2601
0
submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by Zerush@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml

WOW, users can rate and review the apps, apart from paying for them. Revolutionary

(I wasn't really sure about posting it here or in memes)

2602
0
submitted 3 years ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2603
0
submitted 3 years ago by leanleft@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml

Three years ago, the company walked away from a Defense Department project after employees objected to it. Now the company is working on a new proposal for the Pentagon

Three years after an employee revolt forced Google to abandon work on a Pentagon program that used artificial intelligence, the company is aggressively pursuing a major contract to provide its technology to the military.

The company’s plan to land the potentially lucrative contract, known as the Joint Warfighting Cloud Capability, could raise a furor among its outspoken work force and test the resolve of management to resist employee demands.

In 2018, thousands of Google employees signed a letter protesting the company’s involvement in Project Maven, a military program that uses artificial intelligence to interpret video images and could be used to refine the targeting of drone strikes. Google management caved and agreed to not renew the contract once it expired.

The outcry led Google to create guidelines for the ethical use of artificial intelligence, which prohibit the use of its technology for weapons or surveillance, and hastened a shake-up of its cloud computing business. Now, as Google positions cloud computing as a key part of its future, the bid for the new Pentagon contract could test the boundaries of those A.I. principles, which have set it apart from other tech giants that routinely seek military and intelligence work.

The military’s initiative, which aims to modernize the Pentagon’s cloud technology and support the use of artificial intelligence to gain an advantage on the battlefield, is a replacement for a contract with Microsoft that was canceled this summer amid a lengthy legal battle with Amazon. Google did not compete against Microsoft for that contract after the uproar over Project Maven.

The Pentagon’s restart of its cloud computing project has given Google a chance to jump back into the bidding, and the company has raced to prepare a proposal to present to Defense officials, according to four people familiar with the matter who were not authorized to speak publicly. In September, Google’s cloud unit made it a priority, declaring an emergency “Code Yellow,” an internal designation of importance that allowed the company to pull engineers off other assignments and focus them on the military project, two of those people said.

On Tuesday, the Google cloud unit’s chief executive, Thomas Kurian, met with Charles Q. Brown, Jr., the chief of staff of the Air Force, and other top Pentagon officials to make the case for his company, two people said.

Google, in a written statement, said it is “firmly committed to serving our public sector customers” including the Defense Department, and that it “will evaluate any future bid opportunities accordingly.”

The contract replaces the now-scrapped Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure, or JEDI, the Pentagon cloud computing contract that was estimated to be worth $10 billion over 10 years. The exact size of the new contract is unknown, although it is half the duration and will be awarded to more than one company, not to a single provider like JEDI.

It is unclear whether the work, which would provide the Defense Department access to Google’s cloud products, would violate Google’s A.I. principles, although the Defense Department has said the technology is expected to support the military in combat. But Pentagon rules about outside access to sensitive or classified data could prevent Google from seeing exactly how its technology is being used.

The Defense Department said it would seek proposals from a limited set of companies that could meet its requirements. “As this is an active acquisition, we cannot provide any additional information related to this effort,” said Russell Goemaere, a spokesman for the department.

After a late start in selling its cloud computing technology to other organizations, Google has struggled to close the gap with Amazon and Microsoft, which have the two biggest cloud computing businesses. To bring in more big customers, Google hired Mr. Kurian, a longtime executive at the software company Oracle, to take over the business in 2018. He has beefed up the size of Google’s sales staff and pushed the company to compete aggressively for new contracts, including military deals.

But Google employees have continued to resist some work pursued by the cloud unit. In 2019, they protested the use of artificial intelligence tools for the oil and gas industry. A year later, the company said it would not build custom A.I. software for the extraction of fossil fuels.

Google started working on Project Maven in 2017 and prepared to bid for JEDI. Many Google employees believed Project Maven represented a potentially lethal use of artificial intelligence, and more than 4,000 workers signed a letter demanding that Google withdraw from the project.

Soon after, Google announced a set of ethical principles that would govern its use of artificial intelligence. Google would not allow its A.I. to be used for weapons or surveillance, said Sundar Pichai, its chief executive, but would continue to accept military contracts for cybersecurity and search-and-rescue.

Several months later, Google said it would not bid on the JEDI contract, although it was unlikely that the company had a shot at landing the deal: The Maven experience had soured the relationship between Google and the military, and Google lacked some of the security certifications needed to handle classified data.

Google’s cloud business recently has done other work with the military. Since last year, Google has signed contracts with the U.S. Air Force for using cloud computing for aircraft maintenance and pilot training, as well as a U.S. Navy contract for using artificial intelligence to detect and predict the maintenance needs of facilities and vessels.

Some Google workers believed the new contract would not violate the principles, a person familiar with the decision said, because the contract would enable generic uses of its cloud technology and artificial intelligence. The principles specifically state Google will not pursue A.I. that can be applied in “weapons or those that direct injury.”

Lucy Suchman, a professor of anthropology of science and technology at Lancaster University whose research focuses on the use of technology in war, said that with so much money at stake, it is no surprise Google might waver on its commitment.

“It demonstrates the fragility of Google’s commitment to staying outside the major merger that’s happening between the D.O.D. and Silicon Valley,” Ms. Suchman said.

Google’s efforts come as its employees are already pushing the company to cancel a cloud computing contract with the Israeli military, called Project Nimbus, that provides Google’s services to government entities throughout Israel. In an open letter published last month by The Guardian, Google employees called on their employer to cancel the contract.

The Defense Department’s effort to transition to cloud technology has been mired in legal battles. The military operates on outdated computer systems and has spent billions of dollars on modernization. It turned to U.S. internet giants in the hope that the companies could quickly and securely move the Defense Department to the cloud.

In 2019, the Defense Department awarded the JEDI contract to Microsoft. Amazon sued to block the contract, claiming that Microsoft did not have the technical capabilities to fulfill the military’s needs and that former President Donald J. Trump had improperly influenced the decision because of animosity toward Jeff Bezos, Amazon’s executive chairman and the owner of The Washington Post.

In July, the Defense Department announced that it could no longer wait for the legal fight with Amazon to resolve. It scrapped the JEDI contract and said it would be replaced with the Joint Warfighting Cloud Capability.

The Pentagon also noted that Amazon and Microsoft were the only companies that likely had the technology to meet its needs, but said it would conduct market research before ruling out other competitors. The Defense Department said it planned to reach out to Google, Oracle and IBM.

But Google executives believe they have the capability to compete for the new contract, and the company expects the Defense Department to tell it whether it will qualify to make a bid in the coming weeks, two people familiar with the matter said.

The Defense Department has previously said it hopes to award a contract by April.

2604
1
submitted 3 years ago by nutomic@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2605
0
submitted 3 years ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2606
0
submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml

This was originally a discussion on the Fairphone subreddit, where users almost unanimously responded with that they were fine with if a future Fairphone did not have a toolless removable battery as long as the battery was still easily replacable with minor disassembly. One of the main reasons being that modern devices generally have plenty of battery life on a single charge.

I remember carrying an extra battery to switch out when the first one died being a somewhat standard part of using feature phones, because their battery lives were terrible and chargers in public places weren't really a thing yet. It was so common that some feature phones used to come with two batteries in the box and you could buy standalone battery chargers. Damn, I just realized: the golden age of feature phones is now over a decade ago.

What do you think? In terms of the niche of highly repairable devices, how important is a tool-less, instantly replaceable battery to you? Compared to if you had to unscrew the back panel or the screen assembly to access the battery. Would a laptop or a tablet with a toolless battery be more important to you than a phone, since those tend to have shorter battery life and be harder to find public charging spots for?

I guess another issue is barrier to replacement? Technologically inclined people will not find taking out a couple screws or removing a non-glued display assembly very difficult at all, but for the layman, even that could be a daunting task, possibly leading to more devices being thrown out because of dead batteries instead of being repaired? Though, this also seems more a problem with how society views repairing devices than a fault of the design itself.

2607
0
submitted 3 years ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2608
0
submitted 3 years ago by a_Ha@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml

After stupid update of "phone application", had to tape over the proximity sensor ! ... otherwise there's no way to reliably shut the screen during a phone call. Whenever the screen is on, my face touching the screen triggers any stupid functions 🙄 Had to try and test a few location because it was not located at the selfie camera. Once again it shows we are not the customers ; we are the product 😑

2609
-1
submitted 3 years ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2610
0
2611
0
submitted 3 years ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2612
0
submitted 3 years ago by ILikeMultis@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2613
2
submitted 3 years ago by Epsilon@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2614
0
submitted 3 years ago by snackwifi@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml

Those of you who use Linux on a laptop, which laptop do you use? I've been thinking of buying a new laptop to replace my current ageing macbook and would love to run Linux on it.

2615
0
submitted 3 years ago by uthredii@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2616
0
submitted 3 years ago by ksynwa@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml

I personally use passwordstore.org with a git repo on a personal VPS. But I wanted to set up a password manager for my boomer parents and looks like Bitwarden is one of the better options out there.

The problem is that the free tier sounds a bit too good to be true so I am worried that it might just disappear or discontinue one day. Any idea if this fear is unfounded or not?

If you have been using Bitwarden please share your experience with it. Would like to hear.

2617
0
submitted 3 years ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2618
3
submitted 3 years ago by uthredii@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2619
1
submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by snek_boi@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml

Hey.

My brother will buy his very first laptop soon. He was saving for a MacBook Pro, but hearing me go on about Apple being PRISM-compliant and about how open source software is awesome, he's open to new options.

His main argument to buy an M1 is that there is currently no chip nearly as good (in terms of energetic efficiency). And I see that he has a point there.

However, I was also kinda hoping he'd use his savings for a Framework laptop running Linux. Regarding those computers, my biggest hope is that they'll eventually run good RISC-V chips, chips that can be easily be changed with a simple module change. But that may be a long time from now, maybe decades.

Another option I thought about was him buying the M1 and fighting his way to install a Linux distro that supports all the M1 MacBook hardware. He'll have a really fast and efficient chip, as well as a good system!

But the main objection for this is that the M1 is not really future proof... like, it is guaranteed that in the next two years the much better M2 will be put into the MacBook Pro. That improvement isn't trivial; it'll be a 20% reduction in transistor size. But apart from quick changes, it's possible that the novelty of the M1 is problematic. For example, I was reading about a vulnerability in the M1s because of not having adopted a particular instruction set in the very basic operations of the chip. It's almost as if this M1 is an early-adoption technology, if that makes sense.

Anyway, those are the considerations that I have about my brother's computer... hopefully we'll have more clarity by the time his classes begin. Do you have anything that could help us achieve that clarity? Or even muddle the waters a bit more in an interesting way 🙃?

Edit:

Thanks for all the comments! They spurred lots of discussion and some changes of hearts!

So, I was really looking forward to getting a Linux-first machine, but two things happened.

One was that there were few options (due to the chip shortage probably?): System76 Pangolin not available, TUXEDO quite expensive (and only integrated or Nvidia graphics), Slimbook Titan quite expensive, Slimbook X15 without dedicated graphics (or Nvidia I forget which).

The other thing that happened was a friend having us consider the possibility of getting a pure-AMD machine. Since AMD has open source drivers (unlike Nvidia), they will probably work with Linux without much of a hassle. He'd also keep having the option of a dual-boot with Windows, to work with non-Linux software (in case he needs that for school). Such computers could be those with the 'AMD advantage' (AMD CPU and GPU), though they're a bit pricey. Yet this is his money and he's very excited about gaming in them!

This is the most likely route. So, no longer Apple. I would've liked to support Linux-first machines, but I guess AMD was the winner here?

2620
3
2621
0
submitted 3 years ago by uthredii@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2622
0
submitted 3 years ago by pimento@lemmygrad.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2623
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2624
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
2625
0
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml
view more: ‹ prev next ›

Technology

34759 readers
139 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS