Author name: Kris Guyer

a-lot-of-people-are-mistaking-elon-musk’s-starlink-satellites-for-uaps

A lot of people are mistaking Elon Musk’s Starlink satellites for UAPs

elon musk, military space, Science, Space, spacex, starlink, UAP / /

That’s just Elon

But many UAP cases have verifiable explanations as airplanes, drones, or satellites, and lawmakers argue AARO might be able to solve more of the cases with more funding.

Airspace is busier than ever with air travel and consumer drones. More satellites are zooming around the planet as government agencies and companies like SpaceX deploy their constellations for Internet connectivity and surveillance. There’s more stuff up there to see.

“AARO increasingly receives cases that it is able to resolve to the Starlink satellite constellation,” the office said in this year’s annual report.

“For example, a commercial pilot reported white flashing lights in the night sky,” AARO said. “The pilot did not report an altitude or speed, and no data or imagery was recorded. AARO assessed that this sighting of flashing lights correlated with a Starlink satellite launch from Cape Canaveral, Florida, the same evening about one hour prior to the sighting.”

Jon Kosloski, director of AARO, said officials compared the parameters of these sightings with Starlink launches. When SpaceX releases Starlink satellites in orbit, the spacecraft are initially clustered together and reflect more sunlight down to Earth. This makes the satellites easier to see during twilight hours before they raise their orbits and become dimmer.

“We found some of those correlations in time, the direction that they were looking, and the location,” Kosloski said. “And we were able to assess that they were all in those cases looking at Starlink flares.”

SpaceX has more than 6,600 Starlink satellites in low-Earth orbit, more than half of all active spacecraft. Thousands more satellites for Amazon’s Kuiper broadband constellation and Chinese Internet network are slated to launch in the next few years.

“AARO is investigating if other unresolved cases may be attributed to the expansion of the Starlink and other mega-constellations in low-Earth orbit,” the report said.

The Starlink network is still relatively new. SpaceX launched the first Starlinks five years ago. Kosloski said he expects the number of erroneous UAP reports caused by satellites to go down as pilots and others understand what the Starlinks look like.

“It looks interesting and potentially anomalous. But we can model that, and we can show pilots what that anomaly looks like, so that that doesn’t get reported to us necessarily,” Kosloski said.

A lot of people are mistaking Elon Musk’s Starlink satellites for UAPs Read More »

ftc-to-launch-investigation-into-microsoft’s-cloud-business

FTC to launch investigation into Microsoft’s cloud business

antitrust, azure, microsoft, Policy, syndication / /

The FTC also highlighted fees charged on users transferring data out of certain cloud systems and minimum spend contracts, which offer discounts to companies in return for a set level of spending.

Microsoft has also attracted scrutiny from international regulators over similar matters. The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority is investigating Microsoft and Amazon after its fellow watchdog Ofcom found that customers complained about being “locked in” to a single provider, which offers discounts for exclusivity and charge high “egress fees” to leave.

In the EU, Microsoft has avoided a formal probe into its cloud business after agreeing to a multimillion-dollar deal with a group of rival cloud providers in July.

The FTC in 2022 sued to block Microsoft’s $75 billion acquisition of video game maker Activision Blizzard over concerns the deal would harm competitors to its Xbox consoles and cloud-gaming business. A federal court shot down an attempt by the FTC to block it, which is being appealed. A revised version of the deal in the meantime closed last year following its clearance by the UK’s CMA.

Since its inception 20 years ago, cloud infrastructure and services has grown to become one of the most lucrative business lines for Big Tech as companies outsource their data storage and computing online. More recently, this has been turbocharged by demand for processing power to train and run artificial intelligence models.

Spending on cloud services soared to $561 billion in 2023 with market researcher Gartner forecasting it will grow to $675 billion this year and $825 billion in 2025. Microsoft has about a 20 percent market share over the global cloud market, trailing leader Amazon Web Services that has 31 percent, but almost double the size of Google Cloud at 12 percent.

There is fierce rivalry between the trio and smaller providers. Last month, Microsoft accused Google of running “shadow campaigns” seeking to undermine its position with regulators by secretly bankrolling hostile lobbying groups.

Microsoft also alleged that Google tried to derail its settlement with EU cloud providers by offering them $500 million in cash and credit to reject its deal and continue pursuing litigation.

The FTC and Microsoft declined to comment.

© 2024 The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved. Not to be redistributed, copied, or modified in any way.

FTC to launch investigation into Microsoft’s cloud business Read More »

half-life-2-pushed-steam-on-the-gaming-masses…-and-the-masses-pushed-back

Half-Life 2 pushed Steam on the gaming masses… and the masses pushed back

gaming, half life 2, steam, valve / /

It’s Half-Life 2 week at Ars Technica! This Saturday, November 16, is the 20th anniversary of the release of Half-Life 2—a game of historical importance for the artistic medium and technology of computer games. Each day leading up through the 16th, we’ll be running a new article looking back at the game and its impact.

When millions of eager gamers first installed Half-Life 2 20 years ago, many, if not most, of them found they needed to install another piece of software alongside it. Few at the time could imagine that piece of companion software–with the pithy name Steam–would eventually become the key distribution point and social networking center for the entire PC gaming ecosystem, making the idea of physical PC games an anachronism in the process.

While Half-Life 2 wasn’t the first Valve game released on Steam, it was the first high-profile title to require the platform, even for players installing the game from physical retail discs. That requirement gave Valve access to millions of gamers with new Steam accounts and helped the company bypass traditional retail publishers of the day by directly marketing and selling its games (and, eventually, games from other developers). But 2004-era Steam also faced a vociferous backlash from players who saw the software as a piece of nuisance DRM (digital rights management) that did little to justify its existence at the time.

Free (from Vivendi) at last

Years before Half-Life 2’s release, Valve revealed Steam to the world at the 2002 Game Developers Conference, announcing “a broadband business platform for direct software delivery and content management” in a press release. Valve’s vision for a new suite of developer tools for content publishing, billing, version control, and anti-piracy was all present and stressed in that initial announcement.

Perhaps the largest goal for Steam, though, was removing the middlemen of retail game distribution and giving more direct control to game developers, including Valve. “By eliminating the overhead of physical goods distribution, developers will be able to leverage the efficiency of broadband to improve customer service and increase operating margins,” Valve wrote in its 2002 announcement.

Valve’s Gabe Newell on stage unveiling Steam at GDC 2002. Credit: 4Gamer

On stage at GDC, Valve founder Gabe Newell took things even further, positioning himself as “a new-age Robin Hood who wanted to take from the greedy publishers what independent game developers deserved: a larger piece of the revenue pie,” as Gamespot’s Final Days of Half-Life 2 feature summed it up. Cutting out the publishers and retailers, Newell said, could be the difference between a developer taking home $7 or $30 on a full-price game (which generally ran $50 at the time).

Half-Life 2 pushed Steam on the gaming masses… and the masses pushed back Read More »

dragon-age:-the-veilguard-and-the-choices-you-make-while-saving-the-world

Dragon Age: The Veilguard and the choices you make while saving the world

Bioware, Dragon Age, Dragon Age The Veilguard, Dragon Age Veilguard, EA, Features, gaming, RPG / /

“Events are weaving together quickly. The fate of the world shall be decided.”

Dragon Age: The Veilguard is as much about the world, story, and characters as the gameplay. Credit: EA

BioWare’s reputation as a AAA game development studio is built on three pillars: world-building, storytelling, and character development. In-game codices offer textual support for fan theories, replays are kept fresh by systems that encourage experimenting with alternative quest resolutions, and players get so attached to their characters that an entire fan-built ecosystem of player-generated fiction and artwork has sprung up over the years.

After two very publicly disappointing releases with Mass Effect: Andromeda and Anthem, BioWare pivoted back to the formula that brought it success, but I’m wrapping up the first third of The Veilguard, and it feels like there’s an ingredient missing from the special sauce. Where are the quests that really let me agonize over the potential repercussions of my choices?

I love Thedas, and I love the ragtag group of friends my hero has to assemble anew in each game, but what really gets me going as a roleplayer are the morally ambiguous questions that make me squirm: the dreadful and delicious BioWare decisions.

Should I listen to the tormented templar and assume every mage I meet is so dangerous that I need to adopt a “strike first, ask questions later” policy, or can I assume at least some magic users are probably not going to murder me on sight? When I find out my best friend’s kleptomania is the reason my city has been under armed occupation for the past 10 years, do I turn her in, or do I swear to defend her to the end?

Questions like these keep me coming back to replay BioWare games over and over. I’ve been eagerly awaiting the release of the fourth game in the Dragon Age franchise so I can find out what fresh dilemmas I’ll have to wrangle, but at about 70 hours in, they seem to be in short supply.

The allure of interactive media, and the limitations

Before we get into some actual BioWare choices, I think it’s important to acknowledge the realities of the medium. These games are brilliant interactive stories. They reach me like my favorite novels do, but they offer a flexibility not available in printed media (well, outside of the old Choose Your Own Adventure novels, anyway). I’m not just reading about the main character’s decisions; I’m making the main character’s decisions, and that can be some heady stuff.

There’s a limit to how much of the plot can be put into a player’s hands, though. A roleplaying game developer wants to give as much player agency as possible, but that has to happen through the illusion of choice. You must arrive at one specific location for the sake of the plot, but the game can accommodate letting you choose from several open pathways to get there. It’s a railroad—hopefully a well-hidden railroad—but at the end of the day, no matter how great the storytelling is, these are still video games. There’s only so much they can do.

So if you have to maintain an illusion of choice but also want to to invite your players to thoughtfully engage with your decision nodes, what do you do? You reward them for playing along and suspending their disbelief by giving their choices meaningful weight inside your shared fantasy world.

If the win condition of a basic quest is a simple “perform action X at location Y,” you have to spice that up with some complexity or the game gets very old very quickly. That complexity can be programmatic, or it can be narrative. With your game development tools, you can give the player more than one route to navigate to location Y through good map design, or you can make action X easier or harder to accomplish by setting preconditions like puzzles to solve or other nodes that need interaction. With the narrative, you’re not limited to what can be accomplished in your game engine. The question becomes, “How much can I give the player to emotionally react to?”

In a field packed with quality roleplaying game developers, this is where BioWare has historically shined: making me have big feelings about my companions and the world they live in. This is what I crave.

Who is (my) Rook, anyway?

The Veilguard sets up your protagonist, Rook, with a lightly sketched backstory tied to your chosen faction. You pick a first name, you are assigned a last name, and you read a brief summary of an important event in Rook’s recent history. The rest is on you, and you reveal Rook’s essential nature through the dialog wheel and the major plot choices you make. Those plot choices are necessarily mechanically limited in scope and in rewards/consequences, but narratively, there’s a lot of ground you can cover.

One version of the protagonist in Dragon Age The Veilguard, with a dialogue wheel showing options

For the record, I picked “Oof.” That’s just how my Rook rolls. Credit: Marisol Cuervo

During the game’s tutorial, you’re given information about a town that has mysteriously fallen out of communication with the group you’re assisting. You and your companions set out to discover what happened. You investigate the town, find the person responsible, and decide what happens to him next. Mechanically, it’s pretty straightforward.

The real action is happening inside your head. As Rook, I’ve just walked through a real horror show in this small village, put together some really disturbing clues about what’s happening, and I’m now staring down the person responsible while he’s trapped inside an uncomfortably slimy-looking cyst of material the game calls the Blight. Here is the choice: What does my Rook decide to do with him, and what does that choice say about her character? I can’t answer that question without looking through the lens of my personal morality, even if I intend for Rook to act counter to my own nature.

My first emotional, knee-jerk reaction is to say screw this guy. Leave him to the consequences of his own making. He’s given me an offensively venal justification for how he got here, so let him sit there and stare at his material reward for all the good it will do him while he’s being swallowed by the Blight.

The alternative is saving him. You get to give him a scathing lecture, but he goes free, and it’s because you made that choice. You walked through the center of what used to be a vibrant settlement and saw this guy, you know he’s the one who allowed this mess to happen, and you stayed true to your moral center anyway. Don’t you feel good? Look at you, big hero! All those other people will die from the Blight, but you held the line and said, “Well, not this one.”

A dialogue wheel gives the player a decisive choice

Being vindictive might feel good, but I feel leaving him is a profoundly evil choice. Credit: Marisol Cuervo

There’s no objectively right answer about what to do with the mayor, and I’m here for it. Leaving him or saving him: Neither option is without ethical hazards. I can use this medium to dig deep into who I am and how I see myself before building up my idea of who my Rook is going to be.

Make your decision, and Rook lives with the consequences. Some are significant, and some… not so much.

Your choices are world-changing—but also can’t be

Longtime BioWare fans have historically been given the luxury of having their choices—large and small—acknowledged by the next game in the franchise. In past games, this happened largely through small dialog mentions or NPC reappearances, but as satisfying as this is for me as a player, it creates a big problem for BioWare.

Here’s an example: depending on the actions of the player, ginger-haired bard and possible romantic companion Leliana can be missed entirely as a recruitable companion in Dragon Age: Origins, the first game in the franchise. If she is recruited, she can potentially die in a later quest. It’s not guaranteed that she survives the first game. That’s a bit of a problem in Dragon Age II, where Leliana shows up in one of the downloadable content packs. It’s a bigger problem in the third game, where Leliana is the official spymaster for the titular Inquisition. BioWare calls these NPCs who can exist in a superposition of states “quantum characters.”

A tweet that says BioWare's default stance is to avoid using quantum characters, but an exception was made for Liliana

One of the game’s creative leaders talking about “quantum characters.” Credit: Marisol Cuervo

If you follow this thought to its logical end, you can understand where BioWare is coming from: After a critical mass of quantum characters is reached, the effects are impossible to manage. BioWare sidesteps the Leliana problem entirely in The Veilguard by just not talking about her.

BioWare has staunchly maintained that, as a studio, it does not have a set canon for the history of its games; there’s only the personal canon each player develops as a result of their gameplay. As I’ve been playing, I can tell there’s been a lot of thought put into ensuring none of The Veilguard’s in-game references to areas covered in the previous three games would invalidate a player’s personal canon, and I appreciate that. That’s not an easy needle to thread. I can also see that the same care was put into ensuring that this game’s decisions would not create future quantum characters, and that means the choices we’re given are very carefully constrained to this story and only this story.

But it still feels like we’re missing an opportunity to make these moral decisions on a smaller scale. Dragon Age: Inquisition introduced a collectible and cleverly hidden item for players to track down while they worked on saving the world. Collect enough trinkets and you eventually open up an entirely optional area to explore. Because this is BioWare, though, there was a catch: To find the trinkets, you had to stare through the crystal eyes of a skull sourced from the body of a mage who has been forcibly cut off from the source of all magic in the world. Is your Inquisitor on board with that, even if it comes with a payoff? Personally, I don’t like the idea. My Inquisitor? She thoroughly looted the joint. It’s a small choice, and it doesn’t really impact the long-term state of the world, but I still really enjoyed working through it.

Later in the first act of The Veilguard, Rook finally gets an opportunity to make one of the big, ethically difficult decisions. I’ll avoid spoilers, but I don’t mind sharing that it was a satisfyingly difficult choice to make, and I wasn’t sure I felt good about my decision. I spent a lot of time staring at the screen before clicking on my answer. Yeah, that’s the good stuff right there.

In keeping with the studio’s effort to avoid creating quantum worldstates, The Veilguard treads lightly with the mechanical consequences of this specific choice and the player is asked to take up the narrative repercussions. How hard the consequences hit, or if they miss, comes down to your individual approach to roleplaying games. Are you a player who inhabits the character and lives in the world? Or is it more like you’re riding along, only watching a story unfold? Your answer will greatly influence how connected you feel to the choices BioWare asks you to make.

Is this better or worse?

Much online discussion around The Veilguard has centered on Bioware’s decision to incorporate only three choices from the previous game in the series, Inquisition, rather than using the existing Dragon Age Keep to import an entire worldstate. I’m a little disappointed by this, but I’m also not sure anything in Thedas is significantly changed because my Hero of Ferelden was a softie who convinced the guard in the Ostagar camp to give his lunch to the prisoner who was in the cage for attempted desertion.

At the same time, as I wrap up the first act, I’m missing the mild tension I should be feeling when the dialog wheel comes up, and not just because many of the dialog choices seem to be three flavors of “yes, and…” One of my companions was deeply unhappy with me for a period of time after I made the big first-act decision and sharply rebuffed my attempts at justification, snapping at me that I should go. Previous games allowed companions to leave your party forever if they disagreed enough with your main character; this doesn’t seem to be a mechanic you need to worry about in The Veilguard.

Rook’s friends might be divided on how they view her choice of verbal persuasion versus percussive diplomacy, but none of them had anything to say about it while she was very earnestly attempting to convince a significant NPC they were making a pretty big mistake. One of Rook’s companions later asked about her intentions during that interaction but otherwise had no reaction.

Another dialogue choice in Veilguard

BioWare, are you OK? Why do you keep punching people who don’t agree with you? Credit: Marisol Cuervo

Seventy hours into the game, I’m looking for places where I have to navigate my own ethical landscape before I can choose to have Rook conform to, or flaunt, the social mores of northern Thedas. I’m still helping people, being the hero, and having a lot of fun doing so, but the problems I’m solving aren’t sticky, and they lack the nuance I enjoyed in previous games. I want to really wrestle with the potential consequences before I decide to do something. Maybe this is something I’ll see more of in the second act.

If the banal, puppy-kicking kind of evil has been minimized in favor of larger stakes—something I applaud—it has left a sort of vacuum on the roleplaying spectrum. BioWare has big opinions about how heroes should act and how they should handle interpersonal conflict. I wish I felt more like I was having that struggle rather than being told that’s how Rook is feeling.

I’m hopeful my Rook isn’t just going to just save the world, but that in the next act of the game, I’ll see more opportunities from BioWare to let her do it her way.

Dragon Age: The Veilguard and the choices you make while saving the world Read More »

trump-says-elon-musk-will-lead-“doge,”-a-new-department-of-government-efficiency

Trump says Elon Musk will lead “DOGE,” a new Department of Government Efficiency

department of government efficiency, doge, Donald Trump, elon musk, Policy / /

Trump’s “perfect gift to America”

Trump’s statement said the department, whose name is a reference to the Doge meme, “will drive out the massive waste and fraud which exists throughout our annual $6.5 Trillion Dollars of Government Spending.” Trump said DOGE will “liberate our Economy” and that its “work will conclude no later than July 4, 2026” because “a smaller Government, with more efficiency and less bureaucracy, will be the perfect gift to America on the 250th Anniversary of The Declaration of Independence.”

“I look forward to Elon and Vivek making changes to the Federal Bureaucracy with an eye on efficiency and, at the same time, making life better for all Americans,” Trump said. Today, Musk wrote that the “world is suffering slow strangulation by overregulation,” and that “we finally have a mandate to delete the mountain of choking regulations that do not serve the greater good.”

Musk has been expected to have influence in Trump’s second term after campaigning for him. Trump previously vowed to have Musk head a government efficiency commission. “That would essentially give the world’s richest man and a major government contractor the power to regulate the regulators who hold sway over his companies, amounting to a potentially enormous conflict of interest,” said a New York Times article last month.

The Wall Street Journal wrote today that “Musk isn’t expected to become an official government employee, meaning he likely wouldn’t be required to divest from his business empire.”

Trump says Elon Musk will lead “DOGE,” a new Department of Government Efficiency Read More »

what-did-the-snowball-earth-look-like?

What did the snowball Earth look like?

Earth sciences, geology, glaciers, radioactive dating, Science, snowball earth / /

All of which raises questions about what the snowball Earth might have looked like in the continental interiors. A team of US-based geologists think they’ve found some glacial deposits in the form of what are called the Tavakaiv sandstones in Colorado. These sandstones are found along the Front Range of the Rockies, including areas just west of Colorado Springs. And, if the authors’ interpretations are correct, they formed underneath a massive sheet of glacial ice.

There are lots of ways to form sandstone deposits, and they can be difficult to date because they’re aggregates of the remains of much older rocks. But in this case, the Tavakaiv sandstone is interrupted by intrusions of dark colored rock that contains quartz and large amounts of hematite, a form of iron oxide.

These intrusions tell us a remarkable number of things. For one, some process must have exerted enough force to drive material into small faults in the sandstone. Hematite only gets deposited under fairly specific conditions, which tells us a bit more. And, most critically, hematite can trap uranium and the lead it decays into, providing a way of dating when the deposits formed.

Under the snowball

Depending on which site was being sampled, the hematite produced a range of dates, from as recent as 660 million years ago to as old as 700 million years. That means all of them were formed during what’s termed the Sturtian glaciation, which ran from 715 million to 660 million years ago. At the time, the core of what is now North America was in the equatorial region. So, the Tavakaiv sandstones can provide a window into what at least one continent experienced during the most severe global glaciation of the Cryogenian Period.

What did the snowball Earth look like? Read More »

discord-admin-gets-15-years-for-“one-of-the-most-significant-leaks”-in-us-history

Discord admin gets 15 years for “one of the most significant leaks” in US history

discord, discord leaks, jack Teixeira, military leaks, national security, Pentagon, Policy / /

FBI Director Christopher Wray said that his sentence should serve as “a stark warning to all those entrusted with protecting national defense information: betray that trust, and you will be held accountable.”

FBI vows to watch for more leaks

After Teixeira’s crimes were exposed, the now-22-year-old’s former classmates came out, suggesting that Teixeira had always had an “unnerving” fixation with guns and the military. They claimed he would do “crazy stuff” to get attention in school, and that impulse seemingly spilled over into Discord, where he found a community hungry for military insights that could potentially fuel conspiracy theories.

The DOJ noted that Teixeira was twice warned to stop doing “deep dives” of confidential information at his base, but that didn’t stop him from taking top-secret documents home. Sometimes, he would even retype the documents into Discord to try to cover his tracks, but other times, he uploaded the documents themselves, many of which were clearly marked “top-secret.”

Although Teixeira asked Discord members not to share the documents, an investigative journalism group, Bellingcat, found that Teixeira’s friends spread the documents widely, first to other Discord servers, then to Telegram, 4Chan, and Twitter (now called X).

When he ultimately lost control over the documents spreading, Teixeira “took steps to conceal his disclosures by destroying and disposing of his electronic devices, deleting his online accounts, and encouraging his online acquaintances to do the same,” the DOJ said.

The DOJ is hoping that Teixeira’s 15-year sentence will deter future leaks after the incident raised questions about who gets access to the US government’s most sensitive documents. Teixeira had access to the Pentagon’s confidential documents—including top-secret information on troop movements on particular dates—since he became a low-level computer tech at his base at 19 years old, the FBI found. Business Insider estimated that more than 2 million workers have similar clearance.

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said Teixeira’s sentence “demonstrates the seriousness of the obligation to protect our country’s secrets and the safety of the American people,” while Wray promised that the FBI would keep monitoring for leaks.

“Jack Teixeira’s criminal conduct placed our nation, our troops, and our allies at great risk,” Wray said. “The FBI will continue to work diligently with our partners to protect classified information and ensure that those who turn their backs on their country face justice.”

Discord admin gets 15 years for “one of the most significant leaks” in US history Read More »

teen-in-critical-condition-with-canada’s-first-human-case-of-h5-bird-flu

Teen in critical condition with Canada’s first human case of H5 bird flu

avian influenza, bird flu, Canada, dairy herds, health, Infectious disease, outbreak, Science / /

A British Columbia teen who contracted Canada’s first known human case of H5 bird flu has deteriorated swiftly in recent days and is now in critical condition, health officials reported Tuesday.

The teen’s case was announced Saturday by provincial health officials, who noted that the teen had no obvious exposure to animals that could explain an infection with the highly pathogenic avian influenza. The teen tested positive for H5 bird flu at BC’s public health laboratory, and the result is currently being confirmed by the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg.

The teen’s case reportedly began with conjunctivitis, echoing the H5N1 human case reports in the US. The case then progressed to fever and cough, and the teen was admitted to BC’s Children’s hospital late Friday. The teen’s condition varied throughout the weekend but had taken a turn for the worse by Tuesday, according to BC provincial health officer Bonnie Henry.

“This was a healthy teenager prior to this—so, no underlying conditions—and it just reminds us that in young people, this is a virus that can progress and cause quite severe illness,” Bonnie Henry said in a media briefing streamed by Global News on Tuesday.

Health officials in the province have opened an investigation to understand the source of the outbreak. Around three dozen contacts of the teen have been tested, and all have been negative. “The source of exposure is very likely to be an animal or bird and is being investigated by BC’s chief veterinarian and public health teams,” health officials noted in the announcement over the weekend. The teen was reportedly exposed to pets, including dogs, cats, and reptiles, but testing so far has been negative on them.

Teen in critical condition with Canada’s first human case of H5 bird flu Read More »

bitcoin-hits-record-high-as-trump-vows-to-end-crypto-crackdown

Bitcoin hits record high as Trump vows to end crypto crackdown

Bitcoin, crypto scams, Cryptocurrency, cryptocurrency platform, Donald Trump, Policy, wlfi, world liberty financial / /

Bitcoin hit a new record high late Monday, its value peaking at $89,623 as investors quickly moved to cash in on expectations that Donald Trump will end a White House crackdown that intensified last year on crypto.

While the trading rally has now paused, analysts predict that bitcoin’s value will only continue rising following Trump’s win—perhaps even reaching $100,000 by the end of 2024, CNBC reported.

Bitcoin wasn’t the only winner emerging from the post-election crypto trading. Crypto exchanges like Coinbase also experienced surges in the market, and one of the biggest winners, CNBC reported, was dogecoin, a cryptocurrency linked to Elon Musk, who campaigned for Trump and may join his administration. Dogecoin’s value is up 135 percent since Trump’s win.

On the campaign trail, Trump began wooing the cryptocurrency industry, seeking donations and votes by promising to make the US the “crypto capital of the planet,” Fortune reported. He announced the launch of his own crypto platform, World Liberty Financial (WLFI), and vowed to “fire” Gary Gensler—the Securities and Commission Exchange (SEC) chair leading the US crypto crackdown—on “day one” in office, Al Jazeera reported.

Whether Trump can actually fire Gensler is still up in the air, The Washington Post reported. It seems more likely that Trump may demote Gensler, The Post reported, since people familiar with the matter suggested that “fully outing” the current SEC chair “could trigger a novel and complicated legal battle over the president’s authorities.” So far, Gensler has made no indications that he will step down once Trump takes office, although The Post noted that wouldn’t be considered unusual.

Sources told The Post that Trump is considering “a mix of current regulators, former federal officials, and financial industry executives,” for leadership positions, “many of whom have publicly expressed pro-crypto views.”

Reportedly under consideration to replace Gensler are Daniel Gallagher, a former SEC official currently serving as chief legal officer for the financial technology firm Robinhood, and two Republican SEC commissioners, Hester Peirce and Mark Uyeda, The Post’s sources said. Other names in the mix include a former SEC commissioner, Paul Atkins, and a former commissioner at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Chris Giancarlo.

Bitcoin hits record high as Trump vows to end crypto crackdown Read More »

apple-botched-the-apple-intelligence-launch,-but-its-long-term-strategy-is-sound

Apple botched the Apple Intelligence launch, but its long-term strategy is sound

AI, Apple, apple intelligence, generative ai, iOS, iOS 18.1, iOS 18.2, llm, Tech / /

I’ve spent a week with Apple Intelligence—here are the takeaways.

Apple Intelligence includes features like Clean Up, which lets you pick from glowing objects it has recognized to remove them from a photo. Credit: Samuel Axon

Ask a few random people about Apple Intelligence and you’ll probably get quite different responses.

One might be excited about the new features. Another could opine that no one asked for this and the company is throwing away its reputation with creatives and artists to chase a fad. Another still might tell you that regardless of the potential value, Apple is simply too late to the game to make a mark.

The release of Apple’s first Apple Intelligence-branded AI tools in iOS 18.1 last week makes all those perspectives understandable.

The first wave of features in Apple’s delayed release shows promise—and some of them may be genuinely useful, especially with further refinement. At the same time, Apple’s approach seems rushed, as if the company is cutting some corners to catch up where some perceive it has fallen behind.

That impatient, unusually undisciplined approach to the rollout could undermine the value proposition of AI tools for many users. Nonetheless, Apple’s strategy might just work out in the long run.

What’s included in “Apple Intelligence”

I’m basing those conclusions on about a week spent with both the public release of iOS 18.1 and the developer beta of iOS 18.2. Between them, the majority of features announced back in June under the “Apple Intelligence” banner are present.

Let’s start with a quick rundown of which Apple Intelligence features are in each release.

iOS 18.1 public release

  • Writing Tools
    • Proofreading
    • Rewriting in friendly, professional, or concise voices
    • Summaries in prose, key points, bullet point list, or table format
  • Text summaries
    • Summarize text from Mail messages
    • Summarize text from Safari pages
  • Notifications
  • Reduce Interruptions – Intelligent filtering of notifications to include only ones deemed critical
  • Type to Siri
  • More conversational Siri
  • Photos
    • Clean Up (remove an object or person from the image)
    • Generate Memories videos/slideshows from plain language text prompts
    • Natural language search

iOS 18.2 developer beta (as of November 5, 2024)

  • Image Playground – A prompt-based image generation app akin to something like Dall-E or Midjourney but with a limited range of stylistic possibilities, fewer features, and more guardrails
  • Genmoji – Generate original emoji from a prompt
  • Image Wand – Similar to Image Playground but simplified within the Notes app
  • ChatGPT integration in Siri
  • Visual Intelligence – iPhone 16 and iPhone 16 Pro users can use the new Camera Control button to do a variety of tasks based on what’s in the camera’s view, including translation, information about places, and more
  • Writing Tools – Expanded with support for prompt-based edits to text

iOS 18.1 is out right now for everybody. iOS 18.2 is scheduled for a public launch sometime in December.

iOS 18.2 will introduce both Visual Intelligence and the ability to chat with ChatGPT via Siri.

Credit: Samuel Axon

iOS 18.2 will introduce both Visual Intelligence and the ability to chat with ChatGPT via Siri. Credit: Samuel Axon

A staggered rollout

For several years, Apple has released most of its major new software features for, say, the iPhone in one big software update in the fall. That timeline has gotten fuzzier in recent years, but the rollout of Apple Intelligence has moved further from that tradition than we’ve ever seen before.

Apple announced iOS 18 at its developer conference in June, suggesting that most if not all of the Apple Intelligence features would launch in that singular update alongside the new iPhones.

Much of the marketing leading up to and surrounding the iPhone 16 launch focused on Apple Intelligence, but in actuality, the iPhone 16 had none of the features under that label when it launched. The first wave hit with iOS 18.1 last week, over a month after the first consumers started getting their hands on iPhone 16 hardware. And even now, these features are in “beta,” and there has been a wait list.

Many of the most exciting Apple Intelligence features still aren’t here, with some planned for iOS 18.2’s launch in December and a few others coming even later. There will likely be a wait list for some of those, too.

The wait list part makes sense—some of these features put demand on cloud servers, and it’s reasonable to stagger the rollout to sidestep potential launch problems.

The rest doesn’t make as much sense. Between the beta label and the staggered features, it seems like Apple is rushing to satisfy expectations about Apple Intelligence before quality and consistency have fallen into place.

Making AI a harder sell

In some cases, this strategy has led to things feeling half-baked. For example, Writing Tools is available system-wide, but it’s a different experience for first-party apps that work with the new Writing Tools API than third-party apps that don’t. The former lets you approve changes piece by piece, but the latter puts you in a take-it-or-leave-it situation with the whole text. The Writing Tools API is coming in iOS 18.2, maintaining that gap for a couple of months, even for third-party apps whose developers would normally want to be on the ball with this.

Further, iOS 18.2 will allow users to tweak Writing Tools rewrites by specifying what they want in a text prompt, but that’s missing in iOS 18.1. Why launch Writing Tools with features missing and user experience inconsistencies when you could just launch the whole suite in December?

That’s just one example, but there are many similar ones. I think there are a couple of possible explanations:

  • Apple is trying to satisfy anxious investors and commentators who believe the company is already way too late to the generative AI sector.
  • With the original intent to launch it all in the first iOS 18 release, significant resources were spent on Apple Intelligence-focused advertising and marketing around the iPhone 16 in September—and when unexpected problems developing the software features led to a delay for the software launch, it was too late to change the marketing message. Ultimately, the company’s leadership may feel the pressure to make good on that pitch to users as quickly after the iPhone 16 launch as possible, even if it’s piecemeal.

I’m not sure which it is, but in either case, I don’t believe it was the right play.

So many consumers have their defenses up about AI features already, in part because other companies like Microsoft or Google rushed theirs to market without really thinking things through (or caring, if they had) and also because more and more people are naturally suspicious of whatever is labeled the next great thing in Silicon Valley (remember NFTs?). Apple had an opportunity to set itself apart in consumers’ perceptions about AI, but at least right now, that opportunity has been squandered.

Now, I’m not an AI doubter. I think these features and others can be useful, and I already use similar ones every day. I also commend Apple for allowing users to control whether these AI features are enabled at all, which should make AI skeptics more comfortable.

Notification summaries condense all the notifications from a single app into one or two lines, like with this lengthy Discord conversation here. Results are hit or miss.

Credit: Samuel Axon

Notification summaries condense all the notifications from a single app into one or two lines, like with this lengthy Discord conversation here. Results are hit or miss. Credit: Samuel Axon

That said, releasing half-finished bits and pieces of Apple Intelligence doesn’t fit the company’s framing of it as a singular, branded product, and it doesn’t do a lot to handle objections from users who are already assuming AI tools will be nonsense.

There’s so much confusion about AI that it makes sense to let those who are skeptical move at their own pace, and it also makes sense to sell them on the idea with fully baked implementations.

Apple still has a more sensible approach than most

Despite all this, I like the philosophy behind how Apple has thought about implementing its AI tools, even if the rollout has been a mess. It’s fundamentally distinct from what we’re seeing from a company like Microsoft, which seems hell-bent on putting AI chatbots everywhere it can to see which real-world use cases emerge organically.

There is no true, ChatGPT-like LLM chatbot in iOS 18.1. Technically, there’s one in iOS 18.2, but only because you can tell Siri to refer you to ChatGPT on a case-by-case basis.

Instead, Apple has introduced specific generative AI features peppered throughout the operating system meant to explicitly solve narrow user problems. Sure, they’re all built on models that have resemblances to the ones that power Claude or Midjourney, but they’re not built around this idea that you start up a chat dialogue with an LLM or an image generator and it’s up to you to find a way to make it useful for you.

The practical application of most of these features is clear, provided they end up working well (more on that shortly). As a professional writer, it’s easy for me to dismiss Writing Tools as unnecessary—but obviously, not everyone is a professional writer, or even a decent one. For example, I’ve long held that one of the most positive applications of large language models is their ability to let non-native speakers clean up their writing to make it meet native speakers’ standards. In theory, Apple’s Writing Tools can do that.

Apple Intelligence features augment or add additional flexibility or power to existing use cases across the OS, like this new way to generate photo memory movies via text prompt.

Credit: Samuel Axon

Apple Intelligence features augment or add additional flexibility or power to existing use cases across the OS, like this new way to generate photo memory movies via text prompt. Credit: Samuel Axon

I have no doubt that Genmoji will be popular—who doesn’t love a bit of fun in group texts with friends? And many months before iOS 18.1, I was already dropping senselessly gargantuan corporate email threads into ChatGPT and asking for quick summaries.

Apple is approaching AI in a user-centric way that stands in stark contrast to almost every other major player rolling out AI tools. Generative AI is an evolution from machine learning, which is something Apple has been using for everything from iPad screen palm rejection to autocorrect for a while now—to great effect, as we discussed in my interview with Apple AI chief John Giannandrea a few years ago. Apple just never wrapped it in a bow and called it AI until now.

But there was no good reason to rush these features out or to even brand them as “Apple Intelligence” and make a fuss about it. They’re natural extensions of what Apple was already doing. Since they’ve been rushed out the door with a spotlight shining on them, Apple’s AI ambitions have a rockier road ahead than the company might have hoped.

It could take a year or two for this all to come together

Using iOS 18.1, it’s clear that Apple’s large language models are not as effective or reliable as Claude or ChatGPT. It takes time to train models like these, and it looks like Apple started late.

Based on my hours spent with both Apple Intelligence and more established tools from cutting-edge AI companies, I feel the other models crossed a usefulness and reliability threshold a year or so ago. When ChatGPT first launched, it was more of a curiosity than a powerful tool. Now it’s a powerful tool, but that’s a relatively recent development.

In my time with Writing Tools and Notification Summaries in particular, Apple’s models subjectively appear to be around where ChatGPT or Claude were 18 months ago. Notification Summaries almost always miss crucial context in my experience. Writing Tools introduce errors where none existed before.

A writing suggestion shows an egregious grammatical error

It’s not hard to spot the huge error that Writing Tools introduced here. This happens all the time when I use it.

Credit: Samuel Axon

It’s not hard to spot the huge error that Writing Tools introduced here. This happens all the time when I use it. Credit: Samuel Axon

More mature models do these things, too, but at a much lower frequency. Unfortunately, Apple Intelligence isn’t far enough along to be broadly useful.

That said, I’m excited to see where Apple Intelligence will be in 24 months. I think the company is on the right track by using AI to target specific user needs rather than just putting a chatbot out there and letting people figure it out. It’s a much better approach than what we see with Microsoft’s Copilot. If Apple’s models cross that previously mentioned threshold of utility—and it’s only a matter of time before they do—the future of AI tools on Apple platforms could be great.

It’s just a shame that Apple didn’t seem to have the confidence to ignore the zeitgeisty commentators and roll out these features when they’re complete and ready, with messaging focusing on user problems instead of “hey, we’re taking AI seriously too.”

Most users don’t care if you’re taking AI seriously, but they do care if the tools you introduce can make their day-to-day lives better. I think they can—it will just take some patience. Users can be patient, but can Apple? It seems not.

Even so, there’s a real possibility that these early pains will be forgotten before long.

Photo of Samuel Axon

Samuel Axon is a senior editor at Ars Technica. He covers Apple, software development, gaming, AI, entertainment, and mixed reality. He has been writing about gaming and technology for nearly two decades at Engadget, PC World, Mashable, Vice, Polygon, Wired, and others. He previously ran a marketing and PR agency in the gaming industry, led editorial for the TV network CBS, and worked on social media marketing strategy for Samsung Mobile at the creative agency SPCSHP. He also is an independent software and game developer for iOS, Windows, and other platforms, and he is a graduate of DePaul University, where he studied interactive media and software development.

Apple botched the Apple Intelligence launch, but its long-term strategy is sound Read More »

new-smb-friendly-subscription-tier-may-be-too-late-to-stop-vmware-migrations

New SMB-friendly subscription tier may be too late to stop VMware migrations

Biz & IT, Broadcom, vmware / /

Broadcom has a new subscription tier for VMware virtualization software that may appease some disgruntled VMware customers, especially small to medium-sized businesses. The new VMware vSphere Enterprise Plus subscription tier creates a more digestible bundle that’s more appropriate for smaller customers. But it may be too late to convince some SMBs not to abandon VMware.

Soon after Broadcom bought VMware, it stopped the sale of VMware perpetual licenses and started requiring subscriptions. Broadcom also bundled VMware’s products into a smaller number of SKUs, resulting in higher costs and frustration for customers that felt like they were being forced to pay for products that they didn’t want. All that, combined with Broadcom ditching some smaller VMware channel partners (and reportedly taking the biggest clients direct), have raised doubts that Broadcom’s VMware would be a good fit for smaller customers.

“The challenge with much of the VMware by Broadcom changes to date and before the announcement [of the vSphere Enterprise Plus subscription tier] is that it also forced many organizations to a much higher offering and much more components to a stack that they were previously uninterested in deploying,” Rick Vanover, Veeam’s product strategy VP, told Ars.

On October 31, Broadcom announced the vSphere Enterprise Plus subscription tier. From smallest to largest, the available tiers are vSphere Standard, vSphere Enterprise Plus, vSphere Foundation, and the flagship VMware Cloud Foundation. The introduction of vSphere Enterprise Plus means that customers who only want vSphere virtualization can now pick from two bundles instead of one.

“[T]o round out the portfolio, for customers who are focused on compute virtualization, we will now have two options, VMware vSphere Enterprise Plus and VMware vSphere Standard,” Prashanth Shenoy, vice president of product marketing in the VMware Cloud Foundation division of Broadcom, explained in a blog post.

New SMB-friendly subscription tier may be too late to stop VMware migrations Read More »

meta-beats-suit-over-tool-that-lets-facebook-users-unfollow-everything

Meta beats suit over tool that lets Facebook users unfollow everything

facebook, Meta, middleware, Policy, Section 230, third-party, unfollow everything / /

Meta has defeated a lawsuit—for now—that attempted to invoke Section 230 protections for a third-party tool that would have made it easy for Facebook users to toggle on and off their news feeds as they pleased.

The lawsuit was filed by Ethan Zuckerman, a professor at University of Massachusetts Amherst. He feared that Meta might sue to block his tool, Unfollow Everything 2.0, because Meta threatened to sue to block the original tool when it was released by another developer. In May, Zuckerman told Ars that he was “suing Facebook to make it better” and planned to use Section 230’s shield to do it.

Zuckerman’s novel legal theory argued that Congress always intended for Section 230 to protect third-party tools designed to empower users to take control over potentially toxic online environments. In his complaint, Zuckerman tried to convince a US district court in California that:

Section 230(c)(2)(B) immunizes from legal liability “a provider of software or enabling tools that filter, screen, allow, or disallow content that the provider or user considers obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.” Through this provision, Congress intended to promote the development of filtering tools that enable users to curate their online experiences and avoid content they would rather not see.

Digital rights advocates, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, supported Zuckerman’s case, urging that the court protect middleware. But on Thursday, Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granted Meta’s motion to dismiss at a hearing.

Corley has not yet posted her order on the motion to dismiss, but Zuckerman’s lawyers at the Knight Institute confirmed to Ars that their Section 230 argument did not factor into her decision. In a statement, lawyers said that Corley left the door open on the Section 230 claims, and EFF senior staff attorney Sophia Cope, who was at the hearing, told Ars Corley agreed that on “the merits the case raises important issues.”

Meta beats suit over tool that lets Facebook users unfollow everything Read More »