Page 149«..1020..148149150151..160170..»

Binance to Restrict Unauthorized Stablecoins in EU | News – ihodl.com

Crypto exchange Binance has announced plans to limit the availability of certain stablecoins in the European Union that are not considered regulated under the bloc's rules, Cointelegraph has reported.

The announcement comes before the stablecoin rules of the EU's Markets in Cryptoassets Regulation (MiCA) come into force at the end of June.

Binance has stated this will be the first step in complying with the new regulatory framework and will have a significant impact on the stablecoins market in the European Economic Area.

As stablecoins become regulated in Europe, only tokens issued by regulated companies will be made available to the public, as mentioned in the company's statement.

According to Binance, some existing stablecoins may not meet the criteria and will therefore face restrictions.

As of June 30, it will no longer be possible to buy "unauthorized" stablecoins in Europe, according to Binance's statement.

Read this article:

Binance to Restrict Unauthorized Stablecoins in EU | News - ihodl.com

Read More..

Hackers exploit Chrome plugin to steal millions from Binance accounts – TradingView

A Chinese trader lost $1 million to a hacking scam using a promotional Google Chrome plugin called Aggr. The promotional plugin steals cookies from users, which hackers use to bypass password and two-factor authentication (2FA) verification and log into the victims Binance account.

A trader took to X to recount the ordeal of losing their life savings to an unexpected scam.The trader, who goes by the X username CryptoNakamao, said that on May 24, their Binance account started trading randomly, and they only realized this after opening the Binance app to check the Bitcoin BTCUSD price.

By the time he sought assistance from Binance, the hacker had already withdrawn all funds.

Hacker stole cookie data to cross-trade on Binance

The trader claimed that the hackers had gained access to his web browser cookie data, which they had stolen via a Chrome plugin called Aggr. The trader installed the plugin to access prominent trader data only to realize malicious software was created to steal users web browsing data and cookies.

The hacker then used the collected cookies to hijack active user sessions without a password or authentication and carried out multiple leveraged trades to spike the price of low liquidity pairs and profit from them.

The trader explained that even though the hacker couldnt withdraw funds directly due to 2FA, they used the cookies and active login sessions to make profits through cross-trading.

The trader claimed that the hacker bought several tokens in the Tether USDTUSD trading pair with abundant liquidity and placed limit sell orders exceeding the market price in the Bitcoin, USD Coin USDCUSD and other trading pairs with scarce liquidity.

Finally, the hacker opened leveraged positions, bought a large amount in excess, and completed the cross-trading. A cross trade is a practice where buy and sell orders for the same asset are offset without recording the trade on the exchange.

Trader blames Binance

The trader claims that Binance did not implement essential security measures despite unusually high trading activity. Furthermore, even after receiving timely complaints, the exchange failed to take action to stop it, they added.

In their investigation, the trader discovered that Binance had been aware of the fraudulent plugin for quite some time and was already conducting an internal investigation. Despite knowing the hackers address and the nature of the plugin scam, the trader claimed Binance failed to inform the traders or take any actions to prevent the fraud. The trader wrote:

Binance did nothing even though it knew of the theft and frequent cross-trading. Hackers manipulated accounts for over an hour, causing extremely abnormal transactions in multiple currency pairs without any risk control; Binance failed to freeze the funds of the obvious hackers single account in the platform on time.

Cointelegraph reached out to Binance for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.

Read more:

Hackers exploit Chrome plugin to steal millions from Binance accounts - TradingView

Read More..

Binance’s Zhao and FTX’s Bankman-Fried Commence Their Prison Sentences – Coinfomania

Changpeng Zhao, founder of Binance, has begun a four-month sentence at Lompoc II, a low-security federal prison in California.

This facility, located in Santa Barbara County, includes an adjacent satellite camp where inmates work on horse farms and spend time outdoors. Zhao, now designated inmate 88087-510, was initially expected to serve his sentence at the Seatac Federal Detention Center in Seattle. However, his status as a non-US citizen made him eligible for the less restrictive environment at Lompoc.

Zhao, also known as CZ, is a prominent figure in the cryptocurrency industry. Since its inception in 2017, he has transformed Binance into a leading global crypto exchange. With an estimated net worth of $36.5 billion, Zhao is recognized as the wealthiest person to serve time in a US federal prison.

Moreover, his sentence, shorter than the three years prosecutors had requested, stems from his failure to implement an adequate anti-money laundering (AML) program at Binance. This lapse allowed illicit actors, including terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIS, to trade Bitcoin on the platform.

In a plea agreement with the US government, Zhao admitted to the shortcomings of the AML program and voluntarily traveled from his residence in Dubai to Washington state to surrender. In addition to Zhaos plea, Binance admitted to banking law and sanctions violations. The company agreed to pay $4.3 billion to settle the multi-agency investigation.

Sam Mangel, a prison consultant with clients at Lompoc, commented on Zhaos placement, noting that his experience and knowledge in the crypto sector would likely make him a subject of interest among fellow inmates. Mangel expressed confidence that Zhao would adjust well to life at Lompoc.

Meanwhile, Sam Bankman-Fried, co-founder of the now-defunct FTX exchange, has been returned to the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn, New York. This move follows his transportation to facilities in Oklahoma and Pennsylvania over the past month.

Furthermore, the Bureau of Prisons website confirms Bankman-Frieds current location, following Judge Lewis Kaplans request. The judge specified that Bankman-Fried should remain in New York until his appeal process is fully briefed to facilitate access to his appellate counsel.

Bankman-Fried was sentenced to 25 years in prison after being convicted on multiple counts of fraud related to FTXs collapse. The exchanges downfall had significant repercussions in the cryptocurrency market, leading to substantial financial losses for investors. Alongside Bankman-Fried, another FTX executive, Ryan Salame, received a sentence of 7.5 years for his involvement.

On May 23, Bankman-Fried was initially transferred to a facility in Oklahoma, appearing en route to a California prison near his parents residence. However, he was later moved to a prison in Pennsylvania before finally being returned to Brooklyn. Mark Botnick, a spokesperson for Bankman-Fried, acknowledged the Bureau of Prisons prompt handling of the situation.

The contrasting sentences and prison placements of Zhao and Bankman-Fried underscore the varying legal consequences faced by cryptocurrency leaders in the wake of regulatory scrutiny and legal actions. Zhaos relatively brief sentence and placement in a minimum-security facility contrast sharply with Bankman-Frieds lengthy sentence and the more challenging conditions at the MDC in Brooklyn.

Read this article:

Binance's Zhao and FTX's Bankman-Fried Commence Their Prison Sentences - Coinfomania

Read More..

Ann Coulter tells Vivek Ramaswamy she would never vote for him ‘because you’re Indian’ – Yahoo News Canada

Failed 2024 Republican primary candidate Vivek Ramaswamy praised Ann Coulter for having the guts to make racist remarks directly to his face on his podcast this week.

Ms Coulter, a conservative firebrand with a history of openly racist remarks, appeared on the businessmans podcast, Truth, on Wednesday for an episode titled, The N Word: Nationalism.

Mr Ramaswamy welcomed Ms Coulter by telling her that he is a fan.

She replied that he is bright and articulate and notes that she wouldnt be allowed to say that to him, if he was an American Black.

She goes on to say that, even though she agreed with him more than most other GOP primary candidates, she would not have voted for him to be president because he is Indian.

She said: I agreed with many, many things you said during your campaign, in fact probably more than most other candidates when you were running for president. But I still would not have voted for you because youre an Indian.

She then claimed that the core national identity in the United States is a WASP - a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant.

[That] doesnt mean we cant take anyone else ina Sri Lankan, a Japanese, or an Indianbut the core around which the nations values are formed is the WASP, she continued.

Mr Ramaswamy was born in Cincinnati, Ohio, to Indian immigrant parents and is an American citizen. He would not have been eligible to run for president if he was not born in America.

Additionally, the Constitution of India does not permit holding of dual nationality by Indian nationals.

Mr Ramaswamy did not balk at Ms Coulters remarks, and the pair discussed their shared disdain of dual citizenship.

He pushed back on Ms Coulters idea that Americans whose families have been in the US for centuries were more American.

He argued that the children of immigrants could be more loyal to the US than a WASP, seventh generation descendent of some rich guy on the Upper East Side in Brooklyn that pretends to hate this country because its the cool thing to do.

Following the podcast, Mr Ramaswamy posted on X that he agreed with Ms Coulter on dual citizenship but disagreed with her reasoning on why she wouldnt vote for him. However he added that he admired her guts for telling him.

Ann Coulter told me flat-out to my face that she couldnt vote for me because youre an Indian, even though she agreed with me more than most other candidates, he wrote. I disagree with her but respect she had the guts to speak her mind. It was a riveting hour.

Congressman Ted Lieu, whose family immigrated to the US from Taiwan, said that he wasnt surprised by Ms Coulters racism but expressed sympathy for Mr Ramaswamys response.

I wasnt surprised that Ann Coulter made a racist statement about Vivek, he posted on X. What surprised me is the weakness and lack of self respect of @VivekGRamaswamy. Hes actually promoting this episode and praising the person who spewed raw racism to his face. I feel sorry for Vivek.

Original post:
Ann Coulter tells Vivek Ramaswamy she would never vote for him 'because you're Indian' - Yahoo News Canada

Read More..

Ann Coulter: The Media Guide to Shooting Joggers – Northwest Georgia News

I did not think I could hate The New York Times more.

But thanks to Gregory Mantell's amazing new book, "Special Victim Status, The Era of Woke Journalism," I do! Mantell's carefully researched book provides hundreds of new facts about the press's fanatical propaganda on race.

Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

kAmr@:?4:56?E2==J[ E9:D 😀 E96 7@FCJ62C 2??:G6CD2CJ @7 v6@C86 u=@J5VD 562E9[ 2?5 x E9:?< E96 EC25:E:@?2= 8:7E :D A2A6C] *@F 2<6 2 8C62E 2??:G6CD2CJ 8:7En %9:D 3@@<]k^Am

kAm}@E9:?8 D9@4<65 >6 >@C6 E92? r92AE6C b @? E96 p9>2F5 pC36CJ 42D6]k^Am

kAmx7 J@F 7@==@H E96 ?6HD[ J@F 6C6=J 7@C Q;@88:?8 H9:=6 3=24<]Qk^Am

kAmpC36CJVD <:==6CD[ %C2G:D 2?5 vC68@CJ |4|:4926=[ H6C6 4@?G:4E65 :? 23@FE D:I >:?FE6D 2?5 D6?E6?465 E@ =:76 😕 AC:D@? H:E9@FE E96 A@DD:3:=:EJ @7 A2C@=6] !=FD a_ J62CD[ ;FDE E@ 36 D276] t:89E >@?E9D =2E6C[ E96J 8@E 3@?FD =:76 D6?E6?46D 😕 D6A2C2E6 7656C2= 92E6 4C:>6D AC@D64FE:@?D] p ?6:893@C[ (:==:2> Q#@55:6Q qCJ2? yC][ H9@ 92AA6?65 E@ 36 E96C6[ 8@E bd J62CD WDE2E6X A=FD =:76 W7656C2=X]k^Am

kAm"F:E6 2 EFC?23@FE 7@C 2 42D6 E92E E9C66 AC@D64FE@CD C67FD65 E@ E2<6 27E6C 4@?4=F5:?8 E96C6 H2D ?@ 4C:>6] qFE @FC >65:2 42? A6C7@C> >:C24=6DPk^Am

kAm|2?E6== 4@?EC2DED E96 >65:2VD EC62E>6?E @7 pC36CJVD <:==:?8 H:E9 E96:C E2<6 @? E96 >FC56C @7 r9C:DE@A96C {2?6[ 2 H9:E6 ;@886C D9@E 2?5 <:==65 3J 2 3=24< >2? 😕 ~<=29@>2]k^Am

kAmpC36CJi #prx$% wp%t r#x|t[ r~||x%%ts q* wp%tu&{ #prx$%$Pk^Am

kAm{2?6ik^Am

kAm\ QE96 D:>A=6DE @7 >@E:G6D \ 3@C65@>]Q \ %96 (2D9:?8E@? !@DEk^Am

kAm\ Q2 E2=6 23@FE E66?286CD 7C@> 3C@<6? 72>:=:6D[ =:G6D 4@>A=:42E65 3J 5CF8D 2?5 A@G6CEJ[ H9@ D66>65 :5=6]Q \ %96 }6H *@C< %:>6Dk^Am

kAm%96 724ED @7 E96 {2?6 D9@@E:?8 2C6 AC6EEJ D:>A=6ik^Am

kAm{2?6[ 2 aaJ62C@=5 pFDEC2=:2? DEF5J:?8 2E t2DE r6?EC2= &?:G6CD:EJ 😕 ~<=29@>2 @? 2 32D632== D49@=2CD9:A[ H6?E 7@C 2? 27E6C?@@? CF? @? pF8] `e[ a_`b[ 😕 2 E@H? E92EVD a]dT 3=24<[ 2?5 H2D D9@E :? E96 324< 3J 2 3=24< E66?[ r92?46J {F?2[ 5C:G:?8 3J :? 2 42C H:E9 EH@ @E96C 3@JD] {2?6 5:65[ 3=@@5 8FD9:?8 7C@> 9:D >@FE9[ 367@C6 E96 2>3F=2?46 2CC:G65]k^Am

kAms2JD 62C=:6C[ @?6 @7 E96 E66?D 492C865 H:E9 {2?6VD >FC56C EH66E65[ Q(:E9 >J ?Y882D H96? :EVD E:>6 E@ DE2CE E2<6? =:76VD]Qk^Am

kAm%96 724ED @7 pC36CJVD D9@@E:?8 2C6 2=D@ D:>A=6[ @?=J >256 4@>A=:42E65 3J E96 >65:2VD =:6D]k^Am

kAm|2?E6== HC:E6Dik^Am

kAmqFE Q7C@> E96 DE2CE[ 3@E9 E96 %:>6D 2?5 E96 !@DE AFD965 E96 72=D6 ?2CC2E:G6 3J pC36CJVD 72>:=J 2?5 2EE@C?6J WH9@ H6C6 ?@E AC6D6?E 5FC:?8 E96 :?4:56?EX E92E pC36CJ 925 D:>A=J 366? @FE ;@88:?8 E9C@F89 E96 ?6:893@C9@@5 ]]]Qk^Am

kAmx?5665[ 2 %:>6D C6A@CE6C HC@E6 E92E Q6G6? :7 pC36CJ 925 366? EC6DA2DD:?8 😕 E96 9@FD6[ :E 5@6D?VE ;FDE:7J 9:D D9@@E:?8]Q W$2J[ 42? H6 86E |2=249J qC@H?6 E@ HC:E6 2? 2CE:4=6 @? ~77:46C |:4926= qJC5VD 5625=J D9@@E:?8 @7 pD9=: q233:EE 7@C EC6DA2DD:?8 2E E96 r2A:E@= @? y2?] enXk^Am

kAm|2?E6== ?@E6D 2 76H @>:DD:@?D 7C@> E96 %:>6DV 2?5 (2D9:?8E@? !@DEVD Q;@88:?8 H9:=6 3=24

kAm\ Qr@?G6?:6?46 DE@C6 6>A=@J66D C6A@CE65 pC36CJ H2D FA @FED:56 E96 DE@C6 2?5 E96? CF? 😕 2?5 @FE BF:4<=J[ DE62=:?8 DEF77] ]]] %96 6>A=@J66D D2:5 E96J EC:65 E@ 92G6 A@=:46 8:G6 E96 >2? 2 4C:>:?2= EC6DA2DD H2C?:?8[ 3FE 96 2=H2JD C2? @77 367@C6 E96J 4@F=5]Qk^Am

kAm\ Q~? pF8FDE a`[ a_`g[ 244@C5:?8 E@ qFC<6 r@F?EJ H:E?6DD C6A@CED 2?5 qFC<6 r@F?EJ $96C:77 3@5J42> G:56@[ 2 3=24< H@>2? H9@ H2D >2CC:65 E@ 2 D96C:77 56AFEJ 42==65 7@C 96=A 27E6C D66:?8 pC36CJ 😕 96C 3246?E:@?65 96 H2D ECJ:?8 E@ DE62= 2 5@8 7C@> E96 D2>6 9@FD6 ]]] (96? @77:46CD 2CC:G65 E@ 8:G6 pC36CJ 2 H2C?:?8 23@FE 4C:>:?2= EC6DA2DD:?8[ pC36CJ 4=2:>65 96 925 366? @FE ;@88:?8 2?5 E9C62E6?65 E@ VH9@@A E96 @77:46CVD 2DD]VQk^Am

kAm\ Q~? ~4E@36C ab[ a_`g[ 2 3=24< H@>2? 42==65 qFC<6 r@F?EJ $96C:77 56AFE:6D H96? D96 D2H pC36CJ 8@ :?E@ 2 G242?E >@3:=6 9@>6 24C@DD 7C@> 96C 9@FD6 ]]] (96? E96 D96C:77 2CC:G65[ pC36CJ C2? 2H2J 7C@> 56AFE:6D 2?5 72=D6=J 4=2:>65 96 925 366? @FE ;@88:?8]Qk^Am

kAm\ QpC36CJ H2D 2CC6DE65 2?5 492C865 H:E9 V>:D56>62?@C @3DECF4E:@? 7@C CF??:?8 H96? 8:G6? =2H7F= 4@>>2?5D E@ DE@A]VQk^Am

kAmu@==@H:?8 9:D A2EE6C?[ 367@C6 Q;@88:?8Q E96 ?:89E 96 H2D D9@E[ pC36CJ 925 2AA2C6?E=J 366? 3FC8=:?8 t?8=:D9VD 9@FD6]k^Am

kAmqFE Q3@E9 E96 %:>6D 2?5 E96 !@DE W2?5 @E96C >65:2X 4@?E:?F65 E@ 72=D6=J C6A@CE 4=2:>D E92E ?@E9:?8 925 6G6C 366? E2<6? 7C@> t?8=:D9VD 9@FD6 😕 H9:49 pC36CJ 925 366? 42F89E @? G:56@ EC6DA2DD:?8 @? >F=E:A=6 @442D:@?D]Qk^Am

kAm%96 >65:2 D:>A=J EC62E65 2D 8@DA6= t?8=:D9VD A@DE9@4[ ?@EF?56C@2E9[ D42C65DE:77 DE2E6>6?E E92E ?@E9:?8 925 366? DE@=6?] |@C6 =:<6=J[ t?8=:D9 ?@E:465 H92E 925 92AA6?65 E@ E96 pE=2?E2 (6?5JVD H96C6 A@=:46 925 D9@E 2 3=24< >2? 😕 E96 A2C<:?8 =@E :? yF?6 a_a_] W#6FE6CDi Q!C@E6DE6CD 3FC? 5@H? (6?5JVD :? pE=2?E2 27E6C A@=:46 D9@@E:?8]QXk^Am

kAm%6==:?8=J[ t?8=:D9 Q25>:EE65 😕 4@FCE 96 925 366? 8C62E=J EC@F3=65 3J 562E9 E9C62ED 96 C646:G65]Qk^Am

kAm}@ >2EE6C] %96 @?=J C6=6G2?E 724E E@ E96 >65:2 H2D E9:Dik^Am

kAmqFE[ @55=J[ E96 >65:2 925 K6C@ :?E6C6DE 😕 E96 C24:DE EH66ED A@DE65 3J y2>6D t5H2C5D[ @?6 @7 E96 3=24< E66?D :?G@=G65 :? {2?6VD D9@@E:?8[ DF49 2Dik^Am

kAmQh_T @7 H9:E6 AA= 2C6 ?2DEJ] Rwp%t %wt|]Qk^Am

kAmQpJ666 x >6C>2? 4@FCEPiX =@= D9YE :>2 <66A D=66A:? D9YEPR2J6666]Q WQ(@@5Q :D 2 C24:2= 6A:E96E 7@C 2 H9:E6 A6CD@?]Xk^Am

kAmp?@E96C 5:D4C6A2?4J ?@E65 3J |2?E6==ik^Am

kAm*629[ Q=2E6CQ \ 27E6C E96 >65:2VD AC@A282?52 42>A2:8? 925 DF446DD7F==J =65 E@ >F=E:A=6 =:76 D6?E6?46D]k^Am

kAm%96C6VD >F49[ >F49 >@C6 😕 E9:D 492AE6C 2=@?6[ 3FE xV== 6?5 H:E9 @?6 >@C6 AC@@7 @7 H92E |2?E6== >62?D 3J QDA64:2= G:4E:> DE2EFDQik^Am

View post:
Ann Coulter: The Media Guide to Shooting Joggers - Northwest Georgia News

Read More..

Employees Say OpenAI and Google DeepMind Are Hiding Dangers from the Public – TIME

A group of current and former employees at leading AI companies OpenAI and Google DeepMind published a letter on Tuesday warning against the dangers of advanced AI as they allege companies are prioritizing financial gains while avoiding oversight.

Thirteen employees, eleven of which are current or former employees of OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, signed the letter entitled: A Right to Warn about Advanced Artificial Intelligence. The two other signatories are current and former employees of Google DeepMind. Six individuals are anonymous.

The coalition cautions that AI systems are powerful enough to pose serious harms without proper regulation. These risks range from the further entrenchment of existing inequalities, to manipulation and misinformation, to the loss of control of autonomous AI systems potentially resulting in human extinction, the letter says.

Read More: Exclusive: U.S. Must Move Decisively to Avert Extinction-Level Threat From AI, Government-Commissioned Report Says

Were proud of our track record providing the most capable and safest A.I. systems and believe in our scientific approach to addressing risk, OpenAI spokeswoman Lindsey Held told the New York Times. We agree that rigorous debate is crucial given the significance of this technology, and well continue to engage with governments, civil society and other communities around the world.

Google DeepMind has not commented publicly on the letter and did not respond to TIMEs request for comment.

Leaders of all three leading AI companiesOpenAI, Google DeepMind and Anthropichave talked about the risks in the past. If we build an AI system thats significantly more competent than human experts but it pursues goals that conflict with our best interests, the consequences could be dire rapid AI progress would be very disruptive, changing employment, macroeconomics, and power structures [we have already encountered] toxicity, bias, unreliability, dishonesty, AI safety and research company Anthropic said in a March 2023 statement, which is linked to in the letter. (One of the letter signatories who currently works at Google DeepMind used to work at Anthropic.)

Read More: Inside Anthropic, the AI Company Betting That Safety Can Be a Winning Strategy

The group behind the letter alleges that AI companies have information about the risks of the AI technology they are working on, but because they arent required to disclose much with governments, the real capabilities of their systems remain a secret. That means current and former employees are the only ones who can hold the companies accountable to the public, they say, and yet many have found their hands tied by confidentiality agreements that prevent workers from voicing their concerns publicly. Ordinary whistleblower protections are insufficient because they focus on illegal activity, whereas many of the risks we are concerned about are not yet regulated, the group wrote.

Employees are an important line of safety defense, and if they cant speak freely without retribution, that channels going to be shut down, the groups pro bono lawyer Lawrence Lessig told the New York Times.

Eighty-three percent of Americans believe that AI could accidentally lead to a catastrophic event, according to research by the AI Policy Institute. Another 82% do not trust tech executives to self-regulate the industry. Daniel Colson, executive director of the Institute, notes that the letter has come out after a series of high-profile exits from OpenAI, including Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever. Sutskevers departure also made public the non-disparagement agreements that former employees would sign to bar them from speaking negatively about the company. Failure to abide by that rule would put their vested equity at risk. There needs to be an ability for employees and whistleblowers to share what's going on and share their concerns, says Colson. Things that restrict the people in the know from speaking about what's actually happening really undermines the ability for us to make good choices about how to develop technology.

The letter writers have made four demands of advanced AI companies: stop forcing employees into agreements that prevent them from criticizing their employer for risk-related concerns, create an anonymous process for employees to raise their concerns to board members and other relevant regulators or organizations, support a culture of open criticism, and not retaliate against former and current employees who share risk-related confidential information after other processes have failed.

The thing that we haven't seen at all anywhere, Colson says, is requirements being placed upon these companies for things like safety testing, and any sort of limitation on companies being able to develop these models if they don't comply with cybersecurity requirements, or safety testing requirements.

Governments around the world have moved to regulate AI, though progress lags behind the speed at which AI is progressing. Earlier this year, the E.U. passed the worlds first comprehensive AI legislation. Efforts at international cooperation have been pursued through AI Safety Summits in the U.K. and South Korea, and at the U.N. In October 2023. President Joe Biden signed an AI executive order that, among other things, requires AI companies to disclose their development and safety testing plans to the Department of Commerce.

-With additional reporting by Will Henshall/Washington

Read the original post:
Employees Say OpenAI and Google DeepMind Are Hiding Dangers from the Public - TIME

Read More..

OpenAI, Anthropic and Google DeepMind workers warn of AIs dangers – The Washington Post

A handful of current and former employees at OpenAI and other prominent artificial intelligence companies warned that the technology poses grave risks to humanity in a Tuesday letter, calling on companies to implement sweeping changes to ensure transparency and foster a culture of public debate.

The letter, signed by 13 people including current and former employees at Anthropic and Googles DeepMind, said AI can exacerbate inequality, increase misinformation, and allow AI systems to become autonomous and cause significant death. Though these risks could be mitigated, corporations in control of the software have strong financial incentives to limit oversight, they said.

Because AI is only loosely regulated, accountability rests on company insiders, the employees wrote, calling on corporations to lift nondisclosure agreements and give workers protections that allow them to anonymously raise concerns.

The move comes as OpenAI faces a staff exodus. Many critics have seen prominent departures including of OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever and senior researcher Jan Leike as a rebuke of company leaders, who some employees argue chase profit at the expense of making OpenAIs technologies safer.

Daniel Kokotajlo, a former employee at OpenAI, said he left the start-up because of the companys disregard for the risks of artificial intelligence.

Summarized stories to quickly stay informed

I lost hope that they would act responsibly, particularly as they pursue artificial general intelligence, he said in a statement, referencing a hotly contested term referring to computers matching the power of human brains.

They and others have bought into the move fast and break things approach, and that is the opposite of what is needed for technology this powerful and this poorly understood, Kokotajlo said.

Liz Bourgeois, a spokesperson at OpenAI, said the company agrees that rigorous debate is crucial given the significance of this technology. Representatives from Anthropic and Google did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

The employees said that absent government oversight, AI workers are the few people who can hold corporations accountable. They said that they are hamstrung by broad confidentiality agreements and that ordinary whistleblower protections are insufficient because they focus on illegal activity, and the risks that they are warning about are not yet regulated.

The letter called for AI companies to commit to four principles to allow for greater transparency and whistleblower protections. Those principles are a commitment to not enter into or enforce agreements that prohibit criticism of risks; a call to establish an anonymous process for current and former employees to raise concerns; supporting a culture of criticism; and a promise to not retaliate against current and former employees who share confidential information to raise alarms after other processes have failed.

The Washington Post in December reported that senior leaders at OpenAI raised fears about retaliation from CEO Sam Altman warnings that preceded the chiefs temporary ouster. In a recent podcast interview, former OpenAI board member Helen Toner said part of the nonprofits decision to remove Altman as CEO late last year was his lack of candid communication about safety.

He gave us inaccurate information about the small number of formal safety processes that the company did have in place, meaning that it was basically just impossible for the board to know how well those safety processes were working, she told The TED AI Show in May.

The letter was endorsed by AI luminaries including Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton, who are considered godfathers of AI, and renowned computer scientist Stuart Russell.

Go here to see the original:
OpenAI, Anthropic and Google DeepMind workers warn of AIs dangers - The Washington Post

Read More..

Inside DeepMinds effort to understand its own creations – Semafor

With missteps at industry leader OpenAI possibly providing an opening for rivals touting safety advances, Google DeepMind unveiled fresh details of how its building systems to catch potentially dangerous leaps in artificial intelligence capabilities.

OpenAI has tried to reassure the public, announcing a new safety committee earlier this week, after a top safety researcher joined rival firm Anthropic. That move came before actress Scarlett Johansson accused Sam Altmans firm of using her voice without her permission for ChatGPT.

With AI guardrails becoming a possible competitive advantage, Google DeepMind executives told Semafor that the methods for predicting and identifying threats will likely involve a combination of humans and what the company calls auto evaluations, in which AI models analyze other models or even themselves.

The effort, though, has become particularly challenging, now that the most advanced AI models have made the jump to multimodality, meaning they were trained not only on text, but video and audio as well, they said.

We have some of the best people in the world working on this, but I think everybody recognizes the field of science and evaluations is still very much an area where we need additional investment research, collaboration and also best practices, said Tom Lue, general counsel and head of governance at Google DeepMind.

Google, which released a comprehensive new framework earlier this month to assess the dangers of AI models, has been working on the problem for years. But the efforts have ramped up now that foundation models like GPT and DeepMinds Gemini have ignited a global, multibillion dollar race to increase the capabilities of AI models.

The challenge, though, is that the massive foundation models that power these popular products are still in their infancy. They are not yet powerful enough to pose any imminent threat, so researchers are trying to design a way to analyze a technology that has not yet been created.

When it comes to new multimodal models, automated evaluation is still in the distant horizon, said Helen King, Google DeepMinds senior director of responsibility. We havent matured the evaluation approach yet and actually trying to automate that is almost premature, she said.

See the original post:
Inside DeepMinds effort to understand its own creations - Semafor

Read More..

OpenAI, Google Deepmind employees call for oversight, whisteblower protection to curb AI risks By Proactive Investors – Investing.com Canada

Proactive Investors - Current and former staff at AI firms OpenAI, Anthropic and Google (NASDAQ:) Deepmind have published an open letter describing their concerns about the rapid advancement of AI with a lack of oversight and the absence of whistleblower protection.

In the letter, the AI professionals cited numerous risks from AI technologies including the further entrenchment of existing inequalities, manipulation and misinformation, and the loss of control of autonomous AI systems potentially resulting in human extinction.

They wrote that they believe these risks can be mitigated but AI companies have strong financial incentives to avoid effective oversight and we do not believe bespoke structures of corporate governance are sufficient to change this.

They called upon AI companies to commit to several principles, including facilitating an anonymous process for current and former employees to raise concerns to the companys board, regulators and appropriate independent organizations and for these companies to support a culture of open criticism.

They also urged companies not to retaliate against current and former employees who publicly share risk-related confidential information after other processes have failed.

They noted that ordinary whistleblower protections are insufficient because they are focused on illegal activity, whereas the risks they are concerned about are not yet regulated.

So long as there is no effective government oversight of these corporations, current and former employees are among the few people who can hold them accountable to the public, they wrote.

Some of us reasonably fear various forms of retaliation, given the history of such cases across the industry. We are not the first to encounter or speak about these issues.

Read more on Proactive Investors CA

Disclaimer

See more here:
OpenAI, Google Deepmind employees call for oversight, whisteblower protection to curb AI risks By Proactive Investors - Investing.com Canada

Read More..

Is BNB Price Move To $1,000 Programmed? Bulls Pumping On Binance Launchpool Success – 99Bitcoins

BNB price is on the cusp of breaking above $700, printing new all-time highs. Binance launchpools, analysts claim, are behind the rise of the Binance Smart Chain heres whats going on.

Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana have dominated headlines primarily because of their impressive performance.

The launch of spot Bitcoin ETFs drove most altcoins to all-time highs, and Binance Coin (BNB) benefited. However, after that, attention fizzled as analysts focused on ETH and SOL.

This is fast changing, and in the top 5, BNB has been overly resilient despite the drama surrounding Binance and its executives, mostly the resignation of Changpeng Zhao, the founder, back in November 2023.

There are many metrics to measure this impressive performance, but analysts often choose to look at price.

As Artemis data shared by one analyst reveals, BNB has undoubtedly been one of the top performers this year despite on-chain activity dropping.

(Artemis)

To put this into perspective, BNB is now the fourth most valuable coin after BTC, ETH, and USDT, commanding a market cap of over $93 billion.

Over the last year alone, analysts note that BNB has spiked by over 180%, rising from around $250 to over $625. If anything, the coin is at the cusp of breaking all-time highs at spot rates, highlighting just how resilient and rewarding for HODLers BNB has been.

In a post on X, one analyst said the spike in valuation is due to a surge in retail demand stemming from Binances popular offerings like Launchpools.

Launchpools are a kind of fundraising where Binance vets and allows Binance Smart Chain projects to raise capital from its user base. However, there is a catch: interested investors must hold BNB to have exclusive access to these token offerings.

Since BNB is at the backbone of the broader Binance ecosystem, including in the exchange and the BNB Chain, its utility further bolsters prices.

DISCOVER: What Are The Best Penny Crypto to Buy in June 2024

At current price levels, BNB is tantalizingly close to breaching 2021 highs of $700. The coin is on the cusp of breaking above the rising wedge, the bull flag. It is diverging from the middle BB, which points to high volatility.

(BNBUSDT)

Notably, BNB is pushing higher in early June after over five weeks of sideways movement, mirroring the general performance seen in Bitcoin and Ethereum.

That BNB is shaking off FUD, especially in H2 2023, following the arrest and subsequent imprisonment of Zhao, coupled with the success of Launchpool offerings, investors continue to bank heavily on even more gains in the days and weeks ahead.

Nonetheless, going forward, the upcoming Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) regulations in Europe pose a potential challenge, especially to Launchpool investors.

While Binance has assured users that they wont delist unauthorized stablecoins from spot trading, European clients will have restricted access to Binance products, mostly Launchpool and Earn.

Explore: Notcoin Price Explodes 227% Dominates the Market And This Learn-2-Earn Gem is Next To Skyrocket

Disclaimer: Crypto is a high-risk asset class. This article is provided for informational purposes and does not constitute investment advice. You could lose all of your capital.

Excerpt from:

Is BNB Price Move To $1,000 Programmed? Bulls Pumping On Binance Launchpool Success - 99Bitcoins

Read More..