For years Google published scientific research that helped jump-start its competitors. But now it's lurched into defensive mode. From a report: In February, Jeff Dean, Google's longtime head of artificial intelligence, announced a stunning policy shift to his staff: They had to hold off sharing their work with the outside world. For years Dean had run his department like a university, encouraging researchers to publish academic papers prolifically; they pushed out nearly 500 studies since 2019, according to Google Research's website. But the launch of OpenAI's groundbreaking ChatGPT three months earlier had changed things. The San Francisco start-up kept up with Google by reading the team's scientific papers, Dean said at the quarterly meeting for the company's research division. Indeed, transformers -- a foundational part of the latest AI tech and the T in ChatGPT -- originated in a Google study.

Things had to change. Google would take advantage of its own AI discoveries, sharing papers only after the lab work had been turned into products, Dean said, according to two people with knowledge of the meeting, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share private information. The policy change is part of a larger shift inside Google. Long considered the leader in AI, the tech giant has lurched into defensive mode -- first to fend off a fleet of nimble AI competitors, and now to protect its core search business, stock price, and, potentially, its future, which executives have said is intertwined with AI. In op-eds, podcasts and TV appearances, Google CEO Sundar Pichai has urged caution on AI. "On a societal scale, it can cause a lot of harm," he warned on "60 Minutes" in April, describing how the technology could supercharge the creation of fake images and videos. But in recent months, Google has overhauled its AI operations with the goal of launching products quickly, according to interviews with 11 current and former Google employees, most of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to share private information.

The rumors are true: next week, Google will introduce its first foldable phone, the Pixel Fold, during the Google I/O 2023 event. From a report: Google hasn't revealed any specs for the device, but a brief teaser video shows off a full-size outer display on a phone that opens up similarly to Samsung's Galaxy Z Fold devices. The camera bar on the back is similar to other Pixel devices but doesn't stick out as prominently, reflecting what we've seen in leaked marketing materials and even a hands-on video.

CNBC reported in April that the Pixel Fold would be a 5.8-inch phone that folds out into a 7.6-inch tablet, with a Google Tensor G2 processor, weigh 10oz, and have "the most durable hinge on a foldable," along with a price that's over $1,700. Samsung's latest foldable, the Z Fold 4, launched with a price of $1,799. We had expected to see it last year, but the Fold didn't make the cut for I/O in 2022. Rumors about its launch -- and how it fits in with Google's XL plans for Android apps that work across screens of various sizes -- haven't slowed down in the year since.

Shopify said on Thursday it would lay off 20% of employees and would sell its logistics business to Flexport, as the e-commerce company pushes to cut costs further and refocus on its core business. From a report: Shopify's first quarter revenue increased 25% from the same period last year to $1.5 billion, topping the company's own guidance for revenue growth in the high-teen percentages. Executives said on Thursday they expected revenue for the second quarter to grow at a similar rate to the first quarter. It reported free cash flow of $86 million, after burning cash in the year-earlier period, and projected free cash flow profitability for the rest of the year.

Discord is making "big changes" to how identities work on the platform, a move that will force you to change your username. From a report: Up until now, the company has appended four-digit tags to identities as a way to distinguish people with the same username. However, the new system will give everyone a unique username, much like Twitter, Instagram and other services. "The whole point of these changes is that we want to make it a lot easier for you and all the new users coming to Discord to connect and hang out with friends," co-founder Stanislav Vishnevskiy wrote in a blog post. "We know that your username and identity are important, and we understand that some of you may not like this change and disagree with it." The original aim with the four-digit tags was to allow you to choose any username you wanted, but it has now become "technical debt," according to Discord. The company said that the usernames are "too complicated or obscure" for people to remember.

Microsoft is making its Bing GPT-4 chatbot available to everyone today, no more waitlist necessary. From a report: All you need to do is sign in to the new Bing or Edge with your Microsoft account, and you'll now access the open preview version that's powered by GPT-4. Microsoft is also massively upgrading Bing Chat with lots of new features and even plug-in support. Microsoft is now adding more smart features to Bing Chat, including image and video results, new Bing and Edge Actions feature, persistent chat and history, and plug-in support. The plug-in support will be the key addition for developers and for the future of Bing Chat.

The White House on Thursday announced its first new initiatives aimed at taming the risks of artificial intelligence since a boom in A.I.-powered chatbots has prompted growing calls to regulate the technology. From a report: The National Science Foundation plans to spend $140 million on new research centers devoted to A.I., White House officials said. The administration also pledged to release draft guidelines for government agencies to ensure that their use of A.I. safeguards "the American people's rights and safety," adding that several A.I. companies had agreed to make their products available for scrutiny in August at a cybersecurity conference. The announcements came hours before Vice President Kamala Harris and other administration officials were scheduled to meet with the chief executives of Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, the maker of the popular ChatGPT chatbot, and Anthropic, an A.I. start-up, to discuss the technology.

A senior administration official said on Wednesday that the White House planned to impress upon the companies that they had a responsibility to address the risks of new A.I. developments.The White House has been under growing pressure to police A.I. that is capable of crafting sophisticated prose and lifelike images. The explosion of interest in the technology began last year when OpenAI released ChatGPT to the public and people immediately began using it to search for information, do schoolwork and assist them with their job. Since then, some of the biggest tech companies have rushed to incorporate chatbots into their products and accelerated A.I. research, while venture capitalists have poured money into A.I. start-ups.

In a policy reversal, Starlink no longer plans to charge data overage fees to standard residential users who exceed 1TB of monthly usage. Ars Technica reports: When SpaceX's Starlink division first announced the data cap in November 2022, it said that residential customers would get 1TB of "priority access data" each month. After using 1TB, customers could keep accessing the Internet at slower (but unspecified) speeds or pay $0.25 per gigabyte for "additional priority access." This was originally supposed to take effect in December, but Starlink delayed the change to February and then to April.

But now, Starlink's list of support FAQs no longer mentions the residential data cap and the current version of the fair use policy says that standard service plan users have unlimited data. The previous version of the Starlink fair use policy described the 1TB residential cap and optional $0.25-per-gigabyte overage fees. Starlink sent an email to users that said, "Good news! Your Starlink subscription will remain unlimited and will no longer be deprioritized after 1TB of data use." Nathan Owens, a Netflix engineer who frequently tweets about Starlink, posted a screenshot of the email yesterday.

Montana Governor Greg Gianforte has returned an "amendatory veto" to the legislature regarding the state's unconstitutional "ban TikTok" bill, proposing alternative draft language that inadvertently could ban all social media platforms in the state due to poor drafting. The revised language targets any social media application that collects personal information and provides it to a foreign adversary, but since most social media networks collect such information and share it with entities in foreign countries, it would effectively ban all social media in Montana. Techdirt reports: As [1st Amendment lawyer Ari Cohn] points out, the new draft targets any "social media application" that allows for "the collection of personal information or data" and allows for "the personal information or data to be provided to a foreign adversary or a person or entity located within a country designated as a foreign adversary." Now, some might think that sounds reasonable, but the details here matter. And the details reveal that EVERY social media network collects such information and provides it to people located in countries designated as a foreign adversary. And that's because "personal information" is a very broad term, as is "provided." [Ari writes:]

"'Surely,' you might think, 'that just covers the data platforms amass by monitoring and tracking us, right?' Perhaps not. The bill doesn't define the term, so who knows what it means in their heads. But we have an idea of what it means out in the real (online) world, by way of the regulations implementing the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Those regulations include in the definition of 'personal information' things like: First and last name; Online contact information; A screen or user name where it functions in the same manner as online contact information. In other words, the types of information that accompany virtually every piece of content posted on social media. If a platform allows that kind of information to be provided to any foreign adversary or a person or entity located within a foreign adversary, it is banned from Montana.

Do you know who might be persons located within a country designated as a foreign adversary? Users. Users who are provided the kinds of 'personal information' that are inherent in the very concept of social media. So, effectively, the bill would ban any social media company that allows any user in China, Russia, Iran, or Cuba to see content from a Montana user (and this is a generous reading, nothing in the bill seems to require that the data/information shared be from a Montana resident). On top of it, each time a user from one of those countries accesses content, platforms would be subject to a $10,000 fine. Do you know which platforms allow people in those countries to access content posted in the United States? All of them. Congratulations, Montana Governor Greg Gianforte. You just managed to accidentally ban all social media for Montanans. Good work."

According to DigiTimes, TSMC will charge an extra 30% more for chips made in American than for chips made in Taiwan. Tom's Hardware reports: TSMC has started discussions with customers about orders and pricing for both overseas plants, which are set to begin commercial production in late 2024. Industry insiders believe that prices of chips produced on TSMC's N4 and N5 process technologies in the U.S. will be 20% -- 30% higher than those in Taiwan, while older process chips produced in Japan's Kumamoto facility on N28/N22 as well as N16/N12 nodes may cost 10% - 15% more than similar chips fabbed in Taiwan.

While American chip designers certainly won't appreciate higher costs on chip production in the U.S., it is likely that they will make chips aimed at government and less price-sensitive applications in Arizona. Therefore, they should be able to pass those extra costs on to their customers without risking their competitive positions. Given the high construction and operational costs of fabs in Japan and the U.S., TSMC is going to pass those extra expenses on to customers to maintain its gross margin target of 53%.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Growth at $50 billion fintech Stripe has been slowing this year, but one of its key strategies to reverse that course got a decent push today: Stripe is announcing that it has inked a "strategic payments partnership" with Uber. The pair will work together initially on selected services in eight of Uber's biggest markets, including the U.S., the U.K., Canada, Mexico, Australia and Japan. Some context on this deal: Uber's big U.S. rival Lyft has been a longtime marquee customer of Stripe's for payments, and whether or not it was true, that was one reason some assumed Uber and Stripe would not work together. Uber is, however, a much bigger beast, at close to $100 billion transacted annually (Stripe processed $817 billion last year). And Uber is not just a force globally but in the U.S. specifically, where one estimate from YipIt (via WSJ) puts Uber's rideshare market share currently at a whopping 74%.

Lyft will remain a customer of Stripe's, Stripe president Will Gaybrick confirmed to TechCrunch. Financial terms of the deal are not being disclosed, but as with the rest of Stripe's payments business, a big component will come from commissions that Stripe will make from each transaction that it powers on Uber's platform. The Uber partnership, expected to be announced formally later today at Stripe's user conference, comes on the heels of recent enterprise deals Stripe has inked with Amazon, Microsoft and BMW. But this partnership -- for now at least -- is not a global adoption of all that Stripe has to offer. Uber will be using Stripe to break into a specific, new payments frontier. Specifically, it will integrate Stripe Financial Connections and Link to let users import banking details to pay for services like Uber Rides and Eats directly from bank accounts, giving users a payments alternative to credit or debit cards.

Google is giving verified senders a blue check mark to more clearly "help users identify messages from legitimate senders versus impersonators." 9to5Google reports: The existing system is based on the Brand Indicators for Message Identification (BIMI) standard, where brand logos appear in the "avatar slot" next to the sender's name and address. For example, instead of a generic "B" against a plain background, Bank of America can show its official flag logo. It's based on strong authentication with DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance) and logo verification "with a VMC, issued by a Certification Authority such as Entrust or DigiCert."

Google is now making the feature much more explicit by adding a "checkmark icon for senders that have adopted BIMI" to more clearly "help users identify messages from legitimate senders versus impersonators." The company has shared what this will look like on desktop web. The timing of this launch is somewhat amusing, given the rest of the tech landscape. The icon is a blue seal with a white checkmark in the middle, with users able to hover over it on the web. For example, Google's will say: "This sender of this email has verified that they own google.com and the logo in the profile image. Learn more." The feature is rolling out today and will be available over the coming days and weeks. It'll be available to all Google Workspace customers, legacy G Suite Basic and Business customers, and users with personal Google Accounts.

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."

Google is taking a big step toward our supposedly passwordless future by enabling passkey-only Google accounts. From a report: In the blog post, titled "The beginning of the end of the password," Google says: "We've begun rolling out support for passkeys across Google Accounts on all major platforms. They'll be an additional option that people can use to sign in, alongside passwords, 2-Step Verification (2SV), etc." Previously, you've been able to use a passkey with a Google account as part of two-factor authentication, but that was always in addition to a password. Now it's possible to use a Google account with a passkey instead of a password.

A passkey, if you haven't heard of the new authentication method, is a new way to log in to apps and websites and may someday replace a password. Password entry began as a simple text box for humans, and those text boxes slowly had automation and complication bolted onto them as the desire for higher security arrived. While you used to type a remembered word into a password field, today, the right way to use a password is to have a password manager paste a random string of characters into the password box. Since few of us physically type in our passwords, passkeys remove the password box. Passkeys have your operating system directly swap public-private keypairs -- the "WebAuthn" standard -- with a website, and that's how you get authenticated. Google's demo of how this will work on a phone looks great -- the usual box asks for your Google username, then instead of a password, it asks for a fingerprint, which unlocks the passkey system, and you're logged in. Google's passwordless support is headed for consumer devices right now, while business Google Workspace accounts will "soon" have the option to enable passkeys for end users.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Microsoft has now started notifying IT admins that it will force Outlook and Teams to ignore the default web browser on Windows and open links in Microsoft Edge instead. Reddit users have posted messages from the Microsoft 365 admin center that reveal how Microsoft is going to roll out this change. "Web links from Azure Active Directory (AAD) accounts and Microsoft (MSA) accounts in the Outlook for Windows app will open in Microsoft Edge in a single view showing the opened link side-by-side with the email it came from," reads a message to IT admins from Microsoft. While this won't affect the default browser setting in Windows, it's yet another part of Microsoft 365 and Windows that totally ignores your default browser choice for links. Microsoft already does this with the Widgets system in Windows 11 and even the search experience, where you'll be forced into Edge if you click a link even if you have another browser set as default. Further reading: Microsoft Broke a Chrome Feature To Promote Its Edge Browser.

Google will remove the familiar lock icon that allows users to check a website's Transport Layer Security status for the connection, citing research that only a few users correctly understood its precise meaning. From a report: The lock icon has been displayed by web browsers since the 1990s, indicating that the connection to web sites is secured and authenticated with encryption. However, Google said its 2021 research showed that only 11 percent of participants in a study correctly understood the meaning of the lock icon. This, Google argued, is not harmless since most phishing sites also use the hyper text transfer protocol secure extension (HTTPS) and also display the lock icon. Ergo, a lock icon is not in actual fact an indicator of a site's security. [...] Starting with Chrome version 117, Google will introduce a new "tune" icon, which does not imply a site is trustworthy, and is more obviously clickable. The "tune" icon is more commonly associated with settings and other control, and Google said a more neutral indicator like that prevents the misunderstanding around site security that the lock icon is causing.

Artificial intelligence will be dangerous in the hands of unscrupulous people, according to Microsoft Chief Economist Michael Schwarz. From a report: "I am confident AI will be used by bad actors, and yes it will cause real damage," Schwarz said during a World Economic Forum panel in Geneva on Wednesday. "It can do a lot damage in the hands of spammers with elections and so on." AI "clearly" must be regulated, he said, but lawmakers should be cautious and wait until the technology causes "real harm."

Artificial intelligence tools have come under increased scrutiny as their use exploded in recent months following the debut of ChatGPT. Policymakers are trying to pressure companies to implement safeguards around the emerging technology. "Once we see real harm, we have to ask ourselves the simple question: 'Can we regulate that in a way where the good things that will be prevented by this regulation are less important?'" Schwarz said. "The principles should be, the benefits from the regulation to our society should be greater than the cost to our society."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: An anti-pornography group that claims all adult content is unhealthy is taking aim at Reddit, one of the biggest online platforms for sharing porn and sex worker resources. The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), formerly Morality in Media, celebrated changes to policy that resulted in adult performers losing their incomes, taken credit for pressuring Instagram to ban Pornhub from the platform, and encouraged its followers to help them shut down sites that host legal adult content, causing real-world harm to sex workers and pushing them toward the exploitation they claim to aim to prevent. The letter, signed by 320 "anti-sexual exploitation and violence experts," according to NCOSE, accuses Reddit of not doing enough to prevent image-based sexual abuse. The letter's co-signatories don't just push for better protection against non-consensual imagery, but demand that all adult content be banned from the site. This would result in a massive purge of hundreds of subreddits, many of them run by sex workers for posting consensual, legal content.

"Adopt strong policies against hardcore pornography and sexually explicit content, due to the inability for Reddit to ever sufficiently verify the age or consent of people depicted in such content," the letter urges Reddit. It also demands that the platform "ban users who upload sexually explicit material, especially if the material depicts child sexual abuse material or non-consensually shared intimate images, and prevent them from creating another account." "While these are steps forward, Reddit's failure to enact meaningful age and consent verirication[sic] practices and ineffective moderation strategy continues to allow such content to flourish on its platform," the letter states. "If they cause enough fuss in the media, over and over, eventually Reddit will decide it's not financially worthwhile to stand up for sanity, and they'll just nuke porn out of convenience," a moderator for r/cumsluts, a 3-million subscriber community for adult content, told Motherboard. "Eventually groups like NCOSE will get porn outlawed from the web in general. It's just a matter of time, and reintroducing the laws several times under different acronyms until people get tired of fighting. I'm very pessimistic about this. Unfortunately, mindlessly shrieking 'Won't somebody please think of the children?' over and over is a dangerously over-effective tactic."

A moderator for r/18_19 told Motherboard that they don't expect Reddit to ban adult content anytime soon, but if it did, that it could push people to decentralized platforms, or platforms that are more difficult to moderate or search. "I don't think Reddit should ban porn or adult communities. In the short term, banning adult content would suck," they said. "A huge number of people come here for that. But it wouldn't be a big deal in the long run. Porn will be available, it would just take a while for it to consolidate around new locations."

Yesterday, Colorado eliminated a 2005 law that required local governments to hold an election before offering cable television or telecommunications service, "a process that pitted city and town leaders against well-funded broadband industry lobbying campaigns," reports Ars Technica. From the report: Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, signed a bill to eliminate that law yesterday. The bill had been approved by the State House in a 48-14 vote and in the Senate by a 31-4 vote. Both chambers have Democratic majorities, but the votes didn't go entirely along party lines; all of the "no" votes came from Republicans, but other Republicans joined Democrats in approving the bill. The bill signed by Polis "gives local governments the authority to provide broadband service, either on their own or by partnering with industry service providers, without holding a local election," the Governor's Office of Information Technology said.

"Each local government is in a unique position or different phase of connecting residents to high-speed Internet, and this bill allows them to establish broadband plans that meet the needs of their communities," Colorado Broadband Office Executive Director Brandy Reitter said. Going forward, cities and towns won't have to hold elections to opt out of the 2005 restriction on municipal broadband. A vote to opt out of the state law didn't guarantee that a city or town would build a network, but the vote was a necessary step and in some cases resulted in a municipal broadband service.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The New York Police Department (NYPD) and New York City's self-proclaimed computer geek of a mayor are urging resident car owners to equip their vehicles with an Apple AirTag. During a press conference on Sunday, Mayor Eric Adams announced the distribution of 500 free AirTags to New Yorkers, saying the technology would aid in reducing the city's surging car theft numbers. Adams held the press conference at the 43rd precinct in the Bronx, where he said there had been 200 instances of grand larceny of autos. An NYPD official said that in New York City, 966 Hyundais and Kias have been stolen this year thus far, already surpassing 2022's 819 total. The NYPD's public crime statistics tracker says there have been 4,492 vehicle thefts this year, a 13.3 percent increase compared to the same period last year and the largest increase among NYC's seven major crime categories.

Adams, as the city did when announcing litigation against Kia and Hyundai on April 7, largely blamed the rise in car thefts on Kia and Hyundai, which he said are "leading the way" in stolen car brands. Hyundais and Kias were the subjects of the Kia Challenge TikTok trend that encouraged people to jack said vehicles with a mere USB-A cable. The topic has graduated way beyond a social media fad and into a serious concern. [...] Adams was adamant grand larceny auto numbers were dragging the city's overall crime numbers up and urged New Yorkers to "participate" in the fight against car theft by using an AirTag. NYPD Chief of Department Jeffrey Maddrey said users who report a stolen vehicle equipped with an AirTag will see the police use "drones, our StarChase technology & good old fashion police work to safely recover your stolen car."

"Help us help you, get an AirTag," he tweeted.

Mozilla announced today that it has acquired Fakespot, a startup that offers a website and browser extension that helps users identify fake or unreliable reviews. From a report: The financial terms of the deal were not disclosed. Fakespot's offerings can be used to spot fake reviews listed on various online marketplaces including Amazon, Yelp, TripAdvisor and more. Founded in 2016, New York-based Fakespot uses an AI and machine learning system to detect patterns and similarities between reviews in order to flag those that are most likely to be deceptive. Fakespot provides a rating or grade for the product's reviews in order to help consumers make more informed decisions when making a purchase. The goal behind the company's website and browser extension is to give users the ability to quickly see where deceptive reviews may be artificially inflating a product's ranking in search engines.