Is it possible that a public authority destroyed the email account of a lead lawyer assigned to a high-profile and controversial legal case, while the case was still ongoing? And that for more than six years, that authority refused to undertake adequate searches as to who, when, why and how the account was destroyed? And that when it finally did conduct such searches, it was too late to have retained almost all of the information as to when and why the account was destroyed? Yes, that is precisely what happened with the Julian Assange case. The UK authorities have finally conducted detailed searches to try to reconstruct how, when and why they deleted the email account of the lead Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) lawyer involved in liaising with Sweden over allegations against the WikiLeaks founder. CPS Lawyer Paul Close advised Swedish prosecutors not to interview Assange in London after Sweden issued extradition proceedings against him over rape allegations. His advice helped create the legal paralysis that kept Assange arbitrarily detained in London and under investigation in Sweden for years. Today, all investigations against Assange have been closed. The WikiLeaks founder was freed in June 2024, but the full truth is still not known. The CPS was ordered to conduct the searches after a ruling in January 2025 by the London First-tier Tribunal, chaired by Judge Foss, required it to hand over any information it had that could shed light on the deletion of Close’s emails. This followed a relentless Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation by investigative journalist – and the author of this article – Stefania Maurizi, led by the British barrister Estelle Dehon KC, after we discovered in 2017 that key documents had been destroyed.  At that time, the Crown Prosecution Service disclosed to us some of Close’s emails that had been kept in paper files, but we identified gaps in the timing of the correspondence and the CPS explained those gaps by reference to the deletion of the email account.  “If there ever existed further emails,” the CPS stated, “they were not printed off and filed by Paul Close, and the electronic copies were deleted when he retired and are no longer in the possession of the CPS.” Since 2017, we have been trying to unearth the truth about the deleted information and to determine if there is any way to retrieve it, or if it is now permanently lost. The missing documentation concerns some of the most crucial phases in the Assange case, such as when Sweden issued a European arrest warrant against the WikiLeaks founder in December 2010, when he took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in June 2012, and when he obtained asylum in August 2012. In those years, the CPS was headed by Keir Starmer, who was the director of public prosecutions. However, during the past 10 years of our FOIA battle, none of the documents released to us by the CPS provide any evidence that Paul Close ever acted at the instruction of Starmer. As a result of its new searches, the CPS released the following information to us:  The last login to Close’s email account was 31 March 2014, but the CPS has been unable to find information on exactly when his account was deleted. Neither the CPS’s former IT service provider nor the CPS’s extradition unit have retained any “transactional data” – information on the deletion of Close’s account The CPS authorities were already aware in September 2017 that the account had been deleted: “It now transpires that all the data associated with Paul’s account has been deleted and is not capable of being recovered,” wrote the head of departmental security at the CPS on 15 September 2017. As to why the Crown Prosecution Service deleted Close’s account, the CPS has always maintained that it was done in accordance with standard procedure, after he retired in March 2014.  However, from 2017 to 2023, the CPS refused to take our repeated requests for information seriously and provided contradictory statements on exactly when the emails were destroyed. It was only in 2023, after Judge O’Connor ordered it to shed light on the destruction of documents, that the Crown Prosecution Service provided a copy of the “leavers process document”. According to the CPS’s version of the facts, the leavers process document justified the deletion of Close’s email account and outlined the standard operating procedures – which the CPS said were in place in 2014 – for deleting the accounts of CPS lawyers and employees when they retired. But while the two rulings – one by Judge O’Connor in June 2023, the other by Judge Foss in January 2025 – have opened a crack in the wall of secrecy surrounding the destruction of key documents, too many mysteries remain. If Close’s account was deleted under standard and legal procedure outlined in an official document, why in six years of our FOIA litigation did no one ever mention that document to us?  And why did the CPS refuse to provide information for years? And why did it take two rulings by two judges to search for such information? Had the UK authorities with the Crown Prosecution Service addressed our requests seriously from the very beginning, it is likely the CPS’s former IT service provider or the CPS’s extradition unit would have still had data about the destruction of documents. “The tribunal decision [by Judge Foss] vindicated Ms Maurizi’s contention that the CPS never properly dealt with her request and was likely to hold information about the deletion of Paul Close’s emails,” Estelle Dehon KC, a prominent FOIA specialist with Cornerstone Barristers representing us in the FOIA litigation since 2017, told Computer Weekly.  “Now the CPS has disclosed some further limited information, but that raises further questions, so a review will be requested,” Dehon added. To determine whether the leavers process document is genuine, and whether the email in which it was internally circulated by the CPS is genuine, it would be important to obtain the associated metadata, but the CPS authorities have refused to release it to us, and Judge Foss ruled in their favour when it comes to metadata. “Email metadata includes information about how and when emails have travelled over the internet, as well as which individuals and computers have been involved,” Steven Murdoch, professor of security engineering at University College London and a Royal Society University research fellow, told Computer Weekly. “This information is added to an email as ‘headers’, which are not typically shown to users but are invaluable to investigators trying to establish the authenticity and significance of the email,” Murdoch added. “For example, these headers can indicate whether an email is genuine, how it might have been modified and by whom, as well as whether it really is from who it claims to be,” he said. Read more about Stefania Maurizi’s FOIA court battle November 2018: A tribunal finds that the Metropolitan Police Service cannot refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds information on current and former UK-based WikiLeaks journalists Kristinn Hrafnsson, Sarah Harrison and Joseph Farrell. 30 January 2019: The Metropolitan Police confirms that it holds information about current and former WikiLeaks journalists Kristinn Hrafnsson, Sarah Harrison and Joseph Farrell in correspondence with the US Department of Justice. It refuses to disclose the information, citing national security and terrorism exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act. August 2020: Maurizi’s appeal and that of other journalists and non-UK residents is put on hold after the tribunal questions whether it has jurisdiction to hear the appeals of people living outside the UK. January 2021: The tribunal found there should be no territorial restrictions on people outside the UK using the Freedom of Information Act, allowing Maurizi and others to continue with their appeals. July 2021: The tribunal hears an appeal from Maurizi against decisions by the ICO and the Metropolitan Police Service not to release information held by the Metropolitan Police on the three WikiLeaks journalists, based on terrorism and national security grounds. December 2023: An Italian journalist has complained to the data protection watchdog after the Crown Prosecution Service gave conflicting explanations over its deletion of key emails on WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

On April 8, 2024, North America paused for a solar eclipse, including the cast of Apple TV+'s "Severance," who halted filming to watch the event together.

Facepalm: Nintendo would much prefer the focus to be on the many technological improvements introduced with the Switch 2. However, most gamers are now more interested in discussing how much the new console – and its compatible games – will cost compared to the previous generation. No, Nintendo didn't slap a $450 price tag on the Switch 2 because of Trump's tariffs. According to Doug Bowser, the current president of Nintendo of America, multiple factors contributed to the console's final pricing. The Japanese company announced the new console on the same day the US administration dropped its financial "nuclear bomb," and it's now trying to assess the impact of the tariffs on its business. Following the Switch 2 reveal, Bowser confirmed that the newly announced tariffs were not factored into the console's final US price. However, Nintendo was later forced to halt pre-orders – originally set to begin on April 9 – as it evaluates the potential consequences of Trump's trade policy amid an already complex market. The new wave of tariffs introduced by the second Trump administration is expected to significantly affect the entire video game industry, with most consoles and games still manufactured in China and other parts of Asia. Nintendo will also raise the price of its first-party Switch 2 games, which are now expected to cost between $70 and $80. Bowser explained that the Switch 2 will cost $150 more than the original Switch, due to its enhanced features and technological upgrades. The new console will maintain its hybrid design but will offer a larger LCD screen with variable refresh rate capabilities, a custom-built CPU/GPU from Nvidia, more internal storage, and slightly reduced battery life. // Related Stories Nvidia later confirmed that the Switch 2 will deliver 10 times the graphics performance of the original model, with support for DLSS and ray tracing. Additional new features include larger, more durable Joy-Con controllers, hardware integration for the new GameChat communication option, and more. Bowser emphasized that these upgrades were carefully considered when determining the console's final price, and that they'll ensure the Switch 2 remains a long-lasting entertainment device. Nintendo also plans to keep selling the original Switch models for now, which may create a potential overlap in pricing and positioning between the new, more expensive Switch 2 and its predecessors. Bowser also mentioned that Switch 2 games will be priced higher due to offering a "unique" experience. In fact, the company even plans to charge customers for simply learning how to use the Switch 2. The mini-games included in the Nintendo Switch 2 Welcome Tour, Bowser said, are "very deep, very repeatable," and worth $10.

Another day, another tariff. On Monday, President Donald Trump threatened to hammer China with an additional 50% tariff — on top of the the 54% already levied against it — if the Asian giant refuses to cancel the 34% tariff it recently imposed on imports from the U.S., which were set in response to the tariffs announced by Trump on April 2. Yes, this is what a trade war looks like. Recommended Videos Trump said the new total tariff of a whopping 104% on Chinese imports will go into effect on Wednesday, April 9, if China doesn’t back down.  Related With the vast majority of iPhones still manufactured in China, it could potentially mean huge price hikes for Apple’s popular handset, as well as many of its other products. If Apple were to pass on the full 104% import tax to its customers, then the iPhone 16 Pro Max (1TB), which currently costs $1,599, would leap to an eye-watering $3,262. At the other end of the scale, the recently released iPhone 16e — Apple’s most affordable handset — would become rather less affordable with a new price tag of $1,222 for the 128GB version, up from $599.  Meanwhile, the 128GB iPhone 16 would increase from $799 to $1,632. The good news is that Apple is unlikely to pass on the entirety of the import tax to customers. But while the tech behemoth has enough cash sloshing about to comfortably absorb at least some of the costs, higher pricing for U.S.-based customers — in the current circumstances — still seems somewhat inevitable. The current situation creates a real headache for Apple CEO Tim Cook, whose top team will no doubt be buried in spreadsheets looking at how the company can absorb at least some of the costs to prevent scaring customers away when it comes to resetting prices.  To ease the pain, Apple will also be trying to persuade component makers and manufacturers to lower their prices, enabling it to reduce production costs to offset the impact of the tariffs. It’s likely also to be looking to speed up the diversification of its supply chain to other countries with lower tariffs. The company may also be talking to Trump officials in the hope of securing a tariff exemption for the iPhone and other products, something it managed to do during the president’s first term.   Apple is also reported to have engaged in some pre-tariff stockpiling to allow it to retain the current pricing structure while hoping that the U.S. and China can reach some kind of trade agreement to calm what is currently a very volatile situation. Editors’ Recommendations

Customers said they aren’t waiting to see if iPhone costs increase.

It costs what it costs Nintendo explains why Switch 2 hardware and software cost so much $450 system isn't being sold at a loss, wasn't priced with tariffs in mind. Kyle Orland – Apr 7, 2025 5:00 pm | 106 Looking this sleek comes at a price. Looking this sleek comes at a price. Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more Among the many surprises during last week's wider unveiling of the Nintendo Switch 2 was the pricing: $450 for the console itself and $70 to $80 for many first-party games. Now, in a set of interviews posted today (but conducted during last week's unveiling event), Nintendo executives are explaining and defending those prices, even as Trump's tariffs are apparently forcing the company to pause and reassess its whole launch strategy. Nintendo of America President Doug Bowser was speaking to CNBC just as Trump's tariffs were being announced, and said in the moment that "we're still all trying to really understand [the tariffs] better and understand what possible impacts may rise from that." At the same time, he said that the company "didn't consider tariffs into that equation" when choosing the Switch 2's $450 price and instead went with what "we felt that was going to be the right price point for our consumers and the right value proposition if you will for the device that we're creating." Elsewhere in that CNBC interview, Bowser suggested that Nintendo isn't following the Wii U example of selling hardware at a loss in order to gain more potential software customers. Instead, Bowser said the company is "trying to find a way to maintain... margins on the hardware even though they may be more slim than they are on software," and then "to make sure that they're seeing the value in their investment in one of our devices" through software. Those hardware margins might be hard to maintain in the United States if Trump's tariffs add to the cost of importing consoles manufactured in Vietnam or China into the country. That said, Bowser added that "we've had some time to build up inventories on a global basis," and that "some" Switch 2 units are "landed already... in the United States," which could help delay the financial pain of any tariffs on Nintendo's part. Things just cost more now In justifying the $450 price of the Switch 2, Nintendo executives predictably pointed to the system's upgraded hardware specs, as well as new features like GameChat and mouse mode. "As you add more technology into a system, especially in this day and age, that drives additional cost." Nintendo Vice President of Player & Product Experience Bill Trinen told Polygon. That said, Trinen also pointed toward rising prices in the wider economy to justify the $150 jump between Switch and Switch 2 pricing. "We're unfortunately living in an era where I think inflation is affecting everything," Trinen said. The Switch never saw a nominal price drop, but inflation still ate away at its total cost a bit over the years. The Switch never saw a nominal price drop, but inflation still ate away at its total cost a bit over the years. Trinen isn't wrong about that; the $299 early adopters paid for a Switch in 2017 is worth about $391 in today's dollars, according to the BLS CPI calculator. But for customers whose own incomes may have stayed flat over that time, the 50 percent jump in nominal pricing from Switch to Switch 2 may be hard to swallow in a time of increasing economic uncertainty. "Obviously the cost of everything goes up over time, and I personally would love if the cost of things didn't go up over time," Trinen told IGN. "And certainly there's the cost of goods and things that factor into that, but we try to find the right appropriate price for a product based on that." Is $80 the new $70? Talk of inflation extended to Trinen's discussion of why Nintendo decided to sell first-party Switch 2 games for $70 to $80. "The price of video games has been very stable for a very long time," Trinen told Polygon. "I actually have an ad on my phone that I found from 1993, when Donkey Kong Country released on the SNES at $59. That’s a very, very long time where pricing on games has been very stable..." Cherry-picking Donkey Kong Country's price from near the end of console gaming's cartridge era might be a little misleading. But Trinen is correct that $80 in today's money is not out of line with historic inflation-adjusted prices for console games, even in the disc era. $80 games in 2025 have got nothing on $70 games in 1997. Credit: Hughes Johnson $80 games in 2025 have got nothing on $70 games in 1997. Credit: Hughes Johnson Speaking to CNBC, Bowser said that Nintendo is "not really looking to establish a [new] benchmark for pricing" with Mario Kart World's $80 price tag. He echoed the same sentiment to The Washington Post, saying that the game's higher-than-normal price is "less about representing the industry... this is really about Nintendo deciding the right thing to do for its products or what the pricing should be for its products overall." Instead of flat top-end game pricing, Bowser told CNBC "we look at every game and every experience and determine what we believe is the right price point based on that experience." It's a talking point Trinen echoed, telling Polygon that "we take an approach of looking at: What is the experience, and what are players going to enjoy out of this game? What is the length of the game—what’s the volume of the experience? How in-depth is it? And then we price appropriately based on what we think the value of that experience is." That said, Nintendo of America Senior VP of Product Development and Publishing Nate Bihldorff told Digital Trends that game pricing is still as much an art as a science. "There isn’t an Excel sheet up here where you’re checking boxes, and each time you add $5," Bihldorff said. "It’s a number of factors that probably can’t be easily quantified for each one. And that’s why you’ll see a fairly different set of prices for different pieces of software." Kyle Orland Senior Gaming Editor Kyle Orland Senior Gaming Editor Kyle Orland has been the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica since 2012, writing primarily about the business, tech, and culture behind video games. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He once wrote a whole book about Minesweeper. 106 Comments

RT The Boring CompanyOpening Day for the Vegas Loop Encore Tunnel, connecting the Las Vegas Convention Center to the Encore Resort. Thanks to @LVCVA @WynnLasVegas for being great partners.

The Legend of El Cid Rodrigo is a fifteen-year-old boy living in a small village in medieval Castile. One day, after suffering his father's humiliation, he embarks on a path of revenge to restore the family's honor. The young man takes a sword and is determined to win or die. We witness an epic journey filled with battles, conquests, exiles, challenges, and miracles. He is humble in triumph, patient in misfortune, and always shrewd. Long live El Cid Campeador!

Photo Credit: Reuters It may prohibit participants in the same conversation from interacting with Meta AI Highlights The feature is reported in WhatsApp for iOS beta version 25.10.10.70 It prevents shared media from being auto-saved to the recipient's gallery The feature is still in development and not available to beta testers yet Advertisement WhatsApp is said to be developing a new feature for its iOS app which aims to improve privacy in conversations by adding another layer of security. As per a feature tracker, the new feature, dubbed Advanced Chat Privacy, implements several changes which restrict the automatic saving of media shared by the user on the recipient device. Additionally, it is said to prevent them from exporting entire chat histories involving conversations with a user who has the Advanced Chat Privacy feature enabled.WhatsApp's Advanced Chat Privacy Feature for iOSAccording to WhatsApp feature tracker WABetaInfo, Meta Platforms' instant messaging client is developing the Advanced Chat Privacy feature for iOS for release on a future version of the app. It was spotted in WhatsApp Beta for iOS app version 25.10.10.70. Once it is enabled by the sender, the recipient receiving media files in a conversation will not be able to save them to their handset's gallery.However, Advanced Chat Privacy is said to be optional and can be switched on by navigating to the app's settings.Based on screenshots shared by the feature tracker, if the recipient tries to save the media, a Can't auto-save media pop-up will appear with the following description:“Advanced chat privacy has been turned on, and prevents media auto-saving to your device's gallery.”The feature tracker suggests that it might offer another functionality — restrictions on chat exports. It will prohibit exportation of chat histories containing conversation with people who have Advanced Chat Privacy enabled on their device. Further, it is also said to restrict users from interacting with Meta AI — WhatsApp's artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot. Notably, a similar feature was also recently reported to be in development for WhatsApp's Android equivalent. However, WABetaInfo states that Advanced Chat Privacy is still in development and is not available even to beta testers registered via Apple's TestFlight programme. It is speculated to be rolled out to WhatsApp for iOS beta users over the next few weeks. For the latest tech news and reviews, follow Gadgets 360 on X, Facebook, WhatsApp, Threads and Google News. For the latest videos on gadgets and tech, subscribe to our YouTube channel. If you want to know everything about top influencers, follow our in-house Who'sThat360 on Instagram and YouTube. Further reading: WhatsApp for iOS, WhatsApp for iOS Beta, WhatsApp, Apple, IOS, IPhone Shaurya Tomer Shaurya Tomer is a Sub Editor at Gadgets 360 with 2 years of experience across a diverse spectrum of topics. With a particular focus on smartphones, gadgets and the ever-evolving landscape of artificial intelligence (AI), he often likes to explore the industry's intricacies and innovations – whether dissecting the latest smartphone release or exploring the ethical implications of AI advancements. In his free time, he often embarks on impromptu road trips to unwind, recharge, and ...More Related Stories

Crystals of cocaine viewed through a microscopeASTRID & HANNS-FRIEDER MICHLER/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY An experimental medication targeting reward pathways in the brain helps people addicted to cocaine reduce their drug use – and could treat other substance use disorders, too. Medications are available to treat alcoholism and opioid use disorder, but none are approved for addictions to stimulants such as cocaine and methamphetamine. These drugs contribute to roughly half of all overdose deaths in the US. “So this is a giant unmet medical need,” says Ricardo Dolmetsch, founder of Tempero Bio, a California-based pharmaceutical company. Drugs like cocaine are highly addictive because…