Facebook teaches you how to keep your data private

Facebook isn’t the first name you think of for robust user privacy, but it’s hoping a new educational campaign will change that. Ahead of the introduction of new EU data protection laws, the big blue social network has revealed its “privacy principles” for the first time. It’s also adding videos to the News Feed that will show users how to manage the ads they see, delete old posts, and what happens to their info when they delete their account.

Under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), companies must make it easier for users to export and delete their data, and report data breaches within 72 hours. The rules will be implemented on May 25th.

Not to be confused with its terms and conditions, Facebook’s privacy principles are essentially promises to keep your data safe, to show you how to take command of it, and to improve the tools you use. Meanwhile, its educational videos (which will run on and off Facebook), will regurgitate the info already available in its Privacy Basics portal.

Facebook is still battling the spread of misinformation on its News Feed, most recently by prioritizing friends over publishers. In addition, the company will let its 2 billion-strong community rank news sources for trustworthiness.

Along with Twitter and Google, Facebook has appeared before the Senate Intelligence committee over inflammatory ads on its site linked to Russian “Internet Research Agency” (IRA) troll accounts. Greater transparency has followed, with the social network admitting that Russian propaganda was viewed by almost 150 million accounts when including posts on Instagram.

Source: Facebook

HomePod Owners With an iTunes Match or Apple Music Subscription Can Access Their iCloud Music Library Using Siri

Apple began taking pre-orders for its HomePod on Friday, but the company has remained unusually reticent regarding some of the Siri-based smart speaker’s finer functions.

Last week we learned that HomePod can play songs purchased through iTunes Music as well as stream podcasts and Beats 1 radio, but Apple didn’t address questions about the device’s handling of iTunes Match content stored in iCloud Music Libraries.

For those unaware, iCloud Music Library lets users upload or “match” up to 100,000 songs from their personal music library with the DRM-free iTunes Store catalog, without eating into their standard iCloud storage allocation. The feature comes as part of Apple’s iTunes Match service ($24.99 a year) and is also included with every Apple Music subscription ($9.99 monthly).

As it turns out, both iTunes Match and Apple Music subscribers will be able to use HomePod’s Siri voice-based activation to access tracks stored in iCloud Music Library. The detail was confirmed on Sunday by Apple, as relayed by iMore’s Serenity Caldwell:

Okay, got some HomePod clarification: iTunes Match *and* Apple Music users can access their iCloud Music Library via Siri. 🎊

— Serenity Caldwell (@settern) January 28, 2018

To reiterate, the user whose iCloud account is linked to HomePod can access their Apple Music subscription, tracks stored in their Cloud Music Library, and iTunes Store purchases via Siri. However, Siri will not be able to control any content streamed over AirPlay from supporting devices.

Meanwhile, HomePod owners without an Apple Music or iTunes Match subscription can still play music they’ve purchased on iTunes, as well as stream podcasts and Beats 1 radio, but Siri requests for playing songs by name, genre, artist, and so on will not be available. Apple has still to clarify how HomePod handles Family Sharing subscriptions to Apple Music, and whether the speaker’s Bluetooth 5.0 specification means it will accept pairing requests from devices over the Bluetooth protocol.

Apple has positioned the HomePod as a speaker that can stream Apple Music, but with built-in Siri, users can also send messages, set timers and reminders, check the news, control HomeKit-enabled smart home accessories, and complete several other tasks without needing to take out their iPhone. The speaker is equipped with spatial awareness and Apple-engineered audio technology, including a seven‑tweeter array and high-excursion woofer. It stands almost seven inches tall and is powered by Apple’s A8 chip.

HomePod is available in the United States ($349), UK (£319), and Australia ($449). Apple is currently taking pre-orders for the HomePod, with the device set to ship on Friday, February 9.

Related Roundup: HomePod
Discuss this article in our forums

Intel warned Chinese tech firms of Spectre and Meltdown ahead of U.S. government

Intel warned certain customers, including Chinese tech firms, of the Spectre and Meltdown security flaws before notifying the U.S. government, The Wall Street Journal reported. The flaws were first discovered by Google’s Project Zero team in June of last year. Intel held off on disclosing the issue while it worked on possible fixes. The company planned to make the announcement on January 9, but The Register broke the story on January 2. Intel then confirmed the news the next day.

Intel did notify several major tech firms in an effort to limit the potential damage and help work on fixes. A representative from the Department of Homeland Security said that the department did not learn of the flaws until the news was broken, however. Homeland Security is often notified of such issues before the public, and often acts as a source of guidance for how to address them.

The NSA was also uninformed of the problem. Rob Joyce, the White House’s top official on matters of cybersecurity, sent out a tweet saying that the NSA was unaware of the vulnerabilities.

Jake-No nuance to my answer. No lawyerly caveats. NSA did not know about these flaws, nor did they exploit them. I don’t put my good name on the line lightly. I understand you are disinclined to believe, 1/2.

— Rob Joyce (@RobJoyce45) January 13, 2018

Intel refused to name any of the companies it warned prior to the scheduled January 9 announcement. That being said, several of the companies had been identified, including Microsoft, Amazon, Chinese computer manufacturer Lenovo, and Chinese cloud-computing firm Alibaba Group Holding. A representative from Intel said that it had planned to brief others, including the U.S. government, prior to the January 9th announcement. However, the company said that it was unable to do so due to the fact that the story was reported sooner than expected.

Jake Williams, a former employee of the National Security Agency and current president of Rendition Infosec LLC, told the Wall Street Journal that the Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities would have been of great interest to any intelligence organization.

Williams also warned that it is a “near certainty” that the Chinese government was aware of Spectre and Meltdown before the U.S., given that the Communist Party closely monitors such communications.

Representatives from the Chinese government did not comment on this story. However, in the past, the country’s foreign ministry has said that it is “resolutely opposed” to all forms of hacking.

Editors’ Recommendations

• Intel’s 9th-generation ‘Ice Lake’ CPUs will have fixes for Meltdown, Spectre
• Qualcomm is working on patches to address Meltdown and Spectre flaws
• Computers saw Jesus, graffiti, and selfies in this art, and critics were floored
• A super blue blood moon is coming in January! Here’s what you need to know
• CPU and OS makers go on red alert over Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities

A 5G network owned by the United States government? It’s not going to happen.

Image source: Wikimedia

The U.S. government considering its own 5G network is nothing new, frightening, or likely to happen.

Could the Trump White House be pondering a nationalized 5G network? Yes, it’s distinctly possible. But it’s also highly unlikely to happen and the story is being blown dramatically out of proportion.

The latest Twitterverse kerfuffle was kicked up by an Axios report alleging consideration of “an unprecedented federal takeover of a portion of the nation’s mobile network to guard against China”. That’s an alarming claim, no matter what side of the political aisle you’re on. Axios is a relatively new publication, but they’ve made a name for themselves since their 2016 launch with a number high profile exclusives and well-sourced and researched pieces. This 5G report is well-sourced, but also takes a number of alarmist steps that ignore how the U.S. federal government actually functions.

Here’s what Axios is reporting:

We’ve got our hands on a PowerPoint deck and a memo — both produced by a senior National Security Council official — which were presented recently to senior officials at other agencies in the Trump administration. … The documents say America needs a centralized nationwide 5G network within three years.

Axios goes on to describe two options laid out in the report: that the government builds its own 5G network or that the various competing carriers in the US build their own. It’s worth noting that this is a proposal made by a single NSC member. This is how the government is supposed to work. The NSC is just one of many competing interests in the federal government, and its mandate is to advance strategies to maintain and enhance the security of the United States. It would indeed be in the national defense interests of the U.S. military to have a government-controlled high-speed low-latency nation-wide wireless network — rapid and clear communication is vital for successful military operations, and a 5G network would be enormously useful in that.

But… the NSC is still just one of many loud voices in the United States government. The Departments of State and Commerce and Justice would all have competing opinions on the proposal for a federal network, from international trade implications to pushback from the carriers that spend billions on lobbying. Not to mention the cost of such an endeavor.

There’s precedent for large government projects used by civilians: the Interstate Highway System and GPS, for example.

There is historical precedent for large investments that would support both military operations and civilian needs. The Interstate Highway System was funded by the federal government not just to dramatically improve inter-state travel and commerce — the primary impetus for its creation was the need to be able to quickly deploy military force throughout the United States in the event of a foreign invasion. The constellation of GPS satellites we rely on for navigating the world today is a U.S. Air Force project that was originally built for military purposes (and the government still has a switch to downgrade GPS accuracy for non-U.S. military users if deemed necessary).

Talk of a federally owned communications cellular network has been going on for decades, but it was kicked into high gear after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The strikes on New York City and the Pentagon didn’t just reveal the unpreparedness of the United States for such an unsophisticated attack — it also exposed weaknesses in the civilian-owned and operated cellular networks of the time. On that day the cellular networks in New York and DC were overwhelmed by the sheer number of users trying to access services — and that was well before today’s high-speed wireless internet services.

The biggest pushback would come from cellular network operators. Every U.S. carrier has already invested heavily in 5G, from research to live regional tests to making preparatory upgrades to their transmission infrastructure to handle the eventual roll-out of 5G-capable transceivers and consumer devices. Billions of dollars have already been laid out with the expectation that there will be much more invested in the networks and billions more reaped in profit. You can be certain that Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint have already contacted their lobbying firms to communicate their displeasure.

Specialized equipment has long been a part of the military’s inventory. Just this weekend the story of expensive new refrigerators for Air Force One provoked outrage once the context of what the purchase actually consisted of (five bespoke flight-grade walk-in cooling units to store up to 3,000 meals on what is essentially a flying White House). Equipment like tanks and aircraft carriers and grenades is all exclusively manufactured for the military, to its specification. But the military has long also used off-the-shelf civilian hardware when it meets its needs and costs. Walk into the Pentagon and you’ll find government-issued HP and Dell laptops and officers walking around with issued iPhones running on Verizon and AT&T.

The United States has long had an interplay between the needs of the federal government and the civilian population. Sometimes there are things that only the government could effectively fund, organize, and operate, like the interstate system or GPS satellites. The costs behind those become easier to justify when they’re also available to civilian users. Conversely, there are things the civilian market is far better at — AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mobile all have enormous expertise in cellular networks, they’ve already made huge investments in their network infrastructure that they’ll be able to leverage in building their 5G networks, and they’re already responsive to the needs of their customers — both civilian and government.

This proposal was dead in the water before it was ever presented. It’s almost amusing, following the Trump administration’s push against Net Neutrality being framed as unleashing the potential of web services and internet providers, to now see a proposal to create a national 5G network that the government would then lease to the carriers.

Proposals like this are how the government works. Just because somebody made a PowerPoint deck doesn’t mean it’s going to happen.

It’s worth repeating: this is just a proposal from one part of the government. Axios notes that it was already presented to other agencies, where I have no doubt it was met with significant resistance, if not outright derision. After all, the Trump government is supposed to be one that gets out of corporate business (for better or worse), and “we’re going to build a 5G network and you’ll just rent access from us because we’re the federal government” runs 100% counter to that.

There’s much the government could do to promote and accelerate the development and deployment of 5G networks in the United States, though it’d have to come with oversight than the billions of government subsidies paid to Verizon for a fiber network it never built. Grants to ensure deployment into rural areas, subsidies for low income access, regulation clean-up to ease the way for new installations, funding of university and corporate research projects in artificial intelligence and domestic development of these technologies — all of this is already within the wheelhouse of what the federal government can do, and sometimes already does.

Proposals like this are just how the government works. The military side of the equation is going to propose everything they can think of to ensure the most efficient and most effective military they can imagine, while the diplomats will propose their own missions and initiatives to promote their goals, and the economists are going to come with an entirely different set of proposals about trade and monetary policy and financial regulations. These will all be simultaneously complementary and contradictory. This is the nature of government — a dozen departments with competing goals in different arenas jockeying for limited resources. Their proposals are just part of what feeds into the decision-making process of the President and Congress, which are supposed to strike a balance between the needs of the military, business, international partners, civilians, and (of course) politics.

I would be utterly shocked if a government-owned 5G network ever comes to fruition. It’d be massively expensive and inefficient, not to mention well outside the government’s expertise and capability. It’d also see immediate and costly legal challenges, not to mention stand on legally tricky ground when the carriers have already paid billions to the government for the frequency licenses they need to deploy their own 5G networks.

The government would also have to pay for this somehow, and after a $1.5 trillion-dollar tax cut, there’s not a lot of spare cash laying around for GovCell.

Android Go: Everything you need to know

Android Go will significantly lower the barrier to entry for smartphones in emerging markets.

For a few years now, Google has been saying that its next billion users will come from countries like India. With a projected 500 million users estimated to make their way online for the first time over the next five years, Google sees a lot of potential in catering to this market.

The company even has a Next Billion Users team that designs products and solutions for the Indian market. Helmed by Caesar Sengupta, the unit has rolled out payment services like Tez, a minimalist app that hooks into the government’s UPI interface for seamless bank transfers, a lightweight storage manager in Files Go, free public Wi-Fi at thousands of train stations across the country, and much more.

Its most ambitious bet is Android Go — a lightweight version of Android optimized for entry-level devices. Google has tried its hand at the budget segment previously with the Android One initiative, but Android Go is a reimagination of the budget segment entirely. During a visit to the country last year, Google CEO Sundar Pichai said that budget phones need to cost in the vicinity of $30 to be viable for the millions of Indians to consider making their first smartphone purchase. The Android Go platform is the realization of those efforts.

Android Go isn’t that different from the regular Android

Android Go uses the same foundation as the standard version of Android, but with several stability and performance tweaks thrown in to ensure it works on devices with underpowered hardware. The first version of Android Go is built on Android 8.1 Oreo, and the OS also has data management features integrated at a system-wide level, giving you the ability to closely monitor data usage.

And like all devices certified by Google, Android Go phones will come with Google Play Protect out of the box. The security suite leverages machine learning to look for malicious apps on your phone. It also constantly scans your app installs — even those that haven’t been downloaded from the Play Store — to ensure your device is secure.

The platform comes with its own suite of apps

As Android Go is designed primarily to run on phones with less than 1GB of RAM, Google has rolled out lightweight versions of its apps tailored for the platform.

Designed from the ground up, Google Go gives you the ability to query the web and find recommendations, delivering a similar experience as the full-fledged Google app for a fraction of the install size. That’s the same story with Google Assistant Go, which brings Assistant to devices with less than 1GB of RAM for the first time.

As for Gboard Go, the lightweight keyboard retains the same feature-set as the standard version — autocorrect, voice typing, multilingual language support, emojis and GIFs — but in a smaller package. The same holds true for Maps Go and Gmail Go as well. Chrome in Android Go will have Data Saver enabled by default.

Files Go is Google’s new storage manager, and it is fantastic. It does a great job of removing old files and cleaning the device cache, and it also comes with a feature that lets you easily send and receive files.

The lightweight apps combined with fewer pre-installed apps means you’ll get double the amount of storage on a phone with 8GB of internal storage when seen against the standard version of Android. The Play Store on Android Go devices will highlight lightweight apps that are designed to work best on the platform.

Qualcomm and MediaTek have pledged support

Both Qualcomm and MediaTek have announced support for the Android Go platform. Qualcomm has mentioned that low and mid-tier Snapdragon chipsets will be powering Android Go phones, and while we don’t have more to go on, but the fact that we’ll see Snapdragon branding indicates we’ll see some 2xx or even 4xx chipsets making their way to these phones.

As for MediaTek, the company has announced that the MT6739, MT6737, and MT6580 platforms will be used by upcoming Android Go phones. The MT6580 will be used by 3G-only devices, whereas the MT6739 and the MT6737 will power 4G-enabled handsets.

Coming later this quarter for under $50

With decent budget phones from the likes of Xiaomi available for under $100, Android Go devices need to cost significantly lower for them to be attractive to buyers in emerging markets. If early rumors are any indication, it looks like the first wave of devices will retail for around the $30 mark.

That’s for the Micromax Bharat Go, which is likely going to be the world’s first Android Go device. The device is slated to make its debut in India in the coming weeks and is estimated to be priced at ₹2,000 ($32), which gives us a baseline for what Android Go devices will generally cost. We don’t have a lot of details on the hardware powering the Bharat Go, but it’s said to feature 512MB or 1GB of RAM along with 8GB of internal storage. With an official unveil scheduled for the end of January, we don’t have to wait long to find out what’s in store.

With Android Go, Google is aiming to show that it’s possible to deliver a decent user experience on sub-$50 devices. By optimizing the software to run effectively on low-powered hardware and introducing lightweight versions of popular apps, Google is finally on track to provide a cost-effective solution for those looking to make the switch from feature phones.

Your thoughts?

What do you think of Android Go? Let us know in the comments!

Android Oreo

• Android Oreo review!
• Everything new in Android Oreo
• How to get Android Oreo on your Pixel or Nexus
• Oreo will make you love notifications again
• Will my phone get Android Oreo?
• Join the Discussion

MIT’s ColorFab can 3D print jewelry that changes colors

3D printing can already turn your amazing ideas into tangible objects, but a new technique out of MIT CSAIL could lead to even better results. The method, called ColorFab, gives you the ability to create objects that can change colors after you print them out. You can use it, for instance, to create a phone case or a pair of earrings that matches your red dress today and will also match your blue pantsuit tomorrow. ColorFab’s magic lies in the CSAIL team’s custom-made ink, which has base dyes and light-adaptable or “photochromic” dyes. The light-adaptable dyes bring out the color in the base dyes when exposed to UV light. Under visible light, the colors disappear, and the ink turns transparent.

To use ColorFab, you’ll have to upload your 3D model to its interface and then pick a color pattern. The parts of the object that can transform have a pixelated design, and you can choose which pixels to activate (change color) or deactive (switch back to transparent) within ColorFab’s interface. Based on the team’s tests, it takes the system 23 minutes to change an object’s colors, but they believe they can make the wait time shorter by using more powerful lights or adding more light-adaptable dyes. In addition, the team is also working to conjure up a design that allows a ColorFab object to create secondary hues.

Once the method has been refined further, the researchers might adapt it for use by the garment industry, since they envision a future wherein the technique can be applied to to clothing, as well. The researchers’ goal isn’t just to enable the creation of color-changing goods, though — they’re also hoping that ColorFab can lessen the waste we produce:

MIT professor and team member Stefanie Mueller explained:

“Largely speaking, people are consuming a lot more now than twenty years ago, and they’re creating a lot of waste. By changing an object’s color, you don’t have to create a whole new object every time.”

The unbearable slowness of Samsung’s updates

Samsung controls the fate of updates for millions of Android users around the world. So why is it still so slow?

Every year around this time, as I prepare for another onslaught of Samsung leaks, rumors, and eventual reveals and reviews, I try to take a look back at the company’s update track record — and I’m always disappointed.

Just this week, Samsung announced that its extended and relatively exclusive Oreo beta is ending, which means that an update to Android 8.0 is imminent for devices like the Galaxy S8, S8+, and Note 8. Great. But I’ve been using Oreo since August on devices like the original Pixel, and a good chunk of the phones on my office desk, including some that shipped with the latest version, have been enjoying Oreo since well before Thanksgiving.

Year after year, the world’s biggest phone manufacturer fails to deliver on its promise for timely software updates, and in doing so significantly depresses the overall tally in the process. Google can push updates to its Nexus and Pixel lineup as quickly as it wants (and it does), and companies like Sony, HTC, OnePlus and others can help make a dent, but it’s not until Samsung begins its lumbering annual rollout that the tectonic shift begins anew. With Oreo still on under 1% of devices, that massive endeavor can’t come quickly enough.

It’s not like Samsung is new to this game. Articles like this have been proffered since at least 2012, and the company has indeed improved the quality of its software output, but the stakes are just so much higher these days. But Samsung increasingly owns the Android market, and its dominance puts the Android team at Google — separate from the Pixel hardware team — in a tenuous position. As we’ve seen from previews of Android 8.0 Oreo on the Galaxy S8, through the beta program, this particular update isn’t nearly as significant an aesthetic or feature overhaul as last year’s jump to Nougat was, and yet we’re coming up on a year since Samsung began rolling that out. It didn’t hit carriers in the U.S. until late February.

What’s your biggest annoyance with Android right now?

— Android Central (@androidcentral) January 19, 2018

Earlier this month, we asked people what their biggest frustrations are with Android right now. The number one response by a wide margin? Lack of updates.

With the Galaxy S9 being announced on February 25th, and an expected release date just three weeks later, on March 16th, it’s clear that Samsung is using the availability of the latest version of Android as a selling feature. Forget the Galaxy S8 for a moment — most people updating to the S9 will be coming from an S6 or S7, which, in the case of the S6 series, won’t receive Oreo at all, or receive it later this year, as promised to the S7 line. A jump to Android 8.0 out of the box, with all its performance improvements and additional features, is leverage that Samsung hopes to use to sell a few more phones.

Whenever I take this indignant stance towards Samsung’s languid approach to software updates, I risk not taking the other side into account: with great power comes great responsibility. Given that Samsung has the world’s largest fleet of phones waiting for updates, it must ensure that the experience is largely bug-free, with UI elements and software features adapted to its numerous regional partners. I don’t envy the teams in charge of such quality assurance.

No Android manufacturer is good at updates, but Samsung’s prolonged cycles impact the most people at once.

At the same time, Google released the first Android O developer preview on March 21 last year. Oreo was first publicly available on August 21, and the Sony Xperia XZ1, the first phone to arrive with Oreo out of the box, came a month later.

With the Galaxy S9 series inevitably shipping with Oreo out of the box, it’s possible Samsung will support Treble, a system that could potentially speed up software updates in years to come. According to Google, “Project Treble will make it easier, faster and less costly for device maker partners when these devices are updated in the future.”

But that, nor any other Google tool or incentivization, will provide solace to millions of Android users, whether they know it or not, waiting for the latest version. It’s not just about new features, either: every update helps developers improve their apps, and makes it easier for IT managers to troubleshoot problems. It’s a virtuous cycle that Samsung can perpetuate, but like in years past, customers continue to be placed second.

Here’s what else is on my mind this week.

• We took a few weeks off from the podcast over new years, but we’ve released three in the past two weeks and they’re very good. The gaming-focused one, in particular, is a lot of fun if you haven’t listened to it already.
• That Samsung is focusing on camera improvements for the Galaxy S9 is understandable. What’s struck me after picking up the Note 8 again in recent days is just how far it needs to come to compete with the Pixel 2 on imaging.
• Andrew is right on the money here. Android, as occasionally frustrating as it is for new and veteran users alike, no longer needs to be rooted (it arguably never did) to save it from its poor decisions. I haven’t rooted a phone in nearly five years.
• Jerry wrote some smart things about limits on government surveillance, especially in light of the extension to Section 702 of FISA. Worth the read.
• Three weeks ago, I wrote about smartphone addiction. Three weeks ago, I decided to make a concerted effort to use my phone less. I’ve deleted Twitter from my smartphones (limiting use to my laptop) which has helped, but the next step is to set timers for the amount of time I spend on the phone in general. Small but important steps to taking back control of my digital life.
• Peace.

-Daniel

Trump team considers a government-run 5G network

How would you protect the US against Chinese cyberattacks? Would you push for stricter security standards, or new encryption technology? The Trump administration’s national security team has another idea: a government-controlled 5G network. Axios has obtained documents showing that the team is pushing for a centralized, secure 5G network within 3 years. This would create a secure communications avenue for self-driving cars, AI, VR and other budding technologies. Just how it would be built is another story, however.

The officials are currently split between either having the government build the network itself or let telecoms build it as part of a consortium. The document claims it would be the modern equivalent to Eisenhower’s National Highway System and create a “new paradigm” for the wireless industry by the end of Trump’s term. At the same time, it notes that the private consortium would cause “less commercial disruption.” The private option might take longer and cost more, however.

This is far from guaranteed to happen. Reuters has learned that the proposal is circulating at a “low level” of the administration, and might take 6 to 8 months before Trump would have to consider it.

A government wireless network would be unprecedented in the US, and would stand at odds with an administration that has been adamant about deregulation and privatization. There’s also the question of whether or not it would really be faster when first 5G mobile networks should go live in the US as soon as this year, with national coverage by 2020. We’d add that a lot of the security depends on the network equipment, not who’s running it. Still, this hasn’t been tried before in the US — it’s difficult to know how well the feds would handle a 5G rollout.

Source: Axios, Reuters

Intel told Chinese firms of Meltdown flaws before the US government

Intel may have been working with many tech industry players to address the Meltdown and Spectre flaws, but who it contacted and when might have been problematic. Wall Street Journal sources have claimed that Intel initially told a handful of customers about the processor vulnerabilities, including Chinese tech companies like Alibaba and Lenovo, but not the US government. While the chip giant does have to talk to those companies to coordinate fixes, the Chinese government routinely monitors conversations like this — it could have theoretically exploited the holes to intercept data before patches were available.

An Intel spokesman wouldn’t detail who the company had informed, but said that the company couldn’t notify everyone (including US officials) in time because Meltdown and Spectre had been revealed early. Lenovo said the information was protected by a non-disclosure agreement. Alibaba has suggested that any accusasions of sharing info with the Chinese government was “speculative and baseless,” but this doesn’t rule out officials intercepting details without Alibaba’s knowledge.

There’s no immediate evidence to suggest that China has taken advantage of the flaws, but that’s not the point — it’s that the US government could have helped coordinate disclosures to ensure that enough companies had fixes in place. Big names like Apple, Amazon, Google and Microsoft were ready relatively quickly, but most everyone else was left racing to fix or mitigate the flaws. That could have led to attacks on vendors that weren’t in the early list, but were still running critical systems.

Intel is between a rock and a hard place in situations like this. There’s no question that it has to notify partners, but it also has to limit those notifications to minimize leaks before patches are ready. The issue, as you might guess, is that the company didn’t appear to have accounted for the cyberwarfare implications of who it notified first.

Source: Wall Street Journal

Elton John announces his retirement tour with an amazing kaleidoscopic VR video

Rock legend Elton John announced his final concert tour in spectacular fashion with a virtual reality showcase revealing the upcoming “Farewell Yellow Brick Road” tour, a three-year 300-date whirlwind leading up to his retirement.

Ad Week has the details on the event held at Gotham Hall in New York City, where more than 100 journalists decked out with Samsung Gear headsets joined a worldwide streaming audience to embark on a VR journey through his decades-long career. The event ended with a short live performance by Elton John.

You can watch the six-minute VR video here via YouTube. It can be viewed in Google Cardboard or Google Daydream, as well as in regular 2D video. You can also watch a full 34-minute stream featuring live performances and interviews in VR here.

The video features John’s first U.S. show from 1970 at the Troubadour in New York, as well as his legendary Dodgers Stadium concert from 1975. There were no VR cameras around to capture those events, of course, so John turned to the special effects wizards at Spinifex to recreate it.

Using a combination of motion capture and CGI, Spinifex recreated John’s entire career, using a body double for his younger self. “It was one of the most amazing parts of the process, because we’d done the green screen shoot, and we shot the Troubadour on August 25th last year, and his opening show was just two blocks down the road,” said Spinifex CEO Ben Casey. “47 years ago to the day when we shot.”

The team authentically recreated all of the iconic singer’s outfits and the evolution of his distinctive eyewear through the ages, down to the last sequin. John himself even donned a motion-capture rig to play 10 songs on the piano.

“This isn’t just tech for tech’s sake, the digital assets we are capturing and creating will extend Elton’s magic for generations to come,” said Casey. “Great songs endure the test of time and we believe bringing them to life in this way will enable people 50 years from now to discover and experience the full impact of Elton’s music.”

Casey’s team made their pitch to John at an Oscar party in Los Angeles. Memorializing his career in VR certainly wasn’t John’s idea, but he’s amazed with the result. “I’m a Luddite,” he said in a CNN interview after the New York presentation. “I’ve never downloaded anything in my life. Even porn.”

Editors’ Recommendations

• Miles of music: The 55 best songs about cars, driving, and road trips
• Time to kill? These are the best movies on Netflix right now
• The best movies on Hulu
• More than free shipping: The best movies on Amazon Prime
• Real-life Star Wars bikes are built for speed and fan films