What’s next? What other ‘old tech’ is in use?

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2024/09/exploding-pager-lebanon-battery/679930/

Don’t Fool Yourself About the Exploding Pagers

Yesterday, pagers used by Hezbollah operatives exploded simultaneously in Lebanon and Syria, killing at least a dozen people and injuring thousands. Today brought another mass detonation in Lebanon, this time involving walkie-talkies. The attacks are gruesome and shocking. An expert told the Associated Press that the pagers received a message that caused them to vibrate in a way that required someone to press buttons to stop it. That action appears to have triggered the explosion. At a funeral in Beirut, a loudspeaker reportedly called for people to turn off their phones, illustrating a fear that any device could actually be a bomb, including the one in your pocket.

Does this also suggest a superior business model?

https://www.bespacific.com/academic-journal-publishers-antitrust-litigation/

Academic Journal Publishers Antitrust Litigation

Press release: “On September 12, 2024, Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel at Justice Catalyst Law filed a federal antitrust lawsuit against six commercial publishers of academic journals, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor and Francis, Sage, Wiley, and Wolters Kluwer, on behalf of a proposed class of scientists and scholars who provided manuscripts or peer review, alleging that these publishers conspired to unlawfully appropriate billions of dollars that would otherwise have funded scientific research. As detailed in the complaint, the defendants’ alleged scheme has three main components. First, an agreement to fix the price of peer review services at zero that includes an agreement to coerce scholars into providing their labor for nothing by expressly linking their unpaid labor with their ability to get their manuscripts published in the defendants’ preeminent journals. Second, the publisher defendants agreed not to compete with each other for manuscripts by requiring scholars to submit their manuscripts to only one journal at a time, which substantially reduces competition by removing incentives to review manuscripts promptly and publish meritorious research quickly. Third, the publisher defendants agreed to prohibit scholars from freely sharing the scientific advancements described in submitted manuscripts while those manuscripts are under peer review, a process that often takes over a year. As the complaint notes, “From the moment scholars submit manuscripts for publication, the Publisher Defendants behave as though the scientific advancements set forth in the manuscripts are their property, to be shared only if the Publisher Defendant grants permission. Moreover, when the Publisher Defendants select manuscripts for publication, the Publisher Defendants will often require scholars to sign away all intellectual property rights, in exchange for nothing. The manuscripts then become the actual property of the Publisher Defendants, and the Publisher Defendants charge the maximum the market will bear for access to that scientific knowledge.”…

Perspective.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/09/18/1104015/here-are-all-the-ai-bills-in-congress-right-now/

There are more than 120 AI bills in Congress right now

US policymakers have an ‘everything everywhere all at once’ approach to regulating artificial intelligence, with bills that are as varied as the definitions of AI itself.

… That’s why, with help from the Brennan Center for Justice, which created a tracker with all the AI bills circulating in various committees in Congress right now, MIT Technology Review has taken a closer look to see if there’s anything we can learn from this legislative smorgasbord.