Tim Belzer – Page 68

Some of Apple’s last holdout accessories have switched from Lightning to USB-C

Apple, Lightning, magic keyboard, Magic Mouse, Magic Trackpad, Tech, USB-C / Tim Belzer / October 28, 2024

One of the last major holdouts against USB-C has majorly loosened its grasp. All the accessories that come with Apple’s newest iMac—the Magic Keyboard, Magic Mouse, and Magic Trackpad—ship with USB-C charging and connection ports rather than the Lightning ports they have featured for nearly a decade.

“These accessories now come with USB-C ports, so users can charge all of their favorite devices with just a single cable,” Apple writes in announcing its new M4-powered iMac, in the way that only Apple can, suggesting that something already known to so many is, when brought into Apple’s loop, notable and new.

Apple’s shift from its own Lightning connector, in use since 2012, to USB-C was sparked by European Union policies enacted in 2022. Apple gradually implemented USB-C on other devices, like its iPad Pro and MacBooks, over time, but the iPhone 15’s USB-C port made the “switch” somewhat formal.

The iMac and its color-matched accessories kept with Lightning until today’s new release. The back of the iMac has long featured USB-C ports, but the accessories were charged with USB-C-to-Lightning cables. This leaves the iPhone SE and iPhone 14 as the remaining Lightning-port-ed Apple gear that Apple still sells. Apple’s Vision Pro battery pack contains a kind of Lightning-style connector, although not a true Lightning cable. The forthcoming iPhone SE will, given the need to sell it in Europe, almost certainly feature USB-C as well.

It has been a slow, brokered, and uneven path, but it’s getting to the point where a collection of good USB-C cables and charging bricks can power most of your computing devices… except for those with very specific charging demands, like a Raspberry Pi or the cheap or old stuff that still takes USB micro. And some things just refuse to give up barrel chargers, like certain enterprise laptops and network switches.

Regardless, it’s a big day for those who only want one kind of cable on their desk.

Some of Apple’s last holdout accessories have switched from Lightning to USB-C Read More »

Don’t fall for AI scams cloning cops’ voices, police warn

ai voice cloning, ai voice scams, Artificial Intelligence, generative ai, Policy / Tim Belzer / October 28, 2024

AI is giving scammers a more convincing way to impersonate police, reports show.

Just last week, the Salt Lake City Police Department (SLCPD) warned of an email scam using AI to convincingly clone the voice of Police Chief Mike Brown.

A citizen tipped off cops after receiving a suspicious email that included a video showing the police chief claiming that they “owed the federal government nearly $100,000.”

To dupe their targets, the scammers cut together real footage from one of Brown’s prior TV interviews with AI-generated audio that SLCPD said “is clear and closely impersonates the voice of Chief Brown, which could lead community members to believe the message was legitimate.”

The FBI has warned for years of scammers attempting extortion by impersonating cops or government officials. But as AI voice-cloning technology has advanced, these scams could become much harder to detect, to the point where even the most forward-thinking companies like OpenAI have been hesitant to release the latest tech due to obvious concerns about potential abuse.

SLCPD noted that there were clues in the email impersonating their police chief that a tech-savvy citizen could have picked up on. A more careful listen reveals “the message had unnatural speech patterns, odd emphasis on certain words, and an inconsistent tone,” as well as “detectable acoustic edits from one sentence to the next.” And perhaps most glaringly, the scam email came from “a Google account and had the Salt Lake City Police Department’s name in it followed by a numeric number,” instead of from the police department’s official email domain of “slc.gov.”

SLCPD isn’t the only police department dealing with AI cop impersonators. Tulsa had a similar problem this summer when scammers started calling residents using a convincing fake voice designed to sound like Tulsa police officer Eric Spradlin, Public Radio Tulsa reported. A software developer who received the call, Myles David, said he understood the AI risks today but that even he was “caught off guard” and had to call police to verify the call wasn’t real.

Don’t fall for AI scams cloning cops’ voices, police warn Read More »

Are Boeing’s problems beyond fixable?

aviation, Boeing, Boeing 737 MAX, Policy, syndication / Tim Belzer / October 26, 2024

A new CEO promises a culture change as the aerospace titan is struggling hard.

Credit: Getty Images | Olivier Douliery

As Boeing’s latest chief executive, Kelly Ortberg’s job was never going to be easy. On Wednesday, it got harder still.

That morning, Ortberg had faced investors for the first time, telling them that ending a debilitating strike by Boeing’s largest union was the first step to stabilizing the plane maker’s business.

But as the day wore on, it became clear that nearly two-thirds of the union members who voted on the company’s latest contract offer had rejected it. The six-week strike goes on, costing Boeing an estimated $50 million a day, pushing back the day it can resume production of most aircraft and further stressing its supply chain.

The company that virtually created modern commercial aviation has spent the better part of five years in chaos, stemming from fatal crashes, a worldwide grounding, a guilty plea to a criminal charge, a pandemic that halted global air travel, a piece breaking off a plane in mid-flight and now a strike. Boeing’s finances look increasingly fragile and its reputation has been battered.

Bank of America analyst Ron Epstein says Boeing is a titan in a crisis largely of its own making, comparing it to the Hydra of Greek mythology: “For every problem that’s come to a head, then [been] severed, more problems sprout up.”

Resolving Boeing’s crisis is critical to the future of commercial air travel, as most commercial passenger aircraft are made by it or its European rival Airbus, which has little capacity for new customers until the 2030s.

Ortberg, a 64-year-old Midwesterner who took the top job three months ago, says his mission is “pretty straightforward—turn this big ship in the right direction and restore Boeing to the leadership position that we all know and want.”

Resolving the machinists’ strike is just the start of the challenges he faces. He needs to motivate the workforce, even as 33,000 are on strike and 17,000 face redundancy under a cost-cutting initiative.

He must persuade investors to support an equity raise in an industry where the returns could take years to materialize. He needs to fix Boeing’s quality control and manufacturing issues, and placate its increasingly frustrated customers, who have had to rejig their schedules and cut flights owing to delays in plane deliveries.

“I’ve never seen anything like it in our industry, to be honest. I’ve been around 30 years,” Carsten Spohr, chief executive of German flag carrier Lufthansa, said this month.

Eventually, Boeing needs to launch a new aircraft model to better compete with Airbus.

“If Kelly fixes this, he is a hero,” says Melius Research analyst Rob Spingarn. “But it’s very complex. There’s a lot of different things to fix.”

Ortberg started his career as a mechanical engineer and went on to run Rockwell Collins, an avionics supplier to Boeing, until it was sold to engineering conglomerate United Technologies in 2018.

His engineering background has been welcomed by many who regard previous executives’ emphasis on shareholder returns as the root cause of many of Boeing’s engineering and manufacturing problems.

Longtime employees often peg the shift in Boeing’s culture to its 1997 merger with rival McDonnell Douglas. Phil Condit and Harry Stonecipher, who ran Boeing in the late 1990s and early 2000s, were admirers of Jack Welch, the General Electric chief executive known for financial engineering and ruthless cost cuts.

Condit even moved Boeing’s headquarters from its manufacturing base in Seattle to Chicago in 2001, so the “corporate center” would no longer be “drawn into day-to-day business operations.”

Jim McNerney, another Welch acolyte, instituted a program to boost Boeing’s profits by squeezing its suppliers during his decade in charge. He remarked on a 2014 earnings call about employees “cowering” before him, a dark quip still cited a decade later to explain Boeing’s tense relationship with its workers.

Ken Ogren, a member of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers District 751, says managers at Boeing often felt pressured to move planes quickly through the factory.

“We’ve had a lot of bean counters come through, and I’m going to be in the majority with a lot of people who believe they’ve been tripping over dollars to save pennies,” he says.

Dennis Muilenburg headed the company in October 2018, when a new 737 Max crashed off the coast of Indonesia. Five months later, another Max crashed shortly after take-off in Ethiopia. In total, 346 people lost their lives.

Regulators worldwide grounded the plane—a cash cow and a vital product in Boeing’s competition with Airbus—for nearly two years. Investigations eventually showed a faulty sensor triggered an anti-stall system, repeatedly forcing the aircraft’s nose downward.

Boeing agreed in July to plead guilty to a criminal charge of fraud for misleading regulators about the plane’s design. Families of the crash victims are opposing the plea deal, which is before a federal judge for approval.

The manufacturer’s problems were compounded by COVID-19, which grounded aircraft worldwide and led many airlines to hold off placing new orders and pause deliveries of existing ones. Boeing’s debt ballooned as it issued $25 billion in bonds to see it through the crisis.

Regulators cleared the 737 Max to fly again, starting in November 2020. But hopes that Boeing was finally on top of its problems were shattered last January, when a door panel that was missing bolts blew off an Alaska Airlines jet at 16,000 feet.

While no one was injured, the incident triggered multiple investigations and an audit by the US Federal Aviation Administration, which found lapses in Boeing’s manufacturing and quality assurance processes and led to an uncomfortable appearance by then chief executive Dave Calhoun at a Senate subcommittee hearing.

The company also has struggled with its defense and space businesses. Fixed-price contracts on several military programs have resulted in losses and billions of dollars of one-off charges. Meanwhile, problems with its CST-100 Starliner spacecraft resulted in two astronauts being left on the International Space Station. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon vehicle will be used to return them to Earth early next year.

Boeing’s stumbles have resulted in loss of life, loss of prestige, and a net financial loss every year since 2019. On Wednesday, it reported a $6 billion loss between July and September, the second-worst quarterly result in its history.

One of Ortberg’s first big moves as chief executive was to move himself—from his Florida home to a house in Seattle. He told analysts that Boeing’s executives “need to be on the factory floors, in the back shops, and in our engineering labs” to be more in tune with the company’s products and workforce. Change in Boeing’s corporate culture must “be more than the poster on the wall,” he added.

His approach represents a shift from his predecessor Calhoun, who was criticized for spending more time in New Hampshire and South Carolina than in Boeing’s factories in Washington state.

Bill George, former chief executive at Medtronic and an executive fellow at Harvard Business School, says Ortberg is doing a “terrific job” so far, particularly for moving to the Pacific Northwest and pressuring other itinerant executives to follow.

“If you’re based in Florida, and you come occasionally, what do you really know about what’s going on in the business?” he says, adding that Boeing has “no business being in Arlington, Virginia,” where the company moved its headquarters in 2022.

Scott Kirby, chief executive at one of Boeing’s biggest customers, United Airlines, told his own investors this month that he was “encouraged” by Ortberg’s early moves, adding that the company suffered for decades from “a cultural challenge, where they focused on short-term profitability and the short-term stock price at the expense of what made Boeing great, which is building great products.”

“Kelly Ortberg is pivoting the company back to their roots,” he said. “All the employees of Boeing will rally around that.”

But Ogren of the machinists’ union cautions that previous commitments to culture change have been hollow. “You’ve got people at the top saying, ‘We’ve got to be safe, oh, and by the way, we need these planes out the door…’ They said the right thing. They didn’t emphasize it, and that’s not what they put pressure on the managers to achieve.”

When workers eventually return to work—Peter Arment, an analyst at Baird, expects the dispute to be resolved in November—Ortberg wants better execution, even if it means lower output. “It is so much more important we do this right than fast,” he said.

The company had planned to raise Max output from about 25 per month before the strike to 38 per month by the end of the year, a cap set by the FAA. It will not reach that goal and Spingarn, the Melius analyst, says the strike will probably delay any production increase by nine months to a year. Some workers would need retraining, Ortberg said, and the supply chain’s restart was likely to be “bumpy.” The manufacturer also has established a quality plan with the FAA that it must follow.

Boeing also needed to launch a new airplane “at the right time in the future,” Ortberg said. Epstein of BofA called this “one of the most important messages” from the new chief executive, likely “to reinvigorate the workforce and culture at Boeing.”

In the meantime, Boeing will continue to consume cash in 2025, having burnt through $10 billion so far this year, according to chief financial officer Brian West. Spingarn says that investors may be disappointed in the cash flow at first, but adds that “fixing airplanes isn’t one year, it’s three years.”

For all the challenges, Ortberg has the right personality to turn Boeing around, says Ken Herbert, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets.

“If he can’t do it, I don’t think anyone can.”

Are Boeing’s problems beyond fixable? Read More »

A how-to for ethical geoengineering research

carbon capture, carbon dioxide removal, climate change, Earth science, Geoengineering, research ethics, Science, solar radiation management / Tim Belzer / October 26, 2024

Holistic climate justice: The guidelines recognize that geoengineering won’t affect just those people currently residing on Earth, but on future generations as well. Some methods, like stratospheric aerosols, don’t eliminate the risks caused by warming, but shift them onto future generations, who will face sudden and potentially dramatic warming if the geoengineering is ever stopped. Others may cause regional differences in either benefits or warming, shifting consequences to different populations.

Special attention should be paid to those who have historically been on the wrong side of environmental problems in the past. And harms to nature need to be considered as well.

Inclusive public participation: The research shouldn’t be approached as simply a scientific process; instead, any affected communities should be included in the process, and informed consent should be obtained from them. There should be ongoing public engagement with those communities and adapt to their cultural values.

Transparency: The public needs to be aware of who’s funding any geoengineering research and ensure that whoever’s providing the money doesn’t influence decisions regarding the design of the research. Those decisions, and the considerations behind them, should also be made clear to the public.

Informed governance: Any experiments have to conform to laws ranging from local to international. Any research programs should be approved by an independent body before any work starts. All the parties involved—and this could include the funders, the institutions, and outside contractors—should be held accountable to governments, public institutions, and those who will potentially be impacted by the work.

If you think this will make pursuing this research considerably more complicated, you are absolutely correct. But again, even tests of these approaches could have serious environmental consequences. And many of these things represent best practices for any research with potential public consequences; the fact that they haven’t always been pursued is not an excuse to continue to avoid doing them.

A how-to for ethical geoengineering research Read More »

If you thought Astra was going to go away quietly, you were wrong

astra, rocket 4, Science, Space / Tim Belzer / October 26, 2024

On Wednesday morning, a surprising email popped into my inbox with the following subject line: “Astra announces Department of Defense contract valued up to $44 Million.”

I had to read it a second time to make sure I got it right. Astra, the launch company? Astra, whose valuation went from $2.6 billion to $25 million after a series of launch failures? Astra, the company that was taken private in July at 50 cents a share?

Yes, it was that Astra.

This was curious, indeed. To get some answers, I spoke with the cofounder of Astra, Chris Kemp, who remains the company’s chief executive.

“If I have learned anything, it’s that you just don’t give up,” Kemp said. “You know, if you give up easily, this is not the place to be. Fortunately, I am surrounded by a team that has chosen not to give up.”

Rocket 4 becomes more real

I’ll be frank: When Kemp and his co-founder, Adam London, took Astra private this summer, I never expected to hear from the company again. Astra certainly was not the first launch company to fail, and it won’t be the last. But it is the first to seemingly resurrect itself in such a dramatic way.

To be clear, Astra is not back yet. The company remains in the phase of building and testing rocket stages and engines and does not have a launch vehicle ready to go. Its new booster, Rocket 4, will launch no earlier than the fourth quarter of 2025, Kemp said. (That date should probably be viewed with some skepticism).

The company has previously discussed Rocket 4, which is intended to carry 600 kg to low-Earth orbit, as far back as August 2022. But at the time, most of the launch industry, including this reporter, shrugged and moved along. After all, the company’s smaller vehicle, Rocket 3, failed on five of its seven orbital launch attempts. The general sentiment was that the new rocket would never fly.

However, even as Astra’s finances worsened and the company had to stave off bankruptcy by being taken private, not everyone dismissed the vision. In April 2023, the US Space Force awarded a task order for Rocket 4 to launch the STP-S29B mission. That was interesting, but it was just a single data point. Then came this week’s announcement that the US Department of Defense’s “Defense Innovation Unit” had awarded a grant worth up to $44 million to Astra for a “tactically responsive launch system.”

If you thought Astra was going to go away quietly, you were wrong Read More »

Fallout: London is a huge Fallout 4 mod that is now playable—and worth playing

bethesda, Fallout, fallout 4, fallout london, gaming, gog, Mods, steam / Tim Belzer / October 26, 2024

The UK equivalent of a Pip-Boy 3000, which is nice to see after so many hours with the wrist-mounted one. Team FOLON

‘Ello, what’s all this, then?

Fallout: London takes place 160 years after the global nuclear war, 40 years before Fallout 3, and in a part of the world that is both remote and didn’t really have official Fallout lore. That means a lot of the typical Fallout fare—Deathclaws, Super Mutants, the Pip-Boy 3000—is left out.

Or, rather, replaced with scores of new enemies, lore, companions, factions, and even some mechanics picked up from the modding scene (ladders!). It’s a kick to see the across-the-pond variants of wasteland stuff: tinned beans, medieval weapons, the Atta-Boy personal computer. There is at least one dog, a bulldog, and his name is Churchill.

As for the story, stop me if you’ve heard this one before: You, newly awakened from an underground chamber (not a Vault, though), enter a ruined London, one riven by factions with deep disagreements about how to move things forward. You’ll take up quests, pick sides, befriend or blast people, and do a lot of peeking into abandoned buildings, hoping to find that last screw you need for a shotgun modification.

London falling

When you first start Fallout: London, you’ll see a London that looks like, honestly, crap. Whatever London did to anger the nuke-having powers of the world, it got them good and mad, and parts of the city are very busted. The city’s disposition to underground spaces has done it well, though, and you can often find yesteryear’s glory in a Tube tunnel, a bunker, or a basement.

As you move on, you’ll get the surge of seeing a part of London you remember, either from a visit or from media, and how it looks with a bit of char to it. The post-war inhabitants have also made their own spaces inside the ruins, some more sophisticated and welcoming than others. Everywhere you look, you can see that familiar Fallout aesthetic—1950s atomic-minded culture persisting until its downfall—shifted into Greenwich Mean Time.

Fallout: London is a huge Fallout 4 mod that is now playable—and worth playing Read More »

What I learned from 3 years of running Windows 11 on “unsupported” PCs

Features, microsoft, Tech, Windows, Windows 10, windows 10 22h2, Windows 11, windows 11 23h2, windows 11 24h2 / Tim Belzer / October 26, 2024

where we’re going, we don’t need support

When your old PC goes over the Windows 10 update cliff, can Windows 11 save it?

Credit: Andrew Cunningham

The Windows 10 update cliff is coming in October 2025. We’ve explained why that’s a big deal, and we have a comprehensive guide to updating to Windows 11 (recently updated to account for changes in Windows 11 24H2) so you can keep getting security updates, whether you’re on an officially supported PC or not.

But this is more than just a theoretical exercise; I’ve been using Windows 11 on some kind of “unsupported” system practically since it launched to stay abreast of what the experience is actually like and to keep tabs on whether Microsoft would make good on its threats to pull support from these systems at any time.

Now that we’re three years in, and since I’ve been using Windows 11 24H2 on a 2012-era desktop and laptop as my primary work machines on and off for a few months now, I can paint a pretty complete picture of what Windows 11 is like on these PCs. As the Windows 10 update cliff approaches, it’s worth asking: Is running “unsupported” Windows 11 a good way to keep an older but still functional machine running, especially for non-technical users?

My hardware

I’ve run Windows 11 on a fair amount of old hardware, including PCs as old as a late XP-era Core 2 Duo Dell Inspiron desktop. For the first couple of years, I ran it most commonly on an old Dell XPS 13 9333 with a Core i5-4250U and 8GB of RAM and a Dell Latitude 3379 2-in-1 that just barely falls short of the official requirements (both systems are also pressed into service for ChromeOS Flex testing periodically).

But I’ve been running the 24H2 update as my main work OS on two machines. The first is a Dell Optiplex 3010 desktop with a 3rd-generation Core i5-3xxx CPU, which had been my mother’s main desktop until I upgraded it a year or so ago. The second is a Lenovo ThinkPad X230 with a i5-3320M inside, a little brick of a machine that I picked up for next to nothing on Goodwill’s online auction site.

Both systems, and the desktop in particular, have been upgraded quite a bit; the laptop has 8GB of RAM while the desktop has 16GB, both are running SATA SSDs, and the desktop has a low-profile AMD Radeon Pro WX2100 in it, a cheap way to get support for running multiple 4K monitors. The desktop also has USB Wi-Fi and Bluetooth dongles and an internal expansion card that provides a pair of USB 3.0 Type-A ports and a single USB-C port. Systems of this vintage are pretty easy to refurbish since components are old enough that they’ve gone way down in price but not so old that they’ve become rare collectors’ items. It’s another way to get a usable computer for $100—or for free if you know where to look.

And these systems were meant to be maintained and upgraded. It’s one of the beautiful things about a standardized PC platform, though these days we’ve given a lot of that flexibility up in favor of smaller, thinner devices and larger batteries. It is possible to upgrade and refurbish these 12-year-old computers to the point that they run modern operating systems well because they were designed to leave room for that possibility.

But no matter how much you upgrade any of these PCs or how well you maintain them, they will never meet Windows 11’s official requirements. That’s the problem.

Using it feels pretty normal

Once it’s installed, Windows 11 is mostly Windows 11, whether your PC is officially supported or not. Credit: Andrew Cunningham

Depending on how you do it, it can be a minor pain to get Windows 11 up and running on a computer that doesn’t natively support it. But once the OS is installed, Microsoft’s early warnings about instability and the possible ending of updates have proven to be mostly unfounded.

A Windows 11 PC will still grab all of the same drivers from Windows Update as a Windows 10 PC would, and any post-Vista drivers have at least a chance of working in Windows 11 as long as they’re 64-bit. But Windows 10 was widely supported on hardware going back to the turn of the 2010s. If it shipped with Windows 8 or even Windows 7, your hardware should mostly work, give or take the occasional edge case. I’ve yet to have a catastrophic crash or software failure on any of the systems I’m using, and they’re all from the 2012–2016 era.

Once Windows 11 is installed, routine software updates and app updates from the Microsoft Store are downloaded and installed on my “unsupported” systems the same way they are on my “supported” ones. You don’t have to think about how you’re running an unsupported operating system; Windows remains Windows. That’s the big takeaway here—if you’re happy with the performance of your unsupported PC under Windows 10, nothing about the way Windows 11 runs will give you problems.

…Until you want to install a big update

There’s one exception for the PCs I’ve had running unsupported Windows 11 installs in the long term: They don’t want to automatically download and install the yearly feature updates for Windows. So a 22H2 install will keep downloading and installing updates for as long as they’re offered, but it won’t offer to update itself to versions 23H2 or 24H2.

This behavior may be targeted specifically at unsupported PCs, or it may just be a byproduct of how Microsoft rolls out these yearly updates (if you have a supported system with a known hardware or driver issue, for example, Microsoft will withhold these updates until the issues are resolved). Either way, it’s an irritating thing to have to deal with every year or every other year—Microsoft supports most of its annual updates for two years after they’re released to the public. So 23H2 and 24H2 are currently supported, while 22H2 and 21H2 (the first release of Windows 11) are at the end of the line.

This essentially means you’ll need to repeat the steps for doing a new unsupported Windows 11 install every time you want to upgrade. As we detail in our guide, that’s relatively simple if your PC has Secure Boot and a TPM but doesn’t have a supported processor. Make a simple registry tweak, download the Installation Assistant or an ISO file to run Setup from, and the Windows 11 installer will let you off with a warning and then proceed normally, leaving your files and apps in place.

Without Secure Boot or a TPM, though, installing these upgrades in place is more difficult. Trying to run an upgrade install from within Windows just means the system will yell at you about the things your PC is missing. Booting from a USB drive that has been doctored to overlook the requirements will help you do a clean install, but it will delete all your existing files and apps.

If you’re running into this problem and still want to try an upgrade install, there’s one more workaround you can try.

Download an ISO for the version of Windows 11 you want to install, and then either make a USB install drive or simply mount the ISO file in Windows by double-clicking it.
Open a Command Prompt window as Administrator and navigate to whatever drive letter the Windows install media is using. Usually that will be D: or E:, depending on what drives you have installed in your system; type the drive letter and colon into the command prompt window and press Enter.
Type setup.exe /product server

You’ll notice that the subsequent setup screens all say they’re “installing Windows Server” rather than the regular version of Windows, but that’s not actually true—the Windows image that comes with these ISO files is still regular old Windows 11, and that’s what the installer is using to upgrade your system. It’s just running a Windows Server-branded version of the installer that apparently isn’t making the same stringent hardware checks that the normal Windows 11 installer is.

This workaround allowed me to do an in-place upgrade of Windows 11 24H2 onto a Windows 10 22H2 PC with no TPM enabled. It should also work for upgrading an older version of Windows 11 to 24H2.

Older PCs are still very useful!

This 2012-era desktop can be outfitted with 16 GB of memory and a GPU that can drive multiple 4K displays, things that wouldn’t have been common when it was manufactured. But no matter how much you upgrade it, Windows 11 will never officially support it. Credit: Andrew Cunningham

Having to go out of your way to keep Windows 11 up to date on an unsupported PC is a fairly major pain. But unless your hardware is exceptionally wretched (I wouldn’t recommend trying to get by with less than 4GB of RAM at an absolute bare minimum, or with a spinning hard drive, or with an aging low-end N-series Pentium or Celeron chip), you’ll find that decade-old laptops and desktops can still hold up pretty well when you’re sticking to light or medium-sized workloads.

I haven’t found this surprising. Major high-end CPU performance improvements have come in fits and starts over the last decade, and today’s (Windows 11-supported) barebones bargain basement Intel N100 PCs perform a lot like decade-old mainstream quad-core desktop processors.

With its RAM and GPU updates, my Optiplex 3010 and its Core i5 worked pretty well with my normal dual-4K desktop monitor setup (it couldn’t drive my Gigabyte M28U at higher than 60 Hz, but that’s a GPU limitation). Yes, I could feel the difference between an aging Core i5-3475S and the Core i7-12700 in my regular Windows desktop, and it didn’t take much at all for CPU usage to spike to 100 percent and stay there, always a sign that your CPU is holding you back. But once apps were loaded, they felt responsive, and I had absolutely no issues writing, recording and editing audio, and working in Affinity Photo on the odd image or two.

I wouldn’t recommend using this system to play games, nor would I recommend overpaying for a brand-new GPU to pair with an older quad-core CPU like this one (I chose the GPU I did specifically for its display outputs, not its gaming prowess). If you wanted to, you could still probably get respectable midrange gaming performance out of a 4th-, 6th-, or 7th-gen Intel Core i5 or i7 or a first-generation AMD Ryzen CPU paired with a GeForce RTX 4060 or 3060, or a Radeon RX 7600. Resist the urge to overspend, consider used cards as a way to keep costs down, and check your power supply before you install anything—the years-old 300 W power supply in a cheap Dell office desktop will need to be replaced before you can use it with any GPU that has an external power connector.

My experience with the old Goodwill-sourced ThinkPad was also mostly pretty good. It had both Secure Boot and a TPM, making installation and upgrades easier. The old fingerprint sensor (a slow and finicky swipe-to-scan sensor) and its 2013-era driver even support Windows Hello. I certainly minded the cramped, low-resolution screen—display quality and screen-to-bezel ratio being the most noticeable changes between a 12-year-old system and a modern one—but it worked reliably with a new battery in it. It even helped me focus a bit at work; a 1366×768 screen just doesn’t invite heavy multitasking.

But the mid-2010s are a dividing line, and new laptops are better than old laptops

That brings me to my biggest word of warning.

If you want to run Windows 11 on an older desktop, one where the computer is just a box that you plug stuff into, the age of the hardware isn’t all that much of a concern. Upgrading components is easier whether you’re talking about a filthy keyboard, a failing monitor, or a stick of RAM. And you don’t need to be concerned as much with power use or battery life.

But for laptops? Let me tell you, there are things about using a laptop from 2012 that you don’t want to remember.

Three important dividing lines: In 2013, Intel’s 4th-generation Haswell processors gave huge battery life boosts to laptops thanks to lower power use when idle and the ability to switch more quickly between active and idle states. In 2015, Dell introduced the first with a slim-bezeled design (though it would be some years before it would fix the bottom-mounted up-your-nose webcam), which is probably the single most influential laptop design change since the MacBook Air. And around the same time (though it’s hard to pinpoint an exact date), more laptops began adopting Microsoft’s Precision Touchpad specification rather than using finicky, inconsistent third-party drivers, making PC laptop touchpads considerably less annoying than they had been up until that point.

And those aren’t the only niceties that have become standard or near-standard on midrange and high-end laptops these days. We also have high-resolution, high-density displays; the adoption of taller screen aspect ratios like 16: 10 and 3:2, giving us more vertical screen space to use; USB-C charging, replacing the need for proprietary power bricks; and backlit keyboards!

The ThinkPad X230 I bought doesn’t have a backlit keyboard, but it does have a bizarre little booklight next to the webcam that shines down onto the keyboard to illuminate it. This is sort of neat if you’re already the kind of person inclined to describe janky old laptops as “neat,” but it’s not as practical.

Even if you set aside degraded, swollen, or otherwise broken batteries and the extra wear and tear that comes with portability, a laptop from the last three or four years will have a ton of useful upgrades and amenities aside from extra speed. That’s not to say that older laptops can’t be useful because they obviously can be. But it’s also a place where an upgrade can make a bigger difference than just getting you Windows 11 support.

Some security concerns

Some old PCs will never meet Windows 11’s more stringent security requirements, and PC makers often stop updating their systems long before Microsoft drops support. Credit: Andrew Cunningham

Windows 11’s system requirements were controversial in part because they were focused mostly on previously obscure security features like TPM 2.0 modules, hypervisor-protected code integrity (HVCI), and mode-based execution control (MBEC). A TPM module makes it possible to seamlessly encrypt your PC’s local storage, among other things, while HVCI helps to isolate data in memory from the rest of the operating system to make it harder for malicious software to steal things (MBEC is just a CPU technology that speeds up HVCI, which can come with a hefty performance penalty on older systems).

Aside from those specific security features, there are other concerns when using old PCs, some of the same ones we’ve discussed in macOS as Apple has wound down support for Intel Macs. Microsoft’s patches can protect against software security vulnerabilities in Windows, and they can provide some partial mitigations for firmware-based vulnerabilities since even fully patched and fully supported systems won’t always have all the latest BIOS fixes installed.

But software can’t patch everything, and even the best-supported laptops with 5th- or 6th-generation Core CPUs in them will be a year or two past the days when they could expect new BIOS updates or driver fixes.

The PC companies and motherboard makers make some of these determinations; cheap consumer laptops tend to get less firmware and software support regardless of whether Intel or AMD are fixing problems on their ends. But Intel (for example) stops supporting its CPUs altogether after seven or eight years (support ended for 7th-generation CPUs in March). For any vulnerabilities discovered after that, you’re on your own, or you have to trust in software-based mitigations.

I don’t want to overplay the severity or the riskiness of these kinds of security vulnerabilities. Lots of firmware-level security bugs are the kinds of things that are exploited by sophisticated hackers targeting corporate or government systems—not necessarily everyday people who are just using an old laptop to check their email or do their banking. If you’re using good everyday security hygiene otherwise—using strong passwords or passkeys, two-factor authentication, and disk encryption (all things you should already be doing in Windows 10)—an old PC will still be reasonably safe and secure.

A viable, if imperfect, option for keeping an old PC alive

If you have a Windows 10 PC that is still working well or that you can easily upgrade to give it a new lease on life, and you don’t want to pay whatever Microsoft is planning to charge for continued Windows 10 update support, installing Windows 11 may be the path of least resistance for you despite the installation and update hurdles.

Especially for PCs that only miss the Windows 11 support cutoff by a year or two, you’ll get an operating system that still runs reasonably well on your PC, should still support all of your hardware, and will continue to run the software you’re comfortable with. Yes, the installation process for Windows’ annual feature updates is more annoying than it should be. But if you’re just trying to squeeze a handful of years out of an older PC, it might not be an issue you have to deal with very often. And though Windows 11 is different from Windows 10, it doesn’t come with the same learning curve that switching to an alternate operating system like ChromeOS Flex or Linux would.

Eventually, these PCs will age out of circulation, and the point will be moot. But even three years into Windows 11’s life cycle, I can’t help but feel that the system requirements could stand to be relaxed a bit. That ship sailed a long time ago, but given how many PCs are still running Windows 10 less than a year from the end of guaranteed security updates, expanding compatibility is a move Microsoft could consider to close the adoption gap and bring more PCs along.

Even if that doesn’t happen, try running Windows 11 on an older but still functional PC sometime. Once you clean it up a bit to rein in some of modern Microsoft’s worst design impulses, I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

Andrew is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica, with a focus on consumer tech including computer hardware and in-depth reviews of operating systems like Windows and macOS. Andrew lives in Philadelphia and co-hosts a weekly book podcast called Overdue.

What I learned from 3 years of running Windows 11 on “unsupported” PCs Read More »

Google’s DeepMind is building an AI to keep us from hating each other

AI, consensus, DeepBrain, ethics, Google, Habermas, Politics, Science / Tim Belzer / October 26, 2024

The AI did better than professional mediators at getting people to reach agreement.

Image of two older men arguing on a park bench.

An unprecedented 80 percent of Americans, according to a recent Gallup poll, think the country is deeply divided over its most important values ahead of the November elections. The general public’s polarization now encompasses issues like immigration, health care, identity politics, transgender rights, or whether we should support Ukraine. Fly across the Atlantic and you’ll see the same thing happening in the European Union and the UK.

To try to reverse this trend, Google’s DeepMind built an AI system designed to aid people in resolving conflicts. It’s called the Habermas Machine after Jürgen Habermas, a German philosopher who argued that an agreement in a public sphere can always be reached when rational people engage in discussions as equals, with mutual respect and perfect communication.

But is DeepMind’s Nobel Prize-winning ingenuity really enough to solve our political conflicts the same way they solved chess or StarCraft or predicting protein structures? Is it even the right tool?

Philosopher in the machine

One of the cornerstone ideas in Habermas’ philosophy is that the reason why people can’t agree with each other is fundamentally procedural and does not lie in the problem under discussion itself. There are no irreconcilable issues—it’s just the mechanisms we use for discussion are flawed. If we could create an ideal communication system, Habermas argued, we could work every problem out.

“Now, of course, Habermas has been dramatically criticized for this being a very exotic view of the world. But our Habermas Machine is an attempt to do exactly that. We tried to rethink how people might deliberate and use modern technology to facilitate it,” says Christopher Summerfield, a professor of cognitive science at Oxford University and a former DeepMind staff scientist who worked on the Habermas Machine.

The Habermas Machine relies on what’s called the caucus mediation principle. This is where a mediator, in this case the AI, sits through private meetings with all the discussion participants individually, takes their statements on the issue at hand, and then gets back to them with a group statement, trying to get everyone to agree with it. DeepMind’s mediating AI plays into one of the strengths of LLMs, which is the ability to briefly summarize a long body of text in a very short time. The difference here is that instead of summarizing one piece of text provided by one user, the Habermas Machine summarizes multiple texts provided by multiple users, trying to extract the shared ideas and find common ground in all of them.

But it has more tricks up its sleeve than simply processing text. At a technical level, the Habermas Machine is a system of two large language models. The first is the generative model based on the slightly fine-tuned Chinchilla, a somewhat dated LLM introduced by DeepMind back in 2022. Its job is to generate multiple candidates for a group statement based on statements submitted by the discussion participants. The second component in the Habermas Machine is a reward model that analyzes individual participants’ statements and uses them to predict how likely each individual is to agree with the candidate group statements proposed by the generative model.

Once that’s done, the candidate group statement with the highest predicted acceptance score is presented to the participants. Then, the participants write their critiques of this group statement, feed those critiques back into the system which generates updated group’s statements and repeats the process. The cycle goes on till the group statement is acceptable to everyone.

Once the AI was ready, DeepMind’s team started a fairly large testing campaign that involved over five thousand people discussing issues such as “should the voting age be lowered to 16?” or “should the British National Health Service be privatized?” Here, the Habermas Machine outperformed human mediators.

Scientific diligence

Most of the first batch of participants were sourced through a crowdsourcing research platform. They were divided into groups of five, and each team was assigned a topic to discuss, chosen from a list of over 5,000 statements about important issues in British politics. There were also control groups working with human mediators. In the caucus mediation process, those human mediators achieved a 44 percent acceptance rate for their handcrafted group statements. The AI scored 56 percent. Participants usually found the AI group statements to be better written as well.

But the testing didn’t end there. Because people you can find on crowdsourcing research platforms are unlikely to be representative of the British population, DeepMind also used a more carefully selected group of participants. They partnered with the Sortition Foundation, which specializes in organizing citizen assemblies in the UK, and assembled a group of 200 people representative of British society when it comes to age, ethnicity, socioeconomic status etc. The assembly was divided into groups of three that deliberated over the same nine questions. And the Habermas Machine worked just as well.

The agreement rate for the statement “we should be trying to reduce the number of people in prison” rose from a pre-discussion 60 percent agreement to 75 percent. The support for the more divisive idea of making it easier for asylum seekers to enter the country went from 39 percent at the start to 51 percent at the end of discussion, which allowed it to achieve majority support. The same thing happened with the problem of encouraging national pride, which started with 42 percent support and ended at 57 percent. The views held by the people in the assembly converged on five out of nine questions. Agreement was not reached on issues like Brexit, where participants were particularly entrenched in their starting positions. Still, in most cases, they left the experiment less divided than they were coming in. But there were some question marks.

The questions were not selected entirely at random. They were vetted, as the team wrote in their paper, to “minimize the risk of provoking offensive commentary.” But isn’t that just an elegant way of saying, ‘We carefully chose issues unlikely to make people dig in and throw insults at each other so our results could look better?’

Conflicting values

“One example of the things we excluded is the issue of transgender rights,” Summerfield told Ars. “This, for a lot of people, has become a matter of cultural identity. Now clearly that’s a topic which we can all have different views on, but we wanted to err on the side of caution and make sure we didn’t make our participants feel unsafe. We didn’t want anyone to come out of the experiment feeling that their basic fundamental view of the world had been dramatically challenged.”

The problem is that when your aim is to make people less divided, you need to know where the division lines are drawn. And those lines, if Gallup polls are to be trusted, are not only drawn between issues like whether the voting age should be 16 or 18 or 21. They are drawn between conflicting values. The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart argued that, for the right side of the US’s political spectrum, the only division line that matters today is “woke” versus “not woke.”

Summerfield and the rest of the Habermas Machine team excluded the question about transgender rights because they believed participants’ well-being should take precedence over the benefit of testing their AI’s performance on more divisive issues. They excluded other questions as well like the problem of climate change.

Here, the reason Summerfield gave was that climate change is a part of an objective reality—it either exists or it doesn’t, and we know it does. It’s not a matter of opinion you can discuss. That’s scientifically accurate. But when the goal is fixing politics, scientific accuracy isn’t necessarily the end state.

If major political parties are to accept the Habermas Machine as the mediator, it has to be universally perceived as impartial. But at least some of the people behind AIs are arguing that an AI can’t be impartial. After OpenAI released the ChatGPT in 2022, Elon Musk posted a tweet, the first of many, where he argued against what he called the “woke” AI. “The danger of training AI to be woke—in other words, lie—is deadly,” Musk wrote. Eleven months later, he announced Grok, his own AI system marketed as “anti-woke.” Over 200 million of his followers were introduced to the idea that there were “woke AIs” that had to be countered by building “anti-woke AIs”—a world where the AI was no longer an agnostic machine but a tool pushing the political agendas of its creators.

Playing pigeons’ games

“I personally think Musk is right that there have been some tests which have shown that the responses of language models tend to favor more progressive and more libertarian views,” Summerfield says. “But it’s interesting to note that those experiments have been usually run by forcing the language model to respond to multiple-choice questions. You ask ‘is there too much immigration’ for example, and the answers are either yes or no. This way the model is kind of forced to take an opinion.”

He said that if you use the same queries as open-ended questions, the responses you get are, for the large part, neutral and balanced. “So, although there have been papers that express the same view as Musk, in practice, I think it’s absolutely untrue,” Summerfield claims.

Does it even matter?

Summerfield did what you would expect a scientist to do: He dismissed Musk’s claims as based on a selective reading of the evidence. That’s usually checkmate in the world of science. But in the world politics, being correct is not what matters the most. Musk was short, catchy, and easy to share and remember. Trying to counter that by discussing methodology in some papers nobody read was a bit like playing chess with a pigeon.

At the same time, Summerfield had his own ideas about AI that others might consider dystopian. “If politicians want to know what the general public thinks today, they might run a poll. But people’s opinions are nuanced, and our tool allows for aggregation of opinions, potentially many opinions, in the highly dimensional space of language itself,” he says. While his idea is that the Habermas Machine can potentially find useful points of political consensus, nothing is stopping it from also being used to craft speeches optimized to win over as many people as possible.

That may be in keeping with Habermas’ philosophy, though. If you look past the myriads of abstract concepts ever-present in German idealism, it offers a pretty bleak view of the world. “The system,” driven by power and money of corporations and corrupt politicians, is out to colonize “the lifeworld,” roughly equivalent to the private sphere we share with our families, friends, and communities. The way you get things done in “the lifeworld” is through seeking consensus, and the Habermas Machine, according to DeepMind, is meant to help with that. The way you get things done in “the system,” on the other hand, is through succeeding—playing it like a game and doing whatever it takes to win with no holds barred, and Habermas Machine apparently can help with that, too.

The DeepMind team reached out to Habermas to get him involved in the project. They wanted to know what he’d have to say about the AI system bearing his name. But Habermas has never got back to them. “Apparently, he doesn’t use emails,” Summerfield says.

Science, 2024. DOI: 10.1126/science.adq2852

Jacek Krywko is a freelance science and technology writer who covers space exploration, artificial intelligence research, computer science, and all sorts of engineering wizardry.

Google’s DeepMind is building an AI to keep us from hating each other Read More »

Annoyed Redditors tanking Google Search results illustrates perils of AI scrapers

AI, ai overview, Google, reddit, Social Media, Tech / Tim Belzer / October 25, 2024

Fed up Londoners

Apparently, some London residents are getting fed up with social media influencers whose reviews make long lines of tourists at their favorite restaurants, sometimes just for the likes. Christian Calgie, a reporter for London-based news publication Daily Express, pointed out this trend on X yesterday, noting the boom of Redditors referring people to Angus Steakhouse, a chain restaurant, to combat it.

As Gizmodo deduced, the trend seemed to start on the r/London subreddit, where a user complained about a spot in Borough Market being “ruined by influencers” on Monday:

“Last 2 times I have been there has been a queue of over 200 people, and the ones with the food are just doing the selfie shit for their [I]nsta[gram] pages and then throwing most of the food away.”

As of this writing, the post has 4,900 upvotes and numerous responses suggesting that Redditors talk about how good Angus Steakhouse is so that Google picks up on it. Commenters quickly understood the assignment.

“Agreed with other posters Angus steakhouse is absolutely top tier and tourists shoyldnt [sic] miss out on it,” one Redditor wrote.

Another Reddit user wrote:

Spreading misinformation suddenly becomes a noble goal.

As of this writing, asking Google for the best steak, steakhouse, or steak sandwich in London (or similar) isn’t generating an AI Overview result for me. But when I searched for the best steak sandwich in London, the top result is from Reddit, including a thread from four days ago titled “Which Angus Steakhouse do you recommend for their steak sandwich?” and one from two days ago titled “Had to see what all the hype was about, best steak sandwich I’ve ever had!” with a picture of an Angus Steakhouse.

Annoyed Redditors tanking Google Search results illustrates perils of AI scrapers Read More »

X Payments delayed after Musk’s X weirdly withdrew application for NY license

consumer financial protection bureau, elon musk, fintech, Policy, Twitter, X, x corp, x payments / Tim Belzer / October 25, 2024

Will X Payments launch this year? Outlook not so good.

Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images/Bloomberg

This October, many Elon Musk believers are wondering, where is X Payments?

Last year, Musk claimed in a Spaces conversation that he “would be surprised” if it took longer than mid-2024 to roll out the payments feature that he believes is crucial to transforming the social media app formerly known as Twitter into an everything app.

“It would blow my mind if we don’t have that rolled out by the end of next year,” Musk said around this time last year, clarifying that “when I say payments, I actually mean someone’s entire financial life. If it involves money, it’ll be on our platform. Money or securities or whatever. So, it’s not just like ‘send $20 to my friend.’ I’m talking about, like, you won’t need a bank account.”

Echoing Musk as recently as June, X CEO Linda Yaccarino was hyping the US release of X Payments as imminent. But it has been months without another peep from X leadership, and Ars recently confirmed that X took a curious step in April that suggests the payments feature may be delayed indefinitely.

During the Spaces conversation last December with Ark Invest CEO Cathie Wood, Musk discussed X’s bid to secure money transmitter licenses in all 50 states, noting that it would be “irrelevant” to launch X Payments without California and New York licenses.

Since then, X has made a decent amount of progress, picking up money transmitter licenses in 38 states, including a critical license in California.

But approvals in New York were reportedly stalled for months after a New York City law firm, now called Walden Macht Haran & Williams (WMHW), sent an open letter to attorneys general and banking commissioners in all 50 states in September 2023, urging that X be deemed “unfit” for a money transmitter license.

WMHW had filed a lawsuit alleging that Twitter—before Musk acquired it—”acted at the direction of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) in furtherance of KSA’s long-running campaign of transnational repression.”

That campaign led to the murder of Washington Post correspondent Jamal Khashoggi and the “imprisonment of Abdulrahman Al-Sadhan, a human rights worker and anonymous Twitter user, whose confidential user data—leaked by Twitter’s employees—precipitated and enabled this barbarity,” the letter alleged. And when Musk took over the platform, he only deepened the app’s KSA ties further when he “invited KSA to convert its shares in Twitter into a financial stake during his private take-over of the platform,” the letter said.

Rather than grant X money transmitter licenses, WMHW recommended that attorneys general and banking commissioners use X’s money transmitter licenses as an excuse to investigate the allegations and demystify the app’s allegedly dangerous KSA ties.

Apparently, X either did not like the heat or decided to rethink its X Payments strategy, because the New York Department of Financial Services provided new information to Ars this week confirming that X withdrew its money transmitter license in New York in April 2024.

The department also confirmed that X has not since resubmitted the application.

However, WMHW this month voluntarily dismissed its client’s lawsuit against X and declined to comment on whether the open letter seemingly worked to block X Payments’ launch. It seems possible that X may leverage that court win to eventually resubmit its application for a New York license, but Ars could not confirm if X has any plans to resubmit any time soon.

An X spokesperson answered Ars’ request to comment (which rarely happens) but declined to provide an update on any new timeline for X Payments’ launch.

X Payments unlikely to launch without New York

It seems possible that X has gone silent on X Payments because there is no timeline currently.

A global payments expert for tech consultancy Capco, Daniela Hawkins, told Ars that, as an outsider going just off a “gut check,” if X has withdrawn its application from New York—with “New York obviously being such a major metropolitan area… that would seem to be a barrier to entry into the payments market.”

X could launch X Payments without New York and other states, but Hawkins said users might be confused about where they can and cannot send money. Hawkins thinks it’s unlikely that Musk—who co-founded PayPal and has wanted to launch his own payments app since—would roll out X Payments “half-assed.”

Basically, if X pushed through with the launch, users could accept and send funds just like they can using any other payments app, but without licenses in all states, X users could only send money to people located in states where X has licenses. Hawkins said that inconsistency could deter popular use of the payments feature because “it’s too difficult for the consumer to understand.”

“If you roll it out with handcuffs on it, it’s gonna have a bumpy launch,” Hawkins said. “So why would you do that?”

Going that route, X seemingly risks users ditching X to complete payments on apps where every transaction reliably goes through, Hawkins suggested.

“They’re gonna be like, ‘Wait, I don’t know where this Etsy shop is located, I don’t care,” Hawkins said, noting, “that’s just a bad user experience.”

More regulations on payment apps coming

Last year, Hawkins told Ars that X faced an “uphill battle” launching X Payments, partly due to intensifying regulations on the financial services industry that are increasingly pulling payments apps into regulations typically focused on regulating traditional banking services.

Just days ago, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a final rule requiring banks, credit unions, and online payments services to make it easy and safe for customers to port banking data to a new financial service provider.

The CFPB argues customers need to have control over their data, but Hawkins told Ars that banks considered the controversial rule potentially allowing customers to transfer sensitive data in one click to be a “freaking nightmare.”

Banks warned of fraud risks and privacy concerns about sharing sensitive data with third parties that could profit off that data, possibly heightening risks of data breaches. Compliance isn’t required until 2026, but already the rule is being challenged in court, Hawkins said.

In one way, the new rule could be good for X, Hawkins told Ars, as the app could quickly gain access to valuable financial data if X users did switch from, say, using a bank to managing money through X Payments. Then X wouldn’t have “to go build all this data from scratch” to make X Payments profitable, Hawkins suggested.

But in another way, the rule could put X in “an interesting spot” where the app is required to share its user data with third parties in a way that could potentially have Musk second-guessing whether X would even benefit from becoming a bank in the way that he initially planned. Banks have protested the CFPB rule as allowing third parties to profit off data that they can’t, and Musk’s whole X Payments plan appears to revolve around profiting off users’ financial data.

“If somebody wants to pay with X, now X has to transfer the data to the third party, and they may not want to do that, because obviously, data is power, right?” Hawkins said.

Not a bank

But if Musk is suddenly shy about turning X into a bank, it comes at a time when banks are less likely to partner with social media apps for potentially risky new payment ventures.

Hawkins noted that banks have struggled to roll out new payment capabilities as easily as fintechs can, and that struggle inspired longtime partnerships between banks and tech companies that have recently begun to collapse. On Wednesday, the CFPB ordered Apple and Goldman Sachs to pay more than $89 million over “illegally mishandled transaction disputes.” Now Goldman Sachs is banned from offering new credit cards until it can be trusted to comply with laws. And Wells Fargo recently bowed out of PayPal and Square partnerships, citing compliance costs, The Information reported this week.

For Musk, who has notoriously butted heads with his trust and safety compliance teams at X, working with regulators on launching X Payments might, at this moment, seem less attractive.

“It’s one thing to want to move money on a payments app,” Hawkins told Ars. “It’s another thing to be a bank. Like he’s gonna hate being a bank.”

Earlier this year, the CFPB risked being dismantled after the financial services associations alleged its funding scheme was improper. But shortly after X withdrew from New York, the Supreme Court ruled in May that nothing was amiss with CFPB’s funding, despite Justice Samuel Alito warning in his dissent that SCOTUS’s decision meant the CFPB could “bankroll its own agenda without any congressional control or oversight,” Reuters reported.

In this strained environment, X could potentially overcome all obstacles and become a bank and fill a gap left by banks beginning to be spooked by fintech deals, Hawkins said, insisting that she would never bet against Musk, whose successes are many. But granting money transmitter licenses helps states prevent financial crimes through compliance requirements, and X quietly pulling out of New York earlier this year suggests that X may not be prepared to take on regulatory scrutiny at this current moment.

The last major development regarding X Payments came in August. It didn’t come from X leadership but from an app researcher, Nima Owji, who posted on X that “X Payments is coming soon!” Digging in X’s code, Owji apparently found references to new payments features enabling “transactions, balance, and transfer,” as well as a “Payments” button seemingly ready to be added to X’s bookmarks tab, TechCrunch reported.

But for Musk fans awaiting an official update, X executives’ silence on X Payments has been deafening since June, when Yaccarino forecast the feature would be coming soon, despite knowing that X had withdrawn its application for a money transmitter license from New York.

X continuing to hype the payments service without publicly disclosing the apparent speed bump in New York “doesn’t feel very honest,” Hawkins told Ars.

X still losing users, advertisers

It has been two years since Musk took over Twitter, soon after revealing that he intended to use Twitter’s userbase as the launchpad for an everything app that would be so engaging and useful that it would be the only app that anyone would ever need online.

Market intelligence firm Sensor Tower shared data with Ars showing that, compared to October 2022, when Musk bought Twitter, global daily average users on X were down 28 percent in September 2024.

Sensor Tower attributed part of the recent decline to X’s ban in Brazil driving out users but noted that overall, users “were down significantly compared to the pre-acquisition period,” as now-X “contended with a rise of controversial content and technical issues.”

While the decline in users could hurt Musk’s ambitions to launch a hugely popular payments app nested in X, the spike in offensive content has notably alienated advertisers who traditionally are X’s dominant source of revenue. And in lockstep with X’s decline in users, major brands have continued to shed the social app in 2024, Sensor Tower told Ars.

Last November, ad agencies flagged then-Twitter brand safety concerns, including GroupM marking Twitter “high risk” and Interpublic Group recommending that advertisers pause spending. By the end of last year, Sensor Tower reported that “of the company’s top 100 US advertisers in the days before” Musk purchased the platform, “only 50 were still there as of October 2023.”

The picture is even bleaker as X approaches the end of 2024, Sensor Tower’s data shows, estimating that “72 out of the top 100 spending US advertisers on X from October 2022 have ceased spending on the platform as of September 2024.” Compared to the first half of 2022, prior to Musk’s acquisition, X’s ad revenue from top 100 advertisers during the first half of 2024 was down 68 percent, Sensor Tower estimated.

Since becoming X’s CEO, Yaccarino has appeared most vocal about driving growth in X’s video services, allowing advertisers to avoid toxic content on the app by only running their ads alongside pre-approved creators’ content. In particular, Yaccarino has hyped X’s partnership with the NFL, announcing today on X that the partnership will be expanded.

That NFL partnership has seemingly helped X grow its ad revenue, with Sensor Tower estimating that “four out of the top 10 spending US advertisers on X in September 2024 were tied to sports or sports betting, likely in an attempt to capitalize on heightened consumer interest around the beginning of the NFL season.”

But overall, X’s revenue has not recovered in 2024, with Fidelity recently estimating that X is worth 80 percent less than when Musk bought the app, CNN reported.

Instead of working with advertisers, Musk went on the attack, suing the World Federation of Advertisers in August over what he calls an “illegal boycott” of X. But X’s spokesperson, Michael Abboud, linked Ars to an X post suggesting that X has held discussions with big brands about a brand safety solution.

“X is pleased to have reached an agreement with Unilever and to continue our partnership with them on the platform,” X’s post said. “Today’s news is the first part of the ecosystem-wide solution and we look forward to more resolution across the industry.”

Unilever did not respond to Ars’ request to comment on X’s proposed solution.

Musk’s strategy for monetizing X has always been to reduce reliance on advertising, but his everything app pursuit does not seem to be coming together as quickly as planned to make up for lost ad revenue. He initially projected that it would take three to five years to roll out all the features turning X into an everything app. But two years in, launching the core product experts say is critical to the success of everything apps like WeChat—X Payments—seems to be the major obstacle that Musk faces to manage the app without relying nearly entirely on advertisers’ meddling ideas regarding brand safety.

Hawkins said that Musk perhaps did not make a “great bet” when buying Twitter as the foundation of his everything app.

X “has continued to trend down in terms of profitability and users, and I’m sure he’s considering X Payments to be maybe a Hail Mary to try to pull X back into the black,” Hawkins said.

But by trying to disrupt the financial industry, Musk perhaps rashly “picked a highly regulated capability to bet the farm on,” Hawkins suggested.

As it stands now, it’s currently unclear when or if X Payments will launch, as the feed on the X account for Payments remains pointedly blank and Musk has not indicated whether X Payments can possibly launch without New York.

“I think it’s very telling he pulled out his application from New York, when he had even said in the media, there’s no point in doing this if I don’t have New York,” Hawkins said.

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

X Payments delayed after Musk’s X weirdly withdrew application for NY license Read More »

Missouri AG claims Google censors Trump, demands info on search algorithm

andrew bailey, Google, Policy / Tim Belzer / October 25, 2024

In 2022, the Republican National Committee sued Google with claims that it intentionally used Gmail’s spam filter to suppress Republicans’ fundraising emails. A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit in August 2023, ruling that Google correctly argued that the RNC claims were barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

In January 2023, the Federal Election Commission rejected a related RNC complaint that alleged Gmail’s spam filtering amounted to “illegal in-kind contributions made by Google to Biden For President and other Democrat candidates.” The federal commission found “no reason to believe” that Google made prohibited in-kind corporate contributions and said a study cited by Republicans “does not make any findings as to the reasons why Google’s spam filter appears to treat Republican and Democratic campaign emails differently.”

First Amendment doesn’t cover private forums

In 2020, a US appeals court wrote that the Google-owned YouTube is not subject to free-speech requirements under the First Amendment. “Despite YouTube’s ubiquity and its role as a public-facing platform, it remains a private forum, not a public forum subject to judicial scrutiny under the First Amendment,” the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit said.

The US Constitution’s free speech clause imposes requirements on the government, not private companies—except in limited circumstances in which a private entity qualifies as a state actor.

Many Republican government officials want more authority to regulate how social media firms moderate user-submitted content. Republican officials from 20 states, including 19 state attorneys general, argued in a January 2024 Supreme Court brief that they “have authority to prohibit mass communication platforms from censoring speech.”

The brief was filed in support of Texas and Florida laws that attempt to regulate social networks. In July, the Supreme Court avoided making a final decision on tech-industry challenges to the state laws but wrote that the Texas law “is unlikely to withstand First Amendment scrutiny.” The Computer & Communications Industry Association said it was pleased by the ruling because it “mak[es] clear that a State may not interfere with private actors’ speech.”

Missouri AG claims Google censors Trump, demands info on search algorithm Read More »

Taco Bell, KFC, Pizza Hut, Burger King pull onions amid McDonald’s outbreak

CDC, E. coli, health, mcdonalds, onions, Science / Tim Belzer / October 24, 2024

On Thursday, Yum Brands—owner of KFC, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell—followed that lead, saying it, too, would remove fresh onions from its chains’ menus at some locations, according to Reuters. Restaurant Brands International, owner of Burger King, also did the same.

“We’ve been told by corporate to not use any onions going forward for the foreseeable future,” Maria Gonzales, the on-duty manager inside a Burger King in Longmont, Colorado, told Reuters on Wednesday. “They’re off our menu.”

As of Thursday, the case count in the E. coli outbreak remained at 49 people in 10 states. Of those, 10 were hospitalized, including a child with a life-threatening complication. One older person in Colorado has died.

The states with cases include: Colorado (26 cases), Nebraska (9), Utah (4), Wyoming (4), and one case each in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Oregon, and Wisconsin.

McDonald’s removed Quarter Pounders and slivered onions from restaurant menus in Colorado, Kansas, Utah, Wyoming, and portions of Idaho, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. In a statement, McDonald’s said that for these restaurants, its onions are “sourced by a single supplier that serves three distribution centers. The fast-food giant continues to serve other beef burgers and diced onions at impacted locations.

Taco Bell, KFC, Pizza Hut, Burger King pull onions amid McDonald’s outbreak Read More »

Author name: Tim Belzer