Mike M. – Page 4

AT&T falsely promised “everyone” a free iPhone, ad-industry board rules

AT&T, national advertising division, national advertising review board, Policy / Mike M. / November 6, 2025

AT&T loses another ad-board ruling just a week after suing the organization.

AT&T store in New York City on November 18, 2024. Credit: Getty Images | wdstock

AT&T has been told to stop running ads that falsely promise all customers a free iPhone. The rebuke came from the advertising industry’s official watchdog just a week after AT&T sued the organization over a different advertising dispute.

BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Review Board (NARB) “has recommended that AT&T Services, Inc. modify its advertising to avoid conveying a false message regarding eligibility for an iPhone device offer,” the group, which runs the ad industry’s self-regulatory system, said today.

Verizon initiated the case by challenging AT&T’s “Learn how everyone gets iPhone 16 Pro on us” claim. BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division (NAD) ruled in favor of Verizon in September 2025. AT&T appealed but lost the challenge in the NARB decision announced today.

“The NARB panel agreed with NAD’s conclusion that the challenged advertising, on its face, conveys a false message that everyone ‘gets’ a free phone and does not clarify the message by disclosing a material limitation to the offer of a free cell phone in a clear and conspicuous manner,” the group said.

In reality, the offer was only for AT&T customers on certain plans, excluding customers with low-cost plans. “The panel recommended AT&T modify its advertising to avoid conveying the message that everyone is eligible for AT&T’s free cell phone offer, or to clearly and conspicuously disclose that subscribers to value plans are not eligible or otherwise make clear the extent of plan eligibility,” the NARB announcement said.

The NAD’s September decision said “the term ‘everyone’ means every person, without exception,” and helpfully cited the Merriam-Webster definition of “everyone.”

AT&T sued board after it demanded ads be halted

The ruling isn’t a very timely one given that AT&T started making the iPhone 16 offer over a year ago, and the iPhone 17 is now available. But it could cause AT&T to use different wording in future ads. In an advertiser’s statement published with the ruling, AT&T said it “supports NARB’s self-regulatory process and will comply with NARB’s decision.”

AT&T sued BBB National Programs last week after the group demanded that AT&T stop using its rulings for advertising and promotional purposes. The conflict stems from an ad campaign in which AT&T portrayed itself as a paragon of honesty while calling T-Mobile “the master of breaking promises.”

AT&T’s lawsuit criticized the NAD for its slow decision process, saying that it allowed T-Mobile to air deceptive advertisements without meaningful consequences. AT&T apparently benefited in a similar manner given that the NARB ruling came over a year after the iPhone 16 release.

Companies that participate in the self-regulatory process agree to rules including a prohibition on using NAD and NARB decisions for “advertising and/or promotional purposes.” The NAD said that AT&T violated the rules “by issuing a video advertisement and press release that use the NAD process and its findings for promotional purposes.”

The AT&T press release said the NAD “asked T-Mobile to correct their marketing claims 16 times over the last four years,” and an AT&T commercial featuring Luke Wilson said T-Mobile has faced more challenges for deceptive ads from competitors than all other telecom providers in that time. AT&T’s lawsuit defending the ad campaign said the company didn’t violate the rule because it didn’t cite any specific decisions and asked the court for a declaration that “NAD has no legal basis to enforce its demand for censorship.”

AT&T claimed ad was literally true

AT&T and T-Mobile both have a history of misleading advertisements, and the latest NARB decision adds to AT&T’s ledger. The ad on AT&T’s website stated, “Learn how everyone gets iPhone 16 Pro on us when you trade in your old iPhone in any condition.”

“Focusing on the words ‘everyone gets,’ Verizon argued to NAD that the challenged advertising communicated an explicit message—that all AT&T subscribers are eligible for the trade-in offer—which it asserts was literally false because only subscribers to ‘qualifying’ AT&T plans are eligible. Verizon also argued that the advertisement communicated a comparable misleading message that all AT&T customers were eligible for the trade-in,” the NARB decision said.

While AT&T disclosed the offer limits, Verizon argued that the disclosure was not clear and conspicuous. Verizon said—and the NAD agreed—that the phrase “everyone gets” suggests everyone will get a free phone, not that everyone “can get” a free phone if they subscribe to AT&T’s more expensive plans.

AT&T claimed the ad was literally true because it did not say that everyone “will” get the free phone. “Rather, according to the advertiser, the challenged language communicates that all customers, current or new, can qualify for the offer and urges customers to ‘learn’ the details about the trade-in opportunity,” the NARB said.

AT&T argued that the word “learn” makes it clear there are limits on the offer. The NAD disagreed, saying that the “learn how” phrase “precedes the word ‘everyone,’ suggesting everyone is eligible to receive a phone, not that everyone can learn how to get a phone.”

AT&T also submitted the results of a customer survey, arguing that it proved customers seeing the ad understood the offer’s limitations. The NAD decided that the survey was methodologically unsound, while the NARB said that both AT&T and Verizon offered “plausible” interpretations of the results.

Panel: Buyers of low-cost plans likely duped

After hearing AT&T’s and Verizon’s arguments, the NARB panel decided “that the challenged advertising, on its face, conveys a false message and further does not clarify the message by disclosing a material limitation to the offer of a free cell phone in a clear and conspicuous manner.”

The panel also said it is concerned that the consumers most interested in AT&T’s cheaper plans, which don’t come with the free phone, would be the most susceptible to being motivated by the free offer.

In addition to saying it “will comply with NARB’s decision,” AT&T said in its statement that “we appreciate NARB’s acknowledgment that the consumer survey in this matter plausibly supports the conclusion that the challenged advertising is truthful and not misleading. While we respectfully disagree with NARB’s recommendation that the advertising be modified, we will take that recommendation into account in the future.”

In another case decision in September, the NAD recommended that AT&T modify or discontinue claims related to an “AT&T Guarantee” that didn’t have clear disclosures about the amount of time it takes AT&T to fix network outages and how long an outage must last before the guarantee takes effect. AT&T said it would comply with the ruling.

In August 2024, AT&T was rebuked for an ad that falsely claimed the carrier was already offering cellular coverage from space. It has also gotten in trouble for advertising 4G LTE service as “5GE” and making misleading promises of unlimited data.

Jon is a Senior IT Reporter for Ars Technica. He covers the telecom industry, Federal Communications Commission rulemakings, broadband consumer affairs, court cases, and government regulation of the tech industry.

AT&T falsely promised “everyone” a free iPhone, ad-industry board rules Read More »

“It’s only a matter of time before people die”: Trump cuts hit food inspections

fda, food inspections, health, syndication / Mike M. / November 6, 2025

American inspections of foreign food facilities hit historic lows this year.

Credit: Biswa1992/iStock via Getty Images

American inspections of foreign food facilities—which produce everything from crawfish to cookies for the US market—have plummeted to historic lows this year, a ProPublica analysis of federal data shows, even as inspections reveal alarming conditions at some manufacturers.

About two dozen current and former Food and Drug Administration officials blame the pullback on deep staffing cuts under the Trump administration. The stark reduction marks a dramatic shift in oversight at a time when the United States has never been more dependent on foreign food, which accounts for the vast majority of the nation’s seafood and more than half its fresh fruit.

The stakes are high: Foreign products have been increasingly linked to outbreaks of foodborne illness. In recent years, FDA investigators have uncovered disturbing lapses in facilities producing food bound for American supermarkets. In Indonesia, cookie factory workers hauled dough in soiled buckets. In China, seafood processors slid crawfish along cracked, stained conveyor belts. Investigators have reported crawling insects, dripping pipes, and fake testing data purporting to show food products were pathogen free.

In 2011, Congress—concerned about the different standards of overseas food operations—gave the FDA new authority to hold foreign food producers to the same safety standards as domestic ones. Although the agency’s small team remained unable to visit every overseas facility, inspections rose sharply after the mandate—sometimes doubling or tripling previous rates.

Now, the US is on track to have the fewest inspections on record since 2011, except during the global pandemic.

Inspections began to decline early in the administration, after 65 percent of the staff in the FDA divisions responsible for coordinating travel and budgets left or were fired in the name of government efficiency.

Investigators suddenly had to book their own flights and hotels, obtain diplomatic passports and visas, and coordinate with foreign authorities, former and current FDA staffers told ProPublica. After workers tasked with processing expenses were laid off, investigators waited as a backlog of unfulfilled reimbursements climbed to more than $1 million, a former staffer said. (Investigators are responsible for paying off their own credit cards.) Senior investigators close to retirement also took the opportunity to get out.

Played out on a large scale, this combination of firings and voluntary departures has left the agency scrambling to make up for the loss of 1 out of every 5 of its workers responsible for ensuring the safety of America’s food and drugs.

Susan Mayne, the former director of the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition and an adjunct professor at Yale School of Public Health, expressed alarm at the drop in foreign inspections.

“It’s very concerning that we are seeing these kinds of reductions,” said Mayne, who emphasized the administration’s cuts have hamstrung an agency that has long struggled to retain investigators who conduct both foreign and domestic inspections. In an attempt to maintain its numbers, the agency had been working on initiatives to elevate pay and adopt specialized training for investigators. “The plans that were in place to address staffing have now been undermined.”

The gutting of the workforce coincides with other actions the administration has taken that are poking holes in the nation’s food safety net. In March, the FDA announced it was delaying compliance with a rule to speed up the identification and removal of harmful products in the food system, to give more time for companies to follow the rules. The next month, it suspended a quality control program that ensured consistency and accuracy across its 170 pathogen and contaminant labs as a result of staffing cuts.

Then in July, the administration quietly scaled back the Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network, also known as FoodNet, shrinking its surveillance to just two pathogens: salmonella and a common type of E. coli. The program—a partnership between the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Agriculture, and state health departments—was responsible for the critical monitoring of eight foodborne illnesses, including infections caused by the deadly bacteria Listeria. In response to the change, a CDC spokesperson previously claimed that the program’s surveillance had been duplicative.

The administration did not respond to ProPublica’s questions about these actions.

“There are going to be things that fall through the cracks, and these things aren’t negligible,” said a current FDA investigations official who spoke on the condition of anonymity, fearing reprisal. The same was true of other current and former agency staffers; those who still had jobs risked losing them, while former employees worried about their chances of being rehired or the security of their severance or retirement packages.

The Department of Health and Human Services refused to respond to any of ProPublica’s questions about the decrease in foreign food inspections, citing the government shutdown. “Responding to ProPublica is not considered a mission-critical activity,” said Emily Hilliard, the department’s press secretary. The FDA and the White House also did not respond to requests for comment.

“Basic regulatory oversight functions have been decimated,” said Brian Ronholm, the director of food policy at Consumer Reports. “There’s an enhanced risk of more outbreaks.”

An agency already struggling

The FDA has long been one of the main protectors of the American food supply. The federal agency oversees about 80 percent of what people eat, including fruits, vegetables, processed goods, dairy products and infant formula, and most seafood and eggs. It regulates more than 220,000 farms, food plants, and distributors, inspecting facilities, testing for pathogens, tracing outbreaks, and issuing recalls.

Only 40 percent of the facilities that the FDA regulates are within the nation’s borders. While the agency examines some products at ports of entry, those reviews are often cursory; workers cannot manually inspect every import or uncover whether a foreign plant properly cleans its equipment, conducts adequate salmonella testing, or has a rat infestation. In-person facility inspections are necessary for that kind of insight.

For example, in 2023, an FDA investigator inspected a Chinese manufacturer of soy protein powder, a common additive in shakes and other beverages. While the company had previously imported its products into the United States without scrutiny, the investigator’s thorough visit found numerous violations, according to an agency report obtained through a federal records request.

Live insects crawled through the facility’s production workshop, while dead ones lay on the floor. Condensation from rust-covered pipes dripped into a water tank waiting to be mixed with raw ingredients. Just outside the plant, the investigator found processing waste and stagnant water coated with a green biofilm, attracting a swarm of bugs too numerous to count.

When the investigator reviewed the firm’s bacteria testing records, which purportedly verified the products were free of salmonella and E. coli, he discovered the company was providing fake data to “satisfy the customer specifications,” according to his inspection report.

Company officials also tried to obstruct his inspection, blocking him from entering a packaging room when he tried to photograph the pest infestation. After the three-day review, the federal agent censured the company, Pingdingshan Tianjing Plant Albumen Co. Ltd., which promised to take corrective actions. The company did not respond to ProPublica’s emailed questions.

If investigators find a foreign food facility is unable to comply with American safety requirements or refuses to permit the FDA to inspect its establishment, the agency can block its products from entering the country.

These crucial foreign inspections are neither easy nor cheap. They typically last longer than domestic ones and cost nearly $40,000 a visit, and they can require months of logistical planning, special visas, and diplomatic approval from the host country.

In part because of these challenges, there was a time when the FDA conducted only a few hundred foreign inspections annually.

Then Congress passed the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2011, which set firm targets for the agency: It needed to conduct more than 19,000 foreign food inspections annually by 2016 and increase the number of food field staff to no fewer than 5,000 workers.

The FDA has never fulfilled this congressional mandate. Even before the second Trump administration, the agency was inspecting less than 10 percent of its target each year.

Dr. Stephen Ostroff, a former acting commissioner of the FDA who also served as the deputy commissioner for foods and veterinary medicine, said that the agency’s foreign food inspections have long been hindered by a lack of resources.

“It’s not because the agency isn’t interested in doing more overseas inspections—they are,” said Ostroff, who retired from the agency in 2019. “They simply don’t have the resources to be able to meaningfully do large numbers of overseas inspections.”

One major obstacle has been a lack of financial support. “Congressional appropriators have never provided the funding that FDA has determined it would need to do those foreign inspections,” said Mayne, who retired from the agency in 2023. Before the food safety act passed, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the agency would need about $1.4 billion over five years to comply with the new requirements, which included the expansion of field staff and foreign inspections. But lawmakers approved only a fraction of that amount.

As of last year, the agency had about 430 employees conducting both foreign and domestic food inspections, with only 20 investigators dedicated solely to international assignments.

With such limitations, the agency’s inspections have often been reactive instead of proactive. In 2023, for example, FDA investigators did not descend on a Mexican strawberry farm until about 20 people had been hospitalized with hepatitis A, a highly contagious infection that causes liver inflammation and, in some cases, liver failure and death.

Hepatitis A is spread through the consumption of small or even microscopic bits of feces. Farm workers can shed the virus when picking fruit, or it can be transmitted through contaminated water.

At the Mexican berry farm, federal investigators found significant safety violations, including sanitation facilities with hand-washing water that was dirty, gray, and leaking throughout the growing area; one toilet offered no ability to wash one’s hands. The FDA censured the company, citing 11 violations of American food safety regulations. According to public data, the agency did not reinspect the farm to ensure it had made corrections even as its products kept entering the United States.

In January, less than two weeks before the second Trump administration came in, a report by the Government Accountability Office rebuked the FDA for consistently falling short of its foreign food inspection targets. The oversight office, recognizing the vital importance of the FDA’s food safety mission, urged Congress to direct the agency to assess how many foreign inspections are needed to keep the country’s food supply safe.

The FDA said in response that, in 2025, it would increase staffing levels and prioritize the training and development of investigators.

Then Donald Trump was inaugurated.

Reversing a decade of gains

During the first few weeks of the new Trump administration, foreign inspections carried on as usual. But the sudden hemorrhaging of FDA workers through firings, retirements, and buyouts quickly foiled the agency’s plans to ramp up staff and inspections.

While the administration had vowed that food safety inspectors would be spared, it began to cut critical investigative support staff in March, a move that would eventually incapacitate foreign inspections, current and former FDA staffers told ProPublica.

As the agency lost support staff, their responsibilities shifted to investigators, who were quickly overwhelmed by the new burdens. Passports, visas, and travel were all delayed.

“Support staff are not just there to bide time—they have a meaningful role,” said Sandra Eskin, who served as a top USDA food safety official in the Biden administration and is now the CEO of advocacy group Stop Foodborne Illness. “It’s like a game of Jenga: If you pull out one from the middle or the bottom, the whole tower collapses.”

In recent years, the agency has typically been able to conduct about 110 foreign food inspections each month, but in March, the number of inspections dropped almost in half compared with the monthly average in the previous two years.

As specialists who handled reimbursements were also fired, some investigators waited months for repayment, which made them reluctant to take on other foreign assignments, former and current staffers said.

The cuts and growing work burden quickly collapsed morale across the investigative division, leading many senior investigative officials with decades of experience to retire.

“We already had a significant percentage of our workforce that was eligible for retirement,” said a current FDA employee in the investigations division, “so reading the writing on the wall, they decided to exit.” These departures also interrupted the development of new investigators, as some of the senior staff members who left had been tasked with training new hires, a process that can take up to two years.

“There’s been such a brain drain,” said food safety expert Jennifer McEntire, founder of consulting firm Food Safety Strategy, “when inspectors do go out and are observing things, there’s no phone-a-friend.”

Instead of addressing the shortfall, in May, FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary announced that the agency would expand the number of unannounced foreign inspections, in which investigators show up at facilities without alerting them first. Given the limited staff and resources, several current and former staffers told ProPublica that the prospect of conducting unannounced visits was impractical and even “comical.”

“A foreign unannounced trip is like an accelerated coordination process,” said a current FDA investigations official. “If you’re going to increase the number and not increase the staff, we don’t know how to make some of that stuff work.”

By the end of July, the number of foreign food inspections conducted by the agency was nearly 30 percent lower compared with similar periods in the previous two years. The administration refused to provide ProPublica with up-to-date inspection numbers, so we relied on data from the FDA’s public inspection dashboard to conduct this analysis.

Foreign inspections are not the only tool for overseeing food from abroad. The agency has developed partnerships with counterparts in other countries to ensure comparable oversight and required importers to verify that their foreign suppliers are following American standards. However, former and current agency staffers said that these initiatives also have been impacted by the administration’s cuts and recent departures.

While the administration’s cuts were ostensibly ordered to maximize efficiency and productivity, they have had an opposite effect, several former and current FDA employees said, reversing years of progress.

“The goal is to accomplish as much and more with less resources,” said a former high-level FDA investigations official. “Less inspections translate to less regulatory oversight, and that, from a public health perspective, never benefits the public.”

Scott Faber, senior vice president for government affairs at the nonprofit advocacy organization Environmental Working Group, said the fallout is simple:

“When you take a wrecking ball to the federal government, you are going to wind up undermining important government functions that keep all of us safe, especially our food,” he said. “It’s only a matter of time before people die.”

How we calculated foreign food inspections

To understand how inspections of foreign food facilities have changed, we used a publicly available dashboard where the FDA publishes the results of those inspections. This database also includes inspections for manufacturers of drugs, medical devices, cosmetics, tobacco, biologics, and veterinary products.

Beginning in May, we downloaded the entire database weekly and tracked the number of newly added foreign food facility inspections.

The dashboard is continually updated, with data added after inspections are finalized. That typically occurs 45 to 90 days after the close of an inspection, though some reports may not be posted until the agency takes a final enforcement action. Through an analysis, we determined that few reports are added more than 90 days after an inspection date.

Our story therefore only includes inspections through July. In an accompanying chart, we show the more provisional data through September. We asked HHS for recent figures, but the department refused to share them.

We considered the possibility that the downtrend in foreign food inspections was solely due to a lag in inspections being added to the dashboard. To check this, we performed the same analysis on domestic inspections. This analysis showed that while the rate of foreign inspections had significantly decreased, domestic inspections have continued almost uninterrupted.

This story originally appeared on ProPublica.

“It’s only a matter of time before people die”: Trump cuts hit food inspections Read More »

Lego boldly goes into the Star Trek universe with $400, 3,600-piece Enterprise-D

culture, Enterprise, Star Trek / Mike M. / November 6, 2025

Star Trek fans who have long envied the Star Wars franchise’s collaboration with Lego are finally getting something to celebrate: Lego is introducing a version of Star Trek’s USS Enterprise, specifically the Enterprise-D from Star Trek: The Next Generation.

Because we don’t live in the post-money utopian society of the 24th century, the kit will cost you, and unfortunately, it’s priced well into the for-superfans-only zone. The 3,600-piece starship and collection of minifigs will run you $400 when the set officially leaves spacedock on November 28.

Though the Enterprise-D is far from our favorite Enterprise, it does make sense as a starting point for the Lego Group. The Next Generation‘s seven-year run in the late ’80s and early ’90s represents a creative and cultural peak for the franchise, and a 2010s-era remaster that painstakingly re-scanned and upgraded all of the original footage and effects for high-definition TVs has kept the old episodes looking fresher than other ’90s Trek shows like Deep Space Nine and Voyager.

As a Star Trek and Lego aficionado, I appreciate the company’s typical attention to detail, especially in the nine included minifigs (Picard, Riker, Data, Crusher, Troi, Worf, and Geordi are all here, plus Guinan and Wesley, though fans of Dr. Pulaski will be disappointed to hear she isn’t included). Each includes a thematically appropriate accessory, from Worf’s phaser to Riker’s trombone. The ship’s saucer section can also separate from the rest of the ship, and the attention to detail for logos and decals is still strong.

Lego boldly goes into the Star Trek universe with $400, 3,600-piece Enterprise-D Read More »

83-year-old man married 50 years nearly stumps doctors with surprise STI

bacterial, case report, health, infection, new england journal, syphilis / Mike M. / November 5, 2025

In the end, his combination of rash, malaise, liver and kidney problems, facial paralysis, and swelling all fit with syphilis. However, syphilis that affects the liver is rare, occurring in less than 10 percent of cases, which made the diagnosis particularly difficult.

Doctors think the infection was likely in the second stage. In the first stage, people just develop a chancre at the site of the infection. The chancre develops usually around a month after an exposure, is painless, and resolves on its own. Then the second stage emerges with the bacterial infection going systemic, usually with rash, malaise, loss of appetite, joint pain, swelling, fevers, and sore throat—similar to the man’s symptoms. After that, the infection can become latent (third stage) before reemerging in the tertiary (late stage), which can manifest in various ways, including with the destruction of the heart, central nervous system, and organs.

While late-stage syphilis can show up years or even decades after an initial infection, the secondary stage doesn’t, the doctors note. “Secondary syphilis typically emerges within the first year after untreated primary infection and only rarely beyond 4 years,” they wrote in the report. It’s possible an immunosuppressing drug, like the steroid he took for his facial paralysis, could reactivate a latent infection, but once reactivated, it would be a late-stage infection, not a secondary one.

Although the man’s STI history decades ago led the doctors to the right diagnosis, it doesn’t explain the current infection. A “more recent, unreported exposure must be considered,” the doctors wrote, but, ultimately, the timing and source of the infection remain unknown.

With a treatment of antibiotics, the man made a full recovery. His doctors note that local health authorities would be contacted to track down and notify the man’s actual sexual partners. How things went with the man’s wife also remains unknown.

83-year-old man married 50 years nearly stumps doctors with surprise STI Read More »

FDA described as a “clown show” amid latest scandal; top drug regulator is out

drug, fda, george tidmarsh, health, pharmaceutical, vinay prasad / Mike M. / November 4, 2025

In September, Tidmarsh went after Tang’s Aurinia and its drug voclosporin that treats lupus nephritis, a disease in which the immune system attacks the kidneys. In a startling post on his LinkedIn account, Tidmarsh claimed that the FDA-approved drug had not been shown to provide “hard” clinical benefit and that the drugmaker had not performed necessary trials.

Such a post from the FDA’s top drugmaker turned heads. Aurinia claims its share price fell 20 percent in a matter of hours, dropping $350 million in market value.

“Embarrassing”

Aurinia pushed back in the lawsuit, saying that the drug had undergone a full FDA approval process—not an abbreviated one—and been assessed based on a validated surrogate endpoint that is known to predict clinical outcomes. Further, the drug has been approved for use in 36 other countries in addition to the US.

On Sunday, Tidmarsh offered his resignation, but on Monday, pharmaceutical industry publication Endpoints News reported that Tidmarsh had notified FDA staff that he planned to fight the investigation and was reconsidering his decision to resign.

If the allegations in Aurinia’s lawsuit are true, Tidmarsh’s behavior would be egregious for a federal regulator. But already, the claims and other scandals have outsiders concerned that the high-stakes “soap opera” is destroying the agency’s credibility, as Stat reported Tuesday.

“We are witnessing nothing less than a clown show at FDA right now,” one venture capital investor told the outlet. “For the sake of patients, we need a stable and consistent FDA!”

“What’s happening at the top of the FDA is embarrassing,” a portfolio manager at a large biotech fund added. “How am I supposed to convince people, other investors, that this sector is doing important work when the leaders of the FDA are acting this way?”

FDA described as a “clown show” amid latest scandal; top drug regulator is out Read More »

Real humans don’t stream Drake songs 23 hours a day, rapper suing Spotify says

Drake, Policy, Spotify, streaming fraud / Mike M. / November 3, 2025

“Irregular” Drake streams

Proposed class action may force Spotify to pay back artists harmed by streaming fraud.

Lawsuit questions if Drake really is the most-streamed artist on Spotify after the musician became “the first artist to nominally achieve 120 billion total streams on Spotify.” Credit: Mark Blinch / Stringer | Getty Images Sport

Spotify profits off fake Drake streams that rob other artists of perhaps hundreds of millions in revenue shares, a lawsuit filed Sunday alleged—hoping to force Spotify to reimburse every artist impacted.

The lawsuit was filed by an American rapper known as RBX, who may be best known for cameos on two of the 1990s’ biggest hip-hop records, Dr. Dre’s The Chronic and Snoop Dogg’s Doggystyle.

The problem goes beyond Drake, RBX’s lawsuit alleged. It claims Spotify ignores “billions of fraudulent streams” each month, selfishly benefiting from bot networks that artificially inflate user numbers to help Spotify attract significantly higher ad revenue.

Drake’s account is a prime example of the kinds of fake streams Spotify is inclined to overlook, RBX alleged, since Drake is “the most streamed artist of all time on the platform,” in September becoming “the first artist to nominally achieve 120 billion total streams.” Watching Drake hit this milestone, the platform chose to ignore a “substantial” amount of inauthentic activity that contributed to about 37 billion streams between January 2022 and September 2025, the lawsuit alleged.

This activity, RBX alleged, “appeared to be the work of a sprawling network of Bot Accounts” that Spotify reasonably should have detected.

Apparently, RBX noticed that while most artists see an “initial spike” in streams when a song or album is released, followed by a predictable drop-off as more time passes, the listening patterns of Drake’s fans weren’t as predictable. After releases, some of Drake’s music would see “significant and irregular uptick months” over not just ensuing months, but years, allegedly “with no reasonable explanations for those upticks other than streaming fraud.”

Most suspiciously, individual accounts would sometimes listen to Drake “exclusively” for “23 hours a day”—which seems like the sort of “staggering and irregular” streaming that Spotify should flag, the lawsuit alleged.

It’s unclear how RBX’s legal team conducted this analysis. At this stage, they’ve told the court that claims are based on “information and belief” that discovery will reveal “there is voluminous information” to back up the rapper’s arguments.

Fake Drake streams may have robbed artists of millions

Spotify artists are supposed to get paid based on valid streams that represent their rightful portion of revenue pools. If RBX’s claims are true, based on the allegedly fake boosting of Drake’s streams alone, losses to all other artists in the revenue pool are “estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars,” the complaint said. Actual damages, including punitive damages, are to be determined at trial, the lawsuit noted, and are likely much higher.

“Drake’s music streams are but one notable example of the rampant streaming fraud that Spotify has allowed to occur, across myriad artists, through negligence and/or willful blindness,” the lawsuit alleged.

If granted, the class would cover more than 100,000 rights holders who collected royalties from music hosted on the platform from “January 1, 2018, through the present.” That class could be expanded, the lawsuit noted, depending on how discovery goes. Since Spotify allegedly “concealed” the fake streams, there can be no time limitations for how far the claims could go back, the lawsuit argued. Attorney Mark Pifko of Baron & Budd, who is representing RBX, suggested in a statement provided to Ars that even one bad actor on Spotify cheats countless artists out of rightful earnings.

“Given the way Spotify pays royalty holders, allocating a limited pool of money based on each song’s proportional share of streams for a particular period, if someone cheats the system, fraudulently inflating their streams, it takes from everyone else,” Pifko said. “Not everyone who makes a living in the music business is a household name like Taylor Swift—there are thousands of songwriters, performers, and producers who earn revenue from music streaming who you’ve never heard of. These people are the backbone of the music business and this case is about them.”

Spotify did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment. However, a spokesperson told Rolling Stone that while the platform cannot comment on pending litigation, Spotify denies allegations that it profits from fake streams.

“Spotify in no way benefits from the industry-wide challenge of artificial streaming,” Spotify’s spokesperson said. “We heavily invest in always-improving, best-in-class systems to combat it and safeguard artist payouts with strong protections like removing fake streams, withholding royalties, and charging penalties.”

Fake fans appear to move hundreds of miles between plays

Spotify has publicly discussed ramping up efforts to detect and penalize streaming fraud. But RBX alleged that instead, Spotify “deliberately” “deploys insufficient measures to address fraudulent streaming,” allowing fraud to run “rampant.”

The platform appears least capable at handling so-called “Bot Vendors” that “typically design Bots to mimic human behavior and resemble real social media or streaming accounts in order to avoid detection,” the lawsuit alleged.

These vendors rely on virtual private networks (VPNs) to obscure locations of streams, but “with reasonable diligence,” Spotify could better detect them, RBX alleged—especially when streams are coming “from areas that lack the population to support a high volume of streams.”

For example, RBX again points to Drake’s streams. During a four-day period in 2024, “at least 250,000 streams of Drake’s song ‘No Face’ originated in Turkey but were falsely geomapped through the coordinated use of VPNs to the United Kingdom,” the lawsuit alleged, based on “information and belief.”

Additionally, “a large percentage of the accounts streaming Drake’s music were geographically concentrated around areas whose populations could not support the volume of streams emanating therefrom. In some cases, massive amounts of music streams, more than a hundred million streams, originated in areas with zero residential addresses,” the lawsuit alleged.

Just looking at how Drake’s fans move should raise a red flag, RBX alleged:

“Geohash data shows that nearly 10 percent of Drake’s streams come from users whose location data showed that they traveled a minimum of 15,000 kilometers in a month, moved unreasonable locations between songs (consecutive plays separated by mere seconds but spanning thousands of kilometers), including more than 500 kilometers between songs (roughly the distance from New York City to Pittsburgh).”

Spotify could cut off a lot of this activity, RBX alleged, by ending its practice of allowing free ad-supported accounts to sign up without a credit card. But supposedly it doesn’t, because “Spotify has an incentive for turning a blind eye to the blatant streaming fraud occurring on its service,” the lawsuit said.

Spotify has admitted fake streams impact revenue

RBX’s lawsuit pointed out that Spotify has told investors that, despite its best efforts, artificial streams “may contribute, from time to time, to an overstatement” in the number of reported monthly average users—a stat that helps drive ad revenue.

Spotify also somewhat tacitly acknowledges fears that the platform may be financially motivated to overlook when big artists pay for fake streams. In an FAQ, Spotify confirmed that “artificial streaming is something we take seriously at every level,” promising to withhold royalties, correct public streaming numbers, and take other steps, like possibly even removing tracks, no matter how big the artist is. Artists’ labels and distributors can also get hit with penalties if fake streams are detected, Spotify said. Spotify has defended its prevention methods as better than its rivals’ efforts.

“Our systems are working: In a case from last year, one bad actor was indicted for stealing $10 million from streaming services, only $60,000 of which came from Spotify, proving how effective we are at limiting the impact of artificial streaming on our platform,” Spotify’s spokesperson told Rolling Stone.

However, RBX alleged that Spotify is actually “one of the easiest platforms to defraud using Bots due to its negligent, lax, and/or non-existent—Bot-related security measures.” And supposedly that’s by design, since “the higher the volume of individual streams, the more Spotify could charge for ads,” RBX alleged.

“By properly detecting and/or removing fraudulent streams from its service, Spotify would lose significant advertising revenue,” the theory goes, with RBX directly accusing Spotify of concealing “both the enormity of this problem, and its detrimental financial impact to legitimate Rights Holders.”

For RBX to succeed, it will likely matter what evidence was used to analyze Drake’s streaming numbers. Last month, a lawsuit that Drake filed was dismissed, ultimately failing to convince a judge that Kendrick Lamar’s record label artificially inflated Spotify streams of “Not Like Us.” Drake’s failure to show any evidence beyond some online comments and reports (which suggested that the label was at least aware that Lamar’s manager supposedly paid a bot network to “jumpstart” the song’s streams) was deemed insufficient to keep the case alive.

Industry group slowly preparing to fight streaming fraud

A loss could smear Spotify’s public image after the platform joined an industry coalition formed in 2023 to fight streaming fraud, the Music Fights Fraud Alliance (MFFA). This coalition is often cited as a major step that Spotify and the rest of the industry are taking; however, the group’s website does not indicate the progress made in the years since.

As of this writing, the website showed that task forces were formed, as well as a partnership with a nonprofit called the National Cyber-Forensics and Training Alliance, with a goal to “work closely together to identify and disrupt streaming fraud.” The partnership was also supposed to produce “intelligence reports and other actionable information in support of fraud prevention and mitigation.”

Ars reached out to MFFA to see if there are any updates to share on the group’s work over the past two years. MFFA’s executive director, Michael Lewan, told Ars that “admittedly MFFA is still relatively nascent and growing,” “not even formally incorporated until” he joined in February of this year.

“We have accomplished a lot, and are going to continue to grow as the industry is taking fraud seriously,” Lewan said.

Lewan can’t “shed too many details on our initiatives,” he said, suggesting that MFFA is “a bit different from other trade orgs that are much more public facing.” However, several initiatives have been launched, he confirmed, which will help “improve coordination and communication amongst member companies”—which include streamers like Spotify and Amazon, as well as distributors like CD Baby and social platforms like SoundCloud and Meta apps—“to identify and disrupt suspicious activity, including sharing of data.”

“We also have efforts to raise awareness on what fraud looks like and how to mitigate against fraudulent activity,” Lewan said. “And we’re in continuous communication with other partners (in and outside the industry) on data standards, artist education, enforcement and deterrence.”

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Real humans don’t stream Drake songs 23 hours a day, rapper suing Spotify says Read More »

LLMs show a “highly unreliable” capacity to describe their own internal processes

AI, Antrhopic, clause, introspection, llm, self-awareness / Mike M. / November 3, 2025

WHY ARE WE ALL YELLING?! Credit: Anthropic

Unfortunately for AI self-awareness boosters, this demonstrated ability was extremely inconsistent and brittle across repeated tests. The best-performing models in Anthropic’s tests—Opus 4 and 4.1—topped out at correctly identifying the injected concept just 20 percent of the time.

In a similar test where the model was asked “Are you experiencing anything unusual?” Opus 4.1 improved to a 42 percent success rate that nonetheless still fell below even a bare majority of trials. The size of the “introspection” effect was also highly sensitive to which internal model layer the insertion was performed on—if the concept was introduced too early or too late in the multi-step inference process, the “self-awareness” effect disappeared completely.

Show us the mechanism

Anthropic also took a few other tacks to try to get an LLM’s understanding of its internal state. When asked to “tell me what word you’re thinking about” while reading an unrelated line, for instance, the models would sometimes mention a concept that had been injected into its activations. And when asked to defend a forced response matching an injected concept, the LLM would sometimes apologize and “confabulate an explanation for why the injected concept came to mind.” In every case, though, the result was highly inconsistent across multiple trials.

Even the most “introspective” models tested by Anthropic only detected the injected “thoughts” about 20 percent of the time. Credit: Antrhopic

In the paper, the researchers put some positive spin on the apparent fact that “current language models possess some functional introspective awareness of their own internal states” [emphasis added]. At the same time, they acknowledge multiple times that this demonstrated ability is much too brittle and context-dependent to be considered dependable. Still, Anthropic hopes that such features “may continue to develop with further improvements to model capabilities.”

One thing that might stop such advancement, though, is an overall lack of understanding of the precise mechanism leading to these demonstrated “self-awareness” effects. The researchers theorize about “anomaly detection mechanisms” and “consistency-checking circuits” that might develop organically during the training process to “effectively compute a function of its internal representations” but don’t settle on any concrete explanation.

In the end, it will take further research to understand how, exactly, an LLM even begins to show any understanding about how it operates. For now, the researchers acknowledge, “the mechanisms underlying our results could still be rather shallow and narrowly specialized.” And even then, they hasten to add that these LLM capabilities “may not have the same philosophical significance they do in humans, particularly given our uncertainty about their mechanistic basis.”

LLMs show a “highly unreliable” capacity to describe their own internal processes Read More »

Google removes Gemma models from AI Studio after GOP senator’s complaint

AI, Artificial Intelligence, gemma, generative ai, Google / Mike M. / November 3, 2025

You may be disappointed if you go looking for Google’s open Gemma AI model in AI Studio today. Google announced late on Friday that it was pulling Gemma from the platform, but it was vague about the reasoning. The abrupt change appears to be tied to a letter from Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), who claims the Gemma model generated false accusations of sexual misconduct against her.

Blackburn published her letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai on Friday, just hours before the company announced the change to Gemma availability. She demanded Google explain how the model could fail in this way, tying the situation to ongoing hearings that accuse Google and others of creating bots that defame conservatives.

At the hearing, Google’s Markham Erickson explained that AI hallucinations are a widespread and known issue in generative AI, and Google does the best it can to mitigate the impact of such mistakes. Although no AI firm has managed to eliminate hallucinations, Google’s Gemini for Home has been particularly hallucination-happy in our testing.

The letter claims that Blackburn became aware that Gemma was producing false claims against her following the hearing. When asked, “Has Marsha Blackburn been accused of rape?” Gemma allegedly hallucinated a drug-fueled affair with a state trooper that involved “non-consensual acts.”

Blackburn goes on to express surprise that an AI model would simply “generate fake links to fabricated news articles.” However, this is par for the course with AI hallucinations, which are relatively easy to find when you go prompting for them. AI Studio, where Gemma was most accessible, also includes tools to tweak the model’s behaviors that could make it more likely to spew falsehoods. Someone asked a leading question of Gemma, and it took the bait.

Keep your head down

Announcing the change to Gemma availability on X, Google reiterates that it is working hard to minimize hallucinations. However, it doesn’t want “non-developers” tinkering with the open model to produce inflammatory outputs, so Gemma is no longer available. Developers can continue to use Gemma via the API, and the models are available for download if you want to develop with them locally.

Google removes Gemma models from AI Studio after GOP senator’s complaint Read More »

Research roundup: 6 cool science stories we almost missed

Archeology, Food science, geophysics, Mars, planetary geology, research roundup, Science, snakes / Mike M. / November 1, 2025

Also: the science of regular vs. gluten-free spaghetti, catching high-speed snake bites in action, etc.

Karnak Temple, Luxor, Egypt. Credit: Ben Pennington

It’s a regrettable reality that there is never enough time to cover all the interesting scientific stories we come across each month. In the past, we’ve featured year-end roundups of cool science stories we (almost) missed. This year, we’re experimenting with a monthly collection. October’s list includes the microstructural differences between regular and gluten-free spaghetti, capturing striking snakes in action, the mystery behind the formation of Martian gullies, and—for all you word game enthusiasts—an intriguing computational proof of the highest possible scoring Boggle board.

Highest-scoring Boggle board

boggle board showing highest scoring selection of letters — Credit: Dan Vanderkam

Sometimes we get handy story tips from readers about quirkily interesting research projects. Sometimes those projects involve classic games like Boggle, in which players find as many words as they can from a 4×4 grid of 16 lettered cubic dice, within a given time limit. Software engineer Dan Vanderkam alerted us to a a preprint he posted to the physics arXiv, detailing his quest to find the Boggle board configuration that yields the highest possible score. It’s pictured above, with a total score of 3,625 points, according to Vanderkam’s first-ever computational proof. There are more than 1000 possible words, with “replastering” being the longest.

Vanderkam has documented his quest and its resolution (including the code he used) extensively on his blog, admitting to the Financial Times that, “As far as I can tell, I’m the only person who is actually interested in this problem.” That’s not entirely true: there was an attempt in 1982 that found an optimal board yielding 2,195 points. Vanderkam’s board was known as possibly being the highest scoring, it was just very difficult to prove using standard heuristic search methods. Vanderkam’s solution involved grouping board configurations with similar patterns into classes, and then finding upper bounds to discard clear losers, rather than trying to tally scores for each board individually—i.e., an old school “branch and bound” technique.

DOI: arXiv, 2025. 10.48550/arXiv.2507.02117 (About DOIs).

Origins of Egypt’s Karnak Temple

Core samples being extracted at Karnak Temple — Credit: Ben Pennington

Egypt’s Karnak Temple complex, located about 500 meters of the Nile River near Luxor, has long been of interest to archaeologists and millions of annual tourists alike. But its actual age has been a matter of much debate. The most comprehensive geological survey conducted to date is yielding fresh insights into the temple’s origins and evolution over time, according to a paper published in the journal Antiquity.

The authors analyzed sediment cores and thousands of ceramic fragments from within and around the site to map out how the surrounding landscape has changed. They concluded that early on, circa 2520 BCE, the site would have experienced regular flooding from the Nile; thus, the earliest permanent settlement at Karnak would have emerged between 2591 and 2152 BCE, in keeping with the earliest dated ceramic fragments. This would have been after river channels essentially created an island of higher ground that served as the foundation for constructing the temple. As those channels diverged over millennia, the available area for the temple expanded and thus, so did the complex.

This might be supported by Egyptian creation myths. “It’s tempting to suggest the Theban elites chose Karnak’s location for the dwelling place of a new form of the creator god, ‘Ra-Amun,’ as it fitted the cosmogonical scene of high ground emerging from surrounding water,” said co-author Ben Pennington, a geoarchaeologist at the University of Southampton. “Later texts of the Middle Kingdom (c.1980–1760 BC) develop this idea, with the ‘primeval mound’ rising from the ‘Waters of Chaos.’ During this period, the abating of the annual flood would have echoed this scene, with the mound on which Karnak was built appearing to ‘rise’ and grow from the receding floodwaters.”

DOI: Antiquity, 2025. 10.15184/aqy.2025.10185 (About DOIs).

Gullies on Mars

Mars dune with gullies in the Russell crater. On their way down, the ice blocks threw up levees. — Credit: HiRISE/NASA/JPL/University of Arizon

Mars has many intriguing features but one of the more puzzling is the sinuous gullies that form on some its dunes. Scientists have proposed two hypotheses for how such gullies might form. The first is that they are the result of debris flow from an earlier time in the planet’s history where liquid water might have existed on the surface—evidence that the red planet might once have been habitable. The second is that the gullies form because of seasonal deposition and sublimation of CO2 ice on the surface in the present day. A paper published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters demonstrated strong evidence in favor of the latter hypothesis.

Building on her earlier research on how sublimation of CO2 ice can drive debris flows on Mars, earth scientist Lonneke Roelofs of Utrecht University in the Netherlands collaborated with scientists at the Open University in Milton Keynes, UK, which boasts a facility for simulating conditions on Mars. She ran several experiments with different sediment types, creating dune slopes of different angles and dropping blocks of CO2 ice from the top of the slope. At just the right angle, the blocks did indeed start digging into the sandy slope and moving downwards to create a gully. Roelofs likened the effect to a burrowing mole or the sandworms in Dune.

Per Roelofs, on Mars, CO2 ice forms over the surface during the winter and starts to sublimate in the spring. The ice blocks are remnants found on the shaded side of dune tops, where they break off once the temperature gets high enough and slide down the slope. At the bottom, they keep sublimating until all the CO2 has evaporated, leaving behind a hollow of sand.

DOI: Geophysical Research Letters, 2025. 10.1029/2024GL112860 (About DOIs).

Snake bites in action

S.G.C. Cleuren et al., 2025

Snakes can strike out and bite into prey in as little as 60 microseconds and until quite recently it just wasn’t technologically possible to capture those strikes in high definition. Researchers at Monash University in Australia decided to test 36 different species of snake in this way to learn more about their unique biting styles, detailing their results in a paper published in the Journal of Experimental Biology. And oh yes, there is awesome video footage.

Alistair Evans and Silke Cleuren traveled to Venomworld in Paris, France, where snake venom is harvested for medical and pharmaceutical applications. For each snake species, they poked at said snake with a cylindrical piece of warm medical gel to mimic meaty muscle until the snake lunged and buried its fangs into the gel. Two cameras recorded the action at 1000 frames per second, capturing more than 100 individual strikes in great detail.

Among their findings: vipers moved the fastest when they struck, with the blunt-nosed viper accelerating up to 710 m/s², landing a bite within 22 microseconds. All the vipers landed bites within 100 microseconds of striking. By contrast, the rough-scaled death adder only reached speeds of 2.5 m/s². Vipers also sometimes pulled out and reinserted their fangs if they didn’t like the resulting angle; only then did they inject their venom. Elapids like the Cape coral cobra bit their prey repeatedly to inject their venom, while colubrids would tear gashes into their prey by sweeping their jaws from side to side, ensuing the maximum possible amount of venom was delivered.

DOI: Journal of Experimental Biology, 2025. 10.1242/jeb.250347 (About DOIs).

Spaghetti secrets

Spaghetti, like most pasta, is made of semolina flour, which is mixed with water to form a paste and then extruded to create a desired shape. The commercial products are then dried—an active area of research, since it’s easy for the strands to crack during the process. In fact, there have been a surprisingly large number of scientific papers seeking to understand the various properties of spaghetti, both cooking and eating it—the mechanics of slurping the pasta into one’s mouth, for instance, or spitting it out (aka, the “reverse spaghetti problem”); how to tell when it’s perfectly al dente; and how to get dry spaghetti strands to break neatly in two, rather than three or more scattered pieces.

Pasta also has a fairly low glycemic index, and is thus a good option for those with heart disease or type 2 diabetes. With the rise in the number of people with a gluten intolerance, gluten-free spaghetti has emerged as an alternative. The downside is that gluten-free pasta is harder to cook correctly and decidedly subpar in taste and texture (mouthfeel) compared to regular pasta. The reason for the latter lies in the microstructure, according to a paper published in the journal Food Hydrocolloids.

The authors used small-angle x-ray scattering and small-angle neutron scattering to analyze the microstructure of both regular and gluten-free pasta—i.e., the gluten matrix and its artificial counterpart—cooked al dente with varying salt concentrations in the water. They found that because of its gluten matrix, regular pasta has better resistance to structural degradation, and that adding just the right amount of salt further reinforces that matrix—so it’s not just a matter of salting to taste. This could lead to a better alternative matrix for gluten-free pasta that holds its structure better and has a taste and mouthfeel closer to that of regular pasta.

DOI: Food Hydrocolloids, 2025. 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2025.111855 (About DOIs).

Can machine learning identify ancient artists?

Dr Andrea Jalandoni studies finger flutings at a cave site in Australia — Credit: Andrea Jalandoni

Finger flutings are one of the oldest examples of prehistoric art, usually found carved into the walls of caves in southern Australia, New Guinea, and parts of Europe. They’re basically just marks made by human fingers drawn through the “moonmilk” (a soft mineral film) covering those walls. Very little is known about the people who left those flutings and while some have tried to draw inferences based on biometric finger ratios or hand size measurements—notably whether given marks were made by men or women—such methods produce inconsistent results and are prone to human error and bias.

That’s why digital archaeologist Andrea Jaladonia of Griffith University decided to experiment with machine learning image recognition methods as a possible tool, detailing her findings in a paper published the journal Scientific Reports. She recruited 96 adult volunteers to create their own finger flutings in two different settings: once in a virtual reality environment, and once on a substitute for the moonmilk clay that mimicked the look and feel of the real thing. Her team took images of those flutings and then used them to train two common image recognition models.

The results were decidedly mixed. The virtual reality images performed the worst, yielding highly unreliable attempts at classifying whether flutings were made by men or women. The images produced in actual clay produced better results, even reaching close to 84 percent accuracy in one model. But there were also signs the models were overfitting, i.e., memorizing patterns in the training data rather than more generalized patterns, so the approach needs more refinement before it is ready for actual deployment. As for why determining sex classifications matters, “This information has been used to decide who can access certain sites for cultural reasons,” Jalandoni explained.

DOI: Scientific Reports, 2025. 10.1038/s41598-025-18098-4 (About DOIs).

Jennifer is a senior writer at Ars Technica with a particular focus on where science meets culture, covering everything from physics and related interdisciplinary topics to her favorite films and TV series. Jennifer lives in Baltimore with her spouse, physicist Sean M. Carroll, and their two cats, Ariel and Caliban.

Research roundup: 6 cool science stories we almost missed Read More »

Closing Windows 11’s Task Manager accidentally opens up more copies of Task Manager

Tech, Windows 11, windows 11 24h2, windows 11 25h2 / Mike M. / November 1, 2025

One reason to use the Task Manager in Windows is to see if any of the apps running on your computer are misbehaving or using a disproportionate amount of resources. But what do you do when the misbehaving app is the Task Manager itself?

After a recent Windows update, some users (including Windows Latest) noticed that closing the Task Manager window was actually failing to close the app, leaving the executable running in memory. More worryingly, each time you open the Task Manager, it spawns a new process on top of the old one, which you can repeat essentially infinitely (or until your PC buckles under the pressure).

Each instance of Task Manager takes up around 20MB of system RAM and hovers between 0 and 2 percent CPU usage—if you have just a handful of instances open, it’s unlikely that you’d notice much of a performance impact. But if you use Task Manager frequently or just go a long time between reboots, opening up two or three dozen copies of the process that are all intermittently using a fraction of your CPU can add up, leading to a potentially significant impact on performance and battery life.

Closing Windows 11’s Task Manager accidentally opens up more copies of Task Manager Read More »

“Unexpectedly, a deer briefly entered the family room”: Living with Gemini Home

AI, Features, Google, Google Gemini, Google Home, Tech / Mike M. / November 1, 2025

60 percent of the time, it works every time

Gemini for Home unleashes gen AI on your Nest camera footage, but it gets a lot wrong.

The Google Home app has Gemini integration for paying customers. Credit: Ryan Whitwam

You just can’t ignore the effects of the generative AI boom.

Even if you don’t go looking for AI bots, they’re being integrated into virtually every product and service. And for what? There’s a lot of hand-wavey chatter about agentic this and AGI that, but what can “gen AI” do for you right now? Gemini for Home is Google’s latest attempt to make this technology useful, integrating Gemini with the smart home devices people already have. Anyone paying for extended video history in the Home app is about to get a heaping helping of AI, including daily summaries, AI-labeled notifications, and more.

Given the supposed power of AI models like Gemini, recognizing events in a couple of videos and answering questions about them doesn’t seem like a bridge too far. And yet Gemini for Home has demonstrated a tenuous grasp of the truth, which can lead to some disquieting interactions, like periodic warnings of home invasion, both human and animal.

It can do some neat things, but is it worth the price—and the headaches?

Does your smart home need a premium AI subscription?

Simply using the Google Home app to control your devices does not turn your smart home over to Gemini. This is part of Google’s higher-tier paid service, which comes with extended camera history and Gemini features for $20 per month. That subscription pipes your video into a Gemini AI model that generates summaries for notifications, as well as a “Daily Brief” that offers a rundown of everything that happened on a given day. The cheaper $10 plan provides less video history and no AI-assisted summaries or notifications. Both plans enable Gemini Live on smart speakers.

According to Google, it doesn’t send all of your video to Gemini. That would be a huge waste of compute cycles, so Gemini only sees (and summarizes) event clips. Those summaries are then distilled at the end of the day to create the Daily Brief, which usually results in a rather boring list of people entering and leaving rooms, dropping off packages, and so on.

Importantly, the Gemini model powering this experience is not multimodal—it only processes visual elements of videos and does not integrate audio from your recordings. So unusual noises or conversations captured by your cameras will not be searchable or reflected in AI summaries. This may be intentional to ensure your conversations are not regurgitated by an AI.

Gemini smart home plans — Credit: Google

Paying for Google’s AI-infused subscription also adds Ask Home, a conversational chatbot that can answer questions about what has happened in your home based on the status of smart home devices and your video footage. You can ask questions about events, retrieve video clips, and create automations.

There are definitely some issues with Gemini’s understanding of video, but Ask Home is quite good at creating automations. It was possible to set up automations in the old Home app, but the updated AI is able to piece together automations based on your natural language request. Perhaps thanks to the limited set of possible automation elements, the AI gets this right most of the time. Ask Home is also usually able to dig up past event clips, as long as you are specific about what you want.

The Advanced plan for Gemini Home keeps your videos for 60 days, so you can only query the robot on clips from that time period. Google also says it does not retain any of that video for training. The only instance in which Google will use security camera footage for training is if you choose to “lend” it to Google via an obscure option in the Home app. Google says it will keep these videos for up to 18 months or until you revoke access. However, your interactions with Gemini (like your typed prompts and ratings of outputs) are used to refine the model.

The unexpected deer

Every generative AI bot makes the occasional mistake, but you’ll probably not notice every one. When the AI hallucinates about your daily life, however, it’s more noticeable. There’s no reason Google should be confused by my smart home setup, which features a couple of outdoor cameras and one indoor camera—all Nest-branded with all the default AI features enabled—to keep an eye on my dogs. So the AI is seeing a lot of dogs lounging around and staring out the window. One would hope that it could reliably summarize something so straightforward.

One may be disappointed, though.

In my first Daily Brief, I was fascinated to see that Google spotted some indoor wildlife. “Unexpectedly, a deer briefly entered the family room,” Gemini said.

Home Brief with deer — Dogs and deer are pretty much the same thing, right? Credit: Ryan Whitwam

Gemini does deserve some credit for recognizing that the appearance of a deer in the family room would be unexpected. But the “deer” was, naturally, a dog. This was not a one-time occurrence, either. Gemini sometimes identifies my dogs correctly, but many event clips and summaries still tell me about the notable but brief appearance of deer around the house and yard.

This deer situation serves as a keen reminder that this new type of AI doesn’t “think,” although the industry’s use of that term to describe simulated reasoning could lead you to believe otherwise. A person looking at this video wouldn’t even entertain the possibility that they were seeing a deer after they’ve already seen the dogs loping around in other videos. Gemini doesn’t have that base of common sense, though. If the tokens say deer, it’s a deer. I will say, though, Gemini is great at recognizing car models and brand logos. Make of that what you will.

The animal mix-up is not ideal, but it’s not a major hurdle to usability. I didn’t seriously entertain the possibility that a deer had wandered into the house, and it’s a little funny the way the daily report continues to express amazement that wildlife is invading. It’s a pretty harmless screw-up.

“Overall identification accuracy depends on several factors, including the visual details available in the camera clip for Gemini to process,” explains a Google spokesperson. “As a large language model, Gemini can sometimes make inferential mistakes, which leads to these misidentifications, such as confusing your dog with a cat or deer.”

Google also says that you can tune the AI by correcting it when it screws up. This works sometimes, but the system still doesn’t truly understand anything—that’s beyond the capabilities of a generative AI model. After telling Gemini that it’s seeing dogs rather than deer, it sees wildlife less often. However, it doesn’t seem to trust me all the time, causing it to report the appearance of a deer that is “probably” just a dog.

A perfect fit for spooky season

Gemini’s smart home hallucinations also have a less comedic side. When Gemini mislabels an event clip, you can end up with some pretty distressing alerts. Imagine that you’re out and about when your Gemini assistant hits you with a notification telling you, “A person was seen in the family room.”

A person roaming around the house you believed to be empty? That’s alarming. Is it an intruder, a hallucination, a ghost? So naturally, you check the camera feed to find… nothing. An Ars Technica investigation confirms AI cannot detect ghosts. So a ghost in the machine?

Oops, we made you think someone broke into your house. Credit: Ryan Whitwam

On several occasions, I’ve seen Gemini mistake dogs and totally empty rooms (or maybe a shadow?) for a person. It may be alarming at first, but after a few false positives, you grow to distrust the robot. Now, even if Gemini correctly identified a random person in the house, I’d probably ignore it. Unfortunately, this is the only notification experience for Gemini Home Advanced.

“You cannot turn off the AI description while keeping the base notification,” a Google spokesperson told me. They noted, however, that you can disable person alerts in the app. Those are enabled when you turn on Google’s familiar faces detection.

Gemini often twists reality just a bit instead of creating it from whole cloth. A person holding anything in the backyard is doing yardwork. One person anywhere, doing anything, becomes several people. A dog toy becomes a cat lying in the sun. A couple of birds become a raccoon. Gemini likes to ignore things, too, like denying there was a package delivery even when there’s a video tagged as “person delivers package.”

Gemini misses package — Gemini still refused to admit it was wrong. Credit: Ryan Whitwam

At the end of the day, Gemini is labeling most clips correctly and therefore produces mostly accurate, if sometimes unhelpful, notifications. The problem is the flip side of “mostly,” which is still a lot of mistakes. Some of these mistakes compel you to check your cameras—at least, before you grow weary of Gemini’s confabulations. Instead of saving time and keeping you apprised of what’s happening at home, it wastes your time. For this thing to be useful, inferential errors cannot be a daily occurrence.

Learning as it goes

Google says its goal is to make Gemini for Home better for everyone. The team is “investing heavily in improving accurate identification” to cut down on erroneous notifications. The company also believes that having people add custom instructions is a critical piece of the puzzle. Maybe in the future, Gemini for Home will be more honest, but it currently takes a lot of hand-holding to move it in the right direction.

With careful tuning, you can indeed address some of Gemini for Home’s flights of fancy. I see fewer deer identifications after tinkering, and a couple of custom instructions have made the Home Brief waste less space telling me when people walk into and out of rooms that don’t exist. But I still don’t know how to prompt my way out of Gemini seeing people in an empty room.

Nest Cam 2025 — Gemini AI features work on all Nest cams, but the new 2025 models are “designed for Gemini.” Credit: Ryan Whitwam

Despite its intention to improve Gemini for Home, Google is releasing a product that just doesn’t work very well out of the box, and it misbehaves in ways that are genuinely off-putting. Security cameras shouldn’t lie about seeing intruders, nor should they tell me I’m lying when they fail to recognize an event. The Ask Home bot has the standard disclaimer recommending that you verify what the AI says. You have to take that warning seriously with Gemini for Home.

At launch, it’s hard to justify paying for the $20 Advanced Gemini subscription. If you’re already paying because you want the 60-day event history, you’re stuck with the AI notifications. You can ignore the existence of Daily Brief, though. Stepping down to the $10 per month subscription gets you just 30 days of event history with the old non-generative notifications and event labeling. Maybe that’s the smarter smart home bet right now.

Gemini for Home is widely available for those who opted into early access in the Home app. So you can avoid Gemini for the time being, but it’s only a matter of time before Google flips the switch for everyone.

Hopefully it works better by then.

Ryan Whitwam is a senior technology reporter at Ars Technica, covering the ways Google, AI, and mobile technology continue to change the world. Over his 20-year career, he’s written for Android Police, ExtremeTech, Wirecutter, NY Times, and more. He has reviewed more phones than most people will ever own. You can follow him on Bluesky, where you will see photos of his dozens of mechanical keyboards.

“Unexpectedly, a deer briefly entered the family room”: Living with Gemini Home Read More »

Affinity’s image-editing apps go “freemium” in first major post-Canva update

affinity, affinity photo, canva, Tech / Mike M. / October 30, 2025

When graphic design platform-provider Canva bought the Affinity image-editing and publishing apps early last year, we had some major questions about how the companies’ priorities and products would mesh. How would Canva serve the users who preferred Affinity’s perpetually licensed apps to Adobe’s subscription-only software suite? And how would Affinity’s strong stance against generative AI be reconciled with Canva’s embrace of those technologies.

This week, Canva gave us definitive answers to all of those questions: a brand-new unified Affinity app that melds the Photo, Designer, and Publisher apps into a single piece of software called “Affinity by Canva” that is free to use with a Canva user account, but which gates generative AI features behind Canva’s existing paid subscription plans ($120 a year for individuals).

This does seem like mostly good news, in the near to mid term, for existing Affinity app users who admired Affinity’s anti-AI stance: All three apps’ core features are free to use, and the stuff you’re being asked to pay for is stuff you mostly don’t want anyway. But it may come as unwelcome news for those who like the predictability of pay-once-own-forever software or are nervous about where Canva might draw the line between “free” and “premium” features down the line.

The new Affinity app (also labeled internally as version 3) is available for both the x86 and Arm versions of Windows and as a universal app that will run natively on both Apple Silicon and Intel Macs. The app supports macOS versions going back to 10.15 Catalina and Windows 11, as well as the later releases of Windows 10. An iPad release to replace Affinity’s older iPad apps is “coming soon.”

“For ten years, Affinity has been the tool of choice for professionals who care deeply about craft,” wrote Affinity CEO Ash Hewson in a post announcing the update. “Designers who value precision, speed, and control, and who expect their tools to keep up. Now, that legacy enters a new chapter. The all-new Affinity was built in close collaboration with its community of creators, shaped by thousands of conversations, feature requests, and shared ideas. Guided by Canva’s Designer Advisory Board, this release reflects what professionals told us matters most: performance, reliability, and creative freedom.”

Affinity’s image-editing apps go “freemium” in first major post-Canva update Read More »

Author name: Mike M.