Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Separate from the rebranding of covid.gov... (Score 5, Insightful) 213

...an article worth considering from Princeton University's Zeynep Tufekci:

We Were Badly Misled About the Event That Changed Our Lives

Since scientists began playing around with dangerous pathogens in laboratories, the world has experienced four or five pandemics, depending on how you count. One of them, the 1977 Russian flu, was almost certainly sparked by a research mishap. Some Western scientists quickly suspected the odd virus had resided in a lab freezer for a couple of decades, but they kept mostly quiet for fear of ruffling feathers.

Yet in 2020, when people started speculating that a laboratory accident might have been the spark that started the Covid-19 pandemic, they were treated like kooks and cranks. Many public health officials and prominent scientists dismissed the idea as a conspiracy theory, insisting that the virus had emerged from animals in a seafood market in Wuhan, China. And when a nonprofit called EcoHealth Alliance lost a grant because it was planning to conduct risky research into bat viruses with the Wuhan Institute of Virology â" research that, if conducted with lax safety standards, could have resulted in a dangerous pathogen leaking out into the world â" no fewer than 77 Nobel laureates and 31 scientific societies lined up to defend the organization.

So the Wuhan research was totally safe, and the pandemic was definitely caused by natural transmission â" it certainly seemed like consensus.

We have since learned, however, that to promote the appearance of consensus, some officials and scientists hid or understated crucial facts, misled at least one reporter, orchestrated campaigns of supposedly independent voices and even compared notes about how to hide their communications in order to keep the public from hearing the whole story. And as for that Wuhan laboratoryâ(TM)s research, the details that have since emerged show that safety precautions might have been terrifyingly lax.

Full article

Comment Completely avoidable (Score 3, Insightful) 15

There's no excuse for an organization that serves young people to not have more stringent protocols in place to avoid these issues.

As to the "classist and ableist" discussion points, I'm not saying that the "get woke, go broke" mantra applies here ... I'll just mention that the last NaNoWriMo event I bothered going to (near Dallas, TX in 2018) featured a spirited discussion/group therapy session about the pain of being misgendered, which ground the actual writing discussion to a halt. That is when I realized that this organization was no longer for me. The more any organization moves away from the center toward the extremes of ideas and discourse, the less people are going to want to donate to keep it afloat.

Submission + - Email shows that Musk ally is moving to close office behind free tax filing prog (theguardian.com)

Alain Williams writes: An Elon Musk ally installed in the US government said in a late night email going into Saturday that the office behind a popular free online tax filing option would be shuttered – and its employees would be let go.

The 18F office within the General Services Administration (GSA) created the IRS Direct File program that allows for free online tax filings. It has been a frequent target of Musk, and one of the billionaire businessman’s close associates who holds a key position in the GSA informed staffers that the agency would close 18F in an email to staffers that arrived around 1am on Saturday morning.

Comment Awfully odd way to "preserve its legacy" (Score 1) 93

[...] while preserving the ship's legacy as a symbol of American innovation and engineering

What a wonderful new P.R. spin tactic. We're not destroying a historic icon that could be repurposed as a museum ship - we're preserving its legacy.

Translation: We know we're doing something wasteful, but we can't possibly admit that, so we're gonna pretend really hard it's a good thing!

Submission + - AskSlashdot: What would it require for you to trust an AI? (win.tue.nl) 2

shanen writes: Do you trust AI in general? What about DeepSeek in particular? Can anyone even explain what "trust" means these days? For example, I bet most of you trust Amazon and Amazon's secret AIs more than you should...

Recently I've been dabblling with a number of the GAI websites. Of course if I was a serious scientist then I'd have my own hardware and be running local tests. Or at least I'd be rooting around arXiv to see what the serious scientists are saying... All I have (as usual) are too many questions and too few jokes. Especially funny jokes. I wouldn't recognize a funny AI joke until after the AI had pwned me to pieces...

Actually the funniest joke I can think of on this topic involves DeepSeek. One of my experimental conversations on that website involved the topic of trust. DeepSeek turned out to be extremely good at explaining why I should not trust it. Every computer security problem I ever thought of or heard about and some more besides. "So what's that got to do with the price of tea in China?"

It's like the accountant who gets asked what 2 plus 2 is. After locking the doors and shading all the windows, the accountant whispers in your ear: "What do you want it to be?" And the price of tea in China is whatever Xi wants it to be! I bet you assumed the accountant was male, right? So the next questions are whether DeepSeek can do accounting or windows?

So let me start with some questions about DeepSeek in particular:

Have you run it locally and compared the responses with the website's responses? My hypothesis is that your mileage should differ...

It's well established that DeepSeek doesn't want to talk about many "political" topics. Is that based on a distorted model of the world? Or is the censorship implemented in the query interface after the model was trained? My hypothesis is that it must have been trained with lots of data because the cost of removing all of the bad stuff would have been prohibitive. Defining "bad" doesn't matter because I bet everyone agrees the Internet is chock full of bad data these years. Unless perhaps another AI filtered the data first?

What does trust mean? What sort of responses am I hoping to see? How many people still using today's Slashdot have even heard of "Reflections on Trusting Trust"? How many of the identities on today's Slashdot are just (AI-driven?) sock puppets? (Speculations on a mutual timeline building tool to verify childhood friendships?)

In closing, if you asked an AI to analyze all of the conversations on Slashdot, what sort of changes would it show over the years? My hypothesis on this question is that the interactions based on books will trend down. Maybe that's my selective memory, but I think a "sound" analysis would should a monotonic decrease. Largely based on The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt I think the downward gradient might peak after smartphones became widely adopted circa 2010...

Submission + - Titan Sub Implosion Audio Released For the First Time (jalopnik.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Experimental submarine the Titan sank in June 2023 while exploring the wreck of the Titanic. The controversial craft imploded while deep beneath the surface of the ocean killing five people onboard, and now a recording of the Titan’s final moments has been shared by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [...] In the clip, which is available to hear below, the static sound of the ocean is shattered by a great rumble, which sounds almost like a wave crashing against the beach.

It’s this noise that is thought to be the total failure of the Titan, as LBC adds: "It is believed that the noise is the ‘acoustic signature’ of the sub imploding on 18th June 2023. It was recorded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration device about 900 miles from where the sub was last seen on radar, south of Newfoundland, Canada, US Coast Guard officials announced. The five crew members who died onboard the sub were British explorer sub were Hamish Harding, 58, British-Pakistani businessman Shahzada Dawood, 48, and his son Suleman, 19, French deep-sea explorer Paul-Henri Nargeolet (known as 'Mr Titanic'), 77, and and co-founder of the submarines owner’s company OceanGate, Stockton Rushton, 61."

Submission + - Constellation Inks $1 Billion Deal To Supply US Government With Nuclear Power (reuters.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Constellation Energy has been awarded a record $1 billion in contracts to supply nuclear power to the U.S. government over the next decade, the company said on Thursday. Constellation, the country's largest operator of nuclear power plants, will deliver electricity to more than 13 federal agencies as part of the agreements with the U.S. General Services Administration. The deal is the biggest energy purchase in the history of the GSA, which constructs and manages federal buildings, and is among the first major climate-focused energy agreement by the U.S. government to include electricity generated from existing nuclear reactors.

The GSA estimated that the contracts, set to begin on April 25, will comprise over 10 million megawatt-hours over 10 years and provide electricity equivalent to powering more than 1 million homes annually. The procurement will deliver electricity to 80 federal facilities located throughout the PJM Interconnection, a regional transmission operator with service covering more than 65 million people. The U.S. Department of Transportation, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Army Corps of Engineers are some of the facilities that will receive the power. [...] Constellation said the deal will enable it to extend the licenses of existing nuclear plants and invest in new equipment and technology that will increase output by about 135 megawatts.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you sell diamonds, you cannot expect to have many customers. But a diamond is a diamond even if there are no customers. -- Swami Prabhupada

Working...