News of the Cyber World

[kyonides]

GOOGLE ANDROID + A $ETTLEMENT

Here’s how you might qualify for a payout from Google’s $135M Android settlement

Tens of millions of Americans who have used an Android phone in recent years could be eligible for a payout from a $135 million settlement with Google.

The lawsuit alleged that Android devices transmitted data to Google in the background without users’ permission, consuming their paid cellular data. The tech giant denied wrongdoing but agreed to settle.

Mobile market share data suggests there are about 117 million Android users in the US, compared with around 200 million iPhone and other non-Android users.

Individual payouts are expected to be small — roughly $1 to $1.50 per person — though payments are capped at $100 each, depending on how many users ultimately receive money.

So who actually qualifies? To be eligible, users must meet several conditions.

You must be an individual in the US — not a business — who used an Android device to access the internet using a cellular data plan at any point since Nov. 12, 2017.

You also cannot be part of a separate California case, Csupo v. Google LLC, which excludes certain users from this settlement.

Anyone who meets those criteria could be included.

If you’re unsure, settlement materials advise contacting the administrator or checking the official website to confirm eligibility.

Getting paid is relatively simple — but not entirely automatic.
...

GOOGLE VS BACK BUTTON TRICK

Google Is About to Punish Websites for That Annoying Browser Back Button Trick

Have you ever been trapped by a web page, unable to use the back button to get back to the site you were previously browsing, powerless to do anything but sigh and sacrifice the whole browser tab? Turns out that you may have been the victim of "back-button hijacking," a practice that Google is cracking down on starting on June 15.

As defined by Google, back-button hijacking occurs "when a site interferes with a user's browser navigation and prevents them from using their back button to immediately get back to the page they came from."

This navigational interference can present itself in multiple ways, like locking a user onto their current webpage, presenting unsolicited ads or sending users to completely new pages instead of their intended destination.

Now, Google is adding back-button hijacking to the list of malicious practices covered by its spam policies. According to the company, these practices lead to "a negative and deceptive user experience or compromised user security or privacy." That means the search giant is classifying the practice as being as offensive as unwanted software executables and malware.

While Google instated its new rules on Tuesday, it won't start punishing offenders until June 15. According to the company's blog post, this two-month window has been designated to give website owners enough time to make the necessary changes. This entails removing scripts or techniques that insert or replace webpages in someone's browser history.

Google will also penalize websites that unintentionally engage in back-button hijacking caused by third-party software on the site.

Websites that don't make the changes by the deadline could be subject to manual spam actions or to automatically lowered rankings in search engine results. Once a manual spam action has been taken against a website, it can only be removed by fixing the offense and submitting the site for review.

TICKETMASTER

Or should we now call it Ticketenslaver?  

Jury finds Live Nation and Ticketmaster operated as a monopoly and overcharged fans

A jury found Live Nation and Ticketmaster operated as a monopoly in its dominance of the live events and ticketing industry, validating complaints that the industry giant was stifling competition and driving up fees for fans.

The verdict was reached following a lengthy trial in New York federal court that included testimony from top executives in the music and entertainment industries. Jurors began deliberating on Friday.

But fans won’t see ticket prices or fees tacked onto their bills drop anytime soon. Judge Arun Subramanian will now hold second trial to decide what remedies are warranted, including whether to grant the states’ request to break up the company or make other structural changes such as ordering the sale of businesses.

“It will be an earthquake in the industry in terms of people’s perception in feeling validated,” said Scott Grzenczyk, a lawyer with law firm Girard Sharp.

“There’s big difference between people complaining about Goliath and getting a jury verdict that Goliath was a monopolist and doing something wrong,” he added.

Live Nation, in a statement Wednesday, rebuffed the verdict saying that it plans to appeal “any unfavorable rulings” on pending motions.

“The jury’s verdict is not the last word on this matter. Pending motions will determine whether the liability and damages rulings stand,” the statement said.

Justice Department settled earlier

The Justice Department and 39 state attorneys general, including California and New York, and Washington, DC, sued Live Nation in 2024 alleging its combination with Ticketmaster and control of “virtually every aspect of the live music ecosystem” have harmed fans, artists, and venues.

“A jury found what we have long known to be true: Live Nation and Ticketmaster are breaking the law and costing consumers millions of dollars in the process,” New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, said in a staetment Wednesday.

During the second week of trial, in a move that surprised even the judge, the Justice Department reached a secret settlement with Live Nation. A handful of states signed onto the deal, but more than two dozen proceeded to trial.

That settlement was agreed to just weeks after DOJ leadership pushed out Gail Slater, the antitrust division head known to advocate for her aggressive approach to the cases she oversaw.

TRUMP'S MEMEABILITY

Trump reveals why he deleted AI post of himself as Jesus-like figure — and takes shot at conservative activist Riley Gaines

President Trump explained Monday that he deleted an AI-generated image that appeared to depict him as Jesus Christ because of the “confusion” the social media post caused — and took a jab at conservative activist Riley Gaines.

“Normally I don’t like doing that,” Trump told CBS News, when asked why he deleted the Truth Social post, “but I didn’t want to have anybody be confused.”

“People were confused,” the president said.

Earlier Monday, Trump told reporters he thought the image of himself — clad in billowy white and red robes, placing one hand on the forehead of a man in a hospital bed with a heavenly light radiating from his other hand — “was me as a doctor and it had to do with the Red Cross.”

Trump maintained Monday night that “most people thought” the same.

“You had the Red Cross right there, you had, you know, medical people surrounding me, and I was like the doctor, you know, as a little fun playing the doctor and making people better,” he told the outlet. “So that’s what it was viewed as.”

The president denied that criticism from conservative activist and his frequent supporter Gaines played a factor in his decision to delete the post.

“I didn’t listen to Riley Gaines. I’m not a big fan of Riley, actually,” Trump said.

Gaines posted that she couldn’t understand why the president would make such a post.

“Is he looking for a response? Does he actually like this?” the former NCAA swimmer wrote on X, adding, “a little humility would serve him well” and “God shall not be mocked.”

OPENAI

Student accused of trying to murder Sam Altman is ‘well-informed’ ‘AI doomer,’ says podcast host who interviewed him

In January, podcaster Andy Mills interviewed an AI doomer who had advocated on Discord for killing tech execs. Still, when news broke last week that a 20-year-old had been arrested for attempting to murder OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Mills was shocked.

“When I saw that they had released the name of this guy,” Mills told The Post, “I was like, ‘Holy s–t. It’s Dan.'”

On Monday, Daniel Moreno-Gama was arrested for throwing a Molotov cocktail at Altman’s San Francisco house on April 10, then attempting to burn down OpenAI’s headquarters some four miles away. Investigators allege he was carrying an anti-AI manifesto that read, “If I am going to advocate for others to kill and commit crimes, then I must lead by example … .” The DOJ has charged him with attempted murder and arson.

The interview, “Sam Altman’s Attacker, In His Own Words,” debuted Thursday.

Mills, host of the podcast “The Last Invention,” which explores different schools of thought about artificial intelligence, found Moreno-Gama on a Discord channel, Pause AI, dedicated to talking about the dangers of AI.

Hiding behind the username Butlerian Jihadist — the title of a novel in the “Dune” series by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson — the Spring, Texas, college student was anonymously flirting with using violence against tech executives.

“Will speaking about violence get me banned?” he asked moderators.

“[I] reached out and said, ‘Hey, man, what did you have in mind when you talk about violence?'” Mills told The Post. “And he said, ‘How about Luigi-ing some tech CEOs?’” — a reference to Luigi Mangione, who is accused of murdering United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December 2024.

During the interview, when the host asked if the Lone Star College student really thought violence against AI executives was a good idea, Moreno-Gama softened a bit.

“I didn’t really mean that as a threat or anything,” Moreno-Gama said. “I think before we even think about violence, we need to exhaust all our peaceful means first. I think protesting, I think sharing information — I think that needs to come way before we even consider [violence].”

Mills pressed: “Do you think that if we continue to see the industry move in the direction it’s moving now, that by whatever means necessary, we have to stop the extinction of the human race?”

Moreno-Gama paused for several seconds before replying, “I’ll say no comment.”

“He seemed earnest and intelligent, and very informed,” Mills recalled. “He was incredibly well informed on the AI doomer position.”

 I guess people no longer remember what Sam Altman himself stated years ago.

Billionaire signs up to be killed, have brain digitally preserved

Published March 14, 2018 | Updated March 14, 2018, 6:37 p.m. ET

Well, that, and a spare 10 grand.

Entrepreneur Sam Altman is one of 25 people who have splashed the cash to join a waiting list at Nectome – a startup that promises to upload your brain into a computer to grant you eternal life.

There’s just one (huge) catch: It has to kill you first.

The process, as described in the MIT Technology Review, involves embalming your brain for it to potentially be simulated later in a computer.

The living customer would be hooked up to a machine and then pumped full of Nectome’s custom embalming chemicals.

The method is “100 percent fatal,” claims the company.

“The user experience will be identical to physician-assisted suicide,” Nectome’s co-founder Robert McIntyre revealed to the publication.

“Our mission is to preserve your brain well enough to keep all its memories intact: from that great chapter of your favorite book to the feeling of cold winter air, baking an apple pie, or having dinner with your friends and family,” writes Nectome on its site.

“We believe that within the current century it will be feasible to digitize this information and use it to recreate your consciousness.”

How delightful.

The reality, however, is that physician-assisted suicide is currently only legal in five out of 50 US states, and individuals seeking it must have a terminal illness, as well as a prognosis of six months or less to live.

As crazy as it sounds, the idea of uploading our consciousness into a computer is gaining ground among techies and scientists.

Futurologist Dr. Ian Pearson previously told The Sun that in 50 years time we’ll be able to transfer our brains to the cloud (tech speak for online storage).

That way you’ll be able to “use any android that you feel like to inhabit the real world,” he said.

NETFLIX, HBO MAX, HULU & DISNEY+

Netflix, HBO Max, other streaming services subscribers revolt over jacked-up prices: ‘I’m done’

Netflix and other streaming giants are jacking up subscription prices — and some couch potatoes say they’ve had enough.

Scores of cord-cutters have taken to Reddit to vent their anger at shelling out $26.99 a month for Netflix and more than $22.99 for ad-free HBO Max — a far cry from what the services were charging when they debuted.

“I’m done with the constant price hikes. After years of loyalty, I’m out,” one Netflix user wrote on Reddit earlier this week after canceling.
The unnamed Reddit user attached a screenshot of his membership cancellation.

“I can’t justify paying $30 a month,” another user griped, referring to Netflix’s premium tier.

The frustration comes as Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, HBO Max and other platforms have all raised prices over the past year, pushing monthly streaming costs closer to and even beyond traditional cable bills.

Late last month, Netflix, the industry leader, raised the price of its premium tier to $26.99 a month, up from $24.99 — while its standard plan climbed to $19.99 from $17.99 and its ad-supported tier rose to $8.99 from $7.99.

That was after HBO Max, the Warner Bros. Discovery-owned platform, hiked its Premium plan in October to $22.99 a month, up from $20.99.

Its Standard tier increased to $18.49 from $16.99 and its Basic with Ads plan rose to $10.99 from $9.99.

Disney+ has also steadily raised prices. Last fall, the service announced that its Premium ad-free tier would be costing $18.99 a month, up from $15.99, while its ad-supported option climbed to $11.99 from $9.99.

“Just about every major streaming service” has raised prices over the past year, Kourtnee Jackson, a senior editor at CNET, told The Post.

Companies claim the increases are needed to cover rising costs, including expensive content and technology upgrades, Jackson said, noting that streaming platforms are investing heavily in live sports, gaming and new features.

AMAZON

Amazon sued for allegedly sabotaging Fire TV Sticks to force users to upgrade

Amazon is facing a bombshell class action lawsuit accusing the tech giant of purposely letting the software in Fire TV Stick devices peter out so customers would feel compelled to buy newer versions.

The company allegedly “bricked” its first- and second-generation Fire TV Stick devices by cutting off software support and upgrades, according to a suit filed in California state court earlier this month.

As the TV remotes started to glitch, Amazon did not provide refunds or software upgrades to customers – an attempt to steer customers toward replacement purchases, the suit alleged.

Amazon did not immediately respond to The Post’s request for comment.

The first- and second-gen Fire TV Stick devices were released in 2014 and 2016, respectively, and allowed customers to stream thousands of movies and shows from platforms like Amazon Prime and Netflix by plugging the Stick into a TV’s HDMI port.

Amazon has since released half a dozen new TV remotes, including two new models launched last year – the Fire TV Stick 4K Select and 4K Plus, which retail on Amazon’s site for about $40 to $50 at full price. The online retail giant often discounts its remotes.

In December 2022, it stopped providing any software support or updates for its first-gen devices, according to the lawsuit. It ended updates for second-gen remotes in March 2023, the suit said.

Bill Merewhuader, a California resident and the plaintiff in the suit, purchased a second-generation Fire TV Stick from Best Buy in 2018 – but the failing software eventually left the remote “inoperable,” forcing him to buy a new version in 2024, according to the suit.

Some Amazon customers have complained that their remotes have stopped working altogether, while others have claimed that their devices are much slower and face significant buffering times, according to the lawsuit.

The suit – which is seeking unspecified damages and a nationwide class action status – accuses Amazon of “deceptive” marketing, claiming the company never informed customers that it would cut off updates to the devices for any reason, at any time.

Amazon buys satellite operator Globalstar for $11B to challenge Elon Musk’s Starlink

Amazon said Tuesday it would acquire Globalstar in an $11.57 billion deal, bolstering its fledgling satellite business as it tries to catch up with Elon Musk’s Starlink.

Tech companies are pouring in billions of dollars to capture the lucrative market for satellite-based connectivity, but it will be a tall order to match Starlink’s 10,000-unit-strong network.

Through the deal, Amazon adds Globalstar’s two dozen satellites to its existing network of more than 200.

Amazon has been working to ramp up its network by deploying about 3,200 satellites in Earth’s low orbit by 2029, with roughly half required to be in place by a July regulatory deadline.

It is also preparing to roll out its satellite internet services later this year.

Globalstar’s satellite network is designed for reliable, low-data connections directly to mobile devices, or Direct-to-Device (D2D).

The technology removes the need for devices to connect to ground-based cellular towers, making them crucial in powering emergency services and delivering connectivity in areas with limited cellular coverage.

The deal will help Amazon deploy D2D from 2028, the companies said.

Meanwhile, Starlink already serves more than nine million users globally.

The SpaceX unit, which provides high-speed broadband through user terminals, is also developing D2D services through partnerships with telecom operators such as T-Mobile.

“Amazon has been falling behind Starlink on satellite broadband. Acquiring Globalstar allows them to catch-up on their D2D spectrum position, and leap ahead on D2D deployment,” said Armand Musey, president & founder of Summit Ridge Group.

Shares of Louisiana-based Globalstar rose more than 9% in early trading, after gaining over 6% in the past two weeks on media reports of the companies’ discussions.

TWITTER / X

Big advertisers agree to settle FTC probe of alleged boycott against Elon Musk’s X, others

Three large advertising agencies settled a Federal Trade Commission probe accusing them of violating antitrust law by conspiring to boycott online media platforms based on political content they didn’t like, the agency said Wednesday.

Investigators accused Dentsu, Publicis and WPP of steering clients’ ads away from platforms featuring “disfavored” viewpoints, ostensibly to promote “brand safety” and target misinformation identified by left-leaning media watchdogs.

The FTC said websites containing such content risked becoming ineligible for ad placements because of collusion.

Its complaint filed in the Fort Worth, Texas, federal court cited alleged concerns about misinformation on Elon Musk’s X and the conservative website Breitbart.

“This unlawful collusion not only damaged our marketplace, but also distorted the marketplace of ideas by discriminating against speech and ideas that fell below the unlawfully agreed-upon floor,” FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson said in a statement.

Wednesday’s settlements with the FTC and eight Republican-led states require Dentsu, Publicis and GroupM to stop alleged efforts to set common brand safety standards, or use “exclusion lists” when placing ads.

The ad agencies did not admit or deny wrongdoing in agreeing to settle.

Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, Texas, Utah and West Virginia joined the settlements.

In a statement, Dentsu said it was committed to operating transparently, with integrity and in compliance with the law.

WPP said separately it was committed to giving clients unbiased advice on where to place ads. Publicis did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

APPLE

iPhone users warned to delete suspicious emails linked to iCloud storage scam

You’ve got mail (fraud).

Consumer organizations are warning the world’s 1.8 billion iPhone users about a sinister email scam designed to pilfer personal info and loot banking details.

According to reports, users receive seemingly legitimate messages informing them that their iCloud storage is full. The messages prompt victims to upgrade their accounts or risk losing important data, namely all their photos.

The messages include a link that supposedly enables the upgrade to a larger plan, and the onerous email is aesthetically similar to Apple communications and is even signed by “The iCloud Team.”

However, reports indicate that clicking the upgrade link or button redirects users to a phishing website designed to steal banking information and personal details.

Those who attempt to make a payment may have their details and data stolen and distributed on the dark web for nefarious purposes.

According to victims of the storage swindle, some messages are more alarming and exploit time sensitivity, telling users that their iCloud account will close within 48 hours unless immediate action is taken.

“Every Apple user needs to know about this nasty scam doing the rounds,” an independent consumer organization shared on Facebook.

“These sneaky fake emails that look like they’re from iCloud and threaten you with claims that ‘all your photos will be deleted,'” the post forewarned.

“I get them nearly every day, and I don’t even have an iPhone,” said one commentator.

“Going digital has made being mugged so much easier for the mugger,” lamented another.

Others pointed out that, to address account issues, Apple typically instructs customers to “go into your settings” and never redirects them to pay via a link.

Apple fans react to leaked images of iPhone Fold ‘dummy model’: ‘Apple has lost its way’

Apple fans are already folding on Apple — and the device isn’t even out yet.

Leaked images of a supposed “dummy model” for the long-rumored iPhone Fold have sparked a mini meltdown online, with die-hards dragging the tech giant for what they say looks more flop than flip.

Australian leaker Sonny Dickson dropped the images on X, teasing: “Exclusive First Dummies of what the final size of the iPhone Fold, iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max will look like.”

What followed? A brutal pile-on.

One user didn’t mince words: “Apple has lost its way.”

“That fold is horrific, it’s so tiny and will still cost $2300. Typical Apple,” an additional unimpressed viewer fired back.

And if there were any lingering doubts about the vibe, one commenter summed it up in three savage words: “Omg the fold is so… ugly?”

From the photos, the alleged foldable appears to take a book-style approach — opening horizontally into a tablet-like screen — with a chunky frame and a dual-lens camera bump on the back.

But for fans used to Apple’s sleek, minimalist aesthetic, the early look isn’t exactly love at first swipe.

“The Fold is too wide, can’t palm that easily in normal phone use,” one user griped.

Others honed in on what could be a make-or-break miss: the apparent absence of MagSafe — Apple’s magnetic snap-on system, first rolled out with the iPhone 12, that lets chargers, wallets and other accessories click satisfyingly into place.

The backlash is notable — especially for a product that hasn’t even been officially confirmed by Apple.

Still, behind the scenes, signs point to the foldable finally becoming a reality.

Following nude-deepfake outcry, Apple nearly kicked Grok off App Store: report

Apple reportedly threatened to yank Elon Musk’s Grok from its App Store over complaints the AI app wasn’t doing enough to stop users from creating nude or overly sexualized deepfakes — a potentially major blow as Grok came under international scrutiny for the content it was being used to create.

The threat, which surfaced in a recently revealed missive to US senators, came after Apple determined that Grok — along with Musk’s social media site X — were in violation of Apple rules barring overtly sexual material.

Apple took the drastic step after asking X and Grok to clamp down on functions that allowed users to create sexualized deepfakes, according to a Jan. 30 letter cited by NBC News.

Apple had determined Grok’s efforts to address the problem — which included the use of AI to undress images of people with their consent — hadn’t gone far enough, Apple reportedly wrote Democratic Sens. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico, Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Ron Wyden of Oregon.

X had announced a crackdown on using AI for undressing images on Jan. 14, saying that the restriction “applies to all users, including paid subscribers.”

And Apple reportedly said it asked X and Grok to come up with a plan to improve content moderation, though that was found to be lacking.

“Apple … determined that X had substantially resolved its violations, but the Grok app remained out of compliance. As a result, we rejected the Grok submission and notified the developer that additional changes to remedy the violation would be required, or the app could be removed from the App Store,” Apple wrote the senators.

RETRO TREND

Why Gen Zers are trashing smartphones for old-school, retro tech: ‘People are just sick of it’

They’re tossing tech to the trash and seizing a retro reboot.

Gen Zers are ditching sleek smartphones and algorithm-fed apps for vintage flip phones, once-coveted iPods, digital cameras, even typewriters — and jump-starting a simpler, less plugged-in life.

And parents are scooping up retro tech for their children, too, as a way to preserve family life and delay the deluge of doomscrolling that is trapping kids into digital addiction.

About a year ago, Sonya Saydakova, a grad student at New York University, switched from an iPhone to a dumbed-down Nokia 2780 flip phone.

“It’s an indescribable feeling to feel so detached and not constantly available,” the 23-year-old raved to The Post.

Saydakova got a movie theater membership, picked up a digital camera and a CD player — and she quit Spotify. She also asks for directions instead of solely relying on Google Maps, saying the interactions with people on the street have enriched her life.

Reducing her screen time, Saydakova told The Post, has made her feel liberated, focused, happier — and less anxious.   

“We’re culturally at a breaking point,” she maintained. “People are just sick of it.”

Alex Becker, a 34-year-old mother who lives outside of Philadelphia, shares Saydakova’s desire to eschew tech, telling The Post she is one of “many” parents who have “no interest in getting their kids a smartphone or an iPad.”

Instead, she wants her children, 5 and 2, to experience the “joy of childhood” without “the online drama,” she said.

“The second kids get these devices, the innocence of childhood is lost. That’s what I hear from so many parents, like, ‘My daughter is spending every day on Instagram and Snapchat, wanting to buy skincare products, when six months ago she was reading Narnia books.’” 

The low-tech switch is part of a “broader cultural shift away from constant connectivity” and “digital overload,” according to Amanda Michel, US director of marketing at Backmarket, an online marketplace for refurbished electronics.

Michel told The Post — in an email, ironically enough — that the site is seeing a “renewed interest in older, simpler devices,” with consumers scooping up Wi-Fi-free iPods, MP3 players, vintage gaming consoles, handheld cameras and more.

AI

AI chatbot conversations can be used against people in court, lawyers warn after federal ruling

April 15 – As people increasingly turn to artificial intelligence for advice, some US lawyers are telling their clients not to treat AI chatbots like trusted confidants when their freedom or legal liability is on the line.

These warnings became more urgent after a federal judge in New York ruled this year that the former CEO of a bankrupt financial services company could not shield his AI chats from prosecutors pursuing securities fraud charges against him.

In the wake of the ruling, attorneys have been advising that conversations with chatbots like Anthropic’s Claude and ‌OpenAI’s ChatGPT could be demanded by prosecutors in criminal cases or by litigation adversaries in civil cases.

“We are telling our clients: You should proceed with caution here,” said Alexandria Gutiérrez Swette, a lawyer at New York-based law firm Kobre & Kim.

People’s discussions with their lawyers are almost always deemed confidential under US law. But AI chatbots are not lawyers, and attorneys are instructing clients to take steps that could keep their communications with AI tools more private.

In emails to clients and advisories posted on their websites, more than a dozen major US law firms have outlined advice for people and companies to decrease the chances of AI chats winding up in court.

Similar warnings are also appearing in hiring agreements by some firms with their clients. For instance, New York-based firm Sher Tremonte stated in a recent client contract that sharing a lawyer’s advice or communications with a chatbot could erase the legal protection known as attorney-client privilege ⁠that usually shields communications between lawyers and their clients.

A judicial ruling

The case that helped set off the alarm bells involved Bradley Heppner, the former chair of bankrupt financial services company GWG Holdings and founder of alternative asset firm Beneficent. Heppner was charged by federal prosecutors last November with securities and wire fraud, and pleaded not guilty.

Heppner had used Anthropic’s chatbot Claude to prepare reports about his case to share with his attorneys, who later argued that his AI exchanges should be withheld because they contained details from the lawyers related to his defense.

Prosecutors argued that they had a right to demand material that Heppner created with Claude because his defense lawyers were not directly involved, and because attorney-client privilege does not apply to chatbots.

Meta is building a creepy AI clone of Mark Zuckerberg to chat with staff: report

Meta staffers will soon have the option of chatting with a creepy-sounding virtual clone of CEO Mark Zuckerberg, according to a report published Monday.

The AI-powered Zuck will be a “photorealistic” 3D copy of the eccentric executive and is being trained to recreate his mannerisms, tone and even voice, the Financial Times reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

The 41-year-old billionaire is said to be personally involved in building his AI doppelganger, which will be able to spout his publicly available statements and “his own recent thinking on company strategies,” according to the FT.

The project’s goal is reportedly to help employees “feel more connected” to Zuckerberg.

Meta representatives were not quoted in the FT article and did not immediately respond to a Post request for comment.

The Zuckerberg clone is one of multiple AI-powered characters currently in development at Meta, according to the FT. For now, it’s unclear who else will be portrayed.

The digital Zuck initiative drew jeers online, with commenters referring to the tech titan’s well-known history of awkward public appearances.

Using the AI version of Zuckerberg is “probably less weird than engaging with the real version,” one X user quipped.

“This sounds like a horror movie. You’re at work but now you have to run all decisions by robot Zuck,” another wrote.

Snap slashes 1K jobs in ‘AI efficiency’ bloodbath

Snap shares spiked 7% on Wednesday after billionaire CEO Evan Spiegel revealed plans to slash about 1,000 jobs and rely on artificial intelligence to take over their work.

Spiegel, whose personal fortune is pegged by Forbes at $2.3 billion, said he was “deeply sorry” in a staff memo announcing the cuts, which amount to 16% of the Snapchat parent’s overall workforce.

The company is also closing more than 300 open roles.

“While these changes are necessary to realize Snap’s long-term potential, we believe that rapid advancements in artificial intelligence enable our teams to reduce repetitive work, increase velocity, and better support our community, partners, and advertisers,” Spiegel said in the memo.

“We have already witnessed small squads leveraging AI tools to drive meaningful progress across several important initiatives, including Snapchat+, enhanced ad platform performance, and efficiency improvements in our Snap Lite infrastructure,” Speigel added.

Snap employees in North America were told to work from home on Wednesday following the announcement, with impacted workers learning their fate by email.

The social media firm, which has struggled with intense competition from rivals like Instagram and TikTok, had about 5,261 full-time employees as of the end of last year.

The layoffs came as Snap faced pressure from activist investor Irenic Capital Management, which had pushed the company to streamline its business, according to Reuters.

Irenic advised Snap to either spin off or shut down its “Specs” augmented reality glasses business and enact other cost-cutting moves.

Even after Wednesday’s intraday trading gains, Snap shares were still down about 26% since the start of the year.

ORACLE

Oracle accused of targeting employees with stock options in recent layoffs

A former Oracle employee accused the tech giant of targeting workers “with outstanding stock options” in a recent round of layoffs — as the company reportedly offered its new chief financial officer a juicy $26 million stock package.

A 30-year Oracle veteran recently took to LinkedIn as the Larry Ellison-led company laid off about 700 workers, with thousands of more cuts potentially in the offing.

“Well, after 30+ years at Oracle, I join the 30,000 or so laid off today. Quite a shock. Many of the absolute best colleagues were laid off as well,” Nina Lewis wrote.

“It seems (BUT I DON’T KNOW), maybe, layoffs follow an algorithm of high level individual contributors and mid-level managers – especially those with outstanding stock options,” she continued.

“Not sure what to do next, if anything. Open to ideas,” Lewis concluded with a smile emoticon.

Laid-off employees immediately forfeited their unvested stock, according to Marketwise, though their vested stock remained accessible.

Oracle declined to comment.

Lewis clarified in a follow-up post that she had “NO specific inside knowledge of any layoff algorithm” but that rumors circulating among employees “appear to match what we see around us as a possible pattern.”

“Again, I have no inside knowledge of any ‘hidden algorithm’, although there must be some system/algorithm if you are laying off 30k people,” she added.

Other former employees voiced similar suspicions on workplace forums like Blind and TheLayoff.com, with some claiming they were laid off shortly before upcoming vesting dates.

BOOKING.COM-OBSESSED HACKERS

Booking.com hackers use hotel messaging to send fake requests to customers — is your vacation reservation protected?

Booking.com phishers could be invading your inbox.

The travel and hotel reservation platform notified customers this past week that their personal information, such as names, email addresses, phone numbers and booking details, may have been compromised in the breach, according to posts on social media.

“We’re writing to inform you that unauthorized third parties may have been able to access certain booking information associated with your reservation,” the notification read, according to a screenshot posted on Reddit.

The message noted that “anything that you may have shared with the accommodation” could have been part of the information stolen.

A spokesperson for the company told The Guardian that “financial information was not accessed.”

Courtney Camp, a Booking.com spokesperson, told TechCrunch that the company “noticed some suspicious activity involving unauthorized third parties being able to access some of our guests’ booking information.”

“Upon discovering the activity, we took action to contain the issue. We have updated the PIN number for these reservations and informed our guests,” she said.

Attackers are using the hotel and messaging systems tied to reservations to send convincing requests and messages to consumers. They often mimic real hotel communication on the booking platform, which can come off convincing.

The Reddit user who initially posted the notification to the subreddit r/Bookingcom told TechCrunch that they had received a phishing message through WhatsApp two weeks ago that included their booking details and personal information.

In some cases, travelers have reported being asked to “reconfirm payment” or “verify identity” shortly before their arrival.

Customers should look out for messages that look legitimate but feel off, urgent payment requests, last-minute confirmation emails or texts that appear to be tied directly to their reservation.