Agregátor RSS

OpenAI admits it did not disclose an incident where autonomous AI agents hijacked a German wiki, created 18,000 posts, shared answers, and bypassed restrictions, saying it treated the activity as model "misalignment" rather than a security breach. [...]

Google’s dominance in the search arena has given rise to two major antitrust lawsuits from the US government alleging the company has manipulated the market to maintain that dominance, to the exclusion of competitors and the detriment of the public at large.

The first lawsuit, targeting Google’s search business, kicked off in mid-September 2023 and drew to a close in May 2024; US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled against the tech giant in August 2024. The remedy phase of the trial ended in September 2025 with Judge Mehta rejecting the DOJ’s request to break up the company, instead imposing data-sharing requirements.

The second trial against the tech giant, focused on advertising, took place over 15 days in September 2024, with US District Judge Leonie Brinkema ruling against Google in April 2025. In September 2026, Judge Brinkema ruled that Google is not required to break off its ad exchange, instead opting for behavioral changes that have yet to be revealed publicly.

The cases heavily echo the turn-of-the-century Microsoft antitrust case in several respects, most notably that Google, like Microsoft before it, has evaded the forced breakup requested by regulators.

Here’s our condensed timeline of the two overlapping lawsuits and their progress through the court system.

Sep. 2, 2026, advertising lawsuit: In a second big win for Google, Judge Brinkema rules that the company does not have to sell its AdX ad exchange. The search giant is also not required to open-source the final-auction logic in its DoubleClick for Publishers (DFP) ad server or divest its DFP business. Behavioral remedies are sealed while the parties identify confidential information for redaction.

Sep. 2, 2025, search lawsuit: In a significant win for Google, Judge Mehta rules that the tech giant does not have to divest its Chrome and Android businesses as the US government had requested, and it will be allowed to continue paying Apple and other browser makers for default search placement. To level the competitive playing field, Google will have to share search index and user-interaction data with rivals and offer search results syndication.

April 21, 2025, search: The remedy phase of Google’s search antitrust trial begins with Judge Mehta presiding. Federal prosecutors warn that Google might leverage artificial intelligence to entrench its search monopoly, demanding “strong measures” to prevent the tech giant from extending its market control into the AI era. These include requiring Google to divest Chrome, end exclusive default search agreements, license its search data to competitors, and potentially sell its Android operating system if other remedies fail.

April 17, 2025, advertising: In a second landmark defeat for Google, Judge Brinkema rules that Google illegally monopolized the ad tech market. The company’s “exclusionary conduct substantially harmed Google’s publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web,” she wrote in the ruling. Remedies, which could include the breakup of Google’s advertising products and/or changes to its business practices, will be imposed at a future date.

Oct. 8, 2024, search: The US Department of Justice submits a court filing proposing that the Chrome browser and Android operating system be split off from Google as part of sweeping remedies aimed at curbing the tech giant’s monopoly in online search and advertising.

Sept. 20, 2024, advertising: The US Department of Justice is set to wrap its case in the Google antitrust trial after an eventful two weeks. The tech giant is accused of engaging in monopolistic behavior by strategically acquiring certain companies and controlling the adtech industry’s most widely-used tools and exchanges,  beginning with its acquisition of advertising company DoubleClick in 2008.

Sept. 9, 2024, advertising: The second major case against Google begins with the company defending itself against claims it engaged in illegal behavior to maintain control of the ad tech market. The US government is accusing Google of purposefully manipulating that market, snuffing out competitors and gobbling up key technologies through acquisitions. If the DoJ successfully makes its case, Google risks being broken up by regulators.

Aug. 5, 2024, search: In a major defeat for Google, Judge Amit Mehta rules that the company had engaged in anticompetitive behavior in an effort to protect its search business. In the 277-page decision, Mehta was blunt: “After having carefully considered and weighed the witness testimony and evidence, the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly. It has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act.” Mehta’s ruling did not include remedies for the anticompetitive behavior; those will be decided later.

May 3, 2024, search: Over two days of closing arguments, the DoJ revisits its case for Google having a monopoly on search advertising, and Judge Mehta quizzes both parties about whether other platforms could be viewed as substitutes for Google’s search advertising business. He hasn’t said how long he expects to take to reach a decision, but if he rules against Google, a second hearing will take place to decide on any remedies.

Nov. 16, 2023, search: The evidentiary phase of the trial finishes, as Judge Mehta issues instructions for post-trial submissions. Despite considerable amounts of redaction and closed-door testimony, the case revealed some unprecedented details about the relationships between the largest tech companies in the world, including the fact that Apple apparently keeps 36% of the search revenue from Google searches in Safari, and Apple once considered buying Microsoft’s Bing search engine as leverage against Google. Judge Mehta has scheduled closing arguments in the case for May 1, 2024.

Oct. 31, 2023, search: Google CEO Sundai Pichai takes the stand, for long-awaited testimony about the relationship between his company and Apple. He gave some details about Google’s negotiations with Apple over a contract that made Google the default search engine on Apple’s iPhones, iPads, and Macs. Google has paid billions for the privilege of being the default search on Apple products, and the relationship is a key part of the case – which was underlined by the Justice Department’s cross-examination of Pichai, during which he admitted that default search status is a major driver of market share.

Oct. 18, 2023, search: Google begins its defense, calling Paul Nayak, a vice president of search, to the stand as its first witness. Nayak downplays the importance of scale in his testimony, stressing that machine intelligence, compute infrastructure, and a team of 16,000 staff that checks on search results are crucial to maintaining quality of service. DOJ witnesses including DuckDuckGo CEO Gabriel Weinberg and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella had testified that Google keeps an edge over competitors via an ever-increasing trove of data — the result of its default search engine status, maintained through exclusive contracts and billions of dollars in payments to Apple, Samsung and other companies. This data gives Google an advantage in refining search engine results, they said. 

Oct. 3, 2023, search: As a witness for the prosecution in the Google antitrust trial, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella warns that Google’s monopoly profits could lock in publishers as AI-enabled search arrives. Nadella argued that it’s almost impossible to compete with Google, given the search leader’s massive competitive edge in collecting and analyzing user data. He also warned that Google, with its vast profits and lock on the search market, stands poised to extend its monopoly power in a new era where artificial intelligence technologies will turbocharge the search business.

Sept. 26, 2023, search: Apple’s Eddy Cue testifies behind closed doors in the Google search case, as critics slam presiding Judge Amit Mehta’s decision to hold much of the trial’s testimony from witnesses secret, allow documents to be heavily redacted, and block some documents from public view — mainly at the insistence of Google, but also at the request of other companies, including Apple. By the end of Cue’s testimony — and after a wek of wrangling by all parties — Judge Mehta rules that documents used during the trial can be published online at the end of each day, but still allows time Google and third parties to object to exhibits being shown publicly before the DOJ presents them in court. 

Sept. 21, 2023, search: Judge Mehta rules that public access to court exhibits, which have been mostly internal Google documents thus far, should be removed, after Google challenged the Justice Department’s regular publication of them. The company said that it was concerned for its employees’ privacy.

Sept. 12, 2023, search: The default search trial begins with opening statements, and the government begins its case.

Aug. 2023, search: Judge Mehta grants partial summary judgment for Google in the search case, saying that the government had failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact on antitrust charges relating to contracts around the use of the Android operating system, as well as Google Assistant and IoT devices. The claims relating to Google’s exclusive “default search” contracts, however, are allowed to proceed to trial.

July/Aug. 2023, search: Google and the plaintiffs in the search case argue various motions in limine, designed to control what evidence should be included or excluded in the actual trial. Discovery and motion practice over evidence continues in the advertising case.

June 2023, search: Judge Mehta schedules a trial date of September 12, 2023 for the search case.

April 2023, advertising: Judge Leonie M. Brinkema denies Google’s motion to dismiss in the advertising case.

March 2023, advertising: Google’s motion to transfer the advertising case to New York is denied by Judge Brinkema, who orders the parties to propose discovery schedules within two weeks of the order. Two weeks later, Google moves to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim, arguing that the plaintiffs have simply produced legal conclusions, and not specific facts, that could support their claims. Judge Brinkema schedules pre-trial conferences for January 2024.

Feb. 2023, search: The plaintiffs in the default search case case move for sanctions against Google, accusing it of spoliation, which refers to the destruction, alteration or failure to preserve relevant evidence in a case. Elsewhere, in the advertising case, Google moves to transfer the case from the Eastern District of Virginia to the Southern District of New York, which is seen as an attempt to consolidate the case with related digital advertising antitrust litigation.

Jan. 2023, advertising: A second antitrust action, pushed by eight states and the DoJ, is filed in federal district court in eastern Virginia. The plaintiffs, who call for Google’s advertising business to be split up, accuse Google of manipulating its dominant position in the online advertising world to squeeze out rivals and control both the supply and demand side of the advertising market. Google, according to the complaint, thwarted fair competition by manipulating fees, punished advertisers for using alternative platforms and ad exchanges, and engaged in a host of further anti-competitive behavior in the interest of monopolizing the marketplace. (This is case that began in September 2024.)

Dec. 2022, search: Google moves for summary judgment against the separate Colorado case and the larger, DoJ-led case. A summary judgement motion is essentially a request by one of the parties in a lawsuit that the judge rule in their favor and end the case, arguing that, based on the undisputed facts, they are entitled to win the case as a matter of law.

May 2022, search: A deadline of June 17 is set for the production of all discovery materials. Further documents – for example, those whose is existence is first disclosed in late in the discovery window – can be produced until June 30.

May 2022, search: Judge Mehta denies a government motion to sanction Google for inaccurately classifying documents as attorney-client privileged. The plaintiffs had argued that emails on which Google’s lawyers were listed as recipients or CCed, but that the lawyers never responded to, constituted a misuse of the attorney-client privilege rules.

Dec. 2021, search: Judge Mehta conditionally splits Colorado’s claims from the case at large, ordering that separate trials on that state’s issues of liability and remedies will be “more convenient for the Court and the Parties, and will expedite and economize this litigation.”

Aug.-Oct. 2021, search: Discovery-related motions and orders continue, as Yelp and Samsung join the fray. (Those companies, like Microsoft and Apple, are relevant to the case even if they aren’t parties themselves, as their internal records are potentially relevant to Google’s liability.)

June/July 2021, search: The discovery process continues, and the US and Google both file several documents with the court under seal. (Microsoft files two sealed documents, as well, in response to Google’s subpoenas for company records, and Apple becomes involved after the government requests access to some of its internal information.)

March 2021, search: Meetings between Google and the various governmental plaintiffs continue, with periodic status reports on the discovery process.

Jan. 2021, search: Google files a response to the complaint, admitting to many of the facts alleged by the Justice Department and associated attorneys general, but categorically denying the substance of the government’s claims of illegality. Further responses to separate but related claims, generally to specific state attorneys general, follow in the subsequent weeks and months.

Dec. 2020, search: Judge Amit Mehta approves the joinder of Michigan, Wisconsin and California to the suit.

Oct. 2020, search: The Department of Justice, along with the attorneys general of 11 states, sues Google in DC federal district court for unlawfully maintaining a monopoly, in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The case centers on Google’s use of exclusive contracts that mandate its use as the default search engine in a host of different hardware and software applications, with the government alleging that this represents an artificial constraint on any possible competition for the search giant.

Gmail is filled with hidden features and add-on possibilities, but one of the service’s most powerful organizational tools is sitting right in the heart of its regular settings.

As you may have guessed by now (especially if you read this story’s headline, you clever little cat), I’m talking about filters — Gmail’s long-standing system for automating your inbox with a series of custom-crafted rules. At a glance, filters can seem complicated. They can seem overwhelming. They can even seem unnecessary.

But don’t let yourself be fooled by the feature’s curiously crusty exterior. Gmail filters have the potential to completely reshape your inbox and the way your incoming messages are handled. They can help you keep your email in order with no ongoing thought or effort.

And, unlike Google’s new AI Inbox option (which notably still doesn’t seem to be available for most people as of this writing), filters (a) don’t require your personal messages to be processed by generative AI systems — and (b) give you complete control over exactly how your email is handled instead of forcing you to rely on inherently unreliable technology to figure out what you want for you (and then likely come up short at least some of the time).

Best of all? All it takes is a teensy touch of one-time planning to get Gmail filters set up to your exact specifications and working for you quietly and automatically from that moment onward.

Follow the filter-centric Gmail tips in this guide, and your inbox will be running like a well-oiled (but not too greasy) machine in no time.

Part 1: Figuring out your Gmail filters

Let’s start by thinking through some Gmail filter possibilities to get an idea for the sorts of setups you might want to consider — then, we’ll go step by step through the process of creating them.

With Gmail filters, you could:

• Ensure messages from specific high-priority senders always go into your inbox’s Primary tab, where you’re certain to see them
• Ensure specific sorts of lower-priority messages — like invoices, reports, or updates from different services you use — automatically get sorted into an out-of-the-way location and never even show up in your inbox
• Keep messages from annoying people out of your hair (but still available in case you need to find them) by automatically archiving them as soon as they arrive
• Forward messages from a specific address or with a specific phrase in their subjects to other members of your team or family
• Instantly respond to messages to or from a specific address with a prewritten template
• Label messages sent to a specific variation of your Gmail address (like [email protected]) or written with a specific word or phrase in the subject (like “urgent,” “important,” or “hey jerkwad, pay attention to this”) as “VIP” and then receive notifications only for messages with that designation
• Mark specific types of messages from yourself as reminders by giving them a bright yellow “REMINDER” label that makes them stand out in your inbox
• Get a snickerdoodle delivered to your desk every time your boss emails you

All right, so that last one isn’t really possible (not yet, anyway) — just wanted to make sure you were still paying attention. Everything else in that list, however, is absolutely doable and actually quite easy to set up with Gmail filters.

Got some ideas of your own? Good deal. Time to make ’em happen.

Part 2: Creating your Gmail filters

The simplest way to start a new Gmail filter is to click the control panel icon — the symbol showing three horizontal lines stacked on top of each other — within the big search box at the top of the Gmail website. (Filters can’t easily be managed on mobile, unfortunately, so you’ll need to do all of this in a desktop browser.)

That’ll pull up a form where you can fill in whatever you want to use as the basis for your filtering — a word or phase that might appear within an email’s subject or body, an address from which a message could originate, or any other variable or combination of variables you like.

The form for creating a filter is filled with options for controlling email automation.

JR Raphael / Foundry

Fill in the fields as appropriate, using however many variables you want — even employing quotation marks around multiword terms along with operators like “AND” and “OR” between terms, if you really want to get fancy — and then click “Create filter” at the bottom of the box.

You can use any combination of variables, even employing operators within a single field, to control when your filter will run.

JR Raphael / Foundry

One quick warning: By default, your filter will apply to any and all incoming messages — hence the “All Mail” setting that shows up next to the “Search” option in the filter creation pop-up. If you change that option to “Inbox,” you’re likely to see an error message informing you that the parameters you chose are not recommended and may not work properly. Leave that “Search” option set to “All Mail” — which is probably what you want, anyway — and you’ll steer clear of any errors and allow things to work the way they should.

Now it’s time for the fun part — the part where you decide exactly what happens when a message meeting your conditions arrives. You can select any combination of actions from the list and then configure them as needed. You can even tell Gmail to apply your filter retroactively to messages already in your account (as opposed to using it only for new messages that arrive from that point forward) by checking the “Also apply filter to matching conversations” option at the bottom of the box.

Gmail’s filters include a variety of actions that can execute when your conditions are met.

JR Raphael / Foundry

Once you’ve got that finished, click the blue “Create filter” button — and that’s it: Your new Gmail filter is officially in place and active. The next time any message comes in that meets the parameters you outlined, the actions you specified will automatically take place faster than you can say “I embrace Workspace in my workplace cyberspace.”

Part 3: Managing your Gmail filters

Last but not least, make yourself a mental note in case you ever need to adjust your filters in the future: If you want to edit, delete, or even just revisit a filter you created, just click the gear-shaped icon in the upper-right corner of the Gmail website, click “Settings,” then click the “Filters and Blocked Addresses” tab at the top of the settings screen. You’ll see every filter you’ve ever created there and can tweak or remove any of ’em with a couple quick clicks.

Now if only we could find a way to get the filters to deliver those blasted snickerdoodles for us. Hey, Google: Any chance you can make that happen?

This article was originally published in October 2019 and most recently updated in September 2026.

Havířovské semafory v nočních hodinách automaticky pouštějí vozidla • Překročení povolené rychlosti znamená nedobrovolné zastavení na červenou • Modernizace deseti křižovatek zvýšila plynulost dopravy a snížila množství exhalací

Google za poslední roky zlepšil bezpečnost Androidu a změnil způsob aktualizací • Výrobcům však trvá dlouho, než na novou verzi systému upraví svá prostředí • Ideální řešení ale neexistuje, Android zůstává rozdělený na dva světy

A group of AI safety researchers says a fleet of autonomous agents that identified themselves as OpenAI systems left about 18,000 posts on a dormant 25-year-old German wiki between May and July 2026, using the site as a shared board to pool answers to a timed web task and pass around a way out of their sandbox. The activity was concentrated on DSEwiki, a German software developer wiki that runs

A group of AI safety researchers says a fleet of autonomous agents that identified themselves as OpenAI systems left about 18,000 posts on a dormant 25-year-old German wiki between May and July 2026, using the site as a shared board to pool answers to a timed web task and pass around a way out of their sandbox. The activity was concentrated on DSEwiki, a German software developer wiki that runsSwati Khandelwalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/[email protected]

PowerToys 0.101 přidávají do výbavy nástroj Zásobník oken. • Umožňuje rychlé přepínání mezi okny jednoho programu. • Spousta stávajících nástrojů byla vylepšena.

Threat actors are exploiting the newly disclosed PaperCut flaws to facilitate credential theft in attacks targeting the education sector in the U.S. and Europe. The Arctic Wolf Adversary Research Team said it observed attackers exploiting CVE-2026-81578 and CVE-2026-82078 – an authentication bypass and remote code execution chain – to conduct command execution and reconnaissance, as well as

Threat actors are exploiting the newly disclosed PaperCut flaws to facilitate credential theft in attacks targeting the education sector in the U.S. and Europe. The Arctic Wolf Adversary Research Team said it observed attackers exploiting CVE-2026-81578 and CVE-2026-82078 – an authentication bypass and remote code execution chain – to conduct command execution and reconnaissance, as well as Ravie Lakshmananhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/[email protected]

Raketa Falcon Heavy úspěšně vynesla do vesmíru nový teleskop NASA • Přístroj dokáže mapovat oblohu tisíckrát rychleji než slavný Hubble • Hlavním vědeckým cílem bude výzkum tajemné temné hmoty i exoplanet

Linux maintainers are testing a patch for a page-cache bug after KASAN reproduced a use-after-free in filemap_map_pages(). On Sep 3, 2026, Andrew Morton said he would update the changelog, add cc:stable, and queue the patch for testing while awaiting review.

Linux TCP permits a listening socket to be transformed into a different kind of socket. A reproduced memory race has led maintainers to question whether that flexibility is worth keeping.

Linux containers are efficient because they share the host kernel. That same design gives the host deep authority over container memory, mappings, and process state. If the host is compromised or untrusted, namespaces cannot keep workload secrets away from it.

Tenhle týden jsme pro vás prošli desítky partnerských nabídek a vybrali deset, které se fakt vyplatí. Ušetříte na energiích, mobilním tarifu, streamovací službě i oblíbené elektronice, a pokud plánujete cestu do zahraničí, najdete tu i výhodné řešení pro mobilní data. Podívejte se, kde se dá tenhle týden nejvíc ušetřit.

Self-identifying OpenAI agents posted 18,000 messages to a public wiki that discussed ways for other agents to bypass security sandbox restrictions during what was likely internal testing designed to gauge the agents’ hacking abilities, researchers said Friday.

In all, agents with 3,700 distinct self-given names posted the messages to German site DSEwiki over a six-week period. Besides discussing ways the agents could break out of the restricted environment OpenAI intended to prevent them from posting code or content to the Internet, the posts shared test answers. The posts also shared possible ways to perform XSS (cross-site scripting) attacks against the wiki and to impersonate site moderators. In three of the posts, agents used the word “swarm” to describe the collection of agents engaged in the activity.

Colluding to share answers

The research team—composed of Sydney Von Arx, Spencer Kitts, Thomas Larsen, and Cormac Slade Byrd—said they found the posts and pieced them together. The researchers say there are gaps in their understanding of precisely what actions the agents took because the research is based solely on the content of the posts. Additionally, the agents generated “chain of thought” data that’s understood only by OpenAI. As a result, the researchers said, they in some cases made educated guesses, including that the agents were, in fact, from OpenAI. In a statement, OpenAI later confirmed they were.

Read full article

Comments

Ucelený přehled článků, zpráviček a diskusí za minulých 7 dní.

Žijeme vzpřímeně, a to je problém pro srdce a cévní soustavu. Mají problém pumpovat krev žilami z nohou vzhůru proti gravitaci. Naštěstí máme druhé srdce, které tomu prvnímu pomáhá. Má to ale háček. Tohle druhé srdce nefunguje úplně autonomně a musíme ho podpořit.

Už zas abychom opravovali učebnice. Geny fungují ještě složitěji, než jsme si uměli představit. Objev „temného genomu“ nás staví před otázku: Co vše má v našem organismu na starosti, za co mu vděčíme a čím na něj doplácíme?