On the eve of about 8,000 jobs being cut, employees are cashing in on headphone stipends and other perks while they still can. Ahead of Meta's latest round of mass layoffs tomorrow, some employees are deserting offices, abandoning their work, and loading up on perks they might soon lose, several people at the company tell WIRED. Two employees describe a widespread rush to use up an annual $2,000 flexible benefit, which can cover a variety of expenses including health and wellness activities. A separate triennial credit of $200 toward the purchase of audio gear has led to a scramble to purchase Apple AirPods and other headphones. Another source says Meta offices have been largely empty this week, as people prioritize polishing their résumés and gather offsite to commiserate with friends for what may be their final time as colleagues.

Who is James Murray, the new health secretary replacing Wes Streeting? From a high-profile, media-friendly Secretary of State to a relatively unknown MP, the departure of Wes Streeting and arrival of James Murray has raised eyebrows in the health and political worlds. It is one of the biggest Cabinet jobs with the largest public service departmental budgets. There will be a steep learning curve with no time for preparation away from the front line. Murray says he's deeply honoured to be appointed to the brief and continue Wes Streeting's brilliant work on such a critical mission, but who is he, and what issues will he face in his in tray?

'Releasing a marketing post with purposely vague language that obscures evidence brings into question if they are trying to garner further investment without scrutiny,' one scientist said. 'Releasing a marketing post with purposely vague language that obscures evidence brings into question if they are trying to garner further investment without scrutiny,' one scientist said. 'Too powerful for the public': inside Anthropic's bid to win the AI publicity war This week, the AI company Anthropic said it had created an AI model so powerful that, out of a sense of overwhelming responsibility, it was not going to release it to the public. The US treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, summoned the heads of major banks for a chat about the model, Mythos. The Reform UK MP Danny Kruger wrote a letter to the government urging it to " engage with AI firm Anthropic whose new frontier model Claude Mythos could present catastrophic cybersecurity risks to the UK".

X CEO Elon Musk has said he was not aware of any "naked underage images" generated by xAI's Grok chatbot, as scrutiny of the AI tool intensifies worldwide. "I [am] not aware of any naked underage images generated by Grok. Literally zero," Musk said in an X post on Wednesday. Musk reiterated that Grok is programmed to refuse illegal requests and must comply with the laws of any given country or state. "Obviously, Grok does not spontaneously generate images, it does so only according to user requests," Musk said.

CEO Sam Altman announced an age-prediction system and new parental controls in a blog post on Tuesday. OpenAI announced new teen safety features for ChatGPT on Tuesday as part of an ongoing effort to respond to concerns about how minors engage with chatbots . The company is building an age-prediction system that identifies if a user is under 18 years old and routes them to an " age-appropriate " system that blocks graphic sexual content. If the system detects that the user is considering suicide or self-harm, it will contact the user's parents. In cases of imminent danger, if a user's parents are unreachable, the system may contact the authorities.

This paper challenges the assumption that courts should grant First Amendment protections to outputs from large generative AI models, such as GPT-4 and Gemini. We argue that because these models lack intentionality, their outputs do not constitute speech as understood in the context of established legal precedent, so there can be no speech to protect. Furthermore, if the model outputs are not speech, users cannot claim a First Amendment speech right to receive the outputs. We also argue that extending First Amendment rights to AI models would not serve the fundamental purposes of free speech, such as promoting a marketplace of ideas, facilitating self-governance, or fostering self-expression. In fact, granting First Amendment protections to AI models would be detrimental to society because it would hinder the government's ability to regulate these powerful technologies effectively, potentially leading to the unchecked spread of misinformation and other harms.

Armed with drones, long-distance camera lenses and metal detectors, a hillside in Eaton Canyon has become the focus of intense scrutiny over the last month by teams of private investigators now seeking clues on whether Southern California Edison equipment caused the massive fire that destroyed large swaths of Altadena. Some of the findings and theories of these privately hired teams of fire investigators and electrical engineers have emerged in more than 40 lawsuits that residents have filed against the utility. Much of the focus has been centered on a group of transmission towers where the first flames were seen just as the Eaton fire exploded. Earlier this week, a new lawsuit alleged that an idle transmission tower on the hillside -- one that has not been in use for more than 50 years -- might have sparked the devastating blaze. With more than 9,000 homes lost and 17 people killed, liability is going to be a costly question that could affect how Altadena is rebuilt.

This article describes how technical infrastructure developed by the nonprofit OpenMined enables external scrutiny of AI systems without compromising sensitive information. Independent external scrutiny of AI systems provides crucial transparency into AI development, so it should be an integral component of any approach to AI governance. In practice, external researchers have struggled to gain access to AI systems because of AI companies' legitimate concerns about security, privacy, and intellectual property. But now, privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs) have reached a new level of maturity: end-to-end technical infrastructure developed by OpenMined combines several PETs into various setups that enable privacy-preserving audits of AI systems. We showcase two case studies where this infrastructure has been deployed in real-world governance scenarios: "Understanding Social Media Recommendation Algorithms with the Christchurch Call" and "Evaluating Frontier Models with the UK AI Safety Institute." We describe types of scrutiny of AI systems that could be facilitated by current setups and OpenMined's proposed future setups. We conclude that these innovative approaches deserve further exploration and support from the AI governance community. Interested policymakers can focus on empowering researchers on a legal level.

After much discussion, the reviewers largely converged towards recommending to accept this submission. The reviewers appreciate the merits of the paper, believe it investigates important open questions, and will thus be a significant contribution to our understanding of BNNs, but only when the experimental issues mentioned in the reviews are resolved. I would draw the author's attention to the fact that the reviewers raised concerns about the supplementary material containing a number of sections which are not connected to results in the main paper (on tempered posteriors, sampling from the prior, discussions of what's Bayesian, PAC Bayes etc.). Per reviewing guidelines, since these sections were not relevant for understanding the main paper, these were not reviewed with scrutiny. However, the reviewers found strong statements in the unreviewed supplementary material involving other recent work which they believe deserve close scrutiny if they are to be published.

Last Thursday, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Eric Schmitt introduced a bill aimed at stirring up more competition for Pentagon contracts awarded in AI and cloud computing. Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and Oracle currently dominate those contracts. "The way that the big get bigger in AI is by sucking up everyone else's data and using it to train and expand their own systems," Warren told the Washington Post. The new bill would "require a competitive award process" for contracts, which would ban the use of "no-bid" awards by the Pentagon to companies for cloud services or AI foundation models. While Big Tech is hit with antitrust investigations--including the ongoing lawsuit against Google about its dominance in search, as well as a new investigation opened into Microsoft--regulators are also accusing AI companies of, well, just straight-up lying.