Author name: Kris Guyer

openai-built-an-ai-coding-agent-and-uses-it-to-improve-the-agent-itself

OpenAI built an AI coding agent and uses it to improve the agent itself


“The vast majority of Codex is built by Codex,” OpenAI told us about its new AI coding agent.

With the popularity of AI coding tools rising among software developers, their adoption has begun to touch every aspect of the process, including the improvement of AI coding tools themselves.

In interviews with Ars Technica this week, OpenAI employees revealed the extent to which the company now relies on its own AI coding agent, Codex, to build and improve the development tool. “I think the vast majority of Codex is built by Codex, so it’s almost entirely just being used to improve itself,” said Alexander Embiricos, product lead for Codex at OpenAI, in a conversation on Tuesday.

Codex, which OpenAI launched in its modern incarnation as a research preview in May 2025, operates as a cloud-based software engineering agent that can handle tasks like writing features, fixing bugs, and proposing pull requests. The tool runs in sandboxed environments linked to a user’s code repository and can execute multiple tasks in parallel. OpenAI offers Codex through ChatGPT’s web interface, a command-line interface (CLI), and IDE extensions for VS Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.

The “Codex” name itself dates back to a 2021 OpenAI model based on GPT-3 that powered GitHub Copilot’s tab completion feature. Embiricos said the name is rumored among staff to be short for “code execution.” OpenAI wanted to connect the new agent to that earlier moment, which was crafted in part by some who have left the company.

“For many people, that model powering GitHub Copilot was the first ‘wow’ moment for AI,” Embiricos said. “It showed people the potential of what it can mean when AI is able to understand your context and what you’re trying to do and accelerate you in doing that.”

A place to enter a prompt, set parameters, and click

The interface for OpenAI’s Codex in ChatGPT. Credit: OpenAI

It’s no secret that the current command-line version of Codex bears some resemblance to Claude Code, Anthropic’s agentic coding tool that launched in February 2025. When asked whether Claude Code influenced Codex’s design, Embiricos parried the question but acknowledged the competitive dynamic. “It’s a fun market to work in because there’s lots of great ideas being thrown around,” he said. He noted that OpenAI had been building web-based Codex features internally before shipping the CLI version, which arrived after Anthropic’s tool.

OpenAI’s customers apparently love the command line version, though. Embiricos said Codex usage among external developers jumped 20 times after OpenAI shipped the interactive CLI extension alongside GPT-5 in August 2025. On September 15, OpenAI released GPT-5 Codex, a specialized version of GPT-5 optimized for agentic coding, which further accelerated adoption.

It hasn’t just been the outside world that has embraced the tool. Embiricos said the vast majority of OpenAI’s engineers now use Codex regularly. The company uses the same open-source version of the CLI that external developers can freely download, suggest additions to, and modify themselves. “I really love this about our team,” Embiricos said. “The version of Codex that we use is literally the open source repo. We don’t have a different repo that features go in.”

The recursive nature of Codex development extends beyond simple code generation. Embiricos described scenarios where Codex monitors its own training runs and processes user feedback to “decide” what to build next. “We have places where we’ll ask Codex to look at the feedback and then decide what to do,” he said. “Codex is writing a lot of the research harness for its own training runs, and we’re experimenting with having Codex monitoring its own training runs.” OpenAI employees can also submit a ticket to Codex through project management tools like Linear, assigning it tasks the same way they would assign work to a human colleague.

This kind of recursive loop, of using tools to build better tools, has deep roots in computing history. Engineers designed the first integrated circuits by hand on vellum and paper in the 1960s, then fabricated physical chips from those drawings. Those chips powered the computers that ran the first electronic design automation (EDA) software, which in turn enabled engineers to design circuits far too complex for any human to draft manually. Modern processors contain billions of transistors arranged in patterns that exist only because software made them possible. OpenAI’s use of Codex to build Codex seems to follow the same pattern: each generation of the tool creates capabilities that feed into the next.

But describing what Codex actually does presents something of a linguistic challenge. At Ars Technica, we try to reduce anthropomorphism when discussing AI models as much as possible while also describing what these systems do using analogies that make sense to general readers. People can talk to Codex like a human, so it feels natural to use human terms to describe interacting with it, even though it is not a person and simulates human personality through statistical modeling.

The system runs many processes autonomously, addresses feedback, spins off and manages child processes, and produces code that ships in real products. OpenAI employees call it a “teammate” and assign it tasks through the same tools they use for human colleagues. Whether the tasks Codex handles constitute “decisions” or sophisticated conditional logic smuggled through a neural network depends on definitions that computer scientists and philosophers continue to debate. What we can say is that a semi-autonomous feedback loop exists: Codex produces code under human direction, that code becomes part of Codex, and the next version of Codex produces different code as a result.

Building faster with “AI teammates”

According to our interviews, the most dramatic example of Codex’s internal impact came from OpenAI’s development of the Sora Android app. According to Embiricos, the development tool allowed the company to create the app in record time.

“The Sora Android app was shipped by four engineers from scratch,” Embiricos told Ars. “It took 18 days to build, and then we shipped it to the app store in 28 days total,” he said. The engineers already had the iOS app and server-side components to work from, so they focused on building the Android client. They used Codex to help plan the architecture, generate sub-plans for different components, and implement those components.

Despite OpenAI’s claims of success with Codex in house, it’s worth noting that independent research has shown mixed results for AI coding productivity. A METR study published in July found that experienced open source developers were actually 19 percent slower when using AI tools on complex, mature codebases—though the researchers noted AI may perform better on simpler projects.

Ed Bayes, a designer on the Codex team, described how the tool has changed his own workflow. Bayes said Codex now integrates with project management tools like Linear and communication platforms like Slack, allowing team members to assign coding tasks directly to the AI agent. “You can add Codex, and you can basically assign issues to Codex now,” Bayes told Ars. “Codex is literally a teammate in your workspace.”

This integration means that when someone posts feedback in a Slack channel, they can tag Codex and ask it to fix the issue. The agent will create a pull request, and team members can review and iterate on the changes through the same thread. “It’s basically approximating this kind of coworker and showing up wherever you work,” Bayes said.

For Bayes, who works on the visual design and interaction patterns for Codex’s interfaces, the tool has enabled him to contribute code directly rather than handing off specifications to engineers. “It kind of gives you more leverage. It enables you to work across the stack and basically be able to do more things,” he said. He noted that designers at OpenAI now prototype features by building them directly, using Codex to handle the implementation details.

The command line version of OpenAI codex running in a macOS terminal window.

The command line version of OpenAI codex running in a macOS terminal window. Credit: Benj Edwards

OpenAI’s approach treats Codex as what Bayes called “a junior developer” that the company hopes will graduate into a senior developer over time. “If you were onboarding a junior developer, how would you onboard them? You give them a Slack account, you give them a Linear account,” Bayes said. “It’s not just this tool that you go to in the terminal, but it’s something that comes to you as well and sits within your team.”

Given this teammate approach, will there be anything left for humans to do? When asked, Embiricos drew a distinction between “vibe coding,” where developers accept AI-generated code without close review, and what AI researcher Simon Willison calls “vibe engineering,” where humans stay in the loop. “We see a lot more vibe engineering in our code base,” he said. “You ask Codex to work on that, maybe you even ask for a plan first. Go back and forth, iterate on the plan, and then you’re in the loop with the model and carefully reviewing its code.”

He added that vibe coding still has its place for prototypes and throwaway tools. “I think vibe coding is great,” he said. “Now you have discretion as a human about how much attention you wanna pay to the code.”

Looking ahead

Over the past year, “monolithic” large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4.5 have apparently become something of a dead end in terms of frontier benchmarking progress as AI companies pivot to simulated reasoning models and also agentic systems built from multiple AI models running in parallel. We asked Embiricos whether agents like Codex represent the best path forward for squeezing utility out of existing LLM technology.

He dismissed concerns that AI capabilities have plateaued. “I think we’re very far from plateauing,” he said. “If you look at the velocity on the research team here, we’ve been shipping models almost every week or every other week.” He pointed to recent improvements where GPT-5-Codex reportedly completes tasks 30 percent faster than its predecessor at the same intelligence level. During testing, the company has seen the model work independently for 24 hours on complex tasks.

OpenAI faces competition from multiple directions in the AI coding market. Anthropic’s Claude Code and Google’s Gemini CLI offer similar terminal-based agentic coding experiences. This week, Mistral AI released Devstral 2 alongside a CLI tool called Mistral Vibe. Meanwhile, startups like Cursor have built dedicated IDEs around AI coding, reportedly reaching $300 million in annualized revenue.

Given the well-known issues with confabulation in AI models when people attempt to use them as factual resources, could it be that coding has become the killer app for LLMs? We wondered if OpenAI has noticed that coding seems to be a clear business use case for today’s AI models with less hazard than, say, using AI language models for writing or as emotional companions.

“We have absolutely noticed that coding is both a place where agents are gonna get good really fast and there’s a lot of economic value,” Embiricos said. “We feel like it’s very mission-aligned to focus on Codex. We get to provide a lot of value to developers. Also, developers build things for other people, so we’re kind of intrinsically scaling through them.”

But will tools like Codex threaten software developer jobs? Bayes acknowledged concerns but said Codex has not reduced headcount at OpenAI, and “there’s always a human in the loop because the human can actually read the code.” Similarly, the two men don’t project a future where Codex runs by itself without some form of human oversight. They feel the tool is an amplifier of human potential rather than a replacement for it.

The practical implications of agents like Codex extend beyond OpenAI’s walls. Embiricos said the company’s long-term vision involves making coding agents useful to people who have no programming experience. “All humanity is not gonna open an IDE or even know what a terminal is,” he said. “We’re building a coding agent right now that’s just for software engineers, but we think of the shape of what we’re building as really something that will be useful to be a more general agent.”

This article was updated on December 12, 2025 at 6: 50 PM to mention the METR study.

Photo of Benj Edwards

Benj Edwards is Ars Technica’s Senior AI Reporter and founder of the site’s dedicated AI beat in 2022. He’s also a tech historian with almost two decades of experience. In his free time, he writes and records music, collects vintage computers, and enjoys nature. He lives in Raleigh, NC.

OpenAI built an AI coding agent and uses it to improve the agent itself Read More »

man-shocks-doctors-with-extreme-blood-pressure,-stroke-from-energy-drinks

Man shocks doctors with extreme blood pressure, stroke from energy drinks

Sometimes, downing an energy drink can feel like refueling your battery. But with too much, that jolt can turn into a catastrophic surge that fries the wiring and blows a fuse. That was the unfortunate and alarming case for a man in the UK several years ago, according to a case report this week in BMJ Case Reports.

The man, who was in his 50s and otherwise healthy, showed up at a hospital after the entire left side of his body abruptly went numb and he was left with clumsy, uncoordinated muscle movements (ataxia). His blood pressure was astonishingly high, at 254/150 mm Hg. For context, a normal reading is under 120/80, while anything over 180/120 is considered a hypertensive crisis, which is a medical emergency.

The man had suffered a mild stroke, and his extremely high blood pressure was an obvious factor. But why his blood pressure had reached stratospheric heights was far less obvious to his doctors, according to the retrospective case report written by Martha Coyle and Sunil Munshi of Nottingham University Hospital.

Upon examining the man, the doctors described him as fit and healthy. He didn’t smoke, drink, or use any drugs. His blood work was all completely normal. His cholesterol, blood sugar levels, markers for kidney and liver function—everything from routine tests came back normal. Specialized tests for things like autoimmune and clotting disorders were also negative. Heart tests found no problems. Urine tests and abdominal scans found no problems with his other organs.

Power surge

Still, a computed tomography (CT) scan of his head found evidence of spasms in arteries in his brain, which are strongly linked to high blood pressure. And magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) found an infarct (dead tissue) in his thalamus, a central, deep part of the brain, which, among many critical functions, relays sensory and motor signals. In all, it seemed his spasming arteries had cut off blood supply to this part of his brain, causing his stroke, subsequent numbness, and ataxia.

Man shocks doctors with extreme blood pressure, stroke from energy drinks Read More »

apple-loses-its-appeal-of-a-scathing-contempt-ruling-in-ios-payments-case

Apple loses its appeal of a scathing contempt ruling in iOS payments case

Back in April, District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers delivered a scathing judgment finding that Apple was in “willful violation” of her 2021 injunction intended to open up iOS App Store payments. That contempt of court finding has now been almost entirely upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, a development that Epic Games’ Tim Sweeney tells Ars he hopes will “do a lot of good for developers and start to really change the App Store situation worldwide, I think.”

The ruling, signed by a panel of three appellate court judges, affirmed that Apple’s initial attempts to charge a 27 percent fee to iOS developers using outside payment options “had a prohibitive effect, in violation of the injunction.” Similarly, Apple’s restrictions on how those outside links had to be designed were overly broad; the appeals court suggests that Apple can only ensure that internal and external payment options are presented in a similar fashion.

The appeals court also agreed that Apple acted in “bad faith” by refusing to comply with the injunction, rejecting viable, compliant alternatives in internal discussions. And the appeals court was also not convinced by Apple’s process-focused arguments, saying the district court properly evaluated materials Apple argued were protected by attorney-client privilege.

While the district court barred Apple from charging any fees for payments made outside of its App Store, the appeals court now suggests that Apple should still be able to charge a “reasonable fee” based on its “actual costs to ensure user security and privacy.” It will be up to Apple and the district court to determine what that kind of “reasonable fee” should look like going forward.

Speaking to reporters Thursday night, though, Epic founder and CEO Tim Sweeney said he believes those should be “super super minor fees,” on the order of “tens or hundreds of dollars” every time an iOS app update goes through Apple for review. That should be more than enough to compensate the employees reviewing the apps to make sure outside payment links are not scams and lead to a system of “normal fees for normal businesses that sell normal things to normal customers,” Sweeney said.

Apple loses its appeal of a scathing contempt ruling in iOS payments case Read More »

after-years-of-resisting-it,-spacex-now-plans-to-go-public.-why?

After years of resisting it, SpaceX now plans to go public. Why?


“Much of the AI race comes down to amassing and deploying assets.”

Elon Musk gestures as he speaks during a press conference at SpaceX’s Starbase facility near Boca Chica Village in South Texas on February 10, 2022. Credit: JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images

SpaceX is planning to raise tens of billions of dollars through an initial public offering next year, multiple outlets have reported, and Ars can confirm. This represents a major change in thinking from the world’s leading space company and its founder, Elon Musk.

The Wall Street Journal and The Information first reported about a possible IPO last Friday, and Bloomberg followed that up on Tuesday evening with a report suggesting the company would target a $1.5 trillion valuation. This would allow SpaceX to raise in excess of $30 billion.

This is an enormous amount of funding. The largest IPO in history occurred in 2019, when the state-owned Saudi Arabian oil company began public trading as Aramco and raised $29 billion. In terms of revenue, Aramco is a top-five company in the world.

Now SpaceX is poised to potentially match or exceed this value. That SpaceX would be attractive to public investors is not a surprise—it’s the world’s dominant space company in launch, space-based communications, and much more. For investors seeking unlimited growth, space is the final frontier.

Buy why would Musk take SpaceX public now, at a time when the company’s revenues are surging thanks to the growth of the Starlink Internet constellation? The decision is surprising because Musk has, for so long, resisted going public with SpaceX. He has not enjoyed the public scrutiny of Tesla, and feared that shareholder desires for financial return were not consistent with his ultimate goal of settling Mars.

Data centers

Ars spoke with multiple people familiar with Musk and his thinking to understand why he would want to take SpaceX public.

A significant shift in recent years has been the rise of artificial intelligence, which Musk has been involved in since 2015, when he co-founded OpenAI. He later had a falling out with his cofounders and started his own company, xAI, in 2023. At Tesla, he has been pushing smart-driving technology forward and more recently focused on robotics. Musk sees a convergence of these technologies in the near future, which he believes will profoundly change civilization.

Raising large amounts of money in the next 18 months would allow Musk to have significant capital to deploy at SpaceX as he influences and partakes in this convergence of technology.

How can SpaceX play in this space? In the near term, the company plans to develop a modified version of the Starlink satellite to serve as a foundation for building data centers in space. Musk said as much on the social media network he owns, X, in late October: “SpaceX will be doing this.”

But using a next-generation Starlink satellite manufactured on Earth is just the beginning of his vision. “The level beyond that is constructing satellite factories on the Moon and using a mass driver (electromagnetic railgun) to accelerate AI satellites to lunar escape velocity without the need for rockets,” Musk said this weekend on X. “That scales to >100TW/year of AI and enables non-trivial progress towards becoming a Kardashev II civilization.”

Based on some projected analyses, SpaceX is expected to have in the neighborhood of $22 to $24 billion in revenue next year. That is a lot of money—it’s on par with NASA’s annual budget, for example, and SpaceX can deploy its capital far, far more efficiently than the government can. So the company will be able to accomplish a lot. But with a large infusion of cash, SpaceX will be able to go much faster. And it will take a lot of cash to design and build the satellites and launch the rockets to deploy data centers in space.

Abhi Tripathi, a long-time SpaceX employee who is now director of mission operations at the UC Berkeley Space Sciences Laboratory, believes that once Musk realized Starlink satellites could be architected into a distributed network of data centers, the writing was on the wall.

“That is the moment an IPO suddenly came into play after being unlikely for so long,” Tripathi told Ars. “If you have followed Elon’s tactics, you know that once he commits to something, he leans fully into it. Much of the AI race comes down to amassing and deploying assets that work quicker than your competition. A large war chest resulting from an IPO will greatly help his cause and disadvantage all others.”

Foremost among Musk’s goals right now is to “win” the battle for artificial intelligence. He is already attacking the problem at xAI and Tesla, and he now seeks to throw SpaceX into the fray as well. Taking SpaceX public and using it to marshal an incredible amount of resources shows he is playing to win.

What about Mars?

Musk founded SpaceX in 2002 with the goal of one day settling Mars. He has never wavered from that goal, and indeed, the company has made considerable progress in more than two decades. SpaceX now launches more than 90 percent of the world’s mass to orbit, has nearly 90 percent of the satellites in orbit, and backstops a large portion of the US government’s civil and military activities in space. Moreover, with Starship, SpaceX is building the first vehicle that could realistically send humans and a lot of the stuff humans need to survive to Mars one day.

But if Musk’s rationale for keeping SpaceX private was to protect the Mars dream, is he abandoning this long-standing aim?

Not necessarily. It’s likely that Musk sees artificial intelligence as a key part of the Mars vision. Whether one believes the Optimus robot will become a viable product or not, Musk does. And he’s spoken about sending the robots to Mars to make the way smoother for the first human settlers.

Musk also believes that a larger and more financially robust SpaceX is necessary to undertake the settling of Mars. He understands that NASA will not pay for this, as the civil space agency is in the business of exploration and not settlement. For several years now, he has expressed that it will require about 1 million tons of supplies to be shipped to Mars to make a self-sustaining settlement. This is roughly 1,000 ships, and including refueling, at least 10,000 Starship launches. At $100 million per launch, that’s $1 trillion in launch costs alone.

Musk has frequently expressed a concern that there may be a limited window for settling Mars. Perhaps financial markets collapse. Perhaps there’s a worse pandemic. Perhaps a large asteroid hits the planet. Taking SpaceX public now is a bet that he can marshal the resources now, during his lifetime, to make Mars City One a reality. He is 54 years old.

The plan is not without risks, of course. If AI is something of a bubble, ten years from now, SpaceX may be sitting on hundreds of billions of dollars worth of satellites in space for which there is limited use. Maybe shareholders would rather SpaceX make them multimillionaires than make humans multiplanetary.

But Musk has never shied away from risks. So doubling down on his most successful asset in this moment is precisely what one would expect him to do.

Photo of Eric Berger

Eric Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Technica, covering everything from astronomy to private space to NASA policy, and author of two books: Liftoff, about the rise of SpaceX; and Reentry, on the development of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon. A certified meteorologist, Eric lives in Houston.

After years of resisting it, SpaceX now plans to go public. Why? Read More »

a-new-open-weights-ai-coding-model-is-closing-in-on-proprietary-options

A new open-weights AI coding model is closing in on proprietary options

On Tuesday, French AI startup Mistral AI released Devstral 2, a 123 billion parameter open-weights coding model designed to work as part of an autonomous software engineering agent. The model achieves a 72.2 percent score on SWE-bench Verified, a benchmark that attempts to test whether AI systems can solve real GitHub issues, putting it among the top-performing open-weights models.

Perhaps more notably, Mistral didn’t just release an AI model, it released a new development app called Mistral Vibe. It’s a command line interface (CLI) similar to Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, and Gemini CLI that lets developers interact with the Devstral models directly in their terminal. The tool can scan file structures and Git status to maintain context across an entire project, make changes across multiple files, and execute shell commands autonomously. Mistral released the CLI under the Apache 2.0 license.

It’s always wise to take AI benchmarks with a large grain of salt, but we’ve heard from employees of the big AI companies that they pay very close attention to how well models do on SWE-bench Verified, which presents AI models with 500 real software engineering problems pulled from GitHub issues in popular Python repositories. The AI must read the issue description, navigate the codebase, and generate a working patch that passes unit tests. While some AI researchers have noted that around 90 percent of the tasks in the benchmark test relatively simple bug fixes that experienced engineers could complete in under an hour, it’s one of the few standardized ways to compare coding models.

At the same time as the larger AI coding model, Mistral also released Devstral Small 2, a 24 billion parameter version that scores 68 percent on the same benchmark and can run locally on consumer hardware like a laptop with no Internet connection required. Both models support a 256,000 token context window, allowing them to process moderately large codebases (although whether you consider it large or small is very relative depending on overall project complexity). The company released Devstral 2 under a modified MIT license and Devstral Small 2 under the more permissive Apache 2.0 license.

A new open-weights AI coding model is closing in on proprietary options Read More »

ugly-infotainment-mars-the-2025-subaru-forester-hybrid-experience

Ugly infotainment mars the 2025 Subaru Forester Hybrid experience

Although many of us associate it with rally-derived machinery from the late 1990s and early 2000s, these days, Subaru has mostly abandoned its performance cars to concentrate on its true calling—rugged, all-wheel-drive vehicles that are high on practicality, powered by horizontally opposed “boxer” engines. One area where the brand has never particularly excelled has been fuel efficiency, which is where today’s test car, the Subaru Forester Hybrid, comes in.

The last time Ars reviewed a Subaru Forester, it left us impressed. How about one with 40 percent better economy, in that case? Now, the 2.5 L flat-four engine operates on the Atkinson/Miller cycle, which generates 162 hp (121 kW) and 154 lb-ft (208 Nm). There’s an electric motor-generator starter and an electric traction motor with 118 hp (88 kW) and 199 lb-ft (270 Nm) that work together to send a combined 194 hp (145 kW) to all four wheels via a symmetrical all-wheel drive system and a planetary continuously variable transmission.

The Forester Hybrid is 183.3 inches (4,656 mm) long, 70.2 inches (1,783 mm) wide, and 68.1 inches (1,729 mm) tall, with a 105.1-inch (2,670 mm) wheelbase. Jonathan Gitlin

If that sounds vaguely familiar, that’s because it’s the same powertrain that Subaru has also fitted to the smaller Crosstrek Hybrid that we drove in September.

The 14 hp (10 kW) bump over the non-hybrid Forester is little enough that it probably won’t be noticed, but a combined EPA fuel efficiency of 35 mpg (6.7 L/100 km) is a meaningful increase over the unelectrified Forester’s 29 mpg (8.1 L/100 km). In practice, I struggled to exceed 31 mpg (7.6 L/100 km) during my week with the Forester, although as you’ll note from the temperatures displayed on the dash, winter temperatures have arrived, and we all know the cold makes all vehicles less efficient, not just EVs.

Driving a CVT hybrid can often feel disconcerting. Sometimes you press the accelerator and the car decides that electric propulsion will suffice; other times, the engine will rev with a non-linear relationship to the power being delivered at the wheels, as internal combustion tops up lithium-ion and then sends electrons to a motor to make the car go. Like all Atkinson cycle engines, it doesn’t sound very mellifluous when worked hard.

The rest of the driving experience was quite pleasant. The Forester Hybrid rides well on tires that have plenty of sidewall, and the 8.7-inches (221 mm) of ground clearance gives plenty of room for suspension travel. While it doesn’t handle like a WRX (or my dear departed Saab 9-2x), driving the Forester is no real chore. Other than the engine and some wind noise, it’s mostly refined on the move.

Ugly infotainment mars the 2025 Subaru Forester Hybrid experience Read More »

this-is-the-oldest-evidence-of-people-starting-fires

This is the oldest evidence of people starting fires


We didn’t start the fire. (Neanderthals did, at least 400,000 years ago.)

This artist’s impression shows what the fire at Barnham might have looked like. Credit: Craig Williams, The Trustees of the British Museum

Heat-reddened clay, fire-cracked stone, and fragments of pyrite mark where Neanderthals gathered around a campfire 400,000 years ago in what’s now Suffolk, England.

Based on chemical analysis of the sediment at the site, along with the telltale presence of pyrite, a mineral not naturally found nearby but very handy for striking sparks with flint, British Museum archaeologist Rob Davis and his colleagues say the Neanderthals probably started the fire themselves. That makes the abandoned English clay pit at Barnham the oldest evidence in the world that people (Neanderthal people, in this case) had learned to not only use fire, but also create it and control it.

A cozy Neanderthal campfire

Today, the Barnham site is part of an abandoned clay pit where workers first discovered stone tools in the early 1900s. But 400,000 years ago, it would have been a picturesque little spot at the edge of a stream-fed pond, surrounded by a mix of forest and grassland. There are no hominin fossils here, but archaeologists unearthed a Neanderthal skull about 100 kilometers to the south, so the hominins at Barnham were probably also Neanderthals. The place would have have offered a group of Neanderthals a relatively quiet, sheltered place to set up camp, according to Davis and his colleagues.

The cozy domesticity of that camp apparently centered on a hearth about the size of a small campfire. What’s left of that hearth today is a patch of clayey silt baked to a rusty red color by a series of fires; it stands out sharply against the yellowish clay that makes up the rest of the site. When ancient hearth fires heated that iron-rich yellow clay, it formed tiny grains of hematite that turned the baked clay a telltale red. Near the edge of the hearth, the archaeologists unearthed a handful of flint handaxes shattered by heat, alongside a scattering of other heat-cracked flint flakes.

And glinting against the dull clay lay two small pieces of a shiny sulfide mineral, aptly named pyrite—a key piece of Stone Age firestarting kits. Long before people struck flint and steel together to make fire, they struck flint and pyrite. Altogether, the evidence at Barnham suggests that Neanderthals were building and lighting their own fires 400,000 years ago.

Fire: the way of the future

Lighting a fire sounds like a simple thing, but once upon a time, it took cutting-edge technology. Working out how to start a fire on purpose—and then how to control its size and temperature—was the breakthrough that made nearly everything else possible: hafted stone weapons, cooked food, metalworking, and ultimately microprocessors and heavy-lift rockets.

“Something else that fire provides is additional time. The campfire becomes a social hub,” said Davis during a recent press conference. “Having fire… provides this kind of intense socialization time after dusk.” It may have been around fires like the one at Barnham, huddled together against the dark Pleistocene evening, that hominins began developing language, storytelling, and mythologies. And those things, Davis suggested, could have “played a critical part in maintaining social relationships over bigger distances or within more complex social groups.” Fire, in other words, helped make us more fully human and may have helped us connect in the same way that bonding over TV shows does today.

Archaeologists have worked for decades to try to pinpoint exactly when that breakthrough happened (although most now agree that it probably happened multiple times in different places). But evidence of fire is hard to find because it’s ephemeral by its very nature. The small patch of baked clay at Barnham hasn’t seen a fire in half a million years, but its light is still pushing back the shadows.

an artist's impression of a person's hands holding a piece of flint and a piece of pyrite, striking them together to make sparks

This was the first step toward the Internet. We could have turned back. Credit: Craig Williams, The Trustees of the British Museum

A million-year history of fire

Archaeologists suspect that the first hominins to use fire took advantage of nearby wildfires: Picture a Homo erectus lighting a branch on a nearby wildfire (which must have taken serious guts), then carefully carrying that torch back to camp to cook or make it easier to ward off predators for a night. Evidence of that sort of thing—using fire, but not necessarily being able to summon it on command—dates back more than a million years at sites like Koobi Fora in Kenya and Swartkrans in South Africa.

Learning to start a fire whenever you want one is harder, but it’s essential if you want to cook your food regularly without having to wait for the next lightning strike to spark a brushfire. It can also help maintain the careful control of temperature needed to make birch tar adhesives, “The advantage of fire-making lies in its predictability,” as Davis and his colleagues wrote in their paper. Knowing how to strike a light changed fire from an occasional luxury item to a staple of hominin life.

There are hints that Neanderthals in Europe were using fire by around 400,000 years ago, based on traces of long-cold hearths at sites in France, Portugal, Spain, the UK, and Ukraine. (The UK site, Beeches Pit, is just 10 kilometers southwest of Barnham.) But none of those sites offer evidence that Neanderthals were making fire rather than just taking advantage of its natural appearance. That kind of evidence doesn’t show up in the archaeological record until 50,000 years ago, when groups of Neanderthals in France used pyrite and bifaces (multi-purpose flint tools with two worked faces, sharp edges, and a surprisingly ergonomic shape) to light their own hearth-fires; marks left on the bifaces tell the tale.

Barnham pushes that date back dramatically, but there’s probably even older evidence out there. Davis and his colleagues say the Barnham Neanderthals probably didn’t invent firestarting; they likely brought the knowledge with them from mainland Europe.

“It’s certainly possible that Homo sapiens in Africa had the ability to make fire, but it can’t be proven yet from the evidence. We only have the evidence at this date from Barnham,” said Natural History Museum London anthropologist Chris Stringer, a coauthor of the study, in the press conference.

a person holds a tiny fragment of pyrite between a thumb and forefinger

The two pyrite fragments at the side may have broken off a larger nodule when it was struck against a piece of flint. Credit: Jordan Mansfield, Pathways to Ancient Britain Project.

Digging into the details

Several types of evidence at the site point to Neanderthals starting their own fire, not borrowing from a local wildfire. Ancient wildfires leave traces in sediment that can last hundreds of thousands of years or more—microscopic bits of charcoal and ash. But the area that’s now Suffolk wasn’t in the middle of wildfire season when the Barnham hearth was in use. Chemical evidence, like the presence of heavy hydrocarbon molecules in the sediment around the hearth, suggests this fire was homemade (wildfires usually scatter lighter ones across several square kilometers of landscape).

But the key piece of evidence at Barnham—the kind of clue that arson investigators probably dream about—is the pyrite. Pyrite isn’t a naturally common mineral in the area around Barnham; Neanderthals would have had to venture at least 12 kilometers southeast to find any. And although few hominins can resist the allure of picking up a shiny rock, it’s likely that these bits of pyrite had a more practical purpose.

To figure out what sort of fire might have produced the reddened clay, Davis and his colleagues did some experiments (which involved setting a bunch of fires atop clay taken from near the site). The archaeologists compared the baked clay from Barnham to the clay from beneath their experimental fires. The grain size and chemical makeup of the clay from the ancient Neanderthal hearth looked almost exactly like “12 or more heating events, each lasting 4 hours at temperatures of 400º Celsius or 600º Celsius,” as Davis and his colleagues wrote.

In other words, the hearth at Barnham hints at the rhythms of daily life for one group of Neanderthals 400,000 years ago. For starters, it seems that they kindled their campfire in the same spot over and over and left it burning for hours at a time. Flakes of flint nearby conjure up images of Neanderthals sitting around the fire, knapping stone tools as they told each other stories long into the night.

Nature, 2025 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-025-09855-6 About DOIs).

Photo of Kiona N. Smith

Kiona is a freelance science journalist and resident archaeology nerd at Ars Technica.

This is the oldest evidence of people starting fires Read More »

over-250-people-quarantined-in-south-carolina-as-measles-outbreak-rages

Over 250 people quarantined in South Carolina as measles outbreak rages

The quarantine period for measles is 21 days from the exposure, which is the maximum incubation period before the tell-tale rash appears. Measles is highly infectious, with up to 90 percent of unvaccinated or otherwise vulnerable people contracting the virus upon exposure. People infected with measles are infectious from four days before the rash appears to four days after its onset.

The outbreak is occurring in the northern region of South Carolina, with many cases identified in Spartanburg County, which contains Inman, as well as Greenville County. Both counties have low vaccination rates. For the 2024–2025 school year, only 90 percent of Spartanburg students were vaccinated, while Greenville’s vaccination rate was 92.4 percent. Those numbers are well below the 95 percent target needed to halt community transmission.

The two counties’ low vaccination rates are coupled with high rates of religious exemptions. Spartanburg has the state’s highest rate, with 8.2 percent of students exempt from the school vaccination requirement based on religious beliefs. Neighboring Greenville has a religious vaccination exemption rate of 5.3 percent.

Of the 111 outbreak cases, 105 were unvaccinated, three were partially vaccinated, two had an unknown status, and one case was fully vaccinated.

On a national scale, vaccination rates have declined overall amid misinformation spread by anti-vaccine activists, including current Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. As such, measles cases are at a 33-year high, with nearly 2,000 cases this year and 46 outbreaks.

Over 250 people quarantined in South Carolina as measles outbreak rages Read More »

please-send-help-i-can’t-stop-playing-these-roguelikes.

Please send help. I can’t stop playing these roguelikes.


it’s “rogue,” not “rouge”

2025 was a very good year for my favorite genre.

Hades 2 has me in a chokehold. Credit: Supergiant Games

Hades 2 has me in a chokehold. Credit: Supergiant Games

It’s time to admit, before God and the good readers of Ars Technica, that I have a problem. I love roguelikes. Reader, I can’t get enough of them. If there’s even a whisper of a hot new roguelike on Steam, I’m there. You may call them arcane, repetitive, or maddeningly difficult; I call them heaven.

The second best part of video games is taking a puny little character and, over 100 hours, transforming that adventurer into a god of destruction. The best thing about video games is doing the same thing in under an hour. Beat a combat encounter, get an upgrade. Enter a new area, choose a new item. Put together a build and watch it sing.

If you die—immediately ending your ascent and returning you to the beginning of the game—you’ll often make a pit stop at a home base to unlock new goodies to help you on your next run. (Some people distiguish between roguelikes and “roguelites,” with the latter including permanent, between-run upgrades. For simplicity’s sake, I’ll use “roguelike” as an umbrella term).

2025 has been a truly horrific year for most things. But for roguelikes? It’s been an embarrassment of riches. Because I’m an editor and there’s no one here to stop me, I’d like to tell you about them. To keep things manageable, I’ll stick to games that hit 1.0 in 2025.

Hades II

Screenshot of hades 2

Credit: Supergiant Games

Where else could we start? In a year of wall-to-wall video game showstoppers, Hades II sticks out. The first Hades got our nod for best game of 2020, and Hades 2 certainly has my vote for 2025.

This time, you play as Melinoë, sister to Hades protagonist Zagreus and daughter of Hades himself, as she attempts to take back the house of Hades from Chronos, the titan of time. The cast of Olympian gods returns to bestow blessings (upgrades to your various attacks and defensive maneuvers) to help you on your way. If you played the first game, you’ll know what you’re getting into here; the sequel just vastly expands the content and mechanics.

As you fight through the game’s two different paths, you’ll slowly uncover the game’s story via little snippets of dialogue (there’s a truly mind-boggling amount of dialogue in this game), and oodles of unlockables and endgame challenge runs ensure you’ll be playing for a long time.

You won’t find many roguelikes with higher production values. The game is $30. Madness! If you like roguelikes, you’ve probably already picked this up. I’ll go further, though. If you enjoy video games at all, you should buy Hades II. It’s that good.

Ball x Pit

ball x pit screenshot

You ever boot up a new game and immediately think, “Well, this thing is going to be a problem for me”? Yeah.

We’ve been blessed with several pachinko-style roguelites over the past couple of years (Peglin, Ballionaire, and Nubby’s Number Factory are all worth your time); now comes a take on another ball-centric classic. I’m talking about last month’s Ball x Pit, a roguelite version of Breakout. Or at least that’s the simple way to describe it. In actuality, the game is that rarest of finds: something that feels unique.

Take one of your many and varied characters onto the battlefield, and you’ll lob a stream of balls toward the top of the screen, where slowly descending enemies periodically fire attacks back at you. When you level up, you’ll choose “special balls,” which have all manner of effects, like inflicting fire or poison on enemies or balls that explode into other balls. As the game progresses, you can “fuse” these balls together, combining the effects. Sometimes, you’ll be able to “evolve” two balls into an entirely new type of ball. Not enough for you? Slam two evolved balls together for even more wackiness.

The moment-to-moment gameplay is fantastic, with different characters and upgrades forcing you to play differently to succeed. The game doles out new mechanics and surprises along the way to keep things fresh, though this is a game you can “complete”; the between-run metaprogression eventually lets you become a bit of a god.

A base-building system—and a minigame in which you bounce your characters around the map to activate buildings—is a nice, thematic diversion between runs, but it’s mostly just a flashy upgrade screen. I usually just wanted to get back into the game as soon as possible.

Need more convincing? Check out the free demo.

Absolum

absolum screenshot

Absolum’s well-regarded demo was released in June, but this thing came out of nowhere for me. The elevator pitch: a beat ‘em up, but make it roguelite.

Not really a beat ‘em up fan? Me neither. Doesn’t matter. The last side-scrolling brawler I played for more than an hour was probably 1991’s The Simpsons arcade game or that same year’s Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Turtles in Time (though the original TMNT arcade game from 1989 was my first quarter-munching arcade love).

The game features gorgeous hand-drawn visuals and the year’s best soundtrack, including this absolute banger from Doom’s Mick Gordon (that’s from a particularly metal boss fight; most of the songs are more fantasy-forward).

Over your runs, you’ll traverse multiple paths, finding secrets and unlocking new features. The roguelike elements are a bit thin at first, but piecing together powerful builds becomes simple as you fill out your options. The combat is sublime—you can get away with button-mashing for a while, but you’ll want to learn at least some of its intricacies to make it to the end.

This thing’s the complete package, and it’s easily one of the best games of the year. Bring along a friend if you’re into co-op. The surprisingly beefy demo is still available—there’s really no excuse not to check it out.

Clover Pit

clover pit screenshot

I’ve never actually been to a casino, but judging by the electric dopamine surge I get when hitting a jackpot in the slot machine roguelike Clover Pit, I know I should maintain my chastity.

Clover Pit locks you in a disgusting, blood-soaked closet of a room, and the only way to earn your freedom is to deposit money into an ATM over a series of ever-increasing payments. In other words, it’s what’s come to be known in some circles as a Balatro-like, aka a numbers-go-up game (of course, Balatro was just the first such game to hit it big; the genre’s true progenitor came a year or so earlier in the form of another excellent slot machine roguelike, Luck be a Landlord).

Standing on a trap door that will drop you to your death if you fail to hit your deadlines, you’ll pull a lever on a slot machine over and over, hoping to hit it big. It’s not totally random, though, of course. Purchaseable trinkets allow you to manipulate your odds, trigger beneficial effects, and multiply your score. Getting a jackpot of all 7’s? It’s easier than you may think.

Don’t expect Balatro-like depth—most strategies here involve simply picking one symbol and buffing it to high heaven—but fun, game-breaking builds are easy to put together to make you feel like a winner. There’s something disconcertingly hypnotic and soothing about repeatedly pulling a slot machine lever—it’s best to do it here, where you won’t end up losing your home.

Shape of Dreams

shape of dreams screenshot

I’ve been playing the hell out of this game, but if you stopped me on the street, I could not tell you what it’s called. Forgettable name aside, I love it.

I’ve heard the game’s combat and controls described as MOBA-like. That seems reasonable, at least from what I remember from my ill-advised and short-lived attempt to get into Dota 2 a decade ago. Don’t let that scare you off, though; this is basically a top-down action RPG where you’ll be fighting through small rooms of enemies, Hades-style.

What makes it special is its skill system. You start each run with a couple of attacks and a passive ability, and you’ll pick up (and replace) skills as you go. Each skill—here called “memories” (don’t ask me; I skipped the lore)—can fit up to three “essences,” modifications that affect how the skill functions. You can rearrange these modifications at any time, enabling a “make your own skill” system that’s endlessly fascinating.

Unique unlockable characters and robust metaprogression skill trees will keep you busy for embarrassing amounts of time. You can even play with friends. Before long, you’ll be creating game-breaking, room-nuking builds, the hallmark of my favorite games of the genre.

Megabonk

Megabonk screenshot

As its name might suggest, Megabonk is not a serious game. Unlike some other games on this list, there’s no chance of this one becoming an all-time great. But there’s a reason this buzzy little title has been on many gamers’ lips since its release in September. The concept is simple: it’s Vampire Survivors meets Risk of Rain 2.

If you’ve played both games, mash them up in your mind and you’ll know exactly how this thing plays. And not just in the way that most “Survivor-likes” tread extremely similar ground to the original. Megabonk‘s treasure-chest-opening animation is ripped straight from Vampire Survivors, and the game’s structure and items (down to the artwork style) are basically just Risk of Rain 2.

So no, it’s in no way original. And I was disappointed to learn that there are only two real “stages” to play; a Risk of Rain-style teleporter just takes you to a harder version of the stage you’ve picked. There are also balance issues; the damage scaling on anything but the first 10-minute stage is absurd. But there is some ridiculous fun to be had with it.

If you’re not into the whole auto-shooter/bullet heaven thing, there’s nothing here for you. But if you’re interested in seeing how chaotic a third-person Vampire Survivors can get, step right up.

It’s also the one 2025 game where you can play as a sunglasses-wearing, skateboarding skeleton who throws bouncing bones at enemies. In these tough times, that’s not nothing.

Deep Rock Galactic Survivor

deep rock galactic survivor screenshot

We’ve talked about this Survivors-like take on the beloved co-op shooter Deep Rock Galactic a couple of times over its Early Access period, but we were remiss in not discussing it upon its 1.0 release last month. The game was already an Ars favorite, but its progression systems still needed a bit of work. It’s now ready for public consumption, and it’s one of the best auto-shooters on the market. It’s so good that you might want to take a look at it even if you want nothing to do with the oversaturated subgenre.

Its Vampire Survivor-like bones are obvious—you walk around a map while your weapons fire automatically at hordes of enemies closing in on you. Collect the XP gems defeated enemies drop to level up and choose an upgrade. The difference here is that you’re also able to mine through walls of rocks, letting you escape tricky situations and funnel bad guys to traps you’ve laid.

The progression system is heavy on the grind, but there’s plenty of fun to be had no matter how hardcore you want to be about it.

Rock and stone!

Monster Train 2

monster train 2 screenshot

Five years after the original, it’s time for the sequel to the second-best roguelike deckbuilder of all time (the sequel to the first-best roguelike deckbuilder has—thankfully, if I’m being honest—been delayed until the beginning of next year). As in the first game, and as the game’s title might suggest, you’ll be fighting monsters on a train, trying to stop them before they ascend three floors to reach your “pyre”—your health pool for the run.

In Monster Train 2, as in any deckbuilder, you start with a fairly crappy deck of cards and upgrade and expand it throughout your run to try to make it to the end. But in addition to the usual spells and attacks, Monster Train 2 gives you units to assign to the different levels of your battlefield, infusing an interesting spatial element to the cartoonishly violent proceedings.

The sequel is more of the first game, but with smart updates that make everything flow smoother. It’s one of my favorite games of the year, and I highly recommend it to any fan of tactical card games.

Deadzone Rogue

deadzone rogue screenshot

Deadzone Rogue instantly joins the pantheon of roguelite first-person looter shooters, which includes perennial favorites Gunfire Reborn and Roboquest (I haven’t played them yet, but the brand-new Abyssus and Void/Breaker are also generating a bunch of buzz).

Where Roboquest excels at fun, Doom-like movement and colorful environments, Deadzone Rogue is all about the shooting. The game has the best gunplay of any FPS roguelike I’ve played, and the random weapons, armor, and upgrades you get give each run a sense of personality.

The game’s music, voice acting, and lore are best ignored, but the sound design is nice and punchy. This won’t be a game you’ll play for 100 hours, but sometimes it’s just fun to shoot a gun in a video game, and Deadzone Rogue gets that simple formula right.

9 Kings

9 kings screenshot

Look, I’m going to cheat here, and I’m not ashamed of it. It’s true—9 Kings is not fully released. But I can’t not talk about. I initially wrote the game off when it was released into Early Access in July, thinking it looked too simple. It is simple, but that’s to its credit.

The premise is easy to explain: Build a little kingdom on a 3-by-3 grid of squares. Play a card to construct or upgrade a building or unit in your kingdom. Afterward, a neighboring kingdom will attack, and your units will automatically fight to defend your home. After the battle, you draft a card from the defeated kingdom to add to your hand.

As you can see from the above screenshot, you can expand your kingdom beyond the initial nine squares, and unlockable perks change up the way you play each king. A handful of enemies are randomly chosen from the pool of nine, meaning that the cards you can draft each run will be different.

Making busted builds and fighting your way up the difficulty levels is extremely compelling; there was a week where the “one more run” curse descended on me, and I did little else than play this game.

Photo of Aaron Zimmerman

Aaron is Ars Technica’s Copy Chief. He has worked as an editor for over 17 years. In addition to editing features at Ars, he occasionally reviews board and video games. He lives in Chicago.

Please send help. I can’t stop playing these roguelikes. Read More »

little-echo

Little Echo

I believe that we will win.

An echo of an old ad for the 2014 US men’s World Cup team. It did not win.

I was in Berkeley for the 2025 Secular Solstice. We gather to sing and to reflect.

The night’s theme was the opposite: ‘I don’t think we’re going to make it.’

As in: Sufficiently advanced AI is coming. We don’t know exactly when, or what form it will take, but it is probably coming. When it does, we, humanity, probably won’t make it. It’s a live question. Could easily go either way. We are not resigned to it. There’s so much to be done that can tilt the odds. But we’re not the favorite.

Raymond Arnold, who ran the event, believes that. I believe that.

Yet in the middle of the event, the echo was there. Defiant.

I believe that we will win.

There is a recording of the event. I highly encourage you to set aside three hours at some point in December, to listen, and to participate and sing along. Be earnest.

If you don’t believe it, I encourage this all the more. If you don’t understand the mindset, or the culture behind it, or consider it an opponent or dislike it, and especially if yours is a different fight? I encourage this all the more than that. You can also attend New York’s Solstice on the 20th.

You will sing songs you know, and songs you don’t. You will hear tales of struggles, of facing impossible odds or unbearable loss and fighting anyway, of how to face it all and hopefully stay sane. To have the end, if it happens, find us doing well.

I live a wonderful life.

I am crying as I write this. But when I am done, I will open a different Chrome window. I will spend the day with friends I love dearly and watching football games. This evening my wife and I will attend a not wedding of two of them, that is totally a wedding. We will fly home to our wonderful kids, and enjoy endless wonders greater than any king in the beating heart of the world. I want for nothing other than time.

Almost every day, I will mostly reject those wonders. I will instead return to my computer. I will confront waves of events and information. The avalanche will accelerate. Release after release, argument after argument, policies, papers, events, one battle after another. People will be determined to handle events with less dignity than one could imagine, despite having read this sentence. I fight to not be driven into rages. I will triage. I will process. I will change my mind. I will try to explain, just one more time. I will move pieces around multiple chessboards.

We continue. Don’t tell me to stop. Someone has to, and no one else will.

I know if I ignored it, anything else would soon turn to ash in my mouth.

I will look at events, and say to myself as I see the moves unfolding, the consequences of choices I made or influenced, for good and ill: This is the world we made.

It aint over till its over. Never leave a ballgame early. Leave it all on the field, for when the dust covers the sun and all you hope for is undone. You play to win the game.

The odds are against us and the situation is grim. By default, we lose. I act accordingly, and employ some of the unteachable methods of sanity and the mirror version of others, all of which are indeed unteachable but do totally work.

Yet the echo is there. In my head. It doesn’t care.

I believe that we will win.

Discussion about this post

Little Echo Read More »

steamos-vs.-windows-on-dedicated-gpus:-it’s-complicated,-but-windows-has-an-edge

SteamOS vs. Windows on dedicated GPUs: It’s complicated, but Windows has an edge

Other results vary from game to game and from GPU to GPU. Borderlands 3, for example, performs quite a bit better on Windows than on SteamOS across all of our tested GPUs, sometimes by as much as 20 or 30 percent (with smaller gaps here and there). As a game from 2019 with no ray-tracing effects, it still runs serviceably on SteamOS across the board, but it was the game we tested that favored Windows the most consistently.

In both Forza Horizon 5 and Cyberpunk 2077, with ray-tracing effects enabled, you also see a consistent advantage for Windows across the 16GB dedicated GPUs, usually somewhere in the 15 to 20 percent range.

To Valve’s credit, there were also many games we tested where Windows and SteamOS performance was functionally tied. Cyberpunk without ray-tracing, Returnal when not hitting the 7600’s 8GB RAM limit, and Assassin’s Creed Valhalla were sometimes actually tied between Windows and SteamOS, or they differed by low-single-digit percentages that you could chalk up to the margin of error.

Now look at the results from the integrated GPUs, the Radeon 780M and RX 8060S. These are pretty different GPUs from one another—the 8060S has more than three times the compute units of the 780M, and it’s working with a higher-speed pool of soldered-down LPDDR5X-8000 rather than two poky DDR5-5600 SODIMMs.

But Borderlands aside, SteamOS actually did quite a bit better on these GPUs relative to Windows. In both Forza and Cyberpunk with ray-tracing enabled, SteamOS slightly beats Windows on the 780M, and mostly closes the performance gap on the 8060S. For the games where Windows and SteamOS essentially tied on the dedicated GPUs, SteamOS has a small but consistent lead over Windows in average frame rates.

SteamOS vs. Windows on dedicated GPUs: It’s complicated, but Windows has an edge Read More »

elon-musk’s-x-first-to-be-fined-under-eu’s-digital-services-act

Elon Musk’s X first to be fined under EU’s Digital Services Act

Elon Musk’s X became the first large online platform fined under the European Union’s Digital Services Act on Friday.

The European Commission announced that X would be fined nearly $140 million, with the potential to face “periodic penalty payments” if the platform fails to make corrections.

A third of the fine came from one of the first moves Musk made when taking over Twitter. In November 2022, he changed the platform’s historical use of a blue checkmark to verify the identities of notable users. Instead, Musk started selling blue checks for about $8 per month, immediately prompting a wave of imposter accounts pretending to be notable celebrities, officials, and brands.

Today, X still prominently advertises that paying for checks is the only way to “verify” an account on the platform. But the commission, which has been investigating X since 2023, concluded that “X’s use of the ‘blue checkmark’ for ‘verified accounts’ deceives users.”

This violates the DSA as the “deception exposes users to scams, including impersonation frauds, as well as other forms of manipulation by malicious actors,” the commission wrote.

Interestingly, the commission concluded that X made it harder to identify bots, despite Musk’s professed goal to eliminate bots being a primary reason he bought Twitter. Perhaps validating the EU’s concerns, X recently received backlash after changing a feature that accidentally exposed that some of the platform’s biggest MAGA influencers were based “in Eastern Europe, Thailand, Nigeria, Bangladesh, and other parts of the world, often linked to online scams and schemes,” Futurism reported.

Although the DSA does not mandate the verification of users, “it clearly prohibits online platforms from falsely claiming that users have been verified, when no such verification took place,” the commission said. X now has 60 days to share information on the measures it will take to fix the compliance issue.

Elon Musk’s X first to be fined under EU’s Digital Services Act Read More »