California's attorney general filed an antitrust lawsuit against Amazon on Wednesday, claiming the retailer stifles competition and increases the prices consumers pay across the internet. The New York Times: The suit is limited to California, where officials said Amazon had around 25 million customers, but if it succeeds it could have a broad impact across the country. The lawsuit largely focuses on the way Amazon penalizes sellers for listing products at lower prices on other websites. If Amazon spots a product listed for cheaper on a competitor's website, it often will remove important buttons like "Buy Now" and "Add to Cart" from a product listing page. Those buttons are a major driver of sales for companies selling though Amazon, and losing them can quickly hurt their businesses. That creates a dilemma for marketplace sellers. At times, they can offer products for lower prices on sites other than Amazon because the cost of using those sites can be lower. But because Amazon is by far the largest online retailer, the sellers would rather raise their prices on other sites than risk losing their sales on Amazon, the complaint said, citing interviews with sellers, competitors and industry consultants.

A court in South Korea has issued an arrest warrant for Do Kwon, the founder of Terraform Labs, escalating its probe into the crypto ecosystem whose two tokens lost $40 billion in value in a span of days earlier this year. From a report: LUNA, the new token of the revived ecosystem, dropped as high as 48.4% to $2.23 apiece on the news, which was earlier reported by local media Yonhap, before recovering slightly. The South Korean court has issued arrest warrants for six people, the news outlet reported, adding that the prosecutors believe the individuals have violated the nation's capital market rules.

Bruce66423 shares a report from the Associated Press: A rape victim whose DNA from her sexual assault case was used by San Francisco police to arrest her in an unrelated property crime on Monday filed a lawsuit against the city. During a search of a San Francisco Police Department crime lab database, the woman's DNA was tied to a burglary in late 2021. Her DNA had been collected and stored in the system as part of a 2016 domestic violence and sexual assault case, then-District Attorney Chesa Boudin said in February in a shocking revelation that raised privacy concerns. "This is government overreach of the highest order, using the most unique and personal thing we have -- our genetic code -- without our knowledge to try and connect us to crime," the woman's attorney, Adante Pointer, said in a statement.

The revelation prompted a national outcry from advocates, law enforcement, legal experts and lawmakers. Advocates said the practice could affect victims' willingness to come forward to law enforcement authorities. Federal law already prohibits the inclusion of victims' DNA in the national Combined DNA Index System. There is no corresponding law in California to prohibit local law enforcement databases from retaining victims' profiles and searching them years later for entirely different purposes.

Boudin said the report was found among hundreds of pages of evidence against a woman who had been recently charged with a felony property crime. After learning the source of the DNA evidence, Boudin dropped the felony property crime charges against the woman. The police department's crime lab stopped the practice shortly after receiving a complaint from the district attorney's office and formally changed its operating procedure to prevent the misuse of DNA collected from sexual assault victims, Police Chief Bill Scott said. Scott said at a police commission meeting in March that he had discovered 17 crime victim profiles, 11 of them from rape kits, that were matched as potential suspects using a crime victims database during unrelated investigations. Scott said he believes the only person arrested was the woman who filed the lawsuit Monday.

Adobe thinks it has the answer to Netflix's "password sharing" problem that involves up to 46 million people, according to a 2020 study. TorrentFreak reports: Adobe believes that since every user is different, any actions taken against an account should form part of a data-driven strategy designed to "measure, manage and monetize" password sharing. The company's vision is for platforms like Netflix to deploy machine learning models to extract behavioral patterns associated with an account, to determine how the account is being used. These insights can determine which measures should be taken against an account, and how success or otherwise can be determined by monitoring an account in the following weeks or months. Ignoring the obviously creepy factors for a moment, Adobe's approach does seem more sophisticated, even if the accompanying slide gives off a file-sharing-style "graduated response" vibe. That leads to the question of how much customer information Adobe would need to ensure that the right accounts are targeted, with the right actions, at the right time.

Adobe's Account IQ is powered by Adobe Sensei, which in turn acts as the intelligence layer for Adobe Experience Platform. In theory, Adobe will know more about a streaming account than those using it, so the company should be able to predict the most effective course of action to reduce password sharing and/or monetize it, without annoying the account holder. But of course, if you're monitoring customer accounts in such close detail, grabbing all available information is the obvious next step. Adobe envisions collecting data on how many devices are in use, how many individuals are active, and geographical locations -- including distinct locations and span. This will then lead to a "sharing probability" conclusion, along with a usage pattern classification that should identify travelers, commuters, close family and friends, even the existence of a second home.

Given that excessive sharing is likely to concern platforms like Netflix, Adobe's plan envisions a period of mass account monitoring followed by an on-screen "Excessive Sharing" warning in its dashboard. From there, legal streaming services can identify the accounts most responsible and begin preparing their "graduated response" towards changing behaviors. After monetizing those who can be monetized, those who refuse to pay can be identified and dumped. Or as Adobe puts it: "Return free-loaders to available market." Finally, Adobe also suggests that its system can be used to identify customers who display good behavior. These users can be rewarded by eliminating authentication requirements, concurrent stream limits, and device registrations.

Google is facing two legal cases which could result in the tech giant paying out damages of up to ~$25 billion (19.5 billion pounds) over its digital advertising practices. The BBC reports: The company is accused of anti-competitive conduct, and of abusing its dominant place in the ad tech market. Separate legal cases, in the UK and in the Netherlands, are being filed in the coming weeks on behalf of publishers seeking "compensation" from Google. [...] The European Commission and its UK equivalent are investigating whether Google's dominance in the ad tech business gives it an unfair advantage over rivals and advertisers. The French competition watchdog imposed a 220 million euro fine on the company last year. Johnny Ryan, from the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, told the BBC: "Google is under pressure on two big issues - one is anti-trust and the other is data protection." Mr Ryan said more cases were coming to light as competition enforcers around the world "increasingly put demands on Google." But he added "the fines we have seen so far from competition authorities have had absolutely no consequence whatsoever."

Damien Geradin, of the Belgian law firm Geradin Partners -- which is involved in the Dutch case -- said, "Publishers, including local and national news media, who play a vital role in our society, have long been harmed by Google's anti-competitive conduct. It is time that Google owns up to its responsibilities and pays back the damages it has caused to this important industry. That is why today we are announcing these actions across two jurisdictions to obtain compensation for EU and UK publishers."

The British claim, at the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, will seek to recover compensation for all owners of websites carrying banner advertising. If successful, this would mean a wide and diverse group could get compensation - from major media sites down to small and medium-sized businesses who produce their own online content. Businesses which do not which to be included in the legal action can opt out. [...] The UK competition watchdog is also investigating Google's power in the digital advertising technology market. The Dutch case is open to European publishers affected by Google's actions. Geradin Partners has teamed up with Dutch law firm Stek to bring the collective claim.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: The McDonald's McFlurry is a delicious treat that people have a hard time finding because the machine breaks down all the time. Thanks to a third-party device made by an independent company called Kytch, the machines can be made to be easier to maintain and break down less. Taylor, the company that makes the McFlurry machine, has been engaged in a long-running legal dispute about whether Taylor could prevent Kytch devices from being used on the machines. Kytch just won an important victory in that long-running legal battle.

Before Kytch came along, Taylor had a repair monopoly on the McFlurry machine. When the thing broke down or hadn't been cleaned, the machine would shut down, and only a certified Taylor technician could get it going again. That's why it can be so hard to find McFlurries: the machines often break down and a tech has to be dispatched to get them running again. Kytch invented a device that allows McDonald's franchise owners to do basic repairs on the machines and get them running again. Taylor didn't like that and, according to a lawsuit filed by Kytch, started telling its franchise partners that Kytch devices could cause "serious human injury."

In July 2021, Kytch filed a restraining order against Taylor claiming that the company had stolen Kytch's trade secrets. Taylor had begun selling a device similar to Kytch's and Kytch has alleged that Taylor stole one of their devices and reverse-engineered it. Taylor pushed back on these allegations and the lawsuit, filing what's called a demurrer, a formalized objection to Kytch's request for a restraining order. In a court document filed on August 26, 2022, a judge allowed Kytch's restraining order to proceed. In its original filing, Kytch alleged 10 different claims against Taylor, including that it had falsely advertised its product and engaged in unfair competition. The judge agreed with Kytch on seven of these points. "The court will sustain Taylor's demurrer as to the second (tortious interference), sixth (intentional interference with business expectancy), and seventh (negligent interference with business expectancy) causes of action," the filing said. "The court rejects Taylor's other arguments and will overrule its demurrer on those grounds."

Nikhil Wahi, brother of former Coinbase product manager Ishan Wahi, pleaded guilty in a Monday hearing to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud in connection with an alleged insider trading scheme. Decrypt reports: "Less than two months after he was charged, Nikhil Wahi admitted in court today that he traded in crypto assets based on Coinbase's confidential business information to which he was not entitled," said Damien Williams of the U.S. Attorney's Office in New York in a statement. "For the first time ever, a defendant has admitted his guilt in an insider trading case involving the cryptocurrency markets," Williams continued. "Today's guilty plea should serve as a reminder to those who participate in the cryptocurrency markets that the Southern District of New York will continue to steadfastly police frauds of all stripes and will adapt as technology evolves."

Nikhil now awaits sentencing in December, which could mean up to 20 years in prison. He has also been ordered to give back the money earned as a result of the illicit Coinbase trading, Williams said. Back in July, the Justice Department charged Ishan, Nikhil, and their friend Sameer Ramani with wire fraud conspiracy and wire fraud as it relates to cryptocurrency insider trading. The Securities and Exchange Commission also filed charges against the trio. While he was working at Coinbase, Ishan allegedly shared his insider knowledge of upcoming Coinbase listing announcements with Nikhil and Sameer to then profit from the listings by purchasing the tokens before they went live on Coinbase. In August, Ishan pled not guilty to the DOJ's charges. Now that his brother has pleaded guilty, it's unclear how Ishan's case will proceed and whether he will continue to fight the insider trading case.

According to the DOJ's statement released Monday, Nikhil implicated his brother Ishan and admitted to receiving tips from him. Nikhil then reportedly used numerous different crypto wallets in others' names to anonymize his insider trading. Concerns of insider trading at cryptocurrency exchanges extend beyond just this case, which is considered the first of its kind and is likely to set a precedent. Three Australian finance academics have posited that up to 25% of Coinbase listings in the past four years may have involved some insider trading.

There's a tiny, black-freckled toad that likes the water in hot springs.

Unfortunately, the only place in the world where the species is found is on 760 acres of wetlands about 100 miles east of Reno, Nevada, according to the New York Times. And that's near the site for two renewable-energy geothermal plants which poses "significant risk to the well-being of the species," according to America's Fish and Wildlife Service — which just announced an emergency measure declaring it an endangered species. The temporary protection, which went into effect immediately and lasts for 240 days, was imposed to ward off the toad's potential extinction, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said in a statement, adding that it would consider public comments about whether to extend the toad's emergency listing.

The designation would add another hurdle for a plan to build two power plants with the encouragement of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. The project is already the subject of a lawsuit filed by conservationists and a nearby Native American tribe. They hope the emergency listing can be used to block construction, which recently resumed.... The suit contended that the geothermal plants would dry up nearby hot springs sacred to the tribe and wipe out the Dixie Valley toad species.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service argues that "protecting small population species like this ensures the continued biodiversity necessary to maintain climate-resilient landscapes in one of the driest states in the country."

They were only recently scientifically described — or declared a unique species — in 2017, making the Dixie Valley toad ">the first new toad species to be described in the U.S. in nearly 50 years. And they are truly unique. When they were described, scientists analyzed 14 different morphological characteristics like size, shape, and markings. Dixie Valley toads scored "significantly different" from other western toad species in all categories.

Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader walterbyrd for sharing the link!

Did we pass a privacy milestone without realizing it? Computer science professor Ken Perlin writes on his blog: Recently I was traveling internationally. I have the Global Traveller option, so I could just to a machine, put in my passport, put my face in front of a camera, and get a piece of paper to hand to the immigration officer. But I was really tired from the flight. So I forgot to put my passport into the slot — I just posed for the camera.

And it worked anyway. The paper came out saying that I was me, I handed it to the immigration officer, and I was done. It seems that just my photo was enough to identify me.

Apparently sticking your passport into the slot is essentially theater. Your government can already tell who you are just from analyzing a photo of you, and they will let you into the country on that basis.
Where does this lead? In a follow-up blog post, Perlin offers one example, imagining a professor looking at a new class and already knowing "everyone's name, what their interests were, the date of their birth, and whether they played a musical instrument.

"In other words, I would be able to know far too much about them." This is, in my opinion, not a good thing. And yet it might be the future we are about to go into headlong.

I think we should be giving this a lot of thought. We take for granted now that when people look at us, they don't immediately know everything about us.

I'm not sure that particular right to privacy is something we should be willing to give up.

Thanks to Slashdot reader saccade.com for sharing the story

Slashdot reader storagedude writes: Nearly a quarter of healthcare organizations hit by ransomware attacks experienced an increase in patient mortality, according to a new study from Ponemon Institute and Proofpoint.

The report, "Cyber Insecurity in Healthcare: The Cost and Impact on Patient Safety and Care," surveyed 641 healthcare IT and security practitioners and found that the most common consequences of cyberattacks are delayed procedures and tests, resulting in poor patient outcomes for 57% of the healthcare providers, followed by increased complications from medical procedures. The type of attack most likely to have a negative impact on patient care is ransomware, leading to procedure or test delays in 64% of the organizations and longer patient stays for 59% of them.

The Ponemon report depends on the accuracy of self-reporting and thus doesn't have the weight of, say, an epidemiological study that looks at hospital mortality baseline data before and after an attack, but the data is similar to what Ponemon has found in the past and there have been a number of reports of patient deaths and other complications from ransomware attacks.

The new report found that 89% of the surveyed organizations have experienced an average of 43 attacks in the past year. The most common types of attacks were cloud compromise, ransomware, supply chain, and business email compromise (BEC)/spoofing/phishing.

The Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) is a top concern for survey participants. Healthcare organizations have an average of more than 26,000 network-connected devices, yet only 51% of the surveyed organizations include them in their cybersecurity strategy.

Healthcare organizations are better at cloud security, with 63% taking steps to prepare for and respond to cloud compromise attacks, and 62% have taken steps to prevent and respond to ransomware — but that still leaves nearly 40% of healthcare organizations more vulnerable than they should be.

Preparedness is even worse for supply chain attacks and BEC, with only 44% and 48% having a documented response to those attacks, respectively.

The high costs of healthcare cyberattacks — an average of $4.4 million — mean that healthcare cybersecurity tools likely have a high ROI, even though roughly half of the survey respondents say they lack sufficient staffing and in-house expertise.

America's Department of Agriculture and NASA recently announced the Artemis Moon Trees Program. After the first launch of its SLS super-heavy-lift launch vehicle, "the seeds carried on Artemis I will be grown into seedlings by the Forest Service and distributed to locations across the U.S."

But it's just part of a larger initiative. The U.S. government announced Friday that it's working with "a new coalition of space companies that will focus on increasing the space industry's capacity to meet the rising demand for the skilled technical workforce" — partly by inspiring and educating the next generation. This coalition includes Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Blue Origin, Jacobs, L3Harris, Planet Labs PBC, Rocket Lab, Sierra Space, Space X and Virgin Orbit.

Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes: Yesterday at the second convening of America's National Space Council, Vice President Kamala Harris announced "new commitments from the U.S. government, private sector companies, education and training providers, and philanthropic organizations to support space-related STEM initiatives to inspire, prepare, and employ the next generation of the space workforce..." according to a statement from the White House, "to address the challenges of today and prepare for the discoveries of tomorrow...."

Among those anchoring the Administration's efforts to increase the space industry's capacity to meet the rising demand for the skilled technical workforce is Amazon founder Jeff Bezos' space tourism company Blue Origin, which will be joined by industry partner Amazon to inspire youth to pursue space STEM careers. "Blue Origin's Club for the Future," the White House explains, "is launching Space Days to engage millions of students, teachers and school administrators in the excitement of space and space careers." Club for the Future, as reported earlier on Slashdot, is the Blue Origin founded-and-funded tax-exempt foundation that received the $28 million proceeds of a single auctioned ticket to accompany Bezos on Blue Origin's maiden 11-minute space tourism flight in June 2021. The nonprofit's mission is "to inspire future generations to pursue careers in STEM and to help invent the future of life in space."

The White House also announced that Amazon and Bezos-funded nonprofit Code.org "will highlight connections between computer science and space exploration in the 2022 Hour of Code. Students will have the opportunity to explore and develop coding skills through engaging, space-themed tutorials and create shareable projects. Through a collaboration with NASA, the U.S. Space Force, America's Department of Energy, and the U.S. Geological Survey, students will also learn about different careers and pathways for space careers in these agencies. Code.org reaches approximately 15 million students annually." Amazon reported in 2018 on its efforts to accelerate K-12 CS education in the U.S. with Code.org to "support the much-needed pipeline for workers who are well versed in computer science."
The coalition's other efforts include three pilot programs collaborating with community colleges, unions and others "to demonstrate a replicable and scalable approach to attracting, training and creating employment opportunities." Federal agencies and the Smithsonian Institute also launched a new web site with free space-related resources for K-12 educators which also promotes career awareness.

And NASA also released an educator resources hub that includes a LEGO Build to Launch Series — plus $4 million in educational grants.

Attention, people giving money to strangers from the Internet. The Krebs on Security blog knows a way to make it safer.

"Nearly all U.S. states now have designated safe trading stations — mostly at local police departments — which ensure that all transactions are handled in plain view of both the authorities and security cameras." These safe trading places exist is because sometimes in-person transactions from the Internet don't end well for one or more parties involved. The website Craigslistkillers has catalogued news links for at least 132 murders linked to Craigslist transactions since 2015. Many of these killings involved high-priced items like automobiles and consumer electronics, where the prospective buyer apparently intended all along to kill the owner and steal the item offered for sale. Others were motivated simply by a desire to hurt people.

This is not to say that using Craigslist is uniquely risky or dangerous; I'm sure the vast majority of transactions generated by the site end amicably and without physical violence. And that probably holds true for all of Craigslist's competitors.

Still, the risk of a deal going badly when one meets total strangers from the Internet is not zero, and so it's only sensible to take a few simple precautions.

For example, choosing to transact at a designated safe place such as a police station dramatically reduces the likelihood that anyone wishing you harm would even show up.
Krebs points out there's a list maintained at SafeTradeStations.com, adding that "many police departments (but not all) are willing to check the serial number of an item for sale to make sure it's not known to be stolen property."

The site also advises meeting in well-lit and public places, during daylight hours — and bringing a friend.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: A group of independent movie companies has filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against AT&T. The Internet provider, which has over 80 million subscribers in the US, faces far-reaching demands. In addition to millions in damages, the filmmakers want the ISP to terminate the accounts of repeat infringers and block access to sites such as The Pirate Bay and YTS. [...] In a complaint (PDF) filed at a federal court in Texas, Voltage Pictures and its affiliates, known for films such as "After We Collided," "Dallas Buyers Club," "Room 203," and "The Bird Catcher", accuse the ISP of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement.

"For years, AT&T has knowingly allowed AT&T users to engage in online piracy, the illegal distribution and downloading of copyrighted materials, including films. AT&T provides the IP addresses used for piracy, makes the connections needed to share and download pirated films, and transmits the pirated films," they write. The ISP allegedly turned a blind eye to pirating subscribers, facilitating mass online piracy. The filmmakers say they sent tens of thousands of notices to the company, reporting alleged copyright infringements. In some cases, hundreds of notices were sent for a single IP address without any visible response from the Internet provider.

In the United States, the law requires Internet providers to adopt a policy that provides for the termination of accounts of repeat infringers, under appropriate circumstances. AT&T references this in its terms but according to the filmmakers' complaint, this policy is not sufficient. The lawsuit specifically claims that AT&T willingly keeps repeat infringers on board because that adds tens of millions of dollars to AT&T's bottom line. [...] To compensate for all piracy-related losses, the plaintiffs request actual or statutory damages, which can run into millions of dollars. In addition, they also want AT&T to terminate repeat infringers under appropriate circumstances. Finally, and of particular interest, the movie companies also want the Internet provider to block foreign pirate sites. They include YTS, The Pirate Bay, RARBG, 1337x, and others that have been called out in the US Trade Representative's annual overview of notorious markets.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: The U.S. Navy says that releasing any additional UFO videos would "harm national security" and told a government transparency website that all of the government's UFO videos are classified information. In a Freedom of Information Act request response, the Navy told government transparency site The Black Vault that any public dissemination of new UFO videos "will harm national security as it may provide adversaries valuable information regarding Department of Defense/Navy operations, vulnerabilities, and/or capabilities. No portions of the videos can be segregated for release."

The Black Vault was seeking all videos "with the designation of 'unidentified aerial phenomena.'" This is an interesting response from the Navy because, often, military agencies will issue a so-called GLOMAR response, where they neither confirm nor deny that the records (in this case videos) exist, and refuse to say anything more. In this response, the Navy is admitting that it has more videos, and also gives a rationale for releasing three previous UFO videos.

"While three UAP videos were released in the past, the facts specific to those three videos are unique in that those videos were initially released via unofficial channels before official release," it said. "Those events were discussed extensively in the public domain; in fact, major news outlets conducted specials on these events. Given the amount of information in the public domain regarding these encounters, it was possible to release the files without further damage to national security."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: Prosecutors in Taiwan have indicted five men for running an operation that uploaded movies to the internet and then extorted cash settlements from the BitTorrent users who downloaded them. One of the men is former ultramarathon runner Kevin Lin, who founded a copyright consultancy company after graduating from law school in 2020. According to reports, Lin's company enticed users to download the torrents, tracked their IP addresses, and then filed copyright lawsuits in an effort to profit from cash settlements. Lin said that due to his support for the opposition government and his criticism of its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, the investigation against him is politically motivated.

In May 2021, licenses were obtained from Vie Vision Pictures Co. and Applause Entertainment Ltd, which led to 18 movies being uploaded to BitTorrent networks, to tempt users into downloading them. After capturing their IP addresses, Lin's company obtained their identities from ISPs and sued them. The goal was to obtain out-of-court settlements. Since August 2021, Lin's company filed 937 lawsuits for copyright infringement. In just 25 of those cases, the company managed to "extort" settlements of $29,207, FocusTaiwan reports. In addition to Lin, several other people have also been indicted for their part in the operation.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from JURIST: The Australian parliament Thursday passed (PDF) new legislation pledging to reduce carbon emissions by 43 percent by the year 2030 and to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050. The laws mark the first Australian climate change legislation in over a decade and are the first substantial steps to combat climate change from the Australian Labor Party (ALP). ALP took power in May, defeating a conservative government that pulled back many of Australia's existing climate change measures. The new legislation requires government agencies to take emissions targets into account when creating their budgets, infrastructure or regulations. It also requires businesses to comply with new standards for energy usage, encouraging many businesses to embrace renewable energy.

Chris Bowen, Minister for Climate Change and Energy, said (PDF) to Parliament, "today is a good day for our parliament and our country, and we're going to need many more of them." Bowen believes the legislation will help businesses, saying, "[l]egislating these [emissions] targets gives certainty to investors and participants in the energy market and will help stabilize our energy system." Bowen also hopes an annual climate statement to parliament will help improve accountability and transparency for the Australian people. "The passage of the climate change legislation sends a message to the world that Australia is serious about driving down emissions, and serious about reaping the economic opportunities from affordable renewable energy," added Bowen.

The White House on Thursday outlined six principles to reform Big Tech platforms and said it was encouraged to see bipartisan interest in Congress to rein in major U.S. tech companies. Reuters reports: The six principles include promoting technology sector competition; adopting robust federal privacy protections, and tougher privacy and online protections for children; rescinding special legal protections for large tech platforms; increasing transparency about platforms' algorithms and content moderation decisions; and ending discriminatory algorithmic decision-making.

"The rise of tech platforms has introduced new and difficult challenges," the White House said, "from the tragic acts of violence linked to toxic online cultures, to deteriorating mental health and wellbeing, to basic rights of Americans and communities worldwide suffering from the rise of tech platforms big and small." A group of bipartisan lawmakers has introduced antitrust legislation aimed at reining in the four tech giants -- Meta Platform's Facebook, Apple, Alphabet's Google and Amazon.com -- that would bar the companies from favoring their own businesses in search results and other ways. The lawmakers have said they believe they have the 60 Senate votes needed to move forward, but no vote has yet been scheduled. Further reading: Big Tech's $95 Million Spending Spree Leaves Antitrust Bill On Brink of Defeat

Until about a month ago, shoppers on Dell's website looking for a new laptop could log in using their Facebook credentials to avoid creating a new username and password. That option is now gone. Dell isn't alone. CNBC: Other big brands, including Best Buy, Ford Motor, Pottery Barn, Nike, Patagonia, Match and Amazon's video-streaming service Twitch have removed the ability to sign on with Facebook. It's a marked departure from just a few years ago, when the Facebook login was plastered all over the internet, often alongside buttons that let you sign in with Google, Twitter or LinkedIn. Jen Felch, Dell's chief digital and chief information officer, said people stopped using social logins, for reasons that include concerns over security, privacy and data-sharing.

"We really just looked at how many people were choosing to use their social media identity to sign in, and that just has shifted over time," Felch said. "One thing that we see across the industry is more and more security risks or account takeovers, whether that's Instagram or Facebook or whatever it might be, and I just think we're observing people making a decision to isolate that social media account versus having other connections to it." The disappearing login is the latest sign of Facebook's diminishing influence on the internet following more than a decade of spectacular growth. In the past year, the company's business has been beset by Apple's iOS privacy change, which made it harder to target ads, a deteriorating economy, competition from short-video service TikTok, and reputational damage after a whistleblower leaked documents showing Facebook knew of the harm caused by many of its products.

Six users of Tornado Cash, a popular decentralized cryptocurrency service, filed a lawsuit on Thursday against the U.S. Treasury Department, Secretary Janet Yellen, and other officials over their decision to slap sanctions on the service in August. From a report: The outcome of the case, which turns on the novel legal question of whether the U.S. government can impose sanctions on publicly-available software code, is likely to have implications for the crypto industry for years to come. In a 20-page complaint filed in federal court in Texas, the users claim the decision to sanction Tornado Cash exceeded the government's authority, and violated their free speech and property rights under the U.S. Constitution, and "threatens the ability of law-abiding Americans to engage freely and privately in financial transactions."

In recent years, Tornado Cash has emerged as a popular tool for those wishing to hide their crypto transactions. Using smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain, it allows users to deposit crypto into a pool alongside other users and then distribute it to third-party wallets -- the process makes it highly difficult to determine who gave funds to a given wallet. The plaintiffs in the case include Preston Van Loon, a prominent figure in the Ethereum community who claims he cannot access thousands of dollars worth of Ethereum deposited with Tornado Cash, and his brother, Joseph, who says he intended to use the service to privately fund an Ethereum node and staking service but can no longer do so because of the sanctions. The plaintiffs also include Tyler Almeida, a California security analyst at Coinbase, who alleges that he used Tornado Cash to make anonymous donations to support Ukraine. Almeida claims the U.S. placing sanctions on the service impedes his right to donate -- and by extension his right to express himself under the First Amendment. Almeida is one of two Coinbase employees to put their name on the lawsuit. The company, whose CEO Brian Armstrong has vocally objected to the sanctions on Tornado Cash, is paying the legal bills of the employees and four other plaintiffs.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Washington Post: The Internal Revenue Service will spend $15 million studying a free, government-backed tax filing system under a provision in the sweeping climate and health-care law Congress passed this summer. It's a landmark step toward overhauling the way most Americans file their taxes and ending years of domination of tax prep by private corporations. Democrats have long lamented that millions of American pay for the privilege of filing taxes, and that corporate tax services take money from the neediest households. Hardly anyone uses the free e-filing options that industry supports because of restrictions on which returns qualify.

But the IRS has lacked the funding -- or the clout to outmaneuver private lobbyists -- to seriously consider its own e-filing platform, current and former officials say, forcing taxpayers instead to deal with a consortium of private providers and setting the agency back decades in technology and customer service. "The IRS is completely beholden to the software companies at this point because it just doesn't have anything to replace them," said Nina Olson, who served as the national taxpayer advocate, the IRS's internal consumer rights watchdog, from 2001 to 2019.

The commercial tax prep industry is gargantuan, worth $11.9 billion in 2022, according to market research firm IBIS World; 9 in 10 individual tax returns were filed digitally in 2021, the IRS reported. The largest players, Intuit TurboTax and H&R Block, offer narrowly tailored free e-filing options, and charge $59 and $55, respectively, for their lowest-paid tiers, plus variable filing fees and costs for state tax returns. Tax experts say a government-backed system could give more Americans access to free and trustworthy services, while increasing IRS efficiency by encouraging more taxpayers to file easy-to-process digital returns rather than cumbersome paper ones. But that would upset an ecosystem that by many accounts has served taxpayers and the government well for decades. The U.S.'s voluntary tax compliance rate -- the proportion of filers who pay federal taxes accurately each year -- is 83.6 percent by the most recent measurements, among the highest of developed economies.