10 interesting stories served every morning and every evening.

What We Talk About When We Talk About Malware | F-Droid - Free and Open Source Android App Repository

f-droid.org

If you are run­ning Android 8 or higher, a virus has been in­stalled on your de­vice and is silently await­ing re­mote ac­ti­va­tion. Over the past few months, de­vices around the world have been in­fected with this novel strain, with as many as 4 bil­lion Android hand­sets and tablets es­ti­mated to have al­ready been con­t­a­m­i­nated, mean­ing that around half of all hu­man­ity may be at risk from this threat.

Disguising it­self as the in­nocu­ously-ti­tled Android Developer Verifier” (ADV) process, this tro­jan horse runs sur­rep­ti­tiously in the back­ground as a sys­tem ser­vice with full root priv­i­leges, qui­etly await­ing an ac­ti­va­tion sig­nal. The ser­vice can­not be blocked, dis­abled, or re­moved. Unlike a com­mon­place bit of mal­ware, this ex­tra­or­di­nary strain won’t be de­tected and neu­tral­ized by Play Protect (the mal­ware scan­ning and re­me­di­a­tion ser­vice that is in­stalled on all Android Certified de­vices). In fact, Play Protect is it­self the vec­tor through which this virus is trans­mit­ted and in­stalled.

That is be­cause it is Google them­selves who is prop­a­gat­ing ADV. And once ac­ti­vated, this malev­o­lent process has ex­actly one goal: to block you from run­ning soft­ware by de­vel­op­ers who haven’t been ap­proved cen­trally by Google.

Threat mas­querad­ing as Protection

We first raised the alarm about the Android Developer Verification pro­gram last September (“F-Droid and Google’s Developer Registration Decree”) shortly af­ter it was first an­nounced. Google’s loom­ing re­quire­ment that all Android de­vel­op­ers reg­is­ter them­selves cen­trally is ra­tio­nal­ized as a so­lu­tion to help stem the spread of mal­ware. However it does­n’t ac­tu­ally fea­ture any ca­pa­bil­i­ties to pre­vent a malev­o­lent ac­tor from dis­trib­ut­ing mal­ware in the first place; the only al­leged ben­e­fit of ADV is that it may help slow the ac­tions of an al­ready-iden­ti­fied re­cidi­vist by re­quir­ing that they cre­ate (or buy) an­other ac­count in or­der to con­tinue dis­trib­ut­ing their mal­ware with a new sign­ing key.

For this fairly nar­row threat vec­tor of mal­ware re­cidi­vism, a va­ri­ety of con­sid­er­ably less dra­con­ian so­lu­tions have been pro­posed. Play Protect it­self could be en­hanced to scru­ti­nize more closely those newly-in­stalled apps that have el­e­vated per­mis­sions or that were ob­tained through sus­pect chan­nels, con­tin­u­ing with their re­cently touted ad­vances in on-de­vice se­cu­rity ca­pa­bil­i­ties. Or a sys­tem of fed­er­ated ver­i­fiers might be im­ple­mented (as pro­posed in DCM: A Developers Certification Model for Mobile Ecosystems”, 2023) that would em­power end-users to se­lect their own trusted cu­ra­tors and au­thor­i­ties for ex-ante ap­proval. Instead, Google has used this mi­nor vec­tor as a pre­text to rad­i­cally re-en­gi­neer the en­tire Android ecosys­tem by fiat, up­end­ing a 18 year tra­di­tion of open soft­ware de­vel­op­ment and po­si­tion­ing them­selves as the world’s sole gate­keeper for which apps are per­mit­ted to ex­ist.

What They Talk About When They Talk About Malware

Should a de­vel­oper — con­trary to our rec­om­men­da­tion — elect to reg­is­ter them­self with Google as a verified” de­vel­oper, they should ex­pect to sign up for an ac­count and pay a fee, sur­ren­der de­tailed per­sonal in­for­ma­tion and up­load gov­ern­ment-is­sued iden­ti­fi­ca­tion, and then pro­ceed to reg­is­ter the iden­ti­fiers and sign­ing keys for all the apps they in­tend to dis­trib­ute (now or ever).

But the most di­a­bol­i­cal stage is the com­pul­sory agree­ment to the Android Developer Console Terms of Service. There are nu­mer­ous causes for dis­quiet in this doc­u­ment, but the most con­cern­ing of all ought to be:

6.5 If You vi­o­late any of the Terms or if You dis­trib­ute mal­ware or other harm­ful ap­pli­ca­tions, Google may ter­mi­nate Your ac­cess to the ADC…

6.5 If You vi­o­late any of the Terms or if You dis­trib­ute mal­ware or other harm­ful ap­pli­ca­tions, Google may ter­mi­nate Your ac­cess to the ADC…

This rea­son­able-sound­ing clause begs the ques­tion: what ex­actly is meant by malware”? No de­f­i­n­i­tion of the term is to be found any­where in the doc­u­ment. With the ab­sence of any for­mal de­f­i­n­i­tion, stan­dard, or guide­line, it im­plic­itly states:

…and malware” means what­ever we say it means.

…and malware” means what­ever we say it means.

As we dis­cussed in What We Talk About When We Talk About Sideloading”, be­ware the dan­gers of al­low­ing the ter­mi­nol­ogy of de­bate to be de­fined by those who don’t have your best in­ter­ests at heart. Malware be­ing syn­ony­mous with software we don’t like” means that they can uni­lat­er­ally dic­tate — dri­ven ei­ther by busi­ness in­cen­tives or by be­ing com­pelled by a suf­fi­ciently pow­er­ful gov­ern­ment — what the mal­ware-du-jour de­f­i­n­i­tion is to be.

For prece­dent, per­sonal con­tent fil­ter­ing in the form of ad block­ers” has long since been banned from the Play Store, and they have even clas­si­fied some in­stances as mal­ware. How long be­fore they des­ig­nate all ad-block­ing soft­ware as mal­ware, block in­stal­la­tion on all Android cer­ti­fied de­vices world­wide, and per­ma­nently des­ig­nate all de­vel­op­ers of this class of soft­ware as mal­ware cre­ators? Such a move would cer­tainly be aligned with their com­mer­cial in­cen­tives as the global ad-tech mo­nop­o­list, and would be com­pletely in ac­cor­dance with the lan­guage of their ADC Terms and Conditions.

Like a Lead Balloon

In terms of vol­un­tary de­vel­oper up­take, they re­cently claimed that over 99% of [Play de­vel­op­ers’] apps have been reg­is­tered” sug­gests that ADV is some­how a pop­u­lar and widely-ac­cepted dic­tate. That could­n’t be fur­ther from the truth: those 99% of de­vel­op­ers were auto-opted-in with­out their in­formed con­sent due to be­ing al­ready bound by their Play Store agree­ments.

In fact, hun­dreds of thou­sands of peo­ple have signed a pe­ti­tion op­pos­ing ADV. The Open Letter at keepan­droidopen.org de­nounc­ing the pro­gram has been signed by over 70 or­ga­ni­za­tions around the world, in­clud­ing the EFF, FSF, FSFE, ACLU, and the in­es­timable Forbrukerrådet. Any in­ter­net search, chat­bot query, or so­cial me­dia poll will con­firm that the op­po­si­tion to this pro­gram is over­whelm­ing and the con­dem­na­tion is uni­ver­sal. 90% of view­ers of the de­vel­oper round­table video where they at­tempt to de­fend the pro­gram reg­is­tered a dis­like of the spec­ta­cle, and even Google Gemini re­sponds to in­quiries about the pop­u­lar­ity of the pro­gram with:

Aside from Google it­self, find­ing full-throated, en­thu­si­as­tic sup­port for the manda­tory Android Developer Verification pro­gram in the tech com­mu­nity is vir­tu­ally im­pos­si­ble.

The back­lash is over­whelm­ingly dom­i­nant—head­lined by the Keep Android Open” coali­tion of civil rights and open-source groups fiercely op­pos­ing the cen­tral reg­is­tra­tion re­quire­ment.

Aside from Google it­self, find­ing full-throated, en­thu­si­as­tic sup­port for the manda­tory Android Developer Verification pro­gram in the tech com­mu­nity is vir­tu­ally im­pos­si­ble.

The back­lash is over­whelm­ingly dom­i­nant—head­lined by the Keep Android Open” coali­tion of civil rights and open-source groups fiercely op­pos­ing the cen­tral reg­is­tra­tion re­quire­ment.

And yet their lock­down blitzkrieg pro­ceeds apace. Legislators and reg­u­la­tors have thus far been un­re­cep­tive to the out­cry. Our own po­si­tion as a bas­tion of soft­ware free­dom and re­spect for user rights and pri­vacy is in ex­treme jeop­ardy. The F-Droid model of se­cu­rity and trust through open-source trans­parency is fun­da­men­tally at odds with the trust me bro” se­cu­rity model of the closed-source com­mer­cial app stores. And while these two mod­els have been able to co-ex­ist for the past 16 years of F-Droid’s ex­is­tence, it ap­pears that Google in­tends to es­tab­lish a regime where they alone have a mo­nop­oly on the de­f­i­n­i­tions of security” and trust”.

What to Expect in the Days to Come

We do not yet know the ex­act fail­ure mode to ex­pect when the ADV ac­ti­va­tion is trig­gered on September 30. If you are one of the 580 mil­lion peo­ple liv­ing in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, or Thailand, know that these are the first four tar­gets of the ADV lock­down ac­cord­ing to their pub­lished time­line (global roll­out is omi­nously pre­dicted to then oc­cur through­out 2027 and be­yond”).

There are many things we don’t know about what to ex­pect on September 30. Some com­mon ques­tions that we do not yet have the an­swer to, for those in the af­flicted re­gions, are:

What will hap­pen if I try to in­stall or launch the F-Droid app?

What will hap­pen to all the apps I’ve in­stalled through F-Droid? Will they be dis­abled? Deleted?

If apps that I rely on are sud­denly dis­ap­peared, what hap­pens to the data they con­tain? Can I still re­trieve it?

With all soft­ware in­stal­la­tions and launches now be­ing re­ported back to Google for ver­i­fi­ca­tion, what spe­cific in­for­ma­tion does that teleme­try in­clude?

We have reached out to the mal­ware ven­dor with our in­quiries. In the com­ing weeks and months lead­ing up to the lock­down, we will be pub­lish­ing more guid­ance and sup­port for those due to be im­pacted by ADV.

Virginia Bans Sale of Geolocation Data

www.hunton.com

On April 13, 2026, Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger signed into law S.B. 388, which amends the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (“VCDPA) to pro­hibit the sale of ge­olo­ca­tion data. Notably, the VCDPA de­fines sale” more nar­rowly than other state com­pre­hen­sive pri­vacy laws, as the ex­change of per­sonal data for mon­e­tary con­sid­er­a­tion by the con­troller to a third party.”

The ban on the sale of ge­olo­ca­tion data goes into ef­fect on July 1, 2026.

Virginia fol­lows Maryland and Oregon in ban­ning the sale of ge­olo­ca­tion data. Both Maryland and Oregon more broadly de­fine sale” to mean the ex­change of per­sonal data for mon­e­tary or other valu­able con­sid­er­a­tion.” Virginia joins sev­eral other states that have re­cently pro­posed leg­is­la­tion with sim­i­lar bans, in­clud­ing California, Massachusetts, Vermont and Washington State. The leg­isla­tive ac­tiv­ity fol­lows reg­u­la­tory scrutiny on the sale of ge­olo­ca­tion data, in­clud­ing the California Attorney General’s in­ves­ti­ga­tion into the lo­ca­tion data in­dus­try in March 2025, and a 2024 FTC set­tle­ment ban­ning a data bro­ker from sell­ing ge­olo­ca­tion data.

Spain Orders Blacklist of US Tech Giant Palantir From Public and Private Companies

clashreport.com

The Spanish gov­ern­ment has com­menced is­su­ing di­rec­tives to state-con­trolled en­ti­ties to black­list U.S. data an­a­lyt­ics firm Palantir Technologies.

The de­ci­sion stems di­rectly from grow­ing of­fi­cial con­cern over the po­ten­tial mis­use of clas­si­fied in­for­ma­tion linked to na­tional se­cu­rity.

Moncloa has in­structed com­pa­nies over­seen by the State Society of Industrial Participations (SEPI) to halt fu­ture con­tract­ing with the Miami-based ar­ti­fi­cial in­tel­li­gence and data analy­sis multi­na­tional.

The di­rec­tive im­pacts ma­jor en­ti­ties re­spon­si­ble for high-level state com­mu­ni­ca­tions and mil­i­tary in­tel­li­gence, in­clud­ing Telefónica, Indra, and the mil­i­tary ship­builder Navantia.

National Sovereignty Concerns

According to cor­po­rate board sources, the prime min­is­ter’s of­fice com­mu­ni­cated the ban to listed com­pa­nies to pre­vent any con­tracts that could jeop­ar­dize Spanish na­tional sov­er­eignty.

The po­lit­i­cal in­ter­ven­tion has al­ready dis­rupted ad­vanced pro­cure­ment pipelines, in­clud­ing a near-fi­nal­ized pro­ject with Navantia and a ne­go­ti­ated col­lab­o­ra­tion agree­ment with the Guardia Civil that was ve­toed by Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska.

The re­stric­tions mir­ror re­cent reg­u­la­tory and po­lit­i­cal push­back against Palantir else­where in Europe.

Former French Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu an­nounced on June 10 that France would cease work­ing with the firm, while German cy­berde­fense au­thor­i­ties and se­cret ser­vices have in­creas­ingly fa­vored European al­ter­na­tives like the French com­peti­tor ChaosVision.

Defense Procurement Deadlock

Despite the broader pub­lic and pri­vate sec­tor black­list, Palantir con­tin­ues to main­tain ac­tive con­tracts with the Spanish Ministry of Defense.

The firm holds a €16.5 mil­lion con­tract signed in 2023 with the Armed Forces Intelligence Center (CIFAS), which is sched­uled to ex­pire this up­com­ing November.

Military lead­er­ship, in­clud­ing the Chiefs of Staff of the Army and Navy, has lob­bied Defense Minister Margarita Robles to re­new the con­tract, cit­ing the plat­for­m’s op­er­a­tional su­pe­ri­or­ity.

However, Moncloa has yet to make an of­fi­cial de­ter­mi­na­tion re­gard­ing the de­fense con­tract ex­ten­sion as the ex­pi­ra­tion date ap­proaches.

Geopolitical Friction and Domestic Alternatives

The do­mes­tic black­list co­in­cides with sharp geopo­lit­i­cal ten­sion be­tween Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and the in­com­ing U.S. ad­min­is­tra­tion.

Palantir founders Peter Thiel and CEO Alex Karp have deep fi­nan­cial and po­lit­i­cal ties to Donald Trump, whose po­lit­i­cal plat­form con­flicts di­rectly with the diplo­matic po­si­tions main­tained by Madrid.

In re­sponse to the per­ceived risks of re­ly­ing on for­eign de­fense soft­ware, Spain is ac­cel­er­at­ing fund­ing for do­mes­tic tech­nol­ogy plat­forms to pre­serve na­tional data sov­er­eignty.

The ex­ec­u­tive re­cently ap­proved an €115 mil­lion in­vest­ment in the Catalan firm Openchip, part of a broader €5 bil­lion state-backed gi­gafac­tory pro­ject, fi­nanced largely by SEPI Digital.

GitHub - Chocobozzz/PeerTube: ActivityPub-federated video streaming platform using P2P directly in your web browser

github.com

Website | Join an in­stance | Create an in­stance | Chat with us | Donate

Be part of a net­work of mul­ti­ple small fed­er­ated, in­ter­op­er­a­ble video host­ing providers. Follow video cre­ators and cre­ate videos. No ven­dor lock-in. All on a plat­form that is com­mu­nity-owned and ad-free.

Developed with ❤ by Framasoft

Introduction

PeerTube is a free, de­cen­tral­ized and fed­er­ated video plat­form de­vel­oped as an al­ter­na­tive to other plat­forms that cen­tral­ize our data and at­ten­tion, such as YouTube, Dailymotion or Vimeo. 🎬

To learn more:

This two-minute video (hosted on PeerTube) ex­plain­ing what PeerTube is and how it works

PeerTube’s pro­ject home­page, join­peer­tube.org

Demonstration in­stances:

peer­tube.cpy.re (stable) peer­tube2.cpy.re (Nightly) peer­tube3.cpy.re (RC)

peer­tube.cpy.re (stable)

peer­tube2.cpy.re (Nightly)

peer­tube3.cpy.re (RC)

This video demon­strat­ing the com­mu­ni­ca­tion be­tween PeerTube and Mastodon (a de­cen­tral­ized Twitter al­ter­na­tive)

✨ Features

All fea­tures for view­ers | All fea­tures for con­tent cre­ators | All fea­tures for ad­min­is­tra­tors

Video stream­ing, even in live!

Just up­load your videos, and be sure they will stream any­where. Add a de­scrip­tion, some tags and your video will be dis­cov­er­able by the en­tire video fe­di­verse, not just your in­stance. You can even em­bed a player on your fa­vorite web­site!

You are used to host­ing live events? We got you cov­ered too! Start livestream­ing from your fa­vorite client, and even host per­ma­nent streams!

Keep in touch with video cre­ators

Follow your fa­vorite chan­nels from PeerTube or re­ally any other place. No need to have an ac­count on the in­stance you watched a video to fol­low its au­thor, you can do all of that from the Fediverse (Mastodon, Pleroma, and plenty oth­ers), or just with good ol’ RSS.

An in­ter­face to call home

Be it as a user or an in­stance ad­min­is­tra­tor, you can de­cide what your ex­pe­ri­ence will be like. Don’t like the col­ors? They are easy to change. Don’t want to list videos of an in­stance but let your users sub­scribe to them? Don’t like the reg­u­lar web client? All of that can be changed, and much more. No UX dark pat­tern, no min­ing your data, no video rec­om­men­da­tion bull­shit™.

Communities that help each other

In ad­di­tion to vis­i­tors us­ing P2P with WebRTC to share the load among them, in­stances can help each other by caching one an­oth­er’s videos. This way even small in­stances have a way to show con­tent to a wider au­di­ence, as they will be shoul­dered by friend in­stances (more about that in our re­dun­dancy guide).

Content cre­ators can get help from their view­ers in the sim­plest way pos­si­ble: a sup­port but­ton show­ing a mes­sage link­ing to their do­na­tion ac­counts or re­ally any­thing else. No more pay-per-view and ad­ver­tise­ments that hurt vis­i­tors and al­ter cre­ativ­ity (more about that in our FAQ).

🙌 Contributing

You don’t need to be a pro­gram­mer to help!

You can give us your feed­back, re­port bugs, help us trans­late PeerTube, write doc­u­men­ta­tion, and more. Check out the con­tribut­ing guide to know how, it takes less than 2 min­utes to get started. 😉

You can also join the cheer­ful bunch that makes our com­mu­nity:

Matrix (bridged on Discord): #peertube:matrix.org

Forum: https://​fra­ma­col­ibri.org/​c/​peer­tube

Feel free to reach out if you have any ques­tions or ideas! 💬

📦 Create your own in­stance

See the pro­duc­tion guide, which is the rec­om­mended way to in­stall or up­grade PeerTube. For hard­ware re­quire­ments, see Should I have a big server to run PeerTube? in the FAQ.

See the com­mu­nity pack­ages, which cover var­i­ous plat­forms (including YunoHost and Docker).

📖 Documentation

If you have a ques­tion, please try to find the an­swer in the FAQ first.

User doc­u­men­ta­tion

See the user doc­u­men­ta­tion.

Admin doc­u­men­ta­tion

See how to cre­ate your own in­stance.

See the more gen­eral ad­min doc­u­men­ta­tion.

Tools doc­u­men­ta­tion

Learn how to im­port/​up­load videos from CLI or ad­min your PeerTube in­stance with the tools doc­u­men­ta­tion.

Technical doc­u­men­ta­tion

See the ar­chi­tec­ture blue­print for a more de­tailed ex­pla­na­tion of the ar­chi­tec­tural choices.

See our REST API doc­u­men­ta­tion:

OpenAPI 3.0.0 schema: /support/doc/api/openapi.yaml

Spec ex­plorer: docs.join­peer­tube.org/​api-rest-ref­er­ence.html

See our ActivityPub doc­u­men­ta­tion.

License

Logo

CC BY-SA 4.0, by Framasoft

Code

Copyright (C) 2015 – 2025 PeerTube Contributors (see CREDITS.md)

This pro­gram is free soft­ware: you can re­dis­trib­ute it and/​or mod­ify it un­der the terms of the GNU Affero General Public License as pub­lished by the Free Software Foundation, ei­ther ver­sion 3 of the License, or (at your op­tion) any later ver­sion.

This pro­gram is dis­trib­uted in the hope that it will be use­ful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; with­out even the im­plied war­ranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU Affero General Public License for more de­tails.

You should have re­ceived a copy of the GNU Affero General Public License along with this pro­gram. If not, see https://​www.gnu.org/​li­censes/.

How to ask for help from people who don't know you

pradyuprasad.com

30 June 2026

No mat­ter what you’re do­ing, from build­ing a civ­i­liza­tion on Mars to get­ting a sum­mer in­tern­ship, you will have to ask peo­ple for help. Yet, most peo­ple get this cru­cial skill wrong. They put them­selves at the front of their re­quest, when they should be putting the other per­son there. But is­n’t get­ting help just charisma and luck? No, ask­ing for help is a skill, not an at­tribute you are as­signed at birth like green eyes.

How do you ask for help from peo­ple? There is only one prin­ci­ple. Put your­self in their mind. All good com­mu­ni­ca­tion is grounded in an un­der­stand­ing of the read­er’s mind. And so, I have some heuris­tics I would rec­om­mend when you ask for help from peo­ple you don’t know.

One heuris­tic to re­mem­ber is that help is about peo­ple be­fore it is about pro­jects. When you ask for help from some­one, their help­ing your pro­ject is pred­i­cated on them want­ing to help you. So, you should make it clear that you are some­one worth help­ing. One of the strongest ways to show that you’re worth help­ing is to demon­strate that you are a se­ri­ous per­son. You might claim that you want to en­ter ma­chine learn­ing or learn to lift weights. Lots of peo­ple say that though, and the way you show that you’re se­ri­ous is by show­ing proof of work. A trained model, a blog post that shows depth and thought and a vlog of your train­ing are all ways to show that you are se­ri­ous.

Another way is per­sonal con­nec­tion: you could say Steve sug­gested I reach out” which sit­u­ates you more warmly in their mind. But be care­ful here, be­cause you’re bor­row­ing against some­one else’s cred­i­bil­ity. If this per­son does­n’t like Steve, then this might hurt your cred­i­bil­ity. Or, if you aren’t as good as Steve says, his cred­i­bil­ity is hurt.

And fi­nally, we get to in­sti­tu­tional cred­i­bil­ity. You could men­tion that you’re a stu­dent at some fa­mous uni­ver­sity, or work at a large cor­po­ra­tion. This is the weak­est be­cause at best it proves you cleared a fil­ter once, and noth­ing more. It also does­n’t sit­u­ate you to them specif­i­cally and can feel like you’re sig­nalling sta­tus. So use it spar­ingly and avoid mak­ing it your only source of cred­i­bil­ity.

Once you have sit­u­ated your­self (or not), the next step is to ex­plain con­text. Before you ask them for help, you have to an­swer the ques­tion: what is go­ing on here? If you have done the pre­vi­ous step well, you have bor­rowed their at­ten­tion and you must spend it ju­di­ciously. Here, your de­scrip­tion must be so short as to be un­sum­ma­riz­able. You are spend­ing lent at­ten­tion which is the most pre­cious cur­rency. To do this, think of what makes your con­text con­nect to things that they would al­ready know. Do not ex­plain to your elected rep­re­sen­ta­tive the fac­tion­al­ism of your uni­ver­sity club, but do ex­plain how the club con­nects to their leg­isla­tive pri­or­i­ties. Or when ask­ing a sci­en­tist for an in­tern­ship, don’t talk about how you’ve loved sci­ence since you were a child, but do talk about how you’ve im­ple­mented and ex­tended their pa­per from 2023.

The next heuris­tic is to make your re­quest easy to ac­cept. Making some­thing easy to ac­cept largely is about re­duc­ing the cost of ac­cep­tance. One clear kind of cost is the mag­ni­tude. Do ask some­one for twenty min­utes of their time, but don’t ask them to read your five-hun­dred-page man­u­script in a week. Another is to make it spe­cific: ask­ing for a re­source to start with is bet­ter than can I pick your brain?”. When you’ve made your re­quest, make it low fric­tion for them. If you’re ask­ing for an in­tro­duc­tion, write a blurb about your­self which they can for­ward. If you have a ques­tion, ask it in writ­ing rather than over a call. And last on cost, make your ask bounded. Don’t ask for re­cur­ring oblig­a­tions like be­ing your men­tor for your whole life, but do keep it lim­ited to ask­ing them to read a blog post. If that in­stance goes well, they’ll gladly read more.

My last heuris­tic is stranger: make it easy to say no. You might think that the worst out­come is a no, but the worst out­come is a pres­sured, be­grudg­ing yes. If you get a no, a good re­sponse is for you to thank them for their time and move on. Making your mes­sage carry emo­tional guilt or pes­ter­ing them over time will not have the ef­fect you in­tend. Your co­er­cion will have poi­soned your re­la­tion­ship with this per­son while you feel the false glow of a hard-won vic­tory. A per­son who helps you with grit­ted teeth is one who will never help you again. And even then, the help will be a half-hearted ef­fort to get rid of the oblig­a­tion you man­u­fac­tured. By con­trast, help freely given is ef­fort­less, the way you’d hold the door open for some­one. Help will­ingly given keeps your con­science clear, free from the bur­den of hav­ing pres­sured some­one. And help, when given from the heart, is the foun­da­tion of a re­la­tion­ship where both of you con­tribute to what you’re build­ing.

These are only heuris­tics. You can, when fol­low­ing the prin­ci­ple, re­order or drop them al­to­gether. What mat­ters is whether you’re think­ing from the per­spec­tive of your reader. Except. Never lie. All your asks for help come from the per­son at­tached to them — you. And if your reader gets even a whiff of some­thing off, then no re­quest, no mat­ter how small, spe­cific, low-fric­tion, and bounded, can get a yes.

Edit: added a line on how to re­spond when you get a no.

Crime Pays: The Egg Bandits Made A Thousand Times the Fine They Just Paid for Price Fixing

www.thebignewsletter.com

A few days ago, 18 states and the DOJ Antitrust Division signed a se­ries of de­crees with three ma­jor egg pro­duc­ers, Cal-Maine, Versova, and Hickman’s Egg Ranch, the largest egg pro­duc­ers in the coun­try. The al­le­ga­tion, backed with hard-to-re­fute ev­i­dence in­clud­ing quotes from CEOs, is these en­ti­ties op­er­ated a naked con­spir­acy to ma­nip­u­late the price of eggs from 2022 – 2025. That was ex­actly the time bird flu on poul­try farms was rip­ping through the sup­ply chain for egg pro­duc­tion.

Readers of this site won’t be sur­prised at this news. Last year, BIG pub­lished an in­ves­tiga­tive se­ries called Hatching a Conspiracy, in which Basel Musharbash dis­cussed what looked like a con­spir­acy. His ar­gu­ment was that egg pro­duc­ers were us­ing the avian flu cri­sis as a veil to raise prices. Basically, con­sol­i­da­tion had cre­ated con­cen­trated power, and the shock of the flu let them ex­ploit it. He high­lighted the role of Cal-Maine, the in­dus­try’s bellwether,” as well as the his­tory of an­titrust vi­o­la­tions in the in­dus­try.

While most nor­mal peo­ple at the time thought some­one was likely scam­ming them, that is not the mes­sage you heard from the in­dus­try, elite me­dia, or econ­o­mists. Throughout the al­leged con­spir­acy, in­dus­try ex­ec­u­tives and an­a­lysts were say­ing that there was noth­ing to see ex­cept a sup­ply shock of a dis­ease killing lots of hens. As one in­dus­try ex­ec­u­tive put it at the time, it’s all just supply dis­rup­tion, act of God’ type stuff.”

Economists chor­tled at the no­tion of a con­spir­acy. During the 2024 cam­paign, when Kamala Harris meekly sug­gested price goug­ing to tame in­fla­tion, she ran into a buz­z­saw of re­sis­tance from Democratic-leaning econ­o­mists, who were openly sneer­ing at her in the New York Times.

Egg prices went up last year — it’s be­cause there weren’t as many eggs, and it caused more egg pro­duc­tion,” said Jason Furman, a Harvard econ­o­mist for­merly in the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion…Mr. Furman said there was a risk that poli­cies meant to curb cor­po­rate price goug­ing could in­stead keep the econ­omy from ad­just­ing. If prices do not rise in re­sponse to strong de­mand, new com­pa­nies may not have as much in­cli­na­tion to jump into the mar­ket to ramp up sup­ply.“This is not sen­si­ble pol­icy, and I think the biggest hope is that it ends up be­ing a lot of rhetoric and no re­al­ity,” he said. There’s no up­side here, and there is some down­side.”

Egg prices went up last year — it’s be­cause there weren’t as many eggs, and it caused more egg pro­duc­tion,” said Jason Furman, a Harvard econ­o­mist for­merly in the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion…

Mr. Furman said there was a risk that poli­cies meant to curb cor­po­rate price goug­ing could in­stead keep the econ­omy from ad­just­ing. If prices do not rise in re­sponse to strong de­mand, new com­pa­nies may not have as much in­cli­na­tion to jump into the mar­ket to ramp up sup­ply.

This is not sen­si­ble pol­icy, and I think the biggest hope is that it ends up be­ing a lot of rhetoric and no re­al­ity,” he said. There’s no up­side here, and there is some down­side.”

Price ac­tion seemed to con­firm Furman’s view. In 2025, egg prices dropped dra­mat­i­cally, and then fur­ther this year, though they are still roughly 40% above where they were in 2019. And these price de­clines sug­gested that sup­ply and de­mand were do­ing their mag­i­cal work. Populists were mocked as ig­nor­ing nat­ural mar­ket forces. Pundit Matt Yglesias called the the­ory of egg price ma­nip­u­la­tion slopulism,” the Cato Institute blogged Egg Prices Don’t Need to Be Investigated—It’s Just Supply and Demand, and here’s phil­an­thropist John Arnold.

John Arnold@johnarnold

It’s al­most as if egg prices are set by mar­ket forces in­clud­ing sup­ply shocks and not by a pro­ducer car­tel that de­cides how much to gouge con­sumers.

1:28 AM · Jan 13, 2026 · 138K Views

50 Replies · 86 Reposts · 871 Likes

But lo and be­hold, this com­plaint has stone cold ev­i­dence. It in­cludes many state­ments from egg pro­ducer CEOs email­ing and tex­ting one an­other on how to ma­nip­u­late prices up­ward. And it turns out, when they felt threat­ened by le­gal ac­tion, the al­leged price-fix­ing stopped. Suddenly, the avian flu epi­demic was no longer push­ing up prices.

To un­der­stand what they were do­ing, we have to start with how egg prices are set.

Egg pro­duc­ers don’t sell eggs to con­sumers, they sell whole­sale to su­per­mar­kets, pack­aged goods com­pa­nies, restau­rants, and so forth. There are two mar­kets for whole­sale eggs. Most go via con­tracts be­tween egg pro­duc­ers and big buy­ers. For in­stance, roughly 28% of Cal-Maine’s pro­duc­tion is sold to Walmart, through a spe­cial sup­ply arrange­ment. But there’s also an elec­tronic ex­change, called the Egg Clearinghouse, for eggs sold in the spot mar­ket, aka ex­tra eggs. Egg pro­duc­ers are usu­ally net sell­ers of eggs, but they have con­tracts to pro­vide eggs, and some­times can’t ful­fill those con­tracts through their own pro­duc­tion. Other egg pro­duc­ers might have ex­tra eggs. So there is buy­ing and sell­ing of sur­plus eggs on the Egg Clearinghouse.

As Bloomberg’s Matthew Levine puts it, there’s a small mar­ket - the Egg Clearinghouse - and there’s the big mar­ket, which are the con­tracts be­tween buy­ers and egg pro­duc­ers. Where do the prices for the pri­vate buy­ers and sell­ers come from? Well, they come from the Egg Clearinghouse. Specifically, a com­pany called Urner Barry looks at prices for dif­fer­ent re­gions based on trades and bids on and off that ex­change, their an­a­lysts do as best they can to es­ti­mate prices across re­gions, and then they pub­lish a price of where they imag­ine sup­ply and de­mand in­ter­sect.

In other words, the cleared price in the small mar­ket sets the price for the big one. Here’s Cal-Maine’s an­nual re­port: Many of our sales arrange­ments with cus­tomers, par­tic­u­larly for con­ven­tional eggs, are based on for­mu­las that take into ac­count, in vary­ing ways, in­de­pen­dently quoted re­gional whole­sale mar­ket prices for eggs.” And it uses Urner Barry pric­ing charts.

And therein lies the al­leged scam. If you can get Urner Barry to pub­lish higher prices from the small num­ber of eggs sold on the Egg Clearinghouse, then the price that, say, Walmart pays on its bil­lions of eggs goes up.

Such bench­marks, as well as ma­nip­u­la­tion of them, are com­mon. This egg in­dex is sim­i­lar to how a few banks used to set a key in­ter­est rate called LIBOR, the price of lend­ing short-term funds to one an­other, and a bench­mark for credit cards, com­mer­cial lend­ing, and a whole host of credit prod­ucts. The LIBOR price-fix­ing case dragged on for years, and is quite fa­mous.

The al­leged egg con­spir­acy it­self was pretty sim­ple. Evidence showed egg pro­duc­ers were col­lud­ing to trick Urner Barry into rais­ing its pub­lished price. Here’s the Antitrust Division press re­lease:

As the com­plaint al­leges, Defendants con­spired to in­flate Urner Barry’s price quo­ta­tions by agree­ing to: (1) sub­mit a large num­ber of bids; (2) cause mul­ti­ple Defendants to bid in or­der to sig­nal to Urner Barry that a di­verse set of mar­ket par­tic­i­pants needed to buy eggs; (3) sub­mit a large num­ber of bids in the hours lead­ing up to the pub­li­ca­tion of Urner Barry’s price quo­ta­tions; (4) sub­mit bids that were un­likely to lead to ex­e­cuted trades; and (5) ex­e­cute trades at pre­mium prices.

As the com­plaint al­leges, Defendants con­spired to in­flate Urner Barry’s price quo­ta­tions by agree­ing to: (1) sub­mit a large num­ber of bids; (2) cause mul­ti­ple Defendants to bid in or­der to sig­nal to Urner Barry that a di­verse set of mar­ket par­tic­i­pants needed to buy eggs; (3) sub­mit a large num­ber of bids in the hours lead­ing up to the pub­li­ca­tion of Urner Barry’s price quo­ta­tions; (4) sub­mit bids that were un­likely to lead to ex­e­cuted trades; and (5) ex­e­cute trades at pre­mium prices.

Producers were sub­mit­ting fake bids, con­duct­ing sham trans­ac­tions at high prices off the ex­change, and co­or­di­nat­ing to make it look like there was more de­mand than there was.

The most re­mark­able part of the com­plaint is one par­tic­u­lar quote. At a cer­tain point, Urner Barry was con­sid­er­ing low­er­ing is pub­lished price of eggs in re­sponse to a lack of de­mand. So one of the al­leged con­spir­a­tors wrote a fel­low CEO, say­ing [a]s a group we need to bid like they vote in Chicago, early and of­ten.” In short, they should sub­mit fake pur­chase or­ders at el­e­vated prices, to con­vince the in­dex to raise prices. In this case, it worked; Cal-Maine, Versova, and Hickman’s then col­lec­tively sub­mit­ted dozens of bids, ver­sus just five for the rest of the mar­ket. The price was then higher than it should have been.

What I like about that quote is­n’t just that it’s ev­i­dence of col­lu­sion, it’s ac­tu­ally a joke premised on rig­ging the mar­ket the way ma­chine politi­cians rig elec­tions. These guys weren’t just al­legedly price-fix­ing, they were hav­ing a lot of fun do­ing it. And they even vi­o­lated the Stringer Bell rule, as this stuff was in email.

There’s a lot more ev­i­dence in the com­plaint, even though the com­plaint is pretty short (and it says the DOJ with­held a lot of ev­i­dence.) For in­stance:

After re­ceiv­ing Hickman’s CEOs di­rec­tive to [b]id early and of­ten,” on December 22, a se­nior Versova ex­ec­u­tive told an­other Versova ex­ec­u­tive to light up the north­west bids please. .02 over.” That ex­ec­u­tive agreed and then placed bids at a price that was two cents greater than Urner Barry’s price quo­ta­tion for the Northwest. Prospective sell­ers were re­quired to call prior to ac­cept­ing these bids. Then, when one of the Versova ex­ec­u­tives noted that the NW bids are get­ting hit”—mean­ing that a seller was of­fer­ing to sell the eggs to Versova to meet Versova’s bid—the other Versova ex­ec­u­tive stated that he should delete the bids, sug­gest­ing that Versova did not need the eggs.

After re­ceiv­ing Hickman’s CEOs di­rec­tive to [b]id early and of­ten,” on December 22, a se­nior Versova ex­ec­u­tive told an­other Versova ex­ec­u­tive to light up the north­west bids please. .02 over.” That ex­ec­u­tive agreed and then placed bids at a price that was two cents greater than Urner Barry’s price quo­ta­tion for the Northwest. Prospective sell­ers were re­quired to call prior to ac­cept­ing these bids. Then, when one of the Versova ex­ec­u­tives noted that the NW bids are get­ting hit”—mean­ing that a seller was of­fer­ing to sell the eggs to Versova to meet Versova’s bid—the other Versova ex­ec­u­tive stated that he should delete the bids, sug­gest­ing that Versova did not need the eggs.

Here are some other quotes:

We are bid­ding up. Let’s hold it to­day.” — Text mes­sage from a Cal-Maine ex­ec­u­tive to Hickman’s CEO on October 14, 2022.“If we all bid in our re­spec­tive ar­eas for the 3 – 5 loads min­i­mum we are short… the mar­ket re­porters will have to ad­dress.” — Email re­sponse from Hickman’s CEO on December 19, 2022″Please con­sider post­ing strong bids, early and of­ten. The mar­ket re­porters don’t get in for an­other hour, so it will be good for them to see di­verse bid­ding upon log­ging on.” — Email from Hickman’s CEO to se­nior ex­ec­u­tives from Cal-Maine, Versova, and oth­ers on December 20, 2022″Hurry[.] There are only 16 bids on ECI right now and 15 of them are ours” — Email from Hickman’s CEO later on December 20, 2022″Finally!!!!” — Written re­ac­tion from the CEO of Cooperative A when for­ward­ing Urner Barry price in­crease re­ports to Cal-Maine on August 9, 2023

We are bid­ding up. Let’s hold it to­day.” — Text mes­sage from a Cal-Maine ex­ec­u­tive to Hickman’s CEO on October 14, 2022.

If we all bid in our re­spec­tive ar­eas for the 3 – 5 loads min­i­mum we are short… the mar­ket re­porters will have to ad­dress.” — Email re­sponse from Hickman’s CEO on December 19, 2022

Please con­sider post­ing strong bids, early and of­ten. The mar­ket re­porters don’t get in for an­other hour, so it will be good for them to see di­verse bid­ding upon log­ging on.” — Email from Hickman’s CEO to se­nior ex­ec­u­tives from Cal-Maine, Versova, and oth­ers on December 20, 2022

Hurry[.] There are only 16 bids on ECI right now and 15 of them are ours” — Email from Hickman’s CEO later on December 20, 2022

Finally!!!!” — Written re­ac­tion from the CEO of Cooperative A when for­ward­ing Urner Barry price in­crease re­ports to Cal-Maine on August 9, 2023

The al­leged scam went on for years. Until the hol­i­day sea­son in 2024, the egg pro­duc­ers continued to lobby Urner Barry,” ask­ing the pric­ing in­dex to hike its pub­lished prices and to ig­nore trans­ac­tions at lower prices from non-con­spir­a­tors when do­ing its bench­mark­ing. So what fi­nally ended the al­leged con­spir­acy? It turns out that price quo­ta­tions dropped sig­nif­i­cantly from their February 2025 peak af­ter Defendants learned of the Department of Justice in­ves­ti­ga­tion and were in­structed to pre­serve doc­u­ments on March 5, 2025.”

When egg pro­duc­ers re­al­ized they might get in trou­ble, they stopped the al­leged scheme. Here’s a chart show­ing price ac­tion and an­titrust.

Still, what a prof­itable con­spir­acy it was. Cal-Maine made more than $1 bil­lion in prof­its in 2023, triple its 2022 earn­ings. And it made $1.8 bil­lion in 2024, al­most en­tirely as a re­sult of higher prices As Musharbash put it:

All of this ex­tra profit is com­ing from higher sell­ing prices, which have been earn­ing Cal-Maine un­prece­dented 70 – 145 per­cent mar­gins over farm pro­duc­tion costs per dozen. Taking Cal-Maine as the bellwether” for the in­dus­try’s largest firms — as peo­ple in the egg busi­ness do — we can be pretty con­fi­dent that the other large egg pro­duc­ers are also rak­ing in prof­its off the rel­a­tively small dip in egg pro­duc­tion.

All of this ex­tra profit is com­ing from higher sell­ing prices, which have been earn­ing Cal-Maine un­prece­dented 70 – 145 per­cent mar­gins over farm pro­duc­tion costs per dozen. Taking Cal-Maine as the bellwether” for the in­dus­try’s largest firms — as peo­ple in the egg busi­ness do — we can be pretty con­fi­dent that the other large egg pro­duc­ers are also rak­ing in prof­its off the rel­a­tively small dip in egg pro­duc­tion.

Seeing the writ­ing on the wall for egg prices, Cal-Maine has re­cently been us­ing its cash haul to di­ver­sify into pre­pared foods in which eggs are an in­put, mean­ing while they still seek to sell eggs at high prices, they now have lines of busi­ness that ben­e­fit from lower prices as well.

Still, they all got caught. So how much trou­ble are they in? Well ac­cord­ing to the set­tle­ment, the egg pro­duc­ers must pay in ag­gre­gate $3 mil­lion in penal­ties, must do­nate 53 mil­lion eggs to food banks, and can no longer fix prices. Cal-Maine was the ring­leader here - it had to do­nate 30 mil­lion eggs, Versova gave 20 mil­lion, and Centrum do­nated 3 mil­lion.

Is that enough? Well, let’s start with a very ba­sic con­cern. If you’re look­ing at some of these clear emails and texts and won­der­ing why there’s no crim­i­nal charge for price-fix­ing, you’re not alone. Most an­titrust lawyers I know are mock­ing this set­tle­ment as a farce, since it looks so ob­vi­ously like crim­i­nal be­hav­ior but in­stead ended up with a no-ad­mit/​no-deny park­ing ticket. But let’s put that aside, and just look at the cost/​ben­e­fit. Cal-Maine has to pay $1.5 mil­lion, let’s throw in an­other $1.5 mil­lion to cover the cost of the 30 mil­lion eggs they had to do­nate. That means they are out $3 mil­lion, for a scheme that net­ted them more than $3 bil­lion. That’s a thou­sand-fold re­turn.

Importantly, these firms also ad­mit­ted no wrong­do­ing, mean­ing there can be no fol­low-on civil suits for vic­tims us­ing such ad­mis­sions. Restaurants and con­sumers who paid for eggs are out of luck. And the al­leged con­spir­a­tors are re­leased from all claims.

Crime, as it turns out, pays. Allegedly.

This story is in part about the Trump ad­min­is­tra­tion, but it’s also about state en­forcers who signed onto this set­tle­ment. Traditionally, states fol­low the lead of the Federal gov­ern­ment, be­cause the Federal Antitrust Division has a lot more lawyers and is usu­ally do­ing the in­ves­ti­ga­tion. That’s likely what hap­pened here. State en­forcers prob­a­bly had lit­tle choice but to sign on and get some eggs for hun­gry peo­ple in their states, or just drop it en­tirely. Still, the value of not re­leas­ing crim­i­nal or civil claims is real. And while it would have re­quired some bold­ness, I wish some state en­forcers had been will­ing to drop the case and make a state­ment that though they could­n’t con­tinue it due to re­source con­straints, they would refuse to sign onto a bad deal. Alas.

There are two other ob­ser­va­tions here that are more pos­i­tive. One is that this egg story is a help­ful real world ex­am­ple of how price-fix­ing works, a con­fir­ma­tion of the greed­fla­tion the­ory that emerged in the pan­demic. From 2022 – 2025, nor­mal peo­ple could see what was go­ing on, while elites de­nied it.

It was a bizarre state of af­fairs. Cal-Maine ac­tu­ally listed as an in­vestor risk that the avian flu epi­demic might end, lead­ing to lower egg prices and thus less profit. And yet most pow­er­ful peo­ple sim­ply dis­missed the no­tion that there were in­cen­tives to fix prices, just point­ing to sup­ply and de­mand as all-pow­er­ful forces.

As with most price fix­ing schemes in boom-bust com­mod­ity in­dus­tries, it was­n’t that sup­ply and de­mand did­n’t mat­ter, but that the mech­a­nism for ex­trac­tion was to take ad­van­tage of a sup­ply dis­rup­tion and grab as much while they could. Corporations en­gaged in al­leged price-fix­ing or mo­nop­o­liza­tion of­ten need an al­ibi, and avian flu was the al­ibi.

The sec­ond ob­ser­va­tion is that an­titrust, even used by cor­rupt or feck­less ac­tors, can ac­tu­ally de­liver re­sults. Donald Trump has been a very poor President in terms of con­sol­i­da­tion, al­low­ing a merger boom, and gen­er­ally seek­ing to al­low large po­lit­i­cally con­nected firms to or­ga­nize mar­kets as they wish. Even so, when egg pro­duc­ers were threat­ened with le­gal con­se­quences and ex­po­sure, they low­ered prices.

It’s not a very sat­is­fy­ing out­come. Yes, we were be­ing ex­ploited, and now we know it. And the bad guys got away with it. But then, there’s a rea­son Americans are very an­gry, and that the es­tab­lish­ment has lost cred­i­bil­ity with the pub­lic. This egg case is just one more con­firm­ing data point that the wealth of the su­per­rich is com­ing straight out of your pock­et­book.

Thanks for read­ing! Your tips make this newslet­ter what it is, so please send tips on weird mo­nop­o­lies, sto­ries I’ve missed, or other thoughts. And if you liked this is­sue of BIG, you can sign up here for more is­sues, a newslet­ter on how to re­store fair com­merce, in­no­va­tion, and democ­racy. Consider be­com­ing a pay­ing sub­scriber to sup­port this work, or if you are a pay­ing sub­scriber, giv­ing a gift sub­scrip­tion to a friend, col­league, or fam­ily mem­ber. If you re­ally liked it, read my book, Goliath: The 100-Year War Between Monopoly Power and Democracy.

cheers,

Matt Stoller

No posts

Introducing Podman v6.0.0

blog.podman.io

We’re thrilled to an­nounce that Podman v6.0.0 is now avail­able! This ma­jor re­lease brings a host of sig­nif­i­cant im­prove­ments and new fea­tures de­signed to en­hance your con­tainer man­age­ment ex­pe­ri­ence. You can find the lat­est re­lease on our GitHub, and it will be rolling out to your fa­vorite pack­age man­agers very soon.

Many thanks to all our con­trib­u­tors who helped make this re­lease pos­si­ble, es­pe­cially new con­trib­u­tors!

Podman v6.0.0 is the re­sult of months of work to mod­ern­ize the pro­jec­t’s core in­fra­struc­ture, en­hance se­cu­rity, and im­prove user ex­pe­ri­ence.  Here are some of the key high­lights:

Modernized Networking: We’ve made sig­nif­i­cant strides in mod­ern­iz­ing Podman’s net­work in­fra­struc­ture. This re­lease tran­si­tions slir­p4netns, and ipt­a­bles to­wards Netavark, Pasta, and nfta­bles, stream­lin­ing our net­work­ing stack to sim­plify main­te­nance and en­able fu­ture fea­tures. Experimental sup­port has been added for Pesto root­less port for­ward­ing, which does sup­port pre­serv­ing the cor­rect source ip for root­less con­tain­ers on cus­tom net­works.

Enhanced pod­man ma­chine Capabilities: Podman Machine now of­fers a more seam­less multi-provider ex­pe­ri­ence, mak­ing it eas­ier to work across dif­fer­ent VM providers. It also in­tro­duces the new pod­man ma­chine os up­date com­mand, which helps keep your VM en­vi­ron­ments up to date. There are many more im­prove­ments than we can cover here, and we’ll take a closer look at some of them in fu­ture posts.

Quadlet Evolution: Quadlets have re­ceived a ma­jor over­haul, in­clud­ing REST API sup­port, im­proved track­ing of as­so­ci­ated files for eas­ier man­age­ment, ex­panded fea­tures for .volume units, and ad­di­tional search paths for eas­ier dis­tri­b­u­tion pack­ag­ing.

Podman Config Files Changes: Podman’s up­dated con­fig­u­ra­tion file han­dling pro­vides a smoother, more re­li­able ex­pe­ri­ence for ad­min­is­tra­tors man­ag­ing multi-user en­vi­ron­ments.Please see this blog for ex­act de­tails.

Compatibility Improvements: Podman con­tin­ues to im­prove Docker com­pat­i­bil­ity by up­dat­ing its Docker API sup­port and re­fin­ing its com­mand out­put.  Together, these make tran­si­tion­ing from Docker eas­ier than ever.

For a full list of changes, please see the re­lease notes.

Try it out!

We’re ex­cited to share Podman v6.0.0 with every­one! We en­cour­age you to try the new re­lease, ex­plore its fea­tures, and pro­vide feed­back. Your con­tri­bu­tions and in­sights are in­valu­able to the con­tin­ued growth and suc­cess of the Podman pro­ject.

This re­lease would­n’t be pos­si­ble with­out our amaz­ing com­mu­nity. We’re in­cred­i­bly grate­ful to every­one who con­tributed to this cy­cle and thank you for be­ing a part of the Podman com­mu­nity.

Ingo Blechschmidt (@iblech@mathstodon.xyz)

mathstodon.xyz

To use the Mastodon web ap­pli­ca­tion, please en­able JavaScript. Alternatively, try one of the na­tive apps for Mastodon for your plat­form.

Kimi K2.7 Code is generally available in GitHub Copilot

github.blog

Kimi K2.7 Code, an open-weight model, is now gen­er­ally avail­able in GitHub Copilot. This is the first open-weight model of­fered as a se­lec­table op­tion in the Copilot model picker, giv­ing you more choice and a lower-cost op­tion for your cod­ing work­flows.

Kimi K2.7 Code is hosted by GitHub on Microsoft Azure.

This model is billed at provider list pric­ing un­der us­age-based billing. See GitHub Copilot’s pric­ing for mod­els and re­quests for de­tails.

Availability in GitHub Copilot

Kimi K2.7 Code is be­gin­ning to roll out to Copilot Pro, Pro+, and Max plans. You’ll be able to se­lect the model in the model picker in Visual Studio Code. Rollout will be grad­ual and we’ll con­tinue to mon­i­tor the mod­el’s qual­ity and per­for­mance.

We’ll ex­pand to Copilot Business, Enterprise, and ad­di­tional sur­faces over the com­ing weeks. Check back soon if you don’t see it yet.

You’ll be able to se­lect the model in the model picker in:

Visual Studio Code ver­sion 1.127.0 or later

Visual Studio ver­sion 17.14.6 or later

Copilot CLI

GitHub Copilot cloud agent

GitHub Copilot App

github.com

GitHub Mobile iOS and Android

JetBrains ver­sion 1.9.1 – 251 or later

Xcode

Eclipse

Enabling ac­cess for Copilot Business and Copilot Enterprise

Kimi K2.7 Code is off by de­fault for Copilot Business and Copilot Enterprise. Plan ad­min­is­tra­tors must en­able the Kimi K2.7 Code pol­icy in Copilot set­tings be­fore any­one in their or­ga­ni­za­tion can se­lect it. If the pol­icy is left off, the model stays un­avail­able to that or­ga­ni­za­tion.

We rec­om­mend ad­min­is­tra­tors re­view open-weight mod­els against their own se­cu­rity, com­pli­ance, and data-gov­er­nance re­quire­ments be­fore en­abling them.

Learn more

To ex­plore all mod­els avail­able in GitHub Copilot, see our doc­u­men­ta­tion on sup­ported mod­els and choos­ing the right AI model for your task.

Join the dis­cus­sion in GitHub Community to share your feed­back.

This blog is written in en-GB

shkspr.mobi

Someone left a com­ment on my blog re­cently ask­ing if I’d mind mak­ing my lan­guage more in­clu­sive. They did­n’t get some of the cul­tural ref­er­ences I’d used and sug­gested it would be eas­ier if I used tropes which were more glob­ally known.

Here’s the thing. No.

All my blog posts start with a sim­ple de­c­la­ra­tion:

HTML<!doctype html> <html lang=en-GB>

There’s a rea­son for that. It is more than the lan­guage I speak; it is the cul­ture I live in, the way that I think, and the ac­cent I use.

When your AI bot reads this text aloud, it should do so with a British ac­cent0. That’s how I speak. It is OK to hear a slightly un­fa­mil­iar ac­cent. You’ll be able to fig­ure out what I’m say­ing. Your world won’t col­lapse if I don’t start each sen­tence with Howdy, y’all!”

But what should you do if you come across a con­cept you don’t un­der­stand?

When The Wicked Witch of the TERFs re­leased the first Harry Potter book Philosopher’s Stone”, it was pub­lished in the USA with a dif­fer­ent ti­tle; Sorcerer’s Stone”. There were also a dozen other lan­guage changes - which caused great con­ster­na­tion in the fan­dom.

What do you think hap­pens if Skip or Madison come across a kid eat­ing a sher­bet lemon” or a de­scrip­tion of Hermione’s fringe” or dis­cover Harry wear­ing a jumper? Will their lit­tle minds col­lapse un­der the knowl­edge that peo­ple far away use dif­fer­ent words?

No. And nei­ther will you.

It is OK if things are un­fa­mil­iar to you.

Up un­til my mid-twen­ties, I had never seen or eaten a Twinkie. They were a cul­tural lode­stone in a hun­dred books and films, but not the sort of thing I could buy lo­cally. So I used my con­text clues. They seemed like an un­ap­peal­ing food­stuff which, nev­er­the­less, were in­ex­plic­a­bly pop­u­lar.

As a kid, I could re­cite all the lyrics to Vanilla Ice’s Ice Ice Baby with­out get­ting half the ref­er­ences. The brain is mal­leable and can fit in new con­cepts with rel­a­tive ease.

So if you see a ref­er­ence to Count Duckula, or hear me ex­claim Accrington Stanley!”, or even blush as I de­scribe an ut­ter wanker - please take it as a sign that the hege­mony is not uni­ver­sal and some peo­ple ex­ist in a cul­tural mi­lieu dif­fer­ent to your own.

And breathe. It’ll be OK.

OK, ac­cents are a whole can of worms. Regional English is var­ied. I’m not sure if there are any BCP-style tags for in­tra-coun­try ac­cents. ↩︎

OK, ac­cents are a whole can of worms. Regional English is var­ied. I’m not sure if there are any BCP-style tags for in­tra-coun­try ac­cents. ↩︎

To add this web app to your iOS home screen tap the share button and select "Add to the Home Screen".

10HN is also available as an iOS App

If you visit 10HN only rarely, check out the the best articles from the past week.

Visit pancik.com for more.