Daily Archives: January 23, 2024

Ubisoft Says It Out Loud: We Want People To Get Used To Not Owning What They’ve Bought

Posted on by

if buying isnt owning then piracy isnt stealing

[…] the public too often doesn’t understand how it happens that products stop working the way they did after updates are performed remotely, or why movies purchased through an online store suddenly disappear with no refund, or why other media types purchased online likewise go poof. There is a severe misalignment, in other words, between what consumers think their money is being spent on and what is actually being purchased.

[…]

I suppose it’s at least a bit refreshing to see Ubisoft come out here and just say the quiet part out loud.

With the pre-release of Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown started, Ubisoft has chosen this week to rebrand its Ubisoft+ subscription services, and introduce a PC version of the “Classics” tier at a lower price. And a big part of this, says the publisher’s director of subscriptions, Philippe Tremblay, is getting players “comfortable” with not owning their games.

He claims the company’s subscription service had its biggest ever month October 2023, and that the service has had “millions” of subscribers, and “over half a billion hours” played. Of course, a lot of this could be a result of Ubisoft’s various moments of refusing to release games to Steam, forcing PC players to use its services, and likely opting for a month’s subscription rather than the full price of the game they were looking to buy. But still, clearly people are opting to use it.

On the one hand, there are realms where it makes sense for a subscription based gaming service where you pay a monthly fee for access and essentially never buy a game. Xbox’s Game Pass, for instance, makes all the sense in the world for some people. If you’re a more casual gamer who doesn’t want to own a library of games, but rather merely wants to be able to play a broad swath of titles at a moment’s notice, a service like that is perfect.

But Game Pass is $10 a month and includes titles from all kinds of publishers. Ubisoft’s service is nearly double that rate and only includes Ubisoft titles. That’s a much tougher sell.

[…]

Given that most people, while being a part of the problem (hello), also think of this as a problem, it’s so weird to see it phrased as if some faulty thinking in the company’s audience.

“One of the things we saw is that gamers are used to, a little bit like DVD, having and owning their games. That’s the consumer shift that needs to happen. They got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection. That’s a transformation that’s been a bit slower to happen [in games]. As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect… you don’t lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That’s not been deleted. You don’t lose what you’ve built in the game or your engagement with the game. So it’s about feeling comfortable with not owning your game.“

That last sentence’s thoughts are so misaligned as to be nearly in the realm of nonsense. If it’s my game, then I do own it. The point Ubisoft is trying to make is that the public should get over ownership entirely and accept that it’s not my game at all. It’s my subscription service.

And while I appreciate Ubisoft saying the quiet part out loud for once, I don’t believe for a moment that this will go over well with the general gaming public.

Source: Ubisoft Says It Out Loud: We Want People To Get Used To Not Owning What They’ve Bought | Techdirt

Hint: it hasn’t!

Supreme Court declines appeals from Apple and Epic Games in App Store case

Posted on by

The US Supreme Court has declined to hear the appeals filed by both Apple and Epic Games following a judge’s ruling that Apple must allow developers to offer alternative methods to pay for apps and services other than through the App Store. It did not provide an explanation as to why it refused to review either appeal, but it means the permanent injunction giving developers a way to avoid the 30 percent cut Apple takes will remain in place.

Apple made the appeal to the high court back in September of last year, requesting it review the circuit court’s decision it deemed “unconstitutional.” The case brought forward by Epic Games is the first to challenge the business model of the App store, which helps Apple rake in billions. In May 2023, Apple said that developers generated about $1 trillion in total billings through the App Store in 2022. Gaming apps sold on the App Store generate an estimated $100 billion in revenue each year.

While the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Epic’s appeal that Apple has indeed broken California’s Unfair Competition law, it rejected Epic’s claim that the App store is a monopoly. In addition to declining to hear Apple’s appeal, SCOTUS also will not review Epic’s appeal that the district court had made “legal errors.”

Epic claimed that Apple violates federal antitrust laws through its business model, however, this is not an issue the high court will consider.

[…]

Source: Supreme Court declines appeals from Apple and Epic Games in App Store case

EU says music streaming platforms must pay artists more

Posted on by

The European Parliament is calling for new regulations to ensure streaming services pay artists fairly. The proposal also calls for more transparency around how algorithms generate suggestions for which artists to stream and what tracks get the most promotion.

The proposed changes will be designed to ensure smaller artists are compensated fairly. Currently, royalty rates are set in a way that makes artists accept lower pay for the distribution of their content in exchange for visibility on streaming platforms like Spotify and Apple Music. The members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are primarily concerned with introducing new legal frameworks to help support artists.

MEPs believe that the current way royalties are distributed is unfair. Current algorithms favor major labels and artists when providing suggestions, making it more difficult for less popular and diverse genres to get exposure. “Cultural diversity and ensuring that authors are credited and fairly paid has always been our priority; this is why we ask for rules that ensure algorithms and recommendation tools used by music streaming services are transparent as well as in their use of AI tools, placing European authors at the centre,” rapporteur Ibán García del Blanco of Spain said.

As part of this call for change, the MEPs want there to be more regulation regarding the use of artificial intelligence. The actual implementation of a legal framework by EU regulators might take some time to come to fruition. Similarly, UK regulators also raised the issue of pay fairness on streaming apps and even started investigating the effects of algorithms on listening habits. It’s no secret that streaming platforms account for more than half of the music industry’s revenue. Streaming represents about 67 percent of the music industry’s revenue on a global scale.

Source: EU says music streaming platforms must pay artists more

OpenAI must defend ChatGPT fabrications after failing to defeat libel suit

Posted on by

OpenAI may finally have to answer for ChatGPT’s “hallucinations” in court after a Georgia judge recently ruled against the tech company’s motion to dismiss a radio host’s defamation suit.

OpenAI had argued that ChatGPT’s output cannot be considered libel, partly because the chatbot output cannot be considered a “publication,” which is a key element of a defamation claim. In its motion to dismiss, OpenAI also argued that Georgia radio host Mark Walters could not prove that the company acted with actual malice or that anyone believed the allegedly libelous statements were true or that he was harmed by the alleged publication.

It’s too early to say whether Judge Tracie Cason found OpenAI’s arguments persuasive. In her order denying OpenAI’s motion to dismiss, which MediaPost shared here, Cason did not specify how she arrived at her decision, saying only that she had “carefully” considered arguments and applicable laws.

There may be some clues as to how Cason reached her decision in a court filing from John Monroe, attorney for Walters, when opposing the motion to dismiss last year.

Monroe had argued that OpenAI improperly moved to dismiss the lawsuit by arguing facts that have yet to be proven in court. If OpenAI intended the court to rule on those arguments, Monroe suggested that a motion for summary judgment would have been the proper step at this stage in the proceedings, not a motion to dismiss.

Had OpenAI gone that route, though, Walters would have had an opportunity to present additional evidence. To survive a motion to dismiss, all Walters had to do was show that his complaint was reasonably supported by facts, Monroe argued.

Failing to convince the court that Walters had no case, OpenAI’s legal theories regarding its liability for ChatGPT’s “hallucinations” will now likely face their first test in court.

“We are pleased the court denied the motion to dismiss so that the parties will have an opportunity to explore, and obtain a decision on, the merits of the case,” Monroe told Ars.

What’s the libel case against OpenAI?

Walters sued OpenAI after a journalist, Fred Riehl, warned him that in response to a query, ChatGPT had fabricated an entire lawsuit. Generating an entire complaint with an erroneous case number, ChatGPT falsely claimed that Walters had been accused of defrauding and embezzling funds from the Second Amendment Foundation.

Walters is the host of Armed America Radio and has a reputation as the “Loudest Voice in America Fighting For Gun Rights.” He claimed that OpenAI “recklessly” disregarded whether ChatGPT’s outputs were false, alleging that OpenAI knew that “ChatGPT’s hallucinations were pervasive and severe” and did not work to prevent allegedly libelous outputs. As Walters saw it, the false statements were serious enough to be potentially career-damaging, “tending to injure Walter’s reputation and exposing him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule.”

[…]

OpenAI introduced “a large amount of material” in its motion to dismiss that fell outside the scope of the complaint, Monroe argued. That included pointing to a disclaimer in ChatGPT’s terms of use that warns users that ChatGPT’s responses may not be accurate and should be verified before publishing. According to OpenAI, this disclaimer makes Riehl the “owner” of any libelous ChatGPT responses to his queries.

“A disclaimer does not make an otherwise libelous statement non-libelous,” Monroe argued. And even if the disclaimer made Riehl liable for publishing the ChatGPT output—an argument that may give some ChatGPT users pause before querying—”that responsibility does not have the effect of negating the responsibility of the original publisher of the material,” Monroe argued.

[…]

With the lawsuit moving forward, curious chatbot users everywhere may finally get the answer to a question that has been unclear since ChatGPT quickly became the fastest-growing consumer application of all time after its launch in November 2022: Will ChatGPT’s hallucinations be allowed to ruin lives?

In the meantime, the FTC is seemingly still investigating potential harms caused by ChatGPT’s “false, misleading, or disparaging” generations.

[…]

Source: OpenAI must defend ChatGPT fabrications after failing to defeat libel suit | Ars Technica

Samsung and Google launch ‘Circle to Search’ Too

Posted on by

Samsung announced many interesting products and features at its latest Galaxy Unpacked event (including the Galaxy S24 series) but one of the more impressive developments isn’t actually unique to the Galaxy brand itself. The feature, Circle to Search, was developed in partnership with Google, which means it’ll live on Google phones, too.

What is Circle to Search?

In a nutshell, Circle to Search is a new way to search for anything without switching apps. To activate the feature, long press on the home button or navigation bar (if you have gesture navigation enabled). Then, when you see something on your screen that you want to look up, draw a circle around it with your finger, and your phone will return search results. For example, you could use Circle to Search to find an article of clothing you might have seen in a YouTube video, or get more info about a dish in a recipe you’re browsing online.

You don’t have to just circle the item you’re looking to search, either: You can also highlight it, scribble over it, or tap on it. As part of Google’s AI upgrades to search, you can search with text and pictures you’ve circled at the same time using multi-search. Google says that the Circle to Search gesture works on images, text, and videos. Basically, you’re able to find anything and everything using this feature.

These results appear inside the app you’re currently using, so you don’t need to interrupt what you’re doing to search. When you’re done, you can simply swipe the results away to get back to your previous task.

When does Circle to Search launch?

Circle to Search is set to launch globally on Jan. 31 for select premium Android smartphones like the Pixel 8 and Pixel 8 Pro and the newly announced Galaxy S24 series. The feature will be coming to more Android devices at a later date.

Source: How to Use Google’s ‘Circle to Search’ Tool | Lifehacker

Have I Been Pwned adds 71 million emails from Naz.API stolen account list

Posted on by

Have I Been Pwned has added almost 71 million email addresses associated with stolen accounts in the Naz.API dataset to its data breach notification service.

The Naz.API dataset is a massive collection of 1 billion credentials compiled using credential stuffing lists and data stolen by information-stealing malware.

Credential stuffing lists are collections of login name and password pairs stolen from previous data breaches that are used to breach accounts on other sites.

[…]

This dataset has been floating around the data breach community for quite a while but rose to notoriety after it was used to fuel an open-source intelligence (OSINT) platform called illicit.services.

This service allows visitors to search a database of stolen information, including names, phone numbers, email addresses, and other personal data.

The service shut down in July 2023 out of concerns it was being used for Doxxing and SIM-swapping attacks. However, the operator enabled the service again in September.

Illicit.services use data from various sources, but one of its largest sources of data came from the Naz.API dataset, which was shared privately among a small number of people.

Each line in the Naz.API data consists of a login URL, its login name, and an associated password stolen from a person’s device

[…]

“Here’s the back story: this week I was contacted by a well-known tech company that had received a bug bounty submission based on a credential stuffing list posted to a popular hacking forum,” explained a blog post by Hunt.

“Whilst this post dates back almost 4 months, it hadn’t come across my radar until now and inevitably, also hadn’t been sent to the aforementioned tech company.”

“They took it seriously enough to take appropriate action against their (very sizeable) user base which gave me enough cause to investigate it further than your average cred stuffing list.”

Threat actors sharing the Naz.API dataset on hacking forums
Threat actors sharing the Naz.API dataset on hacking forums
Source: BleepingComputer

According to Hunt, the Naz.API dataset consists of 319 files totaling 104GB and containing 70,840,771 unique email addresses.

However, while there are close to 71 million unique emails, for each email address, there are likely many other records for the different sites’ credentials were stolen from.

Hunt says the Naz.API data is likely old, as it contained one of his and other HIBP subscribers’ passwords that were used in the past. Hunt says his password was used in 2011, meaning that some of the data is over 13 years old.

To check if your credentials are in the Naz.API dataset, you can perform a search at Have I Been Pwned. If your email is found to be associated with Naz.API, the site will warn you, indicating that your computer was infected with information-stealing malware at one point.

[…]

Source: Have I Been Pwned adds 71 million emails from Naz.API stolen account list

Amazon wants you to pay to give them your data with Its Next-Gen “Remarkable Alexa” – which is remarkable in how poorly it works

Posted on by

amazon alexa echo device covered in green goo

Amazon is revamping its Alexa voice assistant as it prepares to launch a new paid subscription plan this year, according to internal documents and people familiar with the matter. But the change is causing internal conflict and may lead to further delay.

Tentatively named “Alexa Plus,” the paid version of Alexa is intended to offer more conversational and personalized artificial-intelligence technology, one of the documents obtained by Business Insider says. The people said the team was working toward a June 30 launch deadline and had been testing the underlying voice technology, dubbed “Remarkable Alexa,” with 15,000 external customers.

But the quality of the new Alexa’s answers is still falling short of expectations, often sharing inaccurate information, external tests have found. Amazon is now going through a major overhaul of Alexa’s technology stack to address this issue, though the team is experiencing some discord.

[…]

The people familiar with the matter said the limited preview with 15,000 external customers discovered that, while Remarkable Alexa was generally good at being conversational and informative, it was still deflecting answers, often giving unnecessarily long or inaccurate responses. It also needed to improve its ability to answer ambiguous customer requests that require the engagement of multiple services, such as turning on the light and music at the same time.

The new Alexa still didn’t meet the quality standards expected for Alexa Plus, these people added

[…]

Source: Amazon Is Struggling With Its Next-Gen “Remarkable Alexa’

Hospitals owned by private equity are harming patients, reports find

Posted on by

Private equity firms are increasingly buying hospitals across the US, and when they do, patients suffer, according to two separate reports. Specifically, the equity firms cut corners, slash services, lay off staff, lower quality of care, take on substantial debt, and reduce charity care, leading to lower ratings and more medical errors, the reports collectively find.

Last week, the financial watchdog organization Private Equity Stakeholder Project (PESP) released a report delving into the state of two of the nation’s largest hospital systems, Lifepoint and ScionHealth—both owned by private equity firm Apollo Global Management. Through those two systems, Apollo runs 220 hospitals in 36 states, employing around 75,000 people.

The report found that some of Apollo’s hospitals were among the worst in their respective states, based on a ranking by The Lown Institute Hospital Index. The index ranks hospitals and health systems based on health equity, value, and outcomes, PESP notes. The hospitals also have dismal readmission rates and government rankings. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) ranks hospitals on a one- to five-star system, with the national average of 3.2 stars overall and about 30 percent of hospitals at two stars or below. Apollo’s overall average is 2.8 stars, with nearly 40 percent of hospitals at two stars or below.

Patterns

The other report, a study published in JAMA late last month, found that the rate of serious medical errors and health complications increases among patients in the first few years after private equity firms take over. The study examined Medicare claims from 51 private equity-run hospitals and 259 matched control hospitals.

Specifically, the study, led by researchers at Harvard University, found that patients admitted to private equity-owned hospitals had a 25 percent increase in developing hospital-acquired conditions compared with patients in the control hospitals. In private equity hospitals, patients experienced a 27 percent increase in falls, a 38 percent increase in central-line bloodstream infections (despite placing 16 percent fewer central lines than control hospitals), and surgical site infections doubled.

“These findings heighten concerns about the implications of private equity on health care delivery,” the authors concluded.

It also squares with PESP’s investigation, which collected various data and media reports that could help explain how those medical errors could happen. The report found a pattern of cost-cutting and staff layoffs after private equity acquisition. In 2020, for instance, Lifepoint cut its annual salary and benefit costs by $166 million over the previous year and cut its supply costs by $54 million. Staff that remained at Apollo’s hospitals were, in some cases, underpaid, and some hospitals cut services, including obstetric, pediatric, and psychiatric care.

Another pattern was that Apollo’s hospitals were highly indebted. According to Moody’s Investor Services, Apollo’s ScionHealth has 5.8 times more debt than income to pay that debt off. Lifepoint’s debt was 7.9 times its income. Private equity firms often take on excessive debt for leveraged buyouts, but this can lead cash to be diverted to interest payments instead of operational needs, PESP reported.

Apollo also made money off the hospitals in sale-leaseback transactions, in which it sold the land under the hospitals and then leased it back. In these cases, hospitals are left paying rent on land they used to own.

[…]

Source: Hospitals owned by private equity are harming patients, reports find | Ars Technica