Olivia Solon

@oliviasolon.bsky.social

Covering tech at Bloomberg from London Signal: @oliviasolon.13 Email: osolon2@bloomberg.net

Summer cycling in London is kinda scary. I'm riding to work a little later than usual at the moment (~7:45 a.m. vs ~6:30 a.m.) and I've already seen two nasty collisions -- both, I'm afraid, because a cyclist didn't stop at a light or crossing.

When DOGE arrived at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the operatives had no real background in nuclear issues. They boxed out experienced hands, forcing resignations and massive exodus of talent. Over 400 people have since left or been forced out. Our full story: https://propub.li/3OBQMwk

Graphic displaying how hundreds of staff who do work related to nuclear reactors and their safety have left and not been replaced. The data is categorized into six sections: Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Nuclear Regulatory Research, Nuclear Security and Incident Response, Regional offices, and Other offices. Each orange square underneath a category represents a loss in staff, while each gray square represents an addition of staff. The graphic shows that there have been 443 losses and 57 arrivals across all six of these categories. Note: The data is from the week ending Jan. 24, 2025, through Feb. 13, 2026. Source: Weekly Information Reports from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Nothing quite like the shame of having to explain to a radiographer why you got a microchip implanted in your hand so you could buy a KitKat from a vending machine in Wisconsin for a story 10 years go

OpenAI posted the terms of the deal. Reveals that it absolutely does allow for domestic surveillance. EO 12333 is how the NSA hides its domestic surveillance by capturing communications by tapping into lines *outside the US* even if it contains info from/on US persons. openai.com/index/our-ag...

2. Our contract. Here is the relevant language:

The Department of War may use the AI System for all lawful purposes, consistent with applicable law, operational requirements, and well-established safety and oversight protocols. The AI System will not be used to independently direct autonomous weapons in any case where law, regulation, or Department policy requires human control, nor will it be used to assume other high-stakes decisions that require approval by a human decisionmaker under the same authorities. Per DoD Directive 3000.09 (dtd 25 January 2023), any use of AI in autonomous and semi-autonomous systems must undergo rigorous verification, validation, and testing to ensure they perform as intended in realistic environments before deployment.

For intelligence activities, any handling of private information will comply with the Fourth Amendment, the National Security Act of 1947 and the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act of 1978, Executive Order 12333, and applicable DoD directives requiring a defined foreign intelligence purpose. The AI System shall not be used for unconstrained monitoring of U.S. persons’ private information as consistent with these authorities. The system shall also not be used for domestic law-enforcement activities except as permitted by the Posse Comitatus Act and other applicable law.
Mike Masnick@masnick.com · 7mo ago

I saw some folks asking what the difference was between what OpenAI signed with the DoD and what Anthropic said they wanted, and Sam more or less admits here the key point: OpenAI's deal requires them to trust the NSA. Anthropic's contract had real safeguards.

User Chris: What was the core difference why you think the DoW accepted OpenAI but not Anthropic

Sam Altman: 
I can't speak for them, but to speculate with the best understanding of the situation.

*First, I saw reporting that they were extremely close on a deal, and for much of the time both sides really wanted to reach one. I have seen what happens in tense negotiations when things get stressed and deteriorate super fast, and I could believe that was a large part of what happened here.

*We believe in a layered approach to safety--building a safety stack, deploying FDEs and having our safety and alignment researcher involved, deploying via cloud, working directly with the DoW. Anthropic seemed more focused on specific prohibitions in the contract, rather than citing applicable laws, which we felt comfortable with. We feel that it it's very important to build safe system, and although documents are also important, I'd clearly rather rely on technical safeguards if I only had to pick one.

*We and the DoW got comfortable with the contractual language, but I can understand other people would have a different opinion here.

*I think Anthropic may have wanted more operational control than we did

It’s depressing to see women try to claw back control of their images by imploring a chatbot not to misuse their photos. Posts like these are reminiscent of the copyright declarations you used to see on Facebook. Totally understandable but unlikely to have the desired effect.

BildBild

So much interesting in this (and good work on @caseynewton.bsky.social documenting it). One thing to note though, Google's watermarking identified the image of the badge as created by its AI tool. Other image generators haven't bothered implementing anything similar, why? (Looking at you, Sora.)

Olivia Solon@oliviasolon.bsky.social · 9mo ago

Great work from @caseynewton.bsky.social and an illuminating case study in how journalists authenticate allegations/sources in an age of generative AI www.platformer.news/fake-uber-ea...

Nudify apps have been around for ages, but it's wild to see a mainstream platform like X effectively become a revenge porn machine, generating AND publishing non-consensual intimate images of women