An anonymous reader shared this report from the blog Linuxiac: In a somewhat unexpected move, Cloudflare has announced its sponsorship of the Ladybird browser, an independent (still-in-development) open-source initiative aimed at developing a modern, standalone web browser engine. It's a project launched by GitHub's co-founder and former CEO, Chris Wanstrath, and tech visionary Andreas Kling. It's written in C++, and designed to be fast, standards-compliant, and free of external dependencies. Its main selling point? Unlike most alternative browsers today, Ladybird doesn't sit on top of Chromium or WebKit. Instead, it's building a completely new rendering engine from scratch, which is a rare thing in today's web landscape. For reference, the vast majority of web traffic currently runs through engines developed by either Google (Blink/Chromium), Apple (WebKit), or Mozilla (Gecko). The sponsorship means the Ladybird team will have more resources to accelerate development. This includes paying developers to work on crucial features, such as JavaScript support, rendering improvements, and compatibility with modern web applications. Cloudflare stated that its support is part of a broader initiative to keep the web open, where competition and multiple implementations can drive enhanced security, performance, and innovation. The article adds that Cloudflare also chose to sponsor Omarchy, a tool that runs on Arch and sets up and configures a Hyprland tiling window manager, along with a curated set of defaults and developer tools including Neovim, Docker, and Git.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

A ticket came in marked urgent. When users were entering data in the header field, the spaces they were putting in kept getting mangled. This was in production, and had been in production for sometime.

Mike P picked up the ticket, and was able to track down the problem to a file called Strings.java. Yes, at some point, someone wrote a bunch of string helper functions and jammed them into a package. Of course, many of the functions were re-implementations of existing functions: reinvented wheels, now available in square.

For example, the trim function.

/** * @param str * @return The trimmed string, or null if the string is null or an empty string. */ public static String trim(String str) { if (str == null) { return null; } String ret = str.trim(); int len = ret.length(); char last = '\u0021'; // choose a character that will not be interpreted as whitespace char c; StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer(); for (int i = 0; i < len; i++) { c = ret.charAt(i); if (c > '\u0020') { if (last <= '\u0020') { sb.append(' '); } sb.append(c); } last = c; } ret = sb.toString(); if ("".equals(ret)) { return null; } else { return ret; } }

Now, Mike's complaint is that this function could have been replaced with a regular expression. While that would likely be much smaller, regexes are expensive- in performance and frequently in cognitive overhead- and I actually have no objections to people scanning strings.

But let's dig into what we're doing here.

They start with a null check, which sure. Then they trim the string; never a good sign when your homemade trim method calls the built-in.

Then, they iterate across the string, copying characters into a StringBuffer. If the current character is above unicode character 20- the realm of printable characters- and if the last character was a whitespace character, we copy a whitespace character into the output, and then the printable character into the output.

What this function does is simply replace runs of whitespace with single whitespace characters.

"This string" becomes "This string"

Badly I should add. Because there are plenty of whitespace characters which appear above \u0020- like the non-breaking space (\u00A0), and many other control characters. While you might be willing to believe your users will never figure out how to type those, you can't guarantee that they'll never copy/paste them.

For me, however, this function does something far worse than being bad at removing extraneous whitespace. Because it has that check at the end- if I handed it a perfectly good string that is only whitespace, it hands me back a null.

I can see the argument- it's a bad input, so just give me back an objectively bad result. No IsNullOrEmpty check, just a simple null check. But I still hate it- turning an actual value into a null just bothers me, and seems like an easy way to cause problems.

In any case, the root problem with this bug was simply developer invented requirements: the users never wanted stray spaces to be automatically removed in the middle of the string. Trimmed yes, gutted no.

No one tried to use multiple spaces for most of the history of the application, thus no one noticed the problem. No one expected it to not work. Hence the ticket and the panic by users who didn't understand what was going on.

.comment { border: none; } [Advertisement] Picking up NuGet is easy. Getting good at it takes time. Download our guide to learn the best practice of NuGet for the Enterprise.

An anonymous reader shared this report from Ars Technica: Late last week, The Hollywood Reporter ran a story about an "AI Stan Lee hologram" that would be appearing at the LA Comic Con this weekend. [Watch it in action here.] Nearly seven years after the famous Marvel Comics creator's death at the age of 95, fans will be able to pay $15 to $20 this weekend to chat with a life-sized, AI-powered avatar of Lee in an enclosed booth at the show. The instant response from many fans and media outlets to the idea was not kind, to say the least. A writer for TheGamer called the very idea "demonic" and said we need to "kill it with fire before it's too late...." But Chris DeMoulin, the CEO of the parent company behind LA Comic Con, urged critics to come see the AI-powered hologram for themselves before rushing to judgment. "We're not afraid of people seeing it and we're not afraid of criticism," he told Ars. "I'm just a fan of informed criticism, and I think most of what's been out there so far has not really been informed...." [DeMoulin said he saw] "the leaps and bounds that they were making in improving the technology, improving the interactivity." Now, he said, it's possible to create an AI-powered version that ingests "all of the actual comments that people made during their life" to craft an interactive hologram that "is not literally quoting the person, but everything it was saying was based on things that person actually said...." [Hyperreal CEO and Chief Architect Remington Scott] said Hyperreal "can't share specific technical details" of the models or training techniques they use to power these recreations. But Scott added that this training project is "particularly meaningful, [because] Stan Lee had actually begun digitizing himself while he was alive, with the vision of creating a digital double so his fans could interact with him on a larger scale...." Still, DeMoulin said he understands why the idea of using even a stylized version of Lee's likeness in this manner could rub some fans the wrong way. "When a new technology comes out, it just feels wrong to them, and I respect the fact that this feels wrong to people," he said. "I totally agree that something like this-not just for Stan but for anyone, any celebrity alive or dead-could be put into this technology and used in a way that would be exploitative and unfortunate." That's why DeMoulin said he and the others behind the AI-powered Lee feel a responsibility "to make sure that if we were going to do this, we never got anywhere close to that." The "premium, authenticated digital identities" created by Hyperreal's system are "not replacing artists," says Hyperreal CEO/Chief Architect Remington Scott, but "creating respectful digital extensions that honor their legacy." Still, DeMoulin says in the article that "I suppose if we do it and thousands of fans interact with [it] and they don't like it, we'll stop doing it."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

"As awareness grows around the dangers of head trauma in sports, a small number of professional fighters and football players are turning to a psychedelic called ibogaine for treatment," reports the Los Angeles Times. They note that the drug's proponents "tout its ability to treat addiction, post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury, or TBI. " Ibogaine, which is derived from a West African shrub, is a Schedule 1 drug in America with no legal medical uses, and experts urge caution because of the need for further studies. But the results, several athletes say, are "game-changing".... Although athletes are just discovering ibogaine, the drug is well known within the veteran community, which experiences high rates of brain injury and PTSD. In Stanford's study on the effects of ibogaine on special forces veterans, participants saw average reductions of 88% in PTSD symptoms, 87% in depression symptoms and 81% in anxiety symptoms. They also exhibited improvements in concentration, information processing and memory. "No other drug has ever been able to alleviate the functional and neuropsychiatric symptoms of traumatic brain injury," Dr. Nolan Williams, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences, said in a statement on the results. "The results are dramatic, and we intend to study this compound further...." States can work faster than the federal government by carving out exemptions for supervised ibogaine therapy programs, similar to what Oregon has done with psilocybin therapy. Many states have also opted to legalize marijuana for medicinal or recreational use... In June, Texas approved a historic $50-million investment in state funding to support drug development trials for ibogaine, inspired by the results seen by veterans. Arizona legislators approved $5 million in state funding for a clinical study on ibogaine in March, and California legislators are pushing to fast-track the study of ibogaine and other psychedelics.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The editors of the culture magazine n + 1 decry the "well-funded upheaval" caused by a large and powerful coalition of pro-AI forces. ("According to the logic of market share as social transformation, if you move fast and break enough things, nothing can contain you...") "An extraordinary amount of money is spent by the AI industry to ensure that acquiescence is the only plausible response. But marketing is not destiny." The AI bubbleâS — âSand it is a bubble, as even OpenAI overlord Sam Altman has admittedâS — âSwill burst. The technology's dizzying pace of improvement, already slowing with the release of GPT-5, will stall... [P]rofessional readers and writers: We retain some power over the terms and norms of our own intellectual life. We ought to stop acting like impotence in some realms means impotence everywhere. Major terrains remain AI-proofable. For publishers, editors, critics, professors, teachers, anyone with any say over what people read, the first step will be to develop an ear. Learn to tellâS — âSto read closely enough to tellâS — âSthe work of people from the work of bots... Whatever nuance is needed for its interception, resisting AI's further creep into intellectual labor will also require blunt-force militancy. The steps are simple. Don't publish AI bullshit. Don't even publish mealymouthed essays about the temptation to produce AI bullshit. Resist the call to establish worthless partnerships like the Washington Post's Ember, an "AI writing coach" designed to churn out Bezos-friendly op-eds. Instead, do what better magazines, newspapers, and journals have managed for centuries. Promote and produce original work of value, work that's cliché-resistant and unreplicable, work that triesâS — âSas Thomas Pynchon wrote in an oracular 1984 essay titled "Is It OK to Be a Luddite?"âS — âS"through literary means which are nocturnal and deal in disguise, to deny the machine...." Punishing already overdisciplined and oversurveilled students for their AI use will help no one, but it's a long way from accepting that reality to Ohio State's new plan to mandate something called "AI fluency" for all graduates by 2029 (including workshops sponsored, naturally, by Google). Pedagogically, alternatives to acquiescence remain available. Some are old, like blue-book exams, in-class writing, or one-on-one tutoring. Some are new, like developing curricula to teach the limits and flaws of generative AI while nurturing human intelligence... Our final defenses are more diffuse, working at a level of norms and attitudes. Stigmatization is a powerful force, and disgust and shame are among our greatest tools. Put plainly, you should feel bad for using AI. (The broad embrace of the term slop is a heartening sign of a nascent constituency for machine denial.) These systems haven't worked well for very long, and consensus about their use remains far from settled. That's why so much writing about AI writing sounds the way it doesâS — âSnervous, uneven, ambivalent about the new regime's utilityâS — âSand it means there's still time to disenchant AI, provincialize it, make it uncompelling and uncool... As we train our sights on what we oppose, let's recall the costs of surrender. When we use generative AI, we consent to the appropriation of our intellectual property by data scrapers. We stuff the pockets of oligarchs with even more money. We abet the acceleration of a social media gyre that everyone admits is making life worse. We accept the further degradation of an already degraded educational system. We agree that we would rather deplete our natural resources than make our own art or think our own thoughts... A literature which is made by machines, which are owned by corporations, which are run by sociopaths, can only be a "stereotype"âS — âSa simplification, a facsimile, an insult, a fakeâS — âSof real literature. It should be smashed, and can. The 3,800-word article also argues that "perhaps AI's ascent in knowledge-industry workplaces will give rise to new demands and new reasons to organize..."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

tThe internet is full of people claiming to uncover conspiracies in politics and business..." reports the Wall Street Journal. "Now an unlikely new villain has been added to the list: theoretical physicists," they write, saygin resentment of scientific authority figures "is the major attraction of what might be called 'conspiracy physics'." In recent years, a group of YouTubers and podcasters have attracted millions of viewers by proclaiming that physics is in crisis. The field, they argue, has discovered little of importance in the last 50 years, because it is dominated by groupthink and silences anyone who dares to dissent from mainstream ideas, like string theory... Most fringe theories are too arcane for listeners to understand, but anyone can grasp the idea that academic physics is just one more corrupt and self-serving establishment... In this corner of the internet, the scientist Scott Aaronson has written, "Anyone perceived as the 'mainstream establishment' faces a near-insurmountable burden of proof, while anyone perceived as 'renegade' wins by default if they identify any hole whatsoever in mainstream understanding... As with other kinds of authorities, there are reasonable criticisms to be made of academic physics. By some metrics, scientific productivity has slowed since the 1970s. String theory has not fulfilled physicists' early dreams that it would become the ultimate explanation of all forces and matter in our universe. The Large Hadron Collider, the world's largest particle accelerator, has delivered fewer breakthroughs than scientists expected when it turned on in 2010. But even reasonable points become hard to recognize when expressed in the ways YouTube incentivizes. Conspiracy physics videos with titles like "They Just Keep Lying" are full of sour sarcasm, outraged facial expressions and spooky music... Leonard Susskind, director of the Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics, says physicists need to be both more sober and more forceful when addressing the public. The limits of string theory should be acknowledged, he says, but the idea that progress has slowed isn't right. In the last few decades, he and other physicists have figured out how to make progress on the vast project of integrating general relativity and quantum mechanics, the century-old pillars of physics, into a single explanation of the universe. The bitter attacks on leading physicists get a succinct summary in the article from Chris Williamson, a "Love Island" contestant turned podcast host. "This is like 'The Kardashians' for physicists — I love it."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.