Paul Patrick – Page 6

ICE’s forced face scans to verify citizens is unconstitutional, lawmakers say

biometric data, customs and border protection, face scans, facial recognition, ice, Online Privacy, Policy / Paul Patrick / October 29, 2025

“A 2024 test by the National Institute of Standards and Technology found that facial recognition tools are less accurate when images are low quality, blurry, obscured, or taken from the side or in poor light—exactly the kind of images an ICE agent would likely capture when using a smartphone in the field,” their letter said.

If ICE’s use continues to expand, mistakes “will almost certainly proliferate,” senators said, and “even if ICE’s facial recognition tools were perfectly accurate, these technologies would still pose serious threats to individual privacy and free speech.”

Matthew Guariglia, senior policy analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told 404 Media that ICE’s growing use of facial recognition confirms that “we should have banned government use of face recognition when we had the chance because it is dangerous, invasive, and an inherent threat to civil liberties.” It also suggests that “any remaining pretense that ICE is harassing and surveilling people in any kind of ‘precise’ way should be left in the dust,” Guariglia said.

ICE scans faces, even if shown an ID

In their letter to ICE acting director Todd Lyons, senators sent a long list of questions to learn more about “ICE’s expanded use of biometric technology systems,” which senators suggested risked having “a sweeping and lasting impact on the public’s civil rights and liberties.” They demanded to know when ICE started using face scans in domestic deployments, as previously the technology was only known to be used at the border, and what testing was done to ensure apps like Mobile Fortify are accurate and unbiased.

Perhaps most relevant to 404 Media’s recent report, senators asked, “Does ICE have any policies, practices, or procedures around the use of the Mobile Fortify app to identify US citizens?” Lyons was supposed to respond by October 2, but Ars was not able to immediately confirm whether that deadline was met.

DHS declined “to confirm or deny law enforcement capabilities or methods” in response to 404 Media’s report, while CBP confirmed that Mobile Fortify is still being used by ICE, along with “a variety of technological capabilities” that supposedly “enhance the effectiveness of agents on the ground.”

ICE’s forced face scans to verify citizens is unconstitutional, lawmakers say Read More »

TV-focused YouTube update brings AI upscaling, shopping QR codes

Google, streaming video, Tech, youtube / Paul Patrick / October 29, 2025

YouTube has been streaming for 20 years, but it was only in the last couple that it came to dominate TV streaming. Google’s video platform attracts more TV viewers than Netflix, Disney+, and all the other apps, and Google is looking to further beef up its big-screen appeal with a new raft of features, including shopping, immersive channel surfing, and an official version of the AI upscaling that had creators miffed a few months back.

According to Google, YouTube’s growth has translated into higher payouts. The number of channels earning more than $100,000 annually is up 45 percent in 2025 versus 2024. YouTube is now giving creators some tools to boost their appeal (and hopefully their income) on TV screens. Those elaborate video thumbnails featuring surprised, angry, smiley hosts are about to get even prettier with the new 50MB file size limit. That’s up from a measly 2MB.

Video upscaling is also coming to YouTube, and creators will be opted in automatically. To start, YouTube will be upscaling lower-quality videos to 1080p. In the near future, Google plans to support “super resolution” up to 4K.

The site stresses that it’s not modifying original files—creators will have access to both the original and upscaled files, and they can opt out of upscaling. In addition, super resolution videos will be clearly labeled on the user side, allowing viewers to select the original upload if they prefer. The lack of transparency was a sticking point for creators, some of whom complained about the sudden artificial look of their videos during YouTube’s testing earlier this year.

TV-focused YouTube update brings AI upscaling, shopping QR codes Read More »

Samsung makes ads on $3,499 smart fridges official with upcoming software update

ads, samsung, Smart Home, Tech / Paul Patrick / October 28, 2025

After kicking off an unpopular pilot test last month, Samsung made the practice of having its expensive smart fridges display ads official this week.

The ads will be shown on Samsung’s 2024 Family Hub smart fridges. As of this writing, Samsung’s Family Hub fridges have MSRPs ranging from $1,899 to $3,499. The ads will arrive through a software update that Samsung will start issuing this month and display on the fridge’s integrated 21.5- or 32-inch (depending on the model) screen. The ads will show when the fridges are idle and display what Samsung calls Cover Screens.

As part of the Family Hub software update, we are piloting a new widget for select Cover Screens themes of Family Hub refrigerators. The widget will display useful day-to-day information such as news, calendar and weather forecasts, along with curated advertisements.

Samsung also said that its fridges will only show contextualized ads, instead of personalized ads, which rely on collecting data on users.

The Verge reported that the widget will appear as a rectangular box at the bottom of the screens. The box will change what it displays “every 10 seconds,” the publication said.

The software update will also introduce “a Daily Board theme that offers a new way to see useful information at a glance,” Samsung said. The Verge reported that this feature will also include ads, something that Samsung’s announcement neglected to state. The Daily Board theme will show five tiles with information such as appointments and the weather, and one with ads.

Samsung makes ads on $3,499 smart fridges official with upcoming software update Read More »

Whale and dolphin migrations are being disrupted by climate change

dolphins, marine environment, marine life, Migration Assistant, Science, syndication, whales / Paul Patrick / October 25, 2025

Marine mammals are being forced into new and more dangerous waters, scientists warn.

Credit: Martin van Aswegen/NOAA

For millennia, some of the world’s largest filter-feeding whales, including humpbacks, fin whales, and blue whales, have undertaken some of the longest migrations on earth to travel between their warm breeding grounds in the tropics to nutrient-rich feeding destinations in the poles each year.

“Nature has finely tuned these journeys, guided by memory and environmental cues that tell whales when to move and where to go,” said Trisha Atwood, an ecologist and associate professor at Utah State University’s Quinney College of Agriculture and Natural Resources. But, she said, climate change is “scrambling these signals,” forcing the marine mammals to veer off course. And they’re not alone.

Earlier this year, Atwood joined more than 70 other scientists to discuss the global impacts of climate change on migratory species in a workshop convened by the United Nations Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals. The organization monitors and protects more than 1,000 species that cross borders in search of food, mates, and favorable conditions to nurture their offspring.

More than 20 percent of these species are on the brink of extinction. It was the first time the convention had gathered for such a purpose, and their findings, published this month in a report, were alarming.

“Almost no migratory species is untouched by climate change,” Atwood said in an email to Inside Climate News.

From whales and dolphins, to arctic shorebirds and elephants, all are affected by rising temperatures, extreme weather, and shifting ecosystems, which are disrupting migratory routes and reshaping critical habitats across the planet.

Asian elephants, for instance, are being driven to higher ground and closer to human settlements as they search for food and water amidst intensifying droughts, fueling more frequent human-elephant conflicts, the report found. Shorebirds are reaching their Arctic breeding grounds out of sync with the insect blooms their chicks depend on to survive.

The seagrass meadows that migrating sea turtles and dugongs feed on are disappearing due to warmer waters, cyclones, and sea level rise, according to the report. To date, around 30 percent of the world’s known seagrass beds have been lost, threatening not only the animals that depend on them, but also humans. These vital ecosystems store around 20 percent of the world’s oceanic carbon, in addition to supporting fisheries and protecting coastlines.

Together, these examples reveal how climate change is tipping the delicate balance migratory species have long relied on to survive.

“Climate change is disrupting this balance by altering when and where resources appear, how abundant they are, the environmental conditions species must endure, and the other organisms they interact with, reshaping entire networks of predators and competitors,” Atwood said.

Especially among marine life.

On the United States’ West Coast, for instance, Atwood said, warming waters are pushing juvenile great white sharks out of their traditional southern habitats. This shift has led to a sharp rise in sea otter deaths in Monterey Bay, California, where they are increasingly getting bitten by the sharks.

Whales and dolphins are particularly vulnerable species as rising temperatures threaten both their prey and their habitat, according to the report.

Heatwaves in the Mediterranean are projected to reduce suitable habitat for endangered fin whales by up to 70 percent by mid-century as their prey dwindles or moves due to rising temperatures. In some places, such as the Northern Adriatic Sea, hotter temperatures may eventually prove intolerable for bottlenose dolphins. “Rising water temperatures could exceed the species’ physiological tolerance,” the report says, which also acknowledges that this is already happening in other parts of the world, such as the Amazon River.

In 2023, more than 200 river dolphins, which migrate seasonally between tributaries and lagoons in the Amazon, died due to record-high temperatures, along with much of their prey. In some areas, their shallow aquatic habitats exceeded 100 degrees Fahrenheit. “The river systems were unusually empty and dry and the animals got isolated,” said Mark Simmonds, scientific councilor for marine pollution for the U.N. convention, who led some of the discussions around climate change impacts on cetaceans at the workshop in February. “They lost the water that they would have been living in.”

Loss of prey in traditional habitats is of particular concern for migrating marine mammals that are forced to follow their prey into new, and sometimes more perilous, waters.

This is particularly evident in the case of critically endangered North Atlantic Right whales, which the report says are especially prone to ship strikes and entanglement in fishing gear as they pursue their prey—tiny crustaceans called copepods—which are moving toward cooler waters. There are fewer than 400 of the whales left.

The North Pacific humpback whales that feed off the coast of California are also at risk.

According to the report, these whales have experienced significant changes in their migratory routes due to climate-driven shifts, which has resulted in many getting entangled in dungeness crab fishing gear.

While it is not completely clear what is driving these shifts, Ari Friedlaender, an ecologist and professor at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who monitors whale migrations and did not attend the convention’s workshop, said it could be that changing ocean conditions may be pushing the whales’ prey closer to shore.

“The timing of when these animals migrate now puts them in overlap with that fishery, whereas [previously] they would have migrated through that same area, but at a different time of year,” he said.

In some places, such as the Southern Ocean, Freidlaender said he is especially concerned about the overall availability of prey needed to sustain the whales that feed there. “The food is limited in Antarctica.”

Ideally, migrating whales arrive at their polar feeding grounds right around the same time that krill, their preferred prey, are swarming in massive aggregations in response to phytoplankton blooms, which the little creatures feed on. This synchronicity allows the whales to gorge for several months while building the fat reserves they need to survive long stretches of time that they will go without food as they migrate back to their breeding grounds to mate and calve. But warmer temperatures and melting sea ice are disrupting these cycles.

Krill blooms in polar regions are weakening, peaking earlier, or failing to materialize altogether, Atwood said.“Increasingly, whales reach their feeding grounds to find krill stocks depleted.” This, in turn, forces the whales to travel even greater distances in search of sustenance. But it doesn’t always mean they find it.

“There may not even be an opportunity to go to a place where there is more food,” said Friedlaender.

Krill thrive in icy environments. They graze on algae growing on the underbelly of sea ice, which also provides a nursery-like environment for krill larvae to grow safely without being preyed upon. But as this sea ice disappears, some krill are leaving their traditional habitats and moving towards colder waters. Others are vanishing altogether. In some years, where there’s less sea ice, Friedlaender said, “There’s just not enough food around.”

As a result, it’s becoming more common to see some of the world’s largest whales, including humpbacks, showing up in tropical breeding grounds “looking very skinny,” Simmonds said.

This can have significant repercussions on their health, Friedlaender said, including their ability to reproduce. “It could have those sort of cascading impacts of really changing the dynamics of how that population grows.”

To conserve whales and other migratory marine life, Friedlaender said, static protections such as implementing marine protected areas are not enough. Instead, he said, dynamic management strategies must be created and implemented that help protect the animals as they move, such as real-time monitoring of whale movements, shifting shipping lanes or requiring vessel speed limits when whales are present, as well as stricter fishing regulations in key habitats. Ongoing research into how climate change is reshaping animal migrations around the world is also critical, Atwood said, not only to safeguard the species themselves but to protect the ecosystems they help sustain.

“Because these animals are so uniquely adapted to move across huge swaths of land and oceans, oblivious to political borders, the solutions must be just as dynamic, far-reaching, and borderless,” she said. “Effective responses therefore require an integrated understanding of projected climatic and habitat changes, species’ ecologies and behavioral responses, and mechanisms for fostering international cooperation.”

This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, non-partisan news organization that covers climate, energy, and the environment. Sign up for their newsletter here.

Whale and dolphin migrations are being disrupted by climate change Read More »

This browser claims “perfect privacies protection,” but it acts like malware

malware, Security, syndicated, Universe Browser, web browsers / Paul Patrick / October 25, 2025

Researchers note links to Asia’s booming cybercrime and illegal gambling networks.

This looks like a 100 percent above-board product, right? Right? Credit: Ars Technica

The Universe Browser makes some big promises to its potential users. Its online advertisements claim it’s the “fastest browser,” that people using it will “avoid privacy leaks” and that the software will help “keep you away from danger.” However, everything likely isn’t as it seems.

The browser, which is linked to Chinese online gambling websites and is thought to have been downloaded millions of times, actually routes all Internet traffic through servers in China and “covertly installs several programs that run silently in the background,” according to new findings from network security company Infoblox. The researchers say the “hidden” elements include features similar to malware—including “key logging, surreptitious connections,” and changing a device’s network connections.

Perhaps most significantly, the Infoblox researchers who collaborated with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) on the work, found links between the browser’s operation and Southeast Asia’s sprawling, multibillion-dollar cybercrime ecosystem, which has connections to money-laundering, illegal online gambling, human trafficking, and scam operations that use forced labor. The browser itself, the researchers says, is directly linked to a network around major online gambling company BBIN, which the researchers have labeled a threat group they call Vault Viper.

The researchers say the discovery of the browser—plus its suspicious and risky behavior—indicates that criminals in the region are becoming increasingly sophisticated. “These criminal groups, particularly Chinese organized crimes syndicates, are increasingly diversifying and evolving into cyber enabled fraud, pig butchering, impersonation, scams, that whole ecosystem,” says John Wojcik, a senior threat researcher at Infoblox, who also worked on the project when he was a staff member at the UNODC.

“They’re going to continue to double down, reinvest profits, develop new capabilities,” Wojcik says. “The threat is ultimately becoming more serious and concerning, and this is one example of where we see that.”

Under the hood

The Universe Browser was first spotted—and mentioned by name—by Infoblox and UNODC at the start of this year when they began unpacking the digital systems around an online casino operation based in Cambodia, which was previously raided by law enforcement officials. Infoblox, which specializes in domain name system (DNS) management and security, detected a unique DNS fingerprint from those systems that they linked to Vault Viper, making it possible for the researchers to trace and map websites and infrastructure linked to the group.

Tens of thousands of web domains, plus various command-and-control infrastructure and registered companies, are linked to Vault Viper activity, Infoblox researchers say in a report shared with WIRED. They also say they examined hundreds of pages of corporate documents, legal records, and court filings with links to BBIN or other subsidiaries. Time and time again, they came across the Universe Browser online.

“We haven’t seen the Universe Browser advertised outside of the domains Vault Viper controls,” says Maël Le Touz, a threat researcher at Infoblox. The Infoblox report says the browser was “specifically” designed to help people in Asia—where online gambling is largely illegal—bypass restrictions. “Each of the casino websites they operate seem to contain a link and advertisement to it,” Le Touz says.

The Universe Browser itself is mostly offered for direct download from these casino websites—often being linked at the bottom of the websites, next to the logo of BBIN. There are desktop versions available for Windows, as well as an app version in Apple’s App Store. And while it is not in Google’s Play Store, there are Android APK files that allow the app to be directly installed on Android phones. The researchers say multiple parts of the Universe Browser and the code for its apps reference BBIN, and other technical details also reference the company.

The researchers reverse-engineered the Windows version of the browser. They say that while they have been unable to “verify malicious intent,” elements of the browser that they uncovered include many features that are similar to those found malware and tries to evade detection by antivirus tools. When the browser is launched, it “immediately” checks for the user’s location, language, and whether it is running in a virtual machine. The app also installs two browser extensions: one of which can allow screenshots to be uploaded to domains linked to the browser.

While online gambling in China is largely illegal, the country also runs some of the world’s strictest online censorship operations and has taken action against illegal gambling rings. While the browser may most often be being used by those trying to take part in illegal gambling, it also puts their data at risk, the researchers say. “In the hands of a malicious actor—a Triad for example—this browser would serve as the perfect tool to identify wealthy players and obtain access to their machine,” the Infoblox report says.

Beyond connecting to China, running key logging, and other programs that run in the background, Infoblox’s report also says multiple functions have been disabled. “The right click, settings access and developer tools, for instance, have all been removed, while the browser itself is run with several flags disabling major security features including sandboxing, and the removal of legacy SSL protocols, greatly increasing risk when compared with typical mainstream browsers,” the company’s report says. (SSL, also known as Secure Sockets Layer, is a historic type of web encryption that protected some data transfers.)

It is unclear whether these same suspicious behaviors are present in the iOS and Android versions of the app. A Google spokesperson says the company is looking into the app and confirmed it was not available through its Google Play store. Apple did not respond to requests for comment about the app.

Connect the dots

The web infrastructure around the Universe Browser led the researchers back to BBIN, a company that has existed since 1999. While it was originally founded in Taiwan, the company now has a large base in the Philippines.

BBIN, which also goes by the name Baoying Group and has multiple subsidies, describes itself as a “leading” supplier of iGaming software in Asia. A UNODC report from April, which links BBIN to the Universe Browser but does not formally name the company as Vault Viper, says the firm runs several hotels and casinos in Southeast Asia as well as providing “one of the largest and most successful” iGaming platforms in the region. Over the last decade, BBIN has sponsored or partnered with multiple major European soccer teams, such as Spain’s Atlético de Madrid, Germany’s Borussia Dortmund, and Dutch team AFC Ajax.

In recent years, multiple football clubs in England’s Premier League have faced scrutiny over sponsorship by Asian gambling companies—including by TGP Europe, which was owned by Alvin Chau, the chairman and founder of SunCity Group, who was sentenced in January 2023 to 18 years in prison after being found guilty of running illegal gambling operations. TGP Europe left the UK earlier this year after being fined by the country’s gambling regulator. Atlético Madrid, Borussia Dortmund, and AFC Ajax did not respond to WIRED requests for comment.

The iGaming industry develops online gambling software, such as virtual poker or other online casino games, that can easily be played on the web or on phones. “BBIN Baoying is officially an online casino game developer or ‘white label’ online casino platform, meaning it outsources its online gambling technology to other sites,” says Lindsey Kennedy, research director at The EyeWitness Project, which investigates corruption and organized crime. “The only languages it offers are Korean, Japanese, and Chinese, which isn’t a great sign as online gambling is either banned or heavily restricted in all three countries.”

“Baoying and BBIN are what I would call a multi-billion dollar gray-area international conglomerate with deep criminal connections, backstopping and providing services to online gambling businesses, scams and cybercrime actors,” alleges Jeremy Douglas, chief of staff at the UNODC and its former regional representative for Southeast Asia. “Aside from what has been estimated at a two-thirds ownership by Alvin Chau of SunCity—arguably the biggest money launderer in the history of Asia—law enforcement partners have documented direct connections with Triad groups including the Bamboo Union, Four Seas, Tian Dao,” Douglas says of BBIN. (When Chau was sentenced in January 2023, court documents pointed to him allegedly owning a 66.67 percent share of Baoying).

BBIN did not respond to multiple requests for comment from WIRED. The firm’s primary contact email address it lists on its website bounced back, while questions sent to another email address and online contact forms, plus attempts to contact two alleged staff members on LinkedIn were not answered by the time of publication. A company Telegram account pointed WIRED to one of the contact forms that did not provide any answers.

The Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Commission (PAOCC) in the Philippines, which tackles organized and international crimes, did not respond to a request for comment from WIRED about BBIN.

Over the last decade, online crime in Southeast Asia has massively surged, driven partially by illegal online gambling and also a series of scam compoundsthat have been set up across Myanmar, Laos, and Cambodia. Hundreds of thousands of people from more than 60 countries have been tricked into working in these compounds, where they operate scams day and night, stealing billions of dollars from people around the world.

“Scam parks and compounds across the region generally host both online gambling and online scam operations, and the methodology used to lure individuals into opening online gambling accounts parallels that associated with pig-butchering scams,” says Jason Tower, a senior expert at the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime.

Last week, US law enforcement seized $15 billion in Bitcoin from one giant Cambodian organization, which publicly dealt in real estate but allegedly ran scam facilities in “secret.” One of the sanctioned entities, the Jin Bei Group in Cambodia, which US authorities accused of operating a series of scam compounds, also shows links to BBIN’s technology, Tower says. “There are multiple Telegram groups and casino websites indicating that BBIN partners with multiple entities inside the Jinbei casino,” Tower says, adding that one group on Telegram “posts daily advertisements indicating an official partnership between Jinbei and BBIN.”

Over recent years, multiple government press releases and news reports from countries including China and Taiwan, have alleged how BBIN’s technology has been used within illegal gambling operations and linked to cybercrime. “There are hundreds of Telegram posts aggressively advertising various illegal Chinese facing gambling sites that say they either are, or are built on, BBIN/Baoying technology, many of them by individuals claiming to operate out of scam and illegal gambling compounds, or as part of the highly illegal, trafficking-driven industry in Cambodia and Northern Myanmar,” says Kennedy from The EyeWitness Project.

While the Universe Browser has most likely been downloaded by those accessing Chinese-language gambling websites, researchers say that its development indicates how pivotal and lucrative illegal online gambling operations are and exposing their links to scamming efforts that operate across the world. “As these operations continue to scale and diversify, they are marked by growing technical expertise, professionalization, operational resilience, and the ability to function under the radar with very limited scrutiny and oversight,” Infoblox’s report concludes.

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

Wired.com is your essential daily guide to what’s next, delivering the most original and complete take you’ll find anywhere on innovation’s impact on technology, science, business and culture.

This browser claims “perfect privacies protection,” but it acts like malware Read More »

New Statement Calls For Not Building Superintelligence For Now

Statement / Paul Patrick / October 25, 2025

Building superintelligence poses large existential risks. Also known as: If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies. Where ‘it’ is superintelligence, and ‘dies’ is that probably everyone on the planet literally dies.

We should not build superintelligence until such time as that changes, and the risk of everyone dying as a result, as well as the risk of losing control over the future as a result, is very low. Not zero, but far lower than it is now or will be soon.

Thus, the Statement on Superintelligence from FLI, which I have signed.

Context: Innovative AI tools may bring unprecedented health and prosperity. However, alongside tools, many leading AI companies have the stated goal of building superintelligence in the coming decade that can significantly outperform all humans on essentially all cognitive tasks. This has raised concerns, ranging from human economic obsolescence and disempowerment, losses of freedom, civil liberties, dignity, and control, to national security risks and even potential human extinction. The succinct statement below aims to create common knowledge of the growing number of experts and public figures who oppose a rush to superintelligence.

Statement:

We call for a prohibition on the development of superintelligence, not lifted before there is

broad scientific consensus that it will be done safely and controllably, and

strong public buy-in.

Their polling says there is 64% agreement on this, versus 5% supporting the status quo.

In March of 2023 FLI issued an actual pause letter, calling for an immediate pause for at least 6 months in the training of systems more powerful than GPT-4, which was signed among others by Elon Musk.

This letter was absolutely, 100% a call for a widespread regime of prior restraint on development of further frontier models, and to importantly ‘slow down’ and to ‘pause’ development in the name of safety.

At the time, I said it was a deeply flawed letter and I declined to sign it, but my quick reaction was to be happy that the letter existed. This was a mistake. I was wrong.

The pause letter not only weakened the impact of the superior CAIS letter, it has now for years been used as a club with which to browbeat or mock anyone who would suggest that future sufficiently advanced AI systems might endanger us, or that we might want to do something about that. To claim that any such person must have wanted such a pause at that time, or would want to pause now, which is usually not the case.

The second statement was the CAIS letter in May 2023, which was in its entirety:

“Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.”

This was a very good sentence. I was happy to sign, as were some heavy hitters, including Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, Demis Hassabis and many others.

This was very obviously not a pause, or a call for any particular law or regulation or action. It was a statement of principles and the creation of common knowledge.

Given how much worse many people have gotten on AI risk since then, it would be an interesting exercise to ask those same people to reaffirm the statement.

The new statement is in between the previous two letters.

It is more prescriptive than simply stating a priority.

It is however not a call to ‘pause’ at this time, or to stop building ordinary AIs, or to stop trying to use AI for a wide variety of purposes.

It is narrowly requesting that, if you are building something that might plausibly be a superintelligence, under anything like present conditions, you should instead not do that. We should not allow you to do that. Not until you make a strong case for why this is a wise or not insane thing to do.

This is something that those who are most vocally speaking out against the statement strongly believe is not going to happen within the next few years, so for the next few years any reasonable implementation would not pause or substantially impact AI development.

I interpret the statement as saying, roughly: if a given action has a substantial chance of being the proximate cause of superintelligence coming into being, then that’s not okay, we shouldn’t let you do that, not under anything like present conditions.

I think it is important that we create common knowledge of this, which we very clearly do not yet have. This does not have to involve asking for a concrete short-term particular policy or other intervention.

As of writing this there are 32,214 signatories.

The front page lists before the first break: Yoshua Bengio, Geoffrey Hinton, Stuart Russell, Steve Wozniak, Sir Richard Branson, Steve Bannon, Glenn Beck, Susan Rice, Mike Mullen and Joe Crowley.

Here are some comments by signers:

Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA-8): We won’t realize AI’s promising potential to improve human life, health, and prosperity if we don’t account for the risks.

Developers and policymakers must consider the potential danger of artificial superintelligence raised by these leading thinkers.

Nate Sores explains his support of the agreement, he would have written a different statement but wants to avoid the narcissism of small differences, as do I.

Tristan Harris: I signed this statement against artificial superintelligence along with hundreds of other prominent NatSec leaders, AI scientists, bipartisan political voices, tech founders and more. An important global consensus is emerging.

I hope that both the US and China’s leadership are listening. Neither side “wins” if they build something vastly smarter than themselves that they demonstrably cannot control.

And if you think coordination btwn US and China is impossible – consider that President Xi personally requested to add an agreement to his last meeting with President Biden that no AI be used in the US and China’s nuclear command and control systems.

When existential stakes are mutually recognized, agreement is possible.

Jeffrey Ladish: Most leading AI researchers agree superintelligence is possible. Many AI companies are explicitly aiming for it.

Developing it under intense competitive pressures, with anything like our current level of understanding, would be insane.

The letter defines superintelligence as AI that can “significantly outperform all humans on essentially all cognitive tasks” We’re talking about AIs that aren’t limited to math and coding, but can out think humans in all strategic domains: persuasion, hacking, R&D, politics… [continues]

Dean Ball pushed back on the statement, calling it counterproductive and silly. He points out that any operationalization of such a policy ‘would not feel nice to sign.’ And he points out that without some sort of global coordination to prevent building unsafe superintelligence, we would as soon after it becomes technically possible to do so build superintelligence, and look at how bad it would be if there was global coordination stopping them from doing that.

Sriram Krishnan echoes and endorses Dean’s take, calling this a ‘Stop AI’ letter, equating stopping all AI with not building superintelligence, despite Sriram having also said that he does not believe AGI let alone ASI is going to happen any time soon.

Okay, so should then, when faced with this choice, build a superintelligence shortly after it becomes possible to build one? That does not feel like a nice policy to sign.

As I understand the position taken by Sriram and Dean, they don’t offer a meaningful third option. If you intend to stop the development of superintelligence from happening as rapidly as possible, you must end up with a ‘global organization with essentially unchecked power,’ and that’s worse. Those are, they tell us, our only choices, and the only thing you could be asking for if you express the desire for superintelligence not to be built at the first opportunity.

I don’t think those are the only choices, and I certainly don’t think the way to find a third option is to tell us we can’t create common knowledge of opposition to door number one without endorsing door number two. But also don’t understand why, if the other option is not cake, such people then choose death.

Scott Alexander then responded, defending the idea of vague value statements of intent without operationalized methods of implementation, to create common knowledge that people care, after which you can come up with specific plans. He then challenges Dean’s assumptions about what form that implementation would take, but also asks why Dean’s implementation would be worse than the null action.

Dean Ball: The analogy to slavery abolition makes sense, I suppose, and truthfully if this had just said “we shouldn’t do this ever” I would have remained silent. It is the “until proven safe” issue that concerns me. I don’t understand how existing research could really proceed, in practice, including much of what you have described. Indeed, what you described sounds like an entirely different policy outcome than what I think that statement suggests.

Daniel Kokotajlo: I’m surprised to hear that you would have remained silent if it said “We shouldn’t do this ever.” I imagine that the people who wrote the statement were thinking the “until proven safe” bit would be a sort of conciliatory/compromise/nuance clause that would make it more appealing to people like you. I guess they were wrong.

I agree with Daniel that I would expect the qualification would be seen by most people as a conciliatory/compromise/nuance clause. I also suspect that Dean’s model of himself here is incorrect, although his statement would have been different.

Daniel Kokotajlo: I remember at OpenAI hearing things like “We need to sell the public on AGI, otherwise they’ll be angry and not let us build it.”

I think this statement is basically common sense, so I signed it. Ofc it is not an actual detailed policy proposal. Much work remains to be done.

Exactly. This is creation of common knowledge around common sense thinking, not a request for a particular detailed policy.

Simeon pushes back that we ban technologies deemed unsafe without centralized power, and that yes you can prove safety before building, that Dean’s presumed implementation is very far from the centralization-safety Pareto frontier. I don’t actually think you can ever ‘prove’ safety of a superintelligence, what you do (like for most other things) is mitigate risk to acceptable levels since there are big costs to not building it.

Max Tegmark respectfully pushes back that we need to be able to call for systematic rules or changes without being able to fully define their implementation, using the example of child labor, where people rightfully said ‘we should ban child labor’ without first defining ‘child’ or ‘labor’ (or, I would add in this context, defining ‘ban’).

Dean respectfully notes two things. First, that implementation of child labor restrictions is far easier, which is true, although I’m not convinced it is relevant. The principles remain the same, I think? And two that they importantly disagree about the nature of intelligence and superintelligence, which is also very true.

Dean then gets to his central point, which is he prefers to focus on practical and incremental work that moves us towards good outcomes on the margin. I am all for such work, but I don’t expect it alone to be sufficient and don’t see why it should crowd out the creation of common knowledge or the need to consider bolder action.

Dean offers to discuss the issues live with Max, and I hope they do that.

Dean Ball is the kind of Worthy Opponent you want, who has a different world model than you do but ultimately wants good things over bad things.

He provided an important public service yesterday, as part of a discussion of various AI bills, when he emphasized warnings against negative polarization.

There certainly are those who actively seek to cause negative polarization of AI safety issues generally, who go full on ‘look what you made me do,’ and claim that if you point out that superintelligence probably kills us and ask us to act like it, the only reasonable response is to politicize the issue and to systematically work against any effort to mitigate risks, on principle, that’s how it works and they don’t make the rules.

They are trying to make those the rules, and use everything as ammunition.

I don’t think it is reasonable (or good decision theory) to say ‘therefore, because these people have power, STFU and only work on the margin if you know what’s good for humanity, or you.’

Discussion about this post

New Statement Calls For Not Building Superintelligence For Now Read More »

Clinical trial of a technique that could give everyone the best antibodies

antibodies, Biology, DNA, electroporation, medicine, plasmid, Policy, Science / Paul Patrick / October 24, 2025

If we ID the DNA for a great antibody, anyone can now make it.

One of the things that emerging diseases, including the COVID and Zika pandemics, have taught us is that it’s tough to keep up with infectious diseases in the modern world. Things like air travel can allow a virus to spread faster than our ability to develop therapies. But that doesn’t mean biotech has stood still; companies have been developing technologies that could allow us to rapidly respond to future threats.

There are a lot of ideas out there. But this week saw some early clinical trial results of one technique that could be useful for a range of infectious diseases. We’ll go over the results as a way to illustrate the sort of thinking that’s going on, along with the technologies we have available to pursue the resulting ideas.

The best antibodies

Any emerging disease leaves a mass of antibodies in its wake—those made by people in response to infections and vaccines, those made by lab animals we use to study the infectious agent, and so on. Some of these only have a weak affinity for the disease-causing agent, but some of them turn out to be what are called “broadly neutralizing.” These stick with high affinity not only to the original pathogen, but most or all of its variants, and possibly some related viruses.

Once an antibody latches on to a pathogen, broadly neutralizing antibodies inactivate it (as their name implies). This is typically because these antibodies bind to a site that’s necessary for a protein’s function. For example, broadly neutralizing antibodies to HIV bind to the proteins that help this virus enter immune cells.

Unfortunately, not everyone develops broadly neutralizing antibodies, and certainly doesn’t do so in time to prevent infections. And we haven’t figured out a way of designing vaccinations that ensure their generation. So we’re often found ourselves stuck with knowing what antibodies we’d like to see people making while having no way of ensuring that they do.

One of the options we’ve developed is to just mass-produce broadly neutralizing antibodies and inject them into people. This has been approved for use against Ebola and provided an early treatment during the COVID pandemic. This approach has some practical limitations, though. For starters, the antibodies have a finite life span in the bloodstream, so injections may need to be repeated. In addition, making and purifying enough antibodies in bulk isn’t the easiest thing in the world, and they generally need to be kept refrigerated during the distribution, limiting the areas where they can be used.

So, a number of companies have been looking at an alternative: getting people to make their own. This could potentially lead to longer-lived protection, even ensuring the antibodies are present to block future infections if the DNA survives long enough.

Genes and volts

Once you identify cells that produce broadly neutralizing antibodies, it’s relatively simple to clone those genes and put them into a chunk of DNA that will ensure that they’ll be produced by any human cell. If we could get that DNA into a person’s cells, broadly neutralizing antibodies are the result. And a number of approaches have been tried to handle that “if.” Most of them have inserted the genes needed to make the antibodies into a harmless, non-infectious virus, and then injected that virus into volunteers. Unfortunately, these viruses have tended to set off a separate immune response, which causes more significant side effects and may limit how often this approach can be used.

This brings us to the technique being used here. In this case, the researchers placed the antibody genes in a circular loop of DNA called a plasmid. This is enough to ensure that the DNA doesn’t get digested immediately and to get the antibody genes made into proteins. But it does nothing to help get the DNA inside of cells.

The research team, a mixture of people from a biotech company and academic labs, used a commercial injection setup that mixes the injection of the DNA with short pulses of electricity. The electricity disrupts the cell membrane, allowing the plasmid DNA to make it inside cells. Based on animal testing, doing this in muscle cells is enough to turn the muscles into factories producing lots of broadly neutralizing antibodies.

The new study was meant to test the safety of doing that in humans. The team recruited 44 participants, testing various doses of two antibody-producing plasmids and injection schedules. All but four of the subjects completed the study; three of those who dropped out had all been testing a routine with the electric pulses happening very quickly, which turned out to be unpleasant. Fortunately, it didn’t seem to make any difference to the production of antibodies.

While there were a lot of adverse reactions, most of these were associated with the injection itself: muscle pain at the site, a scab forming afterward, and a reddening of the skin. The worst problem appeared to be a single case of moderate muscle pain that persisted for a couple of days.

In all but one volunteer, the injection resulted in stable production of the two antibodies for at least 72 weeks following the injection; the single exception only made one of the two. That’s “at least” 72 weeks because that’s when they stopped testing—there was no indication that levels were dropping at this point. Injecting more DNA led to more variability in the amount of antibody produced, but that amount quickly maxed out. More total injections also boosted the level of antibody production. But even the minimal procedure—two injections of the lowest concentration tested—resulted in significant and stable antibodies.

And, as expected, these antibodies blocked the virus they were directed against: SARS-CoV-2.

The caveats

This approach seems to work—we can seemingly get anybody to make broadly neutralizing antibodies for months at a time. What’s the hitch? For starters, this isn’t necessarily great for a rapidly emerging pandemic. It takes a while to identify broadly neutralizing antibodies after a pathogen is identified. And, while it’s simple to ship DNA around the world to where it will be needed, injection setups that also produce the small electric pulses are not exactly standard equipment even in industrialized countries, much less the Global South.

Then there’s the issue of whether this really is a longer-term fix. Widespread use of broadly neutralizing antibodies will create a strong selective pressure for the evolution of variants that the antibody can no longer bind to. That may not always be a problem—broadly neutralizing antibodies generally bind to parts of proteins that are absolutely essential for the proteins’ function, and so it may not be possible to change those while maintaining the function. But that’s unlikely to always be the case.

In the end, however, social acceptance may end up being the biggest problem. People had an utter freakout over unfounded conspiracies that the RNA of COVID vaccines would somehow lead to permanent genetic changes. Presumably, having DNA that’s stable for months would be even harder for some segments of the public to swallow.

Nature Medicine, 2025. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-025-03969-0 (About DOIs).

John is Ars Technica’s science editor. He has a Bachelor of Arts in Biochemistry from Columbia University, and a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California, Berkeley. When physically separated from his keyboard, he tends to seek out a bicycle, or a scenic location for communing with his hiking boots.

Clinical trial of a technique that could give everyone the best antibodies Read More »

EU accuses Meta of violating content rules in move that could anger Trump

Digital Services Act, European Union, facebook, Instagram, Meta, Policy, tiktok / Paul Patrick / October 24, 2025

FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson recently warned Meta and a dozen social media and technology companies that “censoring Americans to comply with a foreign power’s laws, demands, or expected demands” may violate US law. Ferguson’s letters said the EU’s Digital Services Act and other laws “incentivize tech companies to censor worldwide speech.”

Meta told media outlets that “we disagree with any suggestion that we have breached the DSA, and we continue to negotiate with the European Commission on these matters.” Meta also said it made changes to comply with the DSA.

“In the European Union, we have introduced changes to our content reporting options, appeals process, and data access tools since the DSA came into force and are confident that these solutions match what is required under the law in the EU,” Meta said.

TikTok, Meta accused of restricting data access

The EC also said it preliminarily found that both Meta and TikTok violated their DSA obligation to grant researchers adequate access to public data.

“The Commission’s preliminary findings show that Facebook, Instagram and TikTok may have put in place burdensome procedures and tools for researchers to request access to public data. This often leaves them with partial or unreliable data, impacting their ability to conduct research, such as whether users, including minors, are exposed to illegal or harmful content,” the announcement said.

The data-access requirement “is an essential transparency obligation under the DSA, as it provides public scrutiny into the potential impact of platforms on our physical and mental health,” the EC said.

In a statement provided to Ars, TikTok said it is committed to transparency and has made data available to nearly 1,000 research teams. TikTok said it may be impossible to comply with both the DSA and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

“We are reviewing the European Commission’s findings, but requirements to ease data safeguards place the DSA and GDPR in direct tension. If it is not possible to fully comply with both, we urge regulators to provide clarity on how these obligations should be reconciled,” TikTok said.

EU accuses Meta of violating content rules in move that could anger Trump Read More »

Researchers show that training on “junk data” can lead to LLM “brain rot”

AI, brain rot, Data, research, training, Tweets / Paul Patrick / October 23, 2025

On the surface, it seems obvious that training an LLM with “high quality” data will lead to better performance than feeding it any old “low quality” junk you can find. Now, a group of researchers is attempting to quantify just how much this kind of low quality data can cause an LLM to experience effects akin to human “brain rot.”

For a pre-print paper published this month, the researchers from Texas A&M, the University of Texas, and Purdue University drew inspiration from existing research showing how humans who consume “large volumes of trivial and unchallenging online content” can develop problems with attention, memory, and social cognition. That led them to what they’re calling the “LLM brain rot hypothesis,” summed up as the idea that “continual pre-training on junk web text induces lasting cognitive decline in LLMs.”

Figuring out what counts as “junk web text” and what counts as “quality content” is far from a simple or fully objective process, of course. But the researchers used a few different metrics to tease a “junk dataset” and “control dataset” from HuggingFace’s corpus of 100 million tweets.

Since brain rot in humans is “a consequence of Internet addiction,” they write, junk tweets should be ones “that can maximize users’ engagement in a trivial manner.” As such, the researchers created one “junk” dataset by collecting tweets with high engagement numbers (likes, retweets, replies, and quotes) and shorter lengths, figuring that “more popular but shorter tweets will be considered to be junk data.”

For a second “junk” metric, the researchers drew from marketing research to define the “semantic quality” of the tweets themselves. Using a complex GPT-4o prompt, they sought to pull out tweets that focused on “superficial topics (like conspiracy theories, exaggerated claims, unsupported assertions or superficial lifestyle content)” or that had an “attention-drawing style (such as sensationalized headlines using clickbait language or excessive trigger words).” A random sample of these LLM-based classifications was spot-checked against evaluations from three graduate students with a 76 percent matching rate.

Researchers show that training on “junk data” can lead to LLM “brain rot” Read More »

An NIH director joins MAHA, gets replaced by JD Vance’s close friend

cancer, cellphones, fluoride, health, NIEHS, NIH, NTP, robert f kennedy jr, Science, trump administration / Paul Patrick / October 23, 2025

The director of a federal health institute that has arguably produced two of the most controversial government studies in recent years has accepted a new federal role to advance the goals of the Make America Healthy Again movement. Meanwhile, the person replacing him as director is a close friend of Vice President JD Vance and was installed in a process that experts describe as completely outside standard hiring practices.

The series of events—revealed in an email to staff last week from the National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya—is only exacerbating the spiraling fears that science is being deeply corrupted by politics under the Trump administration.

Richard Woychik, a molecular geneticist, is the outgoing director of the NIH’s National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), which is located in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. He has been director since 2020 and was recently appointed to a second five-year term, according to Science magazine. Woychik was hired at the institute in 2010, when he joined as deputy director, and was appointed acting director in 2019.

As the director of NIEHS, Woychik was also the director of the National Toxicology Program (NTP). This is an interagency program that has produced two highly controversial scientific reports during Woychik’s time in NIEHS’s upper leadership. One, initially released in 2016, claimed that cellphone radiation causes cancer based on findings from rats, though only male rats. The final reports were published in 2018. Another controversial study, finalized this year, suggested that high levels of fluoride lower the IQ of children. Both the cellphone radiation and fluoride studies have been roundly criticized for flaws in their methodology and analysis, and the scientific community has largely dismissed them.

However, the studies align with—and bolster—the conspiracy theories and misinformation spread by the MAHA movement, which is led by ardent anti-vaccine activist and current US health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. As health secretary, Kennedy has pledged to remove fluoride from municipal water, which, over decades, has proven safe and highly effective at preventing tooth decay in children. He has also, at various times, suggested 5G cell phone radiation causes cancer, a variety of other health conditions, changes to DNA, and is used as mass surveillance.

An NIH director joins MAHA, gets replaced by JD Vance’s close friend Read More »

Great hybrid V6, lousy HMI: Three days with a Ferrari 296 GTB

car review, Cars, Ferrari 296 GTB / Paul Patrick / October 23, 2025

The first time I drove this generation of mid-engined Ferrari, it was on a curated route on the company’s home turf. As the Po Valley gives way to the Apennines, you find plenty of narrow winding roads, steep gradients, and hairpin turns. It was an engaging few hours of driving, but it was too brief to properly assess some of the 296’s technology. I found the ride firm but comfortable on rough Italian tarmac and the hybrid system easy to operate, flicking into calm-and-quiet electric-only mode through the villages I encountered.

That was back in 2022 during the unveiling of Ferrari’s 499P race car. Last month, I met the 499P again as it visited the Circuit of the Americas in Austin, along with the rest of the World Endurance Championship. And that afforded another chance to get to know the 296, with three days rather than three hours to form an impression.

Head west from Austin and you’ll find twisty roads that wrap around the hills. It would have been easy to spend an entire day out there, but that seemed repetitive—I’d experienced the 296’s back road behavior already. Plus, there were things to do at the racetrack, although I’ll admit I took the long way there and back each day.

Driving among the AVs

For mixing it up in downtown traffic—among the dozens of all-white Waymo Jaguars and brightly wrapped Zoox Toyotas doing their autonomous driving thing—the Ferrari’s eDrive mode is perfectly sufficient. It uses the axial flux electric motor that lives between the 2.9 L V6 engine and the eight-speed dual-clutch transmission, but the donut-shaped motor’s 165 hp (123 kW) and, more importantly, 232 lb-ft (315 Nm) are all you need to move the 296’s roughly 3,300 lbs (1,500 kg) at city speeds. Visibility is good looking forward and is adequate otherwise, and the throttle mapping makes it easy to measure out just as much acceleration as you need.

Beyond the confines of the city center, you’ll want the contribution of the V6’s 654 hp (488 kW). There are three modes to choose from. Hybrid is best when the lithium-ion traction battery is charged, and the car’s brain will cut the V6 as and when necessary to save some fuel. If the 7.4 kWh battery is depleted, switching into Performance mode is a solution. This keeps the internal combustion engine fired and uses spare power to keep topping up the pack. It also sounds more raucous.

Great hybrid V6, lousy HMI: Three days with a Ferrari 296 GTB Read More »

Health plan enrollment period is set to be horrifying for everyone this year

ACA, health, health insurance, KFF, Marketplace, premiums / Paul Patrick / October 22, 2025

Employer plans

While ACA sticker shock spreads, a new KFF report out today suggests that people on employer-based health insurance plans are also in for some heftier prices—though the increases aren’t quite as dramatic as the Marketplace hikes.

An analysis of current employer plans finds that the average cost to insure an American family hit nearly $27,000 this year, with average employee contributions to that bill being $7,000 a year. Family premiums are up 6 percent, or $1,408, from last year, while inflation only rose 2.7 percent and wage growth only rose 4 percent.

KFF suggested that various factors are contributing to the increasing costs, with GLP-1 weight-loss drugs being a prominent one. Overall, employers told the organization that they’re bracing for higher costs for 2026 plans, with insurers already seeking double-digit increases in small-group plans.

“There is a quiet alarm bell going off. With GLP-1s, increases in hospital prices, tariffs, and other factors, we expect employer premiums to rise more sharply next year,” KFF President and CEO Drew Altman said in a statement. “Employers have nothing new in their arsenal that can address most of the drivers of their cost increases, and that could well result in an increase in deductibles and other forms of employee cost sharing again, a strategy that neither employers nor employees like but companies resort to in a pinch to hold down premium increases.”

For deductibles—the amount people pay before their plan’s coverage kicks in—costs for single coverage increased 17 percent since 2020. At that time, the average deductible was $1,617 for a covered person, while the average this year is $1,886. But deductibles can be much higher for those who work for a small employer. Among those workers, 36 percent had deductibles of $3,000 or higher this year.

Health plan enrollment period is set to be horrifying for everyone this year Read More »

Author name: Paul Patrick