Stop me if youve heard this one before: A tech company accumulates a ton of user data, hoping to figure out a business model later. That business model never arrives, the company goes under, and the data is in the wind. The latest version of that story emerged on March 24, when the onetime genetic testing darling 23andMe filed for bankruptcy. Now the fate of 15 million peoples genetic data rests in the hands of a bankruptcy judge.hearing on March 26, the judge gave 23andMe permission to seek offers for its users data. But, theres still a small chance of writing a better ending for users. After the bankruptcy filing, the immediate take from policymakers and privacy advocates was that 23andMe users should delete their accounts to prevent genetic data from falling into the wrong hands. Thats good advice for the individual user (and you can read how to do so here). But the reality is most people wont do it. Maybe they wont see the recommendations to do so. Maybe they dont know why they should be worried. Maybe they have long since abandoned an account that they dont even remember exists. Or maybe theyre just occupied with the chaos of everyday life. This means the real value of this data comes from the fact that people have forgotten about it. Given 23andMes meager revenuefewer than 4% of people who took tests pay for subscriptionsit seems inevitable that the new owner, whoever it is, will have to find some new way to monetize that data. This is a terrible deal for users who just wanted to learn a little more about themselves or their ancestry. Because genetic data is forever. Contact information can go stale over time: you can always change your password, your email, your phone number, or even your address. But a bad actor who has your genetic datawhether a cybercriminal selling it to the highest bidder, a company building a profile of your future health risk, or a government trying to identify youwill have it tomorrow and the next day and all the days after that. Users with exposed genetic data are not only vulnerable to harm today; theyre vulnerable to exploits that might be developed in the future. While 23andMe promises that it will not voluntarily share data with insurance providers, employers, or public databases, its new owner could unwind those promises at any time with a simple change in terms. In other words: If a bankruptcy court makes a mistake authorizing the sale of 23andMes user data, that mistake is likely permanent and irreparable. All this is possible because American lawmakers have neglected to meaningfully engage with digital privacy for nearly a quarter-century. As a result, services are incentivized to make flimsy, deceptive promises that can be abandoned at a moments notice. And the burden falls on users to keep track of it all, or just give up. Here, a simple fix would be to reverse that burden. A bankruptcy court could require that users individually opt in before their genetic data can be transferred to 23andMes new owners, regardless of who those new owners are. Anyone who didnt respond or who opted out would have the data deleted. Bankruptcy proceedings involving personal data dont have to end badly. In 2000, the Federal Trade Commission settled with the bankrupt retailer ToySmart to ensure that its customer data could not be sold as a stand-alone asset, and that customers would have to affirmatively consent to unexpected new uses of their data. And in 2015, the FTC intervened in the bankruptcy of RadioShack to ensure that it would keep its promises never to sell the personal data of its customers. (RadioShack eventually agreed to destroy it.) The ToySmart case also gave rise to the role of the consumer privacy ombudsman. Bankruptcy judges can appoint an ombuds to help the court consider how the sale of personal data might affect the bankruptcy estate, examining the potential harms or benefits to consumers and any alternatives that might mitigate those harms. The U.S. Trustee has requested the appointment of an ombuds in this case. While scholars have called for the role to have more teeth and for the FTC and states to intervene more often, a framework for protecting personal data in bankruptcy is available. And ultimately, the bankruptcy judge has broad power to make decisions about how (or whether) property in bankruptcy is sold. Here, 23andMe has a more permissive privacy policy than ToySmart or RadioShack. But the risks incurred if genetic data falls into the wrong hands or is misused are severe and irreversible. And given 23andMes failure to build a viable business model from testing kits, it seems likely that a new business would use genetic data in ways that users wouldnt expect or want. An opt-in requirement for genetic data solves this problem. Genetic data (and other sensitive data) could be held by the bankruptcy trustee and released as individual users gave their consent. If users failed to opt in after a period of time, the remaining data would be deleted. This would incentivize 23andMes new owners to earn user trust and build a business that delivers value to users, instead of finding unexpected ways to exploit their data. And it would impose virtually no burden on the people whose genetic data is at risk: after all, they have plenty more DNA to spare. Consider the alternative. Before 23andMe went into bankruptcy, its then-CEO made two failed attempts to buy it, at reported valuations of $74.7 million and $12.1 million. Using the higher offer, and with 15 million users, that works out to a little under $5 per user. Is it really worth it to permanently risk a persons genetic privacy just to add a few dollars in value to the bankruptcy estate? Of course, this raises a bigger question: Why should anyone be able to buy the genetic data of millions of Americans in a bankruptcy proceeding? The answer is simple: Lawmakers allow them to. Federal and state inaction allows companies to dissolve promises about protecting Americans most sensitive data at a moments notice. When 23andMe was founded, in 2006, the promise was that personalized health care was around the corner. Today, 18 years later, that era may really be almost here. But with privacy laws like ours, who would trust it? Keith Porcaro is the Rueben Everett Senior Lecturing Fellow at Duke Law School.

This is today's edition ofThe Download,our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what's going on in the world of technology. Anthropic can now track the bizarre inner workings of a large language model The news: The AI firm Anthropic has developed a way to peer inside a large language model and watch what it does as it comes up with a response, revealing key new insights into how the technology works. The takeaway: LLMs are even stranger than we thought.Why it matters: Its no secret that large language models work in mysterious ways. Shedding some light on how they work would expose their weaknesses, revealing why they make stuff up and can be tricked into going off the rails. It would help resolve deep disputes about exactly what these models can and cant do. And it would show how trustworthy (or not) they really are. Read the full story. Will Douglas Heaven What is Signal? The messaging app, explained. With the recent news that the Atlantics editor in chief was accidentally added to a group Signal chat for American leaders planning a bombing in Yemen, many people are wondering: What is Signal? Is it secure? If government officials arent supposed to use it for military planning, does that mean I shouldnt use it either? The answer is: Yes, you should use Signal, but government officials having top-secret conversations shouldnt use Signal.Read the full story to find out why.Jack Cushman This story is part of our MIT Technology Review Explains series, in which our writers untangle the complex, messy world of technology to help you understand what's coming next. You can read more of them here. Spare living human bodies might provide us with organs for transplantation Jessica Hamzelou This week, MIT Technology Review published a piece on bodyoidsliving bodies that cannot think or feel pain. In the piece, a trio of scientists argue that advances in biotechnology will soon allow us to create spare human bodies that could be used for research, or to provide organs for donation. If you find your skin crawling at this point, youre not the only one. Its a creepy idea, straight from the more horrible corners of science fiction. But bodyoids could be used for good. And if they are truly unaware and unable to think, the use of bodyoids wouldnt cross most peoples ethical lines, the authors argue. Im not so sure. Read the full story. This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Reviews weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here. The must-reads Ive combed the internet to find you todays most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology. 1 A judge has ordered Trumps officials to preserve their secret Signal chat While officials are required by law to keep chats detailing government business, Signals messages can be set to auto-disappear. (USA Today)+ The conversation detailed an imminent attack against Houthi rebels in Yemen. (The Hill)+ A government accountability group has sued the agencies involved. (Reuters)+ The officials involved in the chat appear to have public Venmo accounts. (Wired $)2 The White House is prepared to cut up to 50% of agency staff But the final cuts could end up exceeding even that. (WP $)+ The sweeping cuts could threaten vital US statistics, too. (FT $)+ Can AI help DOGE slash government budgets? Its complex. (MIT Technology Review)3 OpenAI is struggling to keep up with demand for ChatGPT's image generation The fervor around its Studio Ghibli pictures has sent its GPUs into overdrive. (The Verge)+ Ghiblis founder is no fan of AI art. (404 Media)+ Four ways to protect your art from AI. (MIT Technology Review)4 Facebook is pivoting back towards friends and family Less news, fewer posts from people you dont know. (NYT $)+ A new tab shows purely updates from friends, with no other recommendations. (Insider $)A specialized powerhouse for AI computing, to be precise. (5 Africa is set to build its first AI factoryRest of World)+ What Africa needs to do to become a major AI player. (MIT Technology Review)Including clips of the doctored voices of well-known journalists. (6 A TikTok network spread Spanish-language immigration misinformationNBC News)7 Your TV is desperate for your dataStreamers are scrambling around for new ways to make money off the information they gather on you. (Vox) 8 This startup extracts rare earth oxides from industrial magnets Its a less intrusive way of accessing minerals vital to EV and wind turbine production. (FT $) + The race to produce rare earth elements. (MIT Technology Review)9 NASA hopes to launch its next Starliner flight as soon as later this year After its latest mission stretched from a projected eight days to nine months. (Reuters)+ Europe is finally getting serious about commercial rockets. (MIT Technology Review) 10 The Sims has been the worlds favorite life simulation game for 25 years But a new Korean game is both more realistic and multicultural. (Bloomberg $)Quote of the day Its like, can you tell the difference between a person and a person-shaped sock puppet that is holding up a sign saying, I am a sock puppet? Laura Edelson, a computer science professor at Northeastern University, is skeptical about brands abilities to ensure their ads are being shown to real humans and not bots, she tells the Wall Street Journal. The big story The race to fix space-weather forecasting before next big solar storm hits April 2024 As the number of satellites in space grows, and as we rely on them for increasing numbers of vital tasks on Earth, the need to better predict stormy space weather is becoming more and more urgent.Scientists have long known that solar activity can change the density of the upper atmosphere. But its incredibly difficult to precisely predict the sorts of density changes that a given amount of solar activity would produce.Now, experts are working on a model of the upper atmosphere to help scientists to improve their models of how solar activity affects the environment in low Earth orbit. If they succeed, theyll be able to keep satellites safe even amid turbulent space weather, reducing the risk of potentially catastrophic orbital collisions. Read the full story.Tereza Pultarova We can still have nice things A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or skeet 'em at me.) + This is very coola nearly-infinite virtual museum entirely generated from Wikipedia.+ How to let go of that grudge youve been harboring (you know the one)+ If your social media feeds have been plagued by hot men making bad art, youre not alone.+ Its Friday, so enjoy this 1992 recording of a very fresh-faced Pearl Jam.

Artur Widak/NurPhoto 2025-03-28T14:33:31Z SaveSaved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.Have an account? Business Insider spoke to three Florida men on how they felt owning Teslas.A Cybertruck owner shared how his cherry-red truck was vandalized four different times.An acupuncturist bought his Tesla used because the electric car was prohibitively expensive.It's not easy being a Tesla owner right now.When Tesla's Model S the company's second car and longest-produced model began shipping in 2012, its earliest drivers were generally seen as progressive, environmentally minded, and technologically savvy.Fast forward 13 years and Tesla drivers are getting flipped off and being called Nazis. Their electric cars are being pelted with eggs, decorated with shaving cream, or worse, spray paint. Dealerships and charging stations have become the site of protests, vandalism, and even arson.As Elon Musk continues to deepen his relationship with President Donald Trump, slash funding at federal agencies via his new position at DOGE, and lend support to Germany's far-right AfD party, his company's image as the cutting-edge choice of progressives is now a distant memory.Business Insider spoke to three men one of whom just sold his dream car due to Musk's growing political stances who bought Tesla cars in Florida, the second state behind California when it comes to Tesla sales. They spoke about why they chose to buy Teslas and how they feel when driving them now.A Cybertruck that's been vandalized 4 timesPeter Doran, owner of a cherry-red Cybertruck in Safety Harbor, Florida, ordered the vehicle when it was first announced in 2019. His wife owns a Model Y, and in 2020, Doran also bought a Model 3, which he has since sold, but not for political reasons. Peter Doran's Cybertruck was vandalized four separate times. Courtesy of Peter Doran "My son talked me into it; I've always been a performance guy," Doran, who's in his early 50s, told Business Insider of his truck. Doran boasted that the truck can go from 0 to 60 miles per hour in 2.6 seconds, noting that his Cybertruck is nearly "as quick as his old C8 Corvette."Doran also cited rising fuel prices as a factor in his purchases, as well as safety and lower maintenance costs. He puts roughly 40,000 miles a year on his cars and said the maintenance really adds up. Doran said he's only had to change the tires and wiper blades of his Model Y so far.Doran wanted the Cybertruck when it was announced "for the heck of it it was ugly, but I liked the concept of the stainless steel exoskeleton," he said. When Hurricane Milton took out power for five days in October, the Cybertruck powered his office with its Powershare feature, which allows the vehicle battery to provide power from its onboard outlets or charge port.A Trump supporter who put "45" and "47" decals on his Cybertruck, Doran said he finds the controversies surrounding Tesla difficult to understand. He's still keen on Tesla's future, as well as other Musk ventures like SpaceX and Neuralink, a company he finds exciting as a chiropractor who's worked with paralyzed patients."Years ago, if I wanted to buy a pair of Nikes, I didn't check the political proclivity of the CEO first I bought a product because I liked it," he said. Doran's Cybertruck was keyed by a stranger while parked. Courtesy of Peter Doran Doran's Cybertruck has been vandalized four separate times since Musk started his role at DOGE in January 2025 it's been keyed, spit on, plastered with Hillary Clinton stickers, and had messages written on it with shaving cream in an incident Doran caught on camera. Doran's Cybertruck was sprayed with shaving cream while parked in his driveway. Courtesy of Peter Doran "A grown man went to the trouble of putting on a mask and gloves to write on my car with shaving cream. How is that a form of protest?" he said.While not a Musk fan, he thinks Tesla makes the best carsAcross the state in Lake Worth, Florida, Brian Ritter's Model 3 sits in his driveway.The 43-year-old acupuncturist and tai chi instructor purchased a used Model 3 in December 2024 for around $22,000. He said he hopes to receive a roughly $4,000 tax credit implemented by the Biden administration (it's unclear whether this tax credit will survive the Trump administration because it's at risk of being scrapped). Ritter had admired the cars years before finally buying one secondhand previously, they had been prohibitively expensive for him. Brian Ritter bought his Tesla used. Courtesy of Brian Ritter "For quality, durability, and cost-effectiveness, this was by far the best vehicle," Ritter told BI. He also looked at electric vehicles from Ford and Kia, coming very close to buying a Volkswagen. However, he was dissuaded by the automaker's all-electric SUV's lower reliability ratings based on his online research.Ritter's personal politics lean heavily to the left, but for now he's still behind the wheel of his Tesla. "I'm not going to let them mess up driving what is, for me, the nicest car on the road," he said."It's not my favorite thing in the world to finally get my dream car, and now people call them swasticars," he said.Ritter, who can't stand Musk or Trump, said he thinks a lot about how the public perception of Musk has changed from when he was smoking weed with Joe Rogan and being lauded for being an out-of-the-box thought leader. "And now? Surprise, he's a Nazi. He gave a very clear Nazi salute twice."Musk, on the social media platform that he owns, denied that was his intention for the gesture. "Frankly, they need better dirty tricks," he wrote in January on X. "The 'everyone is Hitler' attack is sooo tired."Vandalism is of some concern, Ritter said, so he's considering getting an anti-Musk bumper sticker for added deterrence. He doesn't want anyone to think he supports what Musk is doing.An early fan of Musk now feels his car is like 'wearing a red hat'Eric Branch purchased a Tesla Model 3 Performance for a little under $50,000 in 2023. By March 2025, he had sold it and bought a Mercedes EQE 350+."It was becoming like wearing a red hat," Branch, a 43-year-old project management office director at a Tampa, Florida, insurance company, told BI. "I loved that car. I had no other reason to sell it. I didn't just sell it; I sold it and took a big loss. I sold my Rolex to buy that car. That's how bad I wanted to get rid of it." Eric Branch sold his Tesla and bought a Mercedes instead. Courtesy of Eric Branch For him, the problem with Tesla now is that you can't separate the company from Musk. Branch said that close association was good for the brand when Musk was popular and seen as an Edison-like figure, even appearing in Marvel's "Iron Man 2" alongside Robert Downey Jr. But now his image now weighs Tesla's brand down. "When Musk starts showing up in Germany talking about national pride, I don't know how you talk yourself out of that being bad," he said.While Branch likes his new Mercedes, he does miss the feel of his old Tesla, particularly its acceleration. "I miss going fast in it," he added.Branch didn't just own a Tesla, he also previously owned around 2,000 shares of the company's stock. As a stockholder, a former Musk fan and ardent supporter of renewable energy, Branch said he had some level of emotional investment in the brand.Still, he sold his stocks shortly after its December 2024 stock price peak because he felt that Musk's relationship as Trump's largest donor seemed certain to benefit his businesses via favorable regulations and government contracts. Now, Branch doesn't think their partnership will benefit Tesla in the long run."Look at every other relationship Trump has had it always goes bad," Branch said, citing his relationships with former Vice President Mike Pence, attorney Michael Cohen, and generals in his first administration. "Everyone gets burned except for him. That will happen to Musk. It's happening right now."Tesla and Musk did not respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.Recommended video

Accepting a job offer isn't just about the salary and benefits that come with it it's also about the opportunities it creates for your future."In this market, it's not just about where you worked, it's about what that brand signals to decision-makers," Albano Gega, the founder of the tech career-coaching platform Alza, told Business Insider.Working for certain names can create more opportunities at a faster pace and candidates "don't have to explain" their credibility, he continued. He said it's what FAANG companies the acronym for Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google have done for candidates for years.BI spoke to seven technical recruiters and career coaches, including Gega, about the most powerful names to have on your rsum if you work in tech. These are the companies they mentioned as indicators of top talent and solid experience.FAANGsCompanies like Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, and Google look good on CVs. CNBC YouTube Art Zeile, CEO of tech careers marketplace Dice, told BI that having a FAANG company on your rsum has traditionally been a "strong indicator that you have the skills and experience necessary to succeed" in any tech position."Those companies' rigorous hiring processes, combined with their massive and complex projects, effectively surface the best of the best tech pros," Zeile said.When people see Amazon, Facebook, Meta, or Google on a rsum, they interpret that the candidate is used to operating in a high-performance environment and working "under pressure," Anthony Louis, head of talent at recruitment firm Beacon Talent, told BI.Brenna Lasky, a former Big Tech recruiter who launched a career coaching business, mentioned Apple, Google, Amazon, and Meta as some of the best companies to have on your rsum. She said those companies are "brand names that everyone recognizes and are known for their ability to attract top talent.""People who work for these companies are perceived as top-tier candidates," Lasky said.Lasky added that big names will only get a candidate so far, though. While a name like Google might look good on your rsum, it's not going to get you a job that doesn't match up with your experience, Lasky said.MicrosoftOne of the recruiters listed Microsoft as the top company to have on your rsum. Adek Berry/AFP via Getty Images Three of the recruiters BI spoke to listed Microsoft as one of the companies that stands out on a resume.Alan Stein, the CEO of career-accelerating service Kadima Careers, shared a list of his company's top 100 companies in 2025 that can accelerate your career and Microsoft was at the top.Stein, who has worked at several Big Tech companies including Google and Meta, told BI that the list was based on companies that had "high compensation" and "brand name prestige." They also picked companies that are actively hiring, are highly perceived by recruiters, and treat their employees well.He said Microsoft received the top spot because of its "breadth of software and services across" different segments, like consumer or enterprise markets. Stein said the company's partnership with OpenAI also contributed.The head of US tech talent at global tech talent and engineering company Akkodis, Janelle Bieler, told BI that Microsoft has a "culture" around "challenging themselves," and is one of the companies that has prioritized innovation.NvidiaNvidia is leading the AI revolution with its GPUs that provide help power LLMs. I-Hwa Cheng/AFP/Getty Images Nvidia's value and reputation have surged amid the AI boom. Nearly all the recruiters BI spoke to mentioned it as a top company to have on your rsum if you work in tech.Bieler told BI that seeing Nvidia on a rsum signifies that a candidate has "worked on cutting edge" technology like machine learning, high-performance computing, chip development, and other hands-on problem-solving related to AI.In today's market, companies known for AI innovation stand out to recruiters, Bieler told BI, and Nvidia is a prime example. The company is leading the AI revolution with its graphics processing units that help power large language models.OpenAIOpenAI has been at the forefront of the AI revolution since it realized ChatGPT. Jason Redmond/AFP/Getty Images OpenAI was another zeitgeisty company mentioned by recruiters BI spoke to, and made it to fourth place on Kadima Career's list, which said it's "at the forefront of breakthroughs in machine learning and natural language processing."Patricia Karam, founder of employment agency Mission Recruit, said companies like Anthropic and OpenAI have experience with rapid and "massive growth."OpenAI has been at the forefront of the AI revolution and is a key player in the AI talent wars. The buzzy startup has been known to poach employees from competitors; One analysis by BI found at least 44 former Googlers left the company to work at OpenAI in 2024. However, a number of executives and employees also left the company last year, with some speaking out about safety concerns around developing AI.AnthropicAnthropic, the startup behind the Claude chatbot, was another company mentioned by recruiters. Chesnot/Getty Images Anthropic, the AI startup behind ChatGPT rival Claude, was another powerful company recruiters mentioned.Anthropic said it's a major "credibility market right now."Gega said that while most AI companies move fast, Anthropic has built advanced models while "prioritizing safety, ethics, and long-term impact." He said Anthropic shows that a candidate has operated at "the highest level of AI-led companies," and puts them in a completely different category."They're known for building some of the most advanced models and doing it with prioritizing safety, ethics, and long-term impact," Gega said.

Perhaps the biggest common theme of Donald Trumps second term is that his administration has aggressively used federal power to punish those deemed to be its or his enemies.Some foreign students who criticized Israel have had their visas revoked and have been whisked into ICE detention. Venezuelan nationals with tattoos some likely members of a foreign gang, some likely not have been deported to El Salvador and imprisoned there.Major law firms that displeased Trump have been hit with executive orders aimed at driving their clients away and destroying their businesses.Elite universities that were the site of protests or had policies the administration dislikes have seen hundreds of millions of dollars in research funding revoked.Its a frightening turn for American governance. Trump and the hard-right appointees who staff this new administration seem intent on ruining the lives of the people theyve deemed enemies of the state, punishing them with state power.Trump officials are punishing enemies first with no process or fairness beforehandWhat sets much of this apart is that there is no semblance of process or fairness before any of these decisions are made.Detentions, executive orders, and funding revocations come first as do deportations, if the administration can get away with them. After that, powerful institutions can possibly, with sufficient bowing and scraping, get these harsh actions rolled back (as the law firm Paul Weiss did and as Columbia University is trying to do). Less powerful people can only hope to sue in court and hope a judge will help them.This lack of process beforehand makes it more likely that innocent people are wrongly swept up. But Trump officials dont seem to mind.In their rush to deport Tren de Aragua members to El Salvador before the courts could stop them, they dont seem to care that they scooped up a gay Venezuelan makeup artist. In their zeal to revoke visas of antisemitic, Hamas-supporting foreign students, they dont seem to care that they may have detained a PhD student for co-writing op-eds in a campus newspaper.Trump set the tone, but his appointees are enthusiastically participatingTrump and his MAGA true-believer appointees are clearly personally responsible for many of these policies aimed at their purported enemies. But more broadly, hes set an ethic thats pervaded the administration, even those who are less overtly allied with his movement.Secretary of State Marco Rubio, for instance, bragged Thursday that he was personally responsible for revoking visas of hundreds of anti-Israel protestors. We do it every day. Every time I find one of these lunatics, I take away their visas, he said.Another telling anecdote came out of the Social Security Administration, currently run by acting appointee Leland Dudek a career SSA official who decided to work with Elon Musks Department of Government Efficiency team and was then promoted to head the agency.Earlier this month, the agency canceled a contract that allowed parents of newborns in Maine to get Social Security numbers for their new babies at the hospital. After criticism, the decision was reversed, but a mystery remained about why it happened at all. Was it a screw-up? Or was it deliberate punishment of Maines people because of a frosty public exchange between Trump and the states Democratic governor, Janet Mills? (Trump had threatened Mills with revoking federal funding over the states policies on trans athletes, to which Mills responded, See you in court.)It was indeed payback aimed at Mills, Dudek admitted to the New York Times last week. I was ticked at the governor of Maine for not being real cordial to the president, he said, while acknowledging, I screwed up.Dudek wasnt even a longtime Trump crony (as seen in his willingness to actually admit screwing up). And if his account is correct, no one ordered him to target Maine. He just felt it was the appropriate thing to do when someone was rude to Donald Trump.Theres likely more to comeThough US citizens cant be summarily deported or ordered to leave the country, they can be retaliated against in other ways. For instance, Trump has long been clear about his desire to target his critics or political enemies with criminal prosecutions but, unlike in his first term, hes appointed people like FBI director Kash Patel and interim US Attorney for the District of Columbia Ed Martin, who seem eager to actually make that happen.An attempt by Martin to have Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer criminally investigated for comments he made in a speech flopped, but Martin has moved on to new targets. One of those targets is Andrew Weissmann, who was a top prosecutor in special counsel Robert Muellers investigation of Trumps ties to Russia, before becoming an MSNBC commentator. Earlier this month, Martin sent a threatening letter to Weissmann, demanding information about a decade-old matter hed worked on at the Justice Department and alluding to impropriety. This seems like an obvious pretext for targeting Weissmann because he is an enemy of Trump.Further targeting of blue states through withholding of federal funds is likely coming too, as seen in, for instance, Trumps executive order on elections this week. Legal experts have said that Trumps revocation of funds in some cases like the $400 million in grants to Columbia University he canceled seems flatly illegal. But many targeted institutions have been reluctant to sue in court, fearing even worse retribution. The problem is, though, that if this tactic keeps working for Trump, hell just keep using it, in even more dubious or unlawful ways. Indeed, its been startling how many institutions corporations, elite law firms, and universities have caved to Trumps pressure already. When will it stop? Will it stop?See More: Politics

Earlier this month, Thomas Edsall published a column in the New York Times titled, Even if the Democrats can move to the center, it may not help. In it, the eminent political analyst argued that there is evidence that the process of moderation has the potential to result in unintended adverse consequences.Edsall was referring to a new working paper from Stanford University political scientist Adam Bonica and two co-authors. As Bonica explained in an interview with the Times, his research points toward a clear conclusion: There appears to be very little electoral advantage from running to the center in contemporary congressional elections.According to Bonica, although moderate candidates were a little better at persuading voters to support them, this advantage was tiny and potentially outweighed by moderations negative impact on turnout.Democrats have achieved their greatest electoral successes precisely in cycles (2008 and 2018) when they did not moderate relative to Republicans, Bonica told the Times, while in cycles where Democrats ran more moderate candidates (like 2010 and 2014), their electoral performance was notably weaker. He also reiterated these claims in a viral Bluesky thread.This story was first featured in The Rebuild.Sign up here for more stories on the lessons liberals should take away from their election defeat and a closer look at where they should go next. From senior correspondent Eric Levitz. All this has triggered a lively debate about how Democrats should weigh Bonicas evidence against the many studies showing that moderation is electorally beneficial on net. The election analysis site SplitTicket noted that Bonicas finding cuts against everything weve modeled.But this debate proceeds from a false premise: Bonicas data doesnt actually cut against the idea that moderation is beneficial. On the contrary, his study indicates that moderation can significantly increase Democrats support with swing voters, especially in high-profile races. He and his co-authors note it is theoretically possible that this benefit is outweighed by moderations negative impact on Democratic turnout. But, by their own admission, they possess no strong evidence that such a negative impact exists.Judging by Bonicas data, a conservative Democrat probably would have beaten Donald Trump in 2016The bulk of Bonicas paper aims to calculate how candidates ideological positioning impacts their electoral performance. The study argues that previous attempts to gauge this relationship have been distorted by a failure to control for voter turnout. As the authors note, a candidates ability to shift overall turnout is limited, since voter participation is influenced by many factors external to their campaigns. For example, if a state has a high-profile abortion referendum on the ballot, then Democratic candidates in that state could enjoy elevated base turnout, even if their own stances did little to mobilize voters. Meanwhile, Democrats in a state with no such referenda might see lower turnout through no fault of their own. To account for this, Bonica and his co-authors look at how ideologically distinct candidates on the ballot at the same time performed within the same precincts. Specifically, for each race on the ballot, they calculate the ideological midpoint basically, the point on a left-to-right axis that is halfway between the Democratic and Republican candidates respective ideological position and then measure how vote-share changes as this midpoint shifts rightward or leftward.The idea here is: When the midpoint lies to the right, the Republican candidate is more conservative than the Democratic candidate is progressive. When the midpoint lies to the left, the opposite is true. They find that the farther right this midpoint moves in a given race, the better Democrats do. Now, on its face, this could just mean that Democrats do better when they run against far-right Republicans the more conservative the GOP candidate in a race is, the farther right the midpoint will be, no matter the ideology of their Democratic opponent. But the study shows that it doesnt really matter why the ideological midpoint shifts right: Democrats becoming more moderate increases the partys vote share by about as much as Republican candidates becoming more conservative. From this, they extrapolate that, on average, centrist Democrats (e.g., Sen. Joe Manchin types) enjoy a roughly 0.6 percentage point advantage over mainstream ones (e.g., Sen. Amy Klobuchar types) across all races, when turnout is held constant.The Times presented this tiny fraction as evidence that moderations benefits might be negligible. And yet, according to Bonicas study, the impact of ideology on electoral outcomes varies widely by office: In high-profile races where voters are more likely to receive information about the candidates positions centrists enjoy a bigger advantage over their more left-wing counterparts. In governors races, the former outperform the latter by 1.9 percentage points; in presidential and Senate races, they outperform by about 1 point. These are not insignificant margins: Had Hillary Clintons share of the vote been 1 point higher in 2016, she likely would have won the presidency.By contrast, ideology has almost no impact on state-level races for judicial positions and other minor state-level offices, likely because voters do not pay close attention to candidates positions in such races. The negligible impact of ideology in these low-profile races drags down the average benefit of moderation in the paper. That said, moderates advantage in House races specifically is barely higher than their average advantage across all offices, at just 0.65 points.Importantly, all of these figures are measuring conservative Democrats advantage over mainstream Democrats. The study implies that the performance gap between conservative Democrats and progressive Democrats would be larger.Bonicas case for questioning moderations efficacy hinges on a speculative premise: that centrism might do more to demobilize base voters than to persuade swing voters. But his paper does not even attempt to prove this. The study does provide evidence for two claims about the relationship between turnout, ideology, and election outcomes: When turnout among Democrats goes up relative to turnout among Republicans Democrats win more elections. And the benefits of turning out a higher percentage of your voters than the other party did are quite large far larger than the benefits of moderation. Between 2008 and 2022, Democrats tended to see stronger turnout and better outcomes when the average ideological midpoint of all House races was more left-wing. They illustrate these two points with a pair of charts:But I think the evidence here is weaker than Bonicas Bluesky posts or Edsalls write-up in the Times would lead one to believe. For one thing, we are looking at only eight data points the eight federal election cycles from 2008 through 2022. And not all eight conform to Bonicas trend lines. Within his data set, Democrats suffered their second-worst election loss and turnout showing in 2014. And yet, the ideological midpoint that year was unusually left-wing (only in 2008 and 2018 did the ideological midpoint of House races lie farther to the left). In 2016, meanwhile, the ideological midpoint of all House races was more left-wing than it had been in 2012. And yet Democrats saw better turnout during the earlier election cycle.Indeed, its not clear that there is any relationship between ideological positioning and turnout in Bonicas data. When the Democratic pollster Charlotte Swasey tried to chart out this relationship, using Bonicas findings for the years 2008 through 2020, she found no clear trend:Courtesy of Charlotte Swasey.And Bonicas proposed correlation breaks down even further when one looks directly at changes in Democratic ideology. Remember: Shifts in the ideological midpoint are influenced by both Republican and Democratic positioning. So to isolate the impact of Democratic moderation on turnout, we should really look at how the average Democratic candidates ideology changes from year to year, rather than at how the ideological midpoint changes.Such figures arent reported in Bonicas paper. But he provided me with the relevant numbers. And several of them cut against the idea that moderation leads to lower turnout: Democrats were more moderate in 2008 than in 2014, yet the party saw much better turnout in the former year. Democrats were more moderate in 2018 than in 2020, yet the party saw better turnout (relative to the GOP) in 2018. Democratic candidates were more moderate in 2012 than in 2016, yet the party had better turnout in 2012. Democratic candidates were more moderate in 2018 than in 2022, yet saw better turnout in 2018. Democratic candidates were more moderate in 2016 than in 2020, and yet according to Bonicas data the party actually had slightly better turnout (relative to Republicans) the year that Hillary Clinton lost than in the year that Biden won.In short, Bonicas numbers dont actually show that moderation even systematically correlates with worse Democratic turnout, much less that the former causes the latter. Rather, his data suggests that the Democratic Party has grown increasingly progressive since 2008, and that this leftward drift has had no predictable impact on Democratic turnout from year to year.And there are simpler explanations for why Democrats saw strong turnout in 2008 and 2018, but weak turnout in 2010, 2014, and 2022.In 2008, Democrats ran an extraordinarily charismatic, historically significant presidential candidate against a GOP that was presiding over a financial crisis. Meanwhile, the party that doesnt hold the presidency almost always has an advantage in midterm elections, in part because their oppositions base grows complacent with power. This dynamic explains why Democrats saw relatively high turnout in 2018 (when a Republican held the White House) but relatively weak turnout in 2010, 2014, and 2022 (when a Democrat held the presidency). In an interview, Bonica told me that he has tried to make clear that his proposed trade-off between moderation and turnout is a potential one that hasnt been causally established. What we do learn from the paper is that the overall gains from moderation are just quite small, Bonica said. Nevertheless, his findings offer more cause for thinking that moderation increases Democratic vote-share than for thinking that it reduces the partys turnout.And other research gives us reasons to doubt the latter premise. According to many political scientists and pollsters, very liberal Democrats are the partys most reliable voters. It is Democrats with more moderate or heterodox views who waffle the most about whether to cast a ballot. And these less politically engaged Democrats often resemble swing voters ideologically and demographically. For this reason, the forces that push swing voters to the right and those that nudge unreliable Democratic voters toward staying home are sometimes one and the same.Progressives should not jump to ideologically convenient conclusions on the basis of weak evidenceIt doesnt necessarily follow that Democrats should move to the right. There are strong substantive arguments for many progressive policies. And the political benefits of moderation in Bonicas paper arent terribly large. Regardless, its more productive to debate how the party should position itself on discrete issues than whether it should move right or move left. Some policies associated with the left are popular, some associated with the center are not. So, its helpful to get specific.Nevertheless, its important to be clear-eyed when analyzing the relationship between ideological positioning and electoral outcomes. In progressive circles, empirical claims about the efficacy of moderation are often imbued with moral weight: To say that Democrats would benefit from moderating on any issue is to betray vulnerable minority groups, while denying the efficacy of moderation is to defend those groups.But this is misguided. Refusing to consider ideologically inconvenient data makes it harder to win elections. And as the current administration is making clear, the most vulnerable have a strong interest in Democrats winning elections. According to some estimates, Donald Trumps defunding of USAID alone has cost more than 10,000 human beings their lives. The election of literally any Democrat last November would have averted those deaths. On a wide variety of fronts, a Joe Manchin presidency would have meant less needless cruelty and suffering than a Trump one. If there is evidence that a Manchin-esque Democrat would have done better than Kamala Harris, we have a responsibility to take that information into account.People will inevitably disagree about how Democrats should balance policy idealism with political expediency. But any rational answer to that question must be premised on an accurate understanding of the relevant tradeoffs. Bonicas research could help advance such an understanding. But the discourse around it has done the opposite.See More: Politics

Forget the Switch 2, Nintendo wants you to know that its live-action Legend of Zelda movie has a release date, and it used its new Nintendo Today app to let fans knowTech13:34, 28 Mar 2025Updated 13:41, 28 Mar 2025The series has plenty of entries to pull inspiration from(Image: Nintendo)Nintendo is having a busy few days. The Nintendo Switch 2 is getting a full reveal on April 2, while the company held a Nintendo Direct yesterday.One of the more curious announcements (alongside a much-requested feature for both Switch 1 and 2) was a mobile app that the company will use to drop regular news drops to iOS and Android users.Article continues belowWhile many of us thought little of it, those that subscribed did get a bit of a bombshell as the company confirmed its Legend of Zelda movie, with is planned as a live-action adaptation, will launch in 2027 even adding a firm release date.The Legend of Zelda: Echoes of Wisdom made Zelda playable(Image: Nintendo/Grezzo)The app today revealed that the Nintendo adaptation of one of the company's most beloved series will launch on 26 March, 2027."The live-action film of The Legend of Zelda will be released worldwide on 27 March 2027" the message reads, teeing up the company's third major film franchise after Pokemon's Detective Pikachu and the Super Mario Bros Movie.While the former is a hybrid of live action and CGI and the latter was developed with Illumination, the studio behind Despicable Me, The Legend of Zelda movie will be live-action.Will the movie give Link a voice?(Image: Nintendo)Still, there are plenty of questions. For one, which Zelda will the series work from, if any? The franchise's entries don't often have more than a nod or wink to each other, save for Tears of the Kingdom which was a direct sequel to Breath of the Wild.There's also Link's nature as a silent protagonist, which would make for some big changes. Who knows, maybe he'll be voiced by Chris Pratt, too?The movie project was announced in November of 2023, and will be distributed by Sony Pictures. Wes Ball is currently attached to direct, having previously worked on The Maze Runner series and Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes.Interestingly, he's still attached to a movie adaptation of Reikon Games' Ruiner.For more on Switch 2, be sure to check out all we know about how the console could use AI, and a report it could already be on US soil.Article continues belowFor the latest breaking news and stories from across the globe from the Daily Star, sign up for our newsletters.

The solution to Ubisofts problems? (Ubisoft)Ubisofts Assassins Creed, Rainbow Six, and Far Cry franchises are now part of a separate company, jointly owned by Tencent.Thanks to the rather dismal 2024 that Ubisoft had, the company was deemed to be in enough financial straits to consider selling itself to Chinese conglomerate Tencent.Those discussions appeared to shift as the months went on though, with Ubisoft considering opening a new subsidiary, albeit one that Tencent would have a modicum of control over.Talks between the two companies must have gone well since then, as a subsidiary has officially been announced and will serve as the new home for Ubisofts three core franchises: Assassins Creed, Far Cry, and Tom Clancys Rainbow Six.Ubisoft remains mostly in charge of the subsidiary, which doesnt appear to have a name, but is said to be valued at around 4 billion (about 3.3 billion).However, Tencent has invested 1.16 billion (just under 1 billion) to acquire a 25% minority stake.According to Ubisoft, this investment will drive further increases in quality of narrative solo experiences, expand multiplayer offerings with increased frequency of content release, introduce free-to-play touchpoints, and integrate more social features.It will probably be a very long time until we actually see what impact this will have on future games and how much input Tencent will have on their direction going forward.Aside from all the teams working on new Assassins Creed, Far Cry, and Rainbow Six games, the subsidiary includes the back catalogue and any new games currently under development or to be developed. So, it doesnt sound like any projects have been cancelled.What Ubisoft games are in development?As it stands, Ubisoft reportedly has a lot of Assassins Creed games in the works, including but not limited to Assassins Creed Hexe, which is centred around 16th century witch trials, and a remake of Assassins Creed 4: Black Flag.More TrendingMeanwhile, Far Cry is rumoured to be getting a new sequel and multiplayer spin-off, while Rainbow Six Siege will be rebranded to Rainbow Six Siege X later this year, as part of its transition into a free-to-play experience.Ubisoft has stressed that this wont mean itll be neglecting its other franchises, although it only namedrops two other Tom Clancy titles The Division and Ghost Recon as examples.Beyond that, the company is meant to be working on remakes of Splinter Cell and Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time, with only the latter having an official release date of 2026.A new Rayman project, with input from series creator Michel Ancel, has also been confirmed. And of course theres the eternally delayed Beyond Good & Evil 2, which was announced in 2017 and hasnt had any real updates in years. Do you think Beyond Good & Evil 2 is ever coming out? (YouTube)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

By Matthew Gault Published March 28, 2025 | Comments (0) | A mockup of a Tamagotchi that dies if you stop vaping at the NYU Stupid Hackathon in 2025. NYU via YouTube. There is a cursed vape somewhere in NYC that holds the soul of a Tamagotchi. If you stop vaping, the digital pet dies. Only engineers who once worked for Meta and weapons manufacturer Anduril could create a machine so heinous. And thats exactly what they did at the annual NYU Stupid Hackathon last month. Stupid hackathons are a tradition in the software engineer, hacker, and maker space. Every year across the country people come together to use their skills to make very dumb things. Past inventions include a machine that makes you look like you pissed yourself when you wanna get out of small talk, a selfie stick for a beer can, and a head mounted rack that makes it look like youre seeing through a long intestinal tract. The NYU Stupid Hackathon is organized by the Interactive Telecommunications Program at the Tisch School of the Arts. It went on for 12 hours and included creations such as a table that never stops shaking and a printer that drafts legally binding documents to track pink promises. But the vape or die Tamagotchi was the belle of the ball. The machine is the invention of former Meta employee Rebecca Xun and former Anduril employee Lucia Camacho. They had originally conceived the machine as a way to help Xun quit vaping. Originally, the idea was to do this for good, because I would like to quit vaping, Xun told Washington Square Times. But its more fun and more stupid if we use this power and harness it for evil and make myself more addicted.A traditional Tamagotchi needs many different kinds of love. It needs to be watered, fed, played with, and groomed. Users have to clean up its poops and balance its various health meters. Xun and Camachos digital pet only has one desire: that you keep huffing the vape. When you dont, its face fills the screen and huge wet tears shoot out the side of its eyes. You can see an early version of the machine in this video from NYU students of the hackathon. Its very intense, Camacho says in the video as an animation of the Tamagotchi crying plays on screen. For the original version of the project, the duo connected a vape to a computer which ran a digital pet.Theyve iterated since then and now have a version thats self-contained though it looks a bit like a brick of C4 with a crying cartoon on it. They used a pink Elf Bar BC5000 vape and strapped a tiny screen to it. Wires run from the screen to some basic components on the back of the Elf Bar. The Tamaogtchi that dies if you stop puffing was the breakout star of the Stupid Hackathon. Xunn and Camacho got a lot of attention, but Xun told Futurism that the experience hadnt been all positive. Remember, before the Hackathon she wanted to use a digital pet to help her stop vaping. Because we tested it so much, we were both diseased from vaping, she said.Daily NewsletterYou May Also Like By AJ Dellinger Published March 22, 2025 By James Whitbrook Published January 27, 2025 By Florence Ion Published December 2, 2024 By Florence Ion Published July 8, 2024 By Andrew Liszewski Published May 17, 2023 By Jody Serrano Published May 12, 2023

By Kyle Barr Published March 28, 2025 | Comments (1) | From left: Audio-Technica's special edition R2-D2, Darth Vader, Grogu, and The Mandalorian earbuds. Audio-Technica/Lucasfilm Have you ever wondered what it would be like to be C3PO and interpret R2-D2s whines, bleeps, and bloops? Audio-Technica shipped in a range of special-edition ATH-CKS50TW2 earbuds ahead of Star Wars Celebration set for April, and they include sound effects for when your buds are low on battery or are disconnected that may make you equal parts whimsical and confused. The special Star Wars editions of the companys premium earbuds include special color schemes reminiscent of baby Yoda Grogu, Din Djarin of The Mandalorian, Darth Vader, and R2-D2. The color schemes are all what you expect for each character, though they include a line of Aurebesh, whichfor those not up on their Star Wars loreis the written alien language you find scrawled on walls in the movies and games. People staring at your ear will wonder what the hell is written on your buds, but if youre curious the writing spells out Audio-Technica. The real benefit of these buds is the special sound effects you get on each one. Theres a particular noise youll hear for when your buds are connected, disconnected, low on battery, or when you turn the power on or off. You can go to each product page to listen to the droid beeps, baby Yoda burbling, and heavy mechanical breathing. Hearing Grogu bubble and squeak with the press of a button certainly wont get old for some of us, but prospective buyers should consider whether theyll get tired of the noises after the 50th time they hear them. You can control the various soundscapes for your buds in the A-T Connect app if you ever want to swap out those sounds. Each special version of the ATH-CKS50TW2 sells for $180 and is up for preorder April 21. The buds have an expected release date of May 4, AKA May the 4th. Otherwise, these are effectively the same ATH-CKS50TW2 wireless buds that normally sell for $150. With noise cancelling disabled, the buds should last for 25-hour out of the case and a total of 40 hours with the case. With ANC on, the buds should have a 15-hour battery life plus the 25 hours of life inside the case. The wireless earbuds also include the companys touted Magnetic Switch Technology. Audio-Technica claims when you magnetically snap the buds together (or Use the Force, as the company calls it) you can preserve the buds battery longer when you stick them in your pocket, and not in the case. Even with the additional $30 charge for the special edition buds, these special edition buds include most of the features you expect at the price. They have hybrid noise cancellinga type of active noise cancelling that tries to cancel out specific types of ambient noise. The case also supports Qi wireless charging and promises 90 minutes of battery off a 5-minute quick charge.The buds are a fun idea, though I feel like Audio-Technica missed the opportunity to make a pun of its own initials with a pair styled after an AT-AT, one of those giant quadrupedal All-terrain walking transports first seen in Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back.Star Wars Celebration is set to kick off in Japan April 18. Our friends at io9 will have the on-the-ground coverage of even more collectibles and anticipated spectacles, so stay tuned.Daily NewsletterYou May Also Like By James Whitbrook Published March 25, 2025 By James Whitbrook Published March 24, 2025 By James Whitbrook Published March 24, 2025 By Justin Carter Published March 23, 2025 By James Whitbrook Published March 20, 2025 By Germain Lussier Published March 18, 2025