SoylentNews

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/06/leaked-financial-docs-show-openai-is-losing-billions-of-dollars-a-year/

As OpenAI files SEC paperwork ahead of an expected initial public stock offering, newly leaked financial documents show a company with quickly growing revenues that are currently being overwhelmed by even larger expenses.

The audited financial statements, obtained by independent journalist Ed Zitron, show OpenAI's reported revenue growing from $3.7 billion in 2024 to $13.07 billion in 2025. The Financial Times, which reviewed the same documents [Website paywalled. --Ed], writes that the company's monthly revenues had grown to nearly $2 billion by the end of 2025, suggesting that its ongoing revenue rates continued to grow throughout the year.

But the company's fast-growing revenues are still dwarfed by its even more significant expenses. OpenAI's total revenues in both of the last two years were outpaced by research and development alone, which grew from a $7.81 billion line item in 2024 to a massive $19.18 billion cost in 2025. Those numbers seem to reflect the significant costs OpenAI incurred in training new models and include $10.59 billion in R&D costs paid to Microsoft alone in 2025.

On top of that, OpenAI's "cost of revenue" (i.e., the money spent producing and distributing the product) increased from $2.65 billion in 2024 to $7.5 billion in 2025. This cost line likely reflects the significant compute costs incurred at "inference time" as the company's models respond to a growing number of user prompts. Costs associated with sales and marketing also grew from $1.11 billion in 2024 to $5.73 billion in 2025.

All told, OpenAI's day-to-day "loss from operations" increased from $8.78 billion in 2024 to $20.92 billion in 2025, a concerning direction for a company that is telling investors it hopes to be profitable by 2030. But measured as a percentage of revenues, the company's operating losses slightly improved year to year, from 237 percent in 2024 to 160 percent in 2025.

Operating numbers aside, OpenAI's headline "net loss" number of just over $5 billion in 2024 ballooned to nearly $39 billion in 2025. But the 2025 number includes a significant accounting charge related to investor valuations that shifted amid the company's 2025 conversion to a for-profit structure. The Financial Times cites "a person familiar with the matter" in reporting that this non-recurring charge was approximately $30 billion and that OpenAI's 2025 net loss amounted to a more reasonable-looking $8 billion without it.

As OpenAI tries to shift all these losses to eventual profits, it will have to start reining in its costs, especially the massive (and growing) R&D costs associated with model training. It will also have to deal with enterprise customers that are beginning to balk at token-based pricing and starting to demand a measurable return on investment for their AI spending. And on the subscription side, pressure from rival Anthropic may force the company to lower prices, which could further increase operating losses in the near term.

OpenAI shut down its Sora video generation model in March. Around the same time, OpenAI CEO of Applications Fidji Simo told employees that the company would be cutting back on "side quests" and focusing on its core coding and business users.

In March, OpenAI raised $122 billion of financing in a funding round that valued the company at $852 billion. The company reports over 900 million weekly active users of ChatGPT, though only about 50 million of those are paid subscribers.

Original Submission

hubie writes:

People underestimate how enjoyable everyday conversations really are, study says:

The small talk you try to avoid because you think it will be boring may actually be more enjoyable than you think, and good for you as well, according to research published by the American Psychological Association.

"We tend to assume that if a topic sounds dull, the conversation will be dull too," said Elizabeth Trinh, MA, a doctoral student at the University of Michigan and lead author of the research published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. "But that's not what people actually experience."

In nine experiments involving 1,800 participants, researchers found that people consistently underestimated how interesting and enjoyable conversations about boring topics would be.

Participants were asked to predict how much they would enjoy talking about specific topics they identified as boring. Topics were many and varied, including World Wars I and II, nonfiction books, the stock market, cats, and vegan diets. In some cases, participants were asked to suggest a topic they found boring (responses included such topics as math, onions and Pokemon). Participants then had real conversations with strangers or friends, in person or online. Afterward, they reported how much they enjoyed the conversations.

Across experiments, the pattern was clear: people expected the conversations to be fairly dull, but afterward they reported enjoying them much more than they had predicted. This pattern held even when both parties agreed the topic was boring.

"We were both surprised and excited by how robust the effect was," said Trinh. "People consistently expected conversations about seemingly boring topics to be less interesting than they turned out to be."

The reason may be that people focus too much on the topic itself, according to Trinh. Before a conversation begins, the topic is the easiest thing to judge. But once people start talking, the interaction becomes more important.

"What really drives enjoyment is engagement," she said. "Feeling heard, responding to each other, and discovering unexpected details about someone's life can make even a mundane topic meaningful."

The findings matter because social connection plays a key role in mental and physical health. Strong relationships are linked to greater well-being and lower risk of loneliness. If people avoid conversations because they expect them to be boring, they may miss easy chances to connect.

"If we skip talking to a coworker at the coffee machine, a neighbor in the elevator, or a stranger at an event, we may be missing small moments of connection," said Trinh. "Even a brief conversation about everyday life may be more rewarding than we expect."

Journal Reference: https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000521.supp

Original Submission

owl writes:

https://www.sciencealert.com/ozempic-literally-came-from-a-monster-and-its-not-alone

The toxic bite of a Gila monster can kill a human, but a specific ingredient in the cocktail of the lizard's venom is the reason we have glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) agonists like Ozempic and Wegovy.

At the end of the 20th century, endocrinologist Daniel Drucker was looking for a hormone similar enough to the human gut's GLP-1, which would have similar appetite-suppressing and blood sugar-regulating qualities, without being broken down by the human body so quickly.

Drucker had read about the work of endocrinologist John Eng, gastroenterologist Jean-Pierre Raufman and biochemist John Pisano, who had sequenced the proteins in Gila monster (Heloderma suspectum) venom and found two that looked like human GLP-1.

Drucker and his team from the University of Toronto acquired a Gila monster from the Utah Zoo's breeding program to dissect for further research. This work confirmed that the lizard species' unique genes produce a protein, Exendin-4, that fit the bill, mimicking GLP-1 while hanging round in the human body for far longer.

A synthetic version was created in the years after, but it took until 2005 for this GLP-1 agonist to become an FDA-approved treatment for type 2 diabetes. It's now also become a popular treatment for obesity, with further potential applications on the horizon.

Original Submission

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

Demand for AI systems plus the shortage of DRAM and NAND are shaping the global market:

Servers employing x86 chips from AMD and Intel now account for little more than half of server revenue, according to the latest figures from IDC.

In its Worldwide Quarterly Server Tracker for Q1 2026, the analyst firm says that non-x86 server revenue hit $58.7 billion, representing a startling increase of 107 percent over the same period last year.

The results mean that those non-x86 servers make up 47.9 percent of the market revenue, closing in rapidly on the amount of cash spent on x86 boxes.

The growth in non-x86 turnover is likely thanks to systems powered by Nvidia's AI chips featuring Arm cores. Although there is high demand for these, they also cost a pretty packet compared to an average datacenter box.

In fact, IDC noted a stark divide shaping the worldwide server market, which reached $122.6 billion in vendor revenue during this period, a 30.4 percent increase year-on-year.

On the one hand, AI infrastructure investment from hyperscalers and large cloud providers is "running at a scale that shows no sign of plateauing," while everything else - the non-accelerated segment - faces a supply-constrained environment, thanks largely to that AI infrastructure spending.

As Reg readers will know, memory chipmakers are prioritizing manufacturing capacity for higher margin products for AI servers and GPUs, starving the rest of the market of supply.

Component availability, particularly DRAM and NAND flash, is limiting near-term shipment volumes from vendors, IDC says, though order pipelines are strong. Supply of the right chips is therefore the chief limiting factor on server market growth.

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

"I consider this a success already, just from the fact that we're even going to try this." :

Just 10 months ago, NASA asked three companies if they could do something nobody had done before. Could they build and launch a satellite to save a $500 million astronomy mission at risk of crashing back to Earth? What's more, could they do it in less than a year on a tight budget?

Katalyst Space Technologies, a startup founded in 2020, presented the most compelling solution. "They came back with a response that was technically and programmatically plausible, and then we were like, 'Yeah, let's do it,'" said Shawn Domagal-Goldman, director of NASA's astrophysics division.

That was in August of last year. In September, NASA awarded Katalyst a $30 million contract to build, test, and launch a small satellite to chase down Swift and latch onto it with three robotic arms. Then, Katalyst's Link servicing spacecraft will boost Swift's orbit back to a safe operating altitude, allowing it to resume scientific observations. Easier said than done.

The Swift observatory is flying in low-Earth orbit, where the outermost layers of the atmosphere still exert some aerodynamic influence on satellites. The spacecraft launched in November 2004 on a mission to detect gamma-ray bursts, the most powerful explosions in the known Universe. Despite its age, astrophysicists still rely on Swift's multi-wavelength instruments to identify and locate gamma-ray bursts for follow-up observations by other observatories.

But there's a hitch. Swift lacks any thrusters to maintain its orbit, so aerodynamic drag has gradually caused its altitude to decay. The observatory launched into an orbit roughly 363 miles (585 km) above the Earth. As of Thursday, Swift was flying at 225 miles (363 km). The decay rate will increase as the spacecraft dips into denser layers of the atmosphere until Swift finally burns up during reentry.

Swift is losing altitude faster than anticipated due to a period of extraordinary solar activity in recent years. An active Sun puffs up Earth's atmosphere, creating higher drag for satellites in low-Earth orbit. Satellites and space debris routinely reenter the atmosphere, and most of Swift is likely to burn up before it falls to Earth's surface.

"But this was not just any spacecraft," Domagal-Goldman said. "This is an observatory with unique capabilities for astrophysics, similar to what its name would imply. It is a swift observatory that can quickly pivot across the night sky to find things that go boom in the night ... So we decided, yeah, we want to go save this one, this time, because of how special it is. But then we had a different challenge of time was running out."

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

25X More Than The Drive's Endurance Rating:

Everything in life has an expiry date, and that holds true even for the best SSDs on the market. A fascinating experiment conducted by the YouTube channel WolfyTech shows that SSDs are more durable than we think, even if they were released 16 years ago.

Over the course of the experiment, the channel wrote one petabyte of data to the drive, and the SSD, despite having over 60,000 hours of power-on time, continues to function and shows no signs of catastrophic failure.

The NAND in SSDs gradually degrades over time as you write or erase data, similar to the wear and tear your car or virtually any other electronic device in your house experiences. Just as cars come with a manufacturer's warranty defined by either years of use or a certain number of miles, whichever comes first, SSDs also come with a warranty defined by either years of use or a metric known as TBW (Terabytes Written).

However, there is a common misconception that when SSD exceeds its TBW rating, it will immediately stop working or become unusable. In reality, the TBW value is simply a guideline that manufacturers establish for warranty coverage. The statistical-based rating is not a definitive indicator of when the drive will fail. Contrary to popular belief, chipmakers don't program NAND to self-destruct when it surpasses the TBW threshold.

To revisit the car analogy, just as a car can run fine beyond 100,000 miles, an SSD can continue to function after exceeding its TBW rating. However, just as older cars may require more frequent maintenance and become less predictable over time, SSDs that surpass their TBW threshold may gradually become less reliable. This is due to the physical wear that accumulates in the drive’s NAND flash memory cells through repeated Program/Erase (P/E) cycles.

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

I'm sorry, Dave. I can't install that repo that will totally hose your system:

Python developer Roman Imankulov nearly took the bait. The fact that he didn't can be chalked up to human intuition and AI code vetting.

A person claiming to be a recruiter from a small crypto startup got in touch through LinkedIn, looking for help with what she described as proof-of-concept code that didn't work. The company, she explained, needed a lead engineer.

As Imankulov described the exchange in a blog post, the recruiter asked him to look into an issue with a deprecated Node module. Something about the request seemed off.

"I'd heard, as probably all of us have, about those types of attacks," Imankulov explained in a phone interview. "And I was like, 'what if this could be I could be the target?' It was just based on the past experience that I had."

So he took the unusual step of spinning up a VPS on Hetzner where he cloned the repo. He then used his Pi coding agent (running Codex) to conduct a read-only analysis of the code. 

"I ran an agent to test how it worked, and I was almost certain that it would return to me 'everything is clear, the code is ugly but in general it's safe to run and just go ahead and perform your review,'" he explained. "To my surprise, almost immediately the agent returned a response like, 'Don't run this code, just walk away because there's a trap.'"

The AI model had flagged one of the files, app/test/index.js.

The file contained a backdoor. It took the form of a server URL, fragmented to look like a test suite configuration, and a network request that will run anything the server sends in response to the request.

Imankulov credited his AI agent with catching details that he had missed.

"I opened this code myself and I skimmed through this code and it looked to me like just, you know, a regular sloppy file written by a sloppy developer," he said. "So I just scroll down, [thinking] 'Yeah, yeah, it's awful, but you know if they can pay me to fix this code, I don't mind.' But the agent in the very same file found the exact vulnerability that I overlooked."

hubie writes:

'Popa' Botnet Linked to Publicly-Traded Israeli Firm:

For the past four years, a sprawling Android-based botnet called Popa has forced millions of consumer TV boxes to relay Internet traffic linked to advertising fraud, account takeovers, and mass data-scraping efforts. This week, researchers from multiple security firms concluded that the Popa botnet is linked to NetNut, a "residential proxy" provider operated by the publicly-traded Israeli firm Alarum Technologies Ltd [NASDAQ: ALAR].

Popa is a massive botnet, but by all accounts it is unlike traditional botnets that enlist compromised systems in destructive activities, such as coordinating huge distributed denial-of-service attacks. Rather, Popa appears designed with a singular purpose: Implementing a persistent communications layer capable of registering a device, maintaining long-lived encrypted connections, and opening communication tunnels on demand.

Experts say Popa is a plugin component associated with the Vo1d botnet, a large-scale malware campaign targeting unofficial Android-based TV boxes. These devices, which are marketed under thousands of brand names and model numbers and broadly available for purchase at top e-commerce destinations, all advertise the ability to stream hundreds of subscription video services for an up front one-time fee.

But as the FBI and security industry experts have warned repeatedly, these streaming boxes typically bundle or come pre-installed with software that turns the user's TV into a "residential proxy" — allowing anyone to route their Internet traffic through that device for as long as it remains plugged into a wall socket and connected to a local network. More concerning, some of these proxy networks do little to stop malicious customers from communicating with and even compromising systems on the local network of the unsuspecting device owner.

[...] Ninjatech is a company founded by Moishi Kramer, whose LinkedIn profile says he is vice president of research and development at NetNut. That resume credits Kramer for helping NetNut to build from the "ground up," "designing the architecture," and "scaling the NetNut" before the company was acquired by Alarum Technologies. A self-created listing at the job board F6S references Kramer as the sole owner of the Ninjatech domain (a screen capture of it is pictured below).

[...] "I didn't register the June 2025 domains you mention, and I don't know who did," he continued. "I have no control over, or visibility into, that infrastructure. I can only tell you it isn't operated by me or by NetNut."

But in a separate Popa research report released today, the proxy-tracking company Synthient said a recent analysis of the Popa SDK revealed outbound traffic clearly associated with NetNut.

"The research team assesses with high confidence that devices running Popa forward traffic from Netnut clients," Synthient wrote. "This proves without a shadow of a doubt that Popa actively continues to be used by NetNut as part of their proxy pool."

Alarum Technologies, NetNut's Tel Aviv-based parent company, said the reports by Synthient and Qurium contained "demonstrably inaccurate assertions and flawed deductions rather than verified facts." Alarum shared a statement saying they reject the basic characterization of the SDKs and technologies discussed in the reports as a "botnet."

"The SDKs at issue are designed to facilitate bandwidth-sharing functionality and do not transform user devices into malware-controlled systems or otherwise compromise the devices on which they operate," the statement reads. "Netnut operates a commercial proxy network and maintains policies, procedures, and technological measures designed to promote lawful and responsible use of its services."

Alarum said NetNut places "significant emphasis on appropriate notice and consent mechanisms, conducts customer due diligence, monitors for potential misuse, and takes steps intended to detect and mitigate suspicious or unauthorized activity."

[...] "What especially makes Popa dangerous is just how widely used NetNut is for reselling and sharing," Formosa said, explaining that many other proxy services simply resell NetNut proxies rather than building out their own far-flung proxy networks. "So these Popa IPs appear in tons of different services all over the ecosystem, which makes it one of the most problematic and dangerous proxy botnets on the market currently."

Formosa said the Popa botnet averages between 1.5 million to 2.5 million distinct IP addresses each day, relying on between 250 and 300 Internet addresses that are used to direct its activities.

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/semiconductors/semianalysis-opens-its-own-chip-teardown-lab

A 36nm pitch is what Panther Lake ships with, but the 18A process on the whole supports a 32nm minimum metal pitch. With Panter Lake, Intel opted to relax the pitch because routing power through the back of the wafer — via PowerVia — clears the front-side metal stack for signal wiring.

Each of those workarounds obviously adds complexity and cost, with N+3’s ceiling ultimately showing a huge trade-off. The Kirin 9030 Pro's prime core runs at 2.75 GHz and lands near Arm's 2021-era Cortex-X2 per clock, leaving the chip roughly level with Android flagships from three years ago and behind current parts from Apple, Qualcomm, MediaTek, and Samsung. Huawei’s roadmap does say that it’s targeting 5 GHz by 2031, but, as SemiAnalysis notes, that’s “far beyond what planar scaling alone could deliver.”

The company is taking aim at the Ottawa-based TechInsights, which is backed by private equity and held by the likes of Oakley Capital and CVC Growth. SemiAnalysis claims its rival is up for sale and has underinvested in equipment as a result, though that hasn’t been officially confirmed. The teardown also found the Kirin 9030 Pro carrying Samsung LPDDR5X memory, with 16 GB variants turning up DRAM from Chinese maker CXMT as well.

Original Submission

An Anonymous Coward writes:

Bruce Schneier wrote an opinion piece in response to the ban on the latest Anthropic AI models Fable and Mythos (with a lot of links for further reading). In it, he argues that banning particular models really does not help the problem, and provides some interesting analogies about how they work. Schneier's thoughts are that the best option forward is to create a public AI model.

Fable requires much less expertise and detailed prompting from the human user. You can give it a difficult goal and it will figure out novel and unexpected ways to satisfy it, finding loopholes in whatever constraints you or the system have imposed on it.

"Relentlessly proactive" is how AI researcher Simon Willison described it. Another descriptor might be "creative." Experienced AI developers have had that combination of creativity and proactivity since last year, but Fable puts it within easy reach of everyone.

In the hands of someone with a legitimate problem that needs solving, that can be an incredibly useful capability. But in the hands of someone who wants to do harm, it can be equally dangerous. AIs don't have a moral compass in the same way that people do. They are agents of the wants and desires of the people who prompt them.

That points to the real problem with relentlessly proactive AI. In language, wants and desires are always underspecified. If I ask you to get me some coffee, you would probably pour me a cup from the coffeepot, or buy one from a nearby coffee shop.

You couldn't buy me a pound of raw beans, or a coffee plantation. You wouldn't order a cup of coffee for delivery next month. You wouldn't find a nearby person, rip a cup of coffee out of their hands, and bring it to me. I wouldn't have to specify any of the million limitations to my request; you would just know.

Original Submission

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

https://www.theregister.com/public-sector/2026/06/16/nhs-palantir-claims-face-scrutiny-after-data-suggests-uneven-results/5256198

Nearly a third of NHS trusts using Palantir's health data platform are performing fewer patient procedures than before it went live, according to figures analyzed by campaign group Foxglove.

The research – based on a series of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests – also found that a single body, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, accounted for 84 percent of the fall in outpatient waiting lists, while 16 trusts use the tool provided by the US firm.

Palantir won the £330 million contract to provide the NHS Federated Data Platform (FDP), which the UK government said was vital to improving NHS productivity and recovering from the long waiting lists for elective care caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Palantir's journey with the NHS began with a £1 award in 2020, which later led to a total of £60 million in contracts awarded without competition during the pandemic.

NHS England, which awarded the contracts, said that as of June, 139 trusts used the FDP, with 137 reporting benefits. An Inpatients Care Co-ordination Solution (CCS) tool based on the platform had resulted in 111,589 additional patients undergoing procedures in operating theatres, it said.

However, data obtained by tech rights campaign group Foxglove found that 41 NHS trusts are using Inpatient CCS, the module for helping hospitals manage operation scheduling, but 13 of them – or about 30 percent – report having carried out fewer operations overall since using the tool.

Staffing shortages, more complex cases, or pressure on hospital bed capacity might explain the fall.

Foxglove said it was the first time that data from individual trusts using FDP had been made publicly available.

The FOI response also shows that, for the Outpatient CCS, a single trust accounted for the vast majority of the benefits. According to NHS figures, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust accounted for 183,061 of the patients removed from the outpatient waiting list, compared with the total of 217,846.

Foxglove head of strategy Tim Squirrell said: "We now know that the big claim the FDP is delivering more operations for hospitals across the NHS is covering up a much less positive reality – a third of the trusts using the FDP's operations scheduling tool, Inpatient CCS, are actually delivering fewer operations than before they started using Palantir's kit.

"Palantir can't have it both ways. If it expects us to believe that the FDP is responsible for improvements in some hospitals, it must also accept that things are getting worse as a result of its tools in others.

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

https://www.theregister.com/cyber-crime/2026/06/17/cyberattack-sees-crops-kept-in-the-ground/5256321

A cyberattack on Australia's second-largest sugar producer has forced farmers to keep crops in the ground, and looks like denting their incomes.

Mackay Sugar, based in the Australian state of Queensland, processes sugar cane farmed in nearby districts. The company disclosed a cyberattack on June 10 and limited operations while it dealt with the fallout. 

Some operations remain restricted, but the company said on Monday that it managed to perform some manual crushing at its Farleigh Mill site, working with sugar cane that was harvested before the attack.

"Significant progress has been made over the weekend in restoring the systems that support cane supply, harvesting, and mill operations," Mackay Sugar said in a statement.

"Steam trials are now underway, and subject to final validation activities, some harvesting is expected to recommence this week in preparation for the staged restart of crushing operations later this week."

While the company is optimistic it can resume crushing, it's advised growers not to harvest their crops for the time being.

That edict works for Mackay Sugar because sugar producers need to process crops within 48 hours of harvest. Doing so preserves high sugar content and overall yield. Delaying the processing for any longer after harvesting could result in sucrose converting to simple sugars, unwanted fermentation, and lower yields. 

But late harvesting can reduce the quality of cane, reducing the price they earn for their crops. Interrupted harvesting also impacts the railways used to move cane from farms to mills.

Mackay Sugar acknowledged the impact its downtime could have on growers and other partners, and committed to restoring systems safely.

"We are communicating directly and regularly with our employees, growers, and key partners," it said. "We recognise the impact this incident is having on our growers, and we are doing everything we can to support them and to safely resume full operations as soon as possible.

"We take our responsibility to protect our systems, operations, and information very seriously. We apologise for any disruption this incident has caused and will continue to provide updates as we continue our investigation."

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/06/15/red-hat-gives-ubuntu-a-bootc-up-the-backside-at-canonical-shindig/5255608

At Ubuntu Summit 26.04, Red Hat Principal Software Engineer Joseph Marrero Corchado presented a talk called Bootc: Use your container knowledge and infrastructure to build and deploy your Ubuntu hosts. Although Ubuntu is very strong in the desktop Linux space, in large corporate server environments, Ubuntu is just another distro among many. This can be a good thing: it is just another Linux distro, and that means that it's perfectly possible to deploy and manage it using existing FOSS tooling.

Marrero introduced himself by saying that he works at Red Hat, but personally runs Ubuntu – and has been doing so for long enough that he has some original media from Canonical's ShipIt program, which the company discontinued in 2011.

While we were surpised to see a Red Hat engineer presenting a talk at the summit, it's not unprecedented. System76's Pop!_OS distro is based on Ubuntu, but it overlaps with other distros as well. It has its own desktop and eschews Snap for Flatpak – and yet, at the previous Summit, System76 boss Carl Richell presented a talk about it. The year before, the Academy Software Foundation's talk started by telling us that Rocky Linux strongly dominated the SFX industry.

Our plan here isn't to recap the entire talk. It's up on YouTube now [video not reviewed --Ed], and if this is the sort of thing that sounds interesting, it's probably a good use of 42 minutes of your time.

We've mentioned the bootc toolchain a few times on The Register. Back in April 2024, we reported that Fedora 40's immutable editions were being rebuilt as bootable containers. Two years and four more Fedora releases later, the toolchain is getting more mature, as we covered in April with Fedora 44, and we linked to Quentin Joly's explainer, Bootc and OSTree: Modernizing Linux System Deployment, which is still one of the best we've read.

Now bootc has graduated to the point of being a CNCF incubator project. The new project website has a slightly better explanation:

The tools for creating and managing OCI containers are familiar to many sysadmins now, and the idea of bootc is to make it possible to manage complete OS images, either for VMs or for bare metal, using the same tooling.

Marrero explained bootc by saying that it lets you perform OS installations and upgrades with OCI containers, which lets you define and ship your customized images of the Ubuntu OS as OCI container images. This allows transactional in-place updates, with rollback.

owl writes:

https://moultano.wordpress.com/2026/06/19/where-to-find-the-colors-your-screen-cant-show-you/

There are colors that I want to show you, but I can't. They exist in the real world. You probably saw some of them today, but I can't show them to you on a screen. A digital photograph can't capture them, and your screen can't display them. No game you've ever played has contained them. Unless you have specialized equipment, they are entirely absent from the digital world.

Most of them are cyans. On screens we live a life starved of cyans. It is shocking when you see one in person. They seem unfamiliar and intense in an otherworldly way. I want you to experience that, but again, I can't show them to you. Instead, I have to show you how to find them in the real world.

Original Submission

Arthur T Knackerbracket writes:

Crew sheltered in SpaceX Dragon as aging Zvezda segment's cracks continue to test orbital nerve:

Russia's space agency Roscosmos intended to cut into part of the International Space Station (ISS) to determine the extent of leaks in the aging structure, according to a space agency source.

The Register was told that discussions involved a handsaw . Other reports have suggested cosmonauts planned to deploy a drill.

Whatever tool was involved, the plan made NASA sufficiently alarmed that the agency sent its astronauts scurrying into the relative safety of a SpaceX Dragon capsule docked at the ISS. Neither NASA nor Roscosmos has commented officially.

Russia's plan was to use the tool to learn more about the extent of the crack. NASA said: "This revised approach involved cutting a bracket to access better an area identified as a possible leak source for further inspection, using a method that could have resulted in elevated risk to the structure in the area."

However, this could have created unpredictable loads on other cracks. Eventually, the plan was called off in favor of more measurements and data gathering.

The SpaceX Crew-12 astronauts and NASA astronaut Chris Williams were forced to shelter in the Crew Dragon spacecraft earlier in June following a sharp increase in the rate of air leakage from the orbiting outpost. The offending area is the Zvezda service module's transfer tunnel, known by the Russian abbreviation PrK.

While more epoxy patches might address the problem in the short term, the fact that additional cracks have appeared suggests issues Zvezda has wider problems. That's not unexpected given the age of the craft, some parts of which date to the 1980s when it was a backup for the Mir space station. Russia launched Zvezda in 2000, so it's now endured decades of stress.