18033 stories
·
175 followers

The Cybertruck is dead, makes way for Cybercab says Elon Musk

1 Share

Elon’s Edsel is no more. Last night Tesla CEO Elon Musk revealed on social media that his car company is calling time on its failed attempt to wrest control of the American pickup truck market. The Cybertruck will cease production in the middle of 2027, liberating that space in Tesla’s cavernous factory for other uses—more Cybercabs, most likely.

Musk first revealed the Cybertruck in late 2019, back when Tesla was still trading at a theoretically understandable price-to-earning ratio. The pickup's unusual angular shape owed more to low-res video game models than any concessions to practicality. At the time Musk made fanciful claims that the truck would use a stainless steel monocoque construction, telling his audience that “the body and bed don’t do anything useful” on a normal truck. While some race cars use carbon-fiber monocoques for strength and lightness, making a pickup truck with a stainless steel monocoque chassis would only make sense if someone had an awful lot of stainless steel lying around and needed something to do with it all.

The truck was supposed to go on sale for less than $40,000, and Tesla made its usual stratospheric sales predictions that (had they been accurate) the bare metal EVs would be as ubiquitous as the Model 3 and Y.

But development of the Cybertruck was more troubled than usual for Tesla, which struggled heavily to bring both the Model 3 and Y into mass production. Musk demanded “Lego-like precision” from the workers assembling the trucks, but achieving the 10-micron tolerances required by the Danish toy company was not evidently successful, based on what we saw when we experienced our first Cybertruck in reality.

That was in 2023, when Cybertruck headlines were mostly about recalls and stop sales. By then, the truck used a conventional unibody chassis—conventional for Tesla, not for full-size pickup trucks. Toward the end of that year, Musk told his audience that “we dug our grave” with the truck, perhaps the first public acknowledgment that annual sales of a quarter of a million Cybertrucks probably wasn’t going to happen after all.

Sales never took off, and the divisive shape of the Cybertruck became an all-too visible reminder of the CEO’s role in reshaping the federal government to his liking. Even selling thousands of Cybertrucks to SpaceX couldn’t save the pickup. Now, with America having vociferously rejected Musk’s vision of governance, those wishing to drive something that reminds everyone around them of that vision will only have a few months more to purchase one.

Read full article

Comments



Read the whole story
fxer
16 hours ago
reply
Bend, Oregon
Share this story
Delete

The folks behind John Wick are back with Karōshi trailer

1 Share

Those of us missing the John Wick universe can take heart, because Chad Stahelski—who created that franchise—is coming back early next year with a new dystopian action film. It's called Karōshi (a Japanese term that means "death overwork"), and Lionsgate released a killer trailer that puts this film at the top of my list of "must see" movies of 2027.

Dying from working too hard is a very real phenomenon, not just in Japan and much of Asia, but also in Sweden. The physical cause is usually stress-related heart attacks or strokes, as well as suicide (karōjisatsu in Japan). Writer/director Takashi Doscher has transported that concept to a grim, futuristic corporate Manhattan, specifically a company called Ikigai Technologies. Per the official premise:

Karōshi is an action-thriller set in a near-future Manhattan, where corporate loyalty and cultural tradition have reshaped everyday life. When a mysterious outsider infiltrates a powerful company after a worker’s death, he exposes the violent system hidden beneath its polished surface.

Teo Yoo (Past Lives) stars as the aptly named Hiro, who is clearly out for vengeance against the offending corporation. The cast also includes Takehiro Hira, so memorable in the 2024 miniseries Shōgun, as well as Giancarlo Esposito, Cynthia Erivo, Bill Camp, Richard Harmon, Isabel May, and Show Kasamatsu.

The trailer opens with Hira's character lauding the contribution of Ikigai Technologies in helping shape "modern life for millions," adding praise for employees' "daily commitment and sacrifice." Then we see one distraught worker deliberately falling backward to his death from the top of the company's skyscraper. Enter our protagonist, Hiro, who suspects something more sinister is going on behind the company's embrace of the samurai path, marked by "integrity" and "honor"—and also violence.

It's not long before Hiro is battling all kinds of opponents in fine Wickian fashion, including using a paper umbrella to shield himself from the blood spurting from the neck of an opponent he's just killed—a clever flourish. John Wick would be proud.

Karōshi hits theaters on February 5, 2027.

Read full article

Comments



Read the whole story
fxer
16 hours ago
reply
Bend, Oregon
Share this story
Delete

NYT demands Brave shut down its paywall blocker and end deals with AI firms

1 Share

The New York Times and other newspaper companies sued Brave Software yesterday, alleging that the browser maker illegally bypasses paywalls and sells stolen news content to AI companies.

"Brave is the supplier, dealer, and distributor of stolen copyrighted content for its own users and many of the most prominent GenAI companies, including Anthropic, Perplexity, Mistral, xAI, and Cohere," the NYT alleged in a lawsuit filed in US District Court for the Southern District of New York. Citing third-party revenue estimates, the suit claimed that "Brave has made more than $100 million by copying and reselling publishers’ work without consent or permission," while "publishers have received nothing."

The lawsuit said, "AI companies pay Brave to provide them with real-time online content from the Brave search index," and use content from the Brave index "to train their own AI models" and "to respond to specific user queries." The NYT lawsuit points to Brave's website, which says the Brave Search API is "used by some of the biggest names in AI, including Cohere, Mistral, Perplexity, and You.com."

The lawsuit accused Brave of all the major types of copyright infringement: direct infringement, contributory infringement, and vicarious infringement. The lawsuit claims Brave infringes copyrights directly by scraping articles for its search index, for its "Ask Brave" AI search feature, and for the Brave API that "serves as an illicit source of unlicensed copyrighted material, including Times journalism, to other AI companies."

The NYT accused Brave of being "a contributory and vicarious infringer when it deliberately induces, facilitates, controls, and profits from its users’ and GenAI customers’ copying of the copyrighted content." Finally, the lawsuit said Brave violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by circumventing technological measures the NYT and other content owners use to restrict access to their articles.

"The Brave Browser includes a default setting that, when activated, causes the browser to go behind website paywalls and provide the paywalled content to the user," the lawsuit said. The browser "blocks advertising that would otherwise appear on The Times’s website, and instead shows its own ads, offering its users a cut of the revenue even as it deprives The Times of digital advertising revenue that helps it fund the expensive effort of producing journalism," the lawsuit said.

When testing the Brave browser for Mac today, we found that the optional "paywall blocker" feature made it possible to read a paywalled New York Times article. The feature was enabled in the default settings and can be turned off.

NYT wants Brave profits

The NYT asked for a permanent injunction to stop Brave from continuing the allegedly illegal conduct. The lawsuit seeks statutory damages, actual damages, restitution of profits derived from alleged copyright infringement, and "restitution and disgorgement of all revenue and profits Brave obtained through its ad-substitution scheme."

A similar lawsuit was filed against Brave in the same court yesterday by the New York Daily News, Chicago Tribune, and Orlando Sentinel companies. "AI giants are now desperate to avoid getting caught red-handed stealing news from publishers, so Brave Software is selling them a back door to the journalism they know they have no right to," said Steven Lieberman, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. "Buying stolen goods secondhand doesn’t make them legitimate. Brave must be held responsible for laundering pirated reporting for the AI industry.”

We contacted Brave and will update this article if it provides a response. Perplexity, which is not a defendant in the Brave lawsuit but is facing a different lawsuit filed by the NYT, accused the news organization of "disinformation" in a statement provided to Ars and other news outlets. Perplexity's statement did not identify any specific inaccuracies in the lawsuit against Brave.

"The New York Times is overpaying its attorneys and underpaying its journalists. (Who could've easily identified the disinformation in this suit.)," Perplexity's statement said.

The NYT sued Perplexity in December 2025, alleging that its AI tool gives users "outputs that are identical or substantially similar to" NYT articles, including "verbatim or near-verbatim reproductions, summaries, or abridgements of the original content." Perplexity's response to that lawsuit said its answer engine only fetches content from copyrighted articles in reply to user queries. Perplexity argued that "developing an AI tool that can allegedly automatically fetch and provide specific content in response to user requests based on its pre-configuration and access to materials available on the Internet" is not "volitional conduct."

The NYT also sued OpenAI and Microsoft in December 2023 in a lawsuit alleging that OpenAI trains its AI with stolen news content. The lawsuit is heading toward a trial, with OpenAI arguing that its use of news articles is fair use under copyright law.

Read full article

Comments



Read the whole story
fxer
3 days ago
reply
Bend, Oregon
Share this story
Delete

Claude’s new rules against game cloning won’t stop the AI copying boom

1 Share

Last week, Anthropic introduced a new system prompt designed to stop its Claude models from re-creating specific, existing video games. While that move could help shield Anthropic from some liability, it's unlikely to slow much of the massive wave of AI-assisted game porting and copying that has emerged in recent months.

A social media user and AI decompilation enthusiast going by the name "chasm" was among the first to note the prompt change late last week, saying a new rule seemed to be added to the Claude Code prompt on or around October 27. That rule—included in a json file under the name "tengu_heron_brook"—reads as follows:

Do build original games, games in a genre, and games from the user’s own designs and assets. Don’t build a recreation of a specific existing game, even if it is renamed or called original.

XDA later independently verified that the new rule appears in version 2.1.314 of the Claude Code binary, which was released on October 30. XDA also reported that the "tengu_heron_brook" rule had been used for other purposes in earlier versions and that the Claude Opus 5.5 model specifically seemed to have its own distinct and independent instructions restricting game recreations as part of its system prompt bundle.

Following chasm's initial report, Anthropic software engineer Addy Osmani confirmed on social media that the company had "added two sentences to Claude Code's prompt on Opus 5.5 to steer it away from recreating someone else's specific game because using Claude to infringe IP is against our usage policy."

He added that the new prompt was designed to still allow "original games, genre games, and games built from your own designs and assets," even as a handful of issue reports on Anthropic's GitHub suggest the new prompt is getting in the way of some game development use cases.

A massive wave

Anthropic's new prompt comes as AI coding tools are powering a deluge of game projects based on existing work in one way or another. That includes thrown-together copies of game demos that are making some developers afraid to show their early work publicly, as well as thousands of AI-powered decompilation and porting projects for retro games. Thanks to AI tools, what used to be a time-consuming process requiring painstaking human effort is now orders of magnitude more efficient (though some veteran coders complain that these vibe-coded ports and decomp projects fail to clear the same quality bar as human-centered efforts).

The trend has gotten so bad that decomp.dev—a years-old community devoted to the "brutally difficult, time-consuming task" of game decompilation—announced it was shutting down last month. Community maintainer Luke Street wrote that quickly improving AI tools had made it clear that "community aspect of decompilation has been broken" as newcomers "rac[e] to port games, especially utilizing decompilations that they did not contribute to."

"Decomp.dev was originally designed to gamify decompilation: watching the progress go up was a fun way to stay motivated when every fraction of a percent took real human effort," Street wrote. "Today, that same idea has warped decompilation into a hollow numbers game, exacerbated by folks who just want to burn tokens to make number go up or 'port game to PC,' all else be damned.

Like trying to stop the tides

While Anthropic's new prompt can be seen as a noble effort to push back against the flood of AI-powered, vibe-coded copying, it seems unlikely to have much impact overall. That's primarily because eager game copiers can simply shift to any of the other frontier models that haven't introduced such restrictions. And even if the AI industry as a whole began to bar this kind of use case, coders could switch to cheaper open-weight models that aren't subject to these kinds of restrictions and are not all that far behind in capabilities.

A fully playable web-slinging Spider-Man looks out over <em>Arkham Knight</em>'s Gotham City, thanks to AI coding tools. Credit: YouTube

The prompt may have a more immediate benefit for Anthropic, helping protect the company from potential liability for copyright infringement in these projects. We've seen how AI companies face legal headaches if their models generate images based on copyrighted works, for instance. As Osmani noted in confirming the new anti-game copying prompt, "Using Claude to infringe IP is against our usage policy"—a policy that's surely in place to protect the company legally.

Decompilation efforts based on reverse engineering code generally pass legal muster as long as "expressive elements" like art and sound assets are not included in the project. But there's no guarantee that individual vibe-coders using Claude would be so careful with their efforts, even with Anthropic guardrails against IP theft in place.

Replay Mode shows off a few AI-powered game mashups and discusses how they were made.

On the other hand, there's a risk that Anthropic's efforts could prove too restrictive, limiting transformative game projects that build off existing work. Take, for instance, the increasingly popular trend of using AI to merge two different game concepts into one, adding Mario to Elden Ring or Spider-Man to Batman: Arkham Knight, for instance. Are these the kinds of "recreations of a specific existing game" that Claude's new prompt should block? Or are they transformative works that are legally and creatively distinct from what inspired them? And how does the use of copyright-protected characters and images factor in?

Beyond mashups, how should a model like Claude ensure there's a difference between a direct re-creation of Tetris (ostensibly disallowed by the new prompt) and a mere game in the Tetris genre (ostensibly allowed by the prompt)?

These are issues that even courts can have trouble adjudicating in the best circumstances. Asking an AI model to reliably draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable game clones is a tall order, even with a new two-sentence prompt in place.

Read full article

Comments



Read the whole story
fxer
4 days ago
reply
Bend, Oregon
Share this story
Delete

Googling "Zelda" today offers a glimpse of how search worked in 1998

1 Share

The year was 1998. Britney Spears topped the charts, Bill Clinton was impeached, and a couple of little websites called Google and Ars Technica came online. It was also the year Nintendo released The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time on the Nintendo 64. Google, which has come to dominate the Internet (Ars is still working on that), is celebrating the imminent release of the Ocarina of Time remaster by temporarily transporting us back to that storied year with a search Easter egg.

To access the Google time machine, you just have to search for either "Zelda" or "Ocarina of Time." Google will load the standard 2026 results page, but you'll see an animated Master Sword in the lower right corner. It appears on both mobile and desktop—just click the sword and enjoy the show.

After a little time-skipping animation and a Link shout (you know the one), you'll swear it's 1998 again. The search page is transformed into a simple list of blue links with retro Google branding. This is particularly apt given the time-shifting mechanics in Ocarina of Time.

Behold the simplicity of '90s search. Credit: Google

Classic Google used to provide a list of 10 links on each page, but there are only seven included in the Easter egg. This is a curated list of links rather than a real search. You get the official Nintendo Zelda page, Zelda on Wikipedia, Zelda games on Amazon, and a couple more.

You can go back to the modern version of Google's search results at any time by clicking the sword again. Oh, you don't want to do that? Sadly, this is a very limited experience. The Google of today is much different, and if you try to search for anything from the retro interface, you are immediately booted back to 2026 with all the AI, sponsored content, suggested searches, and social media links.

Web links are way down the page in today's Google search results. Credit: Google

The Ocarina of Time left its mark on a generation of gamers, and clearly, some of them went on to work at Google. The company's intention is probably to leverage nostalgia to build hype for Nintendo's big launch, but there's also something a little sad about this. Google's push into generative AI is transforming search in a way that many people don't like. Seeing the simple, minimalist roots of Google search on display drives home how much the company's core product has changed.

The Ocarina of Time has changed a lot, too. The remastered game has been completely re-created, with slick Switch 2 graphics, modern controls for movement and camera, numerous quality-of-life improvements, and more. The game is available for preorder now at $60 for digital and $70 for physical. It launches on November 5 for Nintendo Switch 2.

Read full article

Comments



Read the whole story
fxer
4 days ago
reply
Bend, Oregon
Share this story
Delete

Landmark study finds three in four NFL players die with CTE | Scientific American

2 Shares

American football can be brutal. Scientists have long known that the hits, tackles and other collisions that are central to the sport come with health risks, but what these impacts do to the brain has been less clear. What we do know is that many footballers have died with brains that have shown evidence of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a disease associated with symptoms such as mood swings and dementia. But because a diagnosis requires that investigators look for damage in a person’s brain after they die, it’s unclear just how common CTE is among current or former athletes.

But now, in a study published in JAMA Network Open, an analysis of medical records from thousands of deceased former NFL players—including hundreds who donated their brains to science—estimates that about 75 percent of these players likely died with CTE.

“No other environmental or occupational exposure ever studied is known to have increased dementia risk at death by that amount,” says Yorghos Tripodis, senior author of the paper and a professor of biostatistics at Boston University.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

The study is based on records of 2,362 former NFL players who died between 2008 and 2023 and played in the league for an average of five years. Among those who donated their brains—almost 400 players—a stunning 93.5 percent had CTE. Signs of CTE in the brain can include atrophy, or tissue wasting, as well as clusters of tau protein—a symptom that is also linked to Alzheimer’s disease.

The high incidence of CTE in those donors may reflect the sample itself: people who donate their brains to science tend to have more severe behavioral symptoms, Tripodis says. That could skew the dataset, potentially making CTE rates appear artificially high.

To better estimate how common CTE might have been across all 2,362 former players in the study, Tripodis and his colleagues analyzed the medical records of donors and nondonors. The team found that people with cognitive symptoms were about five times more likely to donate their brain. Given that, the researchers recalculated their incidence estimate to find that some three in four football players in the study likely had CTE.

For comparison, among the general population, fewer than 1 percent of brains in community-based brain banks show signs of CTE, Tripodis says.

The study only includes NFL players who had died, and it remains difficult, if not impossible, to diagnose CTE in living players. It is hard to say what the risk to NFL players today is, Tripodis says. The NFL has also taken steps to mitigate the risk of head injuries.

The records may also be incomplete or imprecise. For instance, symptoms of CTE such as dementia may not be listed on death records, Tripodis says. And even if dementia is listed, it can have other—even multiple—causes.

This study is “the best attempt so far to correct for selection bias in CTE brain bank data,” says Russell Lonser, a professor in neurological surgery at the Ohio State University, who was not involved in the study. But “it is an estimate from a model and should be read that way.”

"Without similar men who never played contact sports, we can’t tell how much of the pathology or dementia comes from football,” Lonser says. “The 75 percent includes any CTE pathology, even early changes that may never have caused symptoms.”

To better understand how football increases the risks of CTE, Lonser says, you’d need to study players, with and without symptoms, over time, along with conducting brain analyses and including a comparison group of people who had no exposure to head impacts. “Until that work is done, we won’t know how common CTE really is or what, specifically, it means for players.”

Still, Tripodis hopes the findings will prove useful for families who have been affected by CTE and will inform current and future players of the risks involved in the sport.

“CTE is a preventable disease. We find, in study after study, that the more blows to the head over your lifetime, the higher the risk of CTE,” Tripodis says. “If you reduce exposure to repetitive head impacts, then you reduce the risk of CTE.”

Read the whole story
fxer
10 days ago
reply
Bend, Oregon
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories