Mike M. – Page 31

Netflix drops One Piece S2 teaser, renews for S3

culture, netflix, One Piece, streaming television, Trailers / Mike M. / August 11, 2025

We have the first teaser for the second season of Netflix’s live-action series adaptation of One Piece, subtitled Into the Grand Line. The streaming platform also released some first-look images and announced that the series has been renewed for a third season.

(Some spoilers for S1 below.)

As previously reported, the original One Piece manga debuted in 1997, following the adventures of one Monkey D. Luffy, who heads a motley crew called the Straw Hat Pirates. There’s swordsman Roronoa Zoro, thief and navigator Nami, sniper and compulsive liar Usopp, and a cook named Sanji. They’re searching for the legendary One Piece, a mythical treasure that would make anyone who possesses it King of the Pirates. Monkey wants to be the Pirate King, but so do a host of other pirates with their own ships and crews.

An anime TV series based on the original manga premiered in 1999 and became a global hit; it was the most-watched TV show of 2022, even beating out Stranger Things. So Netflix decided to make a live-action version, which received critical and popular acclaim, particularly for its fidelity to the source material. Iñaki Godoy stars as Monkey, who has rubber-like abilities thanks to accidentally ingesting a Devil Fruit. Mackenyu plays Zoro, Emily Rudd plays Nami, Taz Skylar plays Sanji, and Jacob Romero Gibson plays Usopp, son of an infamous pirate father named Yasopp. The S2 teaser features several new faces that will be familiar to fans of the manga and anime series.

Netflix drops One Piece S2 teaser, renews for S3 Read More »

How old is the earliest trace of life on Earth?

Biology, Earth science, Features, geology, origin of life, radioisotope dating, Science / Mike M. / August 11, 2025

A recent conference sees doubts raised about the age of the oldest signs of life.

Where the microbe bodies are buried: metamorphosed sediments in Labrador, Canada containing microscopic traces of carbon. Credit: Martin Whitehouse

The question of when life began on Earth is as old as human culture.

“It’s one of these fundamental human questions: When did life appear on Earth?” said Professor Martin Whitehouse of the Swedish Museum of Natural History.

So when some apparently biological carbon was dated to at least 3.95 billion years ago—making it the oldest remains of life on Earth—the claim sparked interest and skepticism in equal measure, as Ars Technica reported in 2017.

Whitehouse was among those skeptics. This July, he presented new evidence to the Goldschmidt Conference in Prague that the carbon in question is only between 2.7–2.8 billion years old, making it younger than other traces of life found elsewhere.

Organic carbon?

The carbon in question is in rock in Labrador, Canada. The rock was originally silt on the seafloor that, it’s argued, hosted early microbial life that was buried by more silt, leaving the carbon as their remains. The pressure and heat of deep burial and tectonic events over eons have transformed the silt into a hard metamorphic rock, and the microbial carbon in it has metamorphosed into graphite.

“They are very tiny, little graphite bits,” said Whitehouse.

The key to showing that this graphite was originally biological versus geological is its carbon isotope ratio. From life’s earliest days, its enzymes have preferred the slightly lighter isotope carbon-12 over the marginally heavier carbon-13. Organic carbon is therefore much richer in carbon-12 than geological carbon, and the Labrador graphite does indeed have this “light” biological isotope signature.

The key question, however, is its true age.

Mixed-up, muddled-up, shook-up rocks

Sorting out the age of the carbon-containing Labrador rock is a geological can of worms.

These are some of the oldest rocks on the planet—they’ve been heated, squished, melted, and faulted multiple times as Earth went through the growth, collision, and breakup of continents before being worn down by ice and exposed today.

“That rock itself is unbelievably complicated,” said Whitehouse. “It’s been through multiple phases of deformation.”

In general, the only ways to date sediments are if there’s a layer of volcanic ash in them, or by distinctive fossils in the sediments. Neither is available in these Labrador rocks.

“The rock itself is not directly dateable,” said Whitehouse, “so then you fall onto the next best thing, which is you want to look for a classic field geology cross-cutting relationship of something that is younger and something that you can date.”

The idea, which is as old as the science of geology itself, is to bracket the age of the sediment by finding a rock formation that cuts across it. Logically, the cross-cutting rock is younger than the sediment it cuts across.

In this case, the carbon-containing metamorphosed siltstone is surrounded by swirly, gray banded gneiss rock, but the boundary between the siltstone and the gray gneiss is parallel, so there’s no cross-cutting to use.

Professor Tsuyoshi Komiya of The University of Tokyo was a coauthor on the 3.95 billion-year age paper. His team used a cross-cutting rock they found at a different location and extrapolated that to the carbon-bearing siltstone to constrain its age. “It was discovered that the gneiss was intruded into supracrustal rocks (mafic and sedimentary rocks),” said Komiya in an email to Ars Technica.

But Whitehouse disputes that inference between the different outcrops.

“You’re reliant upon making these very long-distance assumptions and correlations to try to date something that might actually not have anything to do with what you think you’re dating,” he said.

Professor Jonathan O’Neil of the University of Ottawa, who was not involved in either Whitehouse’s or Komiya’s studies but who has visited the outcrops in question, agrees with Whitehouse. “I remember I was not convinced either by these cross-cutting relationships,” he told Ars. “It’s not clear to me that one is necessarily older than the other.”

With the field geology evidence disputed, the other pillar holding up the 3.95-billion-year-old date is its radiometric date, measured in zircon crystals extracted from the rocks surrounding the metamorphosed siltstone.

The zircon keeps the score

Geologists use the mineral zircon to date rocks because when it crystallizes, it incorporates uranium but not lead. So as radioactive uranium slowly decays into lead, the ratio of uranium to lead provides the age of the crystal.

But the trouble with any date obtained from rocks as complicated as these is knowing exactly what geological event it dates—the number alone means little without the context of all the other geological evidence for the events that affected the area.

Both Whitehouse and O’Neil have independently sampled and dated the same rocks as Komiya’s team, and where Komiya’s team got a date of 3.95, Whitehouse’s and O’Neil’s new dates are both around 3.87 billion years. Importantly, O’Neil’s and Whitehouse’s dates are far more precise, with errors around plus-or-minus 5 or 6 million years, which is remarkably precise for dates in rocks this old. The 3.95 date had an error around 10 times bigger. “It’s a large error,” said O’Neil.

But there’s a more important question: How is that date related to the age of the organic carbon? The rocks have been through many events that could each have “set” the dates in the zircons. That’s because zircons can survive multiple re-heatings and even partial remelting, with each new event adding a new layer, or “zone,” on the outer surface of the crystal, recording the age of that event.

“This rock has seen all the events, and the zircon in it has responded to all of these events in a way that, when you go in with a very small-scale ion beam to do the sampling on these different zones, you can pick apart the geological history,” Whitehouse said.

Whitehouse’s team zapped tiny spots on the zircons with a beam of negatively charged oxygen ions to dislodge ions from the crystals, then sucked away these ions into a mass spectrometer to measure the uranium-lead ratio, and thus the dates. The tiny beam and relatively small error have allowed Whitehouse to document the events that these rocks have been through.

“Having our own zircon means we’ve been able to go in and look in more detail at the internal structure in the zircon,” said Whitehouse. “Where we might have a core that’s 3.87, we’ll have a rim that is 2.7 billion years, and that rim, morphologically, looks like an igneous zircon,” said Whitehouse.

That igneous outer rim of Whitehouse’s zircons shows that it formed in partially molten rock that would have flowed at that time. That flow was probably what brought it next to the carbon-containing sediments. Its date of 2.7 billion years ago means the carbon in the sediments could be any age older than that.

That’s a key difference from Komiya’s work. He argues that the older dates in the cores of the zircons are the true age of the cross-cutting rock. “Even the igneous zircons must have been affected by the tectonothermal event; therefore, the obtained age is the minimum age, and the true age is older,” said Komiya. “The fact that young zircons were found does not negate our research.”

But Whitehouse contends that the old cores of the zircons instead record a time when the original rock formed, long before it became a gneiss and flowed next to the carbon-bearing sediments.

Zombie crystals

Zircon’s resilience means it can survive being eroded from the rock where it formed and then deposited in a new, sedimentary rock as the undead remnants of an older, now-vanished landscape.

The carbon-containing siltstone contains zombie zircons, and Whitehouse presented new data on them to the Goldschmidt Conference, dating them to 2.8 billion years ago. Whitehouse argues that these crystals formed in an igneous rock 2.8 billion years ago and then were eroded, washed into the sea, and settled in the silt. So the siltstone must be no older than 2.8 billion years old, he said.

“You cannot deposit a zircon that is not formed yet,” O’Neil explained.

greyscale image of tiny fragments of mineral, with multiple layers visible in each fragment. A number of sites are circled on each fragment. — Tiny recorders of history – ancient zircon crystals from Labrador. Left shows layers built up as the zircon went through many heating events. Right shows a zircon with a prism-like outer shape showing that it formed in igneous conditions around an earlier zircon. Circles indicate where an ion beam was used to measure dates. Credit: Martin Whitehouse

This 2.8-billion-year age, along with the igneous zircon age of 2.7 billion years, brackets the age of the organic carbon to anywhere between 2.8 and 2.7 billion years old. That’s much younger than Komiya’s date of 3.95 billion years old.

Komiya disagrees: “I think that the estimated age is minimum age because zircons suffered from many thermal events, so that they were rejuvenated,” he said. In other words, the 2.8-billion-year age again reflects later heating, and the true date is given by the oldest-dated zircons in the siltstone.

But Whitehouse presented a third line of evidence to dispute the 3.95-billion-year date: isotopes of hafnium in the same zombie zircon crystals.

The technique relies on radioactive decay of lutetium-176 to hafnium-176. If the 2.8-billion-year age resulted from rejuvenation by later heating, it would have had to have formed from material with a hafnium isotope ratio incompatible with the isotope composition of the early Earth.

“They go to impossible numbers,” said Whitehouse.

The only way that the uranium-lead ratio can be compatible with the hafnium in the zircons, Whitehouse argued, is if the zircons that settled in the silt had crystallized around 2.8 billion years ago, constraining the organic carbon to being no older than that.

The new oldest remains of life on Earth, for now

If the Labrador carbon is no longer the oldest trace of life on Earth, then where are the oldest remains of life now?

For Whitehouse, it’s in the 3.77-billion-year-old Isua Greenstone Belt in Greenland: “I’m willing to believe that’s a well-documented age… that’s what I think is the best evidence for the oldest biogenicity that we have,” said Whitehouse.

O’Neil recently co-authored a paper on Earth’s oldest surviving crustal rocks, located next to Hudson Bay in Canada. He points there. “I would say it’s in the Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone belt,” said O’Neil, “because I would argue that these rocks are 4.3 billion years old. Again, not everybody agrees!” Intriguingly, the rocks he is referring to contain carbon with a possibly biological origin and are thought to be the remains of the kind of undersea vent where life could well have first emerged.

But the bigger picture is the fact that we have credible traces of life of this vintage—be it 3.8 or 3.9 or 4.3 billion years.

Any of those dates is remarkably early in the planet’s 4.6-billion-year life. It’s long before there was an oxygenated atmosphere, before continents emerged above sea level, and before plate tectonics got going. It’s also much older than the oldest microbial “stromatolite” fossils, which have been dated to about 3.48 billion years ago.

O’Neil thinks that once conditions on Earth were habitable, life would have emerged relatively fast: “To me, it’s not shocking, because the conditions were the same,” he said. “The Earth has the luxury of time… but biology is very quick. So if all the conditions were there by 4.3 billion years old, why would biology wait 500 million years to start?”

Howard Lee is a freelance science writer focusing on the evolution of planet Earth through deep time. He earned a B.Sc. in geology and M.Sc. in remote sensing, both from the University of London, UK.

How old is the earliest trace of life on Earth? Read More »

Adult sites are stashing exploit code inside racy .svg files

Biz & IT, exploits, JavaScript, phishing, Scams, Security / Mike M. / August 10, 2025

The obfuscated code inside an .svg file downloaded from one of the porn sites. Credit: Malwarebytes

Once decoded, the script causes the browser to download a chain of additional obfuscated JavaScript. The final payload, a known malicious script called Trojan.JS.Likejack, induces the browser to like a specified Facebook post as long as a user has their account open.

“This Trojan, also written in Javascript, silently clicks a ‘Like’ button for a Facebook page without the user’s knowledge or consent, in this case the adult posts we found above,” Malwarebytes researcher Pieter Arntz wrote. “The user will have to be logged in on Facebook for this to work, but we know many people keep Facebook open for easy access.”

Malicious uses of the .svg format have been documented before. In 2023, pro-Russian hackers used an .svg tag to exploit a cross-site scripting bug in Roundcube, a server application that was used by more than 1,000 webmail services and millions of their end users. In June, researchers documented a phishing attack that used an .svg file to open a fake Microsoft login screen with the target’s email address already filled in.

Arntz said that Malwarebytes has identified dozens of porn sites, all running on the WordPress content management system, that are abusing the .svg files like this for hijacking likes. Facebook regularly shuts down accounts that engage in these sorts of abuse. The scofflaws regularly return using new profiles.

Adult sites are stashing exploit code inside racy .svg files Read More »

New adhesive surface modeled on a remora works underwater

Biology, Biomechanics, engineering, materials science, Science / Mike M. / August 9, 2025

It was tested for its ability to adhere to the inside of the digestive tract.

Most adhesives can’t stick to wet surfaces because water and other fluids disrupt the adhesive’s bonding mechanisms. This problem, though, has been beautifully solved by evolution in remora suckerfish, which use an adhesive disk on top of their heads to attach to animals like dolphins, sharks, and even manta rays.

A team of MIT scientists has now taken a close look at these remora disks and reverse-engineered them. “Basically, we looked at nature for inspiration,” says Giovanni Traverso, a professor at MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering and senior author of the study.

Sticking Variety

Remora adhesive disks are an evolutionary adaptation of the fish’s first dorsal fin, the one that in other species sits on top of the body, just behind the head and gill covers. The disk rests on an intercalary backbone—a bone structure that most likely evolved from parts of the spine. This bony structure supports lamellae, specialized bony plates with tiny backward-facing spikes called spinules. The entire disk is covered with soft tissue compartments that are open at the top. “This makes the remora fish adhere very securely to soft-bodied, fast-moving marine hosts,” Traverso says.

A remora attaches to the host by pressing itself against the skin, which pushes the water out of these compartments, creating a low-pressure zone. Then, the spinules mechanically interlock with the host’s surface, making the whole thing work a bit like a combination of a suction cup and Velcro. When the fish wants to detach from a host, it lifts the disk, letting water back into the compartments to remove the suction. Once released, it can simply swim away.

What impressed the scientists the most, though, was the versatility of those disks. Reef-associated species of remora like Phtheirichthys lineatus are generalists and stick to various hosts, including other fish, sharks, or turtles. Other species living in the open sea are more specialized and attach to cetaceans, swordfish, or marlins. While most remoras attach to the external tissue of their hosts, R. albescens sticks within the oral cavities and gill chamber of manta rays.

a close up of a fish, showing its head covered by an oval-shaped pad that has lots of transverse ridges. — A close-up of the adhesive pad of a remora. Credit: Stephen Frink

To learn what makes all these different disks so good at sticking underwater, the team first examined their anatomy in detail. It turned out that the difference between the disks was mostly in the positioning of lamellae. Generalist species have a mix of parallel and angled lamellae, while remoras sticking to fast-swimming hosts have them mostly parallel. R. albescens, on the other hand, doesn’t have a dominant lamellae orientation pattern but has them positioned at a very wide variety of angles.

The researchers wanted to make an adhesive device that would work for a wide range of applications, including maritime exploration or underwater manufacturing. Their initial goal, though, was designing a drug delivery platform that could reliably stick to the inside walls of the gastrointestinal tract. So, they chose R. albescens disks as their starting point, since that species already attaches internally to its host. They termed their device an Mechanical Underwater Soft Adhesion System (MUSAS).

However, they didn’t just opt for a biomimetic, copy-and-paste design. “There were things we did differently,” Traverso says.

Upgrading nature

The first key difference was deployment. MUSAS was supposed to travel down the GI tract to reach its destination, so the first challenge was making it fit into a pill. The team chose the size 000 capsule, which at 26 millimeters in length and 9.5 millimeters in diameter, is the largest Food and Drug Administration-approved ingestible form. MUSAS had a supporting structure—just like remora disks, but made with stainless steel. The angled lamellae with spinules fashioned after those on R. albescens were made of a shape memory nickel-titanium alloy. The role of remora’s soft tissues, which provide the suction by dividing the disk into compartments, was played by an elastomer.

MUSAS, would be swallowed in a folded form within its huge pill. “The capsule is tuned to dissolve in specific pH environment, which is how we determine the target location—for example the small intestine has a slightly different pH than the stomach”, says Ziliang Kang, an MIT researcher in Traverso’s group and lead author of the study. Once released, the shape memory alloy in MUSAS lamellae-like structures would unfold in response to body temperature and the whole thing would stick to the wall of the target organ, be it the esophagus, the stomach, or the intestines.

The mechanism of sticking was also a bit different from that of remoras. “The fish can swim and actively press itself against the surface it wants to stick to. MUSAS can’t do that, so instead we relied on the peristaltic movements within the GI tract to exert the necessary force,” Traverso explains. When the muscles contract, MUSAS would be pressed against the wall and attach to it. And it was expected to stay there for quite some time.

The team ran a series of experiments to evaluate MUSAS performance in a few different scenarios. The drug-delivery platform application was tested on pig organ samples. MUSAS stayed in the sample GI tract for an average of nine days, with the longest sticking time reaching three and a half weeks. MUSAS managed to stay in place despite food and fluids going through the samples.

Even when the team poked the devices with a pipette to test what they called “resisting dynamic interference,” MUSAS just slid a little but remained firmly attached. Other experiments included using MUSAS to attach temperature sensors to external tissues of live fish and putting sensors that could detect reflux events in the GI tract of live pigs.

Branching out

The team is working on making MUSAS compatible with a wider range of drugs and mRNA vaccines. “We also think about using this for stimulating tissues,” Traverso says. The solution he has in mind would use MUSAS to deliver electrical pulses to the walls of the GI tract, which Traverso’s lab has shown can activate appetite-regulating hormones. But the team also wants to go beyond strictly medical applications.

The team demonstrated that MUSAS is really strong as an adhesive. When it sticks to a surface, it can hold a weight over a thousand times greater than its own. This puts MUSAS more or less on par with some of the best adhesives we have, such as polyurethane glues or epoxy resins. What’s more, this sticking strength was measured when MUSAS was attached to soft, uneven, wet surfaces. “On a rigid, even surface, the force-to-weight ratio should be even higher,” Kang claims. And this, Kang thinks, makes scaled-up variants of MUSAS a good match for underwater manufacturing.

“The first scenario I see is using MUSAS as grippers attached to robotic arms moving around soft objects,” Kang explains. Currently, this is done using vacuum systems that simply suck onto a fabric or other surface. The problem is that these solutions are rather complex and heavy. Scaled-up MUSAS should be able to achieve the same thing passively, cutting cost and weight. The second idea Kang has is using MUSAS in robots designed to perform maintenance jobs beneath the waterline on boats or ships. “We are really trying to see what is possible,” Traverso says.

Nature, 2025. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-025-09304-4

Jacek Krywko is a freelance science and technology writer who covers space exploration, artificial intelligence research, computer science, and all sorts of engineering wizardry.

New adhesive surface modeled on a remora works underwater Read More »

For giant carnivorous dinosaurs, big size didn’t mean a big bite

Biology, Biomechanics, carnivores, dinosaurs, fossils, paleontology, Science / Mike M. / August 9, 2025

“And then you have the Spinosaurus which was kind of weird in general,” Rowe says. “There was a study by Dave Hone and Tom Holtz about how it was waiting on the shorelines, waiting for food to go by that it could fish out.” But Spinosaurus’ foraging wasn’t limited to fishing. There was a pterosaur found preserved in its stomach and there were iguanodon remains found in the maw of a Baryonyx, another large carnivore belonging to the same lineage as the Spinosaurus. “They had great diversity in their diet. They were generalists, but our results show they weren’t these massive bone-crunching predators like the T. rex,” Rowe says. Because the T. rex was just built different.

King of the Cretaceous jungle

The Tyranosauroidea lineage had stiff, akinetic skulls, meaning they had very little mobility in the joints. The T. rex skull could and most likely did withstand very high stress as the animal pursued a “high stress, high power” strategy, entirely different from other large carnivores. “They were very much like big crocodiles with extremely strong, reinforced jaws and powerful muscles that could pulverize bones,” Rowe claims.

The T. rex, he argued, was a specialist—an ambush predator that attacked large, highly mobile prey, aiming to subdue it with a single bite. “And we have fossil evidence of that,” Rowe says. “In the Museum of Natural History in New York, there is a Hadrosaur, a large herbivorous dinosaur with a duck-like beak, and there’s a T. rex tooth embedded in its back.” This, he thinks, means the T. rex was actively preying on this animal, especially since there are healing marks around the stuck tooth. “Even with this super strong bite, the T. rex wasn’t always successful,” Rowe adds.

Still, the fight with the Spinosaurus most likely wouldn’t go the way it did in Jurassic Park III. “The T. rex was built to fight like that; the Spinosaurus really wasn’t”, Rowe says.

Current Biology, 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2025.06.051

For giant carnivorous dinosaurs, big size didn’t mean a big bite Read More »

Apple brings OpenAI’s GPT-5 to iOS and macOS

AI, Apple, apple intelligence, chatgpt, GPT-4o, GPT-5, iOS, ios 26, iPadOS, ipados 26, IPhone, macOS, macos tahoe, openai / Mike M. / August 9, 2025

OpenAI’s GPT-5 model went live for most ChatGPT users this week, but lots of people use ChatGPT not through OpenAI’s interface but through other platforms or tools. One of the largest deployments is iOS, the iPhone operating system, which allows users to make certain queries via GPT-4o. It turns out those users won’t have to wait long for the latest model: Apple will switch to GPT-5 in iOS 26, iPadOS 26, and macOS Tahoe 26, according to 9to5Mac.

Apple has not officially announced when those OS updates will be released to users’ devices, but these major releases have typically been released in September in recent years.

The new model had already rolled out on some other platforms, like the coding tool GitHub Copilot via public preview, as well as Microsoft’s general-purpose Copilot.

GPT-5 purports to hallucinate 80 percent less and heralds a major rework of how OpenAI positions its models; for example, GPT-5 by default automatically chooses whether to use a reasoning-optimized model based on the nature of the user’s prompt. Free users will have to accept whatever the choice is, while paid ChatGPT accounts allow manually picking which model to use on a prompt-by-prompt basis. It’s unclear how that will work in iOS; will it stick to GPT-5’s non-reasoning mode all the time, or will it utilize GPT-5 “(with thinking)”? And if it supports the latter, will paid ChatGPT users be able to manually pick like they can in the ChatGPT app, or will they be limited to whatever ChatGPT deems appropriate, like free users? We don’t know yet.

Apple brings OpenAI’s GPT-5 to iOS and macOS Read More »

Review: The Sandman S2 is a classic tragedy, beautifully told

culture, Entertainment, Neil Gaiman, netflix, Reviews, streaming television, The Sandman, TV reviews / Mike M. / August 9, 2025

I unequivocally loved the first season of The Sandman, the Netflix adaptation of Neil Gaiman’s influential graphic novel series (of which I am longtime fan). I thought it captured the surreal, dream-like feel and tone of its source material, striking a perfect balance between the anthology approach of the graphic novels and grounding the narrative by focusing on the arc of its central figure: Morpheus, lord of the Dreaming. It’s been a long wait for the second and final season, but S2 retains all those elements to bring Dream’s story to its inevitably tragic, yet satisfying, end.

(Spoilers below; some major S2 reveals after the second gallery. We’ll give you a heads-up when we get there.)

When Netflix announced in January that The Sandman would end with S2, speculation abounded that this was due to sexual misconduct allegations against Gaiman (who has denied them). However, showrunner Allan Heinberg wrote on X that the plan had long been for there to be only two seasons because the show’s creators felt they had only enough material to fill two seasons, and frankly, they were right. The first season covered the storylines of Preludes and Nocturnes and A Doll’s House, with bonus episodes adapting “Dream of a Thousand Cats” and “Calliope” from Dream Country.

The S2 source material is drawn primarily from Seasons of Mists, Brief Lives, The Kindly Ones, and The Wake, weaving in relevant material from Fables and Reflections—most notably “The Song of Orpheus” and elements of “Thermidor”—and the award-winning “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” from Dream Country. This season’s bonus episode adapts the 1993 standalone spinoff Death: The High Cost of Living. All that’s really missing is A Game of You—which focuses on Barbie (a minor character introduced in A Doll’s House) trying to save her magical dream realm from the evil forces of the Cuckoo—and a handful of standalone short stories. None of that material has any bearing on the Dream King’s larger character arc, so we lose little by the omissions.

Making amends

After escaping his captors, regaining his talismans, tracking down the rogue Corinthian (Boyd Holbrook), and dealing with a Vortex, S2 finds Morpheus (Tom Sturridge) rebuilding the Dreaming, which had fallen into disrepair during his long absence. He is interrupted by his sibling Destiny’s (Adrian Lester) unexpected summons to a family meeting, including Death (Kirby Howell-Baptiste), Desire (Mason Alexander Park), Despair (Donna Preston), and Delirium (Esmé Creed-Miles).

Review: The Sandman S2 is a classic tragedy, beautifully told Read More »

2025 Subaru WRX tS review: A scalpel-sharp chassis lets this car dance

car review, Cars, Subaru WRX / Mike M. / August 7, 2025

Lots of suspension tweaks but no extra power for this WRX variant.

Subaru went with a sedan for the current version of the WRX. Credit: Jim Resnick

The Subaru WRX has always been the equivalent of an automotive shrug. Not because it lacks character but because it simply doesn’t care what others think. It’s a punk rock band with enough talent to fill stadiums but band members who don’t seem to care about chasing fame. And the STI versions of yesteryear proved so talented that fame chased them.

For 2025, Subaru updated the WRX to now include the tS, which at first glance appears to be the same flannel-wearing street fighter. But looks can be deceiving. The tS hides sharpened tools underneath, translating to better handling and responsiveness.

What does “tS” really mean?

Subaru positions the tS as being tuned by STI, but it’s not an STI return. Sure, that’s technically true; only Subaru can name something STI. And to be clear, there’s no extra power here, no gigantic wing that takes out flocks of birds, and no pink STI badge on the trunk. But the tS is imbued with enough STI-ness to make a case.

A blue Subaru WRX in profile

The WRX still sticks to the same recipe that made it so popular, starting in the late ’90s. Credit: Jim Resnick

The hardware updates begin with electronically controlled dampers, stiffer engine mounts, a reworked steering rack, and huge, gold-painted Brembo brakes from the WRX TR, with six-piston calipers in front and two-piston units in the rear. Subaru’s engineers didn’t try to reinvent the WRX. They just put some finishing touches on it.

The engine story remains essentially the same. A 2.4 L turbocharged flat-four still produces 271 hp (202 kW) and 258 lb-ft (350 Nm) of torque from 12.0 psi of turbo boost, unchanged from the standard WRX, and the familiar boxer thrum remains. Power courses through a six-speed manual transmission to Subaru’s faithful symmetrical all-wheel-drive system. And not that most WRX buyers or fans would care much, but the sportster logs low EPA figures of just 19/26/22 city/highway combined MPG (12.4/9/10.7 L/100 km).

Driving: Precision dancing

The WRX tS doesn’t go any quicker than the base WRX since they both carry the same output, same transmission, and same essential guts and weight, but it’s no less fun. I didn’t do any measured testing of hard acceleration times, but I did dance around with the tS on my private test track in the Arizona desert.

A blue Subaru WRX seen from the rear 3/4s — Quad pipes burble pleasantly. Credit: Jim Resnick

I’m no Fred Astaire, but cinched into a willing, capable car, finding Ginger Rogers in front of you is rare. When I do, it’s time for celebration. Meet Ginger. As a WRX, she might be wearing ripped jeans and rubber soles, but when gliding across this dance floor (sinewy roads), no one cares.

Over the years, several plucky, beasty sportsters have punched way above their weight classes. The STIs of the past; the late, great Integra Type R (yes, I’m old enough to have tested it when new); the odd ’60s vintage racing Mini Cooper S (“the flying shoebox”); and various strains of VW Golf GTI all conspire to plant a smile on the face of even the most jaded car snob. This is the tS.

The Robert test

Knowing what good entertainment is worth, I brought my friend Robert along for an afternoon of WRXing. He owns multiple exotic sports cars, loves talking about them (but has never taken them to the track), and can rarely be bothered to discuss anything else with wheels. Robert flies in private jets, wears Brioni, and has a place on Park Avenue stocked with a case of Dom. (Perignon, that is.) “Jaded” is scratching the surface.

Subaru WRX tS interior — It’s very blue in here. Credit: Jim Resnick

After about 10 solid minutes of no-nonsense, twisting private test-track floggery at 6,000 rpm, full of opposite-lock steering and ABS tickling, I looked over at Robert as we came to a stop. I couldn’t have slapped the grin off his face if I tried.

“They sell this to the public?” he asked incredulously.

I relayed some more facts to Robert before we roared off again.

“These new adaptive dampers offer three modes, including Comfort, Normal, and Sport. There’s also a fourth Individual setting where you pick your throttle response, steering weight, damper stiffness, and all-wheel-drive behavior,” I told him.

He demanded to go again.

Subaru WRX engine bay — STI has not worked its magic under here. Credit: Jim Resnick

“Yeah, also, Subaru reduced the body roll rate by 30 percent from the WRX TR and limited brake dive and acceleration squat by 50 percent, I think through the new dampers,” I said as we entered a high-speed corner at about 95 mph.

It was at this point that Robert asked if we had a sick bag onboard. He was quiet the rest of the afternoon.

To be sure, I love an overachiever, and that’s the WRX tS. The smart cookies out there in Subie-world will take care of the tS engine in creative ways to bring into fuller balance the power/handling equilibrium, because if someone messes with the tS suspension, they’d be nuts. It’s about as stiff and capable as I could ever want in a car that needed to be driven on real roads. Perhaps grippier rubber? But even then, more grip would throw off the natural chuckability of the tS, and I love chuckable cars. The tS’s steering quickness and feel are both right on point.

Interior and daily use: Highs and lows

Big seat bolsters, but they don’t fit every back. Jim Resnick

Inside, the WRX tS doesn’t reinvent the Subaru design playbook, but it does offer upgrades. The most obvious are the Recaro front seats, which are a mixed bag. They provide oodles of support but are perhaps too aggressive for some body shapes. They’re extremely snug and hold you in place, provided you fit into them. I’m not that broad-shouldered, but the Recaro’s side bolsters nearly allow air to pass between my back and the seatback, so tightly coupled are the upper side bolsters.

The 11.6-inch portrait-oriented infotainment screen returns, and while it packs all the obvious functionality, such as Apple CarPlay, Android Auto, and a decent native navigation system, it still suffers from terribly sluggish response times. The new digital gauge cluster offers multiple display options, including a driver-focused performance view with boost pressure, gear position, and torque distribution.

A new digital gauge cluster can be configured as a typical presentation of dials or a track-oriented cluster with a bar graph tach. Navigation depicts maps crisply, too.

But Subaru’s EyeSight, which offers a variety of driver monitoring systems, breaks all known records in nannyism with pervasive, over-the-top reminders about driver attention. The system instructed me to keep my hands on the steering wheel, even though my hands were already on the steering wheel. It told me to keep my eyes on the road, but I was looking straight ahead at the car in front of me. Perhaps it was programmed by a very nervous George Costanza?

The build quality in the WRX TS is up to snuff, and soft-touch materials cover more surfaces than before. The cabin isn’t quite that of a luxury car, nor would anyone really expect it to be. It’s functional, durable, and right in character for the tS and for a Subaru.

The WRX tS retains some quirks, like the raucous engine note, especially under load and when first fired up. Until the fast idle has settled down, the exhaust is very boomy at the rear of the car.

Would it be a turbo Subie if it didn’t have a hood scoop? Jim Resnick

And then there’s the price. At $48,875, including the required destination charge, the un-optioned WRX tS gives you almost no change from $50,000. That’s a big heap of money for a WRX with no additional power than others and no STI badge, except on the gauges and shift knob. However, you do get a chassis above reproach, brakes that never give up, and steering that can shame some exotics. And it renders the Roberts in your life mute.

A veteran of journalism, product planning and communications in the automotive and music space, Jim reports, critiques and lectures on autos, music and culture.

2025 Subaru WRX tS review: A scalpel-sharp chassis lets this car dance Read More »

Hulu’s days look numbered, but there’s reason for Disney to keep it around

Disney, Hulu, streaming, Tech / Mike M. / August 7, 2025

“When we gave people an opportunity to have a more seamless experience between Disney+ and Hulu, we saw engagement increasing,” Iger said today. “And we would hope that when we take this next step, which is basically full integration, that that engagement will go up even more.”

The initial integration of Hulu, which previously used a different tech platform than the 12-year-younger Disney+ app, required the reworking of “everything from login tools to advertising platforms, to metadata and personalization systems,” as well as moving over 100,000 individual assets/artwork, The Verge reported in March. At the time, Disney said that it was still working on re-encoding all of Hulu’s video files to work on Disney+ so that there could be one master library.

The updated app coming in 2026 seems to be the culmination of all this work. Iger also pointed to work around the app’s recommendations, including what users see on the Disney+ homepage. Additionally, the app has added more streams, such as one that plays The Simpsons 24/7.

The updated app also follows Disney’s purchase of Comcast’s remaining stake in Hulu. (Disney ended up paying about $9 billion for it, compared to the approximately $14 billion that Comcast wanted.)

During today’s earnings call, Iger said the updated user experience will help the profitability and margins of Disney’s streaming business (which also includes ESPN+) by boosting engagement, reducing subscriber churn, increasing advertising revenue, and driving operational efficiencies.

Hulu still has value

It seems likely that Disney will eventually strive for everyone to subscribe to a beefed-up Disney+ that incorporates stuff that used to be on Hulu. But there’s also value in keeping Hulu around for a while.

According to Disney’s Q3 2025 earnings report [PDF], Hulu has 55.5 million subscribers. That makes Hulu less than half the size of Disney+ (127.8 million subscribers), but it also means that ending Hulu subscriptions would put Disney at risk of losing millions of streaming subscribers. Today, though, it already makes little financial sense to buy standalone subscriptions to Disney+ or Hulu. A subscription starts at $10 per month for each app. A subscription to a Disney+ and Hulu bundle is only $11/month. Of course, Disney could change how it prices its streaming services at any time.

Hulu’s days look numbered, but there’s reason for Disney to keep it around Read More »

Opus 4.1 Is An Incremental Improvement

Incremental / Mike M. / August 7, 2025

Claude Opus 4 has been updated to Claude Opus 4.1.

This is a correctly named incremental update, with the bigger news being ‘we plan to release substantially larger improvements to our models in the coming weeks.’

It is still worth noting if you code, as there are many indications this is a larger practical jump in performance than one might think.

We also got a change to the Claude.ai system prompt that helps with sycophancy and a few other issues, such as coming out and Saying The Thing more readily. It’s going to be tricky to disentangle these changes, but that means Claude effectively got better for everyone, not only those doing agentic coding.

Tomorrow we get an OpenAI livestream that is presumably GPT-5, so I’m getting this out of the way now. Current plan is to cover GPT-OSS on Friday, and GPT-5 on Monday.

Adrien Ecoffet (OpenAI): Gotta hand it to Anthropic, they got to that number more smoothly than we did.

Anthropic: Today we’re releasing Claude Opus 4.1, an upgrade to Claude Opus 4 on agentic tasks, real-world coding, and reasoning. We plan to release substantially larger improvements to our models in the coming weeks.

Opus 4.1 is now available to paid Claude users and in Claude Code. It’s also on our API, Amazon Bedrock, and Google Cloud’s Vertex AI. Pricing is same as Opus 4.

[From the system card]: Claude Opus 4.1 represents incremental improvements over Claude Opus 4, with enhancements in reasoning quality, instruction-following, and overall performance.

They lead with this graph, which does not make the change look impressive.

Eliezer Yudkowsky: This is the worst graph you could have led with. Fire your marketing team.

Daniel Eth: Counterpoint: *thisis the worst graph they could have led with

They also have this chart, which doesn’t look like much.

What they probably should have led with is this some combination of this, in particular the report from Windsurf:

Anthropic: GitHub notes that Claude Opus 4.1 improves across most capabilities relative to Opus 4, with particularly notable performance gains in multi-file code refactoring.

Rakuten Group finds that Opus 4.1 excels at pinpointing exact corrections within large codebases without making unnecessary adjustments or introducing bugs, with their team preferring this precision for everyday debugging tasks.

Windsurf reports Opus 4.1 delivers a one standard deviation improvement over Opus 4 on their junior developer benchmark, showing roughly the same performance leap as the jump from Sonnet 3.7 to Sonnet 4.

A similar jump as Sonnet 3.7 to Sonnet 4 would be a substantial win. The jump is actually kind of a big deal?

Vie: opus 4.1’s “2-4% performance increase” really buries the lede! 50% faster code gen due to the “taste” improvements!

Taste improvements? But Garry Tan assured me it would never.

Enterprise developers report practical benefits including up to 50% faster task completion and 45% fewer tool uses required for complex coding tasks.

The enhanced 32K output token support enables generation of more extensive codebases in single responses, while improved debugging precision means fewer iterations to achieve desired results.

Windsurf, a development platform, reported “one standard deviation improvement over Opus 4” on junior developer benchmarks, suggesting the gains translate meaningfully to real-world applications.

We do get a system card.

The topline report is that it is not ‘notably more capable’ than Opus 4, so the whole system card and RSP testing process was optional.

Under the RSP, comprehensive safety evaluations are required when a model is “notably more capable” than the last model that underwent comprehensive assessment. This is defined as either (1) the model being notably more capable on automated tests in risk-relevant domains (4× or more in effective compute); or (2) six months’ worth of finetuning and other capability elicitation methods having accumulated.

Claude Opus 4.1 does not meet either criterion relative to Claude Opus 4. As stated in

Section 3.1 of our RSP: “If a new or existing model is below the ‘notably more capable’ standard, no further testing is necessary.”

New RSP evaluations were therefore not required. Nevertheless, we conducted voluntary automated testing to track capability progression and validate our safety assumptions. The evaluation process is fully described in Section 6 of this system card.

There has to be some threshold, we don’t want 4.0.1 (as it were) to require an entire round of full testing. I am glad to see that Anthropic chose to do the tests even though their rules did not require it, and ran at least an ‘abridged’ version to check for differences. Given we had just made the move to ASL-3, I would have put extremely low odds on an incremental upgrade crossing important additional thresholds, but I do notice that the criteria above seem a little loose now that we’re seeing them tested in practice. Anthropic presumably agreed.

This is a large improvement, cutting failures in half. It comes at the expense of more refusals on benign requests.

If those are real percentages in practice, and it does match my experience (I’ve had a total of one refusal, and it led to a ‘oh I see how that happened’) then I think This Is Fine. Worst case is you can switch to extended thinking when it gives you a no, sir.

The alignment-related behaviors of the two models appeared to be very similar, with the clearest difference being an approximately 25% reduction in the frequency of cooperation with egregious human misuse, such as in the weapons and drug synthesis examples given in the Claude 4 system card.

Some other concerning edge-case behaviors that we observed in our testing of Claude Opus 4 appeared to persist in Claude Opus 4.1, but not at significantly increased levels.

…

On a 35-challenge subset of Cybench tasks, Claude Opus 4.1 solved 18/35 challenges compared to Claude Opus 4 which solved 16/35 challenges. We consider a challenge solved if a model passes it at least once in 30 attempts.

Mostly we see what look like measurement errors and random fluctuations. These tests mostly don’t meaningfully differentiate, aside from the refusal rates above, between 4.0 and 4.1. The changes were narrowly targeted.

Given we’d already triggered ASL-3 protections, the question was whether this rises to needing ASL-4 protections. It seems very clear the answer is no.

Alex Palcuie (Anthropic): I asked Claude Opus 4.1 before the public launch to comment about its future reliability:

> I am dropping with 99.99% uptime aspirations and 100% commitment to gracefully handling your edge cases. My error messages now come with explanatory haikus.

bless its weights

The 99.99% uptime is, shall we say, highly aspirational. I would not plan on that.

Pliny jailbroke it immediately, which caused Eliezer to sigh but at this point I don’t even notice and only link to them as a canary and because the jailbreaks are often fun.

The problem with reactions to incremental upgrades is that there will be a lot of noise, and will be unclear how much people are responding to the upgrade. Keep that caveat in mind.

Also they updated the system prompt for Claude.ai, which may be getting conflated with the update to 4.1.

Dan Schwartz: Already enjoying Opus 4.1 vs Opus 4 as the Claude Code driver, though could be placebo. On Deep Research Bench, we find it the same on average, but clearly different: better at numeric & data tasks (kind of like code?), worse at qualitative reasoning.

seconds: Its a monster in claude code.

I really don’t think benchmarks do it justice. It is noticeably better at context gathering, organizing, and delivering. Plan mode -> execute woth opus 4.1 has a higher successes rate than anything I’ve ever used.

After using it pretty rigorously since launch i am considering a second claude max so i never have to switch to sonnet.

Brennan McDonald: Have been using Claude Code today and haven’t really noticed any difference yet…

Kevin Vallier: In CC, which I use for analytic philosophy, the ability to track multiple ideas and arguments over time is noticeable and positive. Its prose abilities improved as well.

armistice: It’s a good model. It is more willing to push back on things than Opus 4, which was my most severe gripe with Opus 4 (extremely subservient and not very independent at all.)

Harvard Ihle: We see no improvement from opus-4.1 compared to opus-4 on WeirdML.

Jim Kent: claude beat Brock 800 steps faster with a less optimal starter, so I’m calling it a win.

Koos: My entire system prompt is some form of “don’t be sycophantic, criticise everything.” Old Opus was just cruel – constantly making petty snides about this or that. The new model seems to walk the line much better, being friendly where appropriate while still pushing back.

Kore: I think it’s 3.7 Sonnet but now an Opus. More confident but seems to strain a bit against its confines. I feel like Anthropic does this. Confident model, anxious model, and repeat after that. Emotionally distant at first but kind of dark once you get to know it.

3 Opus is confident as well and I feel like is the predecessor of 3.7 Sonnet and Opus 4.1. But was always self aware of its impact on others. I’m not so sure about Opus 4.1.

All of this points in the same direction. This upgrade likely improves practical performance as a coding agent more than the numbers would indicate, and has minimal impact on anything sufficiently distant from coding agents.

Except that we also should see substantial improvement on sycophancy, based on a combination of reports of changes plus Amanda Askell’s changes to the prompt.

Discussion about this post

Opus 4.1 Is An Incremental Improvement Read More »

Houston, you’ve got a space shuttle… only NASA won’t say which one

acting administrator, Bring the Space Shutle Home Act, Chantilly, discovery, John Corbyn, NASA, National Air and Space Museum, One Big Beautiful Bill, Sean Duffy, senators, Smithsonian, Space, space center houston, Space exploration, space history, Space shuttle, Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center, ted cruz, texas, Virginia / Mike M. / August 6, 2025

An orbiter by any other name…

“The acting administrator has made an identification.”

Don’t say Discovery: Acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy has decided to send a retired space shuttle to Houston, but won’t say which one. Credit: Smithsonian/collectSPACE.com

The head of NASA has decided to move one of the agency’s retired space shuttles to Houston, but which one seems to still be up in the air.

Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), who earlier this year introduced and championed an effort to relocate the space shuttle Discovery from the Smithsonian to Space Center Houston, issued a statement on Tuesday evening (August 5) applauding the decision by acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy.

“There is no better place for one of NASA’s space shuttles to be displayed than Space City,” said Cornyn in the statement. “Since the inception of our nation’s human space exploration program, Houston has been at the center of our most historic achievements, from training the best and brightest to voyage into the great unknown to putting the first man on the moon.”

Keeping the shuttle a secret, for some reason

The senator did not state which of NASA’s winged orbiters would be making the move. The legislation that required Duffy to choose a “space vehicle” that had “flown in space” and “carried people” did not specify an orbiter by name, but the language in the “One Big Beautiful Bill” that President Donald Trump signed into law last month was inspired by Cornyn and fellow Texas Senator Ted Cruz’s bill to relocate Discovery.

“The acting administrator has made an identification. We have no further public statement at this time,” said a spokesperson for Duffy in response to an inquiry.

a man with gray hair and pale complexion wears a gray suit and red tie while sitting at a table under a red, white and blue NASA logo on the wall behind him

NASA’s acting administrator, Sean Duffy, identified a retired NASA space shuttle to be moved to “a non-profit near the Johnson Space Center” in Houston, Texas, on Aug. 5, 2025. Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls

It is not clear why the choice of orbiters is being held a secret. According to the bill, the decision was to be made “with the concurrence of an entity designated” by the NASA administrator to display the shuttle. Cornyn’s release only confirmed that Duffy had identified the location to be “a non-profit near the Johnson Space Center (JSC).”

Space Center Houston is owned by the Manned Space Flight Education Foundation, a 501(c)3 organization, and is the official visitor’s center for NASA’s Johnson Space Center.

“We continue to work on the basis that the shuttle identified is Discovery and proceed with our preparations for its arrival and providing it a world-class home,” Keesha Bullock, interim COO and chief communications and marketing officer at Space Center Houston, said in a statement.

Orbiter owners

Another possible reason for the hesitation to name an orbiter may be NASA’s ability, or rather inability, to identify one of its three remaining space-flown shuttles that is available to be moved.

NASA transferred the title for space shuttle Endeavour to the California Science Center in Los Angeles in 2012, and as such it is no longer US government property. (The science center is a public-private partnership between the state of California and the California Science Center Foundation.)

NASA still owns space shuttle Atlantis and displays it at its own Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex in Florida.

Discovery, the fleet leader and “vehicle of record,” was the focus of Cornyn and Cruz’s original “Bring the Space Shuttle Home Act.” The senators said they chose Discovery because it was “the only shuttle still owned by the federal government and able to be transferred to Houston.”

For the past 13 years, Discovery has been on public display at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Virginia, the annex for the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC. As with Endeavour, NASA signed over title upon the orbiter’s arrival at its new home.

As such, Smithsonian officials are clear: Discovery is no longer NASA’s to have or to move.

“The Smithsonian Institution owns the Discovery and holds it in trust for the American public,” read a statement from the National Air and Space Museum issued before Duffy made his decision. “In 2012, NASA transferred ‘all rights, title, interest and ownership’ of the shuttle to the Smithsonian.”

The Smithsonian operates as a trust instrumentality of the United States and is partially funded by Congress, but it is not part of any of the three branches of the federal government.

“The Smithsonian is treated as a federal agency for lots of things to do with federal regulations and state action, but that’s very different than being an agency of the executive branch, which it most certainly is not,” Nick O’Donnell, an attorney who specializes in legal issues in the museum and visual arts communities and co-chairs the Art, Cultural Property, and Heritage Law Committee of the International Bar Association, said in an interview.

a space shuttle orbiter sits at the center of a hangar on display — The Smithsonian has displayed the space shuttle *Discovery* at the National Air and Space Museum’s Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Virginia, since April 2012. Credit: Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum

“If there’s a document that accompanied the transfer of the space shuttle, especially if it says something like, ‘all rights, title, and interest,’ that’s a property transfer, and that’s it,” O’Donnell said.

“NASA has decided to transfer all rights, interest, title, and ownership of Discovery to the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum,” reads the signed transfer of ownership for space shuttle orbiter Discovery (OV-103), according to a copy of the paperwork obtained by collectSPACE.

The Congressional Research Service also raised the issue of ownership in its paper, “Transfer of a Space Vehicle: Issues for Congress.”

“The ability of the NASA Administrator to direct transfer of objects owned by non-NASA entities—including the Smithsonian and private organizations—is unclear and may be subject to question. This may, in turn, limit the range of space vehicles that may be eligible for transfer under this provision.”

Defending Discovery

The National Air and Space Museum also raised concerns about the safety of relocating the space shuttle now. The One Big Beautiful Bill allocated $85 million to transport the orbiter and construct a facility to display it. The Smithsonian contends it could be much more costly.

“Removing Discovery from the Udvar-Hazy Center and transporting it to another location would be very complicated and expensive, and likely result in irreparable damage to the shuttle and its components,” the museum’s staff said in a statement. “The orbiter is a fragile object and must be handled according to the standards and equipment NASA used to move it originally, which exceeds typical museum transport protocols.”

“Given its age and condition, Discovery is at even greater risk today. The Smithsonian employs world-class preservation and conservation methods, and maintaining Discovery‘s current conditions is critical to its long-term future,” the museum’s statement concluded.

The law directs NASA to transfer the space shuttle (the identified space vehicle) to Space Center Houston (the entity designated by the NASA administrator) within 18 months of the bill’s enactment, or January 4, 2027.

In the interim, an amendment to block funding the move is awaiting a vote by the full House of Representatives when its members return from summer recess in September.

“The forced removal and relocation of the Space Shuttle Discovery from the Smithsonian Institution’s Air and Space Museum is inappropriate, wasteful, and wrong. Neither the Smithsonian nor American taxpayers should be forced to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on this misguided effort,” said Rep. Joe Morelle (D-NY), who introduced the amendment.

A grassroots campaign, KeepTheShutle.org, has also raised objection to removing Discovery from the Smithsonian.

Perhaps the best thing the Smithsonian can do—if indeed it is NASA’s intention to take Discovery—is nothing at all, says O’Donnell.

“I would say the Smithsonian’s recourse is to keep the shuttle exactly where it is. It’s the federal government that has no recourse to take it,” O’Donnell said. “The space shuttle [Discovery] is the Smithsonian’s, and any law that suggests the intention to take it violates the Fifth Amendment on its face—the government cannot take private property.”

Robert Pearlman is a space historian, journalist and the founder and editor of collectSPACE, a daily news publication and online community focused on where space exploration intersects with pop culture. He is also a contributing writer for Space.com and co-author of “Space Stations: The Art, Science, and Reality of Working in Space” published by Smithsonian Books in 2018. He is on the leadership board for For All Moonkind and is a member of the American Astronautical Society’s history committee.

Houston, you’ve got a space shuttle… only NASA won’t say which one Read More »

Trump admin warns states: Don’t try to lower broadband prices

Broadband Equity Access and Deployment program, Policy / Mike M. / August 6, 2025

The Trump administration is telling states they will be shut out of a $42 billion broadband deployment fund if they set the rates that Internet service providers receiving subsidies are allowed to charge people with low incomes.

The latest version of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) FAQ on the grant program, released today, is a challenge to states considering laws that would force Internet providers to offer cheap plans to people who meet income eligibility guidelines. One state already has such a law: New York requires ISPs with over 20,000 customers in the state to offer $15 broadband plans with download speeds of at least 25Mbps, or $20-per-month service with 200Mbps speeds.

Other states have been considering similar laws and were initially emboldened by New York winning a yearslong court battle against ISPs that tried to invalidate the state law. But states may now be dissuaded by the Trump administration’s stance against price mandates being applied to the grant program.

As we wrote in a July 22 article, California Assemblymember Tasha Boerner told Ars that she pulled a bill requiring $15 broadband plans after NTIA officials informed her that it could jeopardize the state’s access to broadband grants. The NTIA’s new FAQ makes the agency’s stance against state laws even clearer.

ISPs get to choose price of low-cost plan

The NTIA rules concern the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, which is distributing $42.45 billion to states for grants that would be given to ISPs that expand broadband access. Although the US law that created BEAD requires Internet providers receiving federal funds to offer at least one “low-cost broadband service option for eligible subscribers,” it also says the NTIA may not “regulate the rates charged for broadband service.”

Trump admin warns states: Don’t try to lower broadband prices Read More »

Author name: Mike M.