alternative_right shares a report from Phys.org: You've probably heard it before in a meeting: 'Let's touch base offline to align our bandwidth on this workflow.' Corporate jargon like this is easy to laugh at -- but its negative impact in the office can be serious. According to a new study, using too much jargon in the workplace can hurt employees' ability to process messages, leading them to experience negative feelings and making them feel less confident. In turn, they're less likely to reach out and ask for or share information with their colleagues.

"You need people to be willing to collaborate, share ideas and look for more information if they don't understand something at work," said Olivia Bullock, Ph.D., an assistant professor of advertising at the University of Florida and co-author of the new study. "And jargon might actually be impeding that information flow across teams." Age made a difference, though. Older workers had a harder time processing jargon, but were more likely to intend to ask for more information to clarify the message. Younger employees were less likely to seek and share information when confused by jargon. "It gives credence to the idea that younger people are more vulnerable to these workplace dynamics," Bullock said. "If you're onboarding younger employees, explain everything clearly." The findings have been published in the International Journal of Business Communication.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Register: A German court has told Apple to stop advertising its Watches as being carbon-neutral, ruling that this was misleading and could not fly under the country's competition law. Apple has been marketing its newest smartwatches as being carbon-neutral for nearly two years now, with an array of rationales. It claims that clean energy for manufacturing, along with greener materials and shipping, lop around three-quarters off the carbon emissions for each model of the Apple Watch. The remaining emissions are offset by the purchase of carbon credits, according to Apple.

Deutsche Umwelthilfe (well, DUH – that's the acronym), a prominent environmental group, begged to differ on that last point. It applied for an injunction in May and Tuesday's ruling (in German), which will only be published in full later this week, led it to claim victory. The ruling means Apple can't advertise the Watch as a "CO2-neutral product" in Germany. [...] The ruling revolved around the Paraguayan forestry program that Apple claimed was offsetting some of the Watch's production emissions. The project involves commercial eucalyptus plantations on leased land, where the leases for three-quarters of the land will run out in 2029 with no guarantee of renewal.

According to the court, consumers' expectations of carbon compensation schemes are shaped by the prominent 2015 Paris Agreement, which commits countries to achieving carbon neutrality by the second half of this century. It said consumers would therefore "assume" that the carbon-neutrality claims around the Apple Watch would mean neutrality was assured through 2050. That leaves a 21-year gap of uncertainty in this case. The Verified Carbon Standard program, in which Apple is participating, has a "pooled buffer account" scheme to hedge against this sort of uncertainty. However, the German court was not impressed, saying it would only allow Apple to monitor the situation after the leases run out, which is a far cry from definitely being able to keep offsetting those emissions if the plantation gets cleared.

Amazon is facing a proposed class action lawsuit alleging it misleads customers by advertising digital movies and TV shows as "purchases," when in reality buyers only receive revocable licenses that can disappear if Amazon loses distribution rights. From the Hollywood Reporter: On Friday, a proposed class action was filed in Washington federal court against Amazon over a "bait and switch" in which the company allegedly misleads consumers into believing they've purchased content when they're only getting a license to watch, which can be revoked at any time. [...] The lawsuit accuses Amazon, which didn't respond to a request for comment, of misrepresenting the nature of movie and TV transactions during the purchase process. On its website and platform, the company tells consumers they can "buy" a movie. But hidden in a footnote on the confirmation page is fine print that says, "You receive a license to the video and you agree to our terms," the complaint says.

The issue is already before a court. In a 2020 lawsuit alleging unfair competition and false advertising over the practice, Amazon maintained that its use of the word "buy" for digital content isn't deceptive because consumers understand their purchases are subject to licenses. Quoting Webster's Dictionary, it said that the term means "rights to the use or services of payment" rather than perpetual ownership and that its disclosures properly warn people that they may lose access. The court ultimately rebuffed Amazon's bid to dismiss the lawsuit outside of a claim alleging a violation of Washington's unjust enrichment law.

Phone manufacturers rarely acknowledge that IP68 water resistance degrades over time, but Google has broken that silence with advertising disclaimers for its Pixel 10 Pro Fold. The fine print explicitly warns that water and dust protection "will diminish or be lost over time due to normal wear and tear, device repair, disassembly or damage." The company further notes that liquid damage voids warranties despite IP68 certification at manufacture.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Adweek: Meta wanted advertisers to believe its ecommerce ad product, Shops ads, was outperforming the competition, per a whistleblower complaint filed in a U.K. court. The former employee alleges the social media giant artificially inflated return on ad spend (ROAS) by counting shipping fees as revenue, subsidizing bids in ad auctions, and applying undisclosed discounts. The complaint, viewed by ADWEEK, was filed with the London Central Employment Tribunal on Wednesday (August 20) by Samujjal Purkayastha, a former product manager on Meta's Shops ads team. The document claims Meta artificially inflated performance metrics to push brands toward its fledgling ecommerce ad product.

The company's motivation, the complaint says, was in part to combat Apple's 2021 privacy changes that cut the troves of iOS tracking information that had long powered Meta's ad machine. Meta's former chief financial officer (CFO), David Wehner, said the changes would cost "on the order of $10 billion" in losses during the company's Q4 2021 earnings call. User purchases on Facebook or Instagram Shops pages would provide more first-party data, however. Purkayastha, who joined Meta (then Facebook) in 2020 as a product manager on the Facebook Artificial Intelligence Applied Research team, was reassigned to the Shops Ads team in March 2022 and remained at the company until Feb. 19, 2025, when he was terminated.

He alleged that during internal reviews in early 2024, Meta data scientists found the return on ad spend (ROAS) from Shops ads had been inflated between 17% and 19%. This discrepancy stemmed from Meta counting shipping fees and taxes as part of a sale, even though that money never went to merchants, he alleged. The company's other ad products exclude those figures, in line with competitors like Google, the complaint reads. Without including the fees and taxes, Shops ads performed no better than Meta's traditional ads, Purkayastha claimed. "This was significant," the complaint reads. "In addition to the ROAS performance metric being overstated by nearly a fifth, it meant that, rather than having exceeded our primary target, the Shops Ads team had in fact missed it once the figure was reduced to take account of the artificial inflation." Purkayastha raised these concerns with senior leadership in multiple meetings between 2022 and 2024, and is now seeking interim relief through his employment tribunal filing to have his former position reinstated.

A Meta spokesperson told ADWEEK the company is "actively defending these proceedings," adding that "allegations related to the integrity of our advertising practices are without merit and we have full confidence in our performance review processes."

In a pair of class actions filed this week, passengers from each coast quibbled with United Airlines and Delta Air Lines' policies charging extra for window seats that are not actually beside windows, instead offering a view of a blank aircraft wall. From a report: "Delta indicated to the plaintiff and class members that the particular seats they chose had a 'window'; even though Delta knew full well they did not," the plaintiffs taking on Delta said in an 18-page complaint filed in federal court in New York, accusing the airline of false advertising and deceptive business practices.

Half of Delta's fleet of nearly 1,000 aircraft comprises Boeing 737s, Boeing 757s and Airbus A321s -- all of which have at least one wall-adjacent seat with no window, according to the plaintiffs. It's where vertical air conditioning riser ducts are located, making putting a window there impossible, the competing Alaska Airlines explains on its website. But unlike Alaska and others, the plaintiffs complain, Delta advertises the seats as having a window, offering them as a "window seat" option on its seat map during checkout.

The Office of the Commissioner of Canada Elections (OCCE) has revealed in its annual report that it will "explore the use" AI and emerging technologies to see how they will shape the government body's approach for the next year. From a report: Commissioner Caroline Simard's office didn't outline ways it might adopt AI. In its outlook, the OCCE expected to use funding announced in January 2025 to secure the tools needed for addressing the "challenges of today's electoral environment." This included staffing roles dictated by its new structure and reflected "ongoing modernization efforts," but no further details.

The Commissioner is an independent officer who ensures the government, political parties, and others honour both the Canada Elections Act and Referendum Act. This includes core aspects like financing, nominations, campaigning, and advertising. More recently, the OCCE has been addressing rising issues with AI, including election disinformation facilitated by bots, AI-generated images, and deepfakes (AI-generated videos that resemble real people in false scenarios).

"What happens when cybercriminals stop thinking small and start thinking like a Fortune 500 company?" asks a blog post from Koi Security. "You get GreedyBear, the attack group that just redefined industrial-scale crypto theft."

"150 weaponized Firefox extensions [impersonating popular cryptocurrency wallets like MetaMask and TronLink]. Nearly 500 malicious executables. Dozens of phishing websites. One coordinated attack infrastructure. According to user reports, over $1 million stolen." They upload 5-7 innocuous-looking extensions like link sanitizers, YouTube downloaders, and other common utilities with no actual functionality... They post dozens of fake positive reviews for these generic extensions to build credibility. After establishing trust, they "hollow out" the extensions — changing names, icons, and injecting malicious code while keeping the positive review history. This approach allows GreedyBear to bypass marketplace security by appearing legitimate during the initial review process, then weaponizing established extensions that already have user trust and positive ratings. The weaponized extensions captures wallet credentials directly from user input fields within the extension's own popup interface, and exfiltrate them to a remote server controlled by the group...

Alongside malware and extensions, the threat group has also launched a network of scam websites posing as crypto-related products and services. These aren't typical phishing pages mimicking login portals — instead, they appear as slick, fake product landing pages advertising digital wallets, hardware devices, or wallet repair services... While these sites vary in design, their purpose appears to be the same: to deceive users into entering personal information, wallet credentials, or payment details — possibly resulting in credential theft, credit card fraud, or both. Some of these domains are active and fully functional, while others may be staged for future activation or targeted scams...

A striking aspect of the campaign is its infrastructure consolidation: Almost all domains — across extensions, EXE payloads, and phishing sites — resolve to a single IP address: 185.208.156.66 — this server acts as a central hub for command-and-control, credential collection, ransomware coordination, and scam websites, allowing the attackers to streamline operations across multiple channels... Our analysis of the campaign's code shows clear signs of AI-generated artifacts. This makes it faster and easier than ever for attackers to scale operations, diversify payloads, and evade detection.

This isn't a passing trend — it's the new normal.
The researchers believe the group "is likely testing or preparing parallel operations in other marketplaces."

xA California man sued Microsoft Thursday over its plan to stop supporting Windows 10 on October 14th, reports Courthouse News Though Windows 11 was launched nearly four years ago, many of its billion or so worldwide users are clinging to the decade-old Windows 10... According to StatCounter, nearly 43% of Windows users still use the old version on their desktop computers....

"With only three months until support ends for Windows 10, it is likely that many millions of users will not buy new devices or pay for extended support," Klein writes in his complaint. "These users — some of whom are businesses storing sensitive consumer data — will be at a heightened risk of a cyberattack or other data security incident, a reality of which Microsoft is well aware...." According to one market analyst writing in 2023, Microsoft's shift away from Windows 10 will lead millions of customers to buy new devices and thrown out their old ones, consigning as many as 240 million PCs to the landfill....

Klein is asking a judge to order Microsoft to continue supporting Windows 10 without additional charge, until the number of devices running the older operating system falls bellow 10% of total Windows users. He says nothing about any money he seeking for himself, though it does ask for attorneys' fees.

Microsoft did not respond to an email requesting a comment.
The complaint also requests an order requiring Microsoft's advertising "to disclose clearly and prominently the approximate end-of-support date for the Windows operating system purchased with the device at the time of purchase" or at least "disclose that support is only guaranteed for a certain delineated period of time without additional cost, and to disclose the potential consequences of such end-of-support for device security and functionality."

Google has quietly admitted defeat in selling advertising for its smart TV platform, returning ad inventory to publishers and accepting a revenue share instead of controlling ad spots directly, according to The Verge. The policy reversal comes as Google spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on Google TV without breaking even, while Amazon outspends the company on retail incentives that have already pushed Google TV sets out of Costco stores in favor of Fire TV models.

Amazon pays up to $50 per activated television to retailers and manufacturers, The Verge reported. Google TV has grown to 270 million monthly active devices worldwide since unifying Android TV and Chromecast under a single brand in 2020, but many devices operate in overseas markets that generate little revenue or run customized versions controlled by pay-TV operators. YouTube's success in the living room -- generating $9.8 billion in quarterly ad revenue and accounting for 12.5% of all US television viewing -- has reduced internal support for Google TV, with sales teams prioritizing the video platform and some YouTube executives arguing the smart TV budget should be redirected, the report adds.

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.

Google will pause non-essential AI workloads to protect power grids, the advertising giant announced on Monday. From a report: The web giant already does this sort of thing for non-essential workloads like processing YouTube vids, which it moves to datacenters where power is available rather than continuing to run them in places demand for energy strains the grid. Under an agreement with Indiana Michigan Power (I&M) and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), Google will use the same techniques for AI workloads.

The announcement comes as states served by the power companies brace for a heat wave that will likely strain the grid as residents use air conditioners and increase demand for energy. Amid debate about datacenters' consumption of power and water, the last thing that the Chocolate Factory needs is folks blaming its AI Mode search function for a power outage when temperatures top 100F (37.7C). Under the agreement, if energy demand surges or there's a disruption in the grid due to extreme weather, I&M and TVA can now request that Google reduce its power use by rescheduling workloads or limiting non-urgent tasks until the issue is resolved.

Longtime Slashdot reader SonicSpike shares a report from TechCrunch: Sarah Murray recalls the first time she saw an artificial model in fashion: It was 2023, and a beautiful young woman of color donned a Levi's denim overall dress. Murray, a commercial model herself, said it made her feel sad and exhausted. The iconic denim company had teamed up with the AI studio Lalaland.ai to create "diverse" digital fashion models for more inclusive ads. For an industry that has failed for years to employ diverse human models, the backlash was swift, with New York Magazine calling the decision "artificial diversity."

"Modeling as a profession is already challenging enough without having to compete with now new digital standards of perfection that can be achieved with AI," Murray told TechCrunch. Two years later, her worries have compounded. Brands continue to experiment with AI-generated models, to the consternation of many fashion lovers. The latest uproar came after Vogue's July print edition featured a Guess ad with a typical model for the brand: thin yet voluptuous, glossy blond tresses, pouty rose lips. She exemplified North American beauty standards, but there was one problem -- she was AI generated.

The internet buzzed for days, in large part because the AI-generated beauty showed up in Vogue, the fashion bible that dictates what is and is not acceptable in the industry. The AI-generated model was featured in an advertisement, not a Vogue editorial spread. And Vogue told TechCrunch the ad met its advertising standards. To many, an ad versus an editorial is a distinction without a difference. TechCrunch spoke to fashion models, experts, and technologists to get a sense of where the industry is headed now that Vogue seems to have put a stamp of approval on technology that's poised to dramatically change the fashion industry. Amy Odell, a fashion writer and author of a recently published biography on Gwyneth Paltrow, put it simply: "It's just so much cheaper for [brands] to use AI models now. Brands need a lot of content, and it just adds up. So if they can save money on their print ad or their TikTok feed, they will."

"Did Craigslist drive the downfall of print classifieds?" That's the question asked in a new article from the nonprofit Poynter Institute for Media Studies: "I've always wondered about that," Newmark said in a Zoom interview July 1. "I think it had an effect." But portraying him and the list as torpedoing an otherwise great business model is way overblown, he still believes. Citing an influential essay by Thomas Baekdal, Newmark contends that the root of newspapers' trouble was the loss of readers. "TV hit hard. ... (And) l'm like the folks on 'CSI,' I follow the evidence. That goes back at least to the '60s."

Bad in itself, the loss also took away newspapers' dominant share of local audiences and ability to charge premium classified ad rates. The slide in circulation looks even worse, Baekdal pointed out, when compared to continued increases in the number of households over the years.

Still, Craigslist came to symbolize the shift. Dozens of other vertical digital sites cropped up, before and after, all offering a deadly competitive pairing of an effective and much cheaper service than newspaper classifieds. Even if Craigslist was just one of many, though, it was arguably Newmark who put a face on the massive disruption... By the early 2000s, newspaper executives had a dawning awareness of the business challenge from Craigslist and similar sites. They took minimal action to meet it...

The biggest response was that three big companies — Knight-Ridder, Tribune and Gannett — bought a copycat of Monster called CareerBuilder... By the time newspapers acted, online classifieds had a full head of steam... By 2010, 70% of the newspaper industry's print classified business was gone. Reliable statistics are no longer kept, but the trend continued over the last 15 years... Newspapers continue to do well only with paid obituaries and legal notices, though the latter is now also under threat by digital startups.
The article cites a 2019 analysis from Peter Zollman, whose AIM Group consultancy has followed the classified business for 25 years. "Craigslist has often been blamed for killing newspapers, but that's a gross canard. It just isn't true." American newspapers stumbled while several well-managed counterparts in places like Scandinavia found ways to prosper, he argued.

It's a cultural milestone. Fiverr just released an ad mocking vibe coding.

The video features what its description calls a "clueless entrepreneur" building an app to tell if an avocado is ripe — who soon ends up blissfully singing with an avocado to the tune of the cheesy 1987 song "Nothing's Gonna Stop Us Now." The avocado sings joyously of "a new app on the rise in a no-code world that's too good to be true" (rhyming that with "So close. Just not tested through...")

"Let them say we're crazy. I don't care about bugs!" the entrepreneur sings back. "Built you in a minute, now I'm so high off this buzz..."

But despite her singing to the overripe avocado that "I don't need a backend if I've got the spark!" and that they can "build this app together, vibe-coding forever. Nothing's going to stop us now!" — the build suddenly fails. (And it turns out that avocado really was overripe...) Fiverr then suggests viewers instead hire one of their experts for building their apps...

The art/design site Creative Bloq acknowledges Fiverr "flip-flopping between scepticism and pro-AI marketing." (They point out a Fiverr ad last November had ended with the tagline "Nobody cares that you use AI! They care about the results — for the best ones higher Fiverr experts who've mastered every digital skill including AI.") But the site calls this new ad "a step in the right direction towards mindful AI usage." Just like an avocado that looks perfect on the outside, once you inspect the insides, AI-generated code can be deceptively unripe.
Fiverr might be feeling the impact of vibecoding themselves. The freelancing web site saw the company's share price fall over 14% this week, with one Yahoo! Finance site saying this week's quarterly results revealed Fiverr's active buyers dropped 10.9% compared to last year — a decrease of 3.4 million buyers which "overshadowed a 9.8% increase in spending per buyer."

Even when issuing a buy recommendation, Seeking Alpha called it "a short-term rebound play, as the company faces longer-term risks from AI and active buyer churn."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Amazon CEO Andy Jassy sees an opportunity to deliver ads to users during their conversations with the company's AI-powered digital assistant, Alexa+, he said during Amazon's second-quarter earnings call Thursday. "People are excited about the devices that they can buy from us that has Alexa+ enabled in it. People do a lot of shopping [with Alexa+]; it's a delightful shopping experience that will keep getting better," said Jassy on the call with investors and Wall Street analysts. "I think over time, there will be opportunities, as people are engaging in more multi-turn conversations, to have advertising play a role to help people find discovery, and also as a lever to drive revenue."

[...] Amazon has made Alexa+ free for Prime customers (who pay $14.99 a month) and added a $20-a-month subscription tier for Alexa+ on its own. Jassy suggested on Thursday that Alexa+ could eventually include subscription tiers beyond what's available today -- perhaps an ad-free tier. Up until now, ads have only appeared in Alexa in limited ways. Users may occasionally see a visual ad on Amazon's smart display device, the Echo Show, or hear a pre-recorded ad in between songs on one of Alexa's smart speakers. But Jassy's description of an AI-generated ad that Alexa+ delivers in a multistep conversation, which could help users find new products, is uncharted territory for Amazon and the broader tech industry. Marketers have expressed interest in advertising in AI chatbots, and specifically Alexa+, but exactly how remains unclear. [...] Jassy is betting that users will talk to Alexa+ more than Alexa, which could drive more advertising and more shopping on Amazon.com. However, early reviews of Alexa+ have been mixed. Amazon has reportedly struggled to ship some of Alexa+'s more complicated features, and the rollout has been slower than many expected.

There's a lot to figure out before Amazon puts ads in Alexa+. Like most AI models, Alexa+ is not immune to hallucinations. Before advertisers agree to make Alexa+ a spokesperson for their products, Amazon may have to come up with some ways to ensure that its AI will not offer false advertising for a product. Jassy seems enthusiastic about making advertising a larger part of Amazon business. Amazon's advertising revenue went up 22% in the second quarter, compared to the same period last year. Delivering ads in AI chatbot conversations may also raise privacy concerns. People tend to talk more with AI chatbots compared to deterministic assistants, like the traditional Alexa and Siri products. As a result, generative AI chatbots tend to collect more information on users. Some users might be unsettled by having that information sold to advertisers and having ads appear in their natural language conversations with AI.

Microsoft researchers have identified 40 occupations [PDF] with the highest exposure to AI, ranking jobs by how closely their tasks align with AI's current capabilities. The study analyzed 200,000 real-world conversations from Copilot users and compared AI performance against occupational data.

Interpreters and translators top the list, followed by historians and passenger attendants. Customer service and sales representatives, comprising about 5 million U.S. jobs, also face significant AI competition. Knowledge workers performing computer, math, or administrative tasks showed high vulnerability, as did sales positions involving information sharing and explanation. The research found occupations requiring Bachelor's degrees demonstrate higher AI applicability than those with lower educational requirements.

First, the top 10 least affected occupations by generative AI: 1. Dredge Operators
2. Bridge and Lock Tenders
3. Water Treatment Plant and System Operators
4. Foundry Mold and Coremakers
5. Rail-Track Laying and Maintenance Equipment Operators
6. Pile Driver Operators
7. Floor Sanders and Finishers
8. Orderlies
9. Motorboat Operators
10. Logging Equipment Operators Now, the top 40 most affected occupations by generative AI:1. Interpreters and Translators
2. Historians
3. Passenger Attendants
4. Sales Representatives of Services
5. Writers and Authors
6. Customer Service Representatives
7. CNC Tool Programmers
8. Telephone Operators
9. Ticket Agents and Travel Clerks
10. Broadcast Announcers and Radio DJs
11. Brokerage Clerks
12. Farm and Home Management Educators
13. Telemarketers
14. Concierges
15. Political Scientists
16. News Analysts, Reporters, Journalists
17. Mathematicians
18. Technical Writers
19. Proofreaders and Copy Markers
20. Hosts and Hostesses
21. Editors
22. Business Teachers, Postsecondary
23. Public Relations Specialists
24. Demonstrators and Product Promoters
25. Advertising Sales Agents
26. New Accounts Clerks
27. Statistical Assistants
28. Counter and Rental Clerks
29. Data Scientists
30. Personal Financial Advisors
31. Archivists
32. Economics Teachers, Postsecondary
33. Web Developers
34. Management Analysts
35. Geographers
36. Models
37. Market Research Analysts
38. Public Safety Telecommunicators
39. Switchboard Operators
40. Library Science Teachers, Postsecondary.

YouTube is rolling out age-estimation technology in the U.S. to identify teen users in order to provide a more age-appropriate experience. TechCrunch reports: When YouTube identifies a user as a teen, it introduces new protections and experiences, which include disabling personalized advertising, safeguards that limit repetitive viewing of certain types of content, and enabling digital well-being tools such as screen time and bedtime reminders, among others. These protections already exist on YouTube, but have only been applied to those who verified themselves as teens, not those who may have withheld their real age. [...]

If the new system incorrectly identifies a user as under 18 when they are not, YouTube says the user will be given the option to verify their age with a credit card, government ID, or selfie. Only users who have been directly verified through this method or whose age has been inferred to be over 18 will be able to view the age-restricted content on the platform. The machine learning-powered technology will begin to roll out over the next few weeks to a small set of U.S. users and will then be monitored before rolling out more widely, the company says. [...]

YouTube isn't sharing specifics about the signals it's using to infer a user's age, but notes that it will look at some data like the YouTube activity and the longevity of a user's account to make a determination if the user is under 18. The new system will apply only to signed-in users, as signed-out users already cannot access age-restricted content, and will be available across platforms, including web, mobile, and connected TV.

Windows 11 has become indistinguishable from malware because of the way Microsoft has inserted intrusive advertising, AI monitoring features, and constant distractions designed to drive user engagement and monetization to the operating system, argues veteran writer and developer Rupert Goodwins of The Register.

Goodwins contends that Microsoft has transformed Windows 11 into "an ADHD horror show, full of distractions, promotions and snares" where AI features "constantly video what you're doing and send it back to Mother." He applies the term malware to describe software that intervenes in work to advertise and monitors user data, concluding that "for Windows it isn't a class of third-party nasties, it's an edition name."

Russian lawmakers passed sweeping new legislation allowing authorities to fine individuals simply for searching and accessing content labeled "extremist" via VPNs. The Washington Post reports: Russia defines "extremist materials" as content officially added by a court to a government-maintained registry, a running list of about 5,500 entries, or content produced by "extremist organizations" ranging from "the LGBT movement" to al-Qaeda. The new law also covers materials that promote alleged Nazi ideology or incite extremist actions. Until now, Russian law stopped short of punishing individuals for seeking information online; only creating or sharing such content is prohibited. The new amendments follow remarks by high-ranking officials that censorship is justified in wartime. Adoption of the measures would mark a significant tightening of Russia's already restrictive digital laws.

The fine for searching for banned content in Russia would be about a $65, while the penalty for advertising circumvention tools such as VPN services would be steeper -- $2,500 for individuals and up to $12,800 for companies. Previously, the most significant expansion of Russia's restrictions on internet use and freedom of speech occurred shortly after the February 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, when sweeping laws criminalized the spread of "fake news" and "discrediting" the Russian military. The new amendment was introduced Tuesday and attached to a mundane bill on regulating freight companies, according to documents published by Russia's lower house of parliament, the State Duma.