After lengthy delays and no small amount of political opposition , it’s official: the US has given up a key aspect of internet oversight. As of October 1st , the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (the outfit that manages the domain name system) is no longer under the watch of the US’ National Telecommunications and Information Administration. ICANN is now a private, non-profit organization that will take its input from academics, companies, governments and the public. While the American government didn’t really wield its influence, it no longer has that option. The handover follows an unsuccessful last-minute attempt by four states’ Republican attorneys general to block the transition . A federal judge shot down their temporary injunction request, which centered around the notion that the US was “giving away government property” and required Congressional approval to give up ICANN. The attorneys echoed their party’s worry that reducing US control would open the internet to greater censorship by countries like China and Russia. They were also concerned that the shift could threaten US government domains like .gov and .mil. Proponents of the transition argue that the move is not only harmless, but might avert a far worse outcome. They say that censorship-heavy countries don’t have any more power over the internet than they did before, especially since ICANN will still operate out of Los Angeles. If anything, a privately-managed domain system reduces the pressure to relinquish control to the United Nations, where China and Russia would have some influence. There’s also a fear that continued American oversight would encourage countries to set up their own domain systems and fragment the internet. In practice? Barring surprises, you shouldn’t notice a difference at all. The NTIA did little more than rubber-stamp ICANN’s actions — this is more of a formality than a practical change, at least in the near term. It’s an acknowledgment that the internet has been decentralized for decades, and that no one country has a claim to it. Via: BBC Source: ICANN
Slashdot reader McGruber reports that federal prosecutors “have filed conspiracy charges against a part-owner of two information technology firms and an employee for fraudulently using the H-1B program”. Both were reportedly recruiting foreign IT workers, according to the AP: Prosecutors said the conspirators falsely represented that the foreign workers had full-time positions and were paid an annual salary [when] the workers were only paid when placed at a third-party client, and the defendants sometimes generated false payroll records… The defendants are charged with conspiracy to commit visa fraud and obstruct justice and conspiracy to harbor aliens. They’re now facing up to 15 years in prison for an “alien-harboring conspiracy” charge — with a maximum penalty of up to 10 years in prison and a $250, 000 fine — and a separate visa fraud and obstruction of justice charge with a maximum 5-year penalty and a $250, 000 fine. Read more of this story at Slashdot. 
sciencehabit quotes a report from Science Magazine: If you shatter a bone in the future, a 3D printer and some special ink could be your best medicine. Researchers have created what they call “hyperelastic bone” that can be manufactured on demand and works almost as well as the real thing, at least in monkeys and rats. Though not ready to be implanted in humans, bioengineers are optimistic that the material could be a much-needed leap forward in quickly mending injuries ranging from bones wracked by cancer to broken skulls. Researchers at Northwestern University, Evanston, in Illinois are working on a hyperelastic bone, which is a type of scaffold made up of hydroxyapatite, a naturally occurring mineral that exists in our bones and teeth, and a biocompatible polymer called polycaprolactone, and a solvent. Hydroxyapatite provides strength and offers chemical cues to stem cells to create bone. The polycaprolactone polymer adds flexibility, and the solvent sticks the 3D-printed layers together as it evaporates during printing. The mixture is blended into an ink that is dispensed by the printer, layer by layer, into exact shapes matching the bone that needs to be replaced. The idea is, a patient would come in with a nasty broken bone — say, a shattered jaw — and instead of going through painful autograft surgeries or waiting for a custom scaffold to be manufactured, he or she could be x-rayed and a 3D-printed hyperelastic bone scaffold could be printed that same day. Read more of this story at Slashdot. 
If you live in California, you may soon start to see self-driving cars on the road with no operators to be seen. California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law on Thursday a bill that allows a self-driving vehicle with no operator inside to test on a public road. Currently, companies are legally able to test self-driving cars in California as long as the operators are located inside the vehicles when they are being tested. Fortune reports: The bill introduced by Democratic Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla allows testing in Contra Costa County northeast of San Francisco of the first full-autonomous vehicle without a steering wheel, brakes, accelerator or operator. New legislation was necessary because although driverless vehicles can be tested on private land like the office park, the shuttle will cross a public road on its loop through the campus. The new law means that two cube-like Easymile shuttles that travel no faster than 25 mph (40 kph) will be tested for a period of up to six months before being deployed and used by people. In an interview with Reuters in March, Bonilla said the “natural tension” between regulators concerned about safety and lawmakers trying to encourage innovation in their state necessitated a new bill. “They’re risk averse and we’re saying we need to open the door here and take steps (to innovate), ” Bonilla said, calling the driverless shuttle project “a very wise first out-of-the-gate opportunity” to show how the technology could work safely. Read more of this story at Slashdot. 
