The first mistake was appointing the peer despite his links to Jeffrey Epstein. The next would be claiming his security risks were properly managed

It is telling that the person who first floated the idea of Peter Mandelson as the next UK ambassador to America was probably himself. He seems to have looked at his global contacts and thought: this is why I’m useful. Whitehall’s security vetters, UKSV, looked at the same contacts and thought: this is why he’s not. The latest revelations illustrate something rotten about modern politics. What the wealthy and connected think makes them an asset is exactly what makes them a risk.

In late 2024, Lord Mandelson was announced as the UK’s ambassador to Washington by Sir Keir Starmer. That posting ended in disgrace last year after US files exposed the depth of his links to the sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. But UKSV advised against giving security clearance to Lord Mandelson, flagging concerns over links to China’s finance minister, a sanctioned Russian oligarch, a former Israeli military intelligence chief and a British individual described as potentially compromising, as well as a £1m loan connected to an Israeli startup investment.

Continue reading...

Former DUP leader’s barrister said woman was mistaken in linking letter to his alleged sex offences

Jeffrey Donaldson told a woman who has accused him of sexual assault that he regretted inflicting “hurt, pain and distress”, but his comments were not related to the allegations, a court has heard.

A lawyer for the former MP and Democratic Unionist party leader told Newry crown court on Friday that Donaldson’s letter to the alleged victim had “nothing to do” with her accusations of sexual abuse and referred to other behaviour.

Continue reading...

Nato has vowed to ‘defend every inch’ of its territory after a Russian drone hit an apartment building in Romania. The strike prompted swift condemnation and threats of repercussion from European leaders. So is there a risk the war could expand beyond Ukraine? Lucy Hough speaks to senior international correspondent Peter Beaumont

Continue reading...

Het laatste half jaar van zijn werkende leven had Hans van Rijn zich heel anders voorgesteld. Eerst alle ophef na een uitzending van het tv-programma Radar, vervolgens brandt deze vrijdagochtend een groot deel van de voorraad brommobielen op het industrieterrein in Numansdorp af. De dader staat op camera.

Het treinverkeer op station Rotterdam Blaak ligt een groot deel van de vrijdagavond plat. Dat komt door een aanrijding met een persoon, rond 18:00 uur. NS verwacht dat de problemen rond 21:15 uur opgelost zijn.

Alexandra van Huffelen, koningin van D66 en de Radboud Universiteit, wordt keihard aangevallen door boze oud-bestuurders van de universiteit. Vijf van hen (MANNEN) ondertekenden zeldzaam genoeg een open brief waarin de kritiek op haar bestuursstijl niet mals is: "De sterke neiging tot centraliseren en uniformeren door het huidige bestuur past wellicht bij de aansturing van een ministerie, maar niet bij een universiteit. Ook de inzet van consultants en beleidsadviseurs is een ministerieel virus waartegen een doeltreffend vaccin dringend gewenst is." Dictatortrekjes dus. Nu komt het erop aan hoe Van Huffelen, die inderdaad bekendstaat om de ijzeren hand waarmee ze de pallie-opstanden neersloeg, een schrikbewind jegens zielige studentjes en om haar pioniersrol als Twitterverlater voordat het cool was, zal terugslaan. Ze wil niet (nergens) reageren op de aanval, die zich toespitst op het ontbreken van 'de menselijke maat'. O wat zal ze zinnen op wraak. Dit wordt oorlog. En die menselijke maat zullen de klagers ongetwijfeld lekker bij de Zeeman moeten zoeken.

Maak Van Huffelen nou niet kwaad

Social

A key Linux virtualization component, QEMU, is considering relaxing its blanket ban on AI-generated contributions to allow limited assistance from the bots. The suggestion came from Paolo Bonzini, distinguished engineer at Red Hat and a maintainer of the KVM hypervisor. Bonzini's suggestion is to allow AI assistance "where the ramifications of copyright violations are at least easy to revert and unlikely to spread." Core code would remain off-limits "without prior agreement from a maintainer." QEMU's current code provenance policy rejects anything that might include or derive from AI-generated content. "A blanket ban," wrote Bonzini, "was easy to maintain while LLM output was rarely usable on its own, but as the tools improved an absolute prohibition has become harder to justify." The problem with code from AI assistants is its source – does the submitter have the legal right to contribute the code? Bonzini's take is that while there remain concerns around copyright and licensing, "what has shifted is the balance of risk." How big is the risk? Not what it was, according to Bonzini. The engineer cited other projects that had accepted AI content without running into serious legal trouble, and organizations (including Red Hat) that reckoned the risk was acceptable. That said, while Red Hat has an army of lawyers at its disposal, a project such as QEMU doesn't have the same resources, hence the suggestion to keep AI-assisted code in areas (Bonzini gave examples, including small bug fixes and documentation) where it can be backed out. The use of LLM output in contributions is a contentious one and has its fans and detractors. Projects such as OpenSlopware tracked free software and open source projects that used LLM-generated code or integrated AI technologies. One concern cited is what LLMs have been trained on and the risk that chunks of code produced by the technology might have licensing issues. One solution is to disclose the use of AI in a contribution, although this might not be necessary where the use is trivial (Red Hat gave the example of autocompleting a variable name.) Bonzini also suggested, "Introduce 'AI-used-for:' as a trailer to record where AI was used, and include other suggestions that help reviewers judge the result." "The standard is slightly different from the more usual 'Assisted-by', which doubles as a check that the author has read the policy." Although Bonzini noted, "use of AI does not relax any other contribution requirement," the discussion indicates a recognition that blanket bans on AI assistance might not be the way forward and that a more nuanced approach is needed. ®

A key Linux virtualization component, QEMU, is considering relaxing its blanket ban on AI-generated contributions to allow limited assistance from the bots. The suggestion came from Paolo Bonzini, distinguished engineer at Red Hat and a maintainer of the KVM hypervisor. Bonzini's suggestion is to allow AI assistance "where the ramifications of copyright violations are at least easy to revert and unlikely to spread." Core code would remain off-limits "without prior agreement from a maintainer." QEMU's current code provenance policy rejects anything that might include or derive from AI-generated content. "A blanket ban," wrote Bonzini, "was easy to maintain while LLM output was rarely usable on its own, but as the tools improved an absolute prohibition has become harder to justify." The problem with code from AI assistants is its source – does the submitter have the legal right to contribute the code? Bonzini's take is that while there remain concerns around copyright and licensing, "what has shifted is the balance of risk." How big is the risk? Not what it was, according to Bonzini. The engineer cited other projects that had accepted AI content without running into serious legal trouble, and organizations (including Red Hat) that reckoned the risk was acceptable. That said, while Red Hat has an army of lawyers at its disposal, a project such as QEMU doesn't have the same resources, hence the suggestion to keep AI-assisted code in areas (Bonzini gave examples, including small bug fixes and documentation) where it can be backed out. The use of LLM output in contributions is a contentious one and has its fans and detractors. Projects such as OpenSlopware tracked free software and open source projects that used LLM-generated code or integrated AI technologies. One concern cited is what LLMs have been trained on and the risk that chunks of code produced by the technology might have licensing issues. One solution is to disclose the use of AI in a contribution, although this might not be necessary where the use is trivial (Red Hat gave the example of autocompleting a variable name.) Bonzini also suggested, "Introduce 'AI-used-for:' as a trailer to record where AI was used, and include other suggestions that help reviewers judge the result." "The standard is slightly different from the more usual 'Assisted-by', which doubles as a check that the author has read the policy." Although Bonzini noted, "use of AI does not relax any other contribution requirement," the discussion indicates a recognition that blanket bans on AI assistance might not be the way forward and that a more nuanced approach is needed. ®

De nieuwe Hongaarse premier boekte een belangrijke symbolische overwinning bij zijn bezoek in Brussel. Maar het geld gaat nog niet vloeien. Europese Commissievoorzitter Ursula von der Leyen wil niet van „afsnijwerk” weten.