A hot potato: According to recent data highlighted by the FTC, user complaints regarding online job scams designed around game-like tasks are skyrocketing. These so-called "task scams" have experienced a massive increase in popularity over the last four years, going from zero in 2020 to 5,000 in 2023. Despite its growing popularity, gamification remains a very controversial and polarizing issue. Systems, services, and organizations are increasingly designed to simulate a gaming experience to motivate or engage users, and even cyber-criminals are now employing similar tactics.In just the first half of 2024, reported task scams have quadrupled to about 20,000. Criminals usually try to reach their target with a text or WhatsApp message, the FTC warns, enticing potential victims with online job offers. If the target shows interest, the scammers say the job is to complete tasks related to app optimization, product boosting, or other menial, tedious things.Once the online tasks start, users will receive a small sum for the "job." Afterward, the scammers show their true colors by asking the victims to invest in the system to complete an even more lucrative set of tasks. If the victim buys into it, the scammers make off with the money and are never heard from again.The standard dress code for scammersRegulators say that scammers usually ask for payment in cryptocurrency. The FTC has seen a two-fold overall increase in cryptocurrency losses to job scams year-over-year. Scammers stole over $41 million in crypto in the first half of 2024. In total, task scams accounted for nearly 40 percent of losses to job-related scams in the first half of 2024 ($220 million). // Related StoriesThe FTC warns that if work feels more like an online game than an actual job, it's likely a task scam. Most fraud goes unreported, meaning the 20,000 individual complaints received in the first six months of 2024 are only a tiny fraction of the task scam "market."Regulators advise users to protect themselves against task scams by ignoring generic and unrequested communication attempts via text or WhatsApp, especially regarding sketchy job offers."Real employers will never contact you that way," the agency said.Furthermore, no one should pay to get paid. Rating or "liking" things online is not a job. Almost 100 percent of the time, these are scammers trying to set you up. No respectable company will pay people to do this.As Glenn Frey famously sung in Smuggler's Blues: "It's the lure of easy money, it's got a very strong appeal."

In context: There are two types of Mac users those who like the Magic Mouse and those who hate it. The device has unique functionality, which is impossible to find in a regular wireless mouse. However, it has some physical design issues that turn many people away. Apple means to change the physical design of its Magic Mouse for the first time in 15 years. Bloomberg's reputable Apple disher Mark Gurman notes that the company is completely reimagining the Mac/iPad peripheral. Insiders say engineers have already created several prototypes over the last few months. The team aims to remodel the accessory to "fit the modern era."While the sources didn't have specific details, they did say that Apple wants to address some of the most common complaints about the Magic Mouse. The device's ergonomics and charging port placement are two of the biggest gripes from sustomers and reviewers.When Apple introduced the Magic Mouse in 2009, it brought many features you couldn't find in other brands. Its touch-sensitive surface provided users with shortcuts for various functions. For example, users could right and left swipe with one finger in a browser to go forward and back on web pages.However, the Magic Mouse was not without its critics. The initial gripe was that the mouse was not ergonomic. While that might be a deal breaker for some, many users found the device's features worth putting up with a non-ergonomic design. However, it would get worse.In 2015, Apple released the "Magic Mouse 2." It was lighter and had fewer moving parts than the first generation. It had longer battery life, better Bluetooth connectivity, and was compatible with the iPad. However, one "improvement" doomed the mouse to further bad reviews the rechargeable Li-ion battery.It wasn't the battery itself that was the problem. It actually provided longer uptime than the first generation's replaceable AA alkalines (or NiCad rechargeables, if you were like me). It was Apple's choice of a charging port that ruined the improvement. // Related StoriesThe mouse's front and back are very low-profile, so they aren't suitable for hosting a charging port. Therefore, the Magic Mouse 2 has a Lightning port (later USB-C) on the bottom. This design choice prevented it from being used while charging. It also made it a game-breaker for some, who would have preferred using the mouse as it charged.Gurman suggests that port location is one of the changes Apple is considering as it continues to prototype the peripheral. Will it still have the touch-sensitive surface and the other features people liked? It's too early to say, but knowing Apple, it will try to fix the criticisms while differentiating the mouse from competitors. We'll have to wait 12 to 18 months to see what engineers have in store.Image credit: Syced

GoogleGoogles latest AI tool helps you automate image generation even further. The tool is called Whisk, and its based on Googles latest Imagen 3 image generation model. Rather than relying solely on text prompts, Whisk helps you create your desired images using other images as the base prompt.Whisk is currently in an experimental phase, but once set up its fairly easy to navigate. Google detailed in a blog post introducing Whisk that it is intended for rapid visual exploration, not pixel-perfect edits.Recommended VideosExploring the tool has a fast-paced feel, in comparison to other text-based tools, that are more contingent on the details and accuracy of the words to produce an image. After going through the Welcome page, which lists the important details you should know about how the tool functions, the page asking if youd like to sign up for emails, and the privacy policy, youll load right into the main page of Whisk. I saw a prompt with a dinosaur plushie as the image style, but the other options are an enamel pin and sticker. I just went with the first.GoogleNext, youre directed to upload an image for the subject. I uploaded a photograph of a smartwatch on my wrist and quickly realized this wasnt going to work. The third option on the right was in a perpetual loading mode, so I tried again, with a more cartoonish image I found on my hard drive, and this loaded right away into plushie figurines of three mythical creatures.RelatedOnce the image was generated, I was able to go into an editing section, with a text prompt area. Simply using the suggested prompt the character is eating ice cream, I generated additional images with the same creatures holding ice cream cones.Alternatively, you can scroll down below the main prompt creation and select start from scratch. This will allow you to upload all your own images or enter your own text. You can also add additional text from the beginning so that your characters can do an action. If youre lost for what images to add or text to type, you can click the Inspire Me button, and Whisk will fill in images.GoogleThe tool also allows you to access a My Library section, where you can view all of the images youve created. In this section, you can enable or disable the library if youd prefer to not save your creations. You can also delete images individually or delete library data as a whole.The Whisk tool is reminiscent of the Microsoft Designer prompt that allows users to create Funko Pop! figures. As a whole, you can use Microsoft Designer to generate a range of whimsical or realistic images. However, the AI generator runs solely on text prompts.As said, Whisk still includes the opportunity to add text prompts, which Google noted is included due to the tools potential to miss the mark, so you always have the option to fill in prompts when needed.Editors Recommendations

After stirring up controversy at The Game Awards, Catlydeveloper SuperAuthenti Co. has clarified that its game does not use generative AI or blockchain technology, Digital Trends confirms.Catly is an upcoming open-world adventure game that got a teaser trailer at this years Game Awards. As soon as it aired, social media users began speculating about whether the photorealistic trailer used generative AI. When Digital Trends first asked a PR representative for SuperAuthenti if the trailer or project, which is described as being technologically innovative and featuring unique cats for every user, uses AI, we were initially told that the studio would not be answering further questions until 2025.Recommended VideosIn the wake of speculation, a SuperAuthneti Co. spokesperson has now confirmed that no generative AI was used to produce the video and the game. Digital Trends also viewed a progress video showing off how the trailer was made, which did highlight underlying 3D models. This information matches what was told to both IGN and Game Developer earlier today.Catly Trailer 4K - THE GAME AWARDS 2024The spokesperson also claims that the project is not a blockchain game nor does it use NFTs. That became a topic of speculation after users connected SuperAuthenti co-founder Kevin Yeung to TenthPlanet, a web3 studio that was working on a blockchain game called Alien Meowin 2022, which had a similar description to Catly, according to GamesBeat.Please enable Javascript to view this contentEven with that confirmation, there are still several unanswered questions around Catly. Though the studio says that AI was not used in the production of its reveal trailer, its statement does not confirm whether it was used in addition marketing assets. That includes its Steam page, which some have speculated used AI to generate its game description. Its also unclear what Catlys advertised technological innovation is and how it will be able to give each player a unique cat. Then theres the question of how an open-world MMO will work on an Apple Watch. Well have to wait longer for those answers; further details will not be revealed until 2025, the spokesperson says.The final mystery lies around the newly founded studio itself, whose ownership outside of Yeung is still unknown. Digital Trends asked if TenthPlanet co-founder William Wei Chen is involved with SuperAuthenti, but the studio isnt revealing details about its staff or connections to previous companies yet.Catly is scheduled to release in 2025 for PC, Apple Watch, and Nintendo Switch.Editors RecommendationsUbisoft, Tencent will begin using Nvidias AI-generated NPC tools

Illinois union members join workers in New York City in calling for a work stoppage.

The Chinese-backed app is seeking to delay the bans Jan. 19 effective date.

Two albums recorded at the same intimate Brooklyn club are marked by immediacy, agility and gracefully rendered musical complexity.

Shortly before he joined the Eagles, the guitarist and singer released this forceful yet elegiac rock album, expressing his grief over his young daughters death.

blow that whistle In IT? Need cash? Cybersecurity whistleblowers are earning big payouts. The US government now relies on whistleblowers to bring many cases. Nate Anderson Dec 16, 2024 5:38 pm | 20 Credit: Getty Images | spxChrome Credit: Getty Images | spxChrome Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreMatthew Decker is the former chief information officer for Penn State Universitys Applied Research Laboratory. As of October, he's also $250,000 richer.In his Penn State position, Decker was well placed to see that the university was not implementing all of the cybersecurity controls that were required by its various contracts with NASA and the Department of Defense (DoD). It did not, for instance, use an external cloud services provider that met the DoD's security guidelines, and it fudged some of the self-submitted "scores" it made to the government about Penn State's IT security.So Decker sued the school under the False Claims Act, which lets private individuals bring cases against organizations on behalf of the government if they come across evidence of wrongdoing related to government contracts. In many of these cases, the government later "intervenes" to assist with the case (as it did here), but whether it does so or not, whistleblowers stand to collect a percentage of any fines if they win.In October, Penn State agreed to a $1.25 million settlement with the government; Decker got $250,000 of the money.On the regularThis now happens in IT with some regularity. In November, Dell, Dell Federal Systems, and Iron Bow Technologies settled with the government for $4.3 million over claims that they "violated the False Claims Act by submitting and causing the submission of non-competitive bids to the Army and thereby overcharging the Army under the Army Desktop and Mobile Computing 3 (ADMC-3) contract."But once again, this wasn't something the government uncovered on its own; a whistleblower named Brent Lillard, who was an executive at another company in the industry, brought the initial complaint. For his work, Lillard just made $345,000.In early December, Gen Digital (formerly Symantec) paid a much larger fee$55.1 millionafter losing a trial in 2022. Gen Digital/Symantec was found liable for charging the government higher prices than it charged to companies.Once again, the issue was brought to light by a whistleblower, Lori Morsell, who oversaw the contract for Gen Digital/Symantec. Morsell's award has not yet been determined by the court, but given the amount of the payout, it should be substantial.False Claims Act goes digitalDue to the complexity of investigatingor even finding out abouttechnical failures and False Claims Act cases from the outside of an organization, the government has increasingly relied on whistleblowers to kick-start these sorts of IT cases.The False Claims Act goes back to the Civil War, where it was used on unscrupulous vendors who sold poor-quality goods to the Union army. Today, it has become the tool of choice to prosecute cyber-failures regarding government contractors, largely because of the Act's robust whistleblower rules (technically known as its "qui tam" provisions).This was, even just a few years ago, a novel proposition. In 2020, the law firm Carlton Fields noted that "two significant whistleblower cases sent ripples through the False Claims Act (FCA) community by demonstrating the specter of FCA liability resulting from the failure to comply with cybersecurity requirements in government contracts."In one of these cases, Brian Markus earned $2.61 million for his False Claims Act case against Aerojet Rocketdyne.In the other, James Glenn sued Cisco over a video surveillance product that had known security flaws and yet was sold to numerous government agencies. Cisco eventually paid $8.6 million, of which Glenn walked away with more than $1 million.By 2021, however, False Claims Act cases to go after government contractors, especially in the IT sector, had become downright normal. The Department of Justice even stood up a special program called the Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative to assist with such cases. In a late 2021 speech, Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton said that the initiative would use whistleblowers and the False Claims Act to focus on three things:Knowing failures to comply with contractual cyber standardsKnowing misrepresentation of security controls and practicesKnowing failure to report suspected breaches in a timely fashionIn the last four years, the initiative has brought in judgments and settlements against many major companies like Boeing (which paid $8.1 million in 2023; several whistleblowers split $1.5 million), and it has gone after huge universities like Penn State (see above) and Georgia Tech (earlier this year, still tied up in court).Blowing a whistle for yearsThese cases all rely on insiders, and the payouts can be hefty, but the cases can also take years to reach their conclusions. The Cisco case, for instance, lasted eight years before the whistleblower got his money. The Penn State case was relatively speedy by contrasta mere two years from its filing in October 2022 to the university's payout earlier this year.To report fraud against the federal government, contact the Department of Justice here. But be aware that, if you're hoping to collect a share of any future payout, you generally need to retain a lawyer and file a whistleblower case first.Nate AndersonDeputy EditorNate AndersonDeputy Editor Nate is the deputy editor at Ars Technica. His most recent book is In Emergency, Break Glass: What Nietzsche Can Teach Us About Joyful Living in a Tech-Saturated World, which is much funnier than it sounds. 20 Comments

Missed a zero Huge math error corrected in black plastic study; authors say it doesnt matter Correction issued for black plastic study that had people tossing spatulas. Beth Mole Dec 16, 2024 5:23 pm | 87 Close-up view of cooking utensils in container on kitchen counter Credit: Getty | Grace Cary Close-up view of cooking utensils in container on kitchen counter Credit: Getty | Grace Cary Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreEditors of the environmental chemistry journal Chemosphere have posted an eye-catching correction to a study reporting toxic flame retardants from electronics wind up in some household products made of black plastic, including kitchen utensils. The study sparked a flurry of media reports a few weeks ago that urgently implored people to ditch their kitchen spatulas and spoons. Wirecutter even offered a buying guide for what to replace them with.The correction, posted Sunday, will likely take some heat off the beleaguered utensils. The authors made a math error that put the estimated risk from kitchen utensils off by an order of magnitude.Specifically, the authors estimated that if a kitchen utensil contained middling levels of a key toxic flame retardant (BDE-209), the utensil would transfer 34,700 nanograms of the contaminant a day based on regular use while cooking and serving hot food. The authors then compared that estimate to a reference level of BDE-209 considered safe by the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA's safe level is 7,000 ngper kilogram of body weightper day, and the authors used 60 kg as the adult weight (about 132 pounds) for their estimate. So, the safe EPA limit would be 7,000 multiplied by 60, yielding 420,000 ng per day. That's 12 times more than the estimated exposure of 34,700 ng per day.However, the authors missed a zero and reported the EPA's safe limit as 42,000 ng per day for a 60 kg adult. The error made it seem like the estimated exposure was nearly at the safe limit, even though it was actually less than a tenth of the limit."[W]e miscalculated the reference dose for a 60 kg adult, initially estimating it at 42,000 ng/day instead of the correct value of 420,000 ng/day," the correction reads. "As a result, we revised our statement from 'the calculated daily intake would approach the U.S. BDE-209 reference dose' to 'the calculated daily intake remains an order of magnitude lower than the U.S. BDE-209 reference dose.' We regret this error and have updated it in our manuscript."Unchanged conclusionWhile being off by an order of magnitude seems like a significant error, the authors don't seem to think it changes anything. "This calculation error does not affect the overall conclusion of the paper," the correction reads. The corrected study still ends by saying that the flame retardants "significantly contaminate" the plastic products, which have "high exposure potential."Ars has reached out to the lead author, Megan Liu, but has not received a response. Liu works for the environmental health advocacy group Toxic-Free Future, which led the study.The study highlighted that flame retardants used in plastic electronics may, in some instances, be recycled into household items."Companies continue to use toxic flame retardants in plastic electronics, and that's resulting in unexpected and unnecessary toxic exposures, Liu said in a press release from October. "These cancer-causing chemicals shouldn't be used to begin with, but with recycling, they are entering our environment and our homes in more ways than one. The high levels we found are concerning."BDE-209, aka decabromodiphenyl ether or deca-BDE, was a dominant component of TV and computer housings before it was banned by the European Union in 2006 and some US states in 2007. China only began restricting BDE-209 in 2023. The flame retardant is linked to carcinogenicity, endocrine disruption, neurotoxicity, and reproductive harm.Uncommon contaminantThe presence of such toxic compounds in household items is important for noting the potential hazards in the plastic waste stream. However, in addition to finding levels that were an order of magnitude below safe limits, the study also suggested that the contamination is not very common.The study examined 203 black plastic household products, including 109 kitchen utensils, 36 toys, 30 hair accessories, and 28 food serviceware products. Of those 203 products, only 20 (10 percent) had any bromine-containing compounds at levels that might indicate contamination from bromine-based flame retardants, like BDE-209. Of the 109 kitchen utensils tested, only nine (8 percent) contained concerning bromine levels."[A] minority of black plastic products are contaminated at levels >50 ppm [bromine]," the study states.But that's just bromine compounds. Overall, only 14 of the 203 products contained BDE-209 specifically.The product that contained the highest level of bromine compounds was a disposable sushi tray at 18,600 ppm. Given that heating is a significant contributor to chemical leaching, it's unclear what exposure risk the sushi tray poses. Of the 28 food serviceware products assessed in the study, the sushi tray was only one of two found to contain bromine compounds. The other was a fast food tray that was at the threshold of contamination with 51 ppm.Beth MoleSenior Health ReporterBeth MoleSenior Health Reporter Beth is Ars Technicas Senior Health Reporter. Beth has a Ph.D. in microbiology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and attended the Science Communication program at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She specializes in covering infectious diseases, public health, and microbes. 87 Comments