An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Washington Post: The Biden administration marked the close of tax season Monday by announcing it had met a modest goal of getting at least 100,000 taxpayers to file through the Internal Revenue Service's new tax software, Direct File -- an alternative to commercial tax preparers. Although the government had billed Direct File as a small-scale pilot, it still represents one of the most significant experiments in tax filing in decades -- a free platform letting Americans file online directly to the government. Monday's announcement aside, though, Direct File's success has proven highly subjective. By and large, people who tried the Direct File software -- which looks a lot like TurboTax or other commercial tax software, with its question-and-answer format -- gave it rave reviews. "Against all odds, the government has created an actually good piece of technology," a writer for the Atlantic marveled, describing himself as "giddy" as he used the website to chat live with a helpful IRS employee. The Post's Tech Friend columnist Shira Ovide called it "visible proof that government websites don't have to stink." Online, people tweeted praise after filing their taxes, like the user who called it the "easiest tax experience of my life." While the users might be a happy group, however, there weren't many of them compared to other tax filing options -- and their positive reviews likely won't budge the opposition that Direct File has faced from tax software companies and Republicans from the outset. These headwinds will likely continue if the IRS wants to renew it for another tax season. The program opened to the public midway through tax season, when many low-income filers had already claimed their refunds -- and was restricted to taxpayers in 12 states, with only four types of income (wages, interest, Social Security and unemployment). But it gained popularity as tax season went on: The Treasury Department said more than half of the total users of Direct File completed their returns during the last week.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The IRS's New Tax Software: Rave Reviews, But Low Turnout

Read 7 remaining paragraphs | Comments

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The White House has announced the "first government-wide policy (PDF) to mitigate risks of artificial intelligence (AI) and harness its benefits." To coordinate these efforts, every federal agency must appoint a chief AI officer with "significant expertise in AI." Some agencies have already appointed chief AI officers, but any agency that has not must appoint a senior official over the next 60 days. If an official already appointed as a chief AI officer does not have the necessary authority to coordinate AI use in the agency, they must be granted additional authority or else a new chief AI officer must be named. Ideal candidates, the White House recommended, might include chief information officers, chief data officers, or chief technology officers, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) policy said. As chief AI officers, appointees will serve as senior advisers on AI initiatives, monitoring and inventorying all agency uses of AI. They must conduct risk assessments to consider whether any AI uses are impacting "safety, security, civil rights, civil liberties, privacy, democratic values, human rights, equal opportunities, worker well-being, access to critical resources and services, agency trust and credibility, and market competition," OMB said. Perhaps most urgently, by December 1, the officers must correct all non-compliant AI uses in government, unless an extension of up to one year is granted. The chief AI officers will seemingly enjoy a lot of power and oversight over how the government uses AI. It's up to the chief AI officers to develop a plan to comply with minimum safety standards and to work with chief financial and human resource officers to develop the necessary budgets and workforces to use AI to further each agency's mission and ensure "equitable outcomes," OMB said. [...] Among the chief AI officer's primary responsibilities is determining what AI uses might impact the safety or rights of US citizens. They'll do this by assessing AI impacts, conducting real-world tests, independently evaluating AI, regularly evaluating risks, properly training staff, providing additional human oversight where necessary, and giving public notice of any AI use that could have a "significant impact on rights or safety," OMB said. Chief AI officers will ultimately decide if any AI use is safety- or rights-impacting and must adhere to OMB's minimum standards for responsible AI use. Once a determination is made, the officers will "centrally track" the determinations, informing OMB of any major changes to "conditions or context in which the AI is used." The officers will also regularly convene "a new Chief AI Officer Council to coordinate" efforts and share innovations government-wide. Chief AI officers must consult with the public and maintain options to opt-out of "AI-enabled decisions," OMB said. "However, these chief AI officers also have the power to waive opt-out options "if they can demonstrate that a human alternative would result in a service that is less fair (e.g., produces a disparate impact on protected classes) or if an opt-out would impose undue hardship on the agency."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Biden Orders Every US Agency To Appoint a Chief AI Officer

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Associated Press: The Environmental Protection Agency on Monday announced a comprehensive ban on asbestos, a carcinogen that kills tens of thousands of Americans every year but is still used in some chlorine bleach, brake pads and other products. The final rule marks a major expansion of EPA regulation under a landmark 2016 law that overhauled regulations governing tens of thousands of toxic chemicals in everyday products, from household cleaners to clothing and furniture. The new rule would ban chrysotile asbestos, the only ongoing use of asbestos in the United States. The substance is found in products such as brake linings and gaskets and is used to manufacture chlorine bleach and sodium hydroxide, also known as caustic soda, including some that is used for water purification. [...] The 2016 law authorized new rules for tens of thousands of toxic chemicals found in everyday products, including substances such as asbestos and trichloroethylene that for decades have been known to cause cancer yet were largely unregulated under federal law. Known as the Frank Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act, the law was intended to clear up a hodgepodge of state rules governing chemicals and update the Toxic Substances Control Act, a 1976 law that had remained unchanged for 40 years. The EPA banned asbestos in 1989, but the rule was largely overturned by a 1991 Court of Appeals decision that weakened the EPA's authority under TSCA to address risks to human health from asbestos or other existing chemicals. The 2016 law required the EPA to evaluate chemicals and put in place protections against unreasonable risks. Asbestos, which was once common in home insulation and other products, is banned in more than 50 countries, and its use in the U.S. has been declining for decades. The only form of asbestos known to be currently imported, processed or distributed for use in the U.S. is chrysotile asbestos, which is imported primarily from Brazil and Russia. It is used by the chlor-alkali industry, which produces bleach, caustic soda and other products. Most consumer products that historically contained chrysotile asbestos have been discontinued. While chlorine is a commonly used disinfectant in water treatment, there are only eight chlor-alkali plants in the U.S. that still use asbestos diaphragms to produce chlorine and sodium hydroxide. The plants are mostly located in Louisiana and Texas. The use of asbestos diaphragms has been declining and now accounts for less than one-third of the chlor-alkali production in the U.S., the EPA said. The EPA rule will ban imports of asbestos for chlor-alkali as soon as the rule is published but will phase in prohibitions on chlor-alkali use over five or more years to provide what the agency called "a reasonable transition period." A ban on most other uses of asbestos will effect in two years. A ban on asbestos in oilfield brake blocks, aftermarket automotive brakes and linings and other gaskets will take effect in six months. The EPA rule allows asbestos-containing sheet gaskets to be used until 2037 at the U.S. Department of Energy's Savannah River Site in South Carolina to ensure that safe disposal of nuclear materials can continue on schedule. Separately, the EPA is also evaluating so-called legacy uses of asbestos in older buildings, including schools and industrial sites, to determine possible public health risks. A final risk evaluation is expected by the end of the year.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

EPA Bans Chrysotile Asbestos

In 2020 Oregon passed Measure 110, decriminalizing possession of small amounts of drugs. But now "America's most radical experiment with drug decriminalization has ended," writes the Atlantic, "after more than three years of painful results." Oregon Governor Tina Kotek has pledged to sign legislation repealing the principal elements of the ballot initiative... Possessing hard drugs is again a crime in Oregon, and courts will return to mandating treatment for offenders. Oregonians had supported Measure 110 with 59 percent of the vote in 2020, but three years later, polling showed that 64 percent wanted some or all of it repealed... More than $260 million were allocated to services such as naloxone distribution, employment and housing services, and voluntary treatment... Once drugs were decriminalized and destigmatized, the thinking went, those who wanted to continue using would be more willing to access harm-reduction services that helped them use in safer ways. Meanwhile, the many people who wanted to quit using drugs but had been too ashamed or fearful to seek treatment would do so. Advocates foresaw a surge of help-seeking, a reduction in drug-overdose deaths, fewer racial disparities in the health and criminal-justice systems, lower rates of incarceration, and safer neighborhoods for all... Measure 110 did not reduce Oregon's drug problems. The drug-overdose-death rate increased by 43 percent in 2021, its first year of implementation — and then kept rising. The latest CDC data show that in the 12 months ending in September 2023, deaths by overdose grew by 41.6 percent, versus 2.1 percent nationwide. No other state saw a higher rise in deaths... Neither did decriminalization produce a flood of help-seeking. The replacement for criminal penalties, a $100 ticket for drug possession with the fine waived if the individual called a toll-free number for a health assessment, with the aim of encouraging treatment, failed completely. More than 95 percent of people ignored the ticket, for which — in keeping with the spirit of Measure 110 — there was no consequence. The cost of the hotline worked out to about $7,000 per completed phone call, according to The Economist. These realities, as well as associated disorder such as open-air drug markets and a sharp rise in violent crime — while such crime was falling nationally — led Oregonians to rethink their drug policy. The article notes that Oregon was the first U.S. state to decriminalize marijuana back in 1973, and had long shown low rates of imprisonment for non-violent crimes (diverting offenders into so-called "drug courts which could mandate treatment or order court-directed supervision). "However, after Measure 110 was passed and the threat of jail time eliminated, the flow of people into these programs slowed." But "One thing Measure 110 got right, at least in principle, is that Oregon's addiction-treatment system was grossly underfunded," the article concludes. And it adds that the newly-passed law now "provides extensive new funding for immediate needs, including detox facilities, sobering centers, treatment facilities, and the staff to support those services." They recommend other states adopt "adequately funded, evidence-based prevention and treatment" — and instead of punitive incarcerations, "use criminal justice productively to discourage drug use."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Why Oregon's Drug Decriminalization Failed

Legislation proposed in California "aims to repeal Daylight saving time and put California permanently on Standard time," reports a San Diego news station: In November 2018, California voters passed Prop 7, a measure that would allow the state legislature to change Daylight saving time by either keeping it year-round or getting rid of it altogether. However, this measure also requires approval by the U.S. Congress if California were to opt for year-round Daylight Saving Time. So far, nothing has materialized. "I am really, really passionate about this bill," said State Assembly Member Tri Ta, who added it is finally time to listen to the will of the voters. He has drafted new legislation that to do away with twice-yearly time changes. However, his bill would put the Golden State onto year-round Standard time: a move that would not require federal action. Oregon and Washington state are also considering similar moves [though Oregon's bill appears stalled]. "If my bill is passed, we do not need congressional approval," Ta told CBS 8, "so that's a win-win for everyone...." Ta said that his bill has the support of the California Medical Association, as well as sleep experts who say Standard time syncs better with our natural clocks. "So why don't we go along with science?" Ta added. "That's what I believe." One things most people seem to agree on: it's time to stop changing our clocks, which research has shown leads to higher rates of accidents as well as increased health risks. "While this new bill continues to work its way through Sacramento, Daylight saving time is still a go here in California," the article points out, "starting 2 a.m. Sunday, when we set our clocks forward one hour." But USA Today adds that across the rest of the country, "Most Americans — 62% — are in favor of ending the time change, according to an Economist/YouGov poll from last year."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

California State Legislator Proposes Ending Daylight Saving Time

An anonymous reader shared this report from the Guardian: The U.S. is not secretly hiding alien technology or extraterrestrial beings from the public, according to a defense department report. On Friday, the Pentagon 'published the findings of an investigation conducted by the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), a government office established in 2022 to detect and, as necessary, mitigate threats including "anomalous, unidentified space, airborne, submerged and transmedium objects".... AARO investigators, which were "granted full access to all pertinent sensitive [U.S. government] programs", reviewed all official government investigatory efforts since 1945. Investigators also researched classified and unclassified archives, conducted approximately 30 interviews, and collaborated with intelligence community and defense department officials responsible for controlled and special access program oversight, the report revealed. NPR writes that "Many of the sightings turned out to be drones, weather balloons, spy planes, satellites, rockets and planets, according to the report..." "AARO has found no evidence that any U.S. government investigation, academic-sponsored research, or official review panel has confirmed that any sighting of a UAP represented extraterrestrial technology," Pentagon Press Secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said in a statement Friday. All investigative efforts concluded that most sightings were ordinary objects and the result of misidentification, Ryder said... The office plans to publish a second volume of the report later this year that covers findings from interviews and research done between November 2023 and April 2024." The report finds no evidence of any confirmed alien technology, the Guardian notes: It added that sensors and visual observations are imperfect, the vast majority of cases lack actionable data and such available data is limited or of poor quality. The report also said resources and staffing for such programs have largely been irregular and sporadic and that the vast majority of reports "almost certainly" are the result of misidentification. In addition, the report found "no empirical evidence for claims that the [U.S. government] and private companies have been reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology"... The report's public release comes as AARO's acting director, Timothy Phillips, told reporters on Wednesday that the US military is developing a UFO sensor and detection system called Gremlin. "If we have a national security site and there are objects being reported that [are] within restricted airspace or within a maritime range or within the proximity of one of our spaceships, we need to understand what that is ... and so that's why we're developing sensor capability that we can deploy in reaction to reports," Phillips said, CNN reports.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

New US Defense Department Report Finds 'No Evidence' of Alien Technology

An anonymous Slashdot reader shared this article from Live Science: Manufacturers will no longer use harmful "forever chemicals" in food packaging products in the U.S., according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In a statement released February 28, the agency declared that grease-proofing materials that contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) will not be used in new food packaging sold in the U.S. These include PFAS used in fast-food wrappers, microwave popcorn bags, takeout boxes and pet food bags. The FDA's announcement marks the completion of a voluntary phase-out of the materials by U.S. food packaging manufacturers. This action will eliminate the "major source of dietary exposure to PFAS," Jim Jones, deputy commissioner for human foods at the FDA, said in an associated statement. Companies told the FDA that it could take up to 18 months to completely exhaust the market supply of these products following their final date of sale. However, most of the affected manufacturers phased out the products faster than they initially predicted, the agency noted... The FDA's new announcement marks a "huge win for the public," Graham Peaslee, a professor of physics at the University of Notre Dame who studies PFAS, told The Washington Post.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

PFAS 'Forever Chemicals' To Officially Be Removed from Food Packaging, FDA Says