ArduinoMania

OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT and DALL-E 2, announced several significant changes today. First, it’s launching developer APIs for ChatGPT and the Whisper speech-transcription model. It also changed its terms of service to let developers opt out of using their data for improvements while adding a 30-day data retention policy.

The new ChatGPT API will use the same AI model (“gpt-3.5-turbo”) as the popular chatbot, allowing developers to add either unchanged or flavored versions of ChatGPT to their apps. Snap’s My AI is an early example, along with a new virtual tutor feature for the online study tool Quizlet and an upcoming Ask Instacart tool in the popular local-shopping app. However, the API won’t be limited to brand-specific bots mimicking ChatGPT; it can also power “non-chat” software experiences that could benefit from AI brains.

The ChatGPT API is priced at $0.002 per 1,000 tokens (about 750 words). Additionally, it’s offering a dedicated-capacity option for deep-pocketed developers who expect to use more tokens than the standard API allows. The new developer options join the consumer-facing ChatGPT Plus, a $20-per-month service launched in February.

Meanwhile, OpenAI’s Whisper API is a hosted version of the open-source Whisper speech-to-text model it launched in September. “We released a model, but that actually was not enough to cause the whole developer ecosystem to build around it,” OpenAI president and co-founder Greg Brockman toldTechCrunch on Tuesday. “The Whisper API is the same large model that you can get open source, but we’ve optimized to the extreme. It’s much, much faster and extremely convenient.” The transcription API will cost developers $0.006 per minute, enabling “robust” transcription in multiple languages and providing translation to English.

Finally, OpenAI revealed changes to its developer terms based on customer feedback about privacy and security concerns. Unless a developer opts in, the company will no longer use data submitted through the API for “service improvements” to train its AI models. Additionally, it’s adding a 30-day data retention policy while providing stricter retention options “depending on user needs” (likely meaning high-usage companies with budgets to match). Finally, it’s simplifying its terms surrounding data ownership, clarifying that users own the models’ input and output.

The company will also replace its pre-launch review process for developers with a mostly automated system. OpenAI justified the change by pointing out that “the overwhelming majority of apps were approved during the vetting process,” claiming its monitoring has “significantly improved.” “One of our biggest focuses has been figuring out, how do we become super friendly to developers?” Brockman said to TechCrunch. “Our mission is to really build a platform that others are able to build businesses on top of.”

Netflix has released a trailer for Money Shot, a documentary about Pornhub (arguably one of its biggest competitors for people's attention). The film features interviews with performers, activists and former employees. It promises to delve into many of the scandals and successes the porn colossus has experienced over the almost 16 years it has been around.

The trailer suggests the film will explore issues such as alleged sexual exploitation and accusations that Pornhub has hosted non-consensual pornography. Pornhub owner MindGeek has faced a lawsuit over its alleged monetization of child porn. In 2020, the site removed all uploads from unverified users.

The documentary seems to go beyond Pornhub to examine other facets of the sex industry. The trailer, for instance, touches on the fact many sex workers and porn performers have lost their accounts on social media platforms. Meanwhile, one interviewee suggests that critics aren't just attacking porn, but the very idea of self-expression. 

The clip suggests that Money Shot takes a far-reaching look at Pornhub and the broader industry. You'll be able to find out for yourself just how tactful and measured the documentary's approach is when it hits Netflix on March 15th.

Rivian's new battery option is coming alongside some less-than-pleasant news. The EV brand is recalling 12,716 R1T pickups and R1S SUVs from the 2022 model year over an airbag deployment problem. A supplier's flawed seatbelt sensors can prevent the front passenger airbag from deploying properly. The car won't necessarily notify occupants, ether.

The firm tells Engadget safety is its "top priority," and that the free repair shouldn't take more than 30 minutes. In its report with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Rivian says it isn't aware of any injuries stemming from the issue. The company estimates that one percent of vehicles covered in the recall may be affected, and that it stopped building R1T and R1S models with the "suspect" sensor on September 15th of last year.

The recall is tiny compared to those at rivals like Tesla, which (among other issues) had to update more than 1 million cars due to pinching windows. However, Rivian only produced 24,337 cars in all of 2022. Roughly half of its yearly output is subject to this notice, in other words. As Electrekobserves, this also comes months after a 13,000-unit recall over a potential steering control fault, and nearly a year after another airbag sensor glitch prompted a 502-car recall.

This isn't likely to significantly hurt Rivian's finances. However, the timing isn't ideal. Rivian just announced its second round of layoffs, and has already taken other steps to shave costs as it deals with a tough economy. The fledgling automaker still needs to ramp up demand as it seeks profitability, and recalls like this don't help its cause.

You'll have to wait a bit longer to see Bigby Wolf's next chapter. Telltale Games has announced that it's delaying The Wolf Among Us 2, the sequel to its 2013 Fables comic adaptation, until next year. The company said it's "committed to protecting the health of our team" in a statement on Twitter, a clear sign that it's trying to avoid the burnout that reportedly plagued the previous iteration of Telltale. 

In an interview with IGN, Jamie Ottilie, the new Telltale CEO, also says the team needs time to switch over from Unreal Engine 4 to 5. That'll involve redoing much of the company's existing work, and together with hiring and production difficulties, it would make it tough to hit a 2023 release date. "Making games is difficult and they need time to be right," he told IGN. "And it doesn't do any of us any good to ship something that's not ready."

The Wolf Among Us 2 was originally announced in December of 2019, and for obvious pandemic-related reasons, development has been slower than Telltale originally predicted. The company still has its adaptation of The Expanse coming later this year, and in many ways that's a more important title for its future. As much as we're eager to see the continuation of The Wolf Among Us, Telltale also needs to build out new properties to survive.

Energy weapons are real. Military and weapons researchers have developed microwave guns and lasers that can be used to disable soldiers or shoot down drones — but a new report from the CIA and other intelligence agencies say that these kinds of weapons probably aren't responsible for the condition known as Havana Syndrome.

When US personnel overseas began suffering from unexplained headaches, nausea and hearing problems in 2016, many were quick to suspect foul play by a foreign adversary. A panel of experts concluded that the anomalous health incidents that came to be known as Havana Syndrome could plausibly have been caused by "pulsed electromagnetic energy," prompting some of those afflicted with the condition to blame their symptoms on a mysterious new energy weapon, possibly wielded by Russian operatives. Now, seven intelligence agencies say that panel got it wrong.

The Washington Post reports that even after reviewing about 1,000 cases across the world, the CIA and half a dozen agencies concluded that it was unlikely that the symptoms were caused by a foreign adversary. Not by energy weapons, not from electronic surveillance, and not from unintentional exposure to radio waves or ultrasonic beams. Analysts simply couldn't find any common pattern that linked the anomalous health incidents together that could suggest an intentional attack, noting that in some cases there wasn't even a direct line of sight from which an energy weapon could have been used.

So, what does cause Havana Syndrome? Officials say that the majority of the cases they reviewed could be linked to pre-existing medical conditions. Environmental factors, like poor building ventilation, could also contribute to some of the symptoms — but the report simply couldn't find a link to an intentional, external factor.

The report seems pretty confident that Russia isn't using an experimental energy weapon to cause nausea, hearing loss and headaches, but officials say that new information could change that assessment: If intelligence reports reveal that a foreign government has developed technology capable of causing these symptoms, they'll take another look and reassess.

Jack Dorsey’s new Twitter alternative, Bluesky, is now available in closed beta on the App Store. The invite-only app could soon join a crowded field of budding Twitter competitors, including Mastodon.

Interested users can submit their email addresses to join the waitlist. The Bluesky app reportedly borrows heavily from Twitter. However, it includes minor differences like “What’s up?” in place of “What’s happening?” along with a simplified process of creating a post (which can also include photos) by selecting a plus button. Otherwise, it has familiar features like searching for and following users and viewing their posts on a Home timeline.

Bluesky began in 2019 as a Twitter-funded side project. Dorsey, who co-founded Twitter and was still CEO when the initiative started, saw it as a more open alternative to an increasingly centralized Twitter. Then, Bluesky spun off as its own company in 2021. Dorsey has said he believes social media should be free of corporate or government control and that only authors should have the power to remove their social-media content. Additionally, although he said Twitter’s decision to ban Donald Trump after his role in inciting the January 6th insurrection was “the right decision,” he also worried about its precedent in endangering a “free and open global internet.”

Whether Twitter users will flee to Bluesky (or other platforms) in large enough numbers to make a significant difference is an open question. However, considering many people seeking an alternative are doing so because of current CEO / owner Elon Musk’s headline-grabbing embrace of far-right figures and ideology, it may be illogical to expect them to flock to a brainchild of someone who holds reservations about banning anyone for any reason.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee has voted to advance legislation that would give President Joe Biden the power to ban TikTok in the US along with other apps owned by Chinese companies. The panel approved the the Deterring America’s Technological Adversaries (DATA) Act in a 24-16 vote. All Republicans on the panel were in favor while every Democrat voted against the bill.

There are several more steps that the bill needs to go through before it becomes law. The full House and the Senate would have to pass it, and Biden would have to sign the bill. Still, it's a notable step forward for the latest attempt to ban TikTok in the US entirely.

Republican committee chair Michael McCaul introduced the DATA Act (PDF) only last week. McCaul expects the bill to go to a full house vote later this month, according to Reuters.

The legislation would grant the president the power to enact sanctions, including bans, on any company that the Treasury Secretary deems "knowingly provides or may transfer sensitive personal data of persons subject to United States jurisdiction to any foreign person that is subject to the jurisdiction or direction" of China. The same applies to a foreign person or company that "is owned by, directly or indirectly controlled by, or is otherwise subject to the influence of China."

Democratic members of the Foreign Affairs Committee claimed that the legislation was too broad. It would "damage our allegiances across the globe, bring more companies into China's sphere, destroy jobs here in the United States and undercut core American values of free speech and free enterprise," Rep. Gregory Meeks, the ranking Democrat member, said. He suggested that the legislation as is could lead to sanctions against businesses in Korea and Taiwan that supply semiconductors and other parts to Chinese companies.

"A US ban on TikTok is a ban on the export of American culture and values to the billion-plus people who use our service worldwide," TikTok wrote on Twitter. "We're disappointed to see this rushed piece of legislation move forward, despite its considerable negative impact on the free speech rights of millions of Americans who use and love TikTok."

"Congress must not censor entire platforms and strip Americans of their constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression," American Civil Liberties Union senior policy counsel Jenna Leventoff said in a statement. "Whether we’re discussing the news of the day, live streaming protests, or ​​even watching cat videos, we have a right to use TikTok and other platforms to exchange our thoughts, ideas, and opinions with people around the country and around the world." Leventoff called the bill "vague, overbroad and unconstitutional."

TikTok has faced a growing backlash in recent months over concerns that the Chinese government may obtain user data from the app. Owner ByteDance is headquartered in Beijing, but TikTok claims it doesn't share data with the Chinese government. By last summer, TikTok was routing all US data to Oracle servers based in the country. It pledged to delete US users' private data from its own servers.

Nevertheless, the US government has banned the app from federally owned devices, this week giving agencies 30 days to make sure it's gone from phones and tablets they operate. Most US states, the European Union, Canada and Quebec are also preventing their employees from using TikTok on state-owned devices.

TikTok has been trying for years to convince US officials that it's not a threat to national security in an attempt to avert a complete ban. The company's CEO Shou Zi Chew is set to testify before the Energy and Commerce Committee on March 23rd to discuss privacy, as well as TikTok's influence on kids and its links to China.

Rivian won't limit its longest-ranged battery pack to the R1T pickup. Founder RJ Scaringe has announced that a configuration with the Max Pack battery and dual-motor all-wheel drive will be available sometime this fall. The company projects a 390-mile range. Crucially, you won't lose the seven-person seating in the process. You can take the whole family on a road trip without as many charging stops as before.

The EV maker hasn't mentioned pricing for the Max Pack trim. As Autoblognotes, the option adds $16,000 to the price of the R1T but extends the range to 400 miles. At present, R1S buyers have to be content with a $6,000 upgrade to the not-yet-EPA-rated Large Pack. You can expect a claimed 260 miles with the stock battery.

The wait for the Max option doesn't come at a great moment for Rivian. The automaker has conducted two rounds of layoffs as part of a broader cost-cutting strategy meant to help the brand survive rough economic conditions. It While Rivian is one of the few EV startups to achieve meaningful production levels, it made just 24,337 cars in 2022, or less than half its originally predicted amount — and roughly half of those (12,700) were just recalled over an airbag deployment issue. The R1S Max model may boost demand, but its late-year arrival may limit its potential to improve Rivian's fortunes in 2023.

Airbnb is reportedly banning users who, despite having a clear background, were associated with people the company deems a safety risk. Although the short-term rental company faces an impossible balancing act of making owners feel secure without discriminating unfairly against renters, its appeals process — a critical step in catching overreaches — sounds lackluster and confusing while erring on the side of perceived homeowner security.

Airbnb confirmed to Motherboard that it sometimes refuses to rent to users associated with banned individuals “likely to travel” with them. For example, in January, Airbnb informed a user named Amanda that she was prohibited from the platform due to being “closely associated with a person who isn’t allowed to use Airbnb.” Amanda used the credit card of her boyfriend — who has a criminal record — to book the rental. (Amanda doesn’t have a criminal record.) She told Motherboard that her partner’s flagged history was from “a white collar charge” while adding that the two don’t share an address or bank account.

Two days after appealing the ban, Airbnb informed her it was upholding it “after careful consideration” to help “safeguard our community.” Then, it slammed the door shut on the case, adding that it wouldn’t “offer additional support on this case at this time.” Although the company is less than transparent about how long it’s enacted this process or how often it uses it, its procedures require one of two things to appeal successfully: the banned acquaintance causing their prohibition successfully appeals their ban, or the person attempting to rent proves they aren’t “closely associated” with the problematic person. 

Either way, the company’s subliminal message has concerning undertones: Associate with someone with a checkered past — regardless of who they are today — and neither of you can use our platform.

Airbnb is a private business, and Amanda could try booking through a competitor — or simply get a hotel room. Further, we don’t know the precise details about why her boyfriend was banned in the first place. But the company’s approach highlights a more significant issue we may see again as Big Tech’s ability to profile users grows more advanced. (The company already uses “anti-party tech,” and competitor Vrbo used what’s essentially pre-crime for house parties during the Super Bowl.) 

So where do you draw the line? Airbnb’s answer appears to be a cynical calculation that risking negative press about banning acquaintances — perhaps unfairly — is preferable to anything that could make homeowners feel less secure about using the service.