Kevin Mitnick, whose pioneering antics tricking employees in the 1980s and 1990s into helping him steal software and services from big phone and tech companies made him the most celebrated U.S. hacker, has died at age 59. Mitnick died Sunday in Las Vegas after a 14-month battle with pancreatic cancer, said Stu Sjouwerman, CEO of the security training firm KnowBe4, where Mitnick was chief hacking officer. His colorful career--from student tinkerer to FBI-hunted fugitive, imprisoned felon and finally respected cybersecurity professional, public speaker and author tapped for advice by U.S. lawmakers and global corporations--mirrors the evolution of society's grasp of the nuances of computer hacking. Through Mitnick's professional trajectory, and what many consider the misplaced prosecutorial zeal that put him behind bars for nearly five years until 2000, the public has learned how to better distinguish serious computer crime from the mischievous troublemaking of youths hellbent on proving their hacking prowess. "He never hacked for money," said Sjouwerman, who became Mitnick's business partner in 2011.

Several of the signers have already publicly agreed to some similar actions to those in the White House's pledge. Before OpenAI rolled it out its GPT-4 system widely, it brought in a team of running outside professions to exercises, a process known as "redteaming." Google has already said in a blog post it is developing a watermarking, which companies and policymakers have touted as a way to address concerns that AI could supercharge misinformation.

Today, the White House was proud to announce it has received "voluntary commitments" from tech companies like Microsoft, Meta, and OpenAI to support forthcoming regulation on artificial intelligence. At first blush, it's a reassuring gesture from tech companies who hold "human extinction" in the palm of their hands, but Americans should take their lip service with a grain of salt. More than a decade after Mark Zuckerberg coined the mantra "move fast and break things," the public is finally realizing the serious negative effect that social media platforms have had on youth mental health, and the brokenness in our democracy and public health that Big Tech has left in its wake. Now, Big Tech wants to "launch and iterate" a new lab experiment on society writ large, this time with artificial intelligence. Leaders in the field agree that "smart regulation" is needed to avoid serious harm to humanity, but AI is already woven into the fabric of the mainstream's daily lives.

The White House has struck a deal with major AI developers--including Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and OpenAI--that commits them to take action to prevent harmful AI models from being released into the world. Under the agreement, which the White House calls a "voluntary commitment," the companies pledge to carry out internal tests and permit external testing of new AI models before they are publicly released. The test will look for problems including biased or discriminatory output, cybersecurity flaws, and risks of broader societal harm. Startups Anthropic and Inflection, both developers of notable rivals to OpenAI's ChatGPT, also participated in the agreement. "Companies have a duty to ensure that their products are safe before introducing them to the public by testing the safety and capability of their AI systems," White House special adviser for AI Ben Buchanan told reporters in a briefing yesterday.

GOP Rep. Nancy Mace spoke exclusively with Fox News Digital about her thoughts on the rapidly advancing AI sector, as Congress races to get ahead of the burgeoning technology. AI is not going to kill us. Nor is AI going to save us. Instead, AI has the potential to help us change. Very few are considering the opportunities this new technology offers to clean up government.

In this paper we will provide a quantitative analysis of a simple model of the Federal Disaster Assistance policy from the viewpoint of three different stakeholders. This quantitative methodology is new and has applications to other areas such as business and healthcare processes. The stakeholders are interested in process transparency but each has a different opinion on precisely what constitutes transparency. We will also consider three modifications to the Federal Disaster Assistance policy and analyse, from a stakeholder viewpoint, how stakeholder satisfaction changes from process to process. This analysis is used to rank the favourability of four policies with respect to all collective stakeholder preferences.

Check-worthy claim detection aims at providing plausible misinformation to downstream fact-checking systems or human experts to check. This is a crucial step toward accelerating the fact-checking process. Many efforts have been put into how to identify check-worthy claims from a small scale of pre-collected claims, but how to efficiently detect check-worthy claims directly from a large-scale information source, such as Twitter, remains underexplored. To fill this gap, we introduce MythQA, a new multi-answer open-domain question answering(QA) task that involves contradictory stance mining for query-based large-scale check-worthy claim detection. The idea behind this is that contradictory claims are a strong indicator of misinformation that merits scrutiny by the appropriate authorities. To study this task, we construct TweetMythQA, an evaluation dataset containing 522 factoid multi-answer questions based on controversial topics. Each question is annotated with multiple answers. Moreover, we collect relevant tweets for each distinct answer, then classify them into three categories: "Supporting", "Refuting", and "Neutral". In total, we annotated 5.3K tweets. Contradictory evidence is collected for all answers in the dataset. Finally, we present a baseline system for MythQA and evaluate existing NLP models for each system component using the TweetMythQA dataset. We provide initial benchmarks and identify key challenges for future models to improve upon. Code and data are available at: https://github.com/TonyBY/Myth-QA

Large-dimensional empirical data in science and engineering frequently has low-rank structure and can be represented as a combination of just a few eigenmodes. Because of this structure, we can use just a few spatially localized sensor measurements to reconstruct the full state of a complex system. The quality of this reconstruction, especially in the presence of sensor noise, depends significantly on the spatial configuration of the sensors. Multiple algorithms based on gappy interpolation and QR factorization have been proposed to optimize sensor placement. Here, instead of an algorithm that outputs a singular "optimal" sensor configuration, we take a thermodynamic view to compute the full landscape of sensor interactions induced by the training data. The landscape takes the form of the Ising model in statistical physics, and accounts for both the data variance captured at each sensor location and the crosstalk between sensors. Mapping out these data-induced sensor interactions allows combining them with external selection criteria and anticipating sensor replacement impacts.

It is important to study how strategic agents can affect the outcome of an election. There has been a long line of research in the computational study of elections on the complexity of manipulative actions such as manipulation and bribery. These problems model scenarios such as voters casting strategic votes and agents campaigning for voters to change their votes to make a desired candidate win. A common assumption is that the preferences of the voters follow the structure of a domain restriction such as single peakedness, and so manipulators only consider votes that also satisfy this restriction. We introduce the model where the preferences of the voters define their own restriction and strategic actions must ``conform'' by using only these votes. In this model, the election after manipulation will retain common domain restrictions. We explore the computational complexity of conformant manipulative actions and we discuss how conformant manipulative actions relate to other manipulative actions.

This paper presents OxfordTVG-HIC (Humorous Image Captions), a large-scale dataset for humour generation and understanding. Humour is an abstract, subjective, and context-dependent cognitive construct involving several cognitive factors, making it a challenging task to generate and interpret. Hence, humour generation and understanding can serve as a new task for evaluating the ability of deep-learning methods to process abstract and subjective information. Due to the scarcity of data, humour-related generation tasks such as captioning remain under-explored. To address this gap, OxfordTVG-HIC offers approximately 2.9M image-text pairs with humour scores to train a generalizable humour captioning model. Contrary to existing captioning datasets, OxfordTVG-HIC features a wide range of emotional and semantic diversity resulting in out-of-context examples that are particularly conducive to generating humour. Moreover, OxfordTVG-HIC is curated devoid of offensive content. We also show how OxfordTVG-HIC can be leveraged for evaluating the humour of a generated text. Through explainability analysis of the trained models, we identify the visual and linguistic cues influential for evoking humour prediction (and generation). We observe qualitatively that these cues are aligned with the benign violation theory of humour in cognitive psychology.