft and Epic Systems announced that they are bringing OpenAI's GPT-4 AI language model into health care for use in drafting message responses from health care workers to patients and for use in analyzing medical records while looking for trends. Epic Systems is one of America's largest health care software companies. Its electronic health records (EHR) software (such as MyChart) is reportedly used in over 29 percent of acute hospitals in the United States, and over 305 million patients have an electronic record in Epic worldwide. Tangentially, Epic's history of using predictive algorithms in health care has attracted some criticism in the past.

In Monday's announcement, Microsoft mentions two specific ways Epic will use its Azure OpenAI Service, which provides API access to OpenAI's large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-3 and GPT-4. In layperson's terms, it means that companies can hire Microsoft to provide generative AI services for them using Microsoft's Azure cloud platform. The first use of GPT-4 comes in the form of allowing doctors and health care workers to automatically draft message responses to patients. The press release quotes Chero Goswami, chief information officer at UW Health in Wisconsin, as saying, "Integrating generative AI into some of our daily workflows will increase productivity for many of our providers, allowing them to focus on the clinical duties that truly require their attention." The second use will bring natural language queries and "data analysis" to SlicerDicer, which is Epic's data-exploration tool that allows searches across large numbers of patients to identify trends that could be useful for making new discoveries or for financial reasons. According to Microsoft, that will help "clinical leaders explore data in a conversational and intuitive way." Imagine talking to a chatbot similar to ChatGPT and asking it questions about trends in patient medical records, and you might get the picture. Dr. Margaret Mitchell, chief ethics scientist at Hugging Face, is concerned about GPT-4's ability to make up information that isn't represented in its data set. Another concern is the potential bias in GPT-4 that might discriminate against certain patients based on gender, race, age, or other factors.

"Combined with the well-known problem of automation bias, where even experts will believe things that are incorrect if they're generated automatically by a system, this work will foreseeably generate false information," says Mitchell. "In the clinical setting, this can mean the difference between life and death."

"The fact remains that Google Chrome is the arbiter of web standards," argues FSF campaigns manager Greg Farough (while adding that Firefox, "through ethical distributions like GNU IceCat and Abrowser, can weaken that stranglehold.")

"Google's deprecation of the JPEG-XL image format in February in favor of its own patented AVIF format might not end the web in the grand scheme of things, but it does highlight, once again, the disturbing amount of control it has over the platform generally." Part of Google's official rationale for the deprecation is the following line: "There is not enough interest from the entire ecosystem to continue experimenting with JPEG-XL." Putting aside the problematic aspects of the term "ecosystem," let us remark that it's easy to gauge the response of the "entire ecosystem" when you yourself are by far the largest and most dangerous predator in said "ecosystem." In relation to Google's overwhelming power, the average web user might as well be a microbe. In supposedly gauging what the "ecosystem" wants, all Google is really doing is asking itself what Google wants...

While we can't link to Google's issue tracker directly because of another freedom issue — its use of nonfree JavaScript — we're told that the issue regarding JPEG-XL's removal is the second-most "starred" issue in the history of the Chromium project, the nominally free basis for the Google Chrome browser. Chromium users came out of the woodwork to plead with Google not to make this decision. It made it anyway, not bothering to respond to users' concerns. We're not sure what metric it's using to gauge the interest of the "entire ecosystem," but it seems users have given JPEG-XL a strong show of support. In turn, what users will be given is yet another facet of the web that Google itself controls: the AVIF format.

As the response to JPEG-XL's deprecation has shown, our rallying together and telling Google we want something isn't liable to get it to change its mind. It will keep on wanting what it wants: control; we'll keep on wanting what we want: freedom.

Only, the situation isn't hopeless. At the present moment, not even Google can stop us from creating the web communities that we want to see: pages that don't run huge chunks of malicious, nonfree code on our computers. We have the power to choose what we run or do not run in our browsers. Browsers like GNU IceCat (and extensions like LibreJS and JShelter> ) help with that. Google also can't prevent us from exploring networks beyond the web like Gemini. What our community can do is rally support behind those free browsers that choose to support JPEG-XL and similar formats, letting the big G know that even if we're smaller than it, we won't be bossed around.

A filmmaker walks us through the reasons behind the 'dark cinematography' that's causing so many complaints. From a report: Take, for instance, Wes Craven's 1996 horror classic Scream -- a film often remarked on for just how lit everything in it is at all times. An early scene depicts protagonist Sidney Prescott embracing her boyfriend Billy Loomis in the wake of a terrifying home invasion and her near-death at the hands of a masked killer. After Sidney throws her arms around Billy, Craven cuts to a tight close-up on Billy's face, which is illuminated by a harsh, ominous, icy-cool light that telegraphs his sinister intentions. But where is that light coming from? The bedroom they're in has no lamps switched on. Could it be the moon? Hard to justify, as the only windows in the space are behind Billy, and the light we're staring at is so much brighter and closer than the moon could ever be. So what on Earth is that light?

The answer is, simply enough, nothing. Craven often didn't feel any real need to rationalize why a bright light would suddenly appear one second before disappearing again in the following shot. It's a purely stylistic choice, employed for that one moment to cast doubt on Billy's trustworthiness in the audience's mind. Itâ(TM)s an extremely stagey choice that fits neatly within the larger series' heightened, melodramatic style. Scream wouldn't really be Scream without it. The hyper-lit style was a staple of cinematography in American films during the '90s, and like all trends, it eventually fell out of fashion -- in this case, a few years after Scream hit theaters. The 2000s saw filmmakers embracing more directional, shadowy lighting styles, evoking a grittier, more "grounded" aesthetic while retaining a sense of classic Hollywood polish. The 2010s featured another huge shift in style, this time toward hyper-naturalism. Even broad, big-budget blockbusters like Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows -- Part 1 embraced a look torn straight from indie cinema. Not only are the lights in that film always motivated, they're realistic. Where earlier films might have used the presence of the moon or a table lamp to justify much brighter lighting, movies like Deathly Hallows, Interstellar, and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes let the light of a lamp simply look like a lamp.

The recently introduced RESTRICT Act, otherwise known as the "TikTok ban," is a dangerous substitute for comprehensive data privacy legislation, writes the Electronic Frontier Foundation in a blog post. From the post: As we wrote in our initial review of the bill, the RESTRICT Act would authorize the executive branch to block 'transactions' and 'holdings' of 'foreign adversaries' that involve 'information and communication technology' and create 'undue or unacceptable risk' to national security and more. We've explained our opposition to the RESTRICT Act and urged everyone who agrees to take action against it. But we've also been asked to address some of the concerns raised by others. We do that here in this post. At its core, RESTRICT would exempt certain information services from the federal statute, known as the Berman Amendments, which protects the free flow of information in and out of the United States and supports the fundamental freedom of expression and human rights concerns. RESTRICT would give more power to the executive branch and remove many of the commonsense restrictions that exist under the Foreign Intelligence Services Act (FISA) and the aforementioned Berman Amendments. But S. 686 also would do a lot more.

EFF opposes the bill, and encourages you to reach out to your representatives to ask them not to pass it. Our reasons for opposition are primarily that this bill is being used as a cudgel to protect data from foreign adversaries, but under our current data privacy laws, there are many domestic adversaries engaged in manipulative and invasive data collection as well. Separately, handing relatively unchecked power over to the executive branch to make determinations about what sort of information technologies and technology services are allowed to enter the U.S. is dangerous. If Congress is concerned about foreign powers collecting our data, it should focus on comprehensive consumer data privacy legislation that will have a real impact, and protect our data no matter what platform it's on -- TikTok, Facebook, Twitter, or anywhere else that profits from our private information. That's why EFF supports such consumer data privacy legislation. Foreign adversaries won't be able to get our data from social media companies if the social media companies aren't allowed to collect, retain, and sell it in the first place. EFF says it's not clear if the RESTRICT Act will even result in a "ban" on TikTok. It does, however, have potential to punish people for using a VPN to access TikTok if it is restricted. In conclusion, the group says the bill is similar to a surveillance bill and is "far too broad in the power it gives to investigate potential user data."

Meta announced that starting next Wednesday, some Facebook and Instagram users in the European Union will for the first time be able to opt out of sharing first-party data used to serve highly personalized ads, The Wall Street Journal reported. The move marks a big change from Meta's current business model, where every video and piece of content clicked on its platforms provides a data point for its online advertisers. Ars Technica reports: People "familiar with the matter" told the Journal that Facebook and Instagram users will soon be able to access a form that can be submitted to Meta to object to sweeping data collection. If those requests are approved, those users will only allow Meta to target ads based on broader categories of data collection, like age range or general location. This is different from efforts by other major tech companies like Apple and Google, which prompt users to opt in or out of highly personalized ads with the click of a button. Instead, Meta will review objection forms to evaluate reasons provided by individual users to end such data collection before it will approve any opt-outs. It's unclear what cause Meta may have to deny requests.

A Meta spokesperson told Ars that Meta is not sharing the objection form publicly at this time but that it will be available to EU users in its Help Center starting on April 5. That's the deadline Meta was given to comply with an Irish regulator's rulings that it was illegal in the EU for Meta to force Facebook and Instagram users to give consent to data collection when they signed contracts to use the platforms. Meta still plans to appeal those Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) rulings, believing that its prior contract's legal basis complies with the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In the meantime, though, the company must change the legal basis for data collection. Meta announced in a blog post today that it will now argue that it does not need to directly obtain user consent because it has a "legitimate interest" to collect data to operate its social platforms. "We believe that our previous approach was compliant under GDPR, and our appeal on both the substance of the rulings and the fines continues," Meta's blog said. "However, this change ensures that we comply with the DPC's decision."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNBC: Google is reshuffling the reporting structure of its virtual assistant unit -- called Assistant -- to focus more on Bard, the company's new artificial intelligence chat technology. In a memo to employees on Wednesday, titled "Changes to Assistant and Bard teams," Sissie Hsiao, vice president and lead of Google Assistant's business unit, announced changes to the organization that show the unit heavily prioritizing Bard. "As the Bard teams continue this work, we want to ensure we continue to support and execute on the opportunities ahead," Hsiao said in the email. "This year, more than ever, we have been focused on delivery with impact to our users."

Jianchang "JC" Mao, who reported directly to Hsiao, will be leaving the company for personal reasons, according to the memo, which was viewed by CNBC. Mao held the position of vice president of engineering for Google Assistant and "helped shape the Assistant we have today," Hsiao wrote. Taking Mao's place will be 16-year Google veteran Peeyush Ranjan, who most recently held the title of vice president in Google's commerce organization, overseeing payments.

The new leadership changes suggest that the Assistant organization may be planning on integrating Bard technology into similar products in the future. [...] As part of Wednesday's change, Google Assistant engineering vice president Amar Subramanya will now lead engineering for the Bard team, the email said. Trevor Strohman, who previously led engineering efforts for Bard, will continue as an "Area Tech Lead" for Bard, reporting to Hsiao. Ars Technica's Ron Amadeo ponders if the Google Assistant is facing a "looming Google shutdown."

"If we assume the idea of the Google Assistant -- a voice assistant that helps you do things -- isn't completely dead at Google, you could imagine a future where Bard's language model helps it understand what you want to do and will do it, but it feels like the service is years away from something like that," writes Amadeo. "The Assistant today doesn't have language model problems, though, just voice recognition problems, and Bard won't help with that."

An influential consultant for Amazon sellers has admitted to bribing employees of the e-commerce giant for information to help his clients boost sales and to get their suspended accounts reinstated. From a report: Ephraim "Ed" Rosenberg wrote in a LinkedIn post that he will plead guilty in federal court to a criminal charge, stemming from a 2020 indictment that charged six people with conspiring to give sellers an unfair competitive advantage on Amazon's third-party marketplace. Four of the defendants have already pleaded guilty, including one former Amazon employee who was sentenced last year to 10 months in prison.

Rosenberg, who's based in Brooklyn, is a well-known figure in the world of Amazon third-party sellers. He runs a consultancy business that advises entrepreneurs on how to sell products on the online marketplace, and navigate unforeseen issues with their Amazon account. Rosenberg's Facebook group for sellers, ASGTG, has over 68,000 members, and he hosts a popular conference for sellers each year. "For a time, some years ago, I began to obtain and use Amazon's internal annotations -- Amazon's private property -- to learn the reasons for sellers' suspensions, in order to assist them in getting reinstated, if possible," wrote Rosenberg, who is due to appear in U.S. District Court in Seattle on March 30, for a change of plea hearing, according to court records. "On some occasions, I paid bribes, directly and indirectly, to Amazon employees to obtain annotations and reinstate suspended accounts. These actions were against the law."

Lebanon's government has reversed a decision to delay the shift to daylight savings time by a month, which had sparked both anger and confusion. The BBC reports: Caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati announced that clocks would now go forward on Wednesday night. He had agreed to a delay last week so Muslims could break their fasts earlier during the holy month of Ramadan. But Christian authorities defied the order and changed their clocks as usual on Sunday, which was the last in March. Many businesses, media outlets and educational institutions followed suit, leaving people living in one of the smallest countries in the Middle East struggling to deal with two different time zones.

Mr Mikati, who is a Sunni Muslim, insisted on Monday that his initial decision to delay the time change until 20 April to "relieve" those fasting during Ramadan had not been for "sectarian reasons", adding: "A decision like this should not have triggered such sectarian responses." He blamed the deep political and religious divisions that have resulted in parliament being unable to agree on a new president since October and a caretaker cabinet with limited powers being left to run the country. "The problem is not summer time or winter time... The problem is the presidential vacuum."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Intercept: At a city council meeting in June 2021, Mayor Thomas Kilgore, of Lakeway, Texas, made an announcement that confused his community. "I believe it is my duty to inform you that a surveillance system has been installed in the city of Lakeway," he told the perplexed crowd. Kilgore was referring to a system consisting of eight license plate readers, installed by the private company Flock Safety, that was tracking cars on both private and public roads. Despite being in place for six months, no one had told residents that they were being watched. Kilgore himself had just recently learned of the cameras. "We find ourselves with a surveillance system," he said, "with no information and no policies, procedures, or protections." The deal to install the cameras had not been approved by the city government's executive branch. Instead, the Rough Hollow Homeowners Association, a nongovernment entity, and the Lakeway police chief had signed off on the deal in January 2021, giving police access to residents' footage. By the time of the June city council meeting, the surveillance system had notified the police department over a dozen times. "We thought we were just being a partner with the city," Bill Hayes, the chief operating officer of Legend Communities, which oversees the Rough Hollow Homeowners Association, said at the meeting. "We didn't go out there thinking we were being Big Brother."

Lakeway is just one example of a community that has faced Flock's surveillance without many homeowners' knowledge or approval. Neighbors in Atlanta, Georgia, remained in the dark for a year after cameras were put up. In Lake County, Florida, nearly 100 cameras went up "overnight like mushrooms," according to one county commissioner -- without a single permit. In a statement, Flock Safety brushed off the Lake County incident as an "an honest misunderstanding," but the increasing surveillance of community members' movements across the country is no accident. It's a deliberate marketing strategy. Flock Safety, which began as a startup in 2017 in Atlanta and is now valued at approximately $3.5 billion, has targeted homeowners associations, or HOAs, in partnership with police departments, to become one of the largest surveillance vendors in the nation. There are key strategic reasons that make homeowners associations the ideal customer. HOAs have large budgets -- they collect over $100 billion a year from homeowners -- and it's an opportunity for law enforcement to gain access into gated, private areas, normally out of their reach.

turp182 shares a report from Ars Technica: Hackers drained millions of dollars in digital coins from cryptocurrency ATMs by exploiting a zero-day vulnerability, leaving customers on the hook for losses that can't be reversed, the kiosk manufacturer has revealed. The heist targeted ATMs sold by General Bytes, a company with multiple locations throughout the world. These BATMs, short for bitcoin ATMs, can be set up in convenience stores and other businesses to allow people to exchange bitcoin for other currencies and vice versa. Customers connect the BATMs to a crypto application server (CAS) that they can manage or, until now, that General Bytes could manage for them. For reasons that aren't entirely clear, the BATMs offer an option that allows customers to upload videos from the terminal to the CAS using a mechanism known as the master server interface.

Over the weekend, General Bytes revealed that more than $1.5 million worth of bitcoin had been drained from CASes operated by the company and by customers. To pull off the heist, an unknown threat actor exploited a previously unknown vulnerability that allowed it to use this interface to upload and execute a malicious Java application. The actor then drained various hot wallets of about 56 BTC, worth roughly $1.5 million. General Bytes patched the vulnerability 15 hours after learning of it, but due to the way cryptocurrencies work, the losses were unrecoverable. [...] Once the malicious application executed on a server, the threat actor was able to (1) access the database, (2) read and decrypt encoded API keys needed to access funds in hot wallets and exchanges, (3) transfer funds from hot wallets to a wallet controlled by the threat actor, (4) download user names and password hashes and turn off 2FA, and (5) access terminal event logs and scan for instances where customers scanned private keys at the ATM. The sensitive data in step 5 had been logged by older versions of ATM software.

Going forward, this weekend's post said, General Bytes will no longer manage CASes on behalf of customers. That means terminal holders will have to manage the servers themselves. The company is also in the process of collecting data from customers to validate all losses related to the hack, performing an internal investigation, and cooperating with authorities in an attempt to identify the threat actor. General Bytes said the company has received "multiple security audits since 2021," and that none of them detected the vulnerability exploited. The company is now in the process of seeking further help in securing its BATMs.

Top tech companies are mounting a push to limit how US intelligence agencies collect and view texts, emails and other information about their users, especially American citizens. From a report: The companies, including Alphabet's Google, Meta Platforms and Apple, want Congress to limit Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as they work to renew the law before it expires at the end of the year, according to three people familiar with the discussions. There is a growing bipartisan consensus in Congress to not only renew the law but to make changes in response to a series of reports and internal audits documenting abuses. That's left the tech industry optimistic that broader reforms will get through Congress this time, according to two lobbyists who asked not to be identified relaying internal discussions.

The law, passed by Congress in 2008 in response to revelations of warrantless spying on US citizens by the Bush administration, granted sweeping powers that have been criticized over the years for different reasons. Civil liberties groups think more privacy protections are needed. Former President Donald Trump and his allies claim that spying powers enable intelligence agencies to conspire against conservatives. "Reforms are needed to ensure dragnet surveillance programs operate within constitutional limits and safeguard American users' rights, through appropriate transparency, oversight and accountability," said Matt Schruers, president of the tech trade group Computer & Communications Industry Association, which counts Apple, Google, Meta and Amazon among its members. Intelligence agencies say Section 702 is an essential tool that has generated critical information on the espionage and hacking activities of countries such as China and contributed to the successful drone strike that killed al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri last year.

The BBC has advised staff to delete TikTok from corporate phones because of privacy and security fears. From a report: The BBC seems to be the first UK media organisation to issue the guidance - and only the second in the world after Denmark's public service broadcaster. The BBC said it would continue to use the platform for editorial and marketing purposes for now. [...] The big fear is that data harvested by the platform from corporate phones could be shared with the Chinese government by TikTok's parent company ByteDance, because its headquarters are in Beijing.

In an email to staff on Sunday, it said: "The decision is based on concerns raised by government authorities worldwide regarding data privacy and security. If the device is a BBC corporate device, and you do not need TikTok for business reasons, TikTok should be deleted from the BBC corporate mobile device." Staff with the app on a personal phone that they also use for work have been asked to contact the corporation's Information Security team for further discussions, while it reviews concerns around TikTok. Dominic Ponsford, editor-in-chief of journalism industry trade publication the Press Gazette, said it would be interesting to see what other media organizations decide to do. He told the BBC: "I suspect everyone's chief technical officer will be looking at this very closely. Until now, news organizations have been very keen to use TikTok, because it's been one of the fastest-growing social media platforms for news publishers over the last year, and it's been a good source of audience and traffic. So most of the talk in the news media has been around encouraging TikTok rather than banning it."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: An analysis of 2,007 damaged or defective hard disk drives (HDDs) has led a data recovery firm to conclude that "in general, old drives seem more durable and resilient than new drives." The statement comes from a Los Angeles-headquartered HDD, SSD, and RAID data recovery firm aptly named Secure Data Recovery that has been in business since 2007 and claims to have resolved more than 100,000 cases. It studied the HDDs it received in 2022. "Most" of those drives were 40GB to 10TB, according to a blog post by Secure Data Recovery spotted by Blocks & Files on Thursday.

Secure Data Recovery's March 8 post broke down the HDDs it received by engineer-verified "power-on hours," or the total amount of time the drive was functional, starting from when its owner began using it and ending when the device arrived at Secure Data Recovery. The firm also determined the drives' current pending sector count, depicting "the number of damaged or unusable sectors the hard drive developed during routine read-and-write operations." The company's data doesn't include HDDs that endured non-predictable failures or damage by unexpected events, such as electrical surges, malware, natural disasters, and "accidental mishandling," the company said.

Among the sample, 936 drives are from Western Digital, 559 come from Seagate, 211 are Hitachi brand, 151 are Toshiba's, 123 are Samsung's, and there are 27 Maxtor drives. Notably, 74.5 percent of the HDDs came from either Western Digital or Seagate, which Secure Data Recovery noted accounted for 80 percent of hard drive shipments in 2021, citing Digital Storage Technology Newsletter data shared by Forbes. The average time before failure among the sample size was 2 years and 10 months, and the 2,007 defective HDDs had an average of 1,548 bad sectors. "While 1,548 bad sectors out of hundreds of millions or even billions of disk subdivisions might seem minuscule, the rate of development often increases, and the risk of data corruption multiplies," the blog said. "We found that the five most durable and resilient hard drives from each manufacturer were made before 2015," says Secure Data Recovery. "On the other hand, most of the least durable and resilient hard drives from each manufacturer were made after 2015." One of the reasons for this may have to do with HDD manufacturers "pushing the performance envelope," adds Ars. "This includes size limits that cut 'allowance between moving parts, appearing to affect mechanical damage and wear resistance.'"

Secure Data Recovery also believes that shingled magnetic recording (SMR) impacts HDD reliability, as the disks place components under "more stress."

"What this study shows is not the average working life of a hard disk drive," notes Blacks & Files. "Instead it provides the average working life if a failed disk drive. Cloud storage provider Backblaze issues statistics about the working life of its disk drive fleet and its numbers are quite different." A recent report of theirs found that SSDs are more reliable than HDDs.

Long-time Slashdot reader BonThomme shared this article from Axios: In a story in the Financial Times out Thursday, current and former Silicon Valley Bank employees cited the bank's commitment to remote work as one reason for its failure....

The banking industry has led the return to office charge for a while, and SVB was an outlier in its commitment to something different. The company's career site touted its flexible culture. "If our time working remotely has taught us anything, it's that we can trust our employees to be productive from wherever they work," the site says. The executive team at SVB was spread out around the country, with CEO Greg Becker at times working from Hawaii, according to the FT.

Yet, SVB included remote work as a risk to its business in its 2022 annual report — in part because of the IT issues posed when employees are dispersed around the country, but also for productivity reasons.

The FDIC, which now runs the bank, told staff they could continue working remotely — except essential workers and branch employees, per Reuters.
Axios ultimately blames SVB's run 11 days ago on its panic-inciting public communications about needing to raise capital, combined with its oddly high concentration of tech clients and a portfolio of long-term U.S. treasuries as interest rates rose. "It's certainly possible that if more executives were working in closer proximity those missteps would've been avoided. But it's hard to really know." Yet they warn workplace policies could change simply because the Financial Times ran a piece blaming remote work.

"Companies looking for a reason to bring workers back to the office may find it in this piece."