This year's "State of Rust" survey was completed by 7,310 Rust developers. DevClass note some key findings: When asked about their biggest worries for Rust's future, 45.5 percent cited "not enough usage in the tech industry," up from 42.5 percent last year, just ahead of the 45.2 percent who cited complexity as a concern... Only 18.6 percent declared themselves "not worried," though this is a slight improvement on 17.8 percent in 2023...

Another question asks whether respondents are using Rust at work. 38.2 percent claimed to use it for most of their coding [up from 34% in 2023], and 13.4 percent a few times a week, accounting for just over half of responses. At the organization level there is a similar pattern. 45.5 percent of organizations represented by respondents make "non-trivial use of Rust," up from 38.7 percent last year.
More details from I Programmer: On the up are "Using Rust helps us achieve or goals", now 82% compared to 72% in 2022; "We're likely to use Rust again in the future", up 3% to 78%; and "Using Rust has been worth the cost of Adoption". Going down are "Adopting Rust has been challenging", now 34.5% compared to 38.5% in 2022; and "Overall adopting Rust has slowed down our team" down by over 2% to 7%.
"According to the survey, organizations primarily choose Rust for building correct and bug-free software (87.1%), performance characteristics (84.5%), security and safety properties (74.8%), and development enjoyment (71.2%)," writes The New Stack: Rust seems to be especially popular for creating server backends (53.4%), web and networking services, cloud technologies and WebAssembly, the report said. It also seems to be gaining more traction for embedded use cases... Regarding the preferred development environment, Linux remains the dominant development platform (73.7%).

However, although VS Code remains the leading editor, its usage dropped five percentage points, from 61.7% to 56.7%, but the Zed editor gained notable traction, from 0.7% to 8.9%. Also, "nine out of 10 Rust developers use the current stable version, suggesting strong confidence in the language's stability," the report said...

Overall, 82% of respondents report that Rust helped their company achieve its goals, and daily Rust usage increased to 53% (up four percentage points from 2023). When asked why they use Rust at work, 47% of respondents cited a need for precise control over their software, which is up from 37% when the question was asked two years ago.

Linus Torvalds responded Thursday to kernel developer Christoph Hellwig, who had claimed Torvalds merged Rust code into the kernel even over his objections as the original C code's maintainer. Highlights from Torvalds' response: The fact is, the pull request you objected to DID NOT TOUCH THE DMA LAYER AT ALL. It was literally just another user of it, in a completely separate subdirectory, that didn't change the code you maintain in _any_ way, shape, or form... Honestly, what you have been doing is basically saying "as a DMA maintainer I control what the DMA code is used for".

And that is not how *any* of this works. What's next? Saying that particular drivers can't do DMA, because you don't like that device, and as a DMA maintainer you control who can use the DMA code? That's _literally_ exactly what you are trying to do with the Rust code. You are saying that you disagree with Rust — which is fine, nobody has ever required you to write or read Rust code. But then you take that stance to mean that the Rust code cannot even use or interface to code you maintain...

You don't have to like Rust. You don't have to care about it. That's been made clear pretty much from the very beginning, that nobody is forced to suddenly have to learn a new language, and that people who want to work purely on the C side can very much continue to do so. So to get back to the very core of your statement:

"The document claims no subsystem is forced to take Rust"

that is very much true. You are not forced to take any Rust code, or care about any Rust code in the DMA code. You can ignore it...

You can't have it both ways. You can't say "I want to have nothing to do with Rust", and then in the very next sentence say "And that means that the Rust code that I will ignore cannot use the C interfaces I maintain".... So when you change the C interfaces, the Rust people will have to deal with the fallout, and will have to fix the Rust bindings. That's kind of the promise here: there's that "wall of protection" around C developers that don't want to deal with Rust issues in the promise that they don't *have* to deal with Rust.

But that "wall of protection" basically goes both ways. If you don't want to deal with the Rust code, you get no *say* on the Rust code. Put another way: the "nobody is forced to deal with Rust" does not imply "everybody is allowed to veto any Rust code".
Torvalds also made sure to add some kind remarks, including "I respect you technically, and I like working with you."

AI coding assistants are reshaping software development, but they're unlikely to replace human programmers entirely, according to industry experts and developers. GitHub CEO Thomas Dohmke projects AI could soon generate 80-90% of corporate code, transforming developers into "conductors of an AI-empowered orchestra" who guide and direct these systems.

Current AI coding tools, including Microsoft's GitHub Copilot, are delivering 10-30% productivity gains in business environments. At KPMG, developers report saving 4.5 hours weekly using Copilot, while venture investment in AI coding assistants tripled to $1.6 billion in 2024. The tools are particularly effective at automating routine tasks like documentation generation and legacy code translation, according to KPMG AI expert Swami Chandrasekaran.

They're also accelerating onboarding for new team members. Demand for junior developers remains soft, however, though analysts say it's premature to attribute this directly to AI adoption. Training programs like Per Scholas are already adapting, incorporating AI fundamentals alongside traditional programming basics to prepare developers for an increasingly AI-augmented workplace.

Software engineering job listings have plummeted to a five-year low, with postings on Indeed dropping to 65% of January 2020 levels -- a steeper decline than any other tech-adjacent field. According to data from Indeed's job aggregator, software development positions are now at 3.5x fewer vacancies compared to their mid-2022 peak and 8% lower than a year ago.

The decline appears driven by multiple factors including widespread adoption of AI coding tools -- with 75% of engineers reporting use of AI assistance -- and a broader tech industry recalibration after aggressive pandemic-era hiring. Notable tech companies like Salesforce are maintaining flat engineering headcount while reporting 30% productivity gains from AI tools, according to an analysis by software engineer Gergely Orosz.

While the overall job market shows 10% growth since 2020, software development joins other tech-focused sectors in decline: marketing (-19%), hospitality (-18%), and banking/finance (-7%). Traditional sectors like construction (+25%), accounting (+24%), and electrical engineering (+20%) have grown significantly in the same period, he wrote. The trend extends beyond U.S. borders, with Canada showing nearly identical patterns. European markets and Australia demonstrate more resilience, though still below peak levels.

Leading AI models can fix broken code, but they're nowhere near ready to replace human software engineers, according to extensive testing [PDF] by OpenAI researchers. The company's latest study put AI models and systems through their paces on real-world programming tasks, with even the most advanced models solving only a quarter of typical engineering challenges.

The research team created a test called SWE-Lancer, drawing from 1,488 actual software fixes made to Expensify's codebase, representing $1 million worth of freelance engineering work. When faced with these everyday programming tasks, the best AI model â" Claude 3.5 Sonnet -- managed to complete just 26.2% of hands-on coding tasks and 44.9% of technical management decisions.

Though the AI systems proved adept at quickly finding relevant code sections, they stumbled when it came to understanding how different parts of software interact. The models often suggested surface-level fixes without grasping the deeper implications of their changes.

The research, to be sure, used a set of complex methodologies to test the AI coding abilities. Instead of relying on simplified programming puzzles, OpenAI's benchmark uses complete software engineering tasks that range from quick $50 bug fixes to complex $32,000 feature implementations. Each solution was verified through rigorous end-to-end testing that simulated real user interactions, the researchers said.

Junior software developers' overreliance on AI coding assistants is creating knowledge gaps in fundamental programming concepts, developer Namanyay Goel argued in a post. While tools like GitHub Copilot and Claude enable faster code shipping, developers struggle to explain their code's underlying logic or handle edge cases, Goel wrote. Goel cites the decline of Stack Overflow, a technical forum where programmers historically found detailed explanations from experienced developers, as particularly concerning.

In January the TIOBE Index (estimating programming language popularity) declared Python their language of the year. (Though it was already #1 in their rankings, it had showed a 9.3% increase in their ranking system, notes InfoWorld.) TIOBE CEO Paul Jansen says this reflects how easy Python is to learn, adding that "The demand for new programmers is still very high" (and that "developing applications completely in AI is not possible yet.")

In fact on February's version of the index, the top ten looks mostly static. The only languages dropping appear to be very old languages. Over the last 12 months C and PHP have both fallen on the index — C from the #2 to the #4 spot, and PHP from #10 all the way to #14. (Also dropping is Visual Basic, which fell from #9 to #10.)

But TechRepublican cites another factor that seems to be affecting the rankings: language speed. Fast programming languages are gaining popularity, TIOBE CEO Paul Jansen said in the TIOBE Programming Community Index in February. Fast programming languages he called out include C++ [#2], Go [#8], and Rust [#13 — up from #18 a year ago].

Also, according to the updated TIOBE rankings...

- C++ held onto its place at second from the top of the leaderboard.
- Mojo and Zig are following trajectories likely to bring them into the top 50, and reached #51 and #56 respectively in February.

"Now that the world needs to crunch more and more numbers per second, and hardware is not evolving fast enough, speed of programs is getting important. Having said this, it is not surprising that the fast programming languages are gaining ground in the TIOBE index," Jansen wrote. The need for speed helped Mojo [#51] and Zig [#56] rise...

Rust reached its all-time high in the proprietary points system (1.47%.), and Jansen expects Go to be a common sight in the top 10 going forward.

Slashdot has been covering Harvard's legendary introductory programming course "CS50" since it began setting attendance records in 2014.

But now long-time Slashdot reader theodp brings some news about the course's fate over at Yale. From Yale's student newspaper: After a decade of partnership with Harvard, Yale's CS50 course will no longer be offered starting in fall 2025.... One of Yale's largest computer science courses, jointly taught with Harvard University, was canceled during a monthly faculty meeting after facing budgetary challenges. [Yale's endowment is $40+ billion]... Since Yale started offering the course in 2015, CS50 has consistently seen enrollment numbers in the hundreds and was often the department's largest class.... According to [Yale instructor Ozan] Erat, the original [anonymous] donation that made CS50 possible ended in June 2024, and the cost of employing so many undergraduate learning assistants for the course had become unsustainable.
theodp reminds us that CS50 and its progeny "will continue to live on in all their glory in-person and online at Harvard and edX."

Keynotes at this year's FOSDEM included free AI models and systemd, reports Heise.de — and also a progress report from Miguel Ojeda, supervisor of the Rust integration in the Linux kernel. Only eight people remain in the core team around Rust for Linux... Miguel Ojeda therefore launched a survey among kernel developers, including those outside the Rust community, and presented some of the more important voices in his FOSDEM talk. The overall mood towards Rust remains favorable, especially as Linus Torvalds and Greg Kroah-Hartman are convinced of the necessity of Rust integration. This is less about rapid progress and more about finding new talent for kernel development in the future.
The reaction was mostly positive, judging by Ojeda's slides:

- "2025 will be the year of Rust GPU drivers..." — Daniel Almedia

- "I think the introduction of Rust in the kernel is one of the most exciting development experiments we've seen in a long time." — Andrea Righi

- "[T]he project faces unique challenges. Rust's biggest weakness, as a language, is that relatively few people speak it. Indeed, Rust is not a language for beginners, and systems-level development complicates things even more. That said, the Linux kernel project has historically attracted developers who love challenging software — if there's an open source group willing to put the extra effort for a better OS, it's the kernel devs." — Carlos Bilbao

- "I played a little with [Rust] in user space, and I just absolutely hate the cargo concept... I hate having to pull down other code that I do not trust. At least with shared libraries, I can trust a third party to have done the build and all that... [While Rust should continue to grow in the kernel], if a subset of C becomes as safe as Rust, it may make Rust obsolete..." Steven Rostedt

Rostedt wasn't sure if Rust would attract more kernel contributors, but did venture this opinion. "I feel Rust is more of a language that younger developers want to learn, and C is their dad's language."

But still "contention exists within the kernel development community between those pro-Rust and -C camps," argues The New Stack, citing the latest remarks from kernel maintainer Christoph Hellwig (who had earlier likened the mixing of Rust and C to cancer). Three days later Hellwig reiterated his position again on the Linux kernel mailing list: "Every additional bit that another language creeps in drastically reduces the maintainability of the kernel as an integrated project. The only reason Linux managed to survive so long is by not having internal boundaries, and adding another language completely breaks this. You might not like my answer, but I will do everything I can do to stop this. This is NOT because I hate Rust. While not my favourite language it's definitively one of the best new ones and I encourage people to use it for new projects where it fits. I do not want it anywhere near a huge C code base that I need to maintain."
But the article also notes that Google "has been a staunch supporter of adding Rust to the kernel for Linux running in its Android phones." The use of Rust in the kernel is seen as a way to avoid memory vulnerabilities associated with C and C++ code and to add more stability to the Android OS. "Google's wanting to replace C code with Rust represents a small piece of the kernel but it would have a huge impact since we are talking about billions of phones," Ojeda told me after his talk.

In addition to Google, Rust adoption and enthusiasm for it is increasing as Rust gets more architectural support and as "maintainers become more comfortable with it," Ojeda told me. "Maintainers have already told me that if they could, then they would start writing Rust now," Ojeda said. "If they could drop C, they would do it...."

Amid the controversy, there has been a steady stream of vocal support for Ojeda. Much of his discussion also covered statements given by advocates for Rust in the kernel, ranging from lead developers of the kernel and including Linux creator Linus Torvalds himself to technology leads from Red Hat, Samsung, Google, Microsoft and others.

"It is now 45+ years since C++ was first conceived," writes 74-year-old C++ creator Bjarne Stroustrup in an article this week for Communications of the ACM. But he complains that many developers "use C++ as if it was still the previous millennium," in an article titled 21st Century C++ that promises "the key concepts on which performant, type safe, and flexible C++ software can be built: resource management, life-time management, error-handling, modularity, and generic programming...

"At the end, I present ways to ensure that code is contemporary, rather than relying on outdated, unsafe, and hard-to-maintain techniques: guidelines and profiles." To help developers focus on effective use of contemporary C++ and avoid outdated "dark corners" of the language, sets of guidelines have been developed. Here I focus on the C++ Core guidelines that I consider the most ambitious... My principal aim is a type-safe and resource-safe use of ISO standard C++. That is:

- Every object is exclusively used according to its definition
- No resource is leaked

This encompasses what people refer to as memory safety and much more. It is not a new goal for C++. Obviously, it cannot be achieved for every use of C++, but by now we have years of experience showing that it can be done for modern code, though so far enforcement has been incomplete... When thinking about C++, it is important to remember that C++ is not just a language but part of an ecosystem consisting of implementations, libraries, tools, teaching, and more.
WG21 (and others) are working on "profiles" to enforce guidelines (though they're "not yet available, except for experimental and partial versions"). But Stroustrup writes that the C++ Core Guidelines "use a strategy known as subset-of-superset." First: extend the language with a few library abstractions: use parts of the standard library and add a tiny library to make use of the guidelines convenient and efficient (the Guidelines Support Library, GSL).
Next: subset: ban the use of low-level, inefficient, and error-prone features.

What we get is "C++ on steroids": Something simple, safe, flexible, and fast; rather than an impoverished subset or something relying on massive run-time checking. Nor do we create a language with novel and/or incompatible features. The result is 100% ISO standard C++. Messy, dangerous, low-level features can still be enabled and used when needed.
Stroustrup writes that the C++ Core Guidelines focus on rules "we hope that everyone eventually could benefit from."

• No uninitialized variables

• No range or nullptr violations

• No resource leaks

• No dangling pointers

• No type violations

• No invalidation

Bjarne Stroustrup answered questions from Slashdot readers in 2014...

A heated dispute has erupted in the Linux kernel community over the integration of Rust code, with kernel maintainer Christoph Hellwig likening multiple programming languages to "cancer" for the project's maintainability. The conflict centers on a proposed patch enabling Rust-written device drivers to access the kernel's DMA API, which Hellwig strongly opposed. While the dispute isn't about Rust itself, Hellwig argues that maintaining cross-language codebases severely compromises Linux's integrated nature. From a report: "Don't force me to deal with your shiny language of the day," he [Hellwig] wrote. "Maintaining multi-language projects is a pain I have no interest in dealing with. If you want to use something that's not C, be that assembly or Rust, you write to C interfaces and deal with the impedance mismatch yourself as far as I'm concerned." This resistance follows the September departure of Microsoft engineer Wedson Almeida Filho from the Rust for Linux project, citing "nontechnical nonsense."

The Register's Thomas Claburn reports: Oracle this week asked the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to partially dismiss a challenge to its JavaScript trademark. The move has been criticized as an attempt to either stall or water down legal action against the database goliath over the programming language's name. Deno Land, the outfit behind the Deno JavaScript runtime, filed a petition with the USPTO back in November in an effort to make the trademarked term available to the JavaScript community. This legal effort is led by Node.js creator and Deno Land CEO Ryan Dahl, summarized on the JavaScript.tm website, and supported by more than 16,000 members of the JavaScript community. It aims to remove the fear of an Oracle lawsuit for using the term "JavaScript" in a conference title or business venture.

"Programmers working with JavaScript have formed innumerable community organizations," the website explains. "These organizations, like the standards bodies, have been forced to painstakingly avoid naming the programming language they are built around -- for example, JSConf. Sadly, without risking a legal trademark challenge against Oracle, there can be no 'JavaScript Conference' nor a 'JavaScript Specification.' The world's most popular programming language cannot even have a conference in its name." [...] In the initial trademark complaint, Deno Land makes three arguments to invalidate Oracle's ownership of "JavaScript." The biz claims that JavaScript has become a generic term; that Oracle committed fraud in 2019 when it applied to renew its trademark; and that Oracle has abandoned its trademark because it does not offer JavaScript products or services.

Oracle's motion on Monday focuses on the dismissal of the fraud claim, while arguing that it expects to prevail on the other two claims, citing corporate use of the trademarked term "in connection with a variety of offerings, including its JavaScript Extension Toolkit as well as developer's guides and educational resources, and also that relevant consumers do not perceive JavaScript as a generic term." The fraud claim follows from Deno Land's assertion that the material Oracle submitted in support of its trademark renewal application has nothing to do with any Oracle product. "Oracle, through its attorney, submitted specimens showing screen captures of the Node.js website, a project created by Ryan Dahl, Petitioner's Chief Executive Officer," the trademark cancellation petition says. "Node.js is not affiliated with Oracle, and the use of screen captures of the 'nodejs.org' website as a specimen did not show any use of the mark by Oracle or on behalf of Oracle."

Oracle contends that in fact it submitted two specimens to the USPTO -- a screenshot from the Node.js website and another from its own Oracle JavaScript Extension Toolkit. And this, among other reasons, invalidates the fraud claim, Big Red's attorneys contend. "Where, as here, Registrant 'provided the USPTO with [two specimens]' at least one of which shows use of the mark in commerce, Petitioner cannot plausibly allege that the inclusion of a second, purportedly defective specimen, was material," Oracle's motion argues, adding that no evidence of fraudulent intent has been presented. Beyond asking the court to toss the fraud claim, Oracle has requested an additional thirty days to respond to the other two claims.

NetChoice has filed (PDF) its 10th lawsuit challenging state internet regulations, this time opposing Maryland's Age-Appropriate Design Code Act. The Verge's Lauren Feiner reports: NetChoice has become one of the fiercest -- and most successful -- opponents of age verification, moderation, and design code laws, all of which would put new obligations on tech platforms and change how users experience the internet. [...] NetChoice's latest suit opposes the Maryland Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, a rule that echoes a California law of a similar name. In the California litigation, NetChoice notched a partial win in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the district court's decision to block a part of the law requiring platforms to file reports about their services' impact on kids. (It sent another part of the law back to the lower court for further review.)

A similar provision in Maryland's law is at the center of NetChoice's complaint. The group says that Maryland's reporting requirement lets regulators subjectively determine the "best interests of children," inviting "discriminatory enforcement." The reporting requirement on tech companies essentially mandates them "to disparage their services and opine on far-ranging and ill-defined harms that could purportedly arise from their services' 'design' and use of information," NetChoice alleges. NetChoice points out that both California and Maryland have passed separate online privacy laws, which NetChoice Litigation Center director Chris Marchese says shows that "lawmakers know how to write laws to protect online privacy when what they want to do is protect online privacy."

Supporters of the Maryland law say legislators learned from California's challenges and "optimized" their law to avoid questions about speech, according to Tech Policy Press. In a blog analyzing Maryland's approach, Future of Privacy Forum points out that the state made some significant changes from California's version -- such as avoiding an "express obligationâ to determine users' ages and defining the "best interests of children." The NetChoice challenge will test how well those changes can hold up to First Amendment scrutiny. NetChoice has consistently maintained that even well-intentioned attempts to protect kids online are likely to backfire. Though the Maryland law does not explicitly require the use of specific age verification tools, Marchese says it essentially leaves tech platforms with a no-win decision: collect more data on users to determine their ages and create varied user experiences or cater to the lowest common denominator and self-censor lawful content that might be considered inappropriate for its youngest users. And similar to its arguments in other cases, Marchese worries that collecting more data to identify users as minors could create a "honey pot" of kids' information, creating a different problem in attempting to solve another.

"Stakeholders must be included" throughout an agile project "to ensure the evolving deliverables meet their expectations," according to an article this week in Communications of the ACM.

But long-time Slashdot reader theodp complains it's a "gushing how-to-make-Agile-even-better opinion piece." Like other pieces by Agile advocates, it's long on accolades for Agile, but short on hard evidence justifying why exactly Agile project management "has emerged as a critical component for firms looking to improve project delivery speed and flexibility" and the use of Agile approaches is being expanded across other departments beyond software development. Indeed, among the three examples of success offered in the piece to "highlight the effectiveness of agile methods in navigating complex stakeholder dynamics and achieving project success" is Atlassian's use of agile practices to market and develop its products, many of which are coincidentally designed to support Agile practices and teams (including Jira). How meta.

Citing "recent studies," the piece concludes its call for stakeholder engagement by noting that "59% of organizations measure Agile success by customer or user satisfaction." But that is one of those metrics that can create perverse incentives. Empirical studies of user satisfaction and engagement have been published since the 1970's, and sadly one of the cruel lessons learned from them is that the easiest path to having satisfied users is to avoid working on difficult problems. Keep that in mind when you ponder why difficult user stories seem to languish forever in the Kanban and Scrum Board "Ice Box" column, while the "Complete" column is filled with low-hanging fruit. Sometimes success does come easy!

So, are you in the Agile-is-Heaven or Agile-is-Hell camp?

Bill Gates' blog has been updated with short videos about his upcoming book, including one about how his school ended up with an ASR-33 teletype that could connect their Seattle classroom to a computer in California. "The teachers faded away pretty quickly," Gates adds, "But about six of us stayed hardcore. One was Paul Allen..." — the future co-founder of Microsoft. And the experience clearly meant a lot to Gates. "Microsoft just never would've happened without Paul — and this teletype room."

In a longer post thanking his "brilliant" teachers, Gates calls his teletype experience "an encounter that would shape my entire future" and "opened up a whole new world for me." Gates also thanks World War II Navy pilot and Boeing engineer Bill Dougall, who "was instrumental in bringing computer access to our school, something he and other faculty members pushed for after taking a summer computer class... The fascinating thing about Mr. Dougall was that he didn't actually know much about programming; he exhausted his knowledge within a week. But he had the vision to know it was important and the trust to let us students figure it out."

Gates shared a similar memory about the computer-room's 20-something overseer Fred Wright, who "intuitively understood that the best way to get students to learn was to let us explore on our own terms. There was no sign-up sheet, no locked door, no formal instruction." Instead, Mr. Wright let us figure things out ourselves and trusted that, without his guidance, we'd have to get creative... Some of the other teachers argued for tighter regulations, worried about what we might be doing in there unsupervised. But even though Mr. Wright occasionally popped in to break up a squabble or listen as someone explained their latest program, for the most part he defended our autonomy...

Mr. Wright gave us something invaluable: the space to discover our own potential.
Any Slashdot readers have a similarly impactful experience? Share your own thoughts and memories in the comments.

Do you remember your high school's computer room?

A recent video from retro tech YouTuber Clint "LGR" Basinger takes a deep dive into the history of the SereneScreen Marine Aquarium, exploring how former Air Force pilot Jim Sachs transformed a lackluster Windows 95 screensaver into a 25-year digital phenomenon. PC Gamer reports: The story centers on Jim Sachs, a man with one of those "they don't make this type of guy anymore" life stories so common to '80s and '90s computing, one Sachs recounted to the website AmigaLove back in 2020. After a six-year career in the US Air Force flying C-141 Starlifters, Sachs taught himself programming and digital art and began creating games for Commodore 64 and Amiga computers. From his first game, Saucer Attack, to later efforts like Defender of the Crown or his large portfolio of promotional and commissioned pieces, Sach's pixel art remains gorgeous and impressive to this day, and he seems to be a bit of a legend among Commodore enthusiasts.

It's with this background in games and digital art that Sachs looked at Microsoft's simple aquarium-themed screensaver for Windows 95 and 98 and thought he could do better. "Microsoft had an aquarium that they gave away with Windows where it was just bitmaps of fish being dragged across the screen," Sachs told the Matt Chat podcast back in 2015. "And they had that for like, three or four years. And I thought, I've given them enough time, I'm taking them to market. I'm gonna do something which will just blow that away."

Using reference photographs of real aquariums -- Sachs thanked a specific pet shop that's still around in an early version of his website" -- Sachs created the 3D art by hand and programmed the screensaver in C++, releasing the initial version in July 2000. Even looking at it all these years later, the first iteration of the SereneScreen Marine Aquarium is pretty gorgeous, and it has the added charm of being such a distinctly Y2K, nostalgic throwback.

The standalone screensaver sold well, but then things came full circle with Microsoft licensing a version of the Marine Aquarium for the Windows XP Plus Pack and later standard releases of the OS. Since that time, the Marine Aquarium has continued to see new releases, and a section on the SereneScreen website keeps track of its various appearances in the background of movies and TV shows like Law and Order. Over on the SereneScreen website, you can purchase a real time, 3D-accelerated version of the Marine Aquarium for Mac, iOS, Android, and the original Windows. Echoing the Windows XP deal, Roku actually licensed this 3.0 version for its TVs, bringing it to a new generation of users.

OpenAI today launched o3-mini, a specialized AI reasoning model designed for STEM tasks that offers faster processing at lower costs compared to its predecessor o1-mini. The model, priced at $1.10 per million cached input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens, performs fact-checking before delivering results to reduce errors in technical domains like physics and programming, the Microsoft-backed startup said. (A million tokens are roughly 750,000 words)

OpenAI claims that its tests showed o3-mini made 39% fewer major mistakes than o1-mini on complex problems while delivering responses 24% faster. The model will be available through ChatGPT with varying access levels -- free users get basic access while premium subscribers receive higher query limits and reasoning capabilities.

A bipartisan group of legislators has reintroduced the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act of 2025, aiming to mandate AM radio in all new vehicles at no additional cost. Adweek reports: The AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act was first introduced in May 2023. It continued to take on new co-sponsors through the fall of 2024. It was reintroduced as the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act of 2025 with 62 cosponsors. Upper Midwest senators showing support for the bill include Sens. John Hoeven and Kevin Cramer R-North Dakota, and Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith, DFL- Minnesota.

If enacted, the bill would require the Department of Transportation to issue a rule requiring new vehicles to maintain access to broadcast AM radio at no additional cost to the consumer and provide small vehicle manufacturers at least four years after the date DOT issues the rule to comply. The act also requires automakers to inform consumers, during the period before the rule takes effect, that the vehicles do not maintain access to broadcast AM radio. "With 82 million Americans tuning in each month, AM radio delivers more than just emergency alerts," says the National Association of Broadcasters in a news release. "It connects communities through hyper-local content, including news, weather and diverse cultural programming," according to a news release from the National Association of Broadcasters."

The state of Michigan will now require each public high school in the state to offer at least one computer science course to its students. "This bill aligns Michigan with a majority of the country," according to the state's announcement, which says the bill "advances technological literacy" and ensures their students "are well-equipped with the critical thinking skills necessary for success in the workforce."

Slashdot reader theodp writes: From the Michigan House Fiscal Agency Analysis: "Supporters of the bill say that increasing access to computer science courses for students in schools should be a priority of the state in order to ensure that students can compete for the types of jobs that have good pay and will be needed in the coming decades."

That analysis goes on to report that testifying in favor of the bill were tech-giant backed nonprofit Code.org (Microsoft is a $30 million Code.org donor), Amazon and AWS (Amazon is a $30+ million Code.org donor), the tech-supported Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA), and the lobbying organization TechNet, whose members include Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and OpenAI).
It's not clear how many high schools in Michigan are already teaching CS courses, but this still raises a popular question for discussion. Should high schools be required to teach at least one CS course?

Friday Bill Gates shared an excerpt from his upcoming memoir Source Code: My Beginnings. Published in the Wall Street Journal, the excerpt includes pictures of young Bill Gates when he was 12 (dressed for a hike) and 14 (studying a teletype machine).

Gates remembers forming "a sort of splinter group" from the Boy Scouts when he was 13 with a group of boys who "wanted more freedom and more risk" and took long hikes around Seattle, travelling hundreds of miles together on hikes as long as "seven days or more." (His favorite breakfast dish was Oscar Mayer Smokie Links.) But he also remembers another group of friends — Kent, Rick, and... Paul — who connected to a mainframe computer from a phone line at their private school. Both hiking and programming "felt like an adventure... exploring new worlds, traveling to places even most adults couldn't reach."

Like hiking, programming fit me because it allowed me to define my own measure of success, and it seemed limitless, not determined by how fast I could run or how far I could throw. The logic, focus and stamina needed to write long, complicated programs came naturally to me. Unlike in hiking, among that group of friends, I was the leader.
When Gates' school got a (DEC) PDP-8 — which cost $8,500 — "For a challenge, I decided I would try to write a version of the Basic programming language for the new computer..." And Gates remembers a long hike where "I silently honed my code" for its formula evaluator: I slimmed it down more, like whittling little pieces off a stick to sharpen the point. What I made seemed efficient and pleasingly simple. It was by far the best code I had ever written...

By the time school started again in the fall, whoever had lent us the PDP-8 had reclaimed it. I never finished my Basic project. But the code I wrote on that hike, my formula evaluator — and its beauty — stayed with me. Three and a half years later, I was a sophomore in college not sure of my path in life when Paul Allen, one of my Lakeside friends, burst into my dorm room with news of a groundbreaking computer. I knew we could write a Basic language for it; we had a head start.
Gates typed his code from that hike, "and with that planted the seed of what would become one of the world's largest companies and the beginning of a new industry."

Gates cites Richard Feynman's description of the excitement and pleasure of "finding the thing out" — the reward for "all of the disciplined thinking and hard work." And he remembers his teenaged years as "intensely driven by the love of what I was learning, accruing expertise just when it was needed: at the dawn of the personal computer."