Author name: Kris Guyer

nasa-test-flight-seeks-to-help-bring-commercial-supersonic-travel-back

NASA test flight seeks to help bring commercial supersonic travel back

Space, supersonic flight, supersonic travel, syndication, X-59 / /

The X-59 has successfully completed its inaugural flight.

Credit: Lockheed Martin/Michael Jackson

About an hour after sunrise over the Mojave Desert of Southern California, NASA’s newest experimental supersonic jet took to the skies for the first time on Tuesday. The X-59 Quesst (Quiet SuperSonic Technology) is designed to decrease the noise of a sonic boom when an aircraft breaks the sound barrier, paving the way for future commercial jets to fly at supersonic speeds over land.

The jet, built by Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works, took off from US Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale, California. Flown by Nils Larson, NASA’s lead test pilot for the X-59, the inaugural flight validated the jet’s airworthiness and safety before landing about an hour after takeoff near NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center in Edwards, California.

“X-59 is a symbol of American ingenuity,” acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy said in a statement. “It’s part of our DNA—the desire to go farther, faster, and even quieter than anyone has ever gone before.”

Commercial planes are prohibited from flying at supersonic speeds over land in the US due to the disruption that breaking the sound barrier causes on the ground, releasing a loud sonic boom that can rattle windows and trigger alarms. The Concorde, which was the only successful commercial supersonic jet, was limited to flying at supersonic speeds only over the oceans.

When a plane approaches the speed of sound, pressure waves build up on the surface of the aircraft. These areas of high pressure coalesce into large shock waves when the plane goes supersonic, producing the double thunderclap of a sonic boom.

The X-59 is capable of reaching supersonic speeds, without the supersonic boom.

Credit: Lockheed Martin/Gary Tice

The X-59 is capable of reaching supersonic speeds, without the supersonic boom. Credit: Lockheed Martin/Gary Tice

The X-59 will generate a lower “sonic thump” thanks to its unique design. It was given a long, slender nose that accounts for about a third of the total length and breaks up pressure waves that would otherwise merge on other parts of the airplane. The engine was mounted on top of the X-59’s fuselage, rather than underneath as on a fighter jet, to keep a smooth underside that limits shock waves and also to direct sound waves up into the sky rather than down toward the ground. NASA aims to provide key data to aircraft manufacturers so they can build less noisy supersonic planes.

A jet like no other

The X-59 is a single-seat, single-engine jet. It is 99.7 feet long and 29.5 feet wide, making it almost twice as long as an F-16 fighter jet but with a slightly smaller wingspan. The X-59’s cockpit and ejection seat come from the T-38 jet trainer, its landing gear from an F-16, and its control stick from the F-117 stealth attack aircraft. Its engine, a modified General Electric F414 from the F/A-18 fighter jet, will allow the plane to cruise at Mach 1.4, about 925 mph, at an altitude of 55,000 feet. This is nearly twice as high and twice as fast as commercial airliners typically fly.

Perhaps the most striking change on the X-59 is that it does not have a glass cockpit window. Instead, the cockpit is fully enclosed to be as aerodynamic as possible, and the pilot watches a camera feed of the outside world on a 4K monitor known as the eXternal Visibility System.

“You can’t see very clearly through glass when you look at it at a very shallow angle, and so you need to have a certain steepness of the view screen to have good optical qualities, and that would develop a strong shock wave that would really corrupt the low-boom characteristics of the airplane,” says Michael Buonanno, the air vehicle lead for the X-59 at Lockheed Martin.

The X-59 has repurposed components of other NASA aircrafts.

Credit: Lockheed Martin

The X-59 has repurposed components of other NASA aircrafts. Credit: Lockheed Martin

For this first flight, the X-59 flew at a lower altitude and at about 240 mph, according to NASA. During future tests, the jet will gradually increase its speed and altitude until it goes supersonic, NASA said, which occurs at about 659 mph at 55,000 feet, or 761 mph at sea level. The speed of sound varies according to temperature and to a lesser degree pressure, causing it to decrease at higher altitudes.

“The primary objective on a first flight is really just to land,” James Less, a project pilot for the X-59 who will be conducting future flights, tells WIRED. Less flew an F-15 fighter jet in formation with the X-59 as a support aircraft during the flight, observing the new experimental jet for any issues.

“I’m looking for anything external to the airplane that the pilot can’t see,” Less says. Generally the first thing he would check for is that the landing gear retracted successfully, but on this initial flight the X-59 intentionally left the landing gear down. “If the aircraft is leaking any kind of fluids, be it fuel or hydraulics, as a chase pilot, you can usually see that… Also I’m looking for other traffic, air traffic, just to point that out to him.”

Following the X-59’s successful touchdown at Armstrong, NASA and Lockheed Martin engineers will review the flight data to prepare for the jet’s future, faster flights.

The design of the X-59 includes a nose that makes up most of the length of the craft, designed to help reduce noise.

Credit: NASA/Steve Freeman

The design of the X-59 includes a nose that makes up most of the length of the craft, designed to help reduce noise. Credit: NASA/Steve Freeman

The future of supersonic flight

The eXternal Visibility System is just one of the modern technologies needed to build a low-boom airplane like the X-59. Decades of computational fluid dynamics research and wind tunnel testing were also required to arrive at the final design.

“We’ve really had the opportunity to spend a lot of time on the computational fluid dynamics application to these low-boom aircraft,” Lori Ozoroski, the commercial supersonic technology project manager at NASA, tells WIRED. “We’ve gone from this computational domain around an aircraft of something that’s got a couple of million cells as you divide up the space around it to… things with a couple million cells, and now we’re pushing a billion cells.”

Once the X-59 gets up to speed, the next step will be to make sure the quieter sonic thumps really are tolerable for people on the ground.

“We have been planning a test campaign where we will fly over various communities in the US, polling them with a survey and understanding how annoyed people are,” Ozoroski says. The flights will produce both loud and quiet sonic booms to see how people react, she explains.

“Our plan is to gather all this data, doing approximately one-month tests in a couple of locations around the country, and then providing all that data to the FAA and the international regulatory community to try to establish a sound limit, rather than the speed limit.”

If the program is a success, it could pave the way for new commercial supersonic aircraft that would cut travel times in half, something that companies such as Boom Supersonic are trying to achieve.

The jet has joined the ranks of innovative NASA X-planes, dating back almost 80 years to the Bell X-1 that Chuck Yeager piloted on the first faster-than-sound flight in 1947.

“I grew up reading Popular Science and Popular Mechanics and reading about the X-planes out at Edwards, and never imagined that I’d be in a position to do something like this,” says Less, who is eagerly awaiting his turn at the X-59’s stick. “This will be the highlight of my career.”

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

Photo of WIRED

Wired.com is your essential daily guide to what’s next, delivering the most original and complete take you’ll find anywhere on innovation’s impact on technology, science, business and culture.

NASA test flight seeks to help bring commercial supersonic travel back Read More »

fcc-to-rescind-ruling-that-said-isps-are-required-to-secure-their-networks

FCC to rescind ruling that said ISPs are required to secure their networks

FCC, Policy, salt typhoon, Security / /

The Federal Communications Commission will vote in November to repeal a ruling that requires telecom providers to secure their networks, acting on a request from the biggest lobby groups representing Internet providers.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said the ruling, adopted in January just before Republicans gained majority control of the commission, “exceeded the agency’s authority and did not present an effective or agile response to the relevant cybersecurity threats.” Carr said the vote scheduled for November 20 comes after “extensive FCC engagement with carriers” who have taken “substantial steps… to strengthen their cybersecurity defenses.”

The FCC’s January 2025 declaratory ruling came in response to attacks by China, including the Salt Typhoon infiltration of major telecom providers such as Verizon and AT&T. The Biden-era FCC found that the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), a 1994 law, “affirmatively requires telecommunications carriers to secure their networks from unlawful access or interception of communications.”

“The Commission has previously found that section 105 of CALEA creates an affirmative obligation for a telecommunications carrier to avoid the risk that suppliers of untrusted equipment will ‘illegally activate interceptions or other forms of surveillance within the carrier’s switching premises without its knowledge,’” the January order said. “With this Declaratory Ruling, we clarify that telecommunications carriers’ duties under section 105 of CALEA extend not only to the equipment they choose to use in their networks, but also to how they manage their networks.”

ISPs get what they want

The declaratory ruling was paired with a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would have led to stricter rules requiring specific steps to secure networks against unauthorized interception. Carr voted against the decision at the time.

Although the declaratory ruling didn’t yet have specific rules to go along with it, the FCC at the time said it had some teeth. “Even absent rules adopted by the Commission, such as those proposed below, we believe that telecommunications carriers would be unlikely to satisfy their statutory obligations under section 105 without adopting certain basic cybersecurity practices for their communications systems and services,” the January order said. “For example, basic cybersecurity hygiene practices such as implementing role-based access controls, changing default passwords, requiring minimum password strength, and adopting multifactor authentication are necessary for any sensitive computer system. Furthermore, a failure to patch known vulnerabilities or to employ best practices that are known to be necessary in response to identified exploits would appear to fall short of fulfilling this statutory obligation.”

FCC to rescind ruling that said ISPs are required to secure their networks Read More »

leaker-reveals-which-pixels-are-vulnerable-to-cellebrite-phone-hacking

Leaker reveals which Pixels are vulnerable to Cellebrite phone hacking

Cellebrite, Google, Security, smartphones, Tech / /

Cellebrite leak

This blurry screenshot appears to list which Pixel phones Cellebrite devices can hack.

Credit: rogueFed

This blurry screenshot appears to list which Pixel phones Cellebrite devices can hack. Credit: rogueFed

At least according to Cellebrite, GrapheneOS is more secure than what Google offers out of the box. The company is telling law enforcement in these briefings that its technology can extract data from Pixel 6, 7, 8, and 9 phones in unlocked, AFU, and BFU states on stock software. However, it cannot brute-force passcodes to enable full control of a device. The leaker also notes law enforcement is still unable to copy an eSIM from Pixel devices. Notably, the Pixel 10 series is moving away from physical SIM cards.

For those same phones running GrapheneOS, police can expect to have a much harder time. The Cellebrite table says that Pixels with GrapheneOS are only accessible when running software from before late 2022—both the Pixel 8 and Pixel 9 were launched after that. Phones in both BFU and AFU states are safe from Cellebrite on updated builds, and as of late 2024, even a fully unlocked GrapheneOS device is immune from having its data copied. An unlocked phone can be inspected in plenty of other ways, but data extraction in this case is limited to what the user can access.

The original leaker claims to have dialed into two calls so far without detection. However, rogueFed also called out the meeting organizer by name (the second screenshot, which we are not reposting). Odds are that Cellebrite will be screening meeting attendees more carefully now.

We’ve reached out to Google to inquire about why a custom ROM created by volunteers is more resistant to industrial phone hacking than the official Pixel OS. We’ll update this article if Google has anything to say.

Leaker reveals which Pixels are vulnerable to Cellebrite phone hacking Read More »

new-study-settles-40-year-debate:-nanotyrannus-is-a-new-species

New study settles 40-year debate: Nanotyrannus is a new species

Nanotyrannus, paleontology, Science, Taxonomy, tyrannosaurs / /

For four decades, a frequently acrimonious debate has raged in paleontological circles about the correct taxonomy for a handful of rare fossil specimens. One faction insisted the fossils were juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex; the other argued that they represented a new species dubbed Nanotyrannus lancensis. Now, paleontologists believe they have settled the debate once and for all due to a new analysis of a well-preserved fossil.

The verdict: It is indeed a new species, according to a new paper published in the journal Nature. The authors also reclassified another specimen as a second new species, distinct from N. lancensis. In short, Nanotyrannus is a valid taxon and contains two species.

“This fossil doesn’t just settle the debate,” said Lindsay Zanno, a paleontologist at North Carolina State University and head of paleontology at North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences. “It flips decades of T. rex research on its head.” That’s because paleontologists have relied on such fossils to model the growth and behavior of T. rex. The new findings suggest that there could have been multiple tyrannosaur species and that paleontologists have been underestimating the diversity of dinosaurs from this period.

Our story begins in 1942, when the fossilized skull of a Nanotyrannus, nicknamed Chomper, was excavated in Montana by a Cleveland Museum of Natural History expedition. Originally, paleontologists thought it belonged to a Gorgosaurus, but a 1965 paper challenged that identification and argued that the skull belonged to a juvenile T. rex. It wasn’t until 1988 that scientists proposed that the skull was actually that of a new species, Nanotyrannus. It’s been a constant back-and-forth ever since.

As recently as 2020, a highly influential paper claimed that Nanotyrannus was definitively a juvenile T. Rex. Yet a substantial number of paleontologists still believed it should be classified as a distinct species. A January 2024 paper, for instance, came down firmly on the Nanotyrannus side of the debate. Co-authors Nicholas Longrich of the University of Bath and Evan Saitta of the University of Chicago measured the growth rings in Nanotyrannus bones and concluded the animals were nearly fully grown.

Dueling dinosaurs

Lindsay Zanno, associate research professor at North Carolina State University and head of paleontology at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, with the Dueling Dinosaurs fossil.

Lindsay Zanno of North Carolina State University, who also heads paleontology at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, with the “dueling dinosaurs” fossil. Credit: N.C. State University/CC BY-NC-ND

Furthermore, there was no evidence of hybrid fossils combining features of both Nanotyrannus and T. rex, which one would expect if the former were a juvenile version of the latter. Longrich and Saitta had also discovered a skull bone, archived in a San Francisco museum, that did belong to a juvenile T. rex, and they were able to do an anatomical comparison. They argued that Nanotyrannus had a lighter build, longer limbs, and larger arms than a T. rex and likely was smaller, faster, and more agile.

New study settles 40-year debate: Nanotyrannus is a new species Read More »

the-chemistry-behind-that-pricey-cup-of-civet-coffee

The chemistry behind that pricey cup of civet coffee

chemistry, coffee, Food science, kopi luwak, Science / /

A sampling of scat

Kopi luwak is quite popular, with well-established markets in several South and East Asian countries. Its popularity has risen in Europe and the US as well, and India has recently become an emerging new market. Since there haven’t been similar studies of the chemical properties of kopi luwak from the Indian subcontinent, the authors of this latest study decided to fill that scientific gap. They focused on civet coffee produced in Kodagu, which produces nearly 36 percent of India’s total coffee production.

The authors collected 68 fresh civet scat samples from five different sites in Kodagu during peak fruit harvesting in January of this year. Collectors wore gloves to avoid contamination of the samples. For comparative analysis, they also harvested several bunches of ripened Robusta coffee berries. They washed the scat samples to remove the feces and also removed any palm seeds or other elements to ensure only Robusta beans remained.

For the manually harvested berries, the authors removed the pulp after a natural fermentation process and then sun-dried the beans for seven days. They then removed the hulls of both scat-derived and manually harvested berries and dried the beans in an oven for two hours. None of the bean samples were roasted, since roasting might significantly alter the acidity and chemical composition of the samples. For the chemical analysis, 10 distinct samples (five from each site where berries were collected) were ground into powder and subjected to various tests.

The civet beans had higher fat levels, particularly those compounds known to influence aroma and flavor, such as caprylic acid and methyl esters—contributing to kopi luwak’s distinctive aroma and flavor—but lower levels of caffeine, protein, and acidity, which would reduce the bitterness. The lower acidity is likely due to the coffee berries being naturally fermented in the civets’ digestive tracts, and there is more to learn about the role the gut microbiome plays in all of this. There were also several volatile organic compounds, common to standard coffee, that were extremely low or absent entirely in the civet samples.

In short, the comparative analysis “further supports the notion that civet coffee is chemically different from conventionally produced coffee of similar types, mainly due to fermentation,” the authors concluded. They recommend further research using roasted samples, along with studying other coffee varieties, samples from a more diverse selection of farms, and the influence of certain ecological conditions, such as canopy cover and the presence of wild trees.

Scientific Reports, 2025. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-21545-x  (About DOIs).

The chemistry behind that pricey cup of civet coffee Read More »

please-do-not-sell-b30a-chips-to-china

Please Do Not Sell B30A Chips to China

Please / /

The Chinese and Americans are currently negotiating a trade deal. There are plenty of ways to generate a win-win deal, and early signs of this are promising on many fronts.

Since this will be discussed for real tomorrow as per reports, I will offer my thoughts on this one more time.

The biggest mistake America could make would be to effectively give up Taiwan, which would be catastrophic on many levels including that Taiwan contains TSMC. I am assuming we are not so foolish as to seriously consider doing this, still I note it.

Beyond that, the key thing, basically the only thing, America has to do other than ‘get a reasonable deal overall’ is not be so captured or foolish or both as to allow export of the B30A chip, or even worse than that (yes it can always get worse) allow relaxation of restrictions on semiconductor manufacturing imports.

At first I hadn’t heard signs about this. But now it looks like the nightmare of handing China compute parity on a silver platter is very much in play.

I disagreed with the decision to sell the Nvidia H20 chips to China, but that chip was and is decidedly behind the frontier and has its disadvantages. Fortunately for us China for an opaque combination of reasons (including that they are not yet ‘AGI pilled’ and plausibly to save face or as part of negotiations) chose to turn those chips down.

The B30A would not be like that. It would mean China could match B300-clusters at only a modest additional cost. If Nvidia allocated chips sufficiently aggressively, and there is every reason to suggest they might do so, China could achieve compute parity with the United States in short order, greatly enhancing its models and competitiveness along with its entire economy and ability to fight wars. Chinese company market share and Chinese model market share of inference would skyrocket.

I turn over the floor to IFP and Saif Khan.

Saif Khan: Trump is meeting Xi this week for China trade talks. Congress is worried Trump may offer downgraded Blackwell AI chips as a concession. If this happens, it could effectively mean the end of US chip restrictions. Thread with highlights from our new 7,000-word report.

First – the reported chip specs: The “B30A” is rumored to be half of NVIDIA’s flagship B300: half the processing performance, half the memory bandwidth, and half the price. This means the B30A’s performance per $ is similar to the B300.

The B30A would: – Be far better than any Chinese AI chip – Have >12x the processing performance of the H20, a chip requiring an export license that has been approved for export in only limited quantities. – Exceed current export control thresholds by >18x

At a system level, a B30A-cluster would cost only ~20% more than a B300-cluster, a cost China can subsidize. Chinese AI labs would have access to supercomputers for AI training as powerful as those available to US AI labs.

When you put it that way, selling these chips to China seems like a really crazy thing to do if you care about whether American AI and American AI models are better than their Chinese counterparts, or you care about who has more compute. It would be a complete repudiation of the idea that we should have more and better compute than China.

Caleb Watney: I would simply not give away the essential bottleneck input for the most important dual-use technology of our era to the US’s primary geopolitical rival.

Hard to understate what a blow this would be for American leadership in AI if [sales of B30As] happens.

The US was not selling our supplies of enriched uranium to the Axis powers as we were building the Manhattan Project.

We could go from a 31x compute lead (in the best case scenario) to actually giving China a 1.1x compute lead if we sell the farm here.

The full report is here.

But won’t US chip restrictions cause Huawei to backfill with its own AI chips? No, for both supply and demand reasons.

On the supply side, China faces bottlenecks due to US/allied chipmaking tool controls. AI chips require two components: processor dies and high-bandwidth memory (HBM). US capacity for processors is 35-38x of China’s (or adjusting for China’s higher mfg errors, 160-170x).

China fares even worse on HBM, making virtually none this year. Even next year, the US advantage will be 70x.

As a result, five different analysts find Huawei makes an extremely small number of AI chips. They’ll be at 1-4% of US AI chips this year, and 1-2% in 2026 as the US ramps and Huawei stalls.

On the demand side, China will likely create artificial demand for inferior Huawei chips. So B30A sales to China will have minimal effect on Huawei market expansion. Instead, sales would supercharge China’s frontier AI & arm Chinese cloud to compete globally with US cloud.

Michael Sobolik (Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute): Allowing Nvidia to sell modified Blackwell chips to China would unilaterally surrender our greatest AI advantage to the Chinese Communist Party.

This would be a grave mistake.

This is why @SenatorBanks’ GAIN AI Act is so important. American chips should go American companies, not China.

America First!

China is going to maximize production on and progress of Huawei chips no matter what because they (correctly) see it as a dependency issue, and to this end they will ensure that Huawei chips sell out indefinitely, no matter what we do, and the amounts they have is tiny. The idea that they would be meaningfully exporting them any time soon is absurd, unless we are selling them so many B30As they have compute to spare.

Huawei is going to produce as many chips as possible, at as high quality as possible, from this point forth, which for a while will be ‘not many.’ Our decision here has at most minimal impact on their decisions and capacity, while potentially handing the future of AI to China by shoring up their one weakness.

Congress is trying to force through the GAIN Act to try and stop this sort of thing, and despite the political costs of doing so Microsoft sees this as important enough that it has thrown its support behind the GAIN Act. If the White House wants to make the case that the GAIN Act is not necessary, this is the time to make that case.

Even if you believe in the White House’s ‘tech stack’ theory (which I don’t), and that Huawei is much closer to catching up than they look (which again I don’t), this is still madness, because ultimately under that theory what matters are the models not the chips.

The the extent anyone was locked into anything, this newly empowered and market ascendant hybrid Nvidia-China stack (whether the main models were DeepSeek, Qwen, Kimi or someone else) would lock people far more into the models than the chips, and the new chips would provide the capacity to serve those customers while starving American companies of compute and also profit margins.

Then, if and when the Huawei chips are produced in sufficient quantity and quality, a process that would proceed apace regardless, it would be a seamless transfer, that PRC would insist upon, to then gradually transition to serving this via their own chips.

Again, if anything, importing massive supplies of Nvidia compute would open up the opportunity for far earlier exports of Huawei chips to other nations, if China wanted to pursue that strategy for real, and allows them to offer better products across the board. This is beyond foolish.

Is a major driver of potentially selling these chips that they would be exports to China, and assist with balance of trade?

I don’t know if this is a major driving factor, especially since the chips would be coming from Taiwan and not from America, but if it is then I would note that China will use these chips to avoid importing compute in other ways, and use them to develop and export services. Chips are inputs to other products, not final goods. Selling these chips will not improve our balance of trade on net over the medium term.

Is it possible that China would not see it this way, and would turn down even these almost state of the art chips? I find this highly unlikely.

One reason to find it unlikely is to look at Nvidia’s stock over the last day of trading. They are a $5 trillion company, whose stock is up by 9% and whose products sell out, on the chance they’ll be allowed to sell chips to China. The market believes the Chinese would buy big over an extended period.

But let’s suppose, in theory, that the Chinese care so much about self-sufficiency and resilience or perhaps pride, or perhaps are taking sufficient queues from our willingness to sell it, that they would turn down the B30As.

In that case, they also don’t care about you offering it to them. It doesn’t get you anything in the negotiation and won’t help you get to a yes. Trump understands this. Never give up anything the other guy doesn’t care about. Even if you don’t face a backlash and you somehow fully ‘get away with it,’ what was the point?

This never ends positively for America. Take the chips off the table.

Does Nvidia need this? Nvidia absolutely does not need this. They’re selling out their chips either way and business is going gangbusters across the board.

Here’s some of what else they announced on Tuesday alone, as the stock passed $200 (it was $139 one year ago, $12.53 post-split five years ago):

Morning Brew: Nvidia announcements today:

– Eli Lilly partnership

– Palantir partnership

– Hyundai partnership

– Samsung partnership

– $1 billion investment in Nokia

– Uber partnership to build 100,000 robotaxi fleet

– $500 billion in expected revenue over through 2026

– New system connecting quantum computers to its AI chips

– Department of Energy partnership to build 7 new supercomputers

Throughout this post, I have made the case against selling B30As to China purely on the basis of the White House’s own publicly stated goals. If what we care about are purely ‘beating China’ and ‘winning the AI race’ where that race means ensuring American models retain market share, and ensuring we retain strategic and military and diplomatic advantages, then this would be one of the worst moves one could make. We would be selling out our biggest edge in order to sell a few chips.

That is not to minimize that there are other important reasons to sell B30As to China, as this would make it far more likely that China is the one to develop AGI or ASI before we do, or that this development is made in a relatively reckless and unsafe fashion. If we sell these chips and China then catches up to us, not only do we risk that it is China that builds it first, it will be built in extreme haste and recklessness no matter who does it. I would expect everyone to collectively lose their minds, and for our negotiating position, should we need to make a deal, to deteriorate dramatically.

Even if it is merely the newly supercharged Chinese models getting market penetration in America, I would expect everyone to lose their minds from that alone. That leads to very bad political decisions all around.

That will all be true even if AGI takes 10 years to develop as per Andrej Karpathy.

But that’s not what is important to the people negotiating and advising on this. To them, let me be clear: Purely in terms of your own views and goals, this is madness.

Discussion about this post

Please Do Not Sell B30A Chips to China Read More »

if-things-in-america-weren’t-stupid-enough,-texas-is-suing-tylenol-maker

If things in America weren’t stupid enough, Texas is suing Tylenol maker

autism, health, paxton, Policy, robert f kennedy jr, texas, Trump, tylenol / /

While the underlying cause or causes of autism spectrum disorder remain elusive and appear likely to be a complex interplay of genetic and environmental factors, President Trump and his anti-vaccine health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—neither of whom have any scientific or medical background whatsoever—have decided to pin the blame on Tylenol, a common pain reliever and fever reducer that has no proven link to autism.

And now, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing the maker of Tylenol, Kenvue and Johnson & Johnson, who previously sold Tylenol, claiming that they have been “deceptively marketing Tylenol” knowing that it “leads to a significantly increased risk of autism and other disorders.”

To back that claim, Paxton relies on the “considerable body of evidence… recently highlighted by the Trump Administration.”

Of course, there is no “considerable” evidence for this claim, only tenuous associations and conflicting studies. Trump and Kennedy’s justification for blaming Tylenol was revealed in a rambling, incoherent press conference last month, in which Trump spoke of a “rumor” about Tylenol and his “opinion” on the matter. Still, he firmly warned against its use, saying well over a dozen times: “don’t take Tylenol.”

“Don’t take Tylenol. There’s no downside. Don’t take it. You’ll be uncomfortable. It won’t be as easy maybe, but don’t take it if you’re pregnant. Don’t take Tylenol and don’t give it to the baby after the baby is born,” he said.

“Scientifically unfounded”

As Ars has reported previously, there are some studies that have found an association between use of Tylenol (aka acetaminophen or paracetamol) and a higher risk of autism. But, many of the studies finding such an association have significant flaws. Other studies have found no link. That includes a highly regarded Swedish study that compared autism risk among siblings with different acetaminophen exposures during pregnancy, but otherwise similar genetic and environmental risks. Acetaminophen didn’t make a difference, suggesting other genetic and/or environmental factors might explain any associations. Further, even if there is a real association (aka a correlation) between acetaminophen use and autism risk, that does not mean the pain reliever is the cause of autism.

If things in America weren’t stupid enough, Texas is suing Tylenol maker Read More »

openai-data-suggests-1-million-users-discuss-suicide-with-chatgpt-weekly

OpenAI data suggests 1 million users discuss suicide with ChatGPT weekly

AI, AI assistants, AI behavior, AI ethics, AI safety, AI sycophancy, Biz & IT, chatbots, chatgpt, machine learning, Mental Health, openai, sam altman / /

Earlier this month, the company unveiled a wellness council to address these concerns, though critics noted the council did not include a suicide prevention expert. OpenAI also recently rolled out controls for parents of children who use ChatGPT. The company says it’s building an age prediction system to automatically detect children using ChatGPT and impose a stricter set of age-related safeguards.

Rare but impactful conversations

The data shared on Monday appears to be part of the company’s effort to demonstrate progress on these issues, although it also shines a spotlight on just how deeply AI chatbots may be affecting the health of the public at large.

In a blog post on the recently released data, OpenAI says these types of conversations in ChatGPT that might trigger concerns about “psychosis, mania, or suicidal thinking” are “extremely rare,” and thus difficult to measure. The company estimates that around 0.07 percent of users active in a given week and 0.01 percent of messages indicate possible signs of mental health emergencies related to psychosis or mania. For emotional attachment, the company estimates around 0.15 percent of users active in a given week and 0.03 percent of messages indicate potentially heightened levels of emotional attachment to ChatGPT.

OpenAI also claims that on an evaluation of over 1,000 challenging mental health-related conversations, the new GPT-5 model was 92 percent compliant with its desired behaviors, compared to 27 percent for a previous GPT-5 model released on August 15. The company also says its latest version of GPT-5 holds up to OpenAI’s safeguards better in long conversations. OpenAI has previously admitted that its safeguards are less effective during extended conversations.

In addition, OpenAI says it’s adding new evaluations to attempt to measure some of the most serious mental health issues facing ChatGPT users. The company says its baseline safety testing for its AI language models will now include benchmarks for emotional reliance and non-suicidal mental health emergencies.

Despite the ongoing mental health concerns, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman announced on October 14 that the company will allow verified adult users to have erotic conversations with ChatGPT starting in December. The company had loosened ChatGPT content restrictions in February but then dramatically tightened them after the August lawsuit. Altman explained that OpenAI had made ChatGPT “pretty restrictive to make sure we were being careful with mental health issues” but acknowledged this approach made the chatbot “less useful/enjoyable to many users who had no mental health problems.”

If you or someone you know is feeling suicidal or in distress, please call the Suicide Prevention Lifeline number, 1-800-273-TALK (8255), which will put you in touch with a local crisis center.

OpenAI data suggests 1 million users discuss suicide with ChatGPT weekly Read More »

australia’s-social-media-ban-is-“problematic,”-but-platforms-will-comply-anyway

Australia’s social media ban is “problematic,” but platforms will comply anyway

age checks, age estimation, age gate, australia, online child safety, Policy, social media ban / /

Social media platforms have agreed to comply with Australia’s social media ban for users under 16 years old, begrudgingly embracing the world’s most restrictive online child safety law.

On Tuesday, Meta, Snap, and TikTok confirmed to Australia’s parliament that they’ll start removing and deactivating more than a million underage accounts when the law’s enforcement begins on December 10, Reuters reported.

Firms risk fines of up to $32.5 million for failing to block underage users.

Age checks are expected to be spotty, however, and Australia is still “scrambling” to figure out “key issues around enforcement,” including detailing firms’ precise obligations, AFP reported.

An FAQ managed by Australia’s eSafety regulator noted that platforms will be expected to find the accounts of all users under 16.

Those users must be allowed to download their data easily before their account is removed.

Some platforms can otherwise allow users to simply deactivate and retain their data until they reach age 17. Meta and TikTok expect to go that route, but Australia’s regulator warned that “users should not rely on platforms to provide this option.”

Additionally, platforms must prepare to catch kids who skirt age gates, the regulator said, and must block anyone under 16 from opening a new account. Beyond that, they’re expected to prevent “workarounds” to “bypass restrictions,” such as kids using AI to fake IDs, deepfakes to trick face scans, or the use of virtual private networks (VPNs) to alter their location to basically anywhere else in the world with less restrictive child safety policies.

Kids discovered inappropriately accessing social media should be easy to report, too, Australia’s regulator said.

Australia’s social media ban is “problematic,” but platforms will comply anyway Read More »

porsche’s-2026-911-turbo-s-is-a-ballistic,-twin-turbo,-701-horsepower-monster

Porsche’s 2026 911 Turbo S is a ballistic, twin-turbo, 701-horsepower monster

car review, Cars, First drive, Porsche 911 Turbo S / /

Other upgrades

To handle the 61 hp (45.5 kW) of additional power over the outgoing car, the new Turbo S features 10 mm wider tires at the rear—sticky Pirelli P Zero Rs to be exact. Porsche also outfitted a new form of active suspension to the Turbo S, which uses one of the pumps from the Panamera’s trick new Active Ride suspension to drive actuators at each of the car’s four corners.

By raising or lowering pressure, the 911 Turbo S effectively varies the stiffness of its anti-rollbars, resulting in a cushier ride for daily driving and a more aggressive one in Sport or Sport Plus. The feeling of the Turbo S is never exactly plush—those low-profile tires aren’t ideal for that—but neither is it harsh. I felt quite comfortable cruising over the broken Malagan asphalt, making this an ideal daily driver.

I didn’t even mind the soft-top convertible in the Cabriolet, which raises and lowers quickly and, even at highway speed, doesn’t add much road noise to the equation. Still, if I were buying, I’d go coupe instead of Cabriolet, if only for the extra headroom and cleaner styling.

I won’t be buying, though, because I can’t afford one. The 2026 Porsche 911 Turbo S starts at $270,300 for the coupe or $284,300 for the soft-top Cabriolet, plus a $2,350 destination fee. That’s for a reasonably well-equipped car, including the new active suspension and carbon-ceramic brakes, but start digging into the options catalogue or ponder the expanded palette in Porsche’s Paint to Sample lines, and you’ll quickly find yourself on the painful side of $300,000. That’s a mighty amount of money for a 911, a whopping $40,000 MSRP increase over last year’s model, but given the wild level of engineering required to deliver this much power and responsiveness, it doesn’t feel completely out of line.

Porsche’s 2026 911 Turbo S is a ballistic, twin-turbo, 701-horsepower monster Read More »

f1-in-mexico-city:-we-have-a-new-championship-leader

F1 in Mexico City: We have a new championship leader

Cars, F1, Formula 1 / /

Doing so vaulted him past his teammate Oscar Piastri to regain the lead Norris held in the early part of the season, albeit by just a single point. But if that makes it sound like it was a boring race, think again.

Behind Norris, the chasing pack went into turn 1 four-wide. Both Ferraris were in the mix: Charles Leclerc qualified second, and his teammate Lewis Hamilton was third. Max Verstappen could qualify his Red Bull no higher than fifth, behind George Russell’s Mercedes. A number of drivers had to take to the grass at turn 1 to avoid crashing, giving Norris plenty of breathing room to build a lead.

Behind him, things were a little more interesting. Leclerc managed to keep second place, but with much less speed than Norris, a following pack formed behind him. By lap 7, Verstappen had managed to fight his way past Russell, then diced with Hamilton, his old foe from the 2021 title. Neither car was able to keep entirely to the track, and Hamilton was handed a 10-second penalty, putting an end to any thoughts of finally grabbing his first Ferrari podium finish. Eventually, he finished eighth.

The stadium section doesn’t have the best sequence of corners, but there are few places to get a good a view of the cars. Peter Fox/Getty Images

Norris, Leclerc, and Verstappen all stuck to a one-stop strategy, with the Red Bull driver starting on medium tires and then swapping to the softs; his rivals did the opposite. Verstappen was in a much stronger position in the final phase of the race, with newer, softer rubber than the Ferrari ahead. But although he closed the gap to fractions of a second, he was denied a chance to overtake Leclerc when a virtual safety car interrupted the race with just three laps to go.

With his third place, Verstappen is now 36 points behind championship leader Norris, with a total of 116 points left on offer for the season.

Fourth went to the Haas of Oliver Bearman, who saw a chance early on to get into the front-running pack but was unable to hold off Verstappen for the final podium spot toward the end of the race. As for Piastri, he was able to claw his way back to fifth after starting eighth. That earned him 10 points, so he only gave away five to Verstappen, although Norris now leads him by 357 points to 356.

The next race will be in Brazil on November 9.

F1 in Mexico City: We have a new championship leader Read More »

man-takes-herbal-pain-quackery,-nearly-dies,-spends-months-in-hospital

Man takes herbal pain quackery, nearly dies, spends months in hospital

case report, cortisol, health, herbal supplements, hormones, supplements / /

Deadly doses

The supplements were: Artri King, Nhan Sam Tuyet Lien, and Linsen Double Caulis Plus. All are known to contain unlisted glucocorticoids, according to the Food and Drug Administration. And testing of two of the man’s supplements by the hospital confirmed the presence of the steroids.

Doctors determined that the man had essentially overdosed on the glucocorticoids—he had taken doses that exceeded the normal levels of glucocorticoids in the body. The steroids likely suppressed immune responses, leading to his infections and GI ulcers. But, more significantly, the excess steroid levels also caused his HPA axis to essentially shut down. While it’s possible to get the HPA axis back up and running after withdrawal from excessive steroid use, the amount of time that takes can vary. Further, if a person stops taking large doses of glucocorticoids abruptly, rather than gradually—as in the man’s case—and particularly after chronic use—also as in the man’s case—it can lead to an adrenal crisis. In retrospect, the man had all the signs of a crisis.

The doctors started treating him with hydrocortisone (medication cortisol) to get him out of danger. But it took six weeks before his HPA axis showed signs of recovery on tests. By that time, he had developed recurrent bacterial infections in his blood and had persistent delirium. It was only after several months in the hospital that he was able to be discharged back home.

In the end, the doctors describe the man’s case as a cautionary tale. Many Americans use supplements, but their efficacy is largely unproven, and they are not rigorously regulated for safety. And even though, in this case, the FDA had issued warnings specifically about the three supplements the man took, his case highlights that public awareness of such dangers remains low.

“Clinicians must remain vigilant in assessing supplement use and educate patients on potential risks, particularly regarding hidden glucocorticoids, to prevent serious health complications such as adrenal insufficiency,” the doctors conclude.

Man takes herbal pain quackery, nearly dies, spends months in hospital Read More »