The UK government confirmed plans to regulate cryptoasset activities more strictly, bringing them under the same regime as traditional financial services. From a report: The government intends to proceed with legislation in 2024 to implement the changes, according to a Treasury announcement on Monday, responding to a consultation it launched earlier this year. The plans include a mandate for crypto exchanges to write detailed requirements on admission standards and disclosures for token issuers when listing new assets. This could include information about a token's underlying code, known vulnerabilities and risks.

The UK's push to regulate crypto is part of a wider effort by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to attract more digital-asset businesses and investment to the country, while at the same time protecting consumers. Crypto firms have long complained that a lack of clear rules has made it hard for them to operate in the UK. "We must make the UK a place where cryptoasset firms have the clarity needed to invest and innovate, and where customers have the protections necessary for confidently using these technologies," said City Minister Andrew Griffith. "The UK is the obvious choice for starting and scaling a cryptoasset business."

President Joe Biden signed a wide-ranging executive order on artificial intelligence Monday, setting the stage for some industry regulations and funding for the U.S. government to further invest in the technology. From a report: The order is broad, and its focuses range from civil rights and industry regulations to a government hiring spree. In a media call previewing the order Sunday, a senior White House official, who asked to not be named as part of the terms of the call, said AI has so many facets that effective regulations have to cast a wide net. "AI policy is like running into a decathlon, and there's 10 different events here," the official said. "And we don't have the luxury of just picking 'we're just going to do safety' or "we're just going to do equity' or 'we're just going to do privacy.' You have to do all of these things."

The official also called for "significant bipartisan legislation" to further advance the country's interests with AI. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., held a private forum in September with industry leaders but has yet to introduce significant AI legislation. Some of the order builds on a previous nonbinding agreement that seven of the top U.S. tech companies developing AI agreed to in July, like hiring outside experts to probe their systems for weaknesses and sharing their critical findings. The order leverages the Defense Production Act to legally require those companies to share safety test results with the federal government.

The Wall Street Journal reports that more than three million Americans have now had a total of $127 billion in student loans flagged for cancellation. (Which for 3 million would average out to over $40,000 apiece).

Interestingly, the article notes this happened despite a set back for forgiveness in America's highest court this June: The high court ruled that the Biden administration couldn't cancel hundreds of billions of dollars for tens millions of student-loan holders, reasoning that the authority for such a broad-based policy doesn't exist under the law. While that closed one path, Biden tapped a variety of different tools that no previous president had ever used to this extent. Since taking office in 2021, the Biden administration has arranged to cancel loans equal to around 30% of the total projected cost of its blocked mass cancellation plan.

The seven industrial countries known as the "G7" — America, Canada, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, and Britain — will agree on a code of conduct Monday for companies developing advanced AI systems, reports Reuters.

The news comes "as governments seek to mitigate the risks and potential misuse of the technology," Reuters reports — citing a G7 document. The 11-point code "aims to promote safe, secure, and trustworthy AI worldwide and will provide voluntary guidance for actions by organizations developing the most advanced AI systems, including the most advanced foundation models and generative AI systems", the G7 document said. It "is meant to help seize the benefits and address the risks and challenges brought by these technologies".

The code urges companies to take appropriate measures to identify, evaluate and mitigate risks across the AI lifecycle, as well as tackle incidents and patterns of misuse after AI products have been placed on the market. Companies should post public reports on the capabilities, limitations and the use and misuse of AI systems, and also invest in robust security controls.

The Washington Post's editorial board looks at America's "net neutrality" debate.

But first they note that America's communications-regulating FCC has "limited authority to regulate unless broadband is considered a 'common carrier' under the Telecommunications Act of 1996." The FCC under President Barack Obama moved to reclassify broadband so it could regulate broadband companies; the FCC under President Donald Trump reversed the change. Dismayed advocates warned the world that, without the protections in place, the internet would break. You'll never guess what happened next: nothing. Or, at least, almost nothing. The internet did not break, and internet service providers for the most part did not block and they did not throttle.

All the same, today's FCC, under Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, has just moved to re-reclassify broadband. The interesting part is that her strongest argument doesn't have much to do with net neutrality, but with some of the other benefits the country could see from having a federal watchdog keeping an eye on the broadband business... Broadband is an essential service... Yet there isn't a single government agency with sufficient authority to oversee this vital tool. Asserting federal authority over broadband would empower regulation of any blocking, throttling or anti-competitive paid traffic prioritization that they might engage in. But it could also help ensure the safety and security of U.S. networks.

The FCC has, on national security grounds, removed authorization for companies affiliated with adversary states, such as China's Huawei, from participating in U.S. telecommunications markets. The agency can do this for phone carriers. But it can't do it for broadband, because it isn't allowed to. Or consider public safety during a crisis. The FCC doesn't have the ability to access the data it needs to know when and where there are broadband outages — much less the ability to do anything about those outages if they are identified. Similarly, it can't impose requirements for network resiliency to help prevent those outages from occurring in the first place — during, say, a natural disaster or a cyberattack.

The agency has ample power to police the types of services that are becoming less relevant in American life, such as landline telephones, and little power to police those that are becoming more important every day.
The FCC acknowledges this power would also allow them to prohibit "throttling" of content. But the Post's editorial also makes the argument that here in 2023 that's "unlikely to have any major effect on the broadband industry in either direction... Substantial consequences have only become less likely as high-speed bandwidth has become less limited."

To explore America's "transition to a post-quantum world," the Washington Post interviewed U.S. federal official Nick Polk, who is focused on national security issues including quantum computing and is also a senior advisor to a White House federal chief information security officer): The Washington Post: The U.S. is in the early stages of a major shift focused on bolstering government network defenses, pushing federal agencies to adopt a new encryption standard known as post-quantum cryptography that aims to prevent systems from being vulnerable to advanced decryption techniques enabled by quantum computers in the near future...

Nick Polk: We've been using asymmetric encryption for a very long time now, and it's been ubiquitous since about 2014, when the U.S. government and some of the large tech companies decided that they're going to make it a default on most web browsers... Interestingly enough, regarding the post-quantum cryptographic standards being developed, the only thing that's quantum about them is that it has "quantum" in the name. It's really just a different type of math that's much more difficult for a quantum computer to be able to reverse-engineer. The National Institute of Standards and Technology is looking at different mathematical models to cover all their bases. The interesting thing is that these post-quantum standards are actually being used to protect classical computers that we have now, like laptops...

Given the breadth of the U.S. government and the amount of computing power we use, we really see ourselves and our role as a steward of the tech ecosystem. One of the things that came out of [this week's Inside Quantum Technology conference in New York City] was that we are very quickly moving along with the private sector to migrate to post-quantum cryptography. I think you're gonna see very shortly a lot of very sensitive private sector industries start to migrate or start to advertise that they're going to migrate. Banks are a perfect example. That means meeting with vendors regularly, and testing their algorithms to ensure that we can accurately and effectively implement them on federal systems...

The administration and national security memorandum set 2035 as our deadline as a government to migrate our [national security] systems to post-quantum cryptography. That's supposed to time with the development of operational quantum computers. We need to ensure that we start now, so that we don't end up not meeting the deadline before computers are operational... This is a prioritized migration for the U.S. government. We're going to start with our most critical systems — that includes what we call high-value assets, and high-impact systems. So for example, we're gonna prioritize systems that have personal health information.

That's our biggest emphasis — both when we talk to private industry and when we encourage agencies when they talk to their contractors and vendors — to really think about where your most sensitive data is and then prioritize those systems for migration.

Bloomberg thinks they've identified the source of the advanced chips in Huawei's newest smartphone, citing to "people familiar with the matter". In a suggestion that export restrictions on Europe's most valuable tech company may have come too late to stem China's advances in chipmaking, ASML's so-called immersion deep ultraviolet machines were used in combination with tools from other companies to make the Huawei Technologies Co. chip, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing information that's not public. ASML declined to comment.

There is no suggestion that their sales violated export restrictions... ASML has never been able to sell its EUV machines to China because of export restrictions. But less advanced DUV models can be retooled with deposition and etching gear to produce 7-nanometer and possibly even more advanced chips, according to industry analysts. The process is much more expensive than using EUV, making it very difficult to scale production in a competitive market environment. In China, however, the government is willing to shoulder a significant portion of chipmaking costs.

Chinese companies have been legally stockpiling DUV gear for years — especially after the U.S. introduced its initial export controls last year before getting Japan and the Netherlands on board... According to an investor presentation published by the company last week, ASML experienced a jump in business from China this year as chipmakers there boosted orders ahead of the export controls taking full effect in 2024. China accounted for 46% of ASML's sales in the third quarter, compared with 24% in the previous quarter and 8% in the three months ending in March.
Another article from Bloomberg includes this prediction: The U.S. won't be able to stop Huawei and SMIC from making progress in chip technology, Burn J. Lin, a former Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. vice president, told Bloomberg News. Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp should be able to advance to the next generation at 5 nanometers with machines from ASML Holding NV that it already operates, said Lin, who at TSMC championed the lithography technology that transformed chipmaking.
The end result is that Huawei's profit "more than doubled during the quarter it revealed its biggest achievement in chip technology," the article reports, "adding to signs the Chinese tech leader is steadying a business rocked by US sanctions." The Shenzhen company reported a 118% surge in net profit to 26.4 billion yuan ($3.6 billion) in the September quarter, and a slight rise in sales to 145.7 billion yuan, according to Bloomberg News calculations from nine-month results released Friday. Those numbers included initial sales of the vastly popular Mate 60 Pro, which began shipping in late August... The gadget sold out almost instantly, spurring expectations it could rejuvenate Huawei's fortunes and potentially cut into Apple Inc.'s lead in China, given signs of a disappointing debut for the iPhone 15...

A resurgent Huawei would pose problems not just for Apple but also local brands from Xiaomi Corp. to Oppo and Vivo, all of which are fighting for sales in a shrinking market.

An anonymous reader shared this report from Ars Technica: Following the passage of California's repair bill that Apple supported, requiring seven years of parts, specialty tools, and repair manual availability, Apple announced Tuesday that it would back a similar bill on a federal level. It would also make its parts, tools, and repair documentation available to both non-affiliated repair shops and individual customers, "at fair and reasonable prices."

"We intend to honor California's new repair provisions across the United States," said Brian Naumann, Apple's vice president for service and operation management, at a White House event Tuesday...

"I think most OEMs [Original Equipment Manufacturers] will realize they can save themselves a lot of trouble by making parts, tools, and other requirements of state laws already in NY, MN, CA, and CO available nationally," wrote Gay Gordon-Byrne, executive director of The Repair Association, to Ars... Gordon-Byrne noted that firms like HP, Google, Samsung, and Lenovo have pledged to comply with repair rules on a national level. The US Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) communicated a similarly hopeful note in its response to Tuesday's event, noting that "Apple makes a lot of products, and its conduct definitely influences other manufacturers." At the same time, numerous obstacles to repair access remain in place through copyright law — "Which we hope will be high on an agenda in the IP subcommittee this session," Gordon-Byrne wrote.
Besides strong support from President Biden, there's also strong support from America's Federal Trade Commission, reports TechCrunch: FTC chair Lina Khan commented on the pushback many corporations have given such legislation. Device and automotive manufacturers have argued that putting such choice in the hands of consumers opens them up to additional security risks. "We hear some manufacturers defend repair restrictions, claiming that they're needed for safety or security reasons," said Khan. "The FTC has found that all too often these claims are backed by limited evidence. Accordingly, the FTC has committed itself to using all of our enforcement and policy tools to fight for people's right to repair their own products."
A cautionary note from Ars Technica: Elizabeth Chamberlain, director of sustainability for iFixit, a parts vendor and repair advocate, suggested that Apple's pledge to extend California's law on a national level is "a strategic move." "Apple likely hopes that they will be able to negotiate out the parts of the Minnesota bill they don't like," Chamberlain wrote in an email, pointing specifically to the "fair and reasonable" parts provisioning measure that could preclude Apple's tendency toward pairing parts to individual devices. "[I]t's vital to get bulletproof parts pairing prohibitions passed in other states in 2024," Chamberlain wrote. "Independent repair and refurbishment depend on parts harvesting."
The Washington Post reports that currently repair shop owners and parts vendors "have had to find ways to reassure their customers they haven't made a mistake by choosing an independent fix." If the digital identifier tied to a replacement part doesn't match the one the phone expects to see, you'll start seeing those warnings and issues. "Only Apple pairs parts in an intrusive way where you get these messages pop up," said Jonathan Strange, owner of two XiRepair gadget repair shops in Montgomery, Alabama. To ward off those unnerving messages and restore full functionality, repair technicians are required to go through a "system configuration" process that authenticates the part after making the fix. Some small operations, like Strange's XiRepair shops, can do that in-store because they've gone through a process to become a certified Apple Independent Repair Providers. But that process can't happen at all in shops that haven't gone through that certification, or if more affordable parts like third-party replacements were used.
The Post also shares this reaction from Aaron Perzanowski, a repair researcher and law professor at the University of Michigan.

"The fact that companies want to use technology to essentially undo the notion of interchangeable parts is something we ought to find deeply disturbing."

The Guardian has revealed that the UK government will diverge from the European Union's standards for monitoring water quality in England. From the report: While in the EU, England was covered by the water framework directive (WFD), which meant a national chemical and ecological survey of rivers was conducted annually. After Brexit, the WFD was transposed into English law but the government removed the requirement to conduct annual tests. This is the latest example of the UK diverging from EU environmental standards. Recent analysis found that many toxic chemicals and pesticides banned in the bloc since Brexit are not outlawed for use in the UK. Ministers have also sought to rip up EU-derived sewage pollution rules for housebuilders.

In 2019, the last time the full water assessments took place, just 14% of rivers were in good ecological health and none met standards for good chemical health. The government has said it does not intend to deliver a complete update until 2025, the latest permissible date under the new WFD. The Guardian can reveal that the government will be using its own, as yet undisclosed methodology to assess river health. Activists say this may make it harder to compare the state of the country's rivers against those in the EU, and will leave the public in the dark over pollution from sewage and agriculture. Stuart Singleton-White, of the Angling Trust, said: "WFD has been the bedrock of us understanding the state of our rivers, lakes and groundwater. It does not give a full picture, but it does provide a useful starting point. Past assessments have shown things are getting worse, not better. To now not have a full assessment in 2022 and have to wait to 2025 ... simply sows confusion and leaves the public in the dark when it comes to properly understanding whether our rivers are getting better or worse."

Jeff Foust reports via SpaceNews: The governments of Australia and the United States have signed an agreement that could allow American rockets to launch from Australian spaceports, although it is unclear how much demand there is for them. The U.S. State Department announced Oct. 26 that the two countries signed a technology safeguards agreement (TSA) regarding space launches from Australia. The agreement provides the "legal and technical framework" for American launches from Australian facilities while protecting sensitive technologies.

The TSA is required to allow the export of U.S.-built launch vehicles to Australia. Industry officials in Australia said the agreement will allow spaceport projects there to sign long-awaited deals to host launches by American companies. [...] The precise demand for Australian launch sites from American launch companies remains unclear. The ELA statement included an illustration of four small launch vehicles from ABL Space Systems, Astra, Phantom Space and Vaya Space, as well as Rocket Lab's Neutron medium-lift rocket. "We hear regularly from both the U.S. government and industry of their demand for this capability in Australia," said Jeremy Hallett, executive chairman of the Space Industry Association of Australia, in a statement. "This agreement removes the blockage stopping this demand being met by Australian space industry and we look forward to the new business opportunities that will emerge for the industry."

The United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has announced the creation of a 39-member advisory body to address issues in the international governance of artificial intelligence. From a report: Members include tech company executives, government officials from Spain to Saudi Arabia, and academics from countries such as the U.S., Russia and Japan. Sony Chief Technology Officer Hiroaki Kitano, OpenAI CTO Mira Murati and Microsoft Chief Responsible AI Officer Natasha Crampton are among the executives representing technology companies.

Representatives also come from six continents with diverse backgrounds ranging from U.S.-based AI expert Vilas Dhar to Professor Yi Zeng fom China and Egyptian lawyer Mohamed Farahat. "The transformative potential of AI for good is difficult even to grasp," Guterres said in a statement. "And without entering into a host of doomsday scenarios, it is already clear that the malicious use of AI could undermine trust in institutions, weaken social cohesion and threaten democracy itself," he said.

The UK's oil and gas regulator is coming under fire from environmental groups for using lawyers to try to prevent the publication of five key documents relating to the environmental impact of Shell's activities in the North Sea. From a report: At a hearing in December, a legal representative for the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) is expected to argue against the publication of documents that contain details about the risk of pollution as a result of decommissioning the Brent oilfield, which was operated by Shell for more than 40 years. It says it opposes publication "on a matter of process basis." Shell has applied for an exemption from international rules that require all infrastructure to be removed from the field and the UK government is deciding whether it will allow the oil company to leave the 170-metre-high oil platform legs in place for the three platforms known as Bravo, Charlie and Delta.

A total of 64 concrete storage cells are contained in the leg structures, 42 of which have previously been used for oil storage and separation. Most of the cells are the size of seven Olympic swimming pools, and collectively still contain an estimated 72,000 tonnes of contaminated sediment and 638,000 cubic metres of oily water. Environmental groups believe the documents held by the NSTA would reveal new information about long-term environmental dangers that is relevant to other North Sea oil developments, including Equinor's plans to develop Rosebank, the UK's largest untapped field.

Google has expanded its vulnerability rewards program (VRP) to include attack scenarios specific to generative AI. From a report: In an announcement shared with TechCrunch ahead of publication, Google said: "We believe expanding the VRP will incentivize research around AI safety and security and bring potential issues to light that will ultimately make AI safer for everyone." Google's vulnerability rewards program (or bug bounty) pays ethical hackers for finding and responsibly disclosing security flaws.

Given that generative AI brings to light new security issues, such as the potential for unfair bias or model manipulation, Google said it sought to rethink how bugs it receives should be categorized and reported. The tech giant says it's doing this by using findings from its newly formed AI Red Team, a group of hackers that simulate a variety of adversaries, ranging from nation-states and government-backed groups to hacktivists and malicious insiders to hunt down security weaknesses in technology. The team recently conducted an exercise to determine the biggest threats to the technology behind generative AI products like ChatGPT and Google Bard.

NR Narayana Murthy, the founder of software consultancy giant Infosys, urged youngsters in India to work 70 hours a week if they want the nation to compete with other economies. From a report: Narayana Murthy, in conversation with former Infosys CFO Mohandas Pai, said that India's work productivity is among the lowest in the world. In order to compete with countries like China, India's youngsters must put in extra hours of work -- like Japan and Germany did after World War 2.

He also blamed other issues like corruption in the government and bureaucratic delays, saying: "India's work productivity is one of the lowest in the world. Unless we improve our work productivity, unless we reduce corruption in the government at some level, because we have been reading I don't know the truth of it, unless we reduce the delays in our bureaucracy in taking this decision, we will not be able to compete with those countries that have made tremendous progress." Murthy, 77, added his request to the youngsters of today. "So therefore, my request is that our youngsters must say, 'This is my country. I'd like to work 70 hours a week.'"

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: The world must treat the risks from artificial intelligence as seriously as the climate crisis and cannot afford to delay its response, one of the technology's leading figures has warned. Speaking as the UK government prepares to host a summit on AI safety, Demis Hassabis said oversight of the industry could start with a body similar to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Hassabis, the British chief executive of Google's AI unit, said the world must act immediately in tackling the technology's dangers, which included aiding the creation of bioweapons and the existential threat posed by super-intelligent systems.

"We must take the risks of AI as seriously as other major global challenges, like climate change," he said. "It took the international community too long to coordinate an effective global response to this, and we're living with the consequences of that now. We can't afford the same delay with AI." Hassabis, whose unit created the revolutionary AlphaFold program that depicts protein structures, said AI could be "one of the most important and beneficial technologies ever invented." However, he told the Guardian a regime of oversight was needed and governments should take inspiration from international structures such as the IPCC.

"I think we have to start with something like the IPCC, where it's a scientific and research agreement with reports, and then build up from there." He added: "Then what I'd like to see eventually is an equivalent of a Cern for AI safety that does research into that -- but internationally. And then maybe there's some kind of equivalent one day of the IAEA, which actually audits these things." The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is a UN body that promotes the secure and peaceful use of nuclear technology in an effort to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons, including via inspections. However, Hassabis said none of the regulatory analogies used for AI were "directly applicable" to the technology, though "valuable lessons" could be drawn from existing institutions. Hassabis said the world was a long time away from "god-like" AI being developed but "we can see the path there, so we should be discussing it now."

He said current AI systems "aren't of risk but the next few generations may be when they have extra capabilities like planning and memory and other things ... They will be phenomenal for good use cases but also they will have risks."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from MIT Technology Review: Egbert Edelbroek was acting as a sperm donor when he first wondered whether it's possible to have babies in space. Curious about the various ways that donated sperm can be used, Edelbroek, a Dutch entrepreneur, began to speculate on whether in vitro fertilization technology was possible beyond Earth -- or could even be improved by the conditions found there. Could the weightlessness of space be better than a flat laboratory petri dish? Now Edelbroek is CEO of SpaceBorn United, a biotech startup seeking to pioneer the study of human reproduction away from Earth. Next year, he plans to send a mini lab on a rocket into low Earth orbit, where in vitro fertilization, or IVF, will take place. If it succeeds, Edelbroek hopes his work could pave the way for future space settlements.

"Humanity needs a backup plan," he says. "If you want to be a sustainable species, you want to be a multiplanetary species." Beyond future space colonies, there is also a more pressing need to understand the effects of space on the human reproductive system. No one has ever become pregnant in space -- yet. But with the rise of space tourism, it's likely that it will eventually happen one day. Edelbroek thinks we should be prepared. Despite the burgeoning interest in deep space exploration and settlement, prompted in part by billionaires such as Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, we still know very little about what happens to our reproductive biology when we're in orbit. A report released in September by the US National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine points out that almost no research has been done on human reproduction in space, adding that our understanding of how space affects reproduction is "vital to long-term space exploration, but largely unexplored to date."

Some studies on animals have suggested that the various stages of reproduction -- from mating and fertilization to embryo development, implantation, pregnancy, and birth -- can function normally in space. For example, in the very first such experiment, eight Japanese medaka fish developed from egg to hatchling aboard the space shuttle Columbia in 1994. All eight survived the return to Earth and seemed to behave normally.Yet other studies have found evidence that points to potential problems. Pregnant rats that spent much of their third trimester -- a total of five days -- on a Soviet satellite in 1983 experienced complications during labor and delivery. Like all astronauts returning to Earth, the rats were exhausted and weak. Their deliveries lasted longer than usual, likely because of atrophied uterine muscles. All the pups in one of the litters died during delivery, the result of an obstruction thought to be due in part to the mother's weakened state.

To Edelbroek, these inconclusive results point to a need to systematically isolate each step in the reproductive process in order to better understand how it is affected by conditions like lower gravity and higher radiation exposure. The mini lab his company developed is designed to do exactly that. It is about the size of a shoebox and uses microfluidics to connect a chamber containing sperm to a chamber containing an egg. It can also rotate at different speeds to replicate the gravitational environment of Earth, the moon, or Mars. It is small enough to fit inside a capsule that can be housed on top of a rocket and launched into space.After the egg has been fertilized in the device, it splits into two cells, each of which divides again to form four cells and so on. After five to six days, the embryo reaches a stage known as a blastocyst, which looks like a hollow ball. At this point, the embryos in the mini lab will be cryogenically frozen for their return to Earth.

The Norwegian Volkswagen importer Moller Mobility Group has confirmed that it will stop selling combustion vehicles in Norway from 2024. Electricdrive.com reports: The farewell to the combustion engine in Norway is only logical: already today, e-cars regularly account for more than 80 percent of new registrations in the Scandinavian country, and the government wants them to reach a full 100 per cent by 2025. "It may seem strange to celebrate the milestone by removing model icons from our portfolio, but this has been an ambitious and important initiative over time," says Ulf Tore Hekneby, managing director of Volkswagen importer Harald A. Moller AS. "The goal has been to drive change that we believe is of critical importance."

Harald A. Moller AS has been importing Volkswagens to Norway since 1948. According to the company, around 1.1 million VWs have been sold in the Scandinavian country during these 75 years. This includes a total of 102,000 electric cars in the past ten years. The sale of the last Golf in Norway this December marks the end of an era, but also the beginning of a new one, Hekneby emphasised. "We encourage everyone to consider an electric car in their next car purchase. Switching to an electric car is a crucial step in reducing an individual's carbon footprint and an important overall contribution to combating climate change," he said. The top-selling car in the country is the Tesla Model Y, "dominating more than 20% of the market share with 15,452 units sold in the first half of this year," reports Electrek. "Almost one in four new passenger car registrations so far this year was Tesla Model Y."

Balaji Srinivasan, former CTO of Coinbase and author of the Network State, has announced his first Network State Conference. This is a conference for people interested in founding, funding, and finding new communities.
Topics include startup societies, network states, digital nomadism, competitive government, legalizing innovation, and building alternatives. Speakers include Glenn Greenwald, Vitalik Buterin, Anatoly Yakovenko, Garry Tan, the Winklevosses, and Tyler Cowen. See presentations by startup society founders around the world, invest in them, and search for the community that fits you.

With this and Joseon, the first legally recognized cyber state, the network state movement is beginning to get interesting.

Another anonymous reader quotes from the Joseon Official X Account's reply to Balaji's announcement:

Joseon, the first legally recognized cyber nation state, will be there.
Interestingly, Joseon dons the same grey checkmark that is for governments on its X account.

The Biden administration on Monday is expected to unveil a long-anticipated artificial intelligence executive order, marking the U.S. government's most significant attempt to date to regulate the evolving technology that has sparked fear and hype around the world. Washington Post: The administration plans to release the order two days before government leaders, top Silicon Valley executives and civil society groups gather in Britain for an international summit focused on the potential risks that AI presents to society, according to four people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private plans.

The sweeping order would leverage the U.S. government's role as a top technology customer by requiring advanced AI models to undergo assessments before they can be used by federal workers, according to three people involved in discussions about the order. The lengthy action would ease barriers to immigration for highly skilled workers, an attempt to boost the United States' technological edge. Federal government agencies -- including the Defense Department, Energy Department and intelligence agencies -- would be required to run assessments to determine how they might incorporate AI into their agencies' work, with a focus on bolstering national cyber defenses.

SonicSpike shares a report from Politico: An agency set up under Donald Trump to protect elections and key U.S. infrastructure from foreign hackers is now fighting off increasingly intense threats from hard-right Republicans who argue it's gone too far and are looking for ways to rein it in. These lawmakers insist work by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency to combat online disinformation during elections singles out conservative voices and infringes upon free speech rights -- an allegation the agency vehemently denies and the Biden administration is contesting in court. The accusations started in the wake of the 2020 election and are ramping up ahead of 2024, with lawmakers now calling for crippling cuts at the agency. "CISA has blatantly violated the First Amendment and colluded with Big Tech to censor the speech of ordinary Americans," Rand Paul (R-Ky.), the ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, which oversees CISA, said in a statement to POLITICO.

The fight over CISA underscores yet another way Trump's election fraud claims are reverberating into 2024. And though the hard right doesn't have enough votes to defund CISA today, the growing backlash against it has supporters worried that a hard-right faction could hobble the agency in the years ahead -- undermining its efforts not just to secure future elections, but also protect key U.S. and federal networks from major hacks. CISA had broad bipartisan support in Congress when lawmakers passed legislation creating the agency in 2018. At the ceremony where Trump signed it into law, he called it "very, very important legislation" to protect the U.S. against both nation-state hackers and cybercriminals. But when Chris Krebs, the then-head of CISA, debunked Trump's 2020 election fraud claims, the president fired him. And since the GOP assumed control of the House in 2022, like-minded Republicans have been ratcheting up their scrutiny of the agency. [...]

Conservatives now argue that activity has become a smokescreen for left-leaning government censorship. In Congress and within the courts, they contend that pressure from federal agencies like CISA led social media companies to limit the spread of information perceived as damaging to Joe Biden's campaign, such as stories relating to Hunter Biden. In a sign of trouble for an agency once boasting strong bipartisan support, 108 Republicans supported the failed push to cut CISA's budget last month -- a near majority within the conference. Backers of the budget cut included a swathe of increasingly influential hard-right lawmakers, like Jordan and James Comer (R-Ky.), chair of the powerful House Oversight Committee. Those with direct oversight over CISA also backed the vote, such as the chief of the Homeland Security Committee, Mark Green (R-Tenn.), and another panel member, August Pfluger (R-Texas).