Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission + - China, Russia and Others Seek to Inflame Debate Over AI Data Centers (nytimes.com)

An anonymous reader writes: A state-owned newspaper in China recently published a satellite image of a data center in Gainesville, Va., writing in English that the development of artificial intelligence posed a threat to Americans’ physical and financial well-being. A comic strip made to look as if it had been published by a Maryland news outlet — created with OpenAI’s ChatGPT by people in China, the tech company said — circulated on X this year, blaming data centers for soaring electricity bills. It showed a tycoon smoking a cigar and clutching bags of cash. A video shared on X by a known covert Russian influence operation questioned the viability of a data center that an American company, Firebird, is constructing in Armenia, the small Caucasus nation that has been a focus of Kremlin pressure. “The country’s electrical grid instability may render it useless,” the video’s narrator says.

All are examples of a push by foreign adversaries to seize on what polls have shown is deep ambivalence — verging at times on hostility — about the spread of the data centers needed to power A.I. in the United States and elsewhere. China, Russia and, to a lesser extent, Iran have sought to use state media outlets to turn the controversy over data centers in the United States into “a domestic fracture point,” according to a new analysis by Alethea, a threat intelligence company, which identified scores of articles and posts on social media this year. These campaigns, whose impact on public opinion remains to be seen, have raised alarms in Washington, where A.I. is seen as a top issue heading into this year’s midterm elections.

Comment Re:Solar fricken roadways all over again (Score 1) 98

Beyond LEO requires more fuel and a bigger rocket to launch, meaning more cost. It creates greater latency due to the greater distance. Also, they want these satellites to have a 5 year lifespan because terrestrial ISPs and cellular providers and datacentre operators are continually upgrading their hardware. So they will probably want to de-orbit and replace them anyway, because moving them to a graveyard orbit will result in the graveyard getting very full very quickly.

It also causes issues when satellites malfunction, because they won't naturally de-orbit in a practical amount of time. Failure to reach the intended orbit, resulting in an uncontrollable satellite, is one of the most common modes.

Comment Re:CGNAT (Score 1) 25

My browser shreds cookies as soon as I leave a site in most cases, as well as all other site date. These days the tracking works based on multiple signals, so even if you delete the cookies, if the IP address and browser signals like user agent and screen resolution match, they will re-associate that identity with you. You need to screw with a lot of metrics to throw them off.

In my country a spam lawsuit against 50 people where only one of them is possibly "guilty" of a civil offence with a relatively small financial loss isn't going to fly. They have largely given up suing people here because such speculative invoicing scams tend not to stand up to judicial scrutiny. At best an IP address identifies a subscriber, who may not be the person who downloaded the file, and who isn't under any legal obligation to help determine who it was, and who can't be held liable as there are no reasonable means for them to prevent such "abuse".

Comment Re:CGNAT (Score 1) 25

I wouldn't say they are doing it wrong, I'd say that there is a fundamental conflict between privacy and anti-bot measures.

For privacy reasons I don't want a unique IP address. I want a shared one, and if it's IPv6 I want it to rotate frequently. That's one of the reasons why I use a VPN. ISPs probably also like it because it means that without extensive logging, for which there is no business justification, they can't identify who downloaded some movie that the MAFIAA et. al. want to sue over.

But of course the anti-bot features would love everyone to have a fixed IP address assigned to their person. Failing that, they seem to prefer to just mass block shared IP addresses and force you to log in.

Comment Re:it’s always the “worst” (Score 5, Interesting) 84

It already has been making false positive matches. There have been several stories about people randomly accosted as they entered stores like B&M, with the security staff claiming they were criminals and often breaking the law themselves in the process.

Because the database is shared by several different chains, it's something that you can't ignore if it falsely flags you. You need to get them to remove your face from it, and ideally claim some compensation for the misuse of your biometric data. The baseline is £250, but I'd be looking for at least £750 due to the hassle and embarrassment caused.

Comment Re:Solar fricken roadways all over again (Score 2) 98

It's because they think they can launch capacity faster than they can built it on Earth. Instead of dealing with local government, grid energy supply availability, water and so on, they can just launch it into orbit. It's all about being the first to deploy the compute capacity and cornering the market.

Of course it also creates lots of business for SpaceX, so a lot of it could be a Hyperloop-style scam.

Thing is they need to deal with the pollution it will create (stuff burning up on re-entry doesn't just vanish), frequency allocations for the comms, and the fact that now everyone wants their own 50,000 satellite constellation in those prime orbits.

The technical hurdles are relatively trivial in comparison.

Comment Re:phrasing, subby. (Score 1) 32

Sure, but thinking further ahead, e.g. the plan for Starship is to land vertically on the moon and then lift off again. The renders they have produced show landing struts, presumably derived from the booster ones.

The Chinese lander shown off a few years ago looks to be more like the Apollo LM and planned Soviet LK, so they don't need that capability to hit their "before 2030" goal.

Space

FCC Approves Reflect Orbital's Space Mirror Satellite That Astronomers Hate (pcmag.com) 76

The FCC has approved (PDF) Reflect Orbital's Earendil-1 test satellite, which will use a 60-by-60-foot mirror to reflect sunlight back to Earth after dark. "The reflected light from the satellite is supposed to span an area about 3 miles wide on the ground," reports PCMag. It comes despite objections from astronomers and environmental groups who are concerned that the satellites will unleash intrusive light pollution. From the report: The approval is only for one satellite, dubbed Earendil-1, which is meant to test Reflect Orbital's technology for shining sunlight back to Earth. The satellite will boast a steerable thin-film reflector measuring about 60 feet by 60 feet, with the goal of powering solar farms at night or illuminating disaster-struck areas after dark to help rescue teams. Reflect Orbital envisions operating over 50,000 satellites by 2035, effectively surrounding the Earth with a fleet of mirrors. The proposal has faced stiff pushback from environmental groups and astronomers who are concerned that the satellites will unleash intrusive light pollution. The opposition has been so strong that the FCC received over 1,800 public comments on the application, many of them objecting to Reflect Orbital's plan for Earendil-1.

[...] [T]he FCC approved the satellite, noting the grant is only "for a single demonstration satellite" to test an innovative technology that could advance American leadership in space. "The Communications Act states that it is the policy of the United States to 'encourage the provision of new technologies and services to the public,' and Reflect Orbital's demonstration satellite is an example of a potentially groundbreaking technology that the Commission has found is in the public interest to support," the order says. But on the most controversial aspect of the satellite, the FCC said the concerns around Reflect Orbital's solar reflector are "unrelated to the Commission's role in authorizing use of radiofrequency spectrum, and even if the Commission had authority to review and condition these operations (which it does not), these harms are unlikely to occur.

In addition, the commission said that U.S. courts have blocked the FCC from using "a generalized public interest requirement beyond its statutory authority in regulating communications. Accordingly, the operations of a solar reflector in space would not be reviewed as part of the Bureau's public interest analysis." The regulator also noted that conducting an environmental review for the satellite went beyond its authority. Even if the FCC did have the power, the commission emphasized that the grant is for a single satellite, not 50,000. "The majority of these comments focus on a hypothetical plan to deploy tens of thousands of satellites, and those who argue the single satellite will harm the human environment do not demonstrate with specificity the potential harm will be caused by the single satellite, but rather rely on the same studies as the commenters objecting to a larger constellation," the FCC adds.

Slashdot Top Deals

One way to make your old car run better is to look up the price of a new model.

Working...