News

A San Francisco jury ruled that Meta violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act by collecting sensitive data from users of the Flo period-tracking app without consent. "The plaintiff's lawyers who sued Meta are calling this a 'landmark' victory -- the tech company contends that the jury got it all wrong," reports SFGATE. From the report: The case goes back to 2021, when eight women sued Flo and a group of other tech companies, including Google and Facebook, now known as Meta. The stakes were extremely personal. Flo asked users about their sex lives, mental health and diets, and guided them through menstruation and pregnancy. Then, the women alleged, Flo shared pieces of that data with other companies. The claims were largely based on a 2019 Wall Street Journal story and a 2021 Federal Trade Commission investigation. Google, Flo and the analytics company Flurry, which was also part of the lawsuit, reached settlements with the plaintiffs, as is common in class action lawsuits about tech privacy. But Meta stuck it out through the entire trial and lost. The case against Meta focused on its Facebook software development kit, which Flo added to its app and which is generally used for analytics and advertising services. The women alleged that between June 2016 and February 2019, Flo sent Facebook, through that kit, various records of "Custom App Events" -- such as a user clicking a particular button in the "wanting to get pregnant" section of the app. Their complaint also pointed to Facebook's terms for its business tools, which said the company used so-called "event data" to personalize ads and content. In a 2022 filing (PDF), the tech giant admitted that Flo used Facebook's kit during this period and that the app sent data connected to "App Events." But Meta denied receiving intimate information about users' health. Nonetheless, the jury ruled (PDF) against Meta. Along with the eavesdropping decision, the group determined that Flo's users had a reasonable expectation they weren't being overheard or recorded, as well as ruling that Meta didn't have consent to eavesdrop or record. The unanimous verdict was that the massive company violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act. The jury's ruling could impact over 3.7 million U.S. users who registered between November 2016 and February 2019, with updates to be shared via email and a case website. The exact compensation from the trial or potential settlements remains uncertain.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The Trump administration has reportedly directed NASA to draw up plans to shut down its Orbiting Carbon Observatory satellite missions, which provide vital climate and agricultural data for scientists, oil and gas companies and farmers who need detailed information about carbon dioxide and crop health. As NPR reports, the satellites are "the only two federal satellite missions that were designed and built specifically to monitor planet-warming greenhouse gases." From the report: It is unclear why the Trump administration seeks to end the missions. The equipment in space is state of the art and is expected to function for many more years, according to scientists who worked on the missions. An official review by NASA in 2023 found that "the data are of exceptionally high quality" and recommended continuing the mission for at least three years. Both missions, known as the Orbiting Carbon Observatories, measure carbon dioxide and plant growth around the globe. They use identical measurement devices, but one device is attached to a stand-alone satellite while the other is attached to the International Space Station. The standalone satellite would burn up in the atmosphere if NASA pursued plans to terminate the mission. NASA employees who work on the two missions are making what the agency calls Phase F plans for both carbon-monitoring missions, according to David Crisp, a longtime NASA scientist who designed the instruments and managed the missions until he retired in 2022. Phase F plans lay out options for terminating NASA missions. The OCO missions would lose funding under the Trump Administration's budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2026, which begins Oct. 1 but has yet to pass. "Presidential budget proposals are wish lists that often bear little resemblance to final congressional budgets," notes NPR. "The Orbiting Carbon Observatory missions have already received funding from Congress through the end of the 2025 fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30." "Draft budgets that Congress is currently considering for next year keep NASA funding basically flat. But it's not clear whether these specific missions will receive funding again, or if Congress will pass a budget before current funding expires on Sept. 30."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Apple released a new developer beta build of macOS 26 Tahoe today, and it came with another big update for a familiar icon. The old Macintosh HD hard drive icon, for years represented by a facsimile of an old spinning hard drive, has been replaced with something clearly intended to resemble a solid-state drive (the SSD in your Mac actually looks like a handful of chips soldered to a circuit board, but we'll forgive the creative license). The Macintosh HD icon became less visible a few years back, when new macOS installs stopped showing your internal disk on the desktop by default. It has also been many years since Apple shifted to SSDs as the primary boot media for new Macs. It's not clear why the icon is being replaced now, instead of years ago -- maybe the icon had started clicking, and Apple just wanted to replace it before it suffered from catastrophic icon failure -- but regardless, the switch is logical (this is a computer storage pun). Apple's iconic Macintosh HD hard drive icon was first introduced in a 2000 Mac OS X beta and remained largely unchanged for over two decades, with only subtle updates in 2012 and 2014. The first SSD-equipped Mac was in 2008, "when the original MacBook Air came out," notes Ars. "By the time 'Retina' Macs began arriving in the early 2010s, SSDs had become the primary boot disk for most of them; laptops tended to be all-SSD, while desktops could be configured with an SSD or a hybrid Fusion Drive that used an SSD as boot media and an HDD for mass storage. Apple stopped shipping spinning hard drives entirely when the last of the Intel iMacs went away."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Jim Acosta, the former CNN chief White House correspondent who now hosts an independent show on YouTube, has interviewed an AI-generated avatar of Parkland shooting victim Joaquin Oliver. The late teen's parents created the avatar to preserve his voice and advocate for gun reform. Oliver's parents "granted Acosta the first 'interview' with the recreated version of their son on what would have been his 25th birthday," notes Variety. "Oliver was one of 17 people killed in the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School." From the report: Acosta asked AI Oliver about his solution for gun violence, to which the avatar responded: "I believe in a mix of stronger gun control laws, mental health support and community engagement. We need to create safe spaces for conversations and connections, making sure everyone feels seen and heard. It's about building a culture of kindness and understanding." The avatar added, "Though my life was cut short, I want to keep inspiring others to connect and advocate for change." Acosta then asked AI Oliver about his personal life, such as his favorite sport and favorite basketball team. The two discussed the movie "Remember the Titans" and their favorite "Star Wars" moments. After a five-minute chat with the AI, Acosta then connected with Oliver's father, Manuel Oliver. "I'm kind of speechless as to the technology there," Acosta said. "It was so insightful. I really felt like I was speaking with Joaquin. It's just a beautiful thing." Manuel, who has been an outspoken voice in the push for gun control, said he believed bringing "AI Joaquin to life" would "create more impact." According to Manuel, the avatar is trained on information on the internet as well as things Oliver wrote, said and posted online. He said he wanted to make it clear to viewers that he is under no illusions about reviving his son. "I understand that this is AI. I don't want anyone to think that I am, in some way, trying to bring my son back," he said. "Sadly, I can't, right? I wish I could. However, the technology is out there." [...] Manuel said he is excited about the future of the project and what it means for his son's legacy. "What's amazing about this is that we've heard from the parents, we've heard from the politicians. Now we're hearing from one of the kids," Acosta said. "That's important. That hasn't happened." Manuel said he plans to have AI Oliver "on stage in the middle of a debate," and that "his knowledge is unlimited." You can watch the full interview on YouTube.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

In a report published Monday, Cloudflare accused Perplexity of deploying undeclared web crawlers that masquerade as regular Chrome browsers to access content from websites that have explicitly blocked its official bots. Since then, Perplexity has publicly and loudly announced that Cloudflare's claims are baseless and technically flawed. "This controversy reveals that Cloudflare's systems are fundamentally inadequate for distinguishing between legitimate AI assistants and actual threats," says Perplexity in a blog post. "If you can't tell a helpful digital assistant from a malicious scraper, then you probably shouldn't be making decisions about what constitutes legitimate web traffic." Perplexity continues: "Technical errors in Cloudflare's analysis aren't just embarrassing -- they're disqualifying. When you misattribute millions of requests, publish completely inaccurate technical diagrams, and demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of how modern AI assistants work, you've forfeited any claim to expertise in this space."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Sweden's Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson has come under fire after admitting that he frequently uses AI tools like ChatGPT for second opinions on political matters. The Guardian reports: ... Kristersson, whose Moderate party leads Sweden's center-right coalition government, said he used tools including ChatGPT and the French service LeChat. His colleagues also used AI in their daily work, he said. Kristersson told the Swedish business newspaper Dagens industri: "I use it myself quite often. If for nothing else than for a second opinion. What have others done? And should we think the complete opposite? Those types of questions." Tech experts, however, have raised concerns about politicians using AI tools in such a way, and the Aftonbladet newspaper accused Kristersson in a editorial of having "fallen for the oligarchs' AI psychosis." Kristersson's spokesperson, Tom Samuelsson, later said the prime minister did not take risks in his use of AI. "Naturally it is not security sensitive information that ends up there. It is used more as a ballpark," he said. But Virginia Dignum, a professor of responsible artificial intelligence at Umea University, said AI was not capable of giving a meaningful opinion on political ideas, and that it simply reflects the views of those who built it. "The more he relies on AI for simple things, the bigger the risk of an overconfidence in the system. It is a slippery slope," she told the Dagens Nyheter newspaper. "We must demand that reliability can be guaranteed. We didn't vote for ChatGPT."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.