Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. Wood Burning Is Reintroducing Lead Pollution Into the Air, Scientists Find
  2. Kioxia and Dell Cram Nearly 10PB Into a Single 2U Server
  3. AMD Is Bringing Improved FSR 4 Upscaling To Its Older GPUs
  4. Bitwarden Scrubs ‘Always Free’ and ‘Inclusion’ Values From Its Website
  5. The Era of 15GB Free Gmail Storage Is Ending
  6. Bill To Block Publishers From Killing Online Games Advances In California
  7. OpenAI Now Wants ChatGPT To Access Your Bank Accounts
  8. ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year if They Submit AI Slop
  9. Congress Introduces Bill To Permanently Block Chinese Vehicles From US
  10. Honda Retreats To Hybrids After Failed EV Bet Triggers Record $9 Billion Loss
  11. Americans Would Rather Have a Nuclear Plant In Their Backyard Than a Datacenter
  12. SpaceX Unveils Sweeping Starship V3 Upgrades
  13. Musk Accused of ‘Selective Amnesia’, Altman of Lying As OpenAI Trial Nears End
  14. UK Antitrust Regulator Is Officially Investigating Microsoft Office
  15. AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile Team Up To Eliminate ‘Dead Zones’ Across US

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.

Wood Burning Is Reintroducing Lead Pollution Into the Air, Scientists Find

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian:
Wood heating is reintroducing lead into the air of local communities and homes, a systematic investigation by academics has found. Overwhelming evidence of lead’s neurotoxicity meant the metal was banned as an additive in petrol more than 25 years ago. The research by academics from the University of Massachusetts Amherst began by analysing samples of particle pollution from five suburban and rural towns in the north-east US. They looked for tiny particles of potassium that are given off when wood is burned and also particles containing lead. Samples from seven winters revealed associations between potassium and lead. When there were more wood burning particles in a daily sample, there was more lead in the air, with clear straight-line relationships in four of the five towns.

The project was extended to 22 other towns across the US. The relationships between lead and potassium varied from place to place, being strongest in the Rocky Mountains. By factoring in the effects of temperature, moderate to strong associations in their analysis strengthened the conclusion that the extra lead came from wood burning. The lead concentrations were less than the US legal limits, but any exposure to the metal is harmful. […] Although less than legal limits, lead particles are routinely measured in UK cities in winter when people are also burning wood. This is normally attributed to waste wood covered with old lead paint, but the Umass Amherst study suggests the metal is coming from the wood itself. This means that any wood burning could increase exposure in neighborhoods and at home.
Tricia Henegan, a PhD student at Umass Amherst and the first author on the research, said: “The most logical answer [to the question of how lead ends up in wood] is that it comes from uptake in the soil, probably riding along with the nutrients and water that trees need. Once in the tree, it deposits in the tree’s tissues and remains until that tree is burned.” Other research has found that it can then become part of the smoke.

“The use of wood as an energy source is a relic of the past, one that should not be relived if given a choice. Although wood fuel use can feel nostalgic, it does have negative consequences on air quality, and therefore public health.”

you will pry my texas brisket

By trelanexiph • Score: 3 Thread

from my cold dead hands.

I want 12+ hours of smoke on that brisket, and I don’t care if it’s regular or unleaded.

After all, we’re all going to die at some point, but life without brisket… isn’t worth living.

Check your elitist privilege

By LondoMollari • Score: 3 Thread

“The use of wood as an energy source is a relic of the past, one that should not be relived if given a choice.”

What kind of elitist crap is this? Americans have been burning wood since the first days of the republic, and wood may very well be the only thing some can burn, especially if they have a source and they cannot afford insane oil or gas heating prices. Yeah, and if they can’t afford oil, rest assured they cannot afford electric heat, which is often more expensive.

I don’t doubt for a moment that there will be a crackling fireplace, recliners, and glasses of a fine vintage wine in elite households.

Choice? This guy’s a hack.

By CAIMLAS • Score: 3 Thread

Perspective is important. It’s an extrapolated figure, based on trace-element factors for Cd, Cr, Mn, Ni, but not lead. That seems incredibly dishonest.

What’s more, they report 0.86–1.70 ng/m ambient lead level… which upon brief examination, is about 1/4th the average urban ambient lead level, and from what I’m able to determine, about 20% of the EPA 2022–2024 non-source Pb-TSP daily mean. In other words, it’s significantly lower than sources with known lead. (Similarly, it’s about ~20% of historic ambient national levels - couldn’t find date later than 2019 for this.)

Looks like they played very Orwellian with their data interpretation. “The use of wood as an energy source is a relic of the past, one that should not be relived if given a choice.” is… well. This is “let them eat cake” level hubris. Whoever said this either has a disdain for the people they’re’s studying, or have zero economic understanding.... and based on the actual study findings, I can’t say it appears to be truthful, either.

The people who burn wood are not doing it out of personal preference. They’re doing because they can afford it: they have no other choice. Chopping, splitting, drying, and burning wood is a labor intensive activity. It’s done out of fiscal/economic necessity: fuel prices for heating are extremely high, and in the area they sampled, they rely primarily on heating oil (basically: diesel fuel). Even last winter, the average household heating cost was about $1800/month, about twice what it was in 2015. With fuel prices surging? You can effectively expect twice that cost (or more) this coming winter due to the conflict with Iran.

Musing: Were the lead actually higher in the area (from what I can tell, it’s not), I wonder if the “high” lead in the air would be representative of “carbon sequestration” of the trees over the past 70 odd years: as they grew, they absorbed the lead in the air?

Kioxia and Dell Cram Nearly 10PB Into a Single 2U Server

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
BrianFagioli writes:
Kioxia and Dell Technologies say they have built a 2U server configuration capable of scaling to 9.8PB of flash storage, which is the sort of density that would have sounded impossible just a few years ago. The setup combines a Dell PowerEdge R7725xd Server with 40 Kioxia LC9 Series 245.76TB NVMe SSDs and AMD EPYC processors. According to Kioxia, matching the same capacity with more common 30.72TB SSDs would require seven additional servers and another 280 drives.

The companies are pitching the hardware squarely at AI and hyperscale workloads, where storage is rapidly becoming a bottleneck alongside compute. Kioxia claims the denser configuration can dramatically reduce power consumption and rack space requirements while remaining air cooled. The announcement also highlights how quickly enterprise storage capacities are escalating as organizations race to support larger AI models, massive datasets, and increasingly demanding data pipelines.

No object

By markdavis • Score: 3 Thread

>“The companies are pitching the hardware squarely at AI and hyperscale workloads, where storage is rapidly becoming a bottleneck alongside compute.”

And where, apparently, price is no object. I wish they would focus on that crap and leave normal business and consumer-sized parts alone so we can afford them again.

>“Kioxia claims the denser configuration can dramatically reduce power consumption”

So the AI datacenters can just buy more of them in the same space and still strain all the grids as much so consumer electricity prices continue to rise.

>“The announcement also highlights how quickly enterprise storage capacities are escalating”

While consumer-grade storage capacities are stagnant or even REDUCING just so people can get by.

I wish this bubble would burst sooner than later.

Power Requirements

By algaeman • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
It doesn’t really do you much good to fit it into 2U if you need 20-30kW for that one box.

40 NVME ?

By kbahey • Score: 3 Thread

How does 40 NVMEs fit in one PCIe bus?
Or are they connected over another interface thar is slower, then into PCIe.
Can someone knowledgeable answer this?

AMD Is Bringing Improved FSR 4 Upscaling To Its Older GPUs

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
AMD says FSR 4.1 will finally bring its newer hardware-accelerated upscaling technology to older Radeon GPUs. “The rollout will begin in July with RDNA3- and 3.5-based GPUs, which include the Radeon RX 7000 series, as well as integrated GPUs like the Radeon 890M and Radeon 8060S,” reports Ars Technica. “In ‘early 2027,’ support will also be extended to the RDNA2 architecture, which includes the Radeon RX 6000 series, integrated GPUs like the Radeon 680M, and the Steam Deck’s GPU. This would also open the door to supporting FSR 4 on the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X and S, all of which also use RDNA2-based GPUs.” From the report:
[AMD Computing and Graphics SVP Jack Huynh’s] short video presentation didn’t get into performance comparisons, but did mention that AMD had to work to get FSR 4’s superior hardware-backed upscaling working on its older graphics architectures. RDNA4 includes AI accelerators that support the FP8 data format in the hardware, and porting FSR 4 to older GPUs meant getting it running on the integer-based INT8 hardware in the RDNA3 and RDNA2-based GPUs.

This may mean that FSR 4.1 running on an RDNA3 or RDNA2-based GPU may come with a larger performance hit relative to RDNA4 cards, or that image quality may differ slightly. Modders have already worked to get FSR4 working on INT8-supporting GPUs, and the older GPUs reportedly see a 10 to 20 percent performance hit relative to FSR 3.1 running on the same hardware. AMD’s official implementation may or may not improve on these numbers.

[…] Any games that support FSR 4 should be able to support FSR 4.1 running on Radeon 7000-series cards; users will presumably be able to install a driver update in July that enables the new feature. Games that support the older FSR 3.1 can also be forced to use FSR 4 in the Radeon graphics driver.

It’s because they are still actively on the market

By rsilvergun • Score: 3 Thread
You can say old gpus but the fact of the matter is AMD is manufacturing these chips and selling them in multiple markets.

You can go out right now and buy a brand new 6700. So it’s kind of messed up to yank support if you’re actively selling the gpus.

Bitwarden Scrubs ‘Always Free’ and ‘Inclusion’ Values From Its Website

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Bitwarden appears to be undergoing a quiet shift in leadership and messaging. Its longtime CEO and CFO have stepped down, while the company has removed “Always free” from a prominent password-manager page and replaced “Inclusion” and “Transparency” in its GRIT values with “Innovation” and “Trust.” Fast Company reports:
In February, longtime CEO Michael Crandell moved to an advisory role, according to LinkedIn, with no announcement from the company. His replacement, Michael Sullivan, former CEO of both Acquia and Insightsoftware, touts his experience with “all facets of mergers and acquisitions” on his own LinkedIn page, including experience working with leading private equity firms. CFO Stephen Morrison also left Bitwarden in April, replaced by former InVision CEO Michael Shenkman. Both Crandell and Morrison joined the company in 2019. Kyle Spearrin, who started Bitwarden as a fun hobby project in 2015, remains the company’s CTO.

Meanwhile, Bitwarden has made some subtle tweaks to its website. The page for its personal password manager no longer includes the phrase “Always free.” Previously this appeared under the “Pick a plan” section partway down the page, but that section no longer mentions the free plan, though it remains available elsewhere on the page. Bitwarden made this change in mid-April, according to the Internet Archive. Bitwarden has also stopped listing “Inclusion” and “Transparency” as tentpole values on its careers page. The company has long defined its values with the acronym “GRIT,” which used to stand for “Gratitude, Responsibility, Inclusion, and Transparency.” After May 4, it changed the acronym to stand for “Gratitude, Responsibility, Innovation, and Trust.” The phrase “inclusive environment” still appears under a description of Gratitude, while “transparency” is mentioned under the Trust heading. They’re just no longer the focus.

the unstoppable march of enshittification

By thegreatemu • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Why can’t we be allowed to keep nice things? I’ve been using bitwarden for years now, and I will never use anything else (other than a similar 3rd party password manager) again. Yes, there are plenty of competitors with similar features, but bitwarden is consistently top-ranked by actual security experts, and the interface is great, especially now that it can do passkeys. But that ranking comes 100% from *transparency*. The instant that goes away, nobody sane is going to keep them around.

“Always free” is nice, but not a deal-breaker. I only have free now because I don’t really need anything at the premium level. I refuse to pay subscriptions for things that I should be able to buy once, but they do provide an actual service (keyring syncing), so I will grumble, but it’s a valid reason.

Everyone will now chime in with how awesome their setup is with custom rsync scripts running on their home server, and that’s fine. I have plenty of stuff like that. But I don’t want to *have* to just to replace an already-working solution because some dipshit CEO thinks he can squeeze an extra profit this quarter. And when they hemorrhage customers instead, dipshit will still get an awesome golden parachute.

Politics

By Local ID10T • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Such terms are in disfavor with the current administration. Businesses are like weather vanes: they know which way the wind is blowing. When a new government is in power they will swing around. They care when it is fashionable to do so, but not when it could hurt the bottom line.

Free is still prominently displayed

By battingly • Score: 4, Interesting Thread

TFS is misleading. The word “free” appears on that web page 23 times. It’s literally the first word after the header.

Bitwarden Staff on Reddit

By knoledgesponge • Score: 4, Informative Thread
Bitwarden staff on Reddit say it has been restored. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitwa…

The Era of 15GB Free Gmail Storage Is Ending

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Google has confirmed it is testing a 5GB storage limit for some new Gmail accounts, with users able to unlock the standard 15GB by adding a phone number. Android Authority reports:
While the company didn’t mention which regions are impacted, user reports from yesterday were mostly from African countries. That said, if Google’s tests prove successful, this could possibly become the norm for new sign-ups in more regions. The company could be testing ways to discourage users from creating multiple Gmail accounts to access free cloud storage. However, if you already have a Gmail account with 15GB free storage, it shouldn’t be impacted by this change.

The language on Google’s support page mentions “up to 15GB of storage.” However, it’s a recent change. An archived version of the support page from February did not use the words “up to.” Whether the test has been running since early March or Google updated its language before it ever started the test, it’s evident that the company could roll out the change globally as well.

If it’s free, you are the product

By Joe Jordan • Score: 4, Informative Thread
Profits have never been higher, and yet their offering continues to get worse. Remember when you could watch your total storage climb in real time? When was the last time you really felt like Google was innovating on their Gmail product? Enshittification continues unabated.

Re: Who cares? You don’t need 5GB of storage!

By LindleyF • Score: 5, Informative Thread
Except, bizarrely, the limit isn’t just GMail. It’s a combined limit across Mail, Drive, Photos, etc. Yes, downloading Google Photos with the default backup to cloud functionality can put you over limit on GMail.

Google Drive and Gmail share space.

By couchslug • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Time to have duplicate backups of both which all users should do anyway.

Indeed, who cares?

By abulafia • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
When I was directly admining systems, I didn’t have time to argue with people over a couple dollars worth of storage.

I also didn’t want people wasting time worrying about quotas or other artificial limits unless they were abusive. (The dude who wrote something that was authing against LDAP 10s of millions of times a day got a talking-to.)

A lot of people confuse “I can’t imagine doing or needing X” with “there is a good reason to deny the ability to do X.” Honestly, I think most people are Doing It Wrong, most of the time. So? If they’re getting shit done, none of my business until they are making unreasonable demands that impact operations. And 100G of mail is peanuts.

My current complaint is the opposite - I can’t keep mail longer than a year now, lest it be discoverable in some potential future lawsuit. I’ve gotten better at predicting what I’ll need to know later, but still miss things I should have saved somewhere, and that absolutely damages my productivity.

Re:$10 for 2TB is a no-brainer for me.

By CAIMLAS • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

There are enough public instances of people losing their Google account due to Google’s policy and automation that this is likely a very bad idea.

Bill To Block Publishers From Killing Online Games Advances In California

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica:
A bill focused on maintaining long-term playable access to online games has passed out of the California Assembly’s appropriations committee, setting up a floor vote by the full legislative body. The advancement is a major win for Stop Killing Games' grassroots game preservation movement and comes over the objections of industry lobbyists at the Entertainment Software Association. California’s Protect Our Games Act, as currently written, would require digital game publishers who cut off support for an online game to either provide a full refund to players or offer an updated version of the game “that enables its continued use independent of services controlled by the operator.” The act would also require publishers to notify players 60 days before the cessation of “services necessary for the ordinary use of the digital game.” As currently amended, the act would not apply to completely free games and games offered “solely for the duration of [a] subscription. Any other game offered for sale in California on or after January 1, 2027, would be subject to the law if it passes. […]

In a formal statement of support for the bill sent to the California legislature, SKG wrote that “there is no other medium in which a product can be marketed and sold to a consumer and then ripped away without notice As live service games rise in popularity for game developers and gamers alike, end-of-life procedures are essential tools to ensure prolonged access to the games consumers pay to enjoy.” The Entertainment Software Association, which helps represent the interests of major game publishers, publicly told the California Assembly last month that the bill misrepresents how modern game distribution actually works. “Consumers receive a license to access and use a game, not an unrestricted ownership interest in the underlying work,” the ESA wrote. The eventual shutdown of outdated or obsolete games is “a natural feature of modern software,” the group added, especially when that software requires online infrastructure maintenance. The ESA also said the bill would impose unreasonable expectations on publishers regarding licensing rights for music or IP rights, which are often negotiated on a time-limited basis. “A legal requirement to keep games playable indefinitely could place publishers in an impossible position — forcing them to renegotiate licenses indefinitely or alter games in ways that may not be legally or technically feasible,” they wrote.

Honestly if the game has even a handful of players

By rsilvergun • Score: 3 Thread
Then somebody is probably going to reverse engineer the protocol and put it back up. I mean Christ you can play the Sega Saturn version of virtual on online today… Any Phantasy Star Online Dreamcast is out there too.

The trouble is that if a lot of people start playing the old game you’re going to get a lawsuit from the original publisher because even if they don’t have a game out there they don’t want gamers playing games without paying them.

One of the things that pisses me off is that to this day I get dipshits bitching about ethics and games journalists instead of about Bobby Kotick talking about how angry he was that somebody bought call of duty for $60 and played it for a 1000 hours without paying Activision per hour.

You can bet your ass CEOs consider how many gamers might be playing old or free games instead of buying what they want to throw on the shelves.

On the other hand back catalogs are nice. I dropped $50 on King of fighters 15 and it’s DLC and I’m happily playing it and it’s a 4-year-old game. Capcom famously was only able to survive the PS3 era and how much damage it did the Japanese publishers who couldn’t adapt because Street fighter 4 just kept selling and selling and selling and selling…

But on the other other hand everybody’s chasing that FIFA money. Where you literally sell people skins for your game that you update marginally every year.

This will only end ownership

By djp2204 • Score: 3 Thread

The publisher is allowed to terminate games that are subscription based. Say good buy to anything other than a subscription

They aren’t wrong.

By Gravis Zero • Score: 3, Insightful Thread

“A legal requirement to keep games playable indefinitely could place publishers in an impossible position — forcing them to renegotiate licenses indefinitely or alter games in ways that may not be legally or technically feasible,”

They aren’t wrong which is why they should merely be required to....
* declare a minimum timeline for the servers to be online.
* put an independently buildable copy of the source code for the server in escrow with the state.
* source code of updated versions of the any changes to the server.
* ensure the client program can easily use a third-party server.

If they don’t want to do that then keeping the servers online indefinitely is the alternative. You do not have a right to a particular business model.

OpenAI Now Wants ChatGPT To Access Your Bank Accounts

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
OpenAI is previewing a feature that lets ChatGPT Pro users connect bank and investment accounts through Plaid, allowing the chatbot to analyze spending, subscriptions, balances, portfolios, debt, and major financial decisions. “More than 200 million people are already going to ChatGPT every month with finance questions — from budgeting to tips on how to cut back on spending,” OpenAI said in its announcement. “Now, users can securely connect their financial accounts with Plaid to get the full view of their financial picture in the context of their personal goals, lifestyle, and priorities that they’ve shared with ChatGPT, powered by OpenAI’s advanced reasoning capabilities.” The Verge reports:
When financial accounts are connected, OpenAI says that ChatGPT users can view a dashboard that details their spending history, including any active subscriptions. Users can also ask it to help with financial decisions like buying a house or signing up for credit cards and flag any changes in spending habits. This financial feature will be initially available to users in the US who subscribe to ChatGPT’s $200-per-month Pro tier. “We’ll learn and improve from early use before rolling it out to Plus, with the goal of making it available to everyone,” says OpenAI.

To assuage concerns, OpenAI promises users “control over their data,” including the ability to disconnect their bank accounts from ChatGPT at any time, though the company has up to 30 days to delete your data from its systems. You can also view and delete “financial memories” like goals or financial obligations saved by the chatbot. User control extends to whether your data is fed back into AI models — users can enable the option to “Improve the model for everyone” to allow financial data in their ChatGPT conversations to be used for training AI, for example. OpenAI also says ChatGPT can’t make any changes to your bank accounts or see “full account numbers.”

Step one in getting your spending under control

By EldoranDark • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
Stop subscribing to a 200 bucks per month chatbot. Thank you for attending my ted talk.

A great idea

By Registered Coward v2 • Score: 5, Funny Thread

What could go wrong? It’s not like AI ever tried to blackmail a user, accidentally wiped out lots of file, hallucinates, etc.; so there is no reason not to ogive it access to your real world financial accounts.

With all the great financial advice on Redit’s various forums, coupled with lots of great crypto investment discussions on other forums, you’d miss out on ways to GET RICH QUICK.

My counteroffer

By CEC-P • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
How about instead: Sam Altman fuck right off and give me my RAM modules back

Re:Dr Evil said it best

By Zocalo • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
Actually, I think it was Fred Schwed Jr. 86 years ago, but still just as relevant. In case it’s not obvious from the fee, this is totally not about making YOU financially better off.

AI remains primitive.

By couchslug • Score: 4, Insightful Thread

Current users are beta testers. I predict hilarity as ignorant gullibles offer up their data.

ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year if They Submit AI Slop

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
ArXiv says it will ban authors for one year if they submit papers containing AI-generated slop, such as hallucinated citations, placeholder text, or chatbot meta-comments left in the manuscript.

“If generative AI tools generate inappropriate language, plagiarized content, biased content, errors, mistakes, incorrect references, or misleading content, and that output is included in scientific works, it is the responsibility of the author(s),” said Thomas Dietterich, chair of the computer science section of ArXiv, on X. “We have recently clarified our penalties for this. If a submission contains incontrovertible evidence that the authors did not check the results of LLM generation, this means we can’t trust anything in the paper.” 404 Media reports:
Examples of incontrovertible evidence, he wrote, include “hallucinated references, meta-comments from the LLM (‘here is a 200 word summary; would you like me to make any changes?’; ‘the data in this table is illustrative, fill it in with the real numbers from your experiments.’" “The penalty is a 1-year ban from arXiv followed by the requirement that subsequent arXiv submissions must first be accepted at a reputable peer-reviewed venue,” Dietterich wrote.

Dietterich told [404 Media] in an email on Friday morning that this is a one-strike rule — meaning authors caught just once including AI slop in submissions will be banned — but that decisions will be open to appeal. “I want to emphasize that we only apply this to cases of incontrovertible evidence,” he said. “I should also add that our internal process requires first a moderator to document the problem and then for the Section Chair to confirm before imposing the penalty.”

Now…

By argStyopa • Score: 3 Thread

…if only our legal system was that stringent?

Ban on practicing law for a year if your submission to the court includes AI slop, how about that?
A second offense, disbarment.

(Personally I think disbarment should be a first-offense result for an ostensibly high-competence field like law, but our society has gotten away from “consequences” for “easily predictable results of ones actions” in general…)

Congress Introduces Bill To Permanently Block Chinese Vehicles From US

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
Longtime Slashdot reader sinij shares a report from Car and Driver:
A group of Michigan lawmakers has introduced a bill in Congress that would effectively place a permanent ban on Chinese connected vehicles from being sold in the United States. While an executive order signed by Joe Biden in early 2025 already imposed heavy restrictions, the new bill would codify and expand on the ban, as first reported by Autoweek and explained in a release by the House of Representatives Select Committee on China.

The bill, titled the Connected Vehicle Security Act, was co-signed by John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican, and Debbie Dingell, a Michigan Democrat. It joins a companion version of the same Connected Vehicle Security Act introduced last month to the Senate by Sen. Bernie Moreno, an Ohio Republican, and Sen. Elissa Slotkin, a Michigan Democrat. While the wording is similar to that found in former President Biden’s January 2025 executive order, the new bill would codify the language into law, as well as determine rules for compliance and enforcement.

Specifically, the new bill would restrict Chinese automakers from selling passenger cars in the United States if those vehicles contain any China-developed connectivity software. Officially, the bill covers the sale of vehicles from states deemed “foreign adversary countries,” which include China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. The proposed legislation arrives as Chinese automakers including Chery, Geely, and BYD (maker of the 2026 BYD Dolphin Surf, shown above), continue to rise in prominence in foreign markets around the world.
“Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons,” comments sinij. “Connected cars that spy on consumers are not a uniquely Chinese problem and should be addressed for all vehicles.”

US connected cars too?

By awwshit • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

You’ve identified a real issue with connected cars. Please ban all the tracking and BS, tell GM, Ford, and others too.

No wonder

By ArchieBunker • Score: 5, Informative Thread

China is a generation ahead in terms of EV and self driving technology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?…

They’re driving a $30,000 car and it navigates around scooters and pedestrians with ease. The traffic signals broadcast their status and countdown the seconds in real time on the vehicle display. Skip ahead to the trade show and you’ll see batteries taken out of service that ran for 800,000km and they’re still at 80% life. Check out the polymer batteries without a liquid electrolyte. They have a working sodium battery sitting at -50c and charging just fine. Oh and if you still think this is all a joke watch the safety testing at the end.

The USA is cooked.

Re:US connected cars too?

By rtkluttz • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

I have been arguing that on Rivian forums for months and fanboys have their heads up their asses. People have to realize that security should be in the hands of the owners. Privacy options should not be trust based on a slider to disable tracking in the infotainment system. It should be able to be verified secure with true zero trust configs available to owner in a way that DOESN’T brick the ability to use the car, nav etc.. There should be regulatory oversight that guarantees that manufacturers of connected things must provide a way for owners to audit communications in a way that does not allow the manufacturer to change the behavior because it knows its being watched. Such as the ability to load owner provided security certs for an authorized man in the middle audit. And for security, especially for EV’s owners should have the ability to completely lock down communications unless there is a documented need. These things are connected to infrastructure for Gods sake. Having them full time connected to the internet is just one secuirty breach from state hackers having control of an entire companies fleet of EV’s. Just simply commanding all of the ones currently connected to start charging at the same time would absolutely destroy the grid. We HAVE to allowed to use industry standard zero trust configurations on our things.

Re:US connected cars too?

By rtkluttz • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

GM sells our data, but at least you can do certain things to the current GM EV’s like I have done to mine and it still functions. I have an Equinox EV and I have the cellular connection resistor terminated at the telematics module. I then use my own cellular setup which is a miniPC with sim card slot and wifi running PFsense to stand up my own mobile full UTM firewall that run in whitelist mode. I open communications to only bare minimum sites to keep nav and streaming audio/video so I can watch and listen to things while charging. All GM and onstar sites are blocked by default because it is in whitelist only mode. Yea Google still has my data by handling it this way, but it is much much much harder for them to correlate to the vehicle in any way that ties their data to a real humans name since I don’t run the vehicle on my normal Google accounts. I also just periodically reset it and start a new one account as well.

Re:US connected cars too?

By rtkluttz • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Opt outs are never good enough. That requires trust. They deserve none. There has to be government guaranteed ability for owners of connected things to institute industry standard zero trust configurations on connected things and if the owner chooses, force lock out manufacturers with guarantees that the manufacturer can’t punitively brick basic features if they choose to do so.

Honda Retreats To Hybrids After Failed EV Bet Triggers Record $9 Billion Loss

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Electrek:
Honda is waving the white flag. The Japanese automaker previewed two new hybrids set to launch by 2028 after taking an over $9 billion hit over its failed EV bet, leading to its biggest loss in company history. Honda admitted it was “unable to deliver products that offer value for money better than that of new EV manufacturers, resulting in a decline in competitiveness,” after suddenly announcing plans to cancel three new EVs in the US in March, warning restructuring costs could reach 2.5 trillion yen ($15.7 billion).

After posting its first annual loss since it became a publicly traded company in 1957 on Thursday, Honda’s CEO Toshihiro Mibe revealed the company’s comeback plans. Honda is no longer planning to phase out gas-powered vehicles by 2040. Instead, Honda now aims “to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050,” including a mix of EVs, hybrids, carbon-neutral fuels, and carbon-offset tech. Starting next year, Honda plans to begin introducing its next-gen hybrids, underpinned by a new hybrid system and platform. Honda said it aims to improve fuel economy by over 10% in its upcoming hybrids. The new system is expected to help cut costs by over 30% compared to Honda’s current hybrid system.

By the end of the decade, Honda plans to launch 15 new hybrid models globally. In North America, its most important market, the company will introduce larger hybrids in the D-segment or above. Honda previewed two of the new hybrids during the business update: the Honda Hybrid Sedan Prototype and the Acura Hybrid SUV Prototype, which the company said will go on sale within the next two years.

Re:If they can’t figure out EV

By AmiMoJo • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

EV sales are increasing every year in Europe, while fossil sales decline. Same in China, another of Honda’s markets.

Honda really screwed up. Their first EV, the Honda e, was small and low range, but it was innovative and really good fun. It showed that they understood EV tech and how to make a great electric car.

For the follow up, they rebadged a Chinese EV, and now seem to have given up. There was supposed to be a cooperation with Sony, but no sign of it.

Quite a few of the Japanese manufacturers missed the EV boat and are struggling now. Panasonic battery tech is okay but struggles against Chinese and Korean products. The Japanese EVs on the market are mostly mediocre. The Ariya is a good car, but the new Leaf is going to struggle to compete on price, and the Micra is a rebadged Renault. Suzuki are messing about with EV versions of fossils. Toyota have and okay but not particularly great EV, but seem to be holding out for the solid state batteries that they have been promising for years. Theoretically great, but in practice they will probably not be competitive on price, at least for as long as it takes everyone else to get their own out.

Meanwhile BYD are installing 1500kW chargers in Europe, and selling cars that take 5 minutes to go from 10 to 90%. Even the daftest EV sceptics have a hard time arguing with that.

Honda Hybrids

By kaatochacha • Score: 5, Informative Thread
I’ve got a 2025 Honda Civic hybrid, and it’s fantastic. It’s essentially a roughly $2-3K extra cost to go from 30 MPG to 50 MPG without doing anything, and delivering significantly more power. I’m consistently at 51 MPG on this thing.
No charge worry.
No stress about battery.
No modification of my driving style.

It was really a no brainer for me. Yes, I may eventually go full EV. But at this point in my life and on my budget, this just works for a relatively small extra cost. .

Should have brought them out sooner

By whitroth • Score: 3 Thread

Hybrids are a pathway to EV, but until chargers are as common as gas stations, they’re the right way to go.

I have a plug-in.

Hybrids are kinda “ick” ....

By King_TJ • Score: 3 Thread

I’ve been driving EVs since I first got a used Tesla S (2014 P85D). I have a 2020 Chevy Bolt EV I use as my daily driver right now. I recently rented a 2025 Toyota Camry Hybrid, which seems to be in high demand and very highly rated/recommended out there.

My experience was … disappointing. Now granted, it delivered on the fuel economy part. I drove it several hundred miles over a few days’ time and when I went to refuel it before the rental return, it only needed 6 gallons of gas to fill it back up. But the whole driving experience felt like a big step back from any EV I’d driven. You had the constant sensation of a gas engine turning on and off at various times, and a constant reminder the battery pack in the vehicle was tiny and only a part of a more complicated system. (You could put the car in “EV mode” to make it drive only on battery, but it would only allow it at very low speeds, like driving around parking lots.) Ultimately, it was just a car lugging around all the things required for an internal combustion engine AND electric vehicle parts at the same time. Double the complexity and a rolling compromise. (Better interior than I’m used to seeing w/Toyota though.)

I’m kind of confused w/Honda. Their “EV strategy” seemed to me like it was basically about trying to sell that Prologue which was really a GM designed car getting rebranded as a Honda product + hand-waving that they’d do cooler stuff soon.

Truthfully? I think one of the big challenges with EVs across the board is trying to mask the high cost of the battery pack, motors and other electronics involved. You can “do it right” by not caring and slapping a high price tag on it. Then you get an EV that still maintains people’s expectations for “fit and finish”, a nice interior, and really good handling. The BMW i4 eDrive 40 is a great example here, or even the Porsche Taycan EV. But most people just want a cheap car that’s reliable, avoids the need for gas fill-ups and oil changes, while still handling well and feeling like corners weren’t cut on the build quality, interior and exterior. That doesn’t really seem to be doable, yet? Tesla sure doesn’t. They just design vehicles that few people think look great on the outside. but “wow” them with all the infotainment / computer capabilities on the inside. Keep the interior really bare-bones but put that big touch-screen front and center to distract them. Spend enough on the seats so they’re really comfortable, but use a real basic “skateboard” suspension and frame across the whole product line. It goes fast enough in a straight line so they’ll ignore other handling issues.

Don’t get me wrong. I like Tesla vehicles. I’m just being real about what one is and isn’t. I don’t think an established brand like Honda is comfortable making all those compromises, and they’re just not seeing a profit margin in converting what they build now into a full EV?

Re:If they can’t figure out EV

By flink • Score: 4, Informative Thread

If you’re in NYC, Chicago, you also need a garage (probably a space heater too) because you’re not going to be able to charge those things at most charging stations when it’s -10F outside.

I live in Boston, where it gets considerably colder than NYC and have no issues charging outside /w an outdoor L2 device mounted to the side of my house. I also spend most weekends in the winter in the mountains in Maine, where it gets very cold. Also no issues with outdoor L2 charging.

Americans Would Rather Have a Nuclear Plant In Their Backyard Than a Datacenter

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
A new Gallup survey found that 71% of Americans oppose having an AI data center built near them, making the facilities even less popular than nearby nuclear plants, which 53% oppose. The Register reports:
When it comes to the reasons for opposing AI campuses, half of all respondents cite the effect on resources, with excess water usage and potential power grid constraints topping the list. Concern about loss of farmland and nature was surprisingly low, with just 7 percent mentioning this, but it is possible the scores are higher in rural areas. Quality-of-life concerns such as increased traffic were put forward by nearly a quarter, while a fifth mentioned higher utility bills.

Many were worried about AI specifically: that it would replace human workers, that they don’t trust it, that it is moving too fast, and that the industry needs regulating. Perhaps the latter sentiment is why President Trump appears to have shifted his own position on the need for AI regulations. Conversely, those in favor of datacenters cite economic benefits, with 55 percent mentioning increased job opportunities, and 13 percent saying it is because of increased tax revenues.

[…] This being America in 2026, Gallup looked at how attitudes stack up depending on political affiliation. It found that Democrats, at 56 percent, are much more likely than Republicans to be strongly opposed to a server farm in their vicinity. But 39 percent of Republicans are also strongly opposed, while another 24 percent are somewhat averse to it, and only about a third are in favor. Gallup points out the contradiction: for AI usage to expand in the US, facilities that can handle the necessary computing power will have to be built. But most Americans appear to take a “not in my backyard” attitude to new bit barns, and that attitude has grown in strength.

The ‘humming’ from them is terrible

By DirkDaring • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

I live near a hundred of them, in Ashburn Va. They are everywhere here. One turned on near me and I have exceptionally good hearing, along with some of my neighbors. We can all hear the low pitched humming from its rooftop coolers. I can’t wait to move in a few years.

Easy

By Artem S. Tashkinov • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Nuclear plants create jobs.

AI datacenters eliminate jobs.

Which one to like and want?

The data center in Utah that got forced through

By rsilvergun • Score: 5, Insightful Thread
It’s going to dump 26 atomic bombs worth of heat into the air every single day and use more electricity than the state is currently using in total.

If that thing goes online and it looks like it will because it’s backed by a billionaire at a corrupt state then there will be water and electricity shortages.

And yes that includes water shortages. Data centers don’t need to use clean drinking water but it’s cheaper for them to do so and when they’re done with it it can’t easily be recycled because they pump it with chemicals to prevent it from corroding their cooling systems.

We spent the last 45 years giving all the money and power to billionaires are stupid reasons. Bad things are going to happen now and they’re going to happen so fast the old farts that voted to allow this shit might not have a chance to die before it bites them in the ass

Re:Concern is over AI spying and digital surveilla

By wildstoo • Score: 5, Funny Thread

appropriately charge the data center operators, they have money to pay for it, instead of distributing costs to all utility users.

That’s just unamerican. Industry should be publicly subsidised and privately profitable. How else do you expect to keep the middle class in check?

Re: Easy

By reanjr • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Nuke power plants might make their electricity cheaper. When they shut down San Onofre, that led to increased electricity costs for the region for years. They are quite competitive in constrained energy markets like you find in some hilly areas West of the Rockies. The reliance on imported energy increases costs. Producing locally using nukes lowers them.

SpaceX Unveils Sweeping Starship V3 Upgrades

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
SpaceX has detailed major Starship V3 upgrades ahead of a launch targeted as early as May 19. The changes are meant to move Starship closer to its core goals: rapid reuse, Starlink deployment, orbital refueling, and eventually Moon and Mars missions. Longtime Slashdot reader schwit1 shares a report from Teslarati:
Here is an explicit, broken-down list of the key changes, first starting with the changes to Super Heavy V3:

- Grid Fin Redesign: Reduced from four fins to three. Each fin is now 50% larger and stronger, repositioned for better catching and lifting performance. Fins are lowered on the booster to reduce heat exposure during hot staging, with hardware moved inside the fuel tank for protection.
- Integrated Hot Staging: Eliminates the old disposable interstage shield. The booster dome is now directly exposed to upper-stage engine ignition, protected by tank pressure and steel shielding. Interstage actuators retract after separation.
- New Fuel Transfer System: Massive redesign of the fuel transfer tube — roughly the size of a Falcon 9 first stage — enables simultaneous startup of all 33 Raptors for faster, more reliable flip maneuvers.
- Engine Bay/Thermal Protection: Engine shrouds removed entirely; new shielding added between engines. Propulsion and avionics are more tightly integrated. CO? fire suppression system deleted for a simpler, lighter aft section.
- Propellant Loading Improvements: Switched from one quick disconnect to two separate systems for added redundancy and reduced pad complexity.

Next, we have the changes to Starship V3:

- Completely Redesigned Propulsion System: Clean-sheet redesign supports new Raptor startup, larger propellant volume, and an improved reaction control system while reducing trapped or leaked propellant risk.
- Aft Section Simplification: Fluid and electrical systems rerouted; engine shrouds and large aft cavity deleted.
- Flap Actuation Upgrade: Changed from two actuators per flap to one actuator with three motors for better redundancy, mass efficiency, and lower cost.
- Faster Starlink Deployment: Upgraded PEZ dispenser enables quicker satellite release.
- Long-Duration Spaceflight Capability: New systems for long orbital coasts, orbital refueling, cryogenic fluid management, vacuum-insulated header tanks, and high-voltage cryogenic recirculation.
- Ship-to-Ship Docking + Refueling: Four docking drogues and dedicated propellant transfer connections added to support in-space refueling architecture.
- Avionics Upgrades: 60 custom avionics units with integrated batteries, inverters, and high-voltage systems (9 MW peak power). New multi-sensor navigation for precision autonomous flight. RF sensors measure propellant in microgravity. ~50 onboard camera views and 480 Mbps Starlink connectivity for low-latency communications.
“Believe it or not, there’s more,” writes schwit1. “Two years ago, the biggest and most powerful rocket ever flown was Starship V1. Last year, it was Starship V2. V3 is about to become the biggest and most powerful rocket ever flown — but don’t worry, the company already has plans for V4.”

Excited !

By greytree • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
Hope it does not take as long as V2 did to debug.

The views from the cameras on the dummy sats will be amazing.
Imagine if they filmed Starship during reentry !

Re:9WM?

By Tailhook • Score: 5, Informative Thread

NINE MEGAWATTS

It’s an electric rocket system. They’ve aggressively eliminated all possible hydraulics. Gimbling rocket engines and flap articulation is all electric in Starship V3 and booster stage. So is cryogenic recirc. All that stuff has to react rapidly to achieve the agility necessary for the insane flight profile they have; slow gear trains won’t cut it; so they have dozens of the most powerful direct drive actuators our species has yet devised.

Also, 9 MW isn’t all that much. It’s about 12,000 HP, or what you get from a modest gas turbine, or a few diesel locomotives. Naval vessels use gas turbines of that size for on-board power generation.

Re:9WM?

By beelsebob • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Well, it needs to move its flaps. Those flaps are roughly 150 square meters, each. It needs to be able to move them against a hypersonic airstream. Imagine trying to push 150 square meters into a mach 25 airstream, and I imagine you’ll figure out where the power draw comes from.

Re:Don’t get this bit

By Zocalo • Score: 5, Interesting Thread
I’m guessing the tank has enough positive pressure left internally that it can withstand the pressure exerted upon it by the upper stage’s engine exhaust without collapsing until the upper stage is clear. If it deforms, then presumably it would not be able to be reused, but if it can withstand the pressure long enough just fine then that removes the need for some additional shielding, and the mass that entails.

Re: Ready for Thunderf00t to mock it

By Luthair • Score: 4, Informative Thread
Musk spent 44-billion on Twitter because he’s a snowflake.

Musk Accused of ‘Selective Amnesia’, Altman of Lying As OpenAI Trial Nears End

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters:
A lawyer for Elon Musk hammered at the credibility of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman on Thursday, near the end of a trial over whether to hold the ChatGPT maker and its leaders responsible for allegedly transforming the nonprofit into a vehicle to enrich themselves. OpenAI’s lawyers fought back, claiming the world’s richest person waited too long to claim OpenAI breached its founding agreement to build safe artificial intelligence to benefit humanity, and couldn’t claim he was essential to its success. “Mr. Musk may have the Midas touch in some areas, but not in AI,” said William Savitt, a lawyer for OpenAI. “To succeed in AI, as it turns out, all Mr. Musk can do is come to court.”

The claims were made during closing arguments of a trial in the Oakland, California, federal court. […] In his closing argument, Musk’s lawyer Steven Molo told jurors that five witnesses, including Musk, former OpenAI board members and former OpenAI Chief ScientistIlya Sutskever, testified that Altman was a liar. Molo also noted that during cross-examination on Tuesday, Altman did not say yes unequivocally when asked if he was completely trustworthy and did not mislead people in business. “Sam Altman’s credibility is directly at issue in this case,” Molo said. “If you don’t believe him, they cannot win.”

Molo accused OpenAI of wrongfully trying to enrich investors and insiders at the nonprofit’s expense, and failing to prioritize AI’s safety. He also challenged Brockman’s goals for the business, citing Brockman’sstatementthat his own OpenAI stake was worth nearly $30 billion. “The arrogance, the lack of sensitivity, the failure to account for just common decency is really, really abhorrent.” Musk also accused Microsoft, which invested $1 billion in OpenAI in 2019 and $10 billion in 2023, of aiding and abetting OpenAI’s wrongful conduct. “Microsoft was aware of what OpenAI was doing every step of the way,” Molo said.

Sarah Eddy, another lawyer for the OpenAI defendants, accused Musk and his legal team in her closing argument of resorting to “sound bites and irrelevant false accusations.” Eddy said by 2017, everyone associated with OpenAI — including Musk, then still on its board — knew it needed more money to fulfill its mission than it could raise as a nonprofit. “Mr. Musk wanted to turn OpenAI into a for-profit company that he could control,” she said. “But the other founders refused to turn the keys of AGI (artificial general intelligence) over to one person, let alone Elon Musk.“She also said if Musk truly believed AI should serve humanity, he would not have pushed to fold OpenAI into his electric car company Tesla, or made his rival xAI a for-profit company.

Musk had a three-year statute of limitations to sue, and OpenAI’s lawyers said his August 2024 lawsuit came too late because he knew several years earlier about OpenAI’s growth plans. Eddy expressed disbelief that Musk claimed he did not read a four-page term sheet in 2018 discussing OpenAI’s plan to seek outside investments. “One of the most sophisticated businessmen in the history of the world” wouldn’t have “stuck his head in the sand,” Eddy said. Savitt accused Musk of having “selective amnesia.” Microsoft’s lawyer Russell Cohen said in his closing statement that Microsoft wasn’t involved in the key events of the case, and was “a responsible partner at every step.”
On Monday, the nine-person jury is expected to begin deliberating. The judge and lawyers will also return to court to discuss possible remedies if Musk wins, including how OpenAI should be restructured and what damages might be awarded. If Musk loses, there will be no remedies to consider.
Recap:
OpenAI Trial Wraps Up With ‘Jackass’ Trophy For Challenging Musk (Day Eleven)
Sam Altman Testifies That Elon Musk Wanted Control of OpenAI (Day Ten)
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella Testifies In OpenAI Trial (Day Nine)
Sam Altman Had a Bad Day In Court (Day Eight)
Sam Altman’s Management Style Comes Under the Microscope At OpenAI Trial (Day Seven)
Brockman Rebuts Musk’s Take On Startup’s History, Recounts Secret Work For Tesla (Day Six)
OpenAI President Discloses His Stake In the Company Is Worth $30 Billion (Day Five)
Musk Concludes Testimony At OpenAI Trial (Day Four)
Elon Musk Says OpenAI Betrayed Him, Clashes With Company’s Attorney (Day Three)
Musk Testifies OpenAI Was Created As Nonprofit To Counter Google (Day Two)
Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Head To Court (Day One)

Difficult task

By procrastinatos • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

Difficult task for the jury.

Question of fact: “Which of these two self-serving bastards is a lying snake?”
Verdict: “Yes.”

In other news

By Uldis Segliņš • Score: 3 Thread
Scientists have discovered that most plants are actually green.

Can Altman or Musk prove they are really human?

By Required Snark • Score: 3 Thread
They both could be hallucinating AI systems as far as I can tell. Neither of them seem to care much about the actual world the rest of us live in.

That explains it…

By Locke2005 • Score: 4, Interesting Thread
Is selective amnesia one of the symptoms of ketamine abuse?

Musk needs AI!

By Locke2005 • Score: 3 Thread
Has Elon finished training his AI to keep track of all his kid’s names and genders yet?

UK Antitrust Regulator Is Officially Investigating Microsoft Office

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot Skip
The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority is opening a formal investigation into whether Microsoft’s bundling of Windows, Office, Teams, Copilot, and related products harms competition. Engadget reports:
“Our aim is to understand how these markets are developing, Microsoft’s position within them and to consider what, if any, targeted action may be needed to ensure UK organizations can benefit from choice, innovation and competitive prices,” CMA Chief Executive Sarah Cardell said in a statement published by Reuters.

She also stressed the importance of the investigation by noting that hundreds of thousands of UK residents use business software and Microsoft products. The organization will take a look into the company’s cloud licensing practices. The CMA has stated that the inquiry will conclude by February. At that point, Microsoft could get slapped with a strategic market label.

Microsoft says it’s “committed to working quickly and constructively with the CMA to facilitate its review of the business software market.” A strategic market designation doesn’t automatically assume wrongdoing, but will give the CMA more leeway when conducting further interventions.

Re:Teams harms civilization.....

By blahbooboo • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

by simply existing.

I mean… at least it’s not Slack or Zoom. The competitors had a chance to do better and didn’t.

In 2022/2021Teams rapidly became popular with businesses once MS bundled it for free with 365 subscriptions despite users hating it. At the time it was a horrible application that was buggy, low quality conferencing, and had multiple versions that didn’t interoperate (i.e Teams business and Teams personal different apps).

I remember quite clearly business users all complaining (“Ugh, Teams sucks”) but they had no choice once their IT department got deals for Office with teams and then dumped their Zoom, WebEx, etc services despite them both being a lot better..

Wait, I’ve Seen This One!

By bill_mcgonigle • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

This is the one where they investigate Office on Antitrust grounds and wind up settling for not bundling Edge.

I’ve seen it in reruns....

Re:Teams harms civilisation.....

By Richard_at_work • Score: 5, Informative Thread

Oh seriously?

I use both Slack and Teams day to day (we use Slack internally, client uses Teams, so we are on both as a result).

Slack we never have any issues with, and can find information from previous conversations easily.

Teams? Fuck teams. Fuck it and then fuck it some more. Its slow, clunky, constantly has issues, very hard to find information unless you still have the chat open somewhere, and chats are spread all over the place (chats, teams, channels…). Teams also requires you to have access to the workspaces OneDrive and SharePoint as well if you want to share files, so if you dont have access to those things then … you are limited to text only.

Its video call system is sorely limited, and even doing things like zooming in to the presenters shared screen is clunky and shit.

Teams is the worst collaboration system I have ever used, so dont try making out that its better than Slack or Zoom. It is by far the worst of the three.

Re:Isn’t this about 25 years too late?

By jenningsthecat • Score: 5, Interesting Thread

What are they hoping to achieve at this point?

My suspicion is that they’re sending a message. Trump has been busy pissing away strategic alliances while he pisses off the rest of the world with his arrogance, presumptuousness, and American exceptionalism. Tech companies are collateral damage; except they’re not really “collateral” when you consider their knee-bending, ring-kissing, and sometimes out-and-out support for Trump.

Just as Austria recently sent up fighter jets to “escort” unauthorized American military planes out of their airspace, the rest of the world is distancing and decoupling itself from the US. Big Tech was already suffering from a lack of trust; now America’s other transgressions on the world stage have rendered everything American toxic. That’s especially true of companies such as Microsoft that hold the keys to the information kingdom.

Other countries have had enough, and are actively seeking and/or building alternatives to companies and institutions which support American hegemony. Expect lots more news like this in the coming months and years.

Re:Until!

By Tony Isaac • Score: 5, Insightful Thread

You’re thinking of the US, I’m afraid. This is in the UK.

AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile Team Up To Eliminate ‘Dead Zones’ Across US

Posted by BeauHD View on SlashDot
AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile have agreed in principle to form a joint venture (JV) aimed at reducing U.S. mobile dead zones through satellite connectivity, especially in rural areas and during emergencies when ground networks fail. Here are three of the customer benefits listed by the JV (as highlighted by Droid Life):
Fewer coverage gaps: Will nearly eliminate dead zones in the U.S. currently without mobile service, reaching previously unserved areas.
Reliable connectivity in emergencies: Redundant connectivity will become available when existing ground-based networks are unavailable due to extreme natural disasters or other unusual disruptions.
Improved network performance: Will give customers more consistent performance and simpler access to satellite services across providers. This will speed up feature updates and improve connectivity for everyone, everywhere.
“It will still take time for these improvements to be available to customers, but this all seems like a positive step,” writes Droid Life’s Tim Wrobel.

Re:Interoperability should have been law long ago.

By Valgrus Thunderaxe • Score: 4, Insightful Thread
I remember having to pay “long distance” to call the next county and being forced to rent my phone. No, I’ll take the wireless providers over the ‘Bells any day.

Dead Zone.

By kellin • Score: 3 Thread

There are enough dead zones within a major metropolitan area that this should have been done ages ago. I mean, I’m sitting on a major street next to a major freeway down the middle of the city of LA and there are spots I can walk along and not get good service. Then again, I know spots in the city where SiriusXM service is bad when there’s not a building within several hundred feet and I cant imagine what’s blocking the signal.

the mountains are the worst

By FudRucker • Score: 3 Thread
I do a lot of camping and when in the mountains I can take a forest road and as soon as a mountain gets in between me and the last cell tower I seen my bars disappear and no service, I seen more than my share of dead zones, give my a job and I’ll help you find them

We’ll see

By RitchCraft • Score: 3 Thread

I trust these three to be about as honest and upfront about future plans as I do a drug addict guarding drugs from other drug addicts.

Starlink Mobile

By Mirnotoriety • Score: 5, Informative Thread
Starlink is the primary reason this joint venture exists. While the “Big Three” carriers (AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon) are framing this as a public service for rural connectivity, industry experts see it as a defensive alliance against the growing dominance of Starlink Mobile.