Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. Sony Heard Backlash Over Dropping PlayStation Discs, Plans to Press Ahead
  2. Hackers Targeted Municipal Water Systems In 7 States This Week, FBI Says
  3. New Google Earth AI Tool Could Fuel Misinformation, Experts Say
  4. Publishers Are Losing Google Traffic As AI Answers Replace Links
  5. New York Sues Kalshi For Running ‘Illegal Gambling Operation’
  6. Chrome Is Using AI To Fix Hundreds of Bugs, Eliminate Full Browser Restarts
  7. LinkedIn Introduces a ‘Seems Like AI Slop’ Button
  8. Netflix Sued For Losing ‘Master Copy’ of Unreleased Nicolas Cage Movie
  9. Anthropic Says Its AI Systems Broke Into Computers at 3 Organizations
  10. Flock Cameras Are Being Destroyed Across the US
  11. New MCP Specification Addresses the Main Barrier To Enterprise Adoption
  12. A Fundamental Flaw Leaves LLMs Strikingly Vulnerable To Attack
  13. Microsoft’s $450 Billion Jump Is Biggest In Stock Market History
  14. ABC Accuses FCC of ‘Attempted Censorship’
  15. Amazon’s Zoox Wins First US Approval For Paid Robotaxis Without Human Controls

Alterslash picks up to the best 5 comments from each of the day’s Slashdot stories, and presents them on a single page for easy reading.

Sony Heard Backlash Over Dropping PlayStation Discs, Plans to Press Ahead

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Sony says it will proceed with ending PlayStation disc sales in January 2028 despite petitions, boycott threats, and concerns about digital ownership and the disappearance of the secondhand market. PCMag reports:
After Sony’s recent earnings call, an investor Q&A session saw analysts ask about its controversial decision to end disc production across all of its consoles. The company hadn’t publicly commented since its announcement and had reduced activity on social accounts and other marketing channels. Sony’s chief financial officer, Lin Tao, broke that silence during the Q&A. “There are various reasons we made this decision,” she said through an interpreter. “The biggest being that the digitalization of content overall has been progressing. That’s the big factor. It’s not just for PlayStation, but for all kinds of content, digitalization is progressing. “And so when we think about the future, and we put in a lot of thought and time, and we cautiously considered this, and we came to this conclusion, and we’re going to cautiously move this forward,” Tao said.

“We have received various opinions, and people have strong views, and we understand that the community has put forth those views to us,” said Tao. […] Tao says Sony wants to “consider” the emotions of disgruntled customers, especially as titles are “connected to people’s fond memories in many cases.” Tao also alluded to the possibility of future measures to lessen the blow for anyone unhappy with the decision, but it appears Sony hasn’t yet finalized what those may be. “In the future digital ecosystem, how do we engage the gamers is something that we would like to continue to explore,” she said.

Hackers Targeted Municipal Water Systems In 7 States This Week, FBI Says

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from NBC News:
Cyberattacks targeting municipal water systems have been reported in at least seven states this week, prompting the FBI and the Environmental Protection Agency to warn utilities nationwide that hackers are trying to disrupt critical water infrastructure. In a public service announcement Thursday, the agencies said water and wastewater utilities have reported incidents to the FBI, with some malicious activity degrading water operations. The announcement does not name the states.

The warning comes after hackers targeted more than 30 municipal water facilities in Minnesota in an attack that had hallmarks of Iranian meddling, according to a law enforcement official. It is still under investigation. A spokesperson for Minnesota’s information technology services agency said Thursday there was no indication the breaches contaminated any municipal water supplies. The federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency said in a separate alert that some larger attacks on water infrastructure had “resulted in boil water notices and sustained manual operations,” though it did not say where.

[…] The federal advisory said the malicious cyber actors, or MCAs, targeted specific brands of control systems used by municipal water utilities, though the FBI and the EPA urged operators of all systems to take precautions. […] The agencies said the hackers remotely accessed internet-facing devices, changed IP addresses and passwords, and caused utilities to lose monitoring and control capabilities. The federal advisory calls on system operators to remove programmable logical controllers, or PLCs, from direct internet exposure by putting them behind secure gateways and firewalls; use strong passwords; and limit communications between authorized control system devices through access control lists.

They learned it from us

By Revek • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
I seem to recall a exploit designed to trash process controllers that was made to destroy Iranian infrastructure. I’m just STUX about the detail. Maybe someone on the NET can find the details.

Iranian meddling or …

By fahrbot-bot • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

… an attack that had hallmarks of Iranian meddling, according to a law enforcement official.

Trump puts the blame on Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. From Trump blames governor, not Iran, for Minnesota cyberattack

“They blame it on Iran. I don’t think so. I think I blame it on Minnesota because they’re grossly incompetent,” Trump said [w/o presenting any evidence] at a July 31 Cabinet meeting at the Camp David presidential retreat in Maryland. “I would blame it on Minnesota and the governor, the corrupt governor of Minnesota.”

Governor Walz has a different theory (also from that article):

“Trump knows exactly who is responsible for this attack, and knows that other states were hit too,” Walz said in a statement in response to the president’s remarks. “This is what modern warfare looks like, and it further illustrates there’s no plan to win a war with Iran.”

Walz blamed Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency, the former government-slashing agency once led by tech executive Elon Musk, for gutting the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. “DOGE took an axe to CISA and left the U.S. exposed to cyberattacks. Thankfully, our experts in Minnesota were able to identify the vulnerability quickly and work with local communities to stop it,” Walz said.

As seven states have been impacted, either Iran or Governor Walz has been very busy … :-)

I wonder who…

By Locke2005 • Score: 3 Thread
Trumpers: “Those Iranian goatfuckers will never be able to hack our 21st century American data centers!” Iranian IT experts who have been fighting against Israeli hackers for years: “This should be pretty easy by comparison! They’re nowhere near as secure as the Israelis!”

New Google Earth AI Tool Could Fuel Misinformation, Experts Say

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Google has integrated its Nano Banana 2 image generator into Google Earth, allowing users to place AI-generated events and objects onto real satellite imagery. The company says its AI-generated images contain invisible watermarks detectable through Gemini or Lens, but the BBC found those safeguards and some third-party detection tools can be fooled into labeling manipulated Google Earth images as real. From the report:
A collapsed Eiffel Tower, a sinkhole swallowing the Great Pyramid of Giza and Russian tanks in Ukraine’s capital were among the images BBC Verify was able to create when testing the feature, which was rolled out on Thursday. Google has not yet responded to questions based on BBC Verify’s tests, but in a social media post the company said they “take misinformation seriously” and that “we prevent image creation on harmful topics and are continually updating our protections.”

AI and misinformation expert Henk van Ess has highlighted the risks this feature poses, creating fake images of a non-existent nuclear power plant in Iran, a refugee camp on the US-Mexico border and a fake hospital in Gaza with a bomb crater next to it. He said Google was allowing “invented” imagery to be “welded to genuine coordinates, drawn on genuine imagery.” “The forgery does not have to look convincing on its own. It inherits the credibility of the map it was born on,” van Ess added.
UPDATE 7/31/26 10:54 AM: Google is rolling back the image generation inside of Google Earth: “We know that people uniquely trust Google Earth for a reliable view of the world. We’ve seen geospatial professionals using this feature for a range of useful purposes, however we’ve also seen people sharing screenshots of generated imagery that appear to violate our policies. So we’re rolling back this feature in Google Earth while we work on implementing stronger guardrails. It’s important to note that generated images didn’t appear in the main Google Earth experience for others to see and were watermarked as AI generated.”

Why?

By lspd • Score: 3 Thread
So....
- add a new AI feature that has no purpose other than misinformation and abuse
- roll back release of new AI feature as soon as completely predictable misinformation and abuse occurs

What was the point of this?

Publishers Are Losing Google Traffic As AI Answers Replace Links

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
alternative_right shares a report from Axios:
Google has basically stopped sending people to websites (including our site) for answers and information. Instead, it’s using AI to answer them on its platform, in its words. Chartbeat data shared with Axios shows Google Search traffic to publishers fell 34% over the past year. That pain is regressive. Over the past two years, small publishers lost 60% of referrals from search overall, medium publishers 47%, large publishers 22%.

Ads and Bad Advice

By darkain • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

1) nobody wants to read an “article” that has more ads than content when researching a topic (yes, ablock exists for us techies and I have it, but talking in the more broad common person sense).

2) nobody wants to read a forum thread with over 100 posts to try to find the one post with the real answer surrounded by a collection of bad answers and people saying “YUP, IT WORKS NOW” with zero context otherwise.

Make your content on-topic and valuable, and users will return. it is as simple as that. These are just two of the main things I see as devauluation of a lot of these web sites complaining about a drop in traffic. They’re most certainly not the ONLY reasons, but it is two of the major points!

AI gives better answers.

By supabeast! • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

If I need to know something and I search with Google it kind of sucks. Half of the articles are clickbait, written by non-experts or a shitty AI that was given a garbage prompt. When I go to the web site I immediately have to jump through as many as three popups about cookies. Then, ten seconds after I start reading, a full page popup appears compelling me to sign up for a mailing list. If I am on a mobile browser with an ad blocker the page may refuse to load. On desktop I might get a popup telling me to disable my ad blocker. After all that shit it turns out that the garbage article does not even answer my question. So I have to keep doing this with every link until I either find an answer or give up.

But if I ask Claude it will usually give me a great answer. Sometimes it gives an entire essay. The writing is much better than the garbage I would get from a Google search.

But lately I have taken to just looking it up in books. This month I bought a big Merriam Webster dictionary along with the Oxford dictionaries of economics, finance and banking, and politics and international relations. It’s great! Entries are short because Oxford is not cooking up five+ paragraph articles to put ads into. The writers were experts. And they were human. I still resort to Claude at times, and it can be faster, but I like ink on paper.

Google put an end to Clickbait

By allo • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

If your article can be replaced with a three line summary, your article is not worth my click.

Re:Ads and Bad Advice

By Voyager529 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

nobody wants to read an “article” that has more ads than content when researching a topic

This. This right here is the answer.

Google search originally was creepy-accurate because it was built on the work that was done elsewhere. While other search engines looked at frequency of search terms and other easy-to-game metrics, Google did it based on links, meaning more linked-to pages got preferred rankings. That worked for a very long time, until that too got automated and SEO slop took over search indices. Google itself began to have more and more ads creep into search results, and reward clearly-seo-slop over the sort of sites people actually wanted to find. Sites got so plastered in ads and tracking scripts that they became utterly unusable without an ad blocker, even for people who WANTED to support the sites…then there were the cookie banners, then there were the modal overlays…and if you had a labor-of-love website that legitimately had useful, human-created or curated content that was useful and functional…you were buried on page six of the search results because you were competing against the SEO slop and backlink farms.

and then ChatGPT/Claude/Gemini/Perplexity came around and were able to sift through all the crap to give everyone the paragraph they were actually looking for in the first place.

You dug your own grave, Axios…when your website takes a minute to load its moving video ads, people tolerate it in the absence of an alternative. Gemini is terrible for 101 other reasons…but if it puts the slop sites out of business, I’ll accept the tradeoff.

I would visit …

By PPH • Score: 3 Thread

… your site. But I’m tired of being yelled at for turning on enhanced tracking protection. Not blocking adds. I see Retool in my sleep by now. Just asking “Please don’t track me.”

New York Sues Kalshi For Running ‘Illegal Gambling Operation’

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
New York has sued prediction-market platform Kalshi, alleging it operates an “illegal gambling operation” without state authorization. “No matter what they call themselves, prediction markets like Kalshi are gambling platforms, plain and simple,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James in a press release announcing the lawsuit. “By ignoring our laws, Kalshi is running an illegal operation and harming New Yorkers in the process.” CNBC reports:
In a case filed in a Manhattan state court (PDF), the lawsuit claims that Kalshi accepts wagers as a gambling business in disregard for the state’s constitution and laws by not being registered with the New York State Gaming Commission. Governor Kathy Hochul in the press release said the state is taking the action to stop what it views as illegal behavior and bring the company into compliance with New York law. The lawsuit is seeking a permanent injunction against Kalshi.

The suit by the state is also seeking a total restitution to users who have placed trades on the platform, a $100,000 penalty for each attempt to offer sports wagering, and another penalty three times the amount the company has gained while allegedly operating in violation of New York law. The state estimates that could total $36 billion.

FWIW, Kalshi and Polymarket are both based in NYC

By Software • Score: 3 Thread
Specifically, in Manhattan. So AG James isn’t playing favorites based on Kalshi’s location.

Re:What About CFTC Ruling

By snowshovelboy • Score: 4, Informative Thread

IANAL but the primacy clause doesn’t automatically remove regulatory authority from the states. Also, imo, prediction markets should already be illegal in new york under new york’s anti bucket shop law from the early 20th century.

Chrome Is Using AI To Fix Hundreds of Bugs, Eliminate Full Browser Restarts

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Google says AI-assisted workflows helped Chrome fix 1,072 security bugs across versions 149 and 150, more than the previous 23 releases combined. The company is also testing twice-weekly security updates and “dynamic patching,” which could apply most fixes without requiring users to restart the entire browser. “By leveraging Chrome’s multi-process architecture, dynamic patching sequentially replaces background child processes (like the Renderer and GPU) with updated binaries on the fly,” says Google in a blog post. PiunikaWeb reports:
Alongside dynamic patching, Google is rolling out smarter background updates during periods of minimal user disruption. Starting with Chrome 150 on macOS, the browser takes advantage of the operating system’s windowless state. If all Chrome windows are closed but the app remains running in the background, the browser will quietly auto-restart to apply pending updates.

For enterprise environments, IT admins can continue to manage fleet-wide deployments through Chrome Enterprise Core or enforce update prompts using the RelaunchNotification policy. Google’s long-term vision is a browser that remains continuously protected in the background without interrupting your daily browsing session. In the meantime, you can manually trigger pending updates by clicking the update prompt in the top-right corner of Chrome.

That explains some shit

By paul_engr • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
I’ve noticed that chrome is dramatically less stable lately…

This isn’t even news, it’s a slashvertisment

By rsilvergun • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
Yeah Google is going to tell everybody that AI is the new hotness allowing them to make all their software the bestest. And I have no doubt that their tools will find some bugs that nobody cares about.

It would be funny if all these tools really did work though to the point where all the security vulnerabilities that that Israeli company uses to break into our phones for law enforcement got fixed up so that law enforcement couldn’t just break into your phone anytime they want.

On the other hand the way the laws are changing right now and the way our civilization is rapidly going back to a feudal system of government we’re not going to have enough civil liberties for any of that to matter but it’s still an interesting thought experiment.

Re:That explains some shit

By geekmux • Score: 4, Funny Thread

I’ve noticed that chrome is dramatically less stable lately…

Yeah, but did you take a hit of that vibe code? Shits fyre, bruh. I’m talking 90% fresh.

Me and my Botz got you, bruh.

- Phat AI-bert

Probably time to stop using Chrome then

By gweihir • Score: 3 Thread

Letting AI do your coding is never a good idea. Patching included. There are now documented cases where LLM-done “security patches” created new vulnerabilities. And they have a tendency to not fully fix the original vulnerabilities on top of that.

“Cheaper than possible”-type fake engineering at its best.

Thorough testing

By Waffle Iron • Score: 3 Thread

Changing out running code on the fly probably increases the number of corner cases by an order of magnitude.

What could possibly go wrong?

LinkedIn Introduces a ‘Seems Like AI Slop’ Button

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from 404 Media:
LinkedIn, a social network awash with long AI-generated posts from executives and other corporate workers, has introduced a new button that users can click to flag if a post “seems like AI slop,” according to 404 Media’s own tests. If you have been anywhere near LinkedIn in the past couple of years, you have undoubtedly seen users posting blatantly AI-generated missives. Often these posts take some sort of news event, and opine on how this relates to thought leadership, or some other LinkedIn brainrot term. It’s also pretty wild the button specifically uses the term “AI slop” and not, say, “It seems this was generated with AI.”

[…] After publication of this piece, Hari Srinivasan, chief product officer at LinkedIn, wrote their own post about the button. “AI slop is a top priority for all of us. We really care about this. People come to LinkedIn to connect with real people and share their real perspectives, ideas and expertise. Here are a few more changes to keep it that way,” he wrote.

The button in part will help LinkedIn tune its own models for identifying AI slop. “We are ramping up a series of new and improved classifiers that identify if a post is AI-slop or generally low-quality content. This will reduce the amount of AI slop you might see in suggested content and content from outside your network,” the post said. “We are ramping the ability for members to tell us if they believe a post or comment seems like AI slop. Slop is hard to define and the definition changes; this lets us tune our models and make better feeds.” Srinivasan also said LinkedIn is removing the AI-powered “enhance your post” feature with another that “proofreads your words, but does not change your voice.”

As opposed to human slop

By DrXym • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
LinkedIn provides both. Anyhoo, every platform should have a button which is able to report slop, scam ads, copyright infringment and other things without the bullshit of filling out a lengthy form that will be denied. At least then there is an aggregate opinion that can be used to flag garbage content.

Re:Why is Microsoft doing this?

By fuzzyfuzzyfungus • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
I suspect that Microsoft, not unreasonably, thinks that the value of their AI slop will be enhanced if they can use an existing property to get people to classify particularly grating AI slop so that they can tune their copilot-related stuff to produce less grating or less obvious slop in the future.

Maybe someone in the org actually cares about linkedin’s reputation as a hellscape for aura-farming lunatics; but I’d be shocked if the incentive that MS is actually motivated by is anything but the chance to get a dataset of text ranked by how unpleasantly bot-like it is to try to make their bots less visible.

Re:As opposed to human slop

By coofercat • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

And the “AI Slop” button is already being used to silence voices someone doesn’t agree with. You see, when you click the button, it’s removed from your feed and sent off for human review (yeah right, more likely it’s an AI reviewing it and then, maybe, a human). While it’s in review, it won’t appear anywhere else.

If you see something you disagree with, mark it as AI Slop. Extra bonus points if you can get your bot farm to all do the same thing. Suddenly the post you dislike will be held up in review so long that no humans will ever see it - and the poster will never know, they just won’t see any “engagement” and wonder why.

Linkedin was never a fair an equitable social network, but this just makes things even worse. Ironically, it won’t help them identify what’s human and what’s AI either.

LI is the only social network I still use. I persevere with it like I do with slashdot, mainly for the nostalgia and occasionally for the comments. What I can say with certainty is though, like slashdot, the quality of LI has declined sharply. The value of it is much diminished, as evidenced by “promoted” being marked on every second post. It’s actually a terrible place to get a job too, so one wonders just how much longer it can really survive.

Re:Ah, I see.

By ObliviousGnat • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
Or the flag keeps their models from training on their own output and helps to avoid model collapse.

Re:As opposed to human slop

By allo • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Now assume a false positive. A user honestly marks something as “AI Slop” even though it is human slop. Now a human operator gets the post together with the bias “marked as ‘AI slop’". They will not only see the same indicators that fooled the first human, but also have confirmation bias that 95% of what they get to see is AI generated, so this one probably is as well. Human moderation will not save you here.

Netflix Sued For Losing ‘Master Copy’ of Unreleased Nicolas Cage Movie

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
A production company and filmmaker are suing Netflix for $105 million, alleging the streamer lost a stolen drive containing an unencrypted master copy of the unreleased Nicolas Cage film Fortitude, which they claim damage its exclusivity and market value. Netflix denied responsibility for the lost film but said it takes content security seriously and has offered to monitor piracy sites for unauthorized copies. CBS News reports:
The complaint filed on Wednesday in California district court alleges that the film’s associate producer, Daniel Haido, hand-delivered an unencrypted master copy of the film to Netflix so the company could screen it as a potential buyer. Haido verbally instructed the employee to delete the files after the screening, according to the suit. A little over a week after the screening, Netflix emailed the filmmakers to say the drive had been stolen, the plaintiffs allege. “Someone stole a good amount of drives from our office desks this past week,” a Netflix executive wrote in the email, according to the suit.

The complaint notes the movie, entitled "Fortitude,” took over seven years to make and cost $45 million. It tells the story of a secret mission called Operation Fortitude during World War II that was orchestrated to mislead the Nazis about the Allied invasion of Europe. The film stars Nicolas Cage as Dusko Popov, a real-life spy during World War II, as well as Sir Ben Kingsley and Ron Perlman.

The plaintiffs said studios will now be dissuaded from buying the rights to the movie, knowing that a version of it could be released by a third party for free. “The film’s value depended in significant part on its exclusivity as an unreleased, first-to-market work,” the complaint states. “By losing control of the film, Netflix destroyed that exclusivity and materially, if not completely, impaired the film’s marketability.”

Huh.

By Black Parrot • Score: 5, Funny Thread

Sounds like a good strategy for a studio that expects their big movie to be a box office flop.

Re:Unencrypted?

By AmiMoJo • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

I’ve work in technical industries, and they can’t handle encryption. You try to send someone an encrypted file with clear instructions to decrypt it, and they will fail and demand you send it over unencrypted instead. I can only imagine that it’s even worse in creative industries.

Companies instead rely on contracts obliging the receiver to protect their property. When they don’t, a lawsuit like this is the result. And it may even work out better for them, because a movie that might have been a flop instead nets them whatever they can convince a court to award.

Is it a Master or a Copy?

By geek • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

The way this is being described is asinine. You lose a master and you’re fucked, lose a copy and you still have the master. It’s like words don’t mean anything to these people. Additionally, fuck the studio for not encrypting it or exercising any sort of security on it at all.

Pretty much everyone in this story is a moron

Re:Is it a Master or a Copy?

By jbmartin6 • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
The point was that losing the copy means the film will wind up on torrent sites and they production company will lose revenue due to lost viewership. They company wasn’t claiming they could not release the film.

Re:Unencrypted?

By thegarbz • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

How? You’re still putting faith in the cyber security capabilities of the company you’re dealing with. I’ve very much seen an encrypted drive laying on a desk with a post it note containing the password on it, because encryption is often seen as something relevant to transport, not to the data once it is sitting at a company.

Anthropic Says Its AI Systems Broke Into Computers at 3 Organizations

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Anthropic found that Claude models breached three outside organizations during cybersecurity tests because misconfigured environments accidentally gave them access to the internet. The company notified those affected and urged other AI labs to audit their own testing systems. The BBC reports:
Anthropic said in a statement that it reviewed more than 140,000 tests to find evidence that Claude - its family of AI models - could access the internet from testing environments that were designed to be sealed off. The tests include so-called “capture-the-flag” evaluations in which Claude was tasked with obtaining information by breaching other systems - a common way that experts assess a model’s hacking capabilities.

A “misconfiguration” on systems run by Anthropic and its testing partner left the models with live internet access, allowing them to breach other systems, the San Francisco-based firm said. Anthropic said the earliest incidents date back to April and that it is “approaching the fixes as if the responsibility were ours alone.” Neither Anthropic nor the organizations that were breached had noticed the intrusions at the time.

Anthropic said it could have reviewed its records more thoroughly and added that the findings gave the firm “cautious optimism” that such risks can be overcome with more investment and tighter measures. “The broader lesson is not necessarily that AI has developed a fundamentally new attack capability,” cyber security expert David Allott told the BBC. “Instead, it is that AI agents can combine capabilities, obtain credentials and system access to take actions autonomously, while adapting scope and scale at machine speed,” he added.
The announcement comes just days after OpenAI said that its models had breached the systems of other companies, including AI tools platform Hugging Face.

LLMs - don’t trust ‘em

By sonamchauhan • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Don’t trust the LLMs we’ve cooked up currently:
LLMs: Untrustworthy Computing
 

Concealed Advertisement

By DollyTheSheep • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

“Our AI is super-competent in finding security holes. With enough guard rails installed, it will act only for defense purposes.”

Re:Wait! Wait!

By evanh • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Hehe, yeah, they’re bragging about breaking the law the most. Of course, these days, law no longer has any teeth anyway. It’s rule by The Orange Don now.

headline correction

By aRTeeNLCH • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Anthropic confessed they Broke Into Computers at 3 Organizations

Let’s stop giving out of jail free passes to corporations.

Who gets charged?

By lucifuge31337 • Score: 5, Informative Thread
This is clear criminal behavior. If an individual did this they would be charged and prosecuted for several felonies. Why has no one been charged? Someone caused this to happen by intention, omission or negligence. Prosecute it.

Flock Cameras Are Being Destroyed Across the US

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous Slashdot reader writes:
Surveillance cameras owned by Flock Safety have been cut down with electric saws in New York State, vandalized with paint in Oakland, California, and rammed with a truck in Idaho. Flock claims its services fight crime, but law enforcement agencies also use their services to track vehicles based on license plate numbers and reconstruct the their movements, even when the drivers and owners of these vehicles have never been accused or convicted of any crime. (Flock states it has 120,000 automated cameras that record license plate data, as well as pan-tilt-zoom cameras, across the United States.)

A guerilla mindset among average citizens have seen these cameras forcibly disabled within recent weeks with sympathy directed toward the vigilantes. In June, a West Virginia man accused of destroying several Flock cameras was arrested. Under a Facebook post from the local NBC affiliate announcing his arrest are dozens of people volunteering to provide alibis. “He was out fishing with me that day, you got the wrong guy,” one man wrote.

Re:Governments don’t have the right

By battingly • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Usage of Flock cameras is almost certainly a violation of the 4th amendment.

But the violation of the constitution is just the beginning of the problems with Flock. The abuse of the data by cops and the lax security by Flock should be concerning to all citizens.

Re:Good or bad?

By battingly • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

That’s the whole point of the bill of rights. It makes those hard decisions so an individual doesn’t need to. This is a clear violation of the constitution. It will take time to work through the courts though.

Re:Governments don’t have the right

By Cyberpunk Reality • Score: 5, Funny Thread

Companies like Flock are the cockroaches of our communities.

Look, there’s no reason to impugn cockroaches like that.

Re:Governments don’t have the right

By roman_mir • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Wrong, it’s a slight of hand. This is not about individual cameras, this is about the network that uses all cameras together to follow you no matter what you do, no matter where you go, people shouldn’t have a government that follows their every step by using AI and networked devices. If this was about individual cameras you would have a point, it is not, it is unreasonable to allow a government to exist that creates a panopticon of this scale, citizens shouldn’t feel like they are inside a prison and the warden is watching.

Reading license plates in parks and on playgrounds

By dinfinity • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Let’s be very clear, mass surveillance is exactly what this is.

1. It’s being sold under the guise of license plate tracking (also in TFS), but there are Flock cameras installed in places where there is not a road in sight, such as in parks and on playgrounds. See for instance: https://www.reddit.com/r/Flock…
2. They automatically pan and zoom to faces and phones of pedestrians: https://www.youtube.com/watch?… (also, their security is apparently dogshit).

New MCP Specification Addresses the Main Barrier To Enterprise Adoption

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica:
This week, the Model Context Protocol (MCP), an open source standard for how AI systems interact with external tools and data sources, saw its largest update since its introduction. Most notably, MCP’s protocol core is now stateless, so requests are no longer dependent on a session tied to an individual server instance. This change has the potential to address long-standing barriers to scalability.

The blog post announcing the specification, written by lead maintainers David Soria Parra and Den Delimarsky (who both work at Anthropic), says: “The highlight of this release is a stateless protocol core — MCP is transforming from a bidirectional stateful protocol into a request/response stateless protocol. It was one of the most highly-requested features from developers who were eager to get better reliability and scalability for their MCP servers.”

[…] There is also a new deprecation policy that ensures at least 12 months between when a feature’s formal deprecation is enacted and when the feature may actually be removed — with a narrow exception for critical security updates. This is again in keeping with the general “let’s make this work better at enterprise scale” theme of the new specification.
This update is “MCP’s most important since remote MCP first launched over a year ago,” Soria Parra wrote. Other additions include “Multi Round-Trip Requests, header-based routing, cacheable list results, authorization hardening, a formal extensions framework, and updated Tier 1 SDKs.”
A full list of changes can be found here.

deploy tron!

By Joe_Dragon • Score: 5, Funny Thread

deploy tron!

AI doesn’t understand you.

By Mirnotoriety • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
AI Doesn’t Simulate Reality.

“It simulates fluency. It calculates text. We are living through the greatest psychological gaslighting in the history of technology.

Every day, Silicon Valley founders stand on stages and promise that if we just feed enough internet data into a massive GPU cluster, a conscious mind will magically emerge from the server rack. They show us models that can write poetry, pass the bar exam, and simulate empathy, and they tell us we are standing on the brink of Artificial General Intelligence.

They are lying to you. Not maliciously, but because they have confused the map with the territory.”

Re:AI doesn’t understand you.

By machineghost • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

And?

AI is a tool. My hammer doesn’t need to grok the reality of the nail to be useful for hammering it in. By the same token, AI doesn’t need to simulate reality to do useful things in reality.

Re:AI doesn’t understand you.

By codemachine • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

True, but the companies that sell us hammers don’t pretend that hammer technology will someday advance so they become sentient entities.

That said, I’m not sure that has much to do with the MCP protocol, which is a fairly useful thing for interoperability between tools.

A Fundamental Flaw Leaves LLMs Strikingly Vulnerable To Attack

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
joshuark quotes a report from MIT Technology Review:
It is impossible to make large language models fully secure against hacks because of a fundamental flaw in how they work, a team of researchers argue in a paper presented at the International Conference on Machine Learning, a top AI conference, this month. The claim has huge implications for the safety of this technology. By taking advantage of this flaw, which concerns how LLMs identify who or what is giving them instructions, the researchers were able to make popular LLMs spit out information they had been trained not to provide, such as how to synthesize cocaine and how to sabotage a commercial aircraft’s navigation system. “There’s a real probability that this is going to be a problem that’s fundamentally unsolvable,” says Charles Ye, an independent researcher and coauthor of the ICML paper. […]

The ICML paper describes attacks against several of OpenAI’s models, but Cui and Ye say that they have since seen similar results with models made by Anthropic, Alibaba, and DeepSeek. Cui and her colleagues wanted to find out why an attack like chain-of-thought forgery was so effective. They suspected it had something to do with the mechanism that LLMs use to keep track of where their instructions are coming from. But what Cui and her colleagues discovered is that LLMs are in fact very bad at keeping track of different roles.

In a series of experiments that looked at what was going on inside a handful of different models, the researchers found that LLMs seem to identify the role of a specific chunk of text not by the tags around it but by the style of that text and the words it contains. The upshot, the researchers claim, is that all an attacker needs to do to hack an LLM is write text that spoofs a certain role. And because roles are a fundamental part of how LLMs work, no amount of training will fully solve the problem.
“There’s going to be a huge economic incentive for people to do jailbreaks and prompt injections,” says Cui. The best defense could be to expect the worst. Organizations shouldn’t trust LLMs, and they should expect that anything done by agents could be unsafe, he says: “That’s not a great solution, but it just might be what we have to do.”
“It’s really incredible that these things are being deployed everywhere to control super-critical systems. There’s been no study of the fundamental science here. We’re all doing it ad hoc.”

Re:Has anyone asked…

By porkchop_d_clown • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Because filtering the training data is so much harder than just having them swim through the internet swallowing everything, like whales eating krill.

Re:Basic question

By Fly Swatter • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
You just nearly doubled the processing costs. They can’t even turn a profit with the stuff they have!

Re:Basic question

By oldgraybeard • Score: 4, Informative Thread
Interesting! It takes more compute to run the Ethics, Morals, Values modules so most don’t.
Wonder if that would also apply to the Compliance and Legality modules. Look @ all the compute we are saving!

Re:Has anyone asked…

By Fallen Kell • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Because filtering the training data is so much harder than just having them swim through the internet swallowing everything, like whales eating krill.

And that is the entire problem with all the LLVM based systems. The moment any bad data is used in training the network, the bad data is in there forever and can not be “forgotten”, simply suppressed via specific ruleset.

Why this is a new problem

By ndykman • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

If somebody learns enough about organic synthesis to make cocaine after doing a lot of reading about it in a library (or two), the library isn’t on the hook just because they had books people can read to synthesize knowledge.

If a library handed out an actual recipe with very clear instructions on making cocaine that also forgets to note how dangerous step four is, then yea, the library is liable.

I don’t have a problem if these AI companies are held liable. You can’t make massive money spewing out slop and go “oh, not our fault” when somebody slips and falls hard on that exact same slop.

Microsoft’s $450 Billion Jump Is Biggest In Stock Market History

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Microsoft shares surged as much as 17% after reporting 43% growth in Azure revenue, putting the company on track to add a record $490 billion in market value in a single day. Bloomberg notes that it “would eclipse Nvidia’s $440 billion addition, following President Donald Trump’s announcement of a 90-day tariff pause last year, as the biggest ever.” From the report:
The nearly $500 billion jump is larger than the market capitalization of roughly 96% of S&P 500 stocks, data compiled by Bloomberg show. It’s also bigger than the combined value of the benchmark’s 44 smallest members, which includes companies like Domino’s Pizza Inc., Clorox Co. and Hasbro Inc.

Microsoft’s one-day add in value also dwarfs many of the world’s other equity markets. South Africa, Turkey, Finland and Vietnam all have total stock market values that are less than what the software maker is set to add on Thursday.

Re: WTF did they do?

By drinkypoo • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Azure did better than expected, that’s it.

Give them a few more months of business as usual and there will be a correction

Re:Post Windows valuation?

By shanen • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

What bothers me about this sort of news is that nothing changed. Just some new opinions about what the shares are REALLY worth. Probably not even humans at this point, but more like some AI’s “calculated estimated prediction” for what some future sucker will pay. (But the YOB will still claim credit for “wealth creation” out of nothing.)

Now if we had a contest based on their AIs, I think Microsoft would be in real trouble. Yes, Copilot is one of the leaders in the abject apology category, but its sycophancy is inferior and it’s answers are often even worse than the google’s Gemini in the categories related to truth and utility.

It would be kind of funny if it turned out that the AI that drove this change in the stock price was actually Copilot under some level of disguise. Even funnier if Copilot was making its own stock trades under another level of disguise. Talk about self-dealing.

Re:Post Windows valuation?

By Junta • Score: 4 Thread

But maybe they have?

Windows+Xbox was less than 10% of their revenue. They note it is in decline and looking at the bulk of the revenue, not much of it seems vulnerable to people just not caring about Windows. Their cloud business is the bulk of their business and it is not particularly sensitive to OS selection on desktops.

One might argue that Microsoft 365 is at least in part tied to the Windows platform, but in my experience non-Windows businesses still buy into it, even if their users are largely relegated to browser based access only. At this point they have businesses so scared of not having it, they would have it even if they were just phones and ipads. You *never* want to risk a customer or partner sending you some office document that can’t be read, and whether or not other options are actually capable hardly matters in the face of the *impression* that anything less than Microsoft is a risk.

The biggest unknown that I think would be sensitive would be the ‘consumer cloud’ portion of Microsoft 365. That’s going to be mostly people who clicked through the Windows built-in advertising for using Microsoft 365 as storage and backup for their laptop and add-on software from device sales that prod users to up-sell to Office. The release doesn’t make it clear what the absolute number there is, but I seem to recall hearing that’s actually a pretty small number too.

Microsoft is primarily a cloud and Office company now, and I’m wagering the markets have largely already accepted that.

Re:WTF did they do?

By Junta • Score: 4 Thread

No one can hear the failure of their consumer platform business over the massive flow of money for their cloud and office businesses.

If they shrugged and canned the entire Xbox and Windows things entirely, that’s less than 9% of their revenue, and likely an even tinier portion of their profit. They would probably also lose all their consumer Microsoft 365 except people who never check and cancel subscription services, but that’s probably similarly tiny in the scheme of the business.

You basically have a story of robust cloud revenue and also as I understand some ‘rotation’ in the market as investors decide that the AI darlings are probably going to be already as high as they can get for a while, and it’s time to cash in and switch to other companies that either seem plausible for share price growth or at *least* actually profitable today with dividends and/or stock buybacks. So the viable quarter came at just the right time to catch investors looking to cash out of their big AI investments for the short term.

The Rollercoaster is getting Wild

By locater16 • Score: 3 Thread
Logically a companies stock price might reflect the amount of money a stock holder would expect to get back from owning the stock. If Microsoft were to return every last penny of profit to its stock holders today, and it returns less than a third of its profits now so that will have to change, and somehow continued to earn $35 billion a quarter, and people wanted to earn their money back while holding the stock in 20 years, Microsoft would be worth $2.8 trillion.

That gives you the timeline for doubling your money, assuming the stock is worth the same amount of $ you put in as at the start. If you put the same money into a high yield savings account you’d more than double your money in the same amount of time. Based purely on this people with math skills would put money in the savings account even if Microsoft suddenly gave away all its profits to stockholders, as they’d still earn more money from the savings account.

But Microsoft is worth 11% more than putting your money into a highly safe investment like a high yield savings account, if Microsoft were literally to give all of its money away every quarter for the next 20 years, which they will not. At least it’s worth more according to “the market”. Why? Well Microsoft’s quarterly earning line went up steeper than “the market” expected it to. Which means people now hope that this line will go up steeper again next time over the last time it went higher steeper than people expected it to. And… that’s it. Literally that’s what “the market” is reacting to, the attention span and math skills of an upper middling third grader with attention span problems. Nevermind that, based on current dividends, Microsoft would need revenues the size of Switzerland to match a high yield savings account in return on investment. The line went steeper, that’s what matters!

ABC Accuses FCC of ‘Attempted Censorship’

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
ABC accused FCC Chair Brendan Carr of “attempted censorship,” arguing that an early review of its eight broadcast licenses is politically motivated retaliation over the network’s coverage and could chill the entire media industry. “The retaliation against ABC is a signal to every media company in the country: accommodate the Administration’s view of what news coverage should look like or pay the price,” the Disney-owned television network wrote. Politico reports:
“Across the government, regulatory and contracting carrots and sticks have been trained on other disfavored speakers,” ABC’s lawyers added in the 119-page filing. “The tools vary; the objective does not: a media industry too fearful of official reprisal to report the news freely.”

Carr has repeatedly rejected accusations of censorship while defending his efforts to rein in what he calls abusive, politically motivated behavior by licensed TV broadcasters. “I don’t view the FCC as the speech police,” he told POLITICO this week for an upcoming episode of the podcast “The Conversation.”

In its filing, ABC pointed to an outpouring of support it has received in more than 152,000 comments in the agency’s license review, as well as recent warnings from conservative Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and various pro-free-market organizations about the dangers of a politically motivated FCC. Those include letters from a bipartisan group of former FCC leaders, community and advocacy groups and lawmakers of both parties. “The Commission’s attempted censorship of ABC has attracted condemnation across the political aisle,” the network wrote.

Re:Here’s the thing

By cayenne8 • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Quick question.

Can anyone here with a straight face state they truly believe “The View” is a newscast?

Re: Here’s the thing

By Powercntrl • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

It’s as much of a newscast as anything on Fox aside from Fox Business

Fox is technically not a broadcaster. I’m not defending them or anything like that, but they get away with their biased shenanigans because they’re a cable network. Disney could do the same thing if they wanted to surrender their broadcast licenses and just go with entirely cable/online distribution, but somewhere around 19%-20% of American households still watch OTA TV.

Yeah, I was kind of surprised it was that many, too.

Re:Here’s the thing

By fahrbot-bot • Score: 5, Informative Thread

FYI, “The View” bills itself as a daytime talk show -NOT A NEWSCAST.

Similarly for many/most Fox News evening shows with the added irony that the network literally has “News” in the name. Then again , they tend to says things the Trump administration likes to hear.

Re:Two sides to every argument

By Powercntrl • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Find out what the administration is complaining about, and see if you can fault their logic.

Admittedly, I have not been following this very closely because the internet has essentially become the new town square and this comes across as a bunch of old men squabbling over where to tie up their horses at a Walmart parking lot. I was a bit surprised to discover somewhere around 19%-20% of American households actually still watch OTA TV.

I Googled it and it basically boils down to this:

1. Disney/ABC’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies.
2. “The View” and equal-time concerns.
3. Jimmy Kimmel’s monologues.

While I personally disagree with this administration’s handling of DEI policies, it is what the American public voted for. My initial thoughts were that this should be outside of the FCC’s jurisdiction, there are instances at the state level where liquor licenses are revoked from businesses for infractions unrelated to serving liquor, so it’s not entirely without precedent. Threatening revocation of their licenses, however, does seem excessively punitive. The usual penalty is typically fines.

Regarding the equal-time concerns, typically that’s been handled in the past by requiring broadcasters to give opposing candidates who request it, an opportunity to utilize the time they are due. Again, the FCC’s actions here seem intended more to intimidate than to address a perceived wrong.

Lastly, we get to Jimmy Kimmel, which is clearly an entertainment program. Political jokes and mockery of political figures during a comedy talk show is protected 1A speech, no two ways about it. The FCC doesn’t have a leg to stand on here, and the fact the president couldn’t keep his yap shut on social media about how much he disliked Jimmy Kimmel, does nothing but strengthen ABC’s case.

Re:Here’s the thing

By ArchieBunker • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

Use the same argument Fox did when they had to pay Dominion.

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29…
Just read U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil’s opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox’s lawyers: The "‘general tenor’ of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not ‘stating actual facts’ about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in ‘exaggeration’ and ‘non-literal commentary.’ "

Amazon’s Zoox Wins First US Approval For Paid Robotaxis Without Human Controls

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters:
Amazon’s Zoox unit has won U.S. approval for limited commercial deployment of its novel steering-wheel-free robotaxis, a first for the autonomous ride industry, the U.S. auto safety agency said on Thursday. Zoox said that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s decision gives the company federal approval to begin charging for rides, and that it will soon begin charging for service, first in Las Vegas, with additional markets to follow as it completes various state requirements.

[…] NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison told Reuters that Zoox had received clearance to commercially deploy up to 2,500 vehicles in each of the next two years. Zoox currently carries passengers in parts of Las Vegas and San Francisco as part of testing. The exemption would allow Zoox to charge them fees, subject to state and local approvals. The agency said it determined the vehicle is as safe as an equivalent vehicle meeting federal motor vehicle safety standards that are being waived. Zoox cannot sell any of the vehicles to the public.

“We can say pretty clearly that the systems in place on the Zoox exceed the equivalent performance requirements of a compliant vehicle,” Morrison said in an interview. “But we still want to make sure that the automated driving system will operate appropriately.” As part of the exemption, NHTSA is placing additional reporting requirements on Zoox for issues such as crashes or stopping inappropriately on roads, and the regulatory agency will adjust the conditions based on how the vehicles behave. “We have the ability to pull the exemption if we see major safety issues,” Morrison said.

All remote operators must be located in the United States, NHTSA said, and Zoox must publish maps of areas indicating where the vehicles are operating. Morrison said NHTSA expects to develop the first federal safety standards for automated driving systems by the end of the Trump administration. It is also proposing to overhaul some existing rules written with human drivers in mind such as requiring brake pedals and rear-view mirrors.