AllYouCanTech

IT Company Charged with Postponing Onboarding for 2,000 New Hires Across Multiple Years

### Infosys Faces Backlash Over Prolonged Onboarding and Uncompensated Training for Engineering Graduates

The Indian technology behemoth Infosys is facing scrutiny for purportedly taking advantage of thousands of engineering graduates by extending job offers while postponing their onboarding for as long as two years. This issue has ignited indignation among the impacted graduates and garnered the attention of labor advocacy organizations and government representatives.

#### The Claims

The Nascent Information Technology Employees Senate (NITES), a group supporting IT workers in India, has accused Infosys of acting in an unprofessional and exploitative manner. A letter dispatched by NITES to Mansukh Mandaviya, India’s Minister of Labor and Employment, states that the company has been extending job offers to engineering graduates since April 2022 but has not onboarded many of them. The letter asserts that more than 2,000 recruits are experiencing these delays.

NITES alleges that Infosys compelled the recruits to engage in an unpaid, virtual “pre-training” program held from July 1, 2024, to July 24, 2024. The graduates were reportedly informed that their onboarding would be completed by August 19 or September 2, yet those dates passed without any further updates from the company. Instead, recruits were told they would need to retake the pre-training exam in an offline format, again without compensation.

#### Continuous Unpaid Training

The situation has caused significant frustration, anxiety, and uncertainty among many graduates. Reports suggest that recruits faced multiple unpaid virtual and in-person training sessions and evaluations. Emails sent to these recruits indicated that failure to attend these sessions, which sometimes lasted as long as six weeks, would result in disqualification from onboarding.

NITES has condemned Infosys for squandering the valuable time of these young graduates, alleging that the company is hindering their potential contributions to India’s economy. The advocacy organization has urged the Indian government to step in and avert further exploitation.

#### Infosys’ Reaction

In defense of the allegations, Infosys CEO Salil Parekh claimed that all graduates who received job offers would eventually join the company, although he did not specify when this would take place or the reasons behind the prolonged delays. “Every offer that we have provided will result in an eventual joining. We have adjusted some timelines, but everyone will come on board, and that commitment remains unchanged,” Parekh communicated in an interview with the Press Trust of India.

However, this reassurance has offered little relief to the concerned graduates and advocacy groups. NITES has insisted that Infosys provide full salary compensation for the duration of the onboarding delays or aid the recruits in securing alternative positions within the organization.

#### Consequences for India’s Economy

NITES has also contended that Infosys’ conduct is detrimental to India’s economic advancement. The IT sector is a vital component of the country’s economy, and delaying the professional journeys of young engineering graduates could lead to long-lasting ramifications. “These young engineering graduates are essential to the future of our nation’s IT landscape, which is crucial to our economic framework. By stalling their careers and exposing them to unpaid labor and recurrent assessments, Infosys is not only misusing their valuable time but also undermining the potential benefits they could bring to India’s development,” stated the letter from NITES.

The situation is further complicated by the wider challenges affecting India’s employment market. Currently, the country is grappling with a job scarcity, especially in the IT domain. A June 2024 analysis of Indian hiring patterns indicated a 9 percent year-over-year drop in IT job opportunities in hardware and networking, alongside a 5 percent decrease in software and software services. Additionally, attrition rates in the IT sector have declined, resulting in fewer job openings, particularly for entry-level positions.

#### The Broader Context

Infosys is not alone in encountering difficulties in onboarding new staff. The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent economic downturn have created logistical hurdles for many companies, causing delays in hiring and onboarding. However, the duration of these delays and the repetition of unpaid training sessions have prompted scrutiny of Infosys’ methodologies.

The organization has also faced criticism for not conducting any campus recruitment in 2023 or 2024, a trend noted throughout the Indian IT sector. With a limited number of job prospects, many graduates may feel compelled to wait for Infosys to complete their onboarding, despite the financial strain and mental health challenges they are encountering.

#### Conclusion

The scandal surrounding Infosys’ delayed onboarding and uncompensated training underscores the difficulties confronting India’s IT sector and the broader economy. While the company has guaranteed that all recruits will eventually join, the absence of transparency and communication has left many graduates in a state of ambiguity. As the situation develops, it remains uncertain whether Infosys will take measures to address the issues faced by the affected graduates and restore its standing in the industry.

Optional Update Delivers Ryzen Performance Enhancements for Windows 11 Version 23H2

### AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and Windows 11 24H2: An In-Depth Examination of Performance Enhancements

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X, a processor that has attracted considerable attention since its debut, remains a central topic in conversations regarding CPU performance, especially concerning gaming and productivity tasks. With the impending Windows 11 24H2 update, AMD fans have new performance enhancements to anticipate—improvements designed to maximize the potential of not just the Ryzen 7 7700X but also other CPUs within AMD’s Ryzen 5000, 7000, and 9000 series.

### The Windows 11 24H2 Update: What’s New?

Microsoft’s Windows 11 24H2 update goes beyond a mere software refresh. It introduces a new compiler, kernel, and scheduler, all crafted to enhance CPU performance across varying architectures. Although initial efforts primarily focused on optimizing Arm CPUs and streamlining the speed of x86 app translation, the update also significantly benefits AMD’s Zen-based processors.

A notable enhancement in the 24H2 update is the refined CPU scheduler, tasked with managing how workloads are distributed across CPU cores. This upgrade is particularly advantageous for AMD’s cutting-edge Ryzen 9000 series, built on the Zen 5 architecture. Moreover, AMD has guaranteed that users with older Ryzen CPUs, including those utilizing Zen 3 and Zen 4 architectures, can also benefit from these advancements.

### Backporting to Windows 11 23H2: A Win for AMD Users

Instead of keeping users in suspense for the official 24H2 release, AMD and Microsoft have backported these scheduler enhancements to the current Windows 11 23H2 version. Consequently, owners of Ryzen 5000, 7000, and 9000 CPUs can now experience these performance enhancements by installing the KB5041587 update, readily available through Windows Update in the “Optional Updates” section.

AMD suggests that the performance boost with the KB5041587 update applied should closely match what users will observe with the complete 24H2 update. This development is a meaningful advantage for those eager to enhance their systems without delaying for the formal debut of 24H2.

### Performance Gains: What to Expect

AMD has released several benchmarks to illustrate the performance gains that users should anticipate with the 24H2 update. For the Ryzen 9000 series, the company asserts that performance can improve by anywhere between 0 to 13 percent, depending on the specific workload. While AMD has not provided precise figures for older CPUs like the Ryzen 5000 and 7000 series, initial tests by independent reviewers shed some light.

The Hardware Unboxed YouTube channel conducted preliminary gaming tests with the 24H2 update, concentrating on the Ryzen 7 7700X and the newer Ryzen 7 9700X. The findings were encouraging: on average, across a variety of games, the Ryzen 7 7700X achieved a 10 percent boost in average frame rates. The Ryzen 7 9700X, as expected, performed slightly better with an 11 percent increase. However, it should be noted that under default settings, the 9700X was merely 2 to 3 percent faster than the nearly two-year-old 7700X in these titles, irrespective of whether the 24H2 update was applied.

### Real-World Implications

While these performance gains are indeed welcomed, they come with certain limitations. The testing executed by Hardware Unboxed was performed at a 1080p resolution using a high-end Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 GPU. In this context, the CPU is more likely to act as the bottleneck, making the performance tweaks more evident. Conversely, gamers who engage at higher resolutions such as 1440p or 4K may find the GPU to be the limiting factor, thus diminishing the visibility of CPU performance enhancements.

Furthermore, the performance improvements are most apparent in contexts where frame rates are already elevated. For instance, one game recorded an average frame rate increase from 142 FPS to 158 FPS on the Ryzen 7 7700X, and from 167 FPS to 181 FPS on the Ryzen 7 9700X. While these figures are impressive, many users may struggle to perceive the differences during actual gameplay.

Additionally, AMD has noted that productivity workloads might also see advantages from the 24H2 update. The company reported a 6 percent improvement in the Procyon Office benchmark, which emulates tasks such as word processing and spreadsheet calculations. However, further analysis is required to grasp the complete impact on various real-world workloads.

### Ryzen 7 9700X vs. Ryzen 7 7700

Continuing Discussion on “Open Source AI” Initiates Attempts to Define It Clearly

### The Movement for Clarity in AI: OSI’s Initiative to Establish “Open Source AI”

In the swiftly changing landscape of artificial intelligence, the phrase “open source” has sparked considerable discussion. As AI technologies increasingly permeate our everyday experiences, the urgency for transparency and understanding in the development, distribution, and utilization of these systems has intensified. The Open Source Initiative (OSI), a prominent supporter of open software principles, has recently made noteworthy strides to tackle this challenge by putting forth a draft definition of “open source AI.”

#### The Uncertainty of “Open Source” in AI

Traditionally, “open source” refers to software that anyone can access, modify, and share freely. However, applying this notion to AI has revealed intricacies. Companies like Meta have introduced AI models such as Llama 3, which are available at no cost but are subject to usage limitations. These limitations, which might restrict the model’s application based on factors like company size or content type, have ignited discussions among advocates of free software regarding the true essence of “open source” when it comes to AI.

For instance, although Meta’s Llama 3 model can be accessed, it doesn’t fulfill the conventional open source criteria established by the OSI for software. The AI image synthesizer Flux represents another instance of a model labeled as “open,” yet it doesn’t fully adhere to open source values. This lack of clarity has led to the emergence of alternative terms like “open-weights” or “source-available” to describe AI models that come with restrictions on code or weights without corresponding training data.

#### OSI’s Initiative to Define Open Source AI

In an effort to clarify this matter, the OSI has gathered a varied group of around 70 contributors, including scholars, legal experts, policymakers, and advocates, to formulate a definition for “open source AI.” Representatives from leading technology firms like Meta, Google, and Amazon have also participated in this initiative. The current draft definition (version 0.0.9) highlights “four essential freedoms” reminiscent of those that characterize free software: the freedom to utilize the AI system for any reason, analyze its workings, modify it, and distribute it with or without changes.

By delineating clear standards for open source AI, the OSI seeks to create a framework against which AI systems can be assessed. This will likely empower developers, scholars, and users to make more enlightened choices concerning the AI tools they create, study, or utilize.

#### The Significance of Transparency

A crucial advantage of genuinely open source AI lies in the potential for enhanced transparency. When researchers can delve into the workings of AI models, they are better positioned to pinpoint and rectify possible software vulnerabilities. This stands in stark contrast to opaque systems like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, which operates as a proprietary entity with a carefully protected architecture.

The OSI’s project timeline suggests a stable version of the “open source AI” definition is anticipated to be unveiled in October during the All Things Open 2024 event in Raleigh, North Carolina.

#### “Unrestricted Innovation”

In a May press release, the OSI stressed the necessity of accurately defining what open source AI entails. Stefano Maffulli, the OSI’s executive director, remarked, “AI differs from standard software and compels all stakeholders to reassess how Open Source principles pertain to this domain. OSI believes everyone should retain agency and oversight of technology. We also acknowledge that markets thrive when clear definitions facilitate transparency, collaboration, and unrestricted innovation.”

The organization’s latest draft definition expands beyond merely the AI model or its weights, covering the full system and its components. For an AI system to be deemed open source, it must grant access to what the OSI refers to as the “preferred form for modifications.” This entails comprehensive information about the training data, the complete source code used for training and operating the system, as well as the model weights and parameters. All these elements are required to be provided under OSI-sanctioned licenses or terms.

Notably, the draft does not require the sharing of raw training data. Instead, it demands “data information”—detailed metadata about the training data and methodologies. This strategy seeks to deliver transparency and replicability without necessarily releasing the actual dataset, effectively addressing privacy or copyright concerns while upholding open source principles.

#### A Diverse Coalition with a Clear Objective

The OSI’s strategy for formulating the “open source AI” definition dates back to 2022 when it initially reached out to organizations for their insights on the term. The initiative has included a series of global workshops that have convened varied groups from diverse backgrounds. According to the OSI, 53 percent of the participants in the working groups on Open Source AI identified as people of color, with 28 percent being women.

“After nearly two years of gathering perspectives from around the globe to pinpoint the principles of Open Source fit for AI systems, we’re launching a worldwide roadshow to refine…

NASA Issues Revised Cost Projection for SLS Launch Tower, Sparking Worries

### NASA’s Mobile Launch Tower Initiative: An Expensive and Prolonged Challenge

NASA’s visionary efforts to back its Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, especially the enhanced Block 1B version, have faced notable hurdles regarding the construction of a new mobile launch tower. Initially estimated at $383 million, the project’s costs have surged to around $2.7 billion, as indicated by a recent report from NASA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG). This article examines the factors contributing to the escalating costs, the repercussions for NASA’s Artemis initiative, and the larger difficulties the agency encounters in managing substantial projects.

#### The Tower’s Expanding Dimensions

The mobile launch tower, referred to as Mobile Launcher 2 (ML-2), is an essential infrastructure element intended to support the SLS Block 1B rocket. Designed for use in the Artemis IV mission, this rocket version incorporates a more robust second stage named the Exploration Upper Stage. The mission’s goal is to transport both a crewed Orion spacecraft and a component of the Lunar Gateway into lunar orbit, representing a pivotal achievement in NASA’s Artemis initiative.

Nevertheless, building the ML-2 tower has been plagued by setbacks and budget overruns. Initially slated for completion in March 2023, the project is now anticipated to wrap up no sooner than September 2027, with expenses soaring to $2.7 billion—almost double the construction cost of the Burj Khalifa, the tallest building globally.

#### Root Causes: Misjudgment and Complexity

A central factor driving the ballooning costs and delays is Bechtel National, Inc.’s miscalculation of the project’s scope and complexity. The OIG report notes that Bechtel profoundly underestimated the labor hours needed for project completion. Consequently, the firm has logged far more labor hours than forecasted, with estimated overtime nearly doubling from May 2022 to January 2024.

This miscalculation has triggered a cascading effect on the project’s schedule and budget. The report indicates that Bechtel’s efforts to meet NASA’s timeline have resulted in a significant rise in labor costs, compounding the project’s financial difficulties.

#### The Consequences for NASA’s Artemis Initiative

Delays in the ML-2 project present critical challenges for NASA’s Artemis initiative, especially the Artemis IV mission. To adhere to the mission’s target launch date of 2028, the ML-2 tower must be ready by November 2026. However, both NASA and the OIG report concur that there exists a zero percent likelihood of achieving this deadline. Consequently, the Artemis IV mission, assuming it employs the upgraded SLS rocket, is not expected to launch before mid-2029 at the earliest.

This delay may have a cascading impact on subsequent Artemis missions, potentially pushing back NASA’s schedule for returning humans to the Moon and establishing a lasting presence on the lunar surface.

#### The Obstacles of Cost-Plus Contracts

A key insight from the OIG report is the limited bargaining power NASA has over Bechtel due to the cost-plus contract structure applied to the ML-2 project. Under a cost-plus arrangement, the contractor is reimbursed for all permissible expenses incurred and receives an additional fee for profit. This contract model offers minimal motivation for the contractor to manage costs or accelerate project timelines.

The report highlights that NASA could opt to modify the contract to a fixed-price structure, which would set a defined cost for the endeavor. However, NASA officials have stated that they do not plan to pursue this option, as they believe Bechtel would likely submit a cost proposal that exceeds NASA’s budget capacity to compensate for the additional risks linked to a fixed-price contract.

This scenario underscores the broader challenges NASA encounters in overseeing large-scale projects. While the cost-plus contracting model can be advantageous in specific situations, it has been criticized for causing cost overruns and delays in governmental undertakings. NASA Administrator Bill Nelson has previously voiced his discontent with the cost-plus approach, advocating for a transition towards fixed-price contracts to foster competition and cost management.

#### Conclusion: A Lesson for Future Endeavors

The persistent issues with the ML-2 project act as a cautionary example for NASA and other governmental organizations engaged in significant infrastructure projects. The substantial cost overruns and delays illuminate the necessity for accurate project forecasting, robust contract administration, and accountability in executing intricate engineering initiatives.

As NASA moves forward with its ambitious objectives under the Artemis program, it is vital for the agency to derive lessons from the ML-2 project. By adopting more rigorous project management strategies and investigating alternative contracting options, NASA can enhance its capacity to fulfill its long-term goals while mitigating the risks of future cost overruns and delays.

In the interim, the soaring costs and delays of

Martin Shkreli Reportedly Duplicated His $2M Wu-Tang Album and Shared Them with Several Women

### The Odyssey of the Wu-Tang Clan Album: Martin Shkreli, PleasrDAO, and the Clash Over “Once Upon a Time in Shaolin”

In the chronicles of contemporary music history, there are few narratives as surreal and intricate as the account of Wu-Tang Clan’s “Once Upon a Time in Shaolin.” This album, a singular artifact crafted as only one physical edition, has become embroiled in a legal and cultural tempest featuring infamous “pharma bro” Martin Shkreli, the decentralized collective called PleasrDAO, and the United States legal framework. The saga has sparked discussions about ownership, copyright, and the significance of art in the digital era.

#### The Album That Initiated It All

“Once Upon a Time in Shaolin” was envisioned as a rebellion against the diminishing value of music in the digital age. Wu-Tang Clan, a revered hip-hop ensemble, created the album as a one-of-a-kind artistic expression. It was more than just an album; it was a proclamation, encased in a specially designed nickel and silver box, accompanied by a 174-page leather-bound tome of lyrics and production stories, along with a pair of tailored audio speakers. The album aimed to serve as a singular cultural treasure, with only one copy ever produced.

In 2015, Martin Shkreli, at that time a hedge fund manager and CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals, acquired the album for $2 million. Shkreli’s purchase was contentious, given his rising infamy for drastically hiking the price of the life-saving medication Daraprim by over 5,000%. The acquisition only heightened his notoriety, making him a representation of corporate avarice.

#### Shkreli’s Legal Issues and the Album’s Confiscation

Shkreli’s luck took a drastic downturn when he was found guilty of securities fraud in 2017. As part of his punishment, he was mandated to surrender $7.4 million in assets, including the Wu-Tang Clan album. The U.S. government confiscated the album and subsequently sold it to an unnamed middleman to assist in covering Shkreli’s fines.

Enter PleasrDAO, a “digital autonomous organization” consisting of 74 individuals who jointly acquired the album from the intermediary for $4.75 million. PleasrDAO, which focuses on obtaining culturally significant digital artifacts, minted a non-fungible token (NFT) to signify their ownership of the album. This NFT functioned as a digital title, representing the collective ownership of the physical album by PleasrDAO’s members.

#### The Exposé: Shkreli’s Replicas

However, PleasrDAO’s thrill over possessing the “one-of-a-kind” album was fleeting. In June 2022, Shkreli disclosed on his YouTube channel that he had created multiple versions of the album before it was confiscated by the authorities. “Naturally, I made MP3 duplicates,” Shkreli stated, mentioning that they were “secured in safes all around the globe.” He even asserted to have shared copies with various people and played the album on his Discord server, mocking PleasrDAO members by claiming that “>5000 people have” the album.

Shkreli’s antics, which included offering to distribute copies to random internet users and hosting listening events on his social media platforms, prompted PleasrDAO to initiate a lawsuit against him. The organization argued that Shkreli was breaching the asset forfeiture order and misappropriating “trade secrets” as per New York law. PleasrDAO contended that Shkreli’s dissemination of the album’s material was undermining its marketability and worth.

#### Shkreli’s Counterargument: A Matter of Rights

In facing the lawsuit, Shkreli’s defense was clear-cut: he believed he retained the right to make and distribute copies of the album. According to Shkreli, upon purchasing the album in 2015, he also obtained 50% of the copyrights related to the package. He asserted that the government had only seized the physical version of the album, not the duplicates he had already produced. Moreover, he argued that the album could no longer qualify as a “trade secret” since it had been rendered non-secret due to his actions.

#### The Legal Dispute: A Temporary Restraining Order

As the proceedings progressed, a federal judge in Brooklyn issued a temporary restraining order on August 26, 2024, barring Shkreli from “owning, using, distributing, or selling any interest in the Wu-Tang Clan album ‘Once Upon a Time in Shaolin,’ including its data and files or the contents of the Album.” The judge further mandated Shkreli to surrender all versions of the album, in any format, to his legal team and to submit an affidavit confirming he no longer holds any copies.

Additionally, by the conclusion of September 2024, Shkreli