geek

22 May 2026

Slashdot

A Bipartisan Amendment Would End Police License Plate Tracking Nationwide

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Wired: US lawmakers plan to introduce an amendment Thursday at a House committee markup hearing that would prohibit any recipient of federal highway funding from using automated license plate readers for any purpose other than tolling -- a sweeping restriction that, if adopted, would bring an immediate end to state and local ALPR programs across the United States. The amendment, obtained first by WIRED, is sponsored by Representative Scott Perry, a Pennsylvania Republican and Freedom Caucus member, and Representative Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, an Illinois progressive whose state has become a flash point in the national fight over ALPR misuse. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will mark up the underlying bill -- a $580 billion, five-year reauthorization of federal surface transportation programs -- at 10 am ET on Thursday. The amendment runs a single sentence: "A recipient of assistance under Title 23, United States Code, may not use automated license plate readers for any purpose other than tolling." The amendment is brief, but its reach would be vast. Title 23 funds roughly a quarter of all public road mileage in the US, including most state and county arteries and many city streets where ALPR cameras are becoming ubiquitous. Conditioning that funding on a ban of the technology would, in practical effect, force any state, county, or municipality that takes federal highway money (essentially all of them) to either remove the cameras or restructure their use around tolling alone. The amendment's cosponsors, Perry and Garcia, represent opposite ends of the House's ideological spectrum but converge on a surveillance concern that has gathered momentum in legislatures and city halls across the US as ALPR networks have quietly become a pervasive layer of American road infrastructure. ALPR cameras -- mounted on poles, overpasses, traffic signals, and police cruisers -- photograph every passing license plate, log times and locations, and feed data into searchable databases shared across agencies and jurisdictions. [...] Privacy advocates have long warned that the aggregation of license plate data amounts to a de facto warrantless tracking system. New York University School of Law's Brennan Center for Justice has documented the integration of ALPR feeds into police data-fusion systems that combine plate data with surveillance and social media monitoring. And the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights nonprofit, has documented a range of police misuse, including the past targeting of mosques and the disproportionate deployment of the technology in low-income neighborhoods. Earlier this week, 404 Media reviewed FBI procurement records that reveal the agency is seeking up to $36 million for nationwide access to ALPR data, which could let it query vehicle movements across the U.S. and its territories through a commercial database.

Ars Technica

To achieve major goals, NASA seeks to streamline its organization

"It is imperative to concentrate resources towards the highest priority objectives."

22 May 2026 2:28pm GMT

AI put "synthetic quotes" in his book. But this author wants to keep using it.

Steven Rosenbaum explains how inaccurate quotes got into his book The Future of Truth.

22 May 2026 2:05pm GMT

First vaccines, now mammograms? RFK Jr.’s latest firings have doctors outraged.

Doctors are angry and alarmed that preventive care could go the way of vaccines.

22 May 2026 11:30am GMT

Slashdot

Steve Wozniak Tells Graduates They All Have 'AI': Actual Intelligence

While other commencement speeches have been met with boos for hyping up artificial intelligence, Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak reminded college graduates that they already posses "AI" of their own: "actual intelligence." He framed AI as an attempt to duplicate brain-like routines, and encouraged students to "think different" as they enter a workforce being reshaped by automation. Business Insider reports: Steve Wozniak did what other college graduation commencement speakers couldn't this year: earn applause when talking about AI. The Apple cofounder took the stage during Grand Valley State University's graduation ceremony earlier this month. During his speech, Wozniak offered reassurance to new graduates who are entering the workforce at the height of the AI revolution. "It would take too long to go deeply into what I think about AI, but we've been trying to create a brain," Wozniak said. "Is there a way we can duplicate a routine a trillion times and have it work like a brain? AI is one of those attempts." [...] During his commencement address, Wozniak reflected on working at Apple and offered students some advice as they begin their careers. "You should always try to think different," he said. "Don't follow the same steps as a million other people. Think, is there something I can do a little different?" You can watch the clip on YouTube.

At Least 80% Responsibility For Ill Health In Old Age Down to Individual, Study Says

A new Oxford Longevity Project report argues that individuals bear at least 80% of the responsibility for ill health in old age. "The report (PDF), launched at the Smart Ageing Summit in Oxford last week, argues that individuals have far greater control over their longevity than is commonly understood," reports The Guardian. "The authors call on the government to take legislative action on alcohol comparable to restrictions on smoking." From the report: Living Longer, Better -- the Oxford Longevity Project's first Age-less report -- was co-authored by an interdisciplinary panel of UK-based experts in medicine, physiology, ageing and education policy. It was sponsored by Oxford Healthspan. The report's authors, Sir Christopher Ball, Sir Muir Gray, Dr Paul Ch'en, Leslie Kenny and Prof Denis Noble, present the figure of 80% as a conservative estimate. [...] The claim, however, has been described as simplistic and said to neglect wider arguments about whether people are genuinely in control of individual choices when it comes to issues including poverty, pollution and healthcare access. [...] Ball, however, pointed to research including the Landmark Twins Study, where researchers concluded at least 75% of human lifespan is determined by environmental and modifiable lifestyle factors. He also cited large-scale analysis led by Oxford Population Health using data from nearly 500,000 UK Biobank participants which found that environmental exposures and habits carry far greater weight in premature death and biological ageing than inherited genetics. The report's recommendations include avoiding processed foods, abstaining entirely from alcohol, prioritising sleep, not eating after 6.30pm, and cultivating what it calls "a not-meat mindset." On alcohol, it takes a position more forthright than current government guidance. "Alcohol is toxic, don't drink it," said Ball. "The report bravely says so -- whereas the government is afraid to tell the public the truth."

21 May 2026

OSnews

Google’s plan for ads in its new “AI” chatbot search engine is to let “AI” generate the ads

After Google killed its search engine a few days ago, one question remained: how exactly does advertising fit into all of this? Google is obviously not going to move to chatbot search without somehow adding ads to your conversation with the pachinko machine, so everybody was wondering how that was going to work, exactly. Well, we have the answer, and it's an obvious one. When researching a topic, consumers want to know exactly how a product suits their unique situation. In fact, 75% of people report making faster, more confident decisions using AI Mode in Search. 1 That's why we're testing two new types of ads, built with Gemini, that offer relevant product details along with helpful guidance. To help people evaluate their choices, both of these new formats will feature an independent AI explainer as part of the ad. Our Gemini model evaluates and synthesizes information about a product or service, and displays that context alongside the advertiser's creative. This coherent, independent response ensures transparency and builds trust. These formats will also continue to be clearly labeled as "Sponsored." ↫ Google's Ads & Commerce Blog Of course they're going to just generate the ads with "AI", too. Google will offer two types of "AI"-generated ads in their new chatbot search tool, the first of which will simply be an "AI"-generated answer to a user's question. If you ask the Google chatbot "how can I clean my bed sheets of unintended nightly slop discharge?", Google will generate an ad based on the features of a slopcleaner washing machine detergent product and show that to you. The second type comes in when a user asks something like "what is the best way to kill a search engine?" Google's chatbot will then show a number of ways to kill a search engine, and one of the items in that list might be an ad generated by Google, alongside the customary unrelated information, wrong information, and made-up nonsense. Google claims both of these types of ads will be labeled as such, but I doubt that small label will be noticed by many, and of course, there's no way to know any of the other answers the chatbot generates aren't paid-for either. Here, too, though, we must ask the question what the end game is. This new chatbot search engine is clearly trying to keep you on Google's website, but in doing so, it'll deprive large numbers of websites of the traffic they need to survive. If they can't survive, they're die. If they're dead, they can't produce the content Google "AI" needs to slobber up to spit back out in Google's chatbot search. Chatbot search is also an agent of its own destruction, because you can't generate improved slop with nothing but slop. Because, and I can't repeat this often enough, nobody has ever used "AI" to produce anything of value.

21 May 2026 10:04pm GMT

Twelve ways to be wrong about “AI”-assisted coding

Suppose your manager asks you next week to demonstrate that the AI coding tools your company signed up for are worth the subscription cost. Would you measure lines of code generated, or tickets closed? Or would you send out a survey asking whether developers feel more productive? Each of those approaches is flawed in a different way; the sections below explain why. ↫ Greg Wilson Every single study that claims to prove "AI" has a positive effect on productivity falls into one or more of these categories. Again, nobody has ever used "AI" to produce anything of value.

21 May 2026 9:43pm GMT

“AI” tools shit where they eat

The stories of "AI" bots and crawlers absolutely ravaging websites and services keep on coming, and the amount of work people have to do just to survive these "AI" bot and crawler assaults is insane. I run Weird Gloop, which hosts some of the biggest video game wikis ever, like Minecraft, OSRS and League. Over the last 3 years, we've had to spend more and more of our time fighting with this bot traffic that is spiky, disproportionately expensive, and getting harder to distinguish from humans. If we weren't constantly mitigating the bots, they would use ~10x more of our compute resources than everything else put together - even though that "everything else" includes tens of millions of (human) pageviews and tens of thousands of edits a day. Everyone who runs wikis is dealing with the exact same problem. The Wikimedia Foundation has a post about it impacting operations, every major wiki farm has had varying degrees of service outages, and some smaller independent wikis have been knocked completely offline. Overall, I'd guess that about 95% of all server issues in the wiki ecosystem this year have been caused by bad scrapers. ↫ cookmeplox at the Weird Gloop blog "AI" tools are a quintessential example of "shitting where you eat". All of these tools just suck up huge amounts of content created by actual humans, only to regurgitate bits and pieces of that content upon request according statistical models. If in that process of sucking up everybody's content, these tools are placing such amounts of undue stress and cost on the people making and hosting that content that said people stop making and hosting such content, where are these "AI" tools going to get their content from next? With every person that throws up their hands in the air in utter frustration as they see they're hosting bills skyrocket and their sites become unusable, "AI" tools are agents of their own destruction, since ingesting the slop they themselves create only makes these "AI" tools worse. Nobody has ever used "AI" to produce anything of value, after all.

21 May 2026 9:35pm GMT