Submission + - Musk can't be trusted to protect X user privacy

Submitted by Mirnotoriety
Mirnotoriety writes: Elon Musk tries again to escape FTC audits of X data handling

Musk can’t be trusted to protect X user privacy, public commenters warn FTC.

Critics hope to keep Elon Musk from escaping a strict data-privacy order imposed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) shortly before he took over Twitter.

The FTC order placed restrictions on X’s data use for 20 years, while requiring regular independent audits and granting the agency authority to request documents as needed to ensure compliance.

The FTC’s action came after Twitter voluntarily disclosed that between May 2013 and September 2019, a coding error accidentally allowed phone numbers and email addresses that users shared for two-factor authentication purposes to be used for targeted advertising aimed at those same users. In a settlement that came just months before Musk’s 2022 takeover, Twitter agreed to pay $150 million and to allow the FTC to monitor the platform’s data-handling practices until 2042 in order to protect user privacy.

Submission + - 'Steve Jobs in Exile' Remembers the Birth of the Web, Making Unix Taste Sweet (arstechnica.com)

Submitted by destinyland
destinyland writes: Ars Technica shares some anecdotes from Steve Jobs in Exile , a new book released last month:

[Author Geoffrey] Cain reminds us, in stunning detail, that Jobs' "exile" era at NeXT was not only critical to his evolution as a man and an entrepreneur, but that it mattered for the rest of us, too. The technological innovations that came out of NeXT — notably, the NeXTSTEP OS — continue to live on in what we now call both macOS and iOS. As Cain puts it, "NeXTSTEP was Steve's attempt to make Unix taste sweet...."

[W]hile many tech nerds know that Tim Berners-Lee created the first World Wide Web server on a NeXT machine while working in Switzerland in 1990, few know that NeXT employees were wary of bringing the news to Jobs. Why? They feared his wrath "and that he would dismiss [the web] as 'shit.'" (In another timeline, NeXT might itself have capitalized on this world-changing innovation....)

Perhaps one of the wildest anecdotes that Cain uncovered was how one voicemail changed computer history forever. In 1996, when Apple was solidly in its mediocre Performa era — and considering buying BeOS as the basis for its new operating system — a mid-level NeXT product manager asked aloud, "Why don't we just frickin' call Apple?" (NeXT was also struggling during this period.) And so someone did. As Cain writes:

Garrett left the group of managers, walked back to his office, and took a risk. He picked up his designer phone and called the head of software at Apple. He left what he described as "one of my more inspired sales pitches" on the man's voicemail, explaining why Apple should be looking at NeXT instead of Be... In any other universe, Garrett's call might have gotten him fired. But in this timeline, it worked out. And thanks to him, Steve [Jobs] was about to enter Apple's airspace once again.

Submission + - Failing CS Grades Soar at UC Berkeley as Professors See Greater AI Usage

Submitted by theodp
theodp writes: "The percentage of failing grades in multiple UC Berkeley computer science classes in spring 2026 is significantly higher than past semesters and marks a departure from the department’s grading guidelines, reports The Daily Californian's Litong Deng. "Instructors point to students’ increased reliance on AI, lack of mathematical preparedness and understaffing as potential contributing factors. According to Berkeleytime, 35.3% of CS 10 students and 10.6% of CS 61A students received F’s in spring 2026. In spring 2025 and spring 2024, the percentage of F’s did not exceed 10% for either class. The electrical engineering and computer sciences department’s grading guidelines state that 7% of students in lower division courses, including CS 10 and CS 61A, should receive D’s and F’s."

"UC Berkeley teaching professor Dan Garcia taught both CS 10, 'The Beauty and Joy of Computing,' and CS 61A, 'The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs,' in spring 2026. Garcia believes the 'primary driver' of these abnormally high failing rates is due to a 'vast increase in academic dishonesty' due to students’ usage of large language models, such as Claude, ChatGPT and Google Gemini."

The report came just a day after tech-backed nonprofit Code.org, which bills itself as "the leading provider of K-12 AI and CS education curriculum across the globe", rebranded itself to CodeAI, solidifying its shift to AI education. "This is the generation that will set the terms for how AI is used," said Code.org CEO Karim Meghji in a press release. "Some are being taught to understand it, direct it, question it, and create with it. Most are not. That's the gap CodeAI exists to close."

Submission + - R.I.P. Code.org (2013–2026)

Submitted by theodp
theodp writes: This week saw tech-backed K-12 CS education nonprofit Code.org rebrand itself as CodeAI (press release), solidifying its shift to AI education more than a decade after it launched in 2013 with the belief "that every student should learn the basics of computer programming." Of the AI rebranding, Code.org Founder and Chairman of The Board Hadi Partovi explained, "We have a responsibility to prepare the next generation for the biggest change In society since the invention of public education."

Following the announcement, members of the Code.org Advocacy Coalition were informed in a conference call that the nine-year-old coalition was being sunsetted immediately. Members will be asked to decide if they want to join a new CodeAI Advocacy Coalition, which will be "bringing in new AI focused entities that will help us advance this mission", or if they are "not in line with the direction that CodeAI is heading" and are "not going to be part of the new advocacy coalition." Much like their tech giant donors, the message sent was it's the AI way or the highway.

Interestingly, the pivot from CS education to AI literacy comes amid reports that blamed increased reliance on AI for causing more than 35% of UC Berkeley students to fail an entry-level CS course described as "a gentle but thorough introduction to computer science," when previously the failing rate was typically 7%.

Submission + - Palantir wins £9M contract to run UK firearms licensing (theregister.com)

Submitted by Shakes Fist
Shakes Fist writes: "The US spy-tech biz will also handle Home Office licensing for explosives, explosive precursors, and poisons. The contract covers a replacement for the National Firearms Licensing Management System (NFLMS), which has been in use since the mid-2000s."

Palantir crawls further under the skin of the UK State.

Submission + - Code.org Rebrands to CodeAI, Disbands Its K-12 CS Education Advocacy Coalition

Submitted by theodp
theodp writes: "The Code.org Advocacy Coalition is growing the movement to make Computer Science a fundamental part of the K-12 education," explained tech-backed nonprofit Code.org in 2018. Eight years later, that mission — which began in 2013 — has changed. On Monday, Code.org rebranded as CodeAI (press release), solidifying its shift to AI education. And on Tuesday, members of the Code.org Advocacy Coalition were rounded up for a conference call and informed that their 100+ organization group was being disbanded and from here on in it'll be the AI Way or the Highway for current members.

From the transcript: "We're now at a crossroads. AI is completely transforming all of society, including education and especially computer science. In the past, the focus of computer science was coding. Today, the focus is AI. [...] Preparing every student for the age of AI requires a broader vision. Starting today, Code.org is CodeAI. [...] We're moving into the next chapter. So, just to be clear, we are sunsetting the Code.org Advocacy Coalition. This will be our last meeting of the Code.org advocacy coalition. We will be standing up the CodeAI advocacy coalition. [...] [Expect an email] giving you a chance to say 'Our organization is in line with the direction that Code AI is heading and we want to be part of those advocacy efforts. But it also gives your organization a chance to say, 'You know what? We're not in line with the direction that CodeAI is heading, so we're not going to be part of the new advocacy coalition.' [...] We are also going to be focused on bringing in new AI focused entities that will help us advance this mission."

Or, to paraphrase Ken Kesey, "You're either on the K-12 AI literacy bus or off the K-12 AI literacy bus."

Submission + - Google Ordered to Put Clearer Links In AI Search, Let UK Publishers Opt Out (arstechnica.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: UK regulators today ordered (PDF) Google to put clearer attributions and links to publishers’ content in its AI-generated search features. The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) also said Google must give publishers a way to opt out of AI features in search. “In a world first, publishers will now have effective tools to prevent their content being used to power AI features in search, such as AI Overviews,” the CMA said today. “This will put publishers, like news organizations, in a stronger position to negotiate content deals with Google. To boost consumer trust, Google is also now required to make sure that publisher content is properly attributed, using clear links, in AIgenerated search results.”

The CMA ruled that Google may not penalize publishers for opting out of AI, meaning that Google can’t downrank opted-out publishers in general search results. The CMA said Google will have nine months to comply with all requirements but that the agency “expects important parts of the controls to become available to publishers well before that deadline. Google will also be required to submit and publish compliance reports, supported by key data and metrics, explaining changes it has made and how it has complied.” [...] The CMA applied the rules to Google after determining that it has “strategic market status” in general search services, and has ongoing investigations into Apple and Microsoft. Google today said it will comply with the CMA decision.

Submission + - Amazon's New Stargate Series Is Officially Dead (screenrant.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: Amazon cancelled the new Stargate show.

The rumor is that the show writer, Martin Gero, would not budge on compromising lore or elements within the show for a "wider modern audience" as they did with Rings of Power for LoTR lore.

Martin Gero wanted to create a show that maintained continuity in the story and lore of the old shows, including the mythology and tech, while respecting the 17 seasons of history.

Amazon instead wanted something new for the "modern audience" that's more accessible, reimagined, with more modern casual sensibilities.

Because the showrunners wanted to maintain integrity rather than turn Stargate into another "modern audience slop" like Rings of Power, Amazon leadership canceled it. The franchise heavyweight, like Joseph Mallozzi, was very excited for the fresh stories Gero worked on. Amazon says they are still open to Stargate, just not "this" version... yes they wanted to Rings of Powerify Stargate.

We really can't hate these people enough.

Submission + - EU working to abandon US tech (politico.eu)

Submitted by whitroth
whitroth writes: Shutting down Office for the ICC was clearly a wake-up call.
"The EU is moving to counter American dominance in technology by reaching for one of the oldest tools in its arsenal: industrial strategy.

As the European Commission unveiled a plan Wednesday to reduce Europeâ(TM)s reliance on the foreign technology providers that underpin the modern economy, it was careful to stress that it was not picking a fight with U.S. digital giants.

Instead, the tech sovereignty package â" motivated in no small part by U.S. President Donald Trumpâ(TM)s weaponization of Europeâ(TM)s dependence on American firms â" takes a longer-term view: boost the continentâ(TM)s players so they can eventually challenge their U.S. rivals."

Submission + - Big Tech hide data centres' environmental toll

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: How Big Tech wrote secrecy into EU law to hide data centres’ environmental toll

“DATA CENTRE OPERATORS successfully lobbied the European Commission to amend legislation intended to bring transparency to the continent’s booming data centre industry, a new investigation has revealed.”

“The investigation, led by Investigate Europe, has uncovered how Microsoft and DigitalEurope, a lobby group whose members include Amazon, Apple, Google and Meta, led the charge to amend these new transparency rules.”

‘A Microsoft spokesperson said they “support greater transparency around data centres”, adding that they are “taking further steps to increase openness, while protecting confidential business information.”’

Submission + - AI security's cost bottleneck isn't tokens – it's validation (scworld.com)

Submitted by spatwei
spatwei writes: A recent report by Axios claims a company accidentally spent $500 million in one month on Claude usage after failing to implement usage limits for employees. This extreme anecdote punctuates growing uncertainty about how token usage and API bills could become a major bottleneck for companies seeking to reap the productivity benefits of AI tools.

Even major tech companies are reportedly seeking to reel in their AI spending, with The Verge reporting that Microsoft is canceling its Claude Code licenses to steer employees toward its own GitHub Copilot and Uber CTO Praveen Neppalli Naga telling The Information the company used up its entire AI coding budget for 2026 within four months.

How does this fit into cybersecurity? With the landmark moment of Anthropic’s Claude Mythos’ release under Project Glasswing, AI-driven code review and vulnerability discovery are gaining interest, but an analysis by Contrast Security offers a sobering look at the “hidden cost of AI security scanners.”

Contrast’s research found that the biggest spend for organizations seeking to use AI to scan their code for vulnerabilities isn’t the API bill, but the cost of triaging and validating thousands of findings, including a huge number of false positives and inconsistent findings between runs and models.
For example, a simple scan of 1.8 million lines of code using Claude Sonnet 4.6 surfaced 3,560 findings and cost just $315 in token usage, but those 3,560 findings don’t triage and validate themselves. Contrast calculated that if a security engineer making $150,000 per year spent half an hour triaging each finding, the labor cost would come out to $128,000.

Submission + - Trump Signs AI Executive Order Asking Companies To Give Government Early Access (cnbc.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed an executive order asking artificial intelligence companies to provide models to the federal government to assess their capabilities ahead of a full release. The order asks companies, on a voluntary basis, to participate in a benchmarking process to assess a model’s “advanced cyber capabilities” and determine whether it should be considered a “covered frontier model.” It then asks for access to those models up to 30 days before the companies plan to release them more broadly, and enables the government to help select the “trusted partners” that will receive early access.

“Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the creation of a mandatory governmental licensing, preclearance, or permitting requirement for the development, publication, release, or distribution of new AI models, including frontier models,” the order said. Trump signed the order in private, just weeks after he postponed a signing ceremony with prominent tech CEOs because he “didn’t like certain aspects of it,” he told reporters at the time. [...] Trump’s AI order outlines several timeframes to develop directives and other guidance, specifically calling on the Department of Defense to prioritize the cyber defense of its information systems.

Submission + - Teachers' Union Urges Schools to Curb AI Chatbots and Screen Time

Submitted by theodp
theodp writes: The New York Times reports the $22.5 million AI partnership to 'bring AI into the classroom' struck last July between the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) union, Microsoft, and OpenAI has hit a bump in the road as the AFT urges schools to curb AI chatbots and screen time, recommending 'no screens' at all for those in second grade or younger, and no AI chatbots for students in elementary school.

The union’s effort reflects a backlash among parents and educators against heavy use of school-issued laptops and apps. Some parents and nonprofit children’s groups are also pushing back against campaigns by tech giants like Google and OpenAI to spread their AI products in schools.

This week, AFT president Randi Weingarten said that the union was negotiating safety and privacy standards for AI use in schools with 'our partners in the AI academy,' and that Microsoft, OpenAI and Anthropic had agreed in principle to those standards. “We’re being transparent,” Weingarten said, adding that "We’re willing to walk away from the funding that we receive here if we don’t get the safety and privacy."

Submission + - Maryland Governor Signs K-12 AI Bill Under Microsoft's Watchful Eye

Submitted by theodp
theodp writes: "Thank you, Gov. Wes Moore, for signing SB 720 into law yesterday!" exclaimed Microsoft Sr. Director of Education and Workforce Policy Allyson Knox in a LinkedIn post celebrating the passage of the Artificial Intelligence Ready Schools Act. "Microsoft was proud to support this legislation, and I was honored to represent the company at yesterday’s bill signing at the Maryland State House. This law accomplishes the following: 1) Establishes statewide AI guidance for schools ... 2) Requires every district to have an AI plan ... 3) Builds teacher capacity and professional learning ... 4) Promotes AI literacy for students ... 5) Creates tools to evaluate AI technologies ... 6) Establishes a statewide AI Education Collaborative." At the same bill-signing ceremony, Gov. Moore paradoxically also signed into law the Phone-Free Schools Act, "prohibiting the use of certain electronic communication devices by a student during the academic school day."

Knox reports up to Microsoft President Brad Smith, who last July told Code.org CEO Hadi Partovi it was time for the tech-backed K-12 CS education nonprofit to "switch hats" from coding to AI as Microsoft announced its new $4 billion Microsoft Elevate initiative to advance AI education. The Maryland State Department of Education is one of many government agencies that are participating in Code.org's Microsoft-advised TeachAI initiative. Code.org also took to social media to celebrate the Maryland win, proclaiming that "Maryland just made AI and CS Education the law."

Interestingly, Maryland's commitment to K-12 AI comes in the same week as the NY Times reports a $22.5 million AI partnership to 'bring AI into the classroom' struck last July between the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) union, Microsoft, and OpenAI has hit a bump in the road as the AFT urges schools to curb AI chatbots and screen time, recommending 'no screens' at all for those in second grade or younger, and no AI chatbots for students in elementary school. AFT president Randi Weingarten said that the union was negotiating safety and privacy standards for AI use in schools with 'our partners in the AI academy,' and that Microsoft, OpenAI and Anthropic had agreed in principle to those standards. "We’re willing to walk away from the funding that we receive here if we don’t get the safety and privacy," Weingarten said.

Submission + - Researchers identify people through ordinary Wi-Fi with 99 percent-accuracy (tomshardware.com)

Submitted by Baron_Yam
Baron_Yam writes: Security researchers at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) in Germany have published a paper demonstrating that unencrypted beamforming data broadcast by Wi-Fi devices during normal operation can be used to identify individuals walking through a room with 99.5% accuracy, regardless of whether the individuals are carrying Wi-Fi devices. The tactic leverages the router's beamforming tech to identify individuals with up to 99.5% accuracy, and it works with existing routers, too.

The system, called BFId, requires no specialized hardware, no access to the target Wi-Fi network, and works even if the person being tracked isn't carrying a wireless device. The team tested the attack on 197 participants, the largest dataset ever used in Wi-Fi-based identification works, and plans to present its findings at the ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS) in Taipei.

See GitHub — https://github.com/ruvnet/RuVi... — for your own personal implementation requiring a couple of APs and a couple of ESP32 nodes. You can get full-home per-zone motion and occupancy detection fairly reliably, with the potential for pose detection and in optimal areas even respiration rate. With the right hardware and configuration, you can theoretically get heart rate too.

Submission + - Occupy Wall Street Co-Founder Built an AI App to Help Activists (gizmodo.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: In an era where Silicon Valley’s conservatism is both expressed openly and becoming more intense by the day, it’s strange to think that tech was once seen as a hive of liberalism. The right-wing nature of today’s tech industry means that its products tend to also be seen as serving right-wing interests, either in their actual operation (like X’s openly and unrepentantly right-wing chatbot Grok) or by the simple fact that their existence serves to enrich a small group of very powerful, very conservative people.

But does it have to be this way? Can LLMs and AI agents find a place in the toolkit of progressive activist groups? The conviction that they can is the idea behind a new app called Outcry, which provides a chatbot designed specifically as a “private, on-device AI mentor for activists, organizers and movement builders.” (There’s also a web version, although it obviously lacks the privacy benefits of being entirely offline.) It’s the brainchild of Occupy Wall Street co-creator Micah White, who recently wrote a blog post about the thinking behind the project.

[...] Outcry’s other distinguishing feature is that its dataset is entirely offline—it’s included with the download. According to the readme, the entire dataset is downloaded to your device at first launch, and stored in your library’s Application Support directory.

Submission + - Microsoft Allegedly Leaked Dutch Civil Servants' Data To the US (cybernews.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: The technology giant Microsoft has been accused of leaking the data of civil servants working for the Netherlands' regulatory agencies to the US House of Representatives. The civil servants affected by the leak work at the Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) and the Dutch Data Protection Authority (AP), according to the NL Times. They are involved in implementing the Digital Services Act (DSA), the European Union regulation on online services, aimed at combating illegal content and protecting user rights.

NL Times reports that Microsoft shared emails, minutes, and invitations sent by the civil servants without redacting their names in the documents. Willemijn Aerdts, Dutch State Secretary for Digital Economy and Sovereignty, said she discussed the allegations with US Ambassador to the Netherlands Joe Popolo.

Submission + - The AI Fight Brewing Inside The New York Times (theverge.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: How newsrooms should use AI — or if they should at all — has been a recurrent debate within the media industry over the last several years. Increasingly, these rules are being hammered out at the bargaining table between unions and publishers. Right now, employees at The New York Times are gearing up for a fight. Unionized staff with the Tech Guild say Times management has refused to provide the union with information related to how the company has used AI, its plans for AI use in the future, and how it will affect employees’ jobs and workflow. (The union filed an unfair labor practice charge earlier this month.) The Tech Guild, a NewsGuild of New York unit of around 700 software engineers, designers, product and project managers, and data analysts, also filed grievances saying Times management violated their collective bargaining agreement when it started using two internal AI tools that track and evaluate employee performance and activity.

[...] Both the Tech Guild and the Times Guild (which represents 1,500 editorial, ad sales, and support staff at the Times) filed unfair labor practice charges against the Times, saying that company violated labor law by refusing to respond to their requests for information around AI use at the outlet. The Times did not respond to specific questions about how it uses DX and Glean, but spokesperson Danielle Rhoades Ha said in an email that the company disagrees with the characterizations made in grievances and that it would respond as part of its “normal contractual process.” “Likewise, we will respond to this Request for Information (RFI) in due course as we’ve done with 80+ other RFIs from the Guild in recent years,” Rhoades Ha said.

The Times Guild is currently bargaining a new contract, pushing for robust protections against AI, like requirements that a human is behind any AI tool being used, that any journalism utilizing AI is transparently labeled, and that staff are compensated for AI model training deals the company might make. The Times deploys artificial intelligence tools for some reporting, like using it to parse millions of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein or scan satellite images of Gaza to try to find where Israel had dropped a specific kind of bomb. [...] [Ben Harnett, a software engineer at the Times and chair of the unit’s generative AI committee] emphasizes that the unit’s position is not that AI shouldn’t ever be used, but that workers should have a say in how it’s deployed. Metrics like how many tokens an employee uses or how often they’re using AI to do their jobs create pressure to do more and incentives that don’t align with doing quality work. “It’s going to distract [you] from actually doing a good job, which is what we think the company should want,” he says.

Submission + - Microsoft tries reassuring the public that AI is not replacing humanity (nerds.xyz)

Submitted by BrianFagioli
BrianFagioli writes: Microsoft has published a new research paper arguing that AI systems are not replacing human intelligence, but instead extending structures already rooted in human cognition and language. The paper claims large language models work because they absorb and remix patterns humans have embedded into writing and communication over generations, not because the systems possess true understanding or consciousness. Microsoft also points to hallucinations and reasoning failures as evidence that current AI still lacks real-world grounding and compositional reasoning comparable to humans.

The company additionally pushes back on fears of âoerogue AI,â arguing the larger risk comes from humans deploying flawed AI systems irresponsibly at scale. Critics, however, may see the paper as an attempt to calm public anxiety while the tech industry aggressively integrates AI into workplaces and software ecosystems. Microsoft repeatedly emphasizes the need for governance, safeguards, monitoring, and operational controls around AI systems, which also happens to align closely with its growing enterprise AI and Azure business.

Submission + - Tech CEOs Are Apparently Suffering From AI Psychosis (techcrunch.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: There is a certain wildness in the tech industry these days that both mimics previous eras of large changes, like cloud computing (runaway costs in the early days), and is like nothing we’ve ever seen before (record revenues accompanied by mass layoffs). One possible explanation: tech executives, especially CEOs, are collectively suffering from delusions of AI grandeur. And at least one tech CEO has said as much out loud: Box founder Aaron Levie.

“CEOs are uniquely prone to AI psychosis because they’re sufficiently distant from the last mile of work that still has to happen to generate most value with AI,” Levie wrote on X. CEOs “play with AI,” develop a prototype, or generate a contract, to use Levie’s examples, and then make the leap to believing agents can do the work. But these top-level executives aren’t the people who have to review code, discover bugs, and identify calls to hallucinated libraries before software is deployed. They aren’t responsible for training AI models on a company’s idiosyncratic contract terms, nor do they have to spend days combing through contracts to find sneaky terms, as Levie indicates.

In other words, Levie’s theory posits, CEOs don’t really understand processes well enough to know what really can and can’t be automated. But that lack of knowledge doesn’t stop them from acting on their beliefs. [...] So what are CEOs to do instead? Levie advises CEOs to use AI “a ton” to really see what it can and can’t do, “and come out the other side with an appreciation for both the upside and the real work.”

Slashdot Top Deals