The aviation sector's plans to pass along the cost of decarbonization could add hundreds of dollars to the price of some fights. From a report: Fresh from surviving the Covid-19 pandemic, the aviation industry is about to hand passengers the multi-trillion dollar bill to fight its next existential threat: decarbonization. Cleaning up flying is a mission of improbable scale: Neutralize the carbon emissions of about 25,000 planes in the world's commercial fleet that typically ferry some 4 billion people a year and burn close to 100 billion gallons of jet kerosene. That's more dirty liquid to launder than all the beer drunk in the world in a year.

Some $5 trillion of capital investment may be needed to deliver on aviation's goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2050, almost all of it plowed into sustainable fuel production and renewable power generation, according to McKinsey. It's a mountain of money so large it could wipe out global airline revenue for the best part of a decade. With the clock ticking, industry leaders are starting to voice an uncomfortable truth. It's clear, they say, that the costs of weaning air travel off fossil fuels will land on passengers.

Through seven decades of nearly unfettered expansion, the aviation industry had to pay little attention to emissions. Passengers grew accustomed to ever-improving connectivity, increasing competition and cheap tickets. Suddenly, carriers find themselves in an environmental squeeze, with governments setting deadlines and activists gluing themselves to runways to call attention to global warming. While Greta Thunberg introduced flight-shaming to the public before the pandemic, record temperatures this summer have only underscored climate campaigners' point. Aviation's expensive transition to cleaner fuels has the power to put the democratization of flying into reverse, leading to higher fares, and fewer routes and airlines.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNN: A group of teenage hackers managed to breach some of the world's biggest tech firms last year by exploiting systemic security weaknesses in US telecom carriers and the business supply chain, a US government review of the incidents has found, in what is a cautionary tale for America's critical infrastructure. The Department of Homeland Security-led review of the hacks, which was shared exclusively with CNN, determined US regulators should penalize telecom firms with lax security practices and Congress should consider funding programs to steer American youth away from cybercrime. The investigation of the hacks -- which hit companies like Microsoft and Samsung -- found that, in general, it was far too easy for the cybercriminals to intercept text messages that corporate employees use to log into systems. [...]

"It is highly concerning that a loose band of hackers, including a number of teenagers, was able to consistently break into the best-defended companies in the world," Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told CNN in an interview, adding: "We are seeing a rise in juvenile cybercrime." After a series of high-profile cyberattacks marked his first four months in office, President Joe Biden established the DHS-led Cyber Safety Review Board in 2021 to study the root causes of major hacking incidents and inform policy on how to prevent the next big cyberattack. Staffed by senior US cybersecurity officials and executives at major technology firms like Google, the board does not have regulatory authority, but its recommendations could shape legislation in Congress and future directives from federal agencies. [...]

The board's first review, released in July 2022, concluded that it could take a decade to eradicate a vulnerability in software used by thousands of corporations and government agencies worldwide. The second review, to be released Thursday, focused on a band of young criminal hackers based in the United Kingdom and Brazil that last year launched a series of attacks on Microsoft, Uber, Samsung and identity management firm Okta, among others. The audacious hacks were often followed by extortion demands and taunts by hackers who seemed to be out for publicity as much as they were for money. The hacking group, known as Lapsus$, alarmed US officials because they were able to embarrass major tech firms with robust security programs. "If richly resourced cybersecurity programs were so easily breached by a loosely organized threat actor group, which included several juveniles, how can organizations expect their programs to perform against well-resourced cybercrime syndicates and nation-state actors?" the Cyber Safety Review Board's new report states. Lapsus$, as well as other hacking groups, conduct "SIM-swapping" attacks that can take over a victim's phone number by having it transferred to another device, thereby gaining access to 2FA security codes and personal messages. These can then be used to reveal login credentials and access financial information.

"The board wants telecom carriers to report SIM-swapping attacks to US regulatory agencies, and for those agencies to penalize carriers when they don't adequately protect customers from such attacks," reports CNN.

The nation's best-known public universities have been on an unfettered spending spree. Over the past two decades, they erected new skylines comprising snazzy academic buildings and dorms. They poured money into big-time sports programs and hired layers of administrators. Then they passed the bill along to students. From a report: The University of Kentucky upgraded its campus to the tune of $805,000 a day for more than a decade. Its freshmen, who come from one of America's poorest states, paid an average $18,693 to attend in 2021-22. Pennsylvania State University spent so much money that it now has a budget crisis -- even though it's among the most expensive public universities in the U.S.

The University of Oklahoma hit students with some of the biggest tuition increases, while spending millions on projects including acquiring and renovating a 32,000-square-foot Italian monastery for its study-abroad program. The spending is inextricably tied to the nation's $1.6 trillion federal student debt crisis. Colleges have paid for their sprees in part by raising tuition prices, leaving many students with few options but to take on more debt. That means student loans served as easy financing for university projects.

It has long been clear to American families that the cost of college has gone up, even at public schools designed to be affordable for state residents. To get at the root cause, The Wall Street Journal examined financial statements since 2002 from 50 universities known as flagships, typically the oldest public school in each state, and adjusted for inflation. At the median flagship university, spending rose 38% between 2002 and 2022. Only one school in the Journal's analysis -- the University of Idaho -- spent less. The schools paid for it in part by pulling in tuition dollars. The median flagship received more than double the revenue from undergraduate and graduate tuition and fees it did 20 years prior. Even accounting for enrollment gains, that amounted to a 64% price increase for the average student, far outpacing the growth in most big household expenses.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Production companies are scanning the faces and bodies of actors and actresses, who fear their likeness will be used to create fake AI doubles for TV shows and films in the future. Some workers spoke to NPR last week about being subjected to the scans, and feeling like they couldn't say no. Alexandria Rubalcaba, who was working as a background actor, described being called into a trailer and asked to stand in front of cameras.

"Have your hands out. Have your hands in. Look this way. Look that way. Let us see your scared face. Let us see your surprised face," she said. What was most concerning, however, was that she didn't know what or how her images were going to be used. "My first thought leaving the trailer was, 'Oh this might just be the future," Lubsey said. "We might just lose our jobs," Dom Lubsey, an actor from Los Angeles, added. Studios already use computational techniques to create synthetic images of people to create fake crowds for backgrounds in films.

It's not too far-fetched to think that extras can also be generated too. Andrew Susskind, an associate professor at Drexel University's film and TV department, explained how AI-made background actors would slash production budgets. "Imagine ballroom scenes, party scenes, any scenes that need tons of extras," Susskind said. "Imagine the amounts of money they would be saving. Not paying $180 a day. Plus meals. Plus costuming," he said.

In a neighborhood in Seoul there's an ordinary red-brick, four-story building, reports Bloomberg — but there's something unique about the building's basement office. It's somehow the registered address of the Centre "whose extraordinary claims about a breakthrough in superconductor technology have shocked the scientific community and captivated the world."

Bloomberg also reports that:

- "No one responded when a Bloomberg News reporter knocked on the center's locked doors or reached out via LinkedIn."

- "Goods including bottles of sparkling water delivered to the center's address have been left untouched outside the office's entrance."

- "Multiple attempts to reach the scientists at the Quantum Energy Research Centre were not answered."

- "The center's website has also been closed and says it is 'under construction.'"

However, Kim Hyun Tak, one of the authors of the papers who is a research professor of physics at the College of William & Mary in Virginia, said the skeptical reaction is expected. "It's common practice when a new crucial discovery or invention is made public that there are more people who say that it's not credible," Kim said in a Zoom interview. "It's a natural thing for some people to laugh at it because it's the first time, and they don't even know what it is, but as time passes, they start to believe it...."

In response to questions about why the Quantum Energy Research Centre hasn't provided the materials to other scientists, Kim said that it doesn't have enough inventory of the LK-99 compound nor time to recreate it, and that the researchers have been distracted by the number of journalists trying to contact them. "You know that the office is extremely small and in a poor state." he said. "It's so small, and you need the money to make the compounds. That's why they cannot mass-produce it."

Despite the questions, he remained defiant that the research was sound. "The experimental data speaks for itself," Kim said. "We know it because we're the ones who synthesized it and conducted the studies."
"The claim has been met with widespread excitement globally," adds Bloomberg, "sending related stocks soaring in South Korea and China, but also skepticism as past claims had been later proven wrong."

The Australian news service 9News reports on the "strongest sign yet" that Australia is headed toward a "totally cashless society... the number of notes in circulation officially declining for the first time since dollars and cents were introduced in 1966." According to data from the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA), more than a billion dollars worth of physical cash disappeared from circulation in the last financial year, a shift that's likely to make life more difficult for the elderly and for those in the regions. Authorities say less cash will also hurt the nation's criminals, who rely heavily on its use, making it harder for them to make transactions undetected...

The RBA's survey of consumers' payment trends revealed that a third of Aussies now consider themselves "low cash users" — meaning they claim to use cash for less than 20 per cent of all their in-person transactions. In 2019, about half of the nation's residents were reported as such... It's expected that cash use will continue to decrease in the coming years, similar to the use of cheques, which are set to wrap up completely in the country by 2030.

Even Zoom is now telling its 8,400 employees to stop working remotely at least two days a week and return to the office. The policy applies to employees within 50 miles of a Zoom office ith a Zoom spokesperson calling this hybrid approach the "most effective".

Business Insider quips that Zoom making the move means "The remote work revolution is officially dead."

And earlier this week The Los Angeles Times argues that "After watching and waiting, some chaotic back-and-forth and a few false starts, the white-collar American workforce appears to be settling — for now — in a hybrid mode." Even as more corporations are moving to call workers back to the office, arguing it's better for preserving company culture and decision-making, few employers have required employees to work on-site five days a week. Most are like Meta and Los Angeles-based Farmers Group, which recently announced that most employees who had been working remotely will have to come in three days a week starting in September.

Some firms have backtracked in favor of a more flexible system, or put return-to-office plans on ice, because of worker resistance and other changes wrought by the pandemic... [M]any other companies have stayed silent on the issue of remote work, maintaining vague or largely unenforced policies as they wait to see where the struggle ends. More unions, including the guild at the Los Angeles Times, are wrestling with management over remote work, which has become a top labor issue. For all these reasons, the overall amount of work done from home has held remarkably steady this year at about 28%, according to monthly surveys of thousands of workers by WFH Research, a group including Stanford and the University of Chicago. That's way up from roughly 5% of work done at home before COVID-19.

And there are some signs that employers are giving workers greater flexibility in their work schedules and when they can work from home. In a nationwide survey conducted last month for The Times by polling firm Leger, 27% of full-time workers said their employers had become more lenient over the last year about working remotely. Only 15% said their employers got stricter. Most of the rest said there was no change. Leger's survey showed that 11% of full-time employees work 100% from home, and 31% work a hybrid schedule, with most saying they choose which days to come into the office. The remainder said that they work fully on company premises or that their jobs aren't compatible with at-home work. These results line up almost exactly with WFH data...

Rob Sadow, chief executive at Scoop Technologies, a firm specializing in flexible-work software and research, says the percentages of employers that are fully remote and fully in-office have both declined since the start of the year. What's grown in their place is a "structured" hybrid model in which employees and employers have essentially split the difference. "This two to three days a week is starting to feel like a pretty decent, happy medium," Sadow said. "Executives and employees are finding somewhat of a truce in terms of how much time is spent in the office and at home."
The article also points out that "Some employees have quit and moved to more remote-work friendly firms."

In February of 1994 Jon "maddog" Hall interviewed a young Linus Torvalds (then just 24). Nearly three decades later — as Hall approaches his 73rd birthday — he's shared a long essay looking back, but also assessing today's controversy about Red Hat's licensing of RHEL. A (slightly- condensed] excerpt: [O]ver time some customers developed a pattern of purchasing a small number of RHEL systems, then using the "bug-for-bug" compatible version of Red Hat from some other distribution. This, of course, saved the customer money, however it also reduced the amount of revenue that Red Hat received for the same amount of work. This forced Red Hat to charge more for each license they sold, or lay off Red Hat employees, or not do projects they might have otherwise funded. So recently Red Hat/IBM made a business decision to limit their customers to those who would buy a license from them for every single system that would run RHEL and only distribute their source-code and the information necessary on how to build that distribution to those customers. Therefore the people who receive those binaries would receive the sources so they could fix bugs and extend the operating system as they wished.....this was, and is, the essence of the GPL.

Most, if not all, of the articles I have read have said something along the lines of "IBM/Red Hat seem to be following the GPL..but...but...but... the community! "

Which community? There are plenty of distributions for people who do not need the same level of engineering and support that IBM and Red Hat offer. Red Hat, and IBM, continue to send their changes for GPLed code "upstream" to flow down to all the other distributions. They continue to share ideas with the larger community. [...]

I now see a lot of people coming out of the woodwork and beating their breasts and saying how they are going to protect the investment of people who want to use RHEL for free [...] So far I have seen four different distributions saying that they will continue the production of "not RHEL", generating even more distributions for the average user to say "which one should I use"? If they really want to do this, why not just work together to produce one good one? Why not make their own distributions a RHEL competitor? How long will they keep beating their breasts when they find out that they can not make any money at doing it? SuSE said that they would invest ten million dollars in developing a competitor to RHEL. Fantastic! COMPETE. Create an enterprise competitor to Red Hat with the same business channels, world-wide support team, etc. etc. You will find it is not inexpensive to do that. Ten million may get you started.

My answer to all this? RHEL customers will have to decide what they want to do. I am sure that IBM and Red Hat hope that their customers will see the value of RHEL and the support that Red Hat/IBM and their channel partners provide for it. The rest of the customers who just want to buy one copy of RHEL and then run a "free" distribution on all their other systems no matter how it is created, well it seems that IBM does not want to do business with them anymore, so they will have to go to other suppliers who have enterprise capable distributions of Linux and who can tolerate that type of customer. [...]

I want to make sure people know that I do not have any hate for people and companies who set business conditions as long as they do not violate the licenses they are under. Business is business.

However I will point out that as "evil" as Red Hat and IBM have been portrayed in this business change there is no mention at all of all the companies that support Open Source "Permissive Licenses", which do not guarantee the sources to their end users, or offer only "Closed Source" Licenses....who do not allow and have never allowed clones to be made....these people and companies do not have any right to throw stones (and you know who you are).

Red Hat and IBM are making their sources available to all those who receive their binaries under contract. That is the GPL.

For all the researchers, students, hobbyists and people with little or no money, there are literally hundreds of distributions that they can choose, and many that run across other interesting architectures that RHEL does not even address.
Hall answered questions from Slashdot users in 2000 and again in 2013.

Further reading: Red Hat CEO Jim Whitehurst answering questions from Slashdot readers in 2017.

"For the second time this year, Wells Fargo acknowledged that deposits were not showing up in customers' accounts," reports NBC News: In an emailed statement Friday morning, a Wells Fargo representative said the issue was affecting a "limited number of customers," and that "the vast majority" of instances had been resolved before noon, while the "few remaining" would be resolved soon. This week's incident mirrored one encountered by Wells Fargo customers in March, which the company then blamed on an unspecified "technical issue...."

Customers nationwide appeared to be affected by this week's outage. Jeani Cortez, a single, disabled, self-employed accountant and Alaska resident, says she was supposed to have paid her rent, gas, electric and internet payments for the month by now with funds she deposited Wednesday. She said she was told Friday by a Wells Fargo representative that she would not be able to access her deposit for another three to five business days. She'd earlier been told that Wells Fargo could send her a letter to give to her creditors; that too has not arrived.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Associated Press: Austria's leader is proposing to enshrine in the country's constitution a right to use cash, which remains more popular in the Alpine nation than in many other places. Chancellor Karl Nehammer said in a statement on Friday that "more and more people are concerned that cash could be restricted as a means of payment in Austria." His office said that the "uncertainty" is fueled by contradictory information and reports. "People in Austria have a right to cash," Nehammer said. [...]

The chancellor's proposal, according to his office, involves a "constitutional protection of cash as a means of payment," ensuring that people can still pay with cash, and securing a "basic supply" of cash in cooperation with Austria's central bank. Austria is one of 20 countries that are part of the euro area. Nehammer said he has instructed Finance Minister Magnus Brunner to work on the proposal and plans to hold a round table with the ministries concerned, finance industry representatives and the central bank in September. "Everyone should have the opportunity to decide freely how and with what he wants to pay," he said. "That can be by card, by transfer, perhaps in future also with the digital euro, but also with cash. This freedom to choose must and will remain."

Freedom Party leader Herbert Kickl accused Nehammer of stealing his party's ideas and argued that the chancellor's "suddenly discovered love of cash" was meant only "to secure his political survival." The biggest opposition party in the current parliament, the center-left Social Democrats, has called for at least one ATM in every municipality and accused Nehammer of "pure populism." "Even if we write the word 'cash' into the constitution 100 times, there won't be a single ATM more in Austria," said the head of its parliamentary group, Philip Kucher.

A husband and wife cyber-crime team have pleaded guilty to trying to launder $4.5bn of Bitcoin that he had stolen in a hack in 2016. From a report: Heather Morgan and Ilya Lichtenstein were arrested last year in New York after police traced their riches back to the crypto heist. While evading police, Morgan masqueraded as a rapper and tech entrepreneur. As part of a plea deal, Lichtenstein admitted he was behind the hack. The couple both pleaded guilty to money laundering, but Morgan pleaded guilty to an additional count of conspiracy to defraud the United States. In spite of attempting to cover up her crimes, Morgan published dozens of expletive-filled music videos and rap songs filmed in locations around New York, under the name Razzlekhan. In her lyrics she called herself a "bad-ass money maker" and "the crocodile of Wall Street."

In articles published in Forbes, Morgan also claimed to be a successful tech businesswoman, calling herself an "economist, serial entrepreneur, software investor and rapper." But while developing her rapping and tech persona, she and her computer programmer husband were attempting to cash out their fortune stolen from the crypto firm Bitfinex. The couple now face prison sentences with Lichtenstein in line for a possible maximum 20 years in prison and Morgan a possible 10. At the time of their arrest in February 2022, the stash of 119,000 Bitcoins was worth about $4.5bn -- making it the US Department of Justice's largest single financial seizure in its history. When the hack was carried out, the Bitcoins were worth about $71m.

Dumi, a Zimbabwean, fell for E-Creator's review-writing job, investing $112. When the company's director disappeared with $1M, his account was frozen, leaving him scammed. Rest of World reports: Thousands of Zimbabweans have been lured into a scam in hopes of making a quick buck, at a time when unemployment in the country is high: Estimates vary from 7.9% to 20%, or even 90%, according to the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions. Alongside the job crisis, the country has been reeling under an inflation of more than 100%, with many struggling to make ends meet. Dumi, who previously worked as a clerk, told Rest of World he found it hard to get another job due to scarce opportunities. He said he joined the E-Creator scheme hoping he'd earn an income while waiting to find the job of his dreams. "Some of us living in marginalized townships such as Mbare, with no decent employment, jumped at an opportunity, which seemed to be so technologically significant and rewarding. Losing money in the process was unexpected," Dumi said, adding that he would not have joined the scheme if he had a job of his choice.

E-Creator agents told Rest of World they had taken up the role because they were unemployed or couldn't find enough work. They said they were lured by the promise of earning 10% returns for posting 10 fake reviews if they invested between $15 and $100. There were higher rewards promised for bigger investments: Depositing $100-$500 and recruiting five agents meant an additional 4.5% return; depositing $500-$2,000 and recruiting over 50 others would take earnings to the highest level of a 5% commision and a 10% base payout. While they could withdraw money from their E-Creator wallets, the lure of getting higher returns stopped them from doing so. Watson Manjobo, a former manager and affiliate marketer for E-Creator, told Rest of World the company owed him his salary for June. His job was to recruit more users and help people reset their account passwords. When news of Jiaotong's escape went viral, users flooded his phone with messages demanding answers, he said, adding that his direct superiors have since been unreachable.

theodp writes: Wired Editor at Large, Steven Levy, was hit with a $52 bill for a 2.9-mile Uber ride in New York City as he headed to interview Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi. "Do you know how much it cost me to go 2.9 miles to where we are now in an Uber?," Levy asked Khosrowshahi. "And he said $20, and I said, 'no it was like $52,' and he said, 'oh my God wow.'" [While Khosrowshahi attributed the head-scratching fee to "surge pricing," Levy insisted that made no sense given the trip took place at "10 a.m. on a sunny weekday and it's not like the president's in town." Uber's CEO blamed inflation for the increased rates, telling Wired during his sit-down that "everything is more expensive."]

When asked for a statement, Uber shared the following: "Riders' fares are a direct result of the city's regulations." "The fact is that they're not subsidizing rides anymore," said Levy of Uber. "And the way that company operates is expensive." Uber, which had recorded more than $31 billion in losses since it launched in 2009, reported its first profit ever on Tuesday.

The FCC's robocaller penalties are growing as the agency tracks down and terminates their operations -- this time resulting in a record $300 million forfeiture. From a report: But whether and when that money will be paid is, as always, something of an open question. The robocaller in this case was known by a variety of names and had been scamming people since 2018, as the FCC announcement explains: "This enterprise operated a complex scheme designed to facilitate the sale of vehicle service contracts under the false and misleading claim of selling auto warranties. Two of the central players of the operation, Roy M. Cox and Aaron Michael Jones, were under lifetime bans against making telemarketing calls following lawsuits by the Federal Trade Commission and State of Texas. The multi-national enterprise did business as Sumco Panama, Virtual Telecom, Davis Telecom, Geist Telecom, Fugle Telecom, Tech Direct, Mobi Telecom, and Posting Express."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A group of Internet service providers that won government grants are asking the Federal Communication Commission for more money or an "amnesty window" in which they could give up grants without penalty. The ISPs were awarded grants to build broadband networks from the FCC's Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF), which selected funding recipients in December 2020. A group calling itself the "Coalition of RDOF Winners" has been meeting with FCC officials about their requests for more money or an amnesty window, according to several filings submitted to the commission.

The group says broadband construction costs have soared since the grants were announced. They asked for extra money, quicker payments, relief from letter of credit requirements, or an amnesty window "that allows RDOF winners to relinquish all or part of their RDOF winning areas without forfeitures or other penalties if the Commission chooses not to make supplemental funds available or if the amount of supplemental funds the Commission does make available does not cover an RDOF Winner's costs that exceed reasonable inflation," a July 31 filing said.

A different group of ISPs urged the FCC to reject the request, saying that telcos that win grants by pledging to build networks at a low cost are "gaming" the system by seeking more money afterward. So far, the FCC leadership seems reluctant to provide extra funding. The commission could issue fines to ISPs that default on grants -- the FCC recently proposed $8.8 million in fines against 22 RDOF applicants for defaults. The Coalition of RDOF Winners doesn't include every ISP that was granted money from the program. But exactly which and how many ISPs are in the coalition is a mystery.

An anonymous reader writes: Today, the US Treasury Department announced that taxpayers will have the choice to go paperless for all Internal Revenue Service (IRS) correspondence in the upcoming 2024 filing season. By 2025, the IRS plans to achieve paperless processing for all tax returns, still accepting paper documents but immediately digitizing them, to "cut processing times in half" and "expedite refunds by several weeks," the Treasury Department said. "The IRS receives about 76 million paper tax returns and forms and 125 million pieces of correspondence, notice responses, and non-tax forms each year, and its limited capability to accept these forms digitally or digitize paper it receives has prevented the IRS from delivering the world-class service taxpayers deserve," the Treasury Department said.

By accelerating paperless processing, the IRS expects to simplify how Americans access their taxpayer data and save millions historically spent on storing more than a billion documents. Digitization can also help eliminate errors, the Treasury Department said, which can "result from manually inputting data from paper returns." And it will help taxpayers more quickly get answers to questions, as IRS customer service employees "do not currently have easy access to the information from paper returns." Starting in 2024, they will. Next filing season, taxpayers will have the option to e-file 20 additional tax forms among the most commonly submitted when amending returns, including forms used to submit information on things like identity theft or proof of eligibility for "key credits and deductions that help low-income households."

"Taxpayers who want to submit paper returns and correspondence can continue to do so," the Treasury Department said, but "all paper will be converted into digital form as soon as it arrives at the IRS." In 2024, the IRS estimates that "more than 94 percent of individual taxpayers will no longer ever need to send mail to the IRS." Once taxpayers arrive at the 2025 filing season, they'll have the option to e-file "an additional 150 of the most used non-tax forms," the Treasury Department said, which "will be available in digital, mobile-friendly formats that make them easy for taxpayers to complete and submit." The IRS prioritized mobile-friendly formats because the agency estimates that "15 percent of Americans rely solely on mobile phones for their Internet access." "When combined with an improved data platform, digitization and data extraction will enable data scientists to implement advanced analytics and pattern recognition methods to pursue cases that can help address the tax gap, including wealthy individuals and large corporations using complex structures to evade taxes they owe," the Treasury Department added.

The US government's credit rating has been downgraded following concerns over the state of the country's finances and its debt burden. From a report: Fitch, one of three major independent agencies that assess creditworthiness, cut the rating from the top level of AAA to a notch lower at AA+. Fitch said it had noted a "steady deterioration" in governance over the last 20 years. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen called the downgrade "arbitrary". It was based on "outdated data" from the period 2018 to 2020, she said. Investors use credit ratings as a benchmark for judging how risky it is to lend money to a government. The US is usually considered a highly secure investment because of the size and relative stability of the economy.

However, this year saw another round of political brinkmanship over government borrowing. In June the government succeeded in lifting the debt ceiling to $31.4 trillion but only after a drawn-out political battle, which threatened to push the country into defaulting on its debts. When Congress returns from its summer recess, lawmakers will have to work to reach an agreement on next year's budget before the end of September to prevent a government shutdown. "The rating downgrade of the United States reflects the expected fiscal deterioration over the next three years, a high and growing general government debt burden, and the erosion of governance" relative to peers, said Fitch in a statement.

"In Fitch's view, there has been a steady deterioration in standards of governance over the last 20 years, including on fiscal and debt matters, notwithstanding the June bipartisan agreement to suspend the debt limit until January 2025," the rating agency said. Ms Yellen said she "strongly" disagreed with Fitch's decision. "Treasury securities remain the world's preeminent safe and liquid asset, and... the American economy is fundamentally strong," she said in a statement.

According to the Financial Times, Meta is preparing to launch AI-enabled chatbots with unique personalities, such as a surfer personality and a chatbot based on Abraham Lincoln. Engadget reports: This is an attempt to boost engagement across Meta's social media platforms, as human-like discussions tend to be more interesting than droll robotic responses. The company hasn't announced which of these platforms would host Abe Lincoln and his pals, though previous reports indicated Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp would be recipients of this new technology. Meta staffers are calling these chatbots "personas" and they could launch as soon as September. These personas will provide a new way to search and they'll even offer recommendations, similar to how current chatbots work, though ChatGPT and the rest don't have Abraham Lincoln on the payroll (just don't ask him about the best local opera houses.)

FT notes that the chatbots could also collect vast amounts of personal data, something Meta has never shied away from. After all, you'll likely share more personal details with a human-like companion than one devoid of personality. The vast majority of Meta's yearly revenue comes from advertising, so go ahead and tell your good friend Abe all about your likes and dislikes. What's the worst that could happen?

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TIME: U.S. and European officials are growing increasingly concerned about China's accelerated push into the production of older-generation semiconductors and are debating new strategies to contain the country's expansion. President Joe Biden implemented broad controls over China's ability to secure the kind of advanced chips that power artificial-intelligence models and military applications. But Beijing responded by pouring billions into factories for the so-called legacy chips that haven't been banned. Such chips are still essential throughout the global economy, critical components for everything from smartphones and electric vehicles to military hardware. That's sparked fresh fears about China's potential influence and triggered talks of further reining in the Asian nation, according to people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified because the deliberations are private. The U.S. is determined to prevent chips from becoming a point of leverage for China, the people said.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo alluded to the problem during a panel discussion last week at the American Enterprise Institute. "The amount of money that China is pouring into subsidizing what will be an excess capacity of mature chips and legacy chips -- that's a problem that we need to be thinking about and working with our allies to get ahead of," she said. While there's no timeline for action to be taken and information is still being gathered, all options are on the table, according to a senior Biden administration official. The most advanced semiconductors are those produced using the thinnest etching technology, with 3-nanometers state of the art today. Legacy chips are typically considered those made with 28-nm equipment or above, technology introduced more than a decade ago.

Senior E.U. and U.S. officials are concerned about Beijing's drive to dominate this market for both economic and security reasons, the people said. They worry Chinese companies could dump their legacy chips on global markets in the future, driving foreign rivals out of business like in the solar industry, they said. Western companies may then become dependent on China for these semiconductors, the people said. Buying such critical tech components from China may create national security risks, especially if the silicon is needed in defense equipment. "The United States and its partners should be on guard to mitigate nonmarket behavior by China's emerging semiconductor firms," researchers Robert Daly and Matthew Turpin wrote in a recent essay for the Hoover Institution think tank at Stanford University. "Over time, it could create new U.S. or partner dependencies on China-based supply chains that do not exist today, impinging on U.S. strategic autonomy."

A proposed state tax in Massachusetts on streaming video services could increase prices for popular platforms like Netflix and Hulu, as the 5 percent fee would support approximately 200 community access cable channels struggling due to declining cable subscriptions. The Boston Globe reports: In July, the Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology held hearings on legislation filed by Democratic State Representative Joan Meschino and Republican Representative Mathew J. Muratore, both of Plymouth. Their bill would require streaming video companies to pay a 5 percent fee on the gross revenues generated in the state. The estimated $65 million a year raised by the fee would support roughly 200 community access channels, the most in any state. The community channels are run by nonprofit organizations or town governments, and funded by cable TV companies, which are assessed a fee by local governments for the right to run their cables through city property. The cable companies pass the cost on to subscribers.

But subscriptions are plummeting as US consumers abandon pay TV for streaming services. Cable and satellite subscribers now number about 70 million, down more than 25 percent from 95.5 million a decade ago, according to Leichtman Research Group, a New Hampshire research and analysis company specializing in media, entertainment, and broadband industries. "The next three to five years it's really going to dry up even more so," said Muratore. Meschino said citizens can't afford to lose access to community media channels, because so many local newspapers have shut down. "There's literally no other way to consume that sort of hyperlocal programming," Meschino said.

About a dozen US states levy sales taxes on consumers' streaming video bills. But Meschino said that sales tax money goes into each state's general fund. Instead, she wants the streaming fee to be dedicated entirely to support for community media services, just like the fee paid by traditional cable TV companies. Some or all of the fees would likely be passed on to consumers. Gauthier estimates that a typical household's costs could rise about $2.40 a month, spread among several streaming networks. "Maybe it'll be 75 cents for your Amazon," he said. "Maybe it'll be 80 cents for your Disney."