theodp writes: In 2012, now-Microsoft President Brad Smith unveiled Microsoft's National Talent Strategy, a two-pronged strategy that called for tech visa restrictions to be loosened to allow tech companies to hire non-U.S. citizens to fill jobs until more American schoolchildren could be made tech-savvy enough to pass hiring standards. Shortly thereafter, tech-backed nonprofit Code.org emerged (led by Smith's next-door neighbor Hadi Partovi with Smith as a founding Board member) with a mission to ensure that U.S. schoolchildren started receiving 'rigorous' computer science education instruction. Around the same time, Mark Zuckerberg's FWD.us PAC launched (with support from Smith, Partovi, and other tech leaders) with a mission to reform tech visa policy to meet tech's need for talent.

Fast forward to 2024, and Newsweek reports the debate over tech immigration policy has been revived, spurred by the recent appointment of Sriram Krishnan as senior policy adviser for AI at the Trump White House. Comments by far-right political activist Laura Loomer on Twitter about Krishnan's call for loosening Green Card restrictions were met with rebuttals from prominent tech leaders who are also serving as members of the Trump transition team. Entrepreneur David Sacks, who Trump has tapped as his cryptocurrency and AI czar, took to social media to clarify that Krishnan advocates for removing country caps on green cards, not eliminating caps entirely, aiming to create a more merit-based system. However, the NY Times reported that Sacks discussed a much broader visa reform proposal with Trump during a June podcast ("What I will do is," Trump told Sacks, "you graduate from a college, I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country"). Elon Musk, the recently appointed co-head of Trump's new Dept. of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had Sacks' and Krishnan's backs (not unexpected -- both were close Musk advisors on his Twitter purchase), tweeting out "Makes sense" to his 209 million followers, lamenting that "the number of people who are super talented engineers AND super motivated in the USA is far too low," reposting claims crediting immigrants for 36% of the innovation in the U.S., and taking USCIS to task for failing to immediately recognize his own genius with an Exceptional Ability Green Card (for his long-defunct Zip2 startup).

Vivek Ramaswamy, who Trump has tapped to co-lead DOGE with Musk, agreed and fanned the Twitter flames with a pinned Tweet of his own explaining, "The reason top tech companies often hire foreign-born -- first-generation engineers over "native" Americans isn't because of an innate American IQ deficit (a lazy -- wrong explanation). A key part of it comes down to the c-word: culture." (Colorado Governor Jared Polis also took to Twitter to agree with Musk and Ramaswamy on the need to import 'elite engineers'). And Code.org CEO Partovi joined the Twitter fray, echoing the old we-need-H1B-visas-to-make-US-schoolchildren-CS-savvy argument of Microsoft's 2012 National Talent Strategy. "Did you know 2/3 of H1B visas are for computer scientists?" Partovi wrote in reply to Musk, Loomer, and Sachs. "The H1B program raises $500M/year (from its corporate sponsors) and all that money is funneled into programs at Labor and NSF without focus to grow local CS talent. Let's fund CS education." The NYT also cited Zuckerberg's earlier efforts to influence immigration policy with FWD.us (which also counted Sacks and Musk as early supporters), taking note of Zuck's recent visit to Mar-a-Lago and Meta's $1 million donation to Trump's upcoming inauguration.

So, who is to be believed? Musk, who attributes any tech visa qualms to "a 'fixed pie' fallacy that is at the heart of much wrong-headed economic thinking" and argues that "there is essentially infinite potential for job and company creation ['We should let anyone in the country who is hardworking and honest and will be a contributor to the United States,' Musk has said]"? Or economists who have found that immigration and globalization is not quite the rising-tide-that-raises-all-boats it's been cracked up to be?

Lost deliveries, shipping delays and theft on the front porch have become such growing problems that companies are making consumers pay for package protection. From a report: Tens of thousands of online retailers now offer the service for a few dollars per order. The fees go to young companies -- Route and Corso, to name two -- that promise to make customers whole without charging the merchant if a delivery doesn't arrive. Consumers are finding that retailers either ask them to pay for package protection or draw a harder line when it comes to replacing a missing item. Some retailers are making the fees mandatory, spreading the burden of package theft among all customers.

To know whether you are paying the fee, review your order before you press purchase. Sometimes it is named after the company offering protection, and sometimes it is called shipping insurance or package protection. Skincare brand Topicals began using Corso two years ago after seeing 30% of its packages were regularly marked delivered but not received, according to customer insights manager Deja Jefferson. By requiring protection, which Topicals discloses on its shipping page, the company doesn't have to worry about convincing customers to opt in. "We actually don't get any complaints on it whatsoever," she said. Further reading: Porch Pirates Steal So Many Packages That Now You Can Get Insurance.

They gave it the old college try, but America's elite universities are facing money problems partly of their own creation. From a report: It might not seem that way compared with the broader world of U.S. higher education. Ivy League institutions and a handful in a similar orbit like Stanford, Duke and the University of Chicago aren't just blessed to have international cachet and their pick of excellent students and professors -- they also have the most money and the richest alumni. By contrast, public and especially smaller private colleges and universities are cutting staff and programs. Many are closing outright.

A school like Harvard, now well into its fourth century, will almost certainly survive for a fifth one. But there are financial problems below the surface that could emerge if the bull market stumbles and especially if some proposed Trump administration policies are enacted. Harvard's $53.2 billion endowment is so huge that the difference between a good and a so-so investment performance translates to sums that would dwarf most colleges' entire nest eggs.

Former Harvard President and former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers estimated this year that if Harvard had been able to just keep up with other Ivies and "large endowment schools" in the past several years, it would have $20 billion more. For perspective, he says that just $1 billion could fund 100 professorships or permanently cover tuition for 100 students. But even Harvard's peer group isn't doing as well as it could. Veteran investment consultant Richard Ennis wrote this month that high costs and "outdated perceptions of superiority" have stymied Ivy League endowment returns, which could have been worth 20% more since the 2008 financial crisis if invested in a classic stock and bond mix.

Honda sketched plans for a drawn-out deal that amounts to a takeover of Nissan in all but name, as Japan's automakers struggle to keep up in an increasingly competitive global car industry. From a report: The two announced a tentative agreement Monday to set up a joint holding company that will aim to list shares in August 2026. While their executives called the transaction a merger, Honda will take the lead in forming the new entity and nominate a majority of its directors.

Nissan's partner Mitsubishi may also participate in the deal. Honda and Nissan both are having trouble contending with ascendant domestic automakers in China, which surpassed Japan as the world's largest car-exporting nation last year and is pulling further ahead in 2024. Honda Chief Executive Officer Toshihiro Mibe spoke to the level of level of difficulty ahead for the companies when he said during a press conference that their goal is to be competitive by 2030.

An anonymous reader shares a report: In recent months, Telegram, the lightly moderated social media app, has held discussions with investors who lent it more than $2 billion. The goal: to reassure them that the company remains a viable bet after its founder, Pavel Durov, was arrested in France in August on charges related to illicit activities on the platform.

In the conversations, Telegram told investors that it was tackling its legal troubles head-on by policing more user-generated content. The company also said it had paid down a "meaningful amount" of its debt, according to an investor in the talks who was not authorized to discuss confidential information. Telegram has been under increasing scrutiny around the world this year for hosting illicit content from child predators, drug traffickers and other criminals. The company also faces pressure another way: to prove it can make money.

For years, skeptics have questioned if a platform known for hosting toxic material could turn a profit. Unlike social media companies such as Meta, Telegram took an unusual business path: It did not raise money from venture capitalists, sell advertising based on user data or hire aggressively to accelerate growth. Instead, it relied on Mr. Durov's fame and fortune to sustain its business, took on debt and barreled into the cryptocurrency market. [...] The result: Telegram is set to be profitable this year for the first time, according to a person with knowledge of the finances who declined to be identified discussing internal figures. Revenue is on track to surpass $1 billion, up from nearly $350 million last year, the person said.

"From the moment GPT-4 came out in March 2023, OpenAI has been working on GPT-5..." reports the Wall Street Journal. [Alternate URL here.] But "OpenAI's new artificial-intelligence project is behind schedule and running up huge bills. It isn't clear when — or if — it'll work."

"There may not be enough data in the world to make it smart enough." OpenAI's closest partner and largest investor, Microsoft, had expected to see the new model around mid-2024, say people with knowledge of the matter. OpenAI has conducted at least two large training runs, each of which entails months of crunching huge amounts of data, with the goal of making Orion smarter. Each time, new problems arose and the software fell short of the results researchers were hoping for, people close to the project say... [And each one costs around half a billion dollars in computing costs.]

The $157 billion valuation investors gave OpenAI in October is premised in large part on [CEO Sam] Altman's prediction that GPT-5 will represent a "significant leap forward" in all kinds of subjects and tasks.... It's up to company executives to decide whether the model is smart enough to be called GPT-5 based in large part on gut feelings or, as many technologists say, "vibes."

So far, the vibes are off...
OpenAI wants to use its new model to generate high-quality synthetic data for training, according to the article. But OpenAI's researchers also "concluded they needed more diverse, high-quality data," according to the article, since "The public internet didn't have enough, they felt." OpenAI's solution was to create data from scratch. It is hiring people to write fresh software code or solve math problems for Orion to learn from. [And also theoretical physics experts] The workers, some of whom are software engineers and mathematicians, also share explanations for their work with Orion... Having people explain their thinking deepens the value of the newly created data. It's more language for the LLM to absorb; it's also a map for how the model might solve similar problems in the future... The process is painfully slow. GPT-4 was trained on an estimated 13 trillion tokens. A thousand people writing 5,000 words a day would take months to produce a billion tokens.

OpenAI's already-difficult task has been complicated by internal turmoil and near-constant attempts by rivals to poach its top researchers, sometimes by offering them millions of dollars... More than two dozen key executives, researchers and longtime employees have left OpenAI this year, including co-founder and Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever and Chief Technology Officer Mira Murati. This past Thursday, Alec Radford, a widely admired researcher who served as lead author on several of OpenAI's scientific papers, announced his departure after about eight years at the company...

OpenAI isn't the only company worrying that progress has hit a wall. Across the industry, a debate is raging over whether improvement in AIs is starting to plateau. Sutskever, who recently co-founded a new AI firm called Safe Superintelligence or SSI, declared at a recent AI conference that the age of maximum data is over. "Data is not growing because we have but one internet," he told a crowd of researchers, policy experts and scientists. "You can even go as far as to say that data is the fossil fuel of AI."

And that fuel was starting to run out.

Monday long-time Slashdot reader denelson83 wrote: The crowdsourced, widely-used map database OpenStreetMap has had a hardware failure at its upstream ISP in Amsterdam and has been put into a protective read-only mode to avoid loss or corruption of data. .
The outage had started Sunday December 15 at 4:00AM (GMT/UTC), but by Tuesday they'd posted a final update: Our new ISP is up and running and we have started migrating our servers across to it. If all goes smoothly we hope to have all services back up and running this evening...

We have dual redundant links via separate physical hardware from our side to our Tier 1 ISP. We unexpectedly discovered their equipment is a single point failure. Their extended outage is an extreme disappointment to us.

We are an extremely small team. The OSMF budget is tiny and we could definitely use more help. Real world experience... Ironically we signed a contract with a new ISP in the last few days. Install is on-going (fibre runs, modules & patching) and we expect to run old and new side-by-side for 6 months. Significantly better resilience (redundant ISP side equipment, VRRP both ways, multiple upstream peers... 2x diverse 10G fibre links).
OpenStreetMap celebrated its 20th anniversary in August, with a TechCrunch profile reminding readers the site gives developers "geographic data and maps so they can rely a little less on the proprietary incumbents in the space," reports TechCrunch, adding "Yes, that mostly means Google."

OpenStreetMap starts with "publicly available and donated aerial imagery and maps, sourced from governments and private organizations such as Microsoft" — then makes them better: Today, OpenStreetMap claims more than 10 million contributors who map out and fine-tune everything from streets and buildings, to rivers, canyons and everything else that constitutes our built and natural environments... Contributors can manually add and edit data through OpenStreetMap's editing tools, and they can even venture out into the wild and map a whole new area by themselves using GPS, which is useful if a new street crops up, for example...

OpenStreetMap's Open Database License allows any third-party to use its data with the appropriate attribution (though this attribution doesn't always happen). This includes big-name corporations such as Apple and VC-backed unicorns like MapBox, through a who's who of tech companies, including Uber and Strava... More recently, the Overture Maps Foundation — an initiative backed by Microsoft, Amazon, Meta and TomTom — has leaned heavily on OpenStreetMap data as part of its own efforts to build a viable alternative to Google's walled mapping garden.
The article notes that OpenStreetMap is now overseen by the U.K.-based nonprofit OpenStreetMap Foundation (supported mainly by donations and memberships), with just one employee — a system engineer — "and a handful of contractors who provide administrative and accounting support."

In August its original founder Steve Coast, returned to the site for a special blog post on its 20th anniversary: OpenStreetMap has grown exponentially or quadratically over the last twenty years depending on the metric you're interested in... The story isn't so much about the data and technology, and it never was. It's the people... OpenStreetMap managed to map the world and give the data away for free for almost no money at all. It managed to sidestep almost all the problems that Wikipedia has by virtue of only representing facts not opinions. The project itself is remarkable. And it's wonderful that so many are in love with it.
"Two decades ago, I knew that a wiki map of the world would work," Coast writes. "It seemed obvious in light of the success of Wikipedia and Linux..."

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is suing America's three largest banks, accusing the institutions of failing to protect customers from fraud on Zelle, the payment platform they co-own. From a report: According to the suit, which also targets Early Warning Services LLC, Zelle's official operator, Zelle users have lost more than $870 million over the network's seven-year existence due to these alleged failures. "The nation's largest banks felt threatened by competing payment apps, so they rushed to put out Zelle," said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra in a statement. "By their failing to put in place proper safeguards, Zelle became a gold mine for fraudsters, while often leaving victims to fend for themselves."

Among the charges:
1. Poor identity verification methods, which have allowed bad actors to quickly create accounts and target Zelle users.
2. Allowing repeat offenders to continue to gain access to the platform
3. Ignoring and failing to report instances of fraud
4. Failing to properly investigate consumer complaints

The CFPB's suit seeks to change the platform's operations, as well as obtain a civil money penalty, that would be paid into the CFPB's victims relief fund.

Ars Technica's Eric Berger reports: In a wide-ranging interview with a Russian television station, the chief executive of Russia's main space corporation said the country is now planning to participate in the International Space Station project all the way to NASA's desired goal of 2030. "In coordination with our American colleagues, we plan to de-orbit the station sometime around the beginning of 2030," the country's chief space official, Yuri Borisov, said during the interview. "The final scenario will probably be specified after the transition to a new NASA administration."

While the documents for such an extension have not been signed, these comments appear to represent a change in tone from Russia. When he first became head of Roscosmos in 2022, Borisov said Russia would leave the station partnership "after" 2024, which was interpreted as shortly thereafter. Later, Russia committed to working with NASA to keep the orbital outpost flying only through 2028. The US space agency has expressed a consistent desire to keep flying the station until 2030, after which point it hopes that private space station operators can provide one or more replacement facilities.
Borisov said the aging station, elements of which have now been in space for more than a quarter of a century, are becoming difficult to maintain. "Today our cosmonauts have to spend more time repairing equipment and less and less time conducting experiments," he said. Borisov also discussed Russia's challenges of getting private investment in space-related activities, saying: "In the West, particularly in America, 70 percent of space services are provided by satellite constellations created by private companies. This process has only just begun with us. This is a very risky business for potential investors."

"Right now, the dynamic growth of private space is being influenced by the general economic situation (likely referring to Russia's costly war in Ukraine), high inflation and interest rates, which leads to expensive money for private investors. We can hope that this will be a temporary period and more favorable times will come soon."

U.S. authorities are investigating Chinese router manufacturer TP-Link over national security risks and considering banning its devices, WSJ reported Wednesday, citing sources familiar with the matter. The Commerce, Defense and Justice departments have launched separate probes into the company, which controls approximately 65% of the U.S. home and small business router market.

Microsoft reported in October that Chinese hackers had compromised thousands of TP-Link routers to launch cyberattacks against Western targets, including government organizations and Defense Department suppliers. The company's routers are widely used across federal agencies, including the Defense Department and NASA. The Justice Department is also examining whether TP-Link's significantly lower pricing violates federal anti-monopoly laws, the report said.

Apple is preparing a series of major design and format changes to its lineup of iPhones and potentially other products, according to WSJ, a bid to revive growth after years of offering largely incremental upgrades. From the report: Starting next year, Apple plans to introduce an iPhone that will be thinner than the approximately 8-millimeter profile of current models, said people familiar with the company's plans. The model is intended to be cheaper than Pro models, with a simplified camera system to reduce costs.

The company is also planning two foldable devices, the people said. A larger device, intended to serve as a laptop, would have a screen that unfolds to be nearly as large as some desktop monitors, at about 19 inches. A smaller model would unfold to a display size that would be larger than an iPhone 16 Pro Max, intended to serve as a foldable iPhone, the people said.

Both foldable designs have been in development for years, but some key parts weren't ready. Major challenges included improving the hinge, a mechanism that allows the device to fold and unfold, and the display cover, a flexible material protecting the foldable screen. Current foldable phones on the market aren't thin, light or energy-efficient enough to meet Apple's standards, which is why Apple has been slower to enter this segment, said Jeff Pu, an analyst with Hong Kong-based brokerage Haitong International Securities.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Softbank CEO Masayoshi Son will announce a $100 billion investment in the U.S. over the next four years during a Monday visit to President-elect Donald Trump's residence Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, sources familiar with the matter told CNBC's Sara Eisen.

The billionaire investor and founder of the Japanese tech-investing firm will also promise in the joint announcement with Trump to create 100,000 jobs focused on artificial intelligence and related infrastructure, the sources said. The money will be deployed before the end of Trump's term. The funding could come from various sources controlled by Softbank, including the Vision Fund, capital projects or chipmaker Arm Holdings, where the firm is majority owner.

"In a tiny handful of places..." Wired wrote last month, "you can find yourself flanked by taxis with no one in the drivers' seats." But they added that "Granted, practically everyone has been numbed by the hype cycle."

Wired's response? "[P]ile a few of us into an old-fashioned, human-piloted hired car, then follow a single Waymo robotaxi wherever it goes for a whole workday" to "study its movements, its relationship to life on the streets, its whole self-driving gestalt. We'll interview as many of its passengers as will speak to us, and observe it through the eyes of the kind of human driver it's designed to replace."

This week Wired senior editor John Gravios discussed the experience on the business-news radio show Marketplace (with Marketplace host Kai Ryssdal): Ryssdal: What kinds of reactions did you get from people once you track them down, what did they say about their experience in this driverless car?

Gravios:It was pretty uniform and impressive how much people just love it. They just like the experience of the drive, I guess it's a little bit less herky-jerky than a human driver, but I think a lot of it just comes down to people are just kind of relieved not to have to talk to somebody else, as as sad as that is...

Ryssdal: Tell me about Gabe, your Uber driver, and his thoughts on this whole thing, because that was super interesting.

Gravios: So Gabe, this is a guy whose labor is directly at stake. You know, he's a guy whose labor is going to be replaced by a Waymo. He's had 30 years of experience as a professional driver, first as a taxi driver. He even organized a taxi driver strike in the days before Uber. His first, I think his prejudice with Waymo is having shared the road with them sort of sporadically, he thought of them as kind of dopey, rule-following, frustrating vehicles to share the road with. But over the course of the day, he started to recognize that the Waymo was driving a lot like a taxi driver. The Waymo was doing things that were aggressive, that are exactly the kinds of things that a taxi driver is trained to be aggressive with and doing things that were cautious that are exactly the kinds of things that taxi drivers are trained to be cautious with.

Ryssdal: Can we talk unit economics here? According to the math from a study you guys' cite, Waymo is not making a whole lot of money per vehicle, right? And eventually they're going to scale, and it's going to work out, but for the moment, even though they've gotten 11 billion-something-dollars, they're not turning a whole lot of profit here.

Gravios: Yeah, that's a big question, and the math is, even that study, based on a lot of guesswork. It's really hard to say what the unit economics are. What we can say is that the ridership rates are going up so fast that that study is already well out of date. When we were doing our chase, I think the monthly ridership for Waymo was 100,000 rides a month. By October, it was already 150,000 rides a month. So, the economics are just shifting under our feet a lot.

"Proposals for a tunnel connecting the U.K. to the U.S. underneath the Atlantic Ocean have resurfaced," reports Newsweek, "but with a price tag of almost $20 trillion, the project is a big ask." With the two global cities being over 3,000 miles apart, construction would take several years — the 23.5-mile Channel Tunnel linking England and France took six years to construct — and require significant investment. Estimates over the cost have reached as high as £15.5 trillion, the equivalent of $19.8 trillion.

However, developments in vacuum tube technology have made the concept more viable. By creating a vacuum within the tunnel and using pressurized vehicles, trains traveling along the structure could theoretically reach speeds of more than 3,000 mph, making the journey between London and New York barely an hour long. This is because trains would not face any air resistance within the tunnel, allowing them to reach higher speeds than unconventional trains. This design, which has seen new development in Indian transportation, is sometimes called a "hyperloop". Cutting the intercontinental journey down to a matter of minutes means that for the first time, the Transatlantic Tunnel justifies the hefty price tag that undersea construction comes with, as it would become significantly more efficient and environmentally friendly than flying.
While no plans are underway, it's interesting to ask whether it could even be done. Weighing in, Elon Musk "has suggested the idea of building a '£20 trillion' underground tunnel link from London to New York appears to be a genuine possibility," according to the site LADbible, "although he says he could do it for less." (On X.com Musk posted that his Boring Company "could do it for 1000X less money.") This comes after the SpaceX boss, 53, who promises to revolutionise the way we travel, said his 'Starship' rocket could be used to transport passengers to any city in the world in under an hour.

"The Chinese government has long subsidized carmakers with the goal of becoming a major auto exporter," notes the New York Times. But this week they reported on dozens of dealerships around Mexico that are now selling China-made electric vehicles, saying it could be "a potentially grave threat to the North American auto industry."

One employee said their dealership "was selling cars as fast as they arrived from China," including "a small but capable four-door electric compact that costs about $18,000." Chinese carmakers are effectively barred from the United States by tariffs that double the sticker price of vehicles imported from China, and they are not yet manufacturing significant numbers of vehicles in Mexico that could be exported across the border. But their ambition to expand overseas is on vivid display in Mexico and across Latin America, Asia, Europe and Africa. Ads for Chinese brands are in airports and soccer stadiums and loom above Mexico City streets on large billboards. Chinese cars, both gasoline and electric models, are an increasingly common sight. BYD and others are also looking for places to build factories in Mexico, although none have announced firm plans. Initially, the plants would serve Latin America, part of a campaign by Chinese automakers to erode the dominance of Japanese, American and European carmakers in places like Brazil and Thailand.

But there is little doubt that, eventually, Chinese carmakers hope to use Mexico as an on-ramp to the United States.
One of Mexico's EV dealers suggested to the Times that "maybe next year BYD can enter the United States." And he added with a smile, "If not, I can deliver." It is very unlikely that the Dolphin or any other Chinese car brand will be available in the United States soon. Because of the high tariffs, Chinese carmakers have not tried to establish dealerships or get approval from federal regulators to sell in the United States. (BYD does make electric buses in California.) And someone buying a BYD from a Mexican dealer like Mr. Alegría would have a hard time registering and insuring it in the United States because the cars have not demonstrated that they meet safety standards... But in the years to come it may be difficult to explain to consumers in the United States why they're not allowed to buy inexpensive electric vehicles that are readily available across the border, especially if they're made in Mexico, which already manufactures millions of cars for the United States.

Less than 20 years ago, Chinese cars were widely seen as inferior, even by many Chinese drivers. But in recent years, the country's manufacturers have pulled even with foreign rivals in mechanical quality, analysts say, and often surpass U.S., Japanese and European carmakers in battery technology, autonomous driving and entertainment software. (Think in-car karaoke and rotating touch screens)... [T]he auto industry does not appear to have seen anything like the current wave of Chinese brands, which have quickly overtaken Japanese companies as the world's largest auto exporters. Chinese carmakers have made deep inroads in countries where they have local production or face few significant trade barriers. In Brazil, Chinese brands have a 9 percent share of car sales, up from 1 percent in 2019. In Thailand, they have 18 percent of the market, up from 5 percent in 2019, according to JATO.
The article notes that for the world's largest car market — China itself — General Motors just announced "a more than $5 billion hit to its profit" to restructure China operations that have been losing money in recent years. And the article includes this quote from Felipe Munoz, global analyst at the research firm JATO Dynamics.

"Before the pandemic, the rules were set down by the Western carmakers. Now it's the opposite."

Bruce Perens, original co-founder of the Open Source Initiative, has responded to questions from Slashdot readers about a new alternative he's developing that hopefully helps "Post Open" developers get paid.

But first, "One of the things that's clear from the Slashdot patter is that people are not aware of what I've been doing, in general," Perens says. "So, let's start by filling that in..."

Read on for the rest of his wide-ranging answers....

The Solana JavaScript SDK "was temporarily compromised yesterday in a supply chain attack," reports BleepingComputer, "with the library backdoored with malicious code to steal cryptocurrency private keys and drain wallets." Solana offers an SDK called "@solana/web3.js" used by decentralized applications (dApps) to connect and interact with the Solana blockchain. Supply chain security firm Socket reports that Solana's Web3.js library was hijacked to push out two malicious versions to steal private and secret cryptography keys to secure wallets and sign transactions... Solana confirmed the breach, stating that one of their publish-access accounts was compromised, allowing the attackers to publish two malicious versions of the library... Solana is warning developers who suspect they were compromised to immediately upgrade to the latest v1.95.8 release and to rotate any keys, including multisigs, program authorities, and server keypairs...

Once the threat actors gain access to these keys, they can load them into their own wallets and remotely drain all stored cryptocurrency and NFTs... Socket says the attack has been traced to the FnvLGtucz4E1ppJHRTev6Qv4X7g8Pw6WPStHCcbAKbfx Solana address, which currently contains 674.86 Solana and varying amounts of the Irish Pepe , Star Atlas, Jupiter, USD Coin, Santa Hat, Pepe on Fire, Bonk, catwifhat, and Genopets Ki tokens. Solscan shows that the estimated value of the stolen cryptocurrency is $184,000 at the time of this writing.

For anyone whose wallets were compromised in this supply chain attack, you should immediately transfer any remaining funds to a new wallet and discontinue the use of the old one as the private keys are now compromised.
Ars Technica adds that "In social media posts, one person claimed to have lost $20,000 in the hack."

The compromised library "receives more than ~350,000 weekly downloads on npm," Socket posted. (Although Solana's statement says the compromised versions "were caught within hours and have since been unpublished."

11 years ago his hard drive ended up in a U.K. landfill — with 8,000 bitcoin. It's now worth $800 million... and James Howell wants it back.

The Guardian reports that his "bid to become extremely rich reached a judge on Tuesday with a team of lawyers arguing that it was still possible to launch a hunt for his missing hard drive containing the bitcoin." They claimed that rather than searching for a "needle in a haystack", the position of the bitcoin hoard had been narrowed down to a small area and there was a "finely tuned" plan to retrieve it... [Howells] has been asking Newport city council for help in getting the hard drive back, and even said he would share the money with the authority, to no avail... James Goudie KC, representing the council, said Howells had no legal claim to the hard drive. He said: "Anything that goes into the landfill goes into the council's ownership."

Goudie said Howells' offer to share some of the bitcoin with Newport council amounted to a bribe. He said: "He is trying to buy something the council is not in a position to sell...." Before the hearing, a spokesperson for Newport council said: "The council has told Mr Howells multiple times that excavation is not possible under our environmental permit and that work of that nature would have a huge negative environmental impact on the surrounding area. "Responding to Mr Howells' baseless claims are costing the council and Newport taxpayers time and money which could be better spent on delivering services."
Howells was 28 when he lost the hard drive, and has said he may as well keep trying to recover it — because he'll always know that it's out there. Howells' legal teams are "working pro bono," the article notes, "on the basis that they get a share of the bitcoin profits if successful..." And TechSpot points out that "There's also the question of whether the data on the drive would still be accessible after more than a decade of sitting under a pile of rotting garbage.

"Howells has a team of data recovery engineers who are also working pro bono..."

Thanks to Slashdot reader jjslash for sharing the news.

An anonymous reader shared this report from Reuters: Elon Musk's artificial intelligence startup xAI plans to expand its Memphis, Tennessee, supercomputer to house at least one million graphics processing units (GPUs), the Greater Memphis Chamber said on Wednesday, as xAI races to compete against rivals like OpenAI.

The move represents a massive expansion for the supercomputer called Colossus, which currently has 100,000 GPUs to train xAI's chatbot called Grok. As part of the expansion, Nvidia, which supplies the GPUs, and Dell and Super Micro, which have assembled the server racks for the computer, will establish operations in Memphis, the chamber said in a statement.
The Greater Memphis chamber (an economic development organization) called it "the largest capital investment in the region's history," even saying that xAI "is setting the stage for Memphis to become the global epicenter of artificial intelligence." ("To facilitate this massive undertaking, the Greater Memphis Chamber established an xAI Special Operations Team... This team provides round-the-clock concierge service to the company.")

Reuters calls the supercomputer "a critical component of advancing Musk's AI efforts, as the billionaire has deepened his rivalry against OpenAI..." And the Greater Memphis chamber describes the expansion by Nvidia/Dell/Super Micro as "further solidifying the city's position as the 'Digital Delta'... Memphis has provided the power and velocity necessary for not just xAI to grow and thrive, but making way for other companies as well."

Nature: Millions of research articles are absent from major digital archives. This worrying finding, which Nature reported on earlier this year, was laid bare in a study by Martin Eve, who studies technology and publishing at Birkbeck, University of London. Eve sampled more than seven million articles with unique digital object identifiers (DOIs), a string of characters used to identify and link to specific publications, such as scholarly articles and official reports. Of these, he found that more than two million were 'missing' from archives -- that is, they were not preserved in major archives that ensure literature can be found in the future.

Eve, who is also a research developer at Crossref, an organization that registers DOIs, carried out the study in an effort to better understand a problem librarians and archivists already knew about -- that although researchers are generating knowledge at an unprecedented rate, it is not necessarily being stored safely for the future. One contributing factor is that not all journals or scholarly societies survive in perpetuity. For example, a 2021 study found that a lack of comprehensive and open archiving meant that 174 open-access journals, covering all major research topics and geographical regions, vanished from the web in the first two decades of this millennium.

A lack of long-term archiving particularly affects institutions in low- and middle-income countries, less-affluent institutions in rich countries and smaller, under-resourced journals worldwide. Yet it's not clear whether researchers, institutions and governments have fully taken the problem on board. [...] At the heart of the problem is a lack of money, infrastructure and expertise to archive digital resources. [...] For institutions that can afford it, one solution is to pay a preservation archive to safeguard content. Examples include Portico, based in New York City, and CLOCKSS, based in Stanford, California, both of which count a raft of publishers and libraries as customers.