Get ready to fight with an all-new look at Mortal Kombat 2, the sequel to 2021sMortal Kombat, arriving later this year.Entertainment Weekly released first-look photos of new characters debuting inMortal Kombat 2, including Karl Urban as Johnny Cage, Adeline Rudolph as Kitana, and Martyn Ford as franchise villain Shao Kahn.Recommended VideosIn the photo, Cage readies for a fight with Liu Kang (Ludi Lin), Jax (Mehcad Brooks), and Sonya Blade (Jessica McNamee) looking on from a distance.Mortal Kombat 2 director Simon McQuoid teased the debut of Cage, who will provide some of the biggest laughs in the sequel.Please enable Javascript to view this contentWe wanted a character that wasnt just completely silly, comic book, McQuoid said about Cage. Its a character that could instantly go there and become too light and throwaway if we were to lean too much into the kind of cheese. The casting of Karl Urban for that role allowed that character to have more depth.Our 'Mortal Kombat 2' exclusive first look reveals Johnny Cage, Kitana, Shao Kahn, and Scorpion's return. 'What I realized was go bigger, go bolder, don't hold back,' director Simon McQuoid tells EW. https://t.co/KwN7RQ9Bc4 Entertainment Weekly (@EW) March 17, 2025Besides the three additions to the cast, Mortal Kombat 2will feature the highly anticipated Mortal Kombat tournament between fighters from different realms, including Earthrealm and the Outworld.They keep score throughout the movie. Theres a visual representation of who is winning, Mortal Kombat co-creator Ed Boon said about the inclusion of the tournament. Its not just a tournament for the sake of a tournament. There are huge consequences, so you really are keeping score. And there are a lot of twists in it that keep you on your toes.Mortal Kombat 2scast also includes Josh Lawson as Kano, Tati Gabrielle as Jade, Lewis Tan as Cole Young, Damon Herriman as Quan Chi, Chin Han as Shang Tsung, Tadanobu Asano as Lord Raiden, Joe Taslim as Bi-Han/Noob Saibot, Max Huang as Revenant Kung Lao, and Hiroyuki Sanada as Hanzo Hasashi/Scorpion.McQuoid directs Mortal Kombat 2from a screenplay by Jeremy Slater, based on the iconic video game franchise.Mortal Kombat 2opens in theaters on October 24, 2025.Editors Recommendations

If youre waiting on Apples rumored foldable iPhone, start saving your pennies. And nickles, dimes, and quarters, too. Analyst Tim Long told Barclays the first foldable iPhone could start in the $2,300 range, which would make it nearly double the price of the current most expensive iPhone (the iPhone 16 Pro Max) and one of the single priciest handsets on the market.This announcement follows rumors that the foldable iPhone will enter mass production sometime in 2026 or 2027 and lines up with what tipster Ming-Chi Kuo predicted for the price. That said, the rumored handset has gained a lot of attention from iPhone fans. The expected demand for the iPhone foldable is great enough that even the higher price tag might not hurt sales.Recommended VideosIts likely that $2,300 would just be the starting price and that higher-end configurations could cost significantly more. When compared to the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold, which starts at $1,899 and tops out at $2,259, its easy to blame the so-called Apple tax for the increase. That said, its not the most expensive foldable on the market.Prakhar Khanna / Digital TrendsThe Huawei Mate XT is one of the only tri-fold models currently available and commands a price tag of $2,800. The Samsung multi-fold (another phone thats more rumor than substance) is expected to easily pass the $2,000 mark.Please enable Javascript to view this contentThe OnePlus Open starts at $1,700, and the OnePlus Open 2 whenever it arrives is expected to cost even more. Book-style foldables tend to carry a higher price tag than flip-style foldables.Apple has a tendency to take existing technology and put its own polish on it, and the techusually justifies a higher price. With luck, the iPhone foldable will set itself apart from the competition and provide features worth paying the equivalent of a months rent for.But if you really want to drop a load of dough on a phone, Huawei has an $18,000 device plated in 24-carat gold.Editors Recommendations

New England Puritans were hard-pressed by Native American warriors who knew how to fight in forestsand now had flintlock rifles.

Exit email Trump plan to fund Musks Starlink over fiber called betrayal of rural US Director of $42 billion broadband fund pushed out, says program is being ruined. Jon Brodkin Mar 17, 2025 2:19 pm | 7 Credit: Getty Images | Yuichiro Chino Credit: Getty Images | Yuichiro Chino Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreA federal broadband official departed the US government with a warning that a Trump administration plan will strand rural Americans with worse Internet access in order to help Elon Musk secure public money for Starlink."Stranding all or part of rural America with worse Internet so that we can make the world's richest man even richer is yet another in a long line of betrayals by Washington," wrote Evan Feinman, who had been a Commerce Department official and director of the $42.45 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program since 2022.As Politico reported, Feinman made the statement in "a blistering email to his former colleagues on his way out the door Sunday warning that the Trump administration is poised to unduly enrich Elon Musk's satellite Internet company with money for rural broadband."Feinman left the department on Friday. His departure came less than two weeks after Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick announced that BEAD was reversing the Biden administration's decision to prioritize fiber Internet networks when distributing grants from the $42.45 billion fund.ProPublica's Craig Silverman reported that "Feinman's term ended and he was not reappointed." Silverman also posted the full email sent by Feinman to colleagues.Warning of deeply negative outcomesFeinman wrote that he is "disappointed not to be able to see this project through" and that "the new administration seems to want to make changes that ignore the clear direction laid out by Congress, reduce the number of American homes and businesses that get fiber connections, and increase the number that get satellite connections."The degree of the shift away from fiber "remains unknown, but regardless of size, it will be a disservice to rural and small-town America," he wrote. Feinman said some versions of the proposal are "benign," but he warned of "significant risk that the changes being proposed will be ill-considered and create deeply negative outcomes."Feinman urged people to contact their representatives in Congress and the Trump administration and urge them to avoid "the worst version" of the planned changes. "They should fix BEAD by removing the requirements that have nothing to do with building infrastructure, NOT change it to benefit technology that delivers slower speeds at higher costs to the household paying the bill... There is still time to help the administration make the right call here. Reach out to your congressional delegation and reach out to the Trump Administration and tell them to strip out the needless requirements, but not to strip away from states the flexibility to get the best connections for their people," he wrote.The 2021 law that created the BEAD program said the government must prioritize technology that "can easily scale speeds over time to meet the evolving connectivity needs of households and businesses; and support the deployment of 5G, successor wireless technologies, and other advanced services."During the Biden administration, the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) decided that fiber architecture is the only technology that achieves the BEAD law's goal of building future-proof networks. Fiber brings high-speed broadband to homes and businesses and is essential for providing backhaul to support advanced wireless services, the Biden NTIA said.Feinman's email said that "even though the law pretty clearly requires that fiber builds be the program's 'priority projects,' the administration wants to increase the usage of low-earth satellites and diminish the usage of fiber." Additionally, fixed wireless providers that use earth-based networks instead of satellites will effectively be "shut out of the BEAD program," he wrote.Some states are on the 1-yard lineRepublicans criticized the Biden administration for not yet distributing grant money, but the NTIA said in November that it had approved initial funding plans submitted by every state and territory. Feinman said the change in direction will delay grant distribution."Some states are on the 1-yard line. A bunch are on the 5-yard line. More will be getting there every week," he wrote. "These more-sweeping changes will only cause delays. The administration could fix the problems with the program via waiver and avoid slowdowns."The program is on pause, even if the new government leaders don't admit it, according to Feinman. "The administration wants to make changes, but doesn't want to be seen slowing things down. They can't have both. States will have to be advised that they should either slow down or stop doing subgrantee selection," he wrote.Delaware, Louisiana, and Nevada had their final proposals approved by the NTIA in January, a few days before Trump's inauguration. "Shovels could already be in the ground in three states, and they could be in the ground in half the country by the summer without the proposed changes to project selection," Feinman wrote.The three states with approved final proposals are now "in limbo," he wrote. "This makes no sensethese states are ready to go, and they got the job done on time, on budget, and have plans that achieve universal coverage," his email said. "If the administration cares about getting shovels in the ground, states with approved Final Proposals should move forward, ASAP."Other states that were nearing the final stage are also in limbo, Feinman wrote. "No decision has been made about how much of the existing progress the 30 states who are already performing subgrantee selection should be allowed to keep," he wrote. "The administration simply cannot say whether the time, taxpayer funds, and private capital that were spent on those processes will be wasted and how much states will have to re-do."Size of spending limit could be crucialFeinman said some changes being floated aren't that big a deal. This includes scrapping requirements that Republicans have described as "woke" priorities."This will include all provisions related to labor and wage, climate resiliency, middle-class affordability, etc. I do not regard the inclusion or removal of these provisions as significant; they were inserted by the prior administration for messaging/political purposes, and were never central to the mission of the program, nor were they significant in the actual conduct of the program," Feinman wrote.Feinman also expects a new per-location spending limit. "This could be fine," he wrote. "There weren't any cases of a state planning to spend hundreds of thousands to connect one location anyway. However, if it's heavy-handed or imposed in a manner that ignores the needs of rural communities, it could be very bad."Feinman said the specific amount of the spending limit would be important because giving grants to Musk's Starlink or Amazon's Kuiper satellite service would cost much less than funding fiber projects. "More people will get Starlink/Kuiper, and fewer people will get fiber connection," he wrote. "This could be dramatic, or it could be measured, depending on where the admin sets the threshold limit, and whether states are permitted to award projects above the new threshold on the basis of value dollar, or if they're forced to take the cheapest proposal, even if it provides poorer service."We contacted the Commerce Department about Feinman's departure and email, and will update this article if we get a response.Jon BrodkinSenior IT ReporterJon BrodkinSenior IT Reporter 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. 7 Comments

Subscription app study Sobering revenue stats of 70K mobile apps show why devs beg for subscriptions Most apps fail to reach $1,000/month revenue within two years. Scharon Harding Mar 17, 2025 2:00 pm | 9 Credit: Getty Credit: Getty Story textSizeSmallStandardLargeWidth *StandardWideLinksStandardOrange* Subscribers only Learn moreIf you're frustrated by some of your favorite apps pestering you to sign up for a subscription, some new data may help you empathize with their developers more. According to revenue data from "over 75,000" mobile apps, the vast majority have a hard time making $1,000 per month.The data is detailed in RevenueCat's 2025 State of Subscription Apps report. RevenueCat makes a mobile app subscription tool kit and gathered the report's data from apps using its platform. The report covers "more than $10 billion in revenue across more than a billion transactions," and RevenueCat's customer base ranges from indie-sized teams to large publishers. Buffer, ChatGPT, FC Barcelona, Goodnotes, and Reuters are among the San Francisco-based firm's customer base.Additionally, the report examines apps that rely primarily on in-app subscriptions, as well as those that only generate some revenue from subscriptions. All apps examined, though, actively generate subscription revenue and "meet a minimum threshold of installs or revenue (to ensure statistically meaningful findings," according to the report.RevenueCat's report doesn't cover every single mobile app available, but it paints a picture of the challenges related to monetizing mobile apps across different types of categories, as well as how uneven the distribution of app revenue is.A strenuous road to $1,000RevenueCat's report concluded that most apps fail to make $1,000 in monthly revenue within their first two years. It says:Across all categories, nearly 20 percent reach $1,000 in revenue, while 5 percent reach the $10,000 mark. Revenue drop-off is steep, with many categories losing ~50 percent of apps at each milestone, emphasizing the challenge of sustained growth beyond early revenue benchmarks.Some app categories with the smallest percentage of newly launched apps hitting the $1,000 mark are shopping, travel, and utilities. Photo, video, and gaming apps are the most likely to hit $1,000/month within two years.The good news is that apps that do eventually make it to $1,000 in monthly revenue tend to do so rather quickly. The median number of days it takes for an app to reach $1,000/month in revenue is 60 days, RevenueCat found. But as the chart below shows, that stat varies based on the type of app. Education apps, for example, have a median of 79 days. Meanwhile, lofty monthly revenue goals of $10,000/month are especially hard to reach for shopping and travel apps.RevenueCat also found that in most app categories, the revenue gap between the top 5 percent of apps by revenue and the other 95 percent is widening. In 2024, RevenueCat concluded that the top 5 percent of apps in most categories made 200 times more revenue than the rest. In this year's, that stat jumped to 500 times.After a year, the top 5 percent of apps in most categories, including gaming, photo and video, health and fitness, and social and lifestyle, make more than $5,000/month. The 25th percentile makes $5 to $20 per month, depending on the category, save for photo and video apps, whereas the bottom quartile makes $32 per month.And in another illustration of how lopsided app monetization can be, the report found that 76.1 percent of devs in North America make over 80 percent of their revenue from iOS apps.Developers try to make ends meetA lack of monetization opportunities in mobile software has led some developers to cajole users to subscribe for premium featuresor sometimes to continue using the app at all. This can be irritating to users who may have no interest in additional features or dont see the value in paying for something theyve previously used for free.According to RevenueCat, the window of time when people are likely to try out a mobile app subscription is small. The report says that 82 percent of trial starts occur the same day a user installs an app, which is even higher than last year.The graphs below show how common it is for trial users to cancel their subscription within a monthor even a weekof signing up.Price increases are not a reported reason for cancelations, suggesting that pricing changes either rarely occur or do not significantly impact subscriber retention, the report says.As you might expect, app developers also face monstrous obstacles around subscription renewals. RevenueCat reported that withmonthly plans, barely 10 percent of payers reach the second year," and with weekly plans, "less than 5 percent make it to month 6.As a result, developers are expected to continue pushing for more ways to make ends meet. Over the next year, the monetization hurdles facing mobile apps likely mean "more paywalls, upsells, and maybe even some price hikes" across all app categories, Rik Haandrikman, VP of growth at RevenueCat, told Ars Technica via email.He expects AI-powered apps to "see many add-on usage-based pricing (credits or pay-per-feature models) instead of relying solely on subscriptions.""In general, app users might expect to see more 'ways to buy' apps as [devs] experiment with multiple subscription types [plus] one-time purchases for certain content or features," Haandrikman said.Scharon HardingSenior Technology ReporterScharon HardingSenior Technology Reporter Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She's been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Toms Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK. 9 Comments

The question of what happens if the Trump administration openly defies a federal court order has hung over the United States since President Donald Trumps second term began. If that happens, it will trigger a constitutional crisis. Now, that long-awaited crisis may be upon us.On Saturday, Trump issued a proclamation claiming the authority to deport Venezuelan nationals that, he claims, are members of a criminal gang known as Tren de Aragua. Trump alleges that these foreign nationals may be swiftly removed under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a law that has only been invoked three times in American history the last time in World War II.Trumps claim is highly dubious. The Alien Enemies Act permits the president to order the removal of all citizens of a foreign nation when there is a declared war with that nation, or when invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government. The United States is not at war with Venezuela. Nor has the Venezuelan government invaded or even threatened to invade the United States.Not long after Trump issued his proclamation, on the same Saturday evening, federal Judge James Boasberg issued two orders that temporarily halted it. The first is a temporary restraining order seeking to prevent any deportations from taking place under Trumps proclamation until Boasberg has time to hold a full hearing and determine how to proceed in this case. The second order certifies this case, known as J.G.G. v. Trump, as a class action lawsuit concerning all noncitizens in U.S. custody who are subject to Trumps Saturday proclamation. That order forbids the government from removing members of such class (not otherwise subject to removal) pursuant to the Proclamation for 14 days or until further Order of the Court.Which brings us to the potential constitutional crisis. At a Saturday hearing on this case, lawyers for the plaintiffs told Boasberg that two planes containing Venezuelans who were deported under the proclamation were in the air. During that hearing, Boasberg ordered that those people need to be returned to the United States. He also acknowledged, however, that once the planes land and their occupants deplane, he no longer has jurisdiction to order their return.In a document filed Monday morning, the plaintiffs attorneys cite publicly available flight data as well as news reports, which suggest that the Trump administration allowed these planes to land and discharge their passengers after Boasberg issued his order. If that is true, then the Trump administration defied the order and can potentially be held in contempt of court.Meanwhile, in a second case known as Chehab v. Noem, the federal government may have removed Dr. Rasha Alawieh, a Lebanese national and professor at Brown Universitys medical school, in violation of a court order requiring the government to give the court 48 hours notice before she is removed. The facts in this case are rapidly evolving, however, and two of her lawyers recently withdrew from the case.The Justice Department, for what it is worth, claims that Alawieh was deported after federal authorities found sympathetic photos and videos regarding the terrorist organization Hezbollah on her phone.There is also some uncertainty about the timing of the flights in each of the cases. In the case of the Venezuelan deportations, the document plaintiffs filed Monday primarily asks Boasberg to seek clarification from the government about whether these flights landed and discharged their passengers after the judges order. Its also possible that these passengers were deported pursuant to some authority other than the Saturday proclamation, in which case Boasbergs order would not apply to them.Yet, even if it turns out that no one was deported illegally, the government still must comply with court orders against it, including temporary orders issued while a judge was trying to determine if the government acted illegally.So what can be done if Trump is defying a court order?The Trump administration claims that Boasberg exceeded his authority when he issued his orders, and it points to the alleged Hezbollah connection to justify its actions in Dr. Alawiehs case. Its far from clear, however, whether the ultimate merits of either case are relevant at this very early stage of this litigation. If a litigant disagrees with a temporary restraining order, the proper course of action is typically to wait until the judge holds a full hearing on the case and to argue that the order should not be extended. If the judge disagrees, that decision can be appealed to a higher court. But a litigant cannot simply defy a court order because they think it is wrong.Indeed, under normal circumstances, a party that defies a court order can be held in contempt of court and be subject to fines, imprisonment, or other sanctions. But its far from clear whether such a contempt order could be enforced if Trump is determined to give the middle finger to the judiciary.As Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers, the courts may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments. Federal court orders, including contempt of court orders, are enforced by the US Marshals Service, a law enforcement agency housed in the Executive Branch of government. So Trump could potentially order the Marshals to not enforce any court order against his administration.If that happens, there are few legal mechanisms remaining to make Trump obey the law. The obvious remedy for a president who commits serious legal violations and refuses to comply with court orders against him is impeachment. But, even if a Republican US House would agree to impeach Trump a highly unlikely proposition it takes 67 votes in the Senate to remove a president. And the Senate couldnt even find 67 votes to declare Trump ineligible for the presidency after he incited a mob to attack the US Capitol in 2020.For now, at least, the J.G.G. case appears to be moving very quickly. And it remains to be seen whether the Trump administration can plausibly argue that its behavior is legal. If it turns out that the administration is determined to violate court orders it does not like, however, then it is likely that the legal system has run out of tools to check Donald Trump.See More:

Canadian government asked to protect Assassins Creed Shadows devs from abuseAdam StarkeyPublished March 17, 2025 6:06pmUpdated March 17, 2025 6:06pm A controversial assassination (Ubisoft)Amid the controversy surrounding Assassins Creed Shadows, Ubisoft has introduced protections to shield employees from harassment.Assassins Creed Shadows has become a pivotal game for Ubisoft in terms of the companys future, which is unfortunate as its also the most contentious in the series history.The game has been mired in controversy ever since it was first revealed, largely because of its chosen protagonists: the real-life African samurai Yasuke and fictional female shinobi Naoe. The backlash even prompted a weird apology from Ubisoft, where they acknowledged how promotional materials have caused concern within the Japanese community.After several delays, the game is finally set to launch on Thursday, March 20, and it seems like Ubisoft is anticipating developer Ubisoft Quebec will be subject to considerable abuse from online trolls.According to French news outlet BFMTV, Ubisoft and Canadian authorities have put measures in place to protect the games developers, which includes safeguards around social media.Speaking to the outlet, a Ubisoft employee said (translated via Google): Were advised not to post on social media that we work at Ubisoft to avoid harassment.According to the report, an anti-online harassment plan was also presented to the CSE (Communications Security Establishment Canada) to help protect Ubisoft Quebec employees around the games launch.This allegedly includes a team that monitors networks and acts quickly in the event of a targeted attack, along with psychological and legal support.GameCentral has reached out to Ubisoft for comment.Beyond the studio itself, theres a lot riding on Assassins Creed Shadows for Ubisoft at large. After several 2024 titles fell below sales expectations, including Star Wars Outlaws and XDefiant, the company is said to be considering various options to keep the company afloat, including a possible buyout with Tencent.More TrendingAccording to Bloomberg, Ubisoft is also looking at bringing in investors to create a separate entity to house its video game IP, like Assassins Creed and Far Cry. The company is said to be considering selling a minority stake in the venture and has already contacted potential bidders, including current shareholder Tencent. However, its said these considerations are ongoing and no final decision has yet been made.Its unclear if Assassins Creed Shadows could reverse the companys fortunes at this stage, if it does particularly well, but the IP has traditionally been Ubisofts biggest seller. The highest-earning entry in the series is Assassins Creed Valhalla, which topped $1 billion in revenue by 2022.Ubisoft has big plans for the future of Assassins Creed, with reports claiming it has over 10 games due in the next five years. Assassins Creed Shadows is a pivotal game for Ubisoft (Ubisoft)Emailgamecentral@metro.co.uk, leave a comment below,follow us on Twitter, andsign-up to our newsletter.To submit Inbox letters and Readers Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use ourSubmit Stuff page here.For more stories like this,check our Gaming page.GameCentralSign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content.This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy

A home security system is not too steep of an investment and works as an excellent deterrent for any unwanted intruders coming onto your property. The Blink Outdoor 4 is a wireless smart security system with a number of different camera options than can give you the peace of mind to leave town for a couple of days or sleep comfortably at night. Right now, its part of a limited time deal in which you can snag a bundle one to eight cameras for quite the discount.The solo camera system typically goes for $100, but at its 30% off offer, it now only costs $70but you can save much more. The two-camera system is 33% off, coming in at $60 per camera. The three-cameras system bundled together for $52 per camera. Your four-camera system is $51 per camera at $204. Then, miraculously, the five-camera system is 50% off at $199, or just $40 per camera. There is no reason to pick up the four-camera bundle during this deal as the total is more than the five. The six-camera system is also now at $40 per camera, and lastly the eight-camera system is just under a dollar shy of $40 per camera. There is no seven-camera bundle for whatever reason.See Blink x5 at AmazonSee Blink x3 at AmazonSee Blink x1 at AmazonFeel Secure at HomeThis fourth-generation home security camera is wire-free meaning it can be mounted anywhere along the outside of your house without a concern for nearby power. And if you think that means youd have to be changing the batteries constantly, it does not. Each camera has a two-year battery life which you can set yourself up with in minutes as they are simply powered by AA lithium batteries which come included!The cameras have enhanced motion detections so you can be alerted on your smartphone if a person is detected, which it can differentiate from motion by other sources. ON the smartphone app, you can see a live view in 1080p HD and infrared night vision. The system even supports two-way audio communication with the built-in microphones and speakers on each camera.You can save and share clips on the cloud with the Blink subscription plan or locally with the Sync Module 2 which comes included.See Blink x5 at AmazonSee Blink x1 at Amazon

By Matt Novak Published March 17, 2025 | Comments (1) | A photo released by El Salvador's president purporting to show people deported from the U.S. to El Salvador to the country's prison for people accused of "terrorism." Photo by El Salvador Presidency / Handout/Anadolu via Getty Images President Donald Trumps administration defied a federal court order on Saturday to halt deportations of migrants from the U.S. to El Salvador. Its not the first time the Trump regime has ignored a court order but the scale and brazenness of the defiance really feels like a turning point for the country. And its unclear whether anything will stop Trump now that the country has reached such a lawless stage. Trump secretly invoked the Alien Enemies Act on Friday, a law from 1798 that gives the president enormous power in a time of war to deport people without judicial review. The problem, of course, is that the U.S. isnt at war. The president insists we are, but simply saying were at war because you dont like immigrants in some abstract way isnt how its done. After Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act, the ACLU sued to stop the deportations, which were already in the process of happening on Saturday. Planes were in the air, and based on the publicly available information, at least some of the people being flown to El Salvador had not been handed over to that country yet when the judge issued his ruling. Trump alleges most of the people deported this weekend were members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. But the fact that these people were deported under the Alien Enemies Act means they didnt get a court hearing of any kind. Theres no way to even know their immigration status, aside from taking the Trump regimes word for it. They couldve been citizens for all we know. One of the ACLU lawyers working on the case, Lee Gelernt, told MSNBC on Monday that he needs to get answers today to a lot of questions raised by the Trump regimes apparent refusal to abide by the court. Gelernt says it doesnt matter if the planes were over international waters, one of the arguments the Trump regime is apparently making about why it didnt need to adhere to the order.The fact that they might have been in international territory makes no difference, because the U.S. had custody of these individuals, and the judge specifically ordered them to be returned, Gelernt said. El Salvadors crypto-loving president Nayib Bukele tweeted about the court order early Sunday, sharing a screenshot of an article from the New York Post with a headline reading Fed judge orders deportation flights carrying alleged Venezuelan gangbanger to return to US, blocks Trump from invoking Alien Enemies Act. Bukele tweeted, Ooopsi Too late, along with a crying-laughing emoji.Bukele later shared that 238 alleged members of Tren de Aragua were sent from the U.S. to El Salvador, transferred to what he calls the CECOT, the Terrorism Confinement Center. Bukele says theyre being held there for a period of one year that can be renewed. An additional 23 alleged members of MS-13 were also transported there, according to the BBC. And the Salvadoran leader says the U.S. is paying for the country to take all these people to its notoriously brutal prison system. The United States will pay a very low fee for them, but a high one for us, Bukele wrote Sunday. Over time, these actions, combined with the production already being generated by more than 40,000 inmates engaged in various workshops and labor under the Zero Idleness program, will help make our prison system self-sustainable. As of today, it costs $200 million per year. There are other cases where the Trump administration appears to be defying court orders. Dr. Rasha Alawieh, a 34-year-old doctor, was reportedly detained Thursday at Boston Logan International Airport while flying into the U.S. from Lebanon. Alawieh reportedly held an H-1B visa working at Brown Universitys medical school, according to CNN. And even though a court ordered she not be deported while the case was heard, the Trump regime apparently sent her back to Lebanon anyway.Lawyers for Alawieh accused Trumps Department of Justice of willfully disobeying the court order, as Slate notes, but the official story is that the DOJ did it unintentionally. There was supposed to be a hearing Monday about Alawiehs case but it was canceled because lawyers representing her withdrew, though its not clear why. Trump has recently targeted law firms, stripping two firms of security clearances last week. Trump has made no secret of his fascist intentions for the United States. The president spoke at the Department of Justice on Friday in a particularly unhinged, though not surprising, speech denouncing perceived enemies, referring to them as scum. Trump at the DOJ: Theres a guy named Norm Eisen. I dont even know what he looks like. His name is Norm Eisen of CREW. Hes been after me for 9 years. Now CREW is a charitable organization. These are bad people theyre scum. [image or embed] Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) March 14, 2025 at 1:10 PM In a late-night post on Truth Social last night Trump declared that President Joe Bidens pardons as he was leaving office were void because they were supposedly signed by auto-pen, a device often used by presidents of all political stripes to sign paperwork. Its a ridiculous theory, but its the excuse Trump clearly wants to use to persecute people like former congresswoman Liz Cheney, a Republican who led a congressional investigation into his attempted self-coup on January 6, 2021. The Trump regime is openly saying the law and the judges who interpret that law dont matter anymore. Tom Homan, Trumps border czar, appeared on Fox News Monday to say he doesnt care what the judges think. Hes just going to keep doing what hes doing. Homan: Were not stopping. I dont care what the judges think. I dont care what the left thinks. Were coming. [image or embed] Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) March 17, 2025 at 8:05 AM There are no guardrails anymore. If the U.S. government says you were a member of a violent gang, you have no way to contest that. Thats exactly why Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act. The courts slow down deportations if you have to actually prove someone is a danger to society. And being a member of a gang isnt itself a crime in the U.S., even a historically violent one. People in the U.S. are supposed to be punished for committing acts of violence or, at the very least, for providing material support for those acts. Congress could not have been [more] clear in the statute that it has to be a foreign government or nation invading or in a declared war with the U.S. Gelernt told MSNBC about the Alien Enemies Act. Fundamentally, this is about separation of powers and the Trump administration thumbing their nose at Congress and the courts. A hearing is scheduled for 4 p.m. ET Monday. The ACLU is expected to bring up Bukeles oopsie tweet, as well as a story published by Axios Sunday that quotes anonymous White House officials.Its the showdown that was always going to happen between the two branches of government, a senior White House official told Axios. And it seemed that this was pretty clean. You have Venezuelan gang members These are bad guys, as the president would say. And that gets to the heart of the problem. Trump is clearly starting with the people he believes will elicit little or no sympathy, even if theyre not actually gang members. Declaring them enemies is typically enough for Americans to believe they must be the bad guys.Lindsay Toczylowski, an attorney for one of the people deported, wrote on Bluesky that her client was only singled out because he has tattoos and is not a member of a gang. Our client worked in the arts in Venezuela. He is LGBTQ. His tattoos are benign. But ICE submitted photos of his tattoos as evidence he is Tren de Aragua, Toczylowski wrote. His @ImmDef attorney planned to present evidence he is not. But never got the chance because our client has been disappeared.The Texas Department of Public Safety guide on how to spot gang tattoos certainly raises more questions than it answers. Uh [image or embed] Don Moynihan (@donmoyn.bsky.social) March 17, 2025 at 9:27 AM Unfortunately, it seems like things will only get dumber and more fascist from here.Daily NewsletterYou May Also Like By Matthew Gault Published March 17, 2025 Kate Yoder, Grist Published March 17, 2025 By Matt Novak Published March 15, 2025 By AJ Dellinger Published March 14, 2025 By Lucas Ropek Published March 14, 2025 By Lucas Ropek Published March 13, 2025

: : ( ) : (VFX masks) . . : (Chroma Keying) (Blue Channel) . . " " (Shadow Catcher) . VFX . (Keywords): (Blender) (VFX) (Mask) (Chroma Keying) (Blue Channel) (Shadow Catcher) (Compositing) (3D) vfx Shadow Catcher BlenderVFX Masks Blender (Tags):#Blender#VFX#Masking#ChromaKey#3D#Compositing#Tutorial#ShadowCatcher#Blender3D#VisualEffects (Captions): . .Video Title:Mastering Advanced VFX Masks in Blender: Perfume Bottle Appear/Disappear Behind BuildingVideo Description:"In this in-depth tutorial, I'll reveal advanced techniques for creating professional VFX masks in Blender. We'll work through a practical project where we add a 3D perfume bottle to a real-world building video, making it appear in front of the building and then realistically disappear behind it.We'll cover two key masking methods:Chroma keying using the Blue Channel for precise separation of the building from the sky.Traditional manual masking within Blender, with frame-specific activation and adjustments for seamless integration.Furthermore, we'll explore the Shadow Catcher technique for natural shadow integration, along with other valuable VFX tips and tricks.This video is designed for anyone looking to enhance their Blender VFX skills, whether you're a beginner or an experienced artist.Keywords:BlenderVFXMaskingChroma KeyingBlue ChannelShadow CatcherCompositing3DBlender TutorialVFX TechniquesHow to MaskAdd 3D to VideoBlender Shadow CatcherVFX Masks BlenderTags:#Blender#VFX#Masking#ChromaKey#3D#Compositing#Tutorial#ShadowCatcher#Blender3D#VisualEffects